Unfortunately, in marketing (as in many other industries), we tend to throw around generalizations as if they are gospel. We use these generalizations as absolutisms–to justify our position, or to shoot someone else’s down. And because they are at some level, based on truth (or more likely, statistics), they rarely get challenged.
But what would happen it you were to challenge them? Not in a “you’re wrong” kind of way, but if, after you catch yourself using one, you add “until we give them a reason to.” For example:
Nobody reads long copy ads…until you give them a reason to.
People can’t tell you how Ford is different than Chevy…until you give them a reason to.
Customers care only about price…until you give them a reason to.
Web visitors won’t stick around after reading the first page…until you give them a reason to.
Nobody remembers a spot after seeing it only once…until you give them a reason to.
Nobody reads below the fold…until you give them a reason to.
Loyal customers never leave…until you give them a reason to.
Trolls can never be placated…until you give them a reason to.
Nobody clicks through on banner ads…until you give them a reason to.
Brands can’t be built using just social media…until you give them a reason to.
It floats the possibility that there might be an exception to the generalization you accept as gospel. No matter what the “best practice,” there’s always room for the “brilliant exception.” If you look at monumentally successful companies and organizations, chances are they flew in the face of conventional wisdom at some key moment of truth and “gave them a reason to” be seen differently.
Posted by Mickey
