The most traditional of the three direct marketing media is direct mail.
It’s so common that one of its most endearing attributes is that people rarely get upset when they receive a piece of mail. The primary negative attribute is that it’s easy to ignore: a flick of the wrist over the waste- basket does the trick for most people. Another feature of direct mail that makes it such an effective medium is that it is tactile and visual—we touch it and look at it. E-mail and telephone communications are more fleet- ing. The tactile nature of this medium gives it an “impact” aspect that is important, particularly if the package goes “bump” in the mail. The great advantage of B2B over consumer programs is that the value of the sale is so much higher. As a result, we can frequently afford to send boxes, tubes, or lumpy envelopes containing some promotional item, all of which will be opened and read at a higher rate than a “flat” mailing. In addition, we can be more creative than in E-mail and telephone contact, even though E-mail is catching up by using streaming media, flash, and PDF formats.
One of the big problems with mail is that other people handle and even screen it before it reaches the target. Getting through the mail room, particularly in large companies, is difficult if the item is not accurately addressed or is sent third class. Believe it or not, some large companies have authorized their mail rooms to throw out third-class mail if they are overloaded and can’t get to all the mail. If you work in a large company, go to the mail room and see what actually happens. It will give you a deeper appreciation of how direct mail is handled.
In years past, we used the term gatekeeperto refer to the secretary or administrative assistant who received the mail for the boss and was fre- quently empowered to sort the correspondence and discard what was not appropriate for that individual. Today we don’t have as many of these gatekeepers except at the “C” level (CEO, COO, CFO, et cetera). That’s an improvement if you’re not targeting these individuals, but if you are, consideration must be given to getting through the gatekeeper. Several years ago, one of my good friends, Ron Jacobs, of Jacobs and Clevenger in Chicago, told me of a very effective mailing campaign sent to the pres- idents of large companies. On top was a mailing to the administrative assistant (they had called first to obtain his or her name). It was a personal note with a paperweight and a “thank-you” for ensuring that the mailing
was seen by the person’s boss. While this may appear as a bribe, it worked, and the follow-up phone call got through more than 70 percent of the time.
Another enemy of direct mail is the inbox. We all know the volume of mail that comes in each day and, if we’re gone for a day or two, the high stack that greets us when we return. Here, lumpy is also good, as it frequently doesn’t even find the inbox and instead sits next to it or even on the desk or chair. There are numerous techniques to fight through the inbox. Another one is to design the mailing piece as though it’s a per- sonal business communication. A closed-face envelope of quality stock with your company logo, a laser-printed address block, and a first-class stamp will do the trick. This letter will get opened, as it appears that it is an important communication compared with all the self-mailers, catalogs, and poorly designed mail surrounding it in the inbox. There’s much more to designing a direct mail package, and I’ll leave it to the experts to help you further, as my focus here is how to get the communication seen and read by the targeted individual.
If I had written this book a year ago, my enthusiasm for E-mail would have been much greater. Unfortunately, this medium is fast self-destructing and losing its effectiveness. I’m not saying that Web or interactive mar- keting is not key to our overall marketing strategies; it is, and it will grow in importance. I’m talking only about E-mail sent to those on a company’s permission list. By the way, I fully support Seth Godin and his philosophy as so well articulated in his book Permission Marketing(Simon & Schus- ter, 1999). He is absolutely right when he states that the only E-marketing is to have someone’s permission to send E-communications. So, my start- ing point is that we have obtained the permission of all individuals in our database to whom we communicate by E-mail. Do not send E-mail to those who have not, in some fashion, opted in. Spam in B2B is detrimen- tal to the new sales coverage model and to overall prospect and customer relationships.
The problem is rather simple: everyone is using E-mail because it doesn’t cost much to launch a communication to a large number of indi- viduals. Its appeal doesn’t stop there, either. I’ve done a number of E-mail campaigns in which the time from conception to measurement spanned
one or two weeks and not the months it takes for a direct mail program to be developed, mailed, and measured. Quite a drug for a direct mar- keter—once you do it, it can become habit-forming. And that’s the hitch.
The habit is becoming an addiction. We all can confirm the truth of that statement when we open the E-mail box every morning. Talk about an overflowing inbox! Of course, we have caused some of this overflow our- selves by happily subscribing to E-newsletters, accepting updates from industry vendors, allowing our names to be included on distribution lists, and similar actions. I’m not aware of a current study on the num- ber of E-mails received in B2B, but, as noted earlier, other studies have indicated that more than 70 percent of unrecognized or unwanted E-mail messages are instantly deleted. This percentage is growing fast and may soon approach 100, just based on the exponential growth in clutter. Even among those who have opted in, there is a high probability that if your dialogue with them has not been recent, they also will delete your mes- sage immediately, since people’s memories may not be able to retain all the companies and Web communications to which they said yes.
While deletion is a problem, another is that, unlike with postal mail, some people become upset when they receive E-mails that they did not request or that are sent from someone they don’t know. This reaction appears to be based on a feeling of invasion of privacy that individuals harbor with E-mail but not postal mail. “How did they get my name and E-mail address?” is a refrain that is heard frequently. Another anom- aly is that the negative response to E-mail is much higher among Internet- savvy or younger individuals, as they seem to have a proprietary feeling about this medium. The negative reactions can take the form of what are called “flaming” E-mails. Here’s an example. Last year we worked with Sales Logix, a maker of sales force automation software—their brand names are ACT and Sales Logix. The company had a list of peo- ple who had viewed a Web demo of the Sales Logix software—real leads, not just inquiries. Sales Logix sent an E-mail to this segment of the pros- pect database offering a white paper that was an evaluation of SFA soft- ware by an independent consulting organization. Pat Sullivan, the president of Sales Logix, got five flaming E-mails from recipients com- plaining that he had no right to communicate to them. This wasn’t even a selling message! Certainly, there is a cultural element to online mar- keting that must be carefully considered before marketing communica- tions are launched.