|
Segmentation: 5 Poisonous
Flaws & 5 Proven Antidotes
By Christopher B. Kuenne
Addressing this list will aid successful implementation.
It's no secret that marketing productivity in the financial
services industry has fallen to critically low levels. Credit card offers
stuff mailboxes nationwide as response rates drop ever lower. Ubiquitous
telemarketing efforts for products such as credit cards and home equity
loans have helped spawn consumer antipathy and "no-call" lists. Even
cross-selling efforts directed at existing customers have not enjoyed
the levels of success seen in some other industries.
Recognizing the problem, banking executives have embraced
market segmentation — the idea that customers must be addressed
in discrete groups, with the product, message and even channel tailored
to the "hot buttons" of each particular group. Conceptually, this makes
sense, but it often disappoints in practice. Why?
Our view is that segmentation is a valid concept tarnished
by poor implementation. Many banks have gone to considerable expense
to identify appropriate target segments for their products and services.
But consistent problems have emerged in their attempts to "operationalize" these
segmentation schemes.
Our client work suggests that five fundamental changes
are required within a financial services institution's sales and marketing
organization in order to operationalize segmentation. For each of the
five "poisonous flaws," we recommend a proven antidote.
First and foremost, traditional behavioral modeling
must be supplemented with approaches incorporating the underlying beliefs
that drive consumer behavior. Second, the manufacturing-like process
of campaign design and execution must be subordinated to deep consumer
insights. Third, active and consistent high-level championing, from the
chief marketing officer (CMO) and other C-level counterparts, is essential
throughout the process. Fourth, quantitative targeting and marketing
communication skills must be effectively melded at the operational level.
And, finally, in order to measure performance at the very root levels
of causality, the conventional, industry-standard metrics need recalibration.
This journey may be both strenuous and stressful,
diverting the marketing organization from well-worn paths. But the results
are worthwhile. Based on more than two dozen engagements with a dozen
different financial institutions, our experience indicates that banks
that effectively operationalize segmentation reap between a 20% to 150%
increase in marketing effectiveness versus business as usual.
POISONOUS
FLAW #1
Superficial segmentation.
PROVEN ANTIDOTE
Identifying the fundamental beliefs that drive observable behaviors.
Operationalizing segmentation cannot fully succeed
unless segmentation itself is correctly structured. Our experience has
consistently shown that discrete and identifiable consumer beliefs drive
differential consumer behavior. Consider, for example, a distinct segment
characterized by an underlying need for control in basic banking functions.
Consumers manifesting this need will be voracious users of e-banking
services requiring little to no personalized assistance. By contrast,
consumers segmented by their lack of financial self-confidence will frequent
brick-and-mortar branch offices, seeking assistance on even the most
basic transactions.
Attempting segmentation without these belief-level
insights is akin to attracting church congregants based on service schedule
and location, while ignoring religious affiliation. Yet traditional approaches
to segmentation have been largely behavior-based, focusing on surface-level
tendencies, such as channel preference or demographic data, which includes
age, income and family formation. These approaches tell the marketer
what types of behavior are performed by whom. Yet they ignore the more
fundamental question of why behaviors occur.
To answer this, marketers need a functional grasp
of belief-level consumer needs and attitudes. Key attitudes may be the
degree of personal confidence or of financial security. The bottom line
in business, as in politics and religion, is that a core set of beliefs
drives behaviors.
Correctly conceived and applied, this integrated approach
to segmentation creates five to seven segments distinguished by underlying
beliefs that determine important behaviors like brand choice and product
usage. Fundamental beliefs, such as confidence, discipline, control,
trust and loyalty, traverse lines of business. Yet, interestingly, individual
consumers are characterized by different belief dimensions depending
upon differing business lines. For example, many of the same consumers
manifesting a need for control through e-banking usage may be disinclined
to take similar control of their investment management services. In effect,
then, they delegate that control to an expert advisor.
As a result, typing tools are vitally important in
determining an individual's segment profile across a variety of product
and service lines. This, in turn, illuminates the marketing hot buttons,
channel preferences and price sensitivities that shape effective marketing
programs segment by segment. In our client work, we find that building
and selectively applying a suite of typing tools is more effective than
a one-tool-fits-all-channels approach. For phone and Web-based marketing,
where real-time interaction is possible, the typing tool can consist
of two to four specific questions calibrated on a seven-point scale.
For direct-mail approaches, where such interaction is not feasible, predictive
tools based on secondary data must be used.
POISONOUS
FLAW #2
Focus on efficiency over effectiveness.
PROVEN ANTIDOTE
Dethrone the process, declare the customer king and establish customer insight
as coin and currency of the new realm.
Once a segmentation scheme has been developed, an organization
must design a process for marketing on that basis. Marketing departments
at most banks find themselves obsessed with efficiency as a way to offset
declining effectiveness and budget constraints. These institutions have
constructed mass production marketing factories focused on standardized
high-volume output for allegedly homogenous populations. In the process,
they ignore the diverse reality of variable consumer beliefs and preferences.
Not surprisingly, identical mass mailings sent to hundreds of thousands
or millions of consumers receive direct response rates of 25 to 75 basis
points, while outbound telemarketing and e-commerce yields are lower
and still declining.
In order to ensure a successful transition to segment-based
marketing, the focus needs to be on understanding the beliefs that drive
brand choice and product usage. The magnitude of this change is best
illustrated in the fact that most marketing departments spend perhaps
one or two weeks within the typical 20- to 25-week development period
dedicated to a cross-sell campaign focused on understanding and capitalizing
on the underlying drivers of consumer choice. The remainder of their
time is consumed by the machinery-like process of list scoring and pulling,
printing and distribution. The operational complexity of these mail factories
has crowded out time for deep insight, de-emphasizing the targeting and
tailoring process to rely entirely on modeling behaviors such as credit
risk and/or response propensity. A truly effective campaign design must
be driven from an understanding of consumer beliefs and motivations,
creating engagement rather than simply transactions.
"Selling today needs to be more than a shotgun blast," advised
John D. Hayes, chief marketing officer at American Express Co., in a
recent keynote address to the Direct Marketing Association. "It needs
to have the accuracy of a laser and the warmth of a hug."
In fact, these two objectives are closely entwined.
Banks that embrace integrated segmentation, while elevating consumer
insight over existing process, can and do achieve improved marketing
accuracy and sales response. These programs, in effect, bring the horse
to water, reminding him how and why to drink.
POISONOUS
FLAW #3
Lack of executive sponsorship.
PROVEN ANTIDOTE
Enlist leadership, enroll rank and file.
Even if segmentation is designed correctly and marketed
well, impetus may falter without the intervention of executive-level
champions. That's because the changes we're advocating are difficult
to implement.
Operational segmentation means reinvention of the
core methods by which sales and marketing efforts are conducted. This
includes changes in target, product and channel selection, in addition
to key messages and offers. Without executive level sponsorship throughout,
the transition to segment-based marketing often falters upon cultural
and business process obstacles. Likewise, it treads on sensitive toes
while traversing typically siloed functions.
C-level sponsorship thus entails much more than passive
authorization. Vision in embracing the program and tactical support in
disseminating it are equally vital components. Kicking off the operational
segmentation project in front of the key managers in his lines-of-business,
the CMO of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.'s credit card division, Rajive
Johri, put it this way: "There are few times in your career when you
have the opportunity to redefine how your company competes, how you do
your job and even how the industry as whole should and will work."
In this case, the CMO appointed a high-level lieutenant,
with direct-line reporting, to oversee the ensuing project. Both worked
to enlist support across key constituencies, which included decision
sciences, credit risk, communications, and channel operations, among
others. An initial segment-based test of a prior campaign helped build
initial momentum. This "backtest" demonstrated the warmth, accuracy and
consistency of integrated segmentation over and above the incumbent behavioral
model.
Progress was then charted on a weekly basis as the
pilot rolled out and accrued the promised gains. This further energized
the organization, laying the groundwork for a successful scale-up of
the operation with substantial impact on marketing productivity.
Even at the pilot stage, operational segmentation
cuts across all marketing-related departments and functions. Within the
pilot, small batch sizes confirm the effectiveness of the targeted and
tailored marketing treatment upon each target segment. When proven more
effective than the business-as-usual approach, the campaign is scaled
up to the entire set of target segments.
Once fully adopted, the company must operationalize
this new "test and learn" mentality. Now, for example, a larger number
of smaller, distinct batch sizes comprise each marketing program. This
increase in consumer-driven complexity necessitates a significant change
in the way each department functions: from database marketing, marketing
communications, legal review all the way through distribution. But without
active C-level champions spanning the departmental divide, even the initial
pilot may be sabotaged, deliberately or not, by resistance from any major
stakeholder.
"I never think about 'The Consumer' anymore," one initially
skeptical client told us. "My focus now is on segments, and the hot buttons
for each segment."
POISONOUS
FLAW #4
The cognitive divide between the left- and right-brainers.
PROVEN
ANTIDOTE
Create marketing structure and processes designed to integrate Quants and Communicators.
Segment-based marketing also requires the melding of
two modes of thought and analysis rarely found around the same watercooler.
Traditionally, the left brain-oriented "Quants" from decision sciences
build mathematical models based on observed consumer behavior and credit
risk. They operate on a different wavelength from right brain marketing
communications professionals, or "Communicators," who leverage intuitive
understanding of consumer hot buttons to create the marketing messages.
But in order to achieve the breakaway results that segment-based marketing
has delivered, these two disparate skill sets must be combined within
the same marketing teams.
To do so, CMOs first must hire bicultural managers,
trained in each discipline, and give them responsibility to work across
the traditional chasm. Second, the CMO must create an organizational
structure and business process that explicitly integrates both skill
sets. Most organizations follow a sequential model in their marketing
programs, with the Quants drawing up the lists and the Communicators
formulating messages. But optimal processes should be loop-shaped, not
sequential, allowing each group's contributions to meld and complement
the others.
The optimal marketing organization should be characterized
by overlap, as in a Venn diagram, not divided by territorial lines. Communicators
need involvement in the modeling process by defining target segments
and championing the importance of actionable consumer insights from Day
One. Quants need to understand the underlying drivers of consumer choice
to continually refine the modeling process. To paraphrase Peter Drucker,
the marketing objective is the same from any viewpoint: "Seeing the world
as it is, not as you want it to be."
POISONOUS
FLAW #5
Reliance on broad, insufficient or misleading measures.
PROVEN
ANTIDOTE
Do the segments, then do the math.
Nearly every bank marketer can recite the virtues of
rigorous forecasting, tracking and continuously refining marketing program
tactics. But in the confessional, most would probably admit they do not
systematically track the real effectiveness of marketing efforts and
refine their tactics accordingly. Take churn rates as an example. The
high number of checking account customers with less than 12 months tenure
is a constant source of concern. Yet some customers are worth losing,
others are worth fighting for. The fundamental issue is not overall churn,
which is inevitable, but retention and ultimately wallet expansion among
profitable customers.
Misleading metrics are one of the main obstacles that
keep marketing departments from operating on a higher productivity plane.
Cost per application/acquired customer (CPA), for example, is often considered
the "ultimate direct marketing measure." Yet CPA ascribes an average
marketing cost to all customers, despite enormous differences in profit
and tenure. Likewise, cross-sell ratios justify the pushing of products
at customers who may neither need nor want them. In the process, brand
equity is diminished and customers rendered less receptive to future
appeals.
By contrast, metrics recalibrated for rigorous tracking
at the segment level can be readily linked to subsequent changes and
improvements in marketing productivity. Goals in the annual marketing
plan, and their associated tactics, should also be segment-based. Likewise,
marketing management bonuses and ad agency fees should be tied into these
same core metrics, and thus pointed toward profitable growth.
One segment-directed measurement we find consistently
useful is the Demand Dynamic Funnel. In contrast to campaign CPA or average
number of products held (the cross-sell ratio), the Demand Funnel indicates
weak links in the marketing productivity chain. This is accomplished
through quantifying, in percentage terms, how many prospects and customers
lie within the footprint of the institution's sales and marketing effort
at each successive stage in the awareness-through-purchase process.
For starters, consumers with some awareness of the
company in the product area sit at the top of the funnel. The next level
of measurement is a ratio of how many consumers from that universe are
actively considering each competitor's products; then how many are actively
shopping for products out of the larger consideration set; and finally
how many become purchasers out of the larger shopping set.
The resulting ratios are then compared across competitors
over time to determine which marketing programs are working and which
are not. Why, for example, do a relatively large percentage of prospects
aware of the company not actively consider the product, yet a comparatively
high percentage of those who shop end up buying it? The weak link in
this example occurs toward the top of the funnel where greater customer
insight and effective messaging is required to compel higher levels of
consideration. Strengthening this weak link will, in turn, have a multiplicative
effect due to the higher shop-to-buy ratio.
Change is never easy. Yet within industries that have
a long tradition of tried-and-true practices, broader transformation,
rather than incremental adjustment, may ultimately be more successful.
For any banking institution committed to raising marketing effectiveness,
the challenge, then, is not simply adopting segmentation but adapting
its operations to segmentation processes.
In fact, the success factors described above are more
interdependent than discrete. A successful financial services competitor
needs cultural and strategic change, as well as C-level championing,
to integrate long-separated marketing skills. Likewise, executives will
require real productivity metrics to retain a customer focus and keep
process-driven marketing at bay. Yet, precisely because few companies
are up to the complete segmentation task, institutions capable of creating
these conditions will reap substantial advantage.
Mr. Kuenne is president and founder of
Rosetta Marketing, Princeton, N.J.
Copyright © 2004 by Banking Strategies,
published by BAI.
back to top
|