|
Friday 11-May-12 Selling raffle tickets
A standard way that clubs, societies and charities raise money is by selling
'raffle' tickets. It's a kind of lottery, where you buy a ticket which then goes
into a draw for a number of possible prizes. The big challenge for most
organizers is how to sell the raffle tickets. Mostly. the tickets are being sold
by members and friends, and they are mostly pretty bad at selling (and generally
hate doing it).
Some raffles have lots of prizes. Some are provided by the organizer and some
are provided by friends and local businesses who get some 'free' advertising in
return, typically with their name appearing on every ticket.
Recently, I was given the task of selling raffle tickets at a local May Fayre.
It's a common British thing: on the local green with various stalls either
selling stuff or encouraging you to join or help various societies. I was there
with the local photo club.
What I did is this. I put up a big sign saying 'Would you like £100?', and
with a smaller sub-title 'ask here'. When people asked (or even just looked), I
just said, with a smile, 'Just one pound for a raffle ticket. First prize
£100!'. If they smiled back, I'd smile more and say 'Go on, I can see you want
one.'
If this didn't work, I'd add a gender spin. If it was a woman, I'd say, a bit
conspiratorially, 'It's a £100 Marks and Spencer voucher'. M&S is a popular
store that sells lots of womens' clothes and this often was enough to tip the
balance for them. For men I'd add the visceral 'In your back pocket'.
I sold loads.
Friday 04-May-12 Attentional bias and religion
How do you know where to place your attention? Attention is the searchlight
you use as you gather information. You go places. You turn your head. You look
and listen carefully. But why? This holy grail for marketers and other
persuaders is a complex question. Attention is related to inner factors such as
needs, interests and goals. These bias our decisions on where to focus. This 'attentional
bias' drives what we subsequently think and do, so is very important to
everyone.
One of the things about attention is that we have a switchable spotlight. We
can pay attention to the broad context or to a specific detail (or maybe a bit
of both). This has been linked to brain hemispheres, with the left brain having
focus on detail and the right brain being more concerned with a wider
perception. The problem is that if we pay too much attention in one area, we
will likely miss important things at other levels of detail.
Researchers in Holland picked up this narrow-wide attentional question,
examining the bias of 72 Dutch participants who were one of Conservative
Calvinists, Liberal Calvinists, Conservative Calvinists who had become atheists,
or life-long atheists. Calvinism has a great focus on detail and rules, which
suggests the more conservative Calvinists may have a narrower attentional bias.
And this appeared to be so. When asked to identify small and large squares, the
Conservative Calvinists identified the small squares quicker and the bigger
squares comparatively slower. The researchers also found that it took about
seven years of atheism to remove the narrow attentional bias, which perhaps says
something about persistence of habit.
They then wondered about the effect of communal solidarity and an external
locus of control (eg. God is in control), which is strong in Orthodox Jews and
Roman Catholics. They tested samples of these and now found bigger squares being
identified more quickly (as compared with atheists), again supporting their
hypothesis that social systems (in this case religions) that focus on detail or
the big picture will shift attentional bias accordingly.
There is an implication here for businesses. Those with a cultural focus on
the detail, such as engineering firms, may miss market changes, while those with
a wider strategic focus may fail in implementation detail. For individuals, too,
we should watch for our cultural environments, whatever they are, leading to
attentional bias.
Reference:
Colzato LS, van Beest I, van den Wildenberg WP, Scorolli C, Dorchin S, Meiran
N, Borghi AM, and Hommel B (2010). God: Do I have your attention? Cognition,
117 (1), 87-94
Friday 27-April-12 The limits of advertising
Advertising is a tricky game. You want customers to pay attention and look or
listen to your advertisements. Yet you can over-do it. So what is the limit? How
do you know when you are over-advertising.
The first problem comes from application of the 'more is better'
school of advertising. If you put in more ads then surely, it seems, consumers
will look at adverts more often. But when there are billboards every few yards
on the freeway, they just become a blur. Similarly, when there are too many
adverts on a web page, readers become saturated and ignore them all.
If the motorists are not looking at the roadside, then how about putting
billboards in the middle of the road? While there would be safety issues on the
road, the equivalent on web pages is to interleave adverts among the main text
body. This can just be plain annoying as the readers are forced to swerve around
these. And if you over-do it, them they will just go elsewhere.
Yet adverts are a kind of necessity. People who make and sell things have to
find ways of attracting customers, and advertising is a standard channel. On the
web, there are no adverts on some sites, such as Wikipedia (apart from the
regular appeals for money to support the site). Many sites are really one big
advert for the business. Then there are many weak content sites, where the
quality and quantity of the content is limited and the real game is to get high
SEO ratings, to get clicks, to serve ads.
And amongst all this, there are a few sites that seek to provide deep and
useful information, using adverts as a means of support rather than an end in
itself. ChangingMinds is such a site. I really enjoy researching and writing and
set out ten years ago to get to a place I have recently achieved -- being able to
work full time on the site. I deliberately chose to go the advertising route
rather than paid-for membership as I felt this would be most successful and would give a
far greater reach. I have a life goal to 'touch the world' and the site is helping me
achieve this. I need adverts to help pay the bills and keeps the site free, but
I also deliberately keep them at the edge of the screen, retaining an
uninterrupted central reading block that gives an uninterrupted view of the
content.
A few months ago I took on another advertiser, putting adverts 'below the
fold' at the bottom of the page (and only appearing in the USA). But it seems
this has resulted in full-page adverts appearing that you have to click away
before you can read the page. I could not see these myself as I'm in the UK, but
heard about them from some generous readers who took time to write. One in
particular wasn't very happy to say the least, but I still took the comments
very seriously. Worrying too, some of the search rankings of key pages seemed to
be slipping. I don't know if this was just coincidence, but it is too
important to ignore.
So I've removed these ads. Apologies to those affected and I hope your
reading experience and confidence is restored. This decision has cost me
significant income, but I have faith that keeping readers happy is the secret of
success.
We're not all mad men.
Friday 20-April-12 Selling the house
After living in England for nearly thirty years, we're selling up and moving
back to Wales. With writing and consulting, I can work anywhere and my wife is
retiring from teaching, so we going back to our roots.
The next question, of course, is how we are going to sell our house.
The traditional way of buying a house in the UK is that you go around the
retail outlets of the local estate agents. You tell them what you want and then
they give you a pile of printed house details. You then take home the big stack
and start whittling them down. Then you maybe drove around the area looking at
houses from the outside before contacting the agent.
These days, you go to an online aggregator such as
Rightmove (the UK gorilla),
Primelocation or
Zoopla (or a host of others). All the
local agents put their houses on most of these, so a search of one website will
show you most houses. Better, I use Rightmove on the iPad, where I can look at a
map and see what's available where. I then go to Google maps and streetview to
review the area. Only then do I contact the agent for a viewing.
Which begs the question of what value the local agents add. Mostly it seems
to be showing people around and negotiating, which I'm happy to do myself.
Agents typically charge 1.5% to 3% of the sale price for this, which can easily
add up to a five-figure sum (especially when the 20% tax is added).
Unsurprisingly, there are also now online agents who offer a range of
packages at far lower prices. Typically, the basic offer is around £500 to put
your house on Rightmove etc. and often includes agent services such as a call
centre for booking visits and price negotiation. Sometimes at extra cost are
things such as photography, floor plans, energy certificate, printed brochures,
etc.
So I did a review of the online agents.
Housenetwork is the biggest. It's
also more expensive with plenty of 'extra cost' items. I also tried 'being a
buyer' to explore that experience and found an irritating form-filling exercise.
Hatched is also larger, but has a 'the low
cost estate agent' as a part of its logo. As a seller, I don't want to tell
buyers I'm a cheapskate. 'Low cost' for buyers also means 'cheap house' or
'negotiate it down'.
Eventually I found Housetree. They're
smaller and more active up north, where they're based, but they have a good
website, a credible logo and easy buyer experience. I gave them a call and spoke
to someone who sounded like they knew what they are doing. They also are open
and on the phone seven days a week. And their prices are competitive. So I'm
putting my house on with them. I've got strong input into the marketing copy,
which I like. I'm also a keen photographer and spend a couple of days doing HDR
photos around the house with a wide-angle lens. I even did a night photo.
So watch this space. I'll write again about my experiences, but I'm hopeful.
Friday 13-April-12 Assertion or Persuasion in Politics
I was reading something recently about the Republican elections for their
2012 presidential candidate that made me think. Normally, it all passes over my
head as I live in Britain and politics across the pond are of limited interest,
particularly the pre-election shenanigans. But this piqued my interest.
The point of interest was made about Mitt Romney, how he was framing
himself as a 'severe conservative' and making assertions about what should
be done. Like many others, he is seeking to persuade his voters by boldly asserting
things as being true rather than gaining votes through more rational and
persuasive methods.
It's a serious question for politicians. Do you appeal to the more
thoughtful, questioning voters by putting forward a reasoned case, or do you
take an authoritative stance, playing the all-knowing parent-leader who knows
what is best? In short, do you push or
do you pull? From what I have seen,
Republicans generally prefer to assertively push, while Democrats prefer to
persuasively pull.
It's not too dissimilar over here in the UK. The Conservative right, based in
an aristocratic past, just seem to want to tell the country what is best for
them. The Labour right, however, are not just about pulling. While not as
leftist as some European parties yet not as central as the US Democrats, Labour
do have a pushy tendency. Take for example Tony Blair's decision to join the USA
in Iraq even after a million people demonstrated against such a decision. The
historical aggressive style of supporting trade unions also leads to more push.
In the UK, the Liberal Democrats seem to be more reasoned and reasoning and
are more popular amongst academics and thinkers, although their reputation for
consideration is being dented in their current bumpy coalition with the
Conservatives.
As in any persuasive situation, the bottom line is what works, wins. If you
have a population that just wants a parent figure who seems to know what they
are doing, then push methods are best. If you have a thinking population or
people who do not like being dictated to, then some of pull is better. In
practice you usually need a fine balance of both. Too much push and you seem
dictatorial and inconsiderate. Too much pull and you seem weak and
insubstantial. Just how much of which is best will be proven by only one thing:
the result.
\
For more, see the ChangingMinds Blog! Archive or
the Blogs by subject. To
comment on any blog, click on the blog either in the archive or in the column to
the right.
Best wishes,
Dave
|
|
Click below to view & comment on any blog
May-12
11-May-12: Selling raffle
tickets
05-May-12: Attentional bias
and religion
Apr-12
27-Apr-12: The limits of
advertising
20-Apr-12: Selling the
house
13-Apr-12: Assertion or
Persuasion in Politics
06-Apr-12: Customer service
language
Mar-12
30-Mar-12: Managing and
measuring
23-Mar-12: How to sell more
shampoo (or use less)
16-Mar-12: How you look
changes what they say
09-Mar-12: Freedom, abuse
and control
02-Mar-12: Housing pains
Feb-12
24-Feb-12: Store designs
that work
17-Feb-12: Painting the
walls smart
10-Feb-12: The extrinsic
end of education
03-Feb-12: Real intimacy
Jan-12
27-Jan-12: Sexy screen
locations
20-Jan-12: The smell of
fear
13-Jan-12: Obviously, you
must believe me
06-Jan-12: The days are
long but the years are short
Dec-11
30-Dec-11: National
treasures
23-Dec-11: Christmas
messages
16-Dec-11: Media, decency
and success
09-Dec-11: The power of
unconditional love
02-Dec-11: Free (again)
Nov-11
25-Nov-11: Black Friday,
Big Deal
18-Nov-11: Respectful
commitment
11-Nov-11: 11-11-11, 11:11
04-Nov-11: Selling the
future
Oct-11
28-Oct-11: Activism and
happiness
21-Oct-11: The fame curve
14-Oct-11: Are long queues
to pay a good thing?
07-Oct-11: Steve Jobs,
Genius
Sep-11
30-Sep-11: A pattern of
change
23-Sep-11: Bias and
imagination
16-Sep-11: Listening
changes
11-Sep-11: 9/11: Ten years
after
09-Sep-11: Presenting
values
02-Sep-11: Flowing into
change
Aug-11
26-Aug-11: Change
frustrations
19-Aug-11: Repercussions of
Rudeness
12-Aug-11: Becoming
fearless
05-Aug-11: Moving
politicians
Jul-11
22-Jul-11: Brown eyed
dominance
08-Jul-11: Fruit looking
good
08-Jul-11: Crisis reactions
01-Jul-11: Is showing
qualifications boasting?
Jun-11
24-Jun-11: The loneliness
of the internal change agent
17-Jun-11: In the press
10-Jun-11: Expect positive
negotiations
03-Jun-11: Happiness is an
option
May-11
27-May-11: Have a heart,
youngster!
20-May-11: Connecting with
celebs
13-May-11: Connecting with
your audience
06-May-11: Consultants and
wagging the dog
Apr-11
29-Apr-11: Royal wedding
exhaustion
22-Apr-11: Chatting up men
08-Apr-11: Government,
health, trust, knights and knaves
01-Apr-11: Why April fools?
Mar-11
25-Mar-11: Chewing on
stress
18-Mar-11: Being nice is
good for you
11-Mar-11: Judging
eye-witness accuracy
04-Mar-11: Multiculturalism
or integration
Feb-11
25-Feb-11: Revolution,
change and disappointment
18-Feb-11: Banishing
blushing
11-Feb-11: Harmonising and
sensitivity
04-Feb-11: The absent
persuader
Jan-11
28-Jan-11: The
second-oldest profession
21-Jan-11: Competition,
performance and cheating
14-Jan-11: How cats
persuade
07-Jan-11: The Persuasion
God
Full archive
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
|
