Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.
Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.
The customer journey, the relationship and experience between people and brands, has been the subject of much theorising for some time.
There are a number of cognitive models, outlining the thought process people undertake; most of which are quite linear and logical. The vast majority of these stop at the point of purchase. This, by definition, cannot be “customer journeys”; isn’t a “customer” someone who has already purchased?
Then there are some, which go beyond purchase and introduce the concept of the "loyalty loop". It is perceived that people will remain loyal if they have a great post purchase experience with the product, offering and brand interaction.
Which of course makes complete sense….as do all the descriptions and commentary based around these models.
Unfortunately, they are all wrong...
Customer journey models
Some of these models are illustrated below, and described by McKinsey: The Consumer Decision Journey:
|GfK's Funnel; McKinsey's and Harvard's Loyalty Loops|
However, they are wrong. They make the assumption that consumers only have direct relationships with the brand and do not cater for the influence and interaction with other people, even though they make reference to word of mouth.
They also over-simplify people’s individual thought processes, and, somewhat arrogantly, treat people as non-emotive robots or automatons making very logical decisions in isolation of others, with no mention of the drivers of impulsive behaviour.
Theoretically, they seem to make complete sense, but in reality it’s not the case.
Accounting for real people
When you throw in real people into the mix, like you and I, the dynamics change. We’re unique individuals right? Biologically we may not be, but emotionally, personality wise and through our experiences, we are.
We’re one of a kind. Our personality/make-up/identity, is steered and influenced by past experiences, how we want to be perceived and by the people we mix with. Our decisions are heavily swayed by this complex mix, not just how good a product is …..we don’t follow logical paths. How dare they even think this!
Example: Why am I made to queue outside a shop by my eldest daughter for at least 20 minutes, to be greeted by two ripped male Adonis models and enter a store where the lights are so dim you can’t really see what’s on sale?
I then spend at least another 30 minutes wandering around, observing that my daughter is not really looking at the clothes, but is much more interested in everyone else.
Due to my pestering and 'encouragement' of my daughter to finally make a decision (because I’m getting a little frustrated by this point) she picks up an item of clothing, which she barely spends 30 seconds looking at. It’s got the logo, the brand on it, colour's ok…it’ll do. "We" buy it.
Who is the customer? I’m the person who pays, yet it’s my daughter who has become absorbed by this whole thing. She’s been influenced by others, and in turn has 'influenced' me…somehow.
Where does this play out in the models illustrated above? It doesn't.
Theory would say, waiting is bad, and not showing the products in a decent enough environment is not a good idea either. It’s a poor experience for the consumer.
But practically, this works really well for Hollister. They have recognised the key influencers along the customer journey are not just the clothes, they have recognised that their brand, which is a badge, means something to people and those who have it on show.
It’s a common bond of a micro community.
This dynamic is all about the influence of others, being part, or more accurately, aspiring to be part of a 'cool' group of people. It’s about identity, how you want to be seen and the recognition from others that comes with this.
More importantly, this isn't a new dynamic, being part or being seen to be part of a "cool" group is most probably something people have always done.
If I can make a slight indulgence at this point, The Mods in the sixties had this down to a fine art and subsequent sub-cultures have followed a very similar dynamic.
Being part of such a group was everything to the people involved; achieving a level of status and recognition gave them even more kudos. Being a 'ticket' is one thing, but everyone wanted to be a “face”!
Putting people at the heart of the customer journey
So, doesn’t it make sense to put people at the heart of every customer journey framework? If you don't know what gets them excited and how they behave, how can you create and implement a successful engagement strategy?
We need to create one which caters for the influence of others at every stage of their own unique journey, pre and post sale. It’s time to put the customer back into the customer journey.
It is essential to know exactly who the people are you wish to engage with; what they are doing and the reasons why they behave this way. Only then can you create a communications framework that resonates with the right people, at the right time and in the right places.
A framework for customer-centric engagement
- People are unique individuals and behave differently to each other.
- They are motivated and influenced by many differing factors.
- Fellow consumers influence other individual’s own unique journey. The level of influence sometimes outweighs that of the brand itself.
- Cognitive thought process from awareness through consideration to commitment seem rational. But, the pace of travelling through these stages and the influence others have are sometimes overlooked.
Not everyone spends time researching, many act on impulse; some purchases are habitual, it all depends on the mind-set of the individual concerned.
The plethora of communication channels now available has caused people to change their behaviour significantly. Some consume content via multiple channels at the same time; some are very heavy social web users, others shy away from the latest technology and would be considered more “traditional”.
The simple fact is, the paradox of choice means people will choose what is right for them and it could be different every single time they embark on a journey.
- The various stages of Awareness through to Advocacy are mapped around the people. This non-linear approach caters for sector cross over.
The amplification of customer advocacy to create awareness, interest and even conversion, or for the more impulsive enable to move quickly from awareness to conversion and from suspect through to customer.
This is a base framework with which businesses can map their consumer centric engagement around. It takes research. It takes time and effort. It’s real. It works.