When does targeting become intrusive?

This is a question that has vexed marketers for many years.

I remember years ago working with a mail order company with full CTI integration (when it was something new) who had tried answering the phone to a repeat purchasers with “Hello Mr Smith, how can we help you today”. They stopped doing this for two reasons. Firstly many customers were spooked by this level of “big brother” knowledge and secondly the ensuing explanation actually wasted time, and in a contact centre time can mean money.  The consumer calling never questioned the targeting of the offer specifically to them, based on detailed RFV and other segmentation. They questioned the in your face application of the data.

The recent Phorm controversy is just this argument moving forward. I’d hope that all Marketing Direct and most BR readers are up to speed on this latest manifestation of data usage but you can get a fair summary on wikipedia (with the usual Tim Berners-Lee disclaimer about the web). In reality there are always two sides to these arguments and with privacy issues they tend to become polarised. However the success or failure of the implementation is whether it gives the consumer a better online experience or worse one. Given that no consumers really like online advertising then making it more relevant seems entirely sensible. That is as long as it doesn’t make some “mickey mouse” beginners mistakes. As an example the computer in our study at home is likely to have my wife or myself surfing. Our online habits are very different (no no, not that way!) but if my 17 year old son happens to use it because he’s too idle to go upstairs to his room then it becomes even more difficult for any behavioural targeting to keep pace. The light touch that was used by the mail order call centre many years ago, ignoring some of the attributes of the CTI integration, still teaches us lessons.

The heart of the matter

As a first post I suppose I better record the background of the blog title. It's Mark Twain: "Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising". From this point on we'll forget that sort of thing and concentrate on issues closer to DM.

Data (or at least the loss of memory sticks) is thankfully taking a back seat in the news to the recent financial turmoil.
However the management of data isn't far behind the issues. Aside from "spivs", securitisation and the role that it has played in the problems it is the failure of businesses to apply correct understanding of both customers and prospects is at the heart of the matter. Lack of analysis, lack of diligance, lack of data all play their part. It might just be that when we come through this malaise that marketing data and risk data might be really used together to find help make the best decisions. Maybe the teenage scribblers, (to use Nigel Lawson's phrase) will learn something of the value of the data industry. I certainly hope so.