Communication is no longer about just businesses talking to anyone; it’s about people talking to people. Forget who’s on the end of the conversation. This is about where it all starts. The future of communications is C2C, or consumer2consumer or people2people.

Individuals, whether buying for business or themselves, are talking to and listening to other consumers. They are setting the agenda, leading the conversation, sharing their views, recommending the best products and deciding whether brands are successful or not.

No longer are consumers just taking in information corporations and brands are spewing at them. Now they question and make brands earn their loyalty. Because of social media platforms, like Facebook and Twitter, consumers are now quick to ask brands: What can you do for me?

Case in point: Take the fatal example of Netflix. When Netflix raised prices last summer, customers became infuriated, took to their blogs and Twitter accounts, and raised hell. Netflix was humiliated and has yet to fully recover from the CRM crisis that has plagued it ever since. Instead of being accountable to its customers, Netflix let Facebook comments go unanswered, and the company’s president responded with an answer about profits rather than speak to its customers directly in a level manner. Millions of customers felt betrayed and gave Netflix quite a scare by cutting service, resulting in its stock prices taking a 60 percent nosedive.

So, our challenge is getting people talking about brands in a positive way, not getting brands to talk to people. With so many touch points, brands must move away from the traditional 1960s formula of one-sided information and start having conversations with consumers. Consumers want brands to be authentic and have a real human voice they can speak with when something goes wrong (or right).

Advertisers are in complete denial if they think they can continue with the same tired, one-sided formula. Brands need to have authentic conversations with consumers if they want to survive. Consumers are talking to each other, so why aren’t brands following?

Fiona Menzies is managing director at gyro Dubai.

Originally published at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

Advertising was based on a simple funnel concept called the Hierarchy of Effects. The funnel said, push messaging out using these three networks and some print and radio, and people will become aware, form an opinion, make a commitment to buy, and then stay loyal to the brand–the traditional push/pull advertising model. Then the model broke—actually, it shattered into thousands of fragments.

After Al Gore re-invented the Internet (wink), everything changed and the funnel was turned on its head.  Now, people started to form opinions based on well, other people. Networks and communities arose, and some voices were stronger than others. And the others followed.

Social media went from an interesting idea to one of the most powerful tools in the toolbox. Why? Because advocacy started to help form people’s opinions before branding. This is the polar opposite of the shotgun approach of many forms of traditional media.

So where does this leave us? What is media? The answer: It is a series of connections. Today’s media mix is about finding the best ways to connect with the consumer or decision maker.

It is about finding the best ways to connect with the target, with our planning, account and creative peers, and with the ever-increasing world of vendors who bring new ideas to the table every day. Together, we have the opportunity to become an incubator of media firsts via all of the emerging outlets as well as the tried-and-true.

In fact, sometimes the best route is still the traditional route. That aspect of the mix isn’t broken. There is nothing to fix. We just need to connect the old with the new. Awareness building and advocacy are far stronger together than separately.

There is more creativity and excitement around developing media plans than ever before. And the way we connect with our audiences will only continue to become deeper, richer and more engaging. For folks involved in media planning, or better yet, connections planning (such as myself) there has never been a better time to be alive.

Richard Lefkowitz is Connections Planning Director of gyro North America

Originally published at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

On Feb. 27, I received a handwritten thank you note from the Tiffany’s sales associates who assisted me with my purchase. It’s not uncommon to receive a thank you from Tiffany’s given its reputation for service, but in the same pile of mail was a handwritten thank you from my florist. The florist’s note was the first I’d received after years of doing business with them.

Minutes later, I received a phone call from Pete, the manager of the Lorien Hotel and Spa, inviting my wife and me for a return trip—free of charge—as a result of some service issues we had experienced during our stay. Pete realized that those misfires disrupted an important customer experience (see my note above about “continual travel” and “well deserved”) and offered to make it right.

Significantly impressed with the three simultaneous acts of kindness, I thought to myself that maybe there is a silver lining to the recession. Maybe companies have been reminded that customers are, in fact, important to their success.

A customer is defined as an individual, not a segment that scores the highest on a propensity model or an occupation with a “desirable socioeconomic profile.” A person with feelings and beliefs who has had an experience with a brand, a company representative, a product or service, might be most likely to decide to buy it again, or tell a friend, or both, if that experience was a good one.

In a new study published by Accenture titled The New Realties of “Dating” in the Digital Age, 85 percent of consumers who posted a comment about a negative online experience switched providers. And these consumers are getting harder to please. Customer service expectations have been increasing consistently over the last four years, with 44 percent of consumers saying their expectations are slightly or much higher than the previous year, compared to only 31 percent in 2008.

The study also identifies five potential blind spots over the course of the provider-customer relationship that could predispose customers to switch providers:

*Nice to Meet You – Missing the chance to set the right expectations at the onset of the relationship.
*You Don’t Know Me Anymore – Missing subtler changes that matter in customers’ need for special treatment or reward.
*Cheating Heart – Overlooking signs customers are itching to switch.
*Are You Listening – Failure to offer consumers opportunities to engage with a provider.
*Trinkets Won’t Save Me – Relying on point solutions to satisfy and keep customers.

The “cheating heart” effect points to companies over emphasis on retention, which may cause them to miss important shifts in buying behavior that could signal a future switch in vendors. Thankfully, my florist carefully monitors my purchase patterns and reminds me of purchases I make at certain times of the year (birthdays, anniversaries, etc.), creating a win-win for both of us.

As the researchers note, failure to notice these subtle changes in behavior puts the company at risk for eventually losing the customer. For example, 27 percent of respondents mentioned that they had stayed with their bank/financial services provider but have added another provider (a partial switch), a foot out the door that eventually leads to customer attrition.

So remember to treat your customer as you would a loved one, with respect, kindness and an occasional gift to smooth over any misgivings. If you don’t, that cheating heart might just leave you.

Mark Johnson, CEO of Loyalty 360, in an interview identifying the top loyalty trends for 2011 stated, “Loyalty will focus more on emotions than on rational, incentive-based initiatives. Behavioral economists tell us that economic decision-making is 70 percent emotional and 30 percent rational, which is why incentive-based loyalty programs that tend to be rational do not work well. It’s the emotional side of the decision-making process that creates connected, passionate, engaged customers.“

The thank you cards and the phone call I received were specific to me and my experience. They weren’t form letters generated by a transactional or CRM system, based on my purchase. The notes were handwritten by the people who assisted me and mentioned the specific purchases I made with them.

They were relevant to me, left an impression and got me talking about the experience. I didn’t receive bonus points or special discounts. Instead, I got a response from someone who appreciated my business and cared enough about my experience to reach out to me on a personal and emotional level, which is how you can create connected, engaged customers and prevent “a cheating heart.”

Scott Gillum leads gyro’s Channel Marketing practice and is president of gyro Washington, D.C.

Follow Scott on Twitter @SGillum.

Originally published at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

On one hand, the phones themselves can practically do everything short of making a double espresso (although if I downloaded the right app, my new Samsung might do that for me, too). The technology has advanced astonishingly fast—the svelte and alluring cell phone that seduced me a mere two years ago came to feel like a clunky and not-so-smart artifact I couldn’t wait to dump—and there’s no sign that it will slow down anytime soon. Shall I instant-message that new bistro for a reservation? No problem! How about high-res cameras front and back? Sure, when I shoot the Grand Canyon I want a close-up of my eyeball at the same time! Sudoku on demand? I’m on game 51 at the “Challenging” level! The frosting on this scrumptious digital cake is that I can even make phone calls—although texting is usually faster.

On the other hand, despite their ever-expanding spate of features and capabilities, cell phones—or more precisely and remarkably, smartphones—already seem to risk becoming commodities. The product life cycle of many models can be measured in weeks, at a time when more than 87 million Americans now own smartphones, according to a comScore report issued in November. The carriers themselves—Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile at the top of the heap—face an equally daunting challenge: How to beat their competitors with offers just good enough, just simple enough to entice and retain customers?

The extent of all this churn might well cause Charles Dickens, if he were reporting for CNET, to summarize the state of the cell phone industry in 2011 quite tellingly: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times …”

In her remarkable book, Resonate, CEO and educator Nancy Duarte notes that “if two products have the same features, the one that appeals to an emotional need will be chosen.” In a recent online discussion of retail promotion strategy, Carol Spieckerman, president of NewMarketBuilders, commented that “when everyone has access to the same raw materials, sourcing, supply chain efficiencies, and democratized design, brand is really the ONLY difference.” [emphasis in original]

As a hardcore loyalist of cell phone carrier “X” for 15 years, I embodied the twin stars of Duarte’s and Spieckerman’s points. I couldn’t wait to trade up, and I eagerly scoured the company’s website for details on the various smartphone features. But that all changed when I hit the nearby corporate retail store.

Indifference reigned, and the store wasn’t even busy. The rep assigned to me pointed vaguely to a wall display. I asked about the data plan for all four members in our family plan. “Lemme go check,” he said.  Meanwhile, I tried a demo phone but couldn’t access the Internet. “Yeah,” the rep said when he returned.  “Customers mess ’em up, and our techs have to reset them.”

“Would that be possible to do today?” I asked. No, apparently not until late on Sunday.

“OK,” I said. “But I’m ready to buy four new phones and contracts today if I can try them out.”

“Gotcha,” he replied, then paused. “Thanks for coming in,” he added, as he turned away.

With the rep nowhere in sight, I left the store 10 minutes later and, after some thought, ended up in a competitor’s store down the street. I didn’t simply want a new smartphone, I realized; I wanted a brand whose ambassadors would share my excitement. If I were an IT manager aiming to equip my colleagues with mobile devices to help them win in the field, the process would have differed, but the desire would have been exactly the same. Let’s make some cool stuff happen!

As it turned out, my needs were met on the second try. A responsive sales rep understood and shared my delight with the new capabilities a smartphone would provide; by that simple human connection—by making a mash-up of gee-whiz technical features into somethinghumanly relevant—the rep made me a new brand ambassador.

We’ll see if that feeling lasts; for now, I’m enjoying my new phone. One might expect that intense competition in an industry would raise the level of customer service; however, the forces of commoditization may be hitting cell phone carriers much as they have the airlines, eroding investment in almost any aspect of the post-purchase brand experience. Brand loyalty? Lifetime customers? Whatever.

If that’s the case, then being a cell phone carrier nowadays must truly be brutal—especially if you work on the retail side.

by Pete Healy
Vice President – Account Planning

Follow Pete on Twitter @PeteHealy

So why do marketers continue to tilt at the cross-selling windmill? In many cases, it’s because we’re buying into three popular myths.

Myth # 1: We Have the Incumbent Advantage

Sure, you’re doing business with that targeted prospect. But so, too, are a whole roster of other suppliers, vendors and service providers. SMB buyers in particular are likely to level this particular playing field by inviting your fellow “incumbents” into the mix. However, two-thirds of them are going to continue to shop around among non-incumbents.

Myth #2: We Have a Strong Relationship With Our Customer

That’s all well and good and may give you a very good chance of keeping your current business. But as for cross-selling efforts? Not so much. The study found that far from being a leading factor in purchase decisions, relationship strength ranks near the bottom when it comes to selecting additional or complementary products and services.

Myth # 3: We Have a Long-standing Relationship

Many companies and brands are proud—perhaps rightfully so—of their status and “the name you’ve known and trusted since …” But rather than being an advantage, tenure actually can be a handicap when it comes to introducing new categories of offerings. In addition to the risk of being typecast as that supplier of a specific line, your customers have had many more opportunities for a less-than-satisfying experience with your quality or service.

The Good News

Not all of your cross-selling efforts need be in vain, however. The ECSB research demonstrated that business decision-makers are most receptive to cross-sell efforts at the beginning of a new relationship. The likelihood of successfully selling in additional or complementary products and services is particularly high during the three months immediately following the initial transaction.

Building this understanding into your customer on-boarding process provides a bright window of opportunity for successful cross-selling. A well-planned on-boarding program provides an opportunity to not only listen, gather data, diagnose problems and improve overall satisfaction, but also introduce more offerings at a time when the propensity to buy additional and complementary products is highest. Too many brands are leaving incremental sales on the table by not taking advantage of this window of opportunity. You still need relevant messaging, meaningful offers and customized/personalized points of contact to develop the dialogue. But in this, like many endeavors, timing is everything.

gyro is a member of and agency for ECSB.

by Judy Rudolph Begehr
Senior Vice President – Account Planning

Cross posted at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

Take a look at the biographies in the new Forbes 400 edition. These are people who have made their ways in the company of real friends, not those they’ve friended. Sure, David Rockefeller has collected a refrigerator-size tumbler of what were once called Rolodex cards, but only as a meticulous record of thousands of intimate interactions with people for whom he has cared, and who have cared about him. Granted, he started with an ancestral advantage, but he prospered his birthright through the careful cultivation of authentic friendships, not just the compilation of records and connections.

Successful people have real friends. Schaub further observes that for centuries, “…  befriending another was a morally demanding commitment that might entail risks and sacrifice, and certainly entailed action on behalf of someone else.” Were we to ask the Millennial Generation to define a “friend,” could they distinguish one from an “acquaintance,” or worse, a “link” to someone else via some new gadget?

No, I suspect were we to survey these four hundred Forbes titans, we would learn that friendship was as valuable and essential to their personal prosperity as all the other forms of capital at their mastery, combined.

Indeed, the friendship that grew between Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, and the conjoined philanthropy that blossomed on its stem in the form of the work of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation — and their so-called “Billionaires’ Challenge” that already has prompted nearly 10 percent of the Forbes 400 to commit at least half their wealth to charity — may represent the greatest private humanitarian effort in history.

All among friends.

At the end of the 1988 presidential campaign, it was observed that the victorious George H. W. Bush was a man who had spent decades tending an extensive garden of friends he had nurtured. He had “worked the phone,” incessantly staying in touch for years. He sent tens of thousands of handwritten notes acknowledging the simplest of courtesies. I know. I have such a note of gratitude sent to me for having once driven him from the airport to downtown Columbus, Ohio. Of the vanquished Michael Dukakis, it was said that no one could even identify the name of his best friend.

Bill Clinton, we’ve read, still plays cards with his Arkansan high school chums, whenever he returns home. The litmus test of a candidacy is often “With which one would you rather drink a beer?”

Real friendship is more about intimacy than technological enablement. In a great new edition of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, translators Bartlett and Collins render VIII.1155a5 as “… it is most necessary with a view to life: without friends, no one would choose to live, even if he possessed all other goods.”

Friendship is not a utility of life. It is a condition of the good life; a matter of virtue, not efficiency; more about loving than about exhibitionism or its equally perverse cousin, voyeurism.

Our marketing world today is replete with pseudo-intimacy; so many 1:1 and CRM enablements that confuse easier direct contact with human relevance. I’ve made a purchase at Amazon.com nearly every week since it launched, and still it seems to base its recommendations on only the last few purchases I’ve made. I have patronized a London hotel, part of a prominent global chain, repeatedly over the last four years. Every time I come to the counter, the desk clerk feverishly taps her keyboard making a record of my check-in. Always she asks, “Have you stayed with us before?”

Politely, I nod, “Yes.” In my thoughts I plead, “I know your name, Natasha! How come you don’t know mine?” To how many companies have I surrendered my date of birth? Might just one ever send a note acknowledging my birthday?

Successful people and companies pay attention to people. They extend themselves. The original language around the word “friend” involved caring. The Forbes 400, unlike so many Hollywood stereotypes of the successful, became thusly listed because, along the way, they most certainly did.

by Rick Segal
President Worldwide and Chief Practice Officer

Follow Rick on Twitter @MrBtoB

Cross-posted at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

Why?

In the tech industry and according to author Tom Grant, Ph.D, companies desire early commitment, due to the industry’s “voracious appetite for leads.” As Grant explains in his report, Tech Marketers Pursue Antiquated Marketing Strategies, the “high-speed innovation” rate drives a hyperfocus on product marketing and lead generation compared to other industries.

In fact, only 22 percent of marketers in the technology industry said that customer relationship management was one of the two most important priorities. Contrast that with 52 percent of marketers in non-tech companies. The focus is obviously on producing a measurable outcome that drives the product P&L: leads.

Developing a relationship with an audience takes time and resources, and it can be perceived as a distraction to the task of finding “ready to marry” prospects. This inward-out view of marketing ignores audience needs and assumes that all audiences are the same, and that all searches must indicate intent.

However, the key to driving demand and lead generation in today’s economy is not being more aggressive and pushing harder, but rather, taking time to develop and nurture relationships. Audiences, like dates, can sense desperation.  Perhaps the way to go faster is to slow down and shift the focal point from the conversion to the conversation.

We have long known that relevancy drives conversion and that conversion drives revenue. Getting to relevancy requires us to engage with the audience to understand their unique needs and motivations. As a result, our role changes from dictating to facilitating and understanding that it’s now on the buyer’s time frame, not ours.

New technologies such as Bizo enable us to know who the audience is at the first interaction. We also know where they’ve been for 30 days (who they’ve been dating, so to speak) before the conversion point, via Google Analytics’ new Multichannel Funnels.

We can serve up custom content through retargeting based on audience profiles, adapt for whatever device they are using, and deepen engagement by providing specific product or brand messages that align with their journey.

95% of prospects on your website are not yet ready to talk with a sales rep.” Source: 2011 MECLABS research

We no longer have to interrupt a buyer’s journey to gauge the interest level.   We no longer have to call a prospect to qualify him or her.  When a company offers something of value (i.e., relevant and personal), buyers are more likely to share their interests, desires and needs, but only if we listen, nurture and respect the relationship. According to Forrester, this intimate information is critical to creating real opportunity (leads) for the sales force.

In the Technology Buyer Insight Study, Forrester found that although tech has done a good job of equipping its sales force to discuss company products, it had failed to provide reps with insight into the buyer’s roles and responsibilities. Only 29 percent of CIOs said that sales reps could “relate to their role”; less than a quarter (24 percent) of business leaders said that reps were “knowledgeable about their business.”

Still too touchy-feely for you? Consider Harte Hanks’ report, Mapping the Technology Buyer’s Journey, which states that the relationship with the vendor is still a top five consideration driver. The first and second most important drivers are what you’d expect: (1) Meets all needs and (2) cost.

Competitors can match your price, but they can’t necessarily match your understanding of the buyer’s need or the relationship developed through that journey.

by Scott Gillum

President, gyro Washington, D.C. and

Head of gyro’s Channel Marketing Practice

Cross-posted at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

You can follow Scott Gillum on Twitter @SGillum

A recent study by ITSMA and RainToday.com highlighted the metrics regularly used to measure the success of lead-generation activities. The top responses are what one would expect: Number of Qualified Leads (68%), Number of Closed Deals (63%), Revenue Growth (54%).

The metrics that ranked lowest are far more interesting and valuable to strategic marketers: Cost per Customer Acquired (15%) and Lifetime Value of Customers Acquired (19%). The lowly ranked Customer Lifetime Value metric is often an overlooked but very valuable metric for aligning the performance of various groups across an organization.

For example, a company that sold six-figure primary research reports found its customer acquisition model unable to support future growth. Acquiring new customers was largely a transactional effort, i.e., “one and done.” In order to meet revenue objectives, it had relied heavily on marketing to generate new opportunities to fill the pipeline. But moving forward, the traditional demand-generation model was unsustainable. It could not increase marketing budgets to support the volume of leads needed to reach new revenue targets.

The key to solving this challenge came from calculating their Customer Lifetime Value (CLV). Almost immediately, the analysis pointed to issues with the company’s average price point, year-over-year churn rate (retention) and average account size. Not surprisingly, the company had a negative CLV, but no one was measuring or managing it.

Even though the symptom of the underlying problem manifested itself in marketing, it was not just a marketing issue. The challenges reached across the organization and into the product, sales and service groups. Of course, understanding the cost envelope for acquiring customers helped guide future marketing investments and activities, but fixing this problem was not only about cutting or right sizing the marketing budget.

As a result of the analysis, the firm set itself on a course to build and implement other areas of improvement:

• An upsell and cross-sell program
• Complimentary products that could be sold as follow-on/add-on
• Enhanced products to drive higher initial price points
• An account management and retention program

By implementing the aforementioned tactics, the company was able to correct the problem and generate a profitable CLV, which became a key performance indicator (KPI).

Organizations using CLV as a KPI have an early-warning system that can indicate these issues:

• Targeting the wrong audience – too small, short-term focused, etc.
• Creating the wrong type of leads – clients may be interested only in the initial offer and not in a longer-term relationship (see the next point for more detail); the value of the lead is not worth the cost.
• Promoting the wrong offer – the offer may be serving as an incentive for the wrong behaviors, which is especially true with discounts associated with individual purchases, such as retail store cards that offer 10% off the first purchase if a customer opens an account.
• Setting the wrong price point – the true cost of the sale may not have been considered or known.
• Having retention and/or account management issues – this issue often shows up quickly (aka the “leaky bucket”).

As illustrated in the case study, the symptom may show up in marketing; however, these issues will cut across the organization. Budget cutting will not fix the problem. Marketers need to be able to point to other parts of the equation that are contributing to the issues, which is good for the other CLV: Career Lifetime Value.

by Scott Gillum
President gyro Washington, D.C. and Head of gyro’s Channel Marketing Practice

Follow Scott on Twitter @SGillum

Cross-posted at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

Click a link.

Vote in our poll.

Like.

Retweet.

Donate a dollar.

While what the Twitterati refer to as “slacktivism” is not new (WIN buttons, anyone?), the ready access to social platforms clearly makes it easier than ever to publicly do almost nothing of real value. But that’s not really the point, is it?

Gladwell compared the level of commitment in online communities to the real risk taken by Freedom Riders and sit-in participants in the American Civil Rights Movement. He was, of course, correct that no measure of avatar coloring managed to bring about social change in the Iranian elections. For all of the hashtags and well wishes, the suffering of those affected by the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile or the tsunami in northeastern Japan remain all too real.

But since that writing, we have seen real change effected by engagement in social networks. From the chaos of the Arab Spring to the tragedy of England’s Summer of Rage, real people have taken action influenced by information and engagement on Twitter, Facebook, BlackBerry Messenger and other platforms. Some quoted in the mainstream media have even pointed an accusing finger at the technology for inspiring violence in London. In fairness, it also should be noted that religious groups and entire neighborhoods have used the same channels to organize peaceful responses and cleanup efforts.

Social media interactions—what we call engagement—are a means, not an end. Success in social media per se is not a rational objective for most organizations or for most individuals.

It’s only the ignition point.

The students of the June Rebellion, the Freedom Riders, the crowds in Tahrir Square … none of them organized spontaneously to take action. Each of the events they would help shape sprung from a series of conversations. Had they remained in the coffee shops, taverns and cafés—the social platforms of their days—we would little note what they said or thought. It was only when they took action that they became remarkable.

Which is why it’s not about how many followers or fans or retweets you accumulate, just as it never really was about the number of page views on your website or how many brochures you handed around. It’s about what happens after. Does somebody pick up the phone, try a product, take the appointment, apply for that job or give you an idea for your next product?

But it still begins with a conversation.

And whether that conversation begins with a tweet, a comment thread, a chance meeting at the trade show … or speech in a Boston tavern in 1773 … conversations influence action, and action changes the world.

by Rick Segal
President Worldwide and Chief Practice Officer

Follow Rick on Twitter @MrBtoB

Cross posted at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network

Reputation:

There’s a strong expectation of trust and integrity among small-business owners (SBO) and stable social norms at work in this community. This sort of thing has been referred to as Reputation Theory of Social Norms, by social psychologist Andreas Engert.

ECSB presented research that showed 45% of seek advice from other SBOs when making a purchase decision, and 70% of the time they follow the advice they receive! What motivates the SBO to recommend a product or service to their peers? Most often, it’s to make a positive impact on their peers’ business. And they consider their peers to include their larger network of SBOs within and outside their industry. Why would a SBO NOT make a recommendation? Most often, it’s because they are concerned that the product or service could in some way harm another SBO and thereby hurt their reputation.

Even though many are competitors as well as peers, the individual business owner’s own reputation seems important enough to nearly ensure the recommendation will further the collective good. You could just say SBOs take care of their peeps.

Reciprocity:

In the simplest terms, the social reciprocity norm refers to our compulsion to respond to a positive action with another positive action. Research presented at the ECSB Summit showed that SBOs feel a strong sense of reciprocity not only with other SBOs (96% inclined to reciprocate), but the great majority feel a strong sense of reciprocity also with their suppliers (≥71% inclined to reciprocate) if something nice was done for them. It’s the golden rule, applied to business.

The strong sense of obliged integrity is a powerful dynamic in the SBO community. As we think about developing programs to encourage advocacy, we will all do well to remember small business customers are people, not businesses.

by

Judy Rudolph Begehr

Senior Vice President – Account Planning

Cross-posted at Ignite Something on the Forbes CMO Network