According to a recent B&T, this year Myer will spend more on direct marketing to its Myer One customers, than all of its other advertising put together.  Their CEO, Bernie Brooks, reckons that “once you have the basics of the business right, it’s the use of DM that drives the future trajectory”.  Apparently each $50 voucher invested returns a sale of $125.  Remembering that the $50 voucher is earned from dollars already spent in the store, that’s a pretty good return.  Factor this across 2.7-million Myer One cardholders, and this focus on their loyalty programme makes good business sense.

As a long-time Myer One cardholder, I’ve watched the programme develop and evolve into the sophisticated loyalty scheme it is today.  They know the products I buy, the brands I like, which store I shop at, and they make relevant offers.  They also consistently reward my shopping behaviour, and even remember my birthday!  And it works.  I rarely shop at any other department store.  On the surface it looks deceptively simple, but you have to admire their commitment to and investment in building their loyalty programme.  Contrast that with Fly Buys and Qantas Frequent Flyer – speaking of which, does anybody else feel like they’re being stalked by Qantas’ current campaign to convert our credit card points by the end of March?!  It has an air of desperation.

Another brand investing heavily in loyalty is Woolworths.  They’re doing it well too.  Starting as an Everyday Rewards customer to get petrol discounts, I now have an Everyday Rewards credit card, and by using this at a Woolworths business (supermarket, petrol, Big W, Dan Murphy, Dick Smith), I accumulate points which can either be converted to Qantas Frequent Flyer points (one-for-one), or a cash voucher.

Done properly, these loyalty programmes are a highly effective marketing tool that drive repeat business.  Makes me wonder why more Australian brands don’t embrace them.

The social networking buzz continues with stories and predictions about MySpace, Facebook and more recently Twitter.

But the ‘quiet achiever’ of the social networking world is LinkedIn.

LinkedIn was only launched in 2003 with $25m in venture capital. In its first year it only drew a few hundred thousand users but by 2005 nearly 5 million people had joined.

Now, with over 30 million users representing 150 industries LinkedIn is one of the fastest growing social networking brands around the world.

According to the latest data from comScore, LinkedIn’s US unique visitors have shot up 22% t0 7.7million, up from 6.3 million in December.  And total minutes spent on the site (’engagement’ is the new currency online!) doubled in January to 96.8 million minutes, from 47.6 million minutes in December.

But why the recent growth?

Unlike Facebook and Twitter, which are largely leisure based networks for sharing personal stories, photos etc, LinkedIn was developed as a networking tool for business professionals.  That in itself has driven interest in LinkedIn from the business world and confirms to the idea of social object theory.

LinkedIn co-founder and Chairman Reid Hoffman summed this up recently “People like to keep their work and professional lives separate from their personal lives. The functions we provide make professionals more effective. We don’t give people a way to spend their entertainment or idle time”

So its single minded focus has certainly helped it carve out a strong position as the professional social networking tool.

But, the recent surge in growth for LinkedIn has no doubt been caused by the global economic downturn and the resulting job losses. A total of 12.5 million people are now unemployed in the US, so it’s no surprise that professionals are looking to tools like LinkedIn to help.

So, will this boom in interest in LinkedIn occur here in Australia?

Australia is certainly mirroring the US with job losses (100,000 in the last 6 months alone) which will almost certainly be reflected in a massive rise in interest in LinkedIn.

As at June last year there were 440,000 LinkedIn members here in Australia.  Current data reveals that the June member base has grown to 637,000 members. That’s a 23% increase in 8 months!’

I predict continued huge growth for LinkedIn here in Australia.   Do you agree?

A recent experience got me thinking about “customer satisfaction”.  And how delighted we are when research reveals a high satisfaction rating.  Which often becomes a measure of customer loyalty and commitment.

My mobile phone provider (who shall remain nameless!) wrote advising that I will soon be charged $2.20 to receive a paper bill.  And they urged me to register for online billing.  Following their step-by-step instructions, I attempted to do so.  Nearing the end of my 3rd attempt, the final click returned the screen “Sorry, this page can no longer be displayed”.  Frustrated, I emailed saying I wasn’t going to try again, and requesting they register me.

A couple of days later I got an email saying this had been done.

A couple of days after that, I received a call from their Customer Service Centre conducting a survey about how satisfied I was at the handling of my complaint. Of course I was satisfied they responded.  Of course I was satisfied they dealt with my problem.  Of course I was satisfied the communication was personalised (their words, not mine).  And so on.  No doubt my survey returned about a 90% satisfaction rate.

But am I a 90% satisfied customer?  Absolutely not!  About 20% would be more accurate.  Would I recommend them?  Probably not.  Am I a loyal and committed customer?  I have to stay with them, because I just signed up for another 2 years.  But that doesn’t mean I’m loyal, nor committed.  In fact, I’m really peed-off!

It’s interesting they wanted to know how satisfied I was with their response to my complaint, rather than exploring the dissatisfaction that led to my complaint in the first place!

For me, this highlighted a couple of things.  (1) If we ask customers to do something that is mostly for the organisation’s benefit, don’t make it hard for them to do so.  And maybe even try to make it look as though it could be to their benefit!  (2)  Beware the “satisfaction” measure.  Like me, how many other customers are “satisfied”, but a long way from being loyal or committed … which is the only thing that’s truly worth knowing.

There’s no doubt that the rise of social networking and all of the great things it brings has changed the way we perceive security and personal safety.

When I was a kid if we were going away for the weekend mum would always leave a couple of lights on, burning away day and night to fool people into thinking that someone  was home. (I wonder how many people would admit to that these days? Especially using good old 100 watt globes at that!) If you were off for any longer than a weekend a trusted neighbour would be arranged to clear the letterbox, collect the newspapers off the front yard, be seen watering the plants etc all to create the illusion that this was somewhere burglars should avoid.

Now, thanks to Twitter and one simple question… ‘What are you doing?’ plenty of us are very happy to tell the rest of the world that we’re not home and for how long we might be out.

Which is fine if you use a handle that doesn’t identify you by your real name. But it gets interesting when the lines between professional and personal applications blur and you actually want people to know you by your real name. How many people with my name live in Brisbane? Not many. So if I tweet to the world that I’ve just had a great surf or I’m at a function or anything else that tells people I’m not home it seems to present a window of opportunity for an enterprising criminal to pay my home a little visit. Even more convenient is letting them know what I’m looking forward to doing on the weekend so they can plan to hire the mini-van ahead of time.

Of course the flip-side of this is actually letting strangers know when you are home. Maybe I’ve watched a few too many slasher movies in my time but the idea of, for example, a young girl freely sharing with strangers that she’s home alone for the night could be an open invitation to the wrong kind of visitor.

This isn’t intended to creep anyone out or suggest that I’m criminally inclined but there are plenty of folks out there who are just that. To my mind that’s a good reason to keep your handle description vague and anonymous.

The technology behind things such as Twitter is genuinely exciting. It will change the world for the better and it presents loads of innovative opportunities. But I find it fascinating how free we are with sharing information that not so long ago society was encouraged to keep secret.

Maybe just double check that you’ve locked the windows before you step out and tweet about it.

The world of outdoor advertising has been embracing the world of digital for some time – many outdoor signs are now full LCD screens, or feature news tickers, or similar digial advances. But some clever marketers are now turning outdoor into a truly interactive space.

The first example is from the UK, where Cadbury’s developed a ‘Splat The Egg’ game on bus shelter posters. People waiting at bus stops could do their best to ’splat’ eggs as they appeared, thanks to the touch-sensitive screen. Much more fun than simply reading a poster! A video of the game can be seen here.

And in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, this cheeky bus shelter shames you into losing weight by displaying your weight for all to see! After sitting on the seat in the bus shelter, the inbuilt scales calculate your weight and displays it on the billboard. A little too forward for our tastes in Australia, perhaps.

Both examples show that forward-thinking brands can take advantage of online/offline synergies to create great interactive experiences in places where consumers are least expecting it. Keep your eyes out for some examples in Australia  – or even better, be the brand with the first mover advantage!

Surely there are things we don’t need to know!

Forget the blogosphere. OMG that’s sooo 2008. The new sphere we need to interested in (apparently) is the statusphere. Leading the way is the relatively new kid on the social media block, Twitter. Twitter started in San Francisco in 2006. Like most social media it’s growing-and growing quick. Latest estimates suggest it has around 6 million users worldwide.  Perhaps not surprisingly almost 50% are in the US. According to internet metrics site Alexa though, only 2.8% of users are Australian. Twitter is focussed primarily on one thing. To participate users must answer only one question, “What are you doing now?” (hence the term statusphere).  Users have just 140 characters to answer. Now it doesn’t surprise me that Twitter has gained traction in the US.  My observation is that culturally, Americans are programmed, at a moments notice, to share what they’re thinking and feeling. Freedom of speech is a big part of the American psyche; they freely offer their opinion. Observe and listen to the average American and you’ll find they think out loud. They have no problem letting their ‘inner monologue’ out. Now don’t get me wrong this isn’t a rant about Americans. They’re expressive, and personally I like that. But let’s contrast that with the average Aussie. Are we laconic? Yes. Expressive? Not so sure. Up for constant mindless chatter? Definitely not. When I talk and explain Twitter to most Aussies they respond with ‘Why would you
bother?’; ‘Who cares!’; or  ’I don’t  really get it’.  So my question is not so much about whether Twitter will end up being a global success. It’s well and truly on its way. Nor is this a comment on whether it has social currency. There are lots of people talking about it. My questions are more about:

1. Whether Twitter will have sustained success in Australia and I don’t just mean attract initial interest or subscription (with all the talk about it, it’s sure to gain increased trial) but what about ongoing and frequent use?
2. Do tools such as Twitter and Facebook (which recently changed its key question to“what’s on your mind?”- I suspect to keep up with the statusphere notion) have the power to profoundly change our culture? 
3. Does Twitter and future incarnations lead to a more narcissitic national psyche, where there’s an assumption that people give a stuff about what’s on my mind and what I’m doing wherever and whenever I deign to fill them in.

What do you think? 

Do you subscribe to What Next?

What Next is BCM’s weekly review of what’s happening in the world of media, entertainment, new products etc. If it’s new, you’ll hear about it here!

This week:

• The rise and rise of the smart phone
• Google set to dominate smart phone search
• A newspaper becomes a platform
• For sale – by SMS
• Social networking passes email usage in uptake
• Helicopter parenting – are we helping kids or hindering them?

Click here to subscribe, and here to see this week’s edition.

A couple of weeks ago I blogged about how Australian companies may not quite ‘get’ social media quite as much as they should. Two very recent examples sadly seem to prove this to be the case. But all three are a good lesson for any brand in how NOT to ‘do’ social media.

A couple of weeks ago, the University of South Australia got caught out when they ran a series of videos of students talking about how great the uni was. All very off-the-cuff and vox populi. The only problem was, one of the students was part of the uni marketing department! And was clearly identified as so on the uni website. Silly! It didn’t take long for somebody at Crikey to catch on. There’s no hiding from this kind of thing anymore!

This week, Freeview tried to cover up a Youtube video mocking the upcoming digital TV service. They had their lawyers issue a takedown notice to Youtube. Since the video was doing nothing illegal, it was promptly re-uploaded. The result? Huge amounts of press surrounding the takedown attempt, and heaps more people seeing the video that never would have. The lesson? Don’t try to suppress the conversation, it’s like stomping on an ant’s nest – just manage it more effectively!

How many more Australian brands will need to learn the hard way before learning – listen, engage, influence!

Online shopping is generally a very one-dimensional affair.  That wasn’t my opinion a couple of weeks ago, though. I thought the experience at places like Amazon – clean, functional, straightforward – were a good benchmark. And they are – the profits tell the story there. But I’ve been pointed towards a few great examples of innovative online shopping experiences recently that have changed my mind a bit – because it’s clear that the online shopping experience can be something quite profound.

Take a look at the ‘Explore‘ options on craft retailer Etsy.com – in addition to the standard browsing options, you can explore by colour, by time, by location, even by a seller’s birthday! The colour one is particularly cool. Thanks to our interactive producer Trudy for finding that one!

Then we have this great experience over at the Swedish H&M site. Instead of just showing stock like pillows, blankets and curtains by themselves – you can instead see exactly what their entire range looks like in the bedroom, bathroom and kitchen.

And over at the Japanese Uniqlo site for their Girls Collection, once you get past the head-caving party intro, you can again get an idea of what the range looks like when it’s actually being worn by someone. Much better than a shirt on a white background! Thanks to Adverblog for those two examples.

So online shopping is already a long way from being a point-and-click experience for many forward-thinking retailers. Savvy online shops will want to make their buying experience as exciting as trying out the real deal in-store – if not better! It won’t always be appropriate – books and hard drives can stay on Amazon – but there’s great opportunity for other categories to explore.

What’s the opportunity for your brand?