Kudos!

We want to extend a huge “Congratulations!!!” to Trinity High School’s Broadcast Journalism class!!!

They recently won the Advertising Federation of Louisville’s 12^th Annual High School Marketing Challenge Competition.

Their challenge was to create a compelling campaign to increase awareness of the issue of teen obesity.

Click here to access their winning work.

We salute the students for confronting all of the challenges and complications that accompany the creation of a campaign, and for overcoming them to produce some fine pieces of work.

It was a delight to meet these students, and we we’d like to thank the fine people at Kertis Creative for introducing us to this ambitious crew.

Forest Fun!

Our team spent last Friday doing some gratifying (although definitely arduous) work at Jefferson Memorial Forest.

If you visit the welcome area, note the gorgeous (and somewhat heavy) mulch laboriously placed all around the parking lot.

Bask in the clean, well-kept garden beds that have been lovingly cleared of debris, weeds, and broken branches.

And definitely take note of the new Prairie Dropseed we hope will be thriving throughout the big rock wall.

We planted a whole tray of these, and the vision is that they will mature and soften up the look of the wall (see photo below…you can see one next to Zig’s right elbow). 

Afterwards, we spent a wonderful night in the park relaxing, grilling, and camping.

And we had nighttime visitors in the form of raccoons and (we’re pretty sure) a wild hog.

Huge thanks to Bennett, Sherry, and Brian for the wonderful day, and for taking great care of such a beautiful community resource.

When 3 is Greater Than 5

A while back, I was privileged to write a guest post for Vovici’s online research blog after an invitation from industry wizard Jeffrey Henning (he has since joined Affinnova).

While collaborating on a project, Jeffrey and I struck up a conversation on scales, and I mentioned that our company has had tremendous success replacing traditional 5-point scales with 3-point scales.

You can read the original article here, but the main arguments I make in advocating the 3-point scale are:

1. They are visually more appealing to respondents, and thus create more buy-in

2. They generate more variance than 1-5 scales (where ~90% of all respondents say 4 or 5)

3. They decrease response set

All three are important, but from a client’s viewpoint, the main advantage is that a 3-point scale allows us to distinguish between people who are perfectly satisfied with your product/service/brand from people who are REALLY enthusiastic about your product/service/brand.

And that’s crucial.

Interview respondents after they use a 5-point scale and you’ll hear some disconcerting comments that make you really question validity.

People who are extremely enthusiastic about your product/service/brand might only score it as a 4 and argue, “It’s terrific, but things can always be better than they are.”

Other people might assign a rating of 5; and when pressed for their reasoning, they’ll argue, “Well, things are fine; I have no complaints.” Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

In these two examples, you’d like the first person to have assigned a 5, and the second person to have assigned a 3.

I argue that the 3-point scale helps us improve our validity (though certainly not perfect it) by more accurately capturing respondents’ sentiments.

We’ll offer respondents options such as:

• Truly outstanding
• Perfectly acceptable
• Can use some improvement

A few things to note.

First, when using a 5-point scale, respondents with mild quibbles or complaints often feel like a score of 1, 2, or 3 is too harsh. So they will still assign a 4, or a 3 at worst. Thus, with the 3-point scale above, we have made the “negative” category sound less severe to encourage more people to choose it.

Clearly, the people with strong negative opinions (the few who DO use the 1 or 2 on a 5-point scale) will still use our “Can use some improvement” category. But that category now includes many more respondents who aren’t irate or dissatisfied at all, but who do have constructive criticism or minor concerns to share.

Further, we’ve made it more acceptable to answer with the middle category. Whereas respondents using a 1-5 scale feel like a score of 3 is harsh, our middle item is still framed positively.

Thus, we are encouraging more people to use the middle option, which will reduce the number of respondents who use our “best” category even when they really aren’t that enthusiastic.

This should leave us with only our most enthusiastic respondents in the most positive category, all of our “things are fine” respondents in the middle category, and anyone with a complaint in our bottom category, which is exactly what we want.

Is it perfect? Hah. But I think it gets us a little closer to perfection, and that’s a lot in research.

*   *   *   *   *

I recently observed Carbonite using a 3-point scale, which is a perfect choice for them.

They have a pretty simple business model. They back up your data. Either you think they’re doing it or you don’t. No need for 5-point scales here.

So their survey does a few smart things. First, it’s short and clearly formatted, and very unintimidating.

Next, the categories for the closed-ended questions are Satisfied/Neutral/Dissatisfied.

It’s a great choice. Some customers might have actively recovered data using their services and are happy. Others probably have never needed to retrieve files, and they’re neutral, while everyone else probably had an issue and is dissatisfied. Three types of customers, three categories of response.

If you’re a research geek, it’s gratifying to see conceptualization so perfectly match operationalization.



Connections

The Magnetic Group is dedicated to engaging with the community around us.

There are so many wonderful people, businesses, and organizations in Louisville, and the more we can interconnect, the stronger the fabric of our community will be.

So here’s what we’ve been up to.

In March, those of us not suffering from Strep throat took part in the Brightside cleanup; did you see those nerds in neon green shirts picking up trash on Bardstown Road? We were those nerds!

In April, we were unable to physically join in the Central Park cleanup (a project close to our hearts since Central Park is the home of Kentucky Shakespeare), but we did send a donation to help the cause.

On May 9, we were proud to join Wyatt, Thorntons, ValuMarket and others as corporate sponsors of the first annual Hawk-A-Thon fundraiser at Hawthorne Elementary.

Even more valuable than money, we gave our time, as our entire company spent the day at Hawthorne to organize events and assist with all the fun activities. We were thrilled to hear that Hawthorne raised over $10k for new classroom technology!

[Note: in the image below, it only looks like Aaron does not know how to hula-hoop. In fact, that hula-hoop is on the way up; that’s right, he can start it at his feet and shake it up to his waist.]

Days later, Ziggy volunteered at a big warehouse cleanup for Kentucky Shakespeare, and he managed to break into the Macbeth costumes before security could restrain him.

[Note: blood is fake.]

On May 20, we spent a long, hot afternoon at Tyler Park removing invasive honeysuckle bushes to help preserve the health of the trees. We made another fun connection, as our Olmstead Parks coordinator happens to live just a few houses down from Zig and Jes. Great meeting you, Erin!

Tonight, we launch a very fun project for Actors Theatre of Louisville, in which we’ll be donating our qualitative expertise to talk with key stakeholders about fortifying one of the city’s best arts organizations.

And in June, we’ll be participating in the Jefferson Memorial Forest cleanup.

It’s a thrill to be part of such a tremendous community!

Thank you, Louisville.

Heads, Marketing Wins; Tails, Customers Lose

You can imagine the conversation.

Marketing Department: “We need to visually demonstrate how many free features come with all of our corporate accounts!”

Voice of Customer Representative (most like an idealistic intern given that title only to make the bank feel more responsive to its customers): “But that’s not really helpful. We need to show how the accounts differ for this visual to be really helpful.”

Marketing: “Customers want to know about all the free features they’ll receive.”

VoC Rep: “No, customers want to be fully informed so they can make the best decisions for their business. Plus, this visual is going to appear on the ‘Account Comparison’ page of our website. Shouldn’t it actually, you know, compare the accounts?”

Marketing: “Fine, since your dad is CEO, we’ll add a ‘Strengths & Benefits’ row that talks about the few ways the accounts differ.



VoC Rep: “Okay, but why don’t we present the features that differ item-by-item instead of clumping them  all under ‘Strengths & Benefits’? This is a mess to read, and we could easily lay it out just like we do with the ‘free’ features.”

Marketing: “We need to emphasize how many free features there are. That’s what marketing does.”

VoC Rep: “Oh. And is marketing going to list the monthly fees, minimum/maximum balance requirements, and other differentiating account features that would actually make this visual useful to the businesses trying to make an informed decision?”

Marketing: “Customers want to know about all the free features they’ll receive. And aren’t you supposed to be getting coffee or something?”

* * * * * * *

Listen to the intern. Listen to your Customer Advocates (if you have any).

Make it easier for companies to work with you, not harder.

Become magnetic.

The Extra 5 Miles

I was talking to a customer of Dan Chaffin Furniture Makers who said:

• "Every time I get a quote from them, I can’t believe how much they cost. But every time we finish a project, I can’t believe how little they cost."

It’s the quintessential definition of value: getting more for your money.

As designers and manufacturers of high-end heirloom furniture, their work is not cheap. So how do they create perceptions of value at such high price points?

It’s not the final products themselves, as they always deliver exactly what they promise.

Rather, it’s the outstanding personal service that owners Matt Frederick and Dan Chaffin provide to every customer that leaves people saying, “Wow, is that really all they’re charging me?”

They don’t just go the extra mile; they go an extra five miles.

They communicate openly and honestly, always maintaining a sense of humor along with their desire to make their products perfect.

I’ve witnessed them voluntarily supervise other contractors for clients to make sure jobs go right. I’ve seen them help clients think through other implications of renovation work to help avoid pitfalls and delays. They routinely provide advice and services far beyond the scope of work, and do so with smiles, jokes, and great attitudes.

There is no script they’re following. It’s not planned.

They are simply driven to help their clients as much as they possibly can, and it shows not just in their incredible furniture, but in the service they provide every day.

And it’s that dedication to their clients that creates such strong perceptions of value.

(See their original and inspired designs at their website, and read this recent review of their work.)



“Ummm, is there another option?”

Hypothetical situation: You receive a call from an alien survey center (and we’re talking about a space alien, not the illegal kind).

An alien interviewer graciously invites you to take a short survey about regional politics on his planet.

Clearly, this is a wrong number since you don’t live on his planet (which is wonderfully ironic since the alien has technology sophisticated enough to translate his language into yours while also placing an intergalactic call, but that’s beside the point).

Even though you know nothing about politics on the alien’s planet, you try not to disappoint people (you don’t go through two divorces without learning something), and agree to take the survey.

The alien asks you the following question:

Which political party do you think will benefit more from Grazz’t M’ynox?

(A) The Zarks for taking a strong stance against Grazz’t M’ynox

(B) The Teligs for trying to keep Grazz’t M’ynox

I don’t know about you, but knowing nothing about Grazz’t M’ynox or the political parties involved, I’d rather go with the party taking the “strong stance” rather than the party simply “trying to keep.”

By “taking a strong stance,” the Zarks have clearly been positioned as a party of strength, principal, and determination.

Conversely, the Teligs are simply “trying to keep” something. Yawn.

So the answer categories have been framed in a way that makes one option more desirable than the other even if you know nothing of the politics and parties involved.

In the latest Bloomberg survey, Americans were asked a similar question (see page 3, half-way down):

Which party will benefit more if the federal government shuts down?

(A) Republicans for taking a strong stance against government spending

(B) Democrats for trying to keep the government open

In the survey, 45% said Republicans, and 34% said Democrats. Given the different framing in the answer categories, is it any surprise that the “taking a strong stance” party beat the “trying to keep” party?

So that question was loaded to favor Republicans. Not that the survey is slanted in only one direction.

For example, take a look at the question right above it, again on page 3. The question involves the potential government shut-down over budget cuts.

The first answer option is an inflexible, line-in-the-sand statement: 

Deep cuts need to be made, even if it means shutting down the government for a while to get that done

The other answer option is a more understanding statement about people working together to find common ground:

Cuts need to be made, but compromises should be reached to avoid a government shutdown

In my experience, the average American is far too busy raising their kids, running their household, and paying the bills to pay close attention to the national economy.

So really, when pressed on such questions, how can busy, hard-working Americans come up with an intelligent answer? Well, how about by listening to the answer options and hedging your bets by picking the one that sounds safest?

And in a situation where you don’t really understand the issue or the implications of your answer, which choice is safer: a hard-line stance or a call for compromise?

So is it really surprising that 77% opted for the “compromise” option while only 20% selected the hard-line stance?

Again, if 1,001 Americans were asked this same question about alien politics, I expect the numbers would work out roughly the same.

I might be deeply ambivalent about Grazz’t M’ynox, but I take a strong stance against questionable survey design, and will not compromise.