I recently recalled a conversation I had with a health care professional at a private medical clinic. The gist is that the clinic actively avoids social media and web presence because they feel it’s not a channel that their target audience frequents. Taking it even further, they believe their clients attach negative associations with those channels and would therefore be turned off and way from their services. For reference, their average patient (anecdotally) is male, higher income bracket and over 40.

So I’m wondering if the clinic’s views are antiquated or perhaps a function of the industry and their strategy? The business is successful, awareness and reach are not a problem, and so engagement directly with patients does not seem to be necessary. Furthermore, in the health care industry, there are strict laws in terms of confidentiality, and I can see where twitter engagement could tread closely to these lines should a patient complain or even give praise. Social media is often a platform for grievances, but considering the seriousness of the industry, I suspect few would go to those channels, particularly in extreme cases. Patients would also get more immediate response from customer service if they felt slighted or disrespected. In other industries, for larger corporations or phone companies for example, they simply cannot deal with the volume and that is one of the major differences in this case.

However, does this mean that the clinic couldn’t benefit from twitter exposure or facebook in other ways? Complaints could be relegated to direct channels, but on-line postings could be more informative and a form of outbound messaging. I feel that a much tighter strategy and very specific voice would need to be developed for the messaging to resonate with the target audience. This is all assuming those customers even use the social web tools. The times are changing however, and those that are young now, will be old later and knocking at their door for service. Should they stay ahead of the curve or remain a back-channel, niche provider?

To forecast how this might play out, we can perhaps look at some comparables – situations in which internet marketing was not used deliberately to give an air of exclusivity and because of the target audience. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of any such case…perhaps you can comment on one and I’ll get back to you.

I recall a quick experiment in class where, by show of hands, we measured the popularity of SnapChat. Prof Cubbon related our results (~30% usage) to that of his undergraduate class (~90%) and commented that Facebook and Twitter have, by nature, different content and different targets. But what does this say about those that do use SnapChat and those that don’t? There are many competitors such as Instagram and Twitter with photos now, but what is so appealing about the alternative? SnapChat allows the viewer to only see the message once and that has some potentially seedy implications. It’s the communication of choice for those risky messages, those that tread close to the line. That caters to a different segment, or more specifically, to a different mood of the same segment, but my conservative self doesn’t see the point. This is particularly true in consideration of how often we choose to text versus phoning, versus real in-person conversation. The chatting and posting has become a form of barrier or form of inebriation. We say and do things we wouldn’t normally say or do. We need to consider that, maybe if we wouldn’t do it in natural circumstances, we should pause and think twice. Why is it that people just don’t want to think twice? We need to move fast, as fast as the information, but I hope somebody creates a network that slows it all down.

So we’re in the thick of Movember and we can definitely argue that social media has helped expose the cause that much more. I hope somebody studies the effects, and not only the link to collected dollars but also to posted pictures and style of moustache. I wonder if that’s possible through some facial recognition software?

.

This is not Part III to the outdoor branding discussion, although I do expand a bit on some of the points.

As a bit of background, I have to mention that social media did not interest me up until recently. I have always felt overwhelmed by the information out there and avoided connectivity. I didn’t have an FB account until I was cornered into getting one for school, and I joined Twitter 5 weeks ago. I just got an iPhone last week, so perhaps Instagram and the like are next. At any rate, you get the picture. It’s not that I don’t understand the utility of the information, it just that I feel more comfortable searching it out on my own (provided I have the time).

So, from this starting point, I don’t necessarily feel that I have something to add since there is so much out there already. Why would someone listen to me? How could I possibly reach anybody beyond my personal network if they were only following me on Twitter out of pity? That was a couple of months ago, and then something odd happened…I started posting on FB some of those videos I mentioned (that’s not the odd part), and people began responding with quips and likes. At its current scale, there isn’t any widespread buzz about when I might post next, or anything of the sort, but it got me thinking a bit. In some ways, I had people’s trust and they knew they weren’t getting kitty videos if my name was attached. It was all well and good on-line, but to me, it’s all still a bunch of 1s and 0s, and relating it to the real world is important. If you can drive traffic without conversions, what’s the point? It might be good for a teenager but not a business. In my case, a small tipping point came in the form of a conversation with a classmate. We started talking skiing, and he asked about my next post, when it was going to be, where I get my info etc…This demonstrated to me, in a tangible way, that on-line conversations can form the basis of real-world influence even on my scale. Of course social media can start and foster revolutions (Egypt, Syria), but on a small scale, they can start conversations.

Moreover, I was impressed that I had an impact and credibility in the on-line community at Sauder, but I feel it started from my personal living self. I’m not sure that if I had started on-line without a walking-talking persona that I would have the same impact. But I don’t need to over think that one, I’m just happy I have some credibility.

I want to discuss an observation I made through my trawling of various outdoor brands I associate with. (aside: should I admit to associating with a brand? I don’t like being labelled. So maybe it’s better to just say “product websites I touch base with once in a while.”). I have found that I am increasingly going back to salomonfreeski.com and naishkites.com over and over again, despite the fact that my purchase cycle for their products might be 4 years at best. These firms are banking on the fact that I will give my money to them once decision time comes, but how can they be sure? Well, the nice thing about the internet is that it’s cheap to try to grab my loyalty, and the lifetime value is what they’re gunning for.

So how exactly are they nabbing me time and time again? It’s the once-a-month video episodes that are on the landing page, and the brands’ association with a specific place and lifestyle. The videos are front and centre on the landing page and are touted as “TV episodes”. They’re short (5-8min) and cover a variety of topics (exotic locations, athlete profiles, history) with a healthy dose of kite or ski porn. What surprised me the most on my first few visits were the high production standards of the shows. It seems to me they know how to get the repeat customer. Furthermore, the web-technology allows for an interactive experience where at the end of the video, you can click on the relevant players for that episode and get more information or biographies (or specifics about the gear they’re wearing in the show).

With regards to the associations the brands create, I have found that relating the product to a geographical location is an extremely tangible way to make an emotional connection.  And I have to say, it works well with me. For example, #Naish goes to great lengths to communicate that Mauii is where they’re headquarters are and that everything Mauii is also Naish. Similarly, Salomon has a local flair with Whistler being one of its activity hubs. Both those locations draw on some instant memories for me, and emotional recollections of great life experiences in nature. Both brands also create a mellow lifestyle messaging that is in concert with the locales and products alike. What’s interesting here is that they’ve used the web to evoke a more grand response within me and I’m not sure any other medium could achieve the same goal. Further to that, I haven’t started following these firms on twitter or Facebook. Those channels don’t create the same type of connection in my opinion. The flip-side is that the twitter+FB combo is often used to drive the user to the website, so the point might be moot in my case. Perhaps I’ll experiment with myself, and actually see if I can’t get anything out of their feeds?…Perhaps that can be Part III.

It seems to me that internet marketing might be at odds with the customers/participants of outdoor adventure sports in that the technology doesn’t necessarily meet these enthusiasts in their natural habitat. A skier, kiteboarder, climber or avid hiker isn’t plugged into twitter when experiencing a natural high. So how and why do companies such as #Salomon, #OceanRodeo, #Naish and #MEC manage to have such a well developed online presence? There’s no big secret coming on this question, but the topic does bring together some great talking points about the customer journey (or funnel) and brands. So let’s take a closer look.

I don’t think it comes as much of a surprise that the outdoorsy people we’re discussing are often gear-junkies. These personalities seek out information about many products, read reviews, look for the best deal and track weather conditions religiously.  A well positioned brand can take advantage of all aspects of customer inquiry on the aforementioned points to drive traffic and convergence. The most tactful companies use all channels (facebook, website, twitter…) but they also diversify their message even more by using tags and names specific to each sub-segment so that each message is refined. For example, the Salomon brand curates salomonrunning.com, salomonnordic.com and salomonfreeski in addition to at least 5 other product categories. This is an exhaustive example, but there is a trend towards this type of fracturing even with smaller brands. Intuitively, to me, this is indicative of simplification and impactful landing pages that give the customers what they want with the fewest required clicks.

And what are the customers looking for? Well, as previously mentioned, many research products down to the last detail but this also drives them to messaging outside the control of the brands themselves. Customer reviews and outside opinions are very highly regarded in the sports gear industry since they are the next best thing to actually testing the product. This is certainly the case for any product but the effect is amplified here because these toys can be the difference between life and death, or life-altering fun and a broken leg. So, with that in mind, how do these companies stay above the noise and in turn direct the conversation from afar? I have found that many companies are delving into a “show don’t tell” system to guide the gear-talk. Through videos, short movies and interactive graphics, the websites are able to demonstrate that ski X will not break, or that carabiner Y can hold up to the world’s most technical climb. The most clever marketing rolls these product placements into an overall brand message with sponsored athletes doing the heavy lifting.

Having videos extolling the virtues of a ski is nothing new, but this is only the beginning. With the advent of the GoPro camera, every Redbull drinking teenager has become a brand embassador and defacto product reviewer. And many companies are facilitating these interactions. The reviews cannot be controlled, but the videos don’t need to be because by their very nature, they show that the proof is in the product pudding.

I wanted to delve into online brand messaging a bit more, but I will take a breather and comeback to it in a few.