I recently came across a fascinating Sydney Morning Herald article which gets my vote for the most unusual word of mouth marketing story of the year.

Zingara Cucina (Italian for 'Gypsy Kitchen'?) is Australia's first 'underground' restaurant. It has no fixed address, diners are notified by email of the location only on the evening before, it's not advertised - relying completely on word of mouth - and diners pay only what they think the experience is worth. (A chef from an exclusive Melbourne restaurant is reported to have estimated his meal would have cost $150 in any fine dining restaurant).

This transient and illegal 'restaurant' has won accolades for its cuisine that any 3-chef hats fine dining restaurant would 'kill' for and is reported to have a year long waiting list.

An extra-ordinary and unique experience wrapped in mystery, trust and exclusivity all combine to make this a destination which people can't help but talk about.

Does this restaurant really exist or have we all been conned? - Who really knows? I never actually met anyone who has eaten there but it surely makes for a good story!!

Online research has many benefits - speed and lower cost being the two main advantages - but there is growing concern with the validity of findings derived from on-line research which often does not adhere to scientific design principles.

ARF President-CEO Robert Barocci was recently quoted as saying "The 'good, fast, cheap ... pick any two' syndrome has jeopardized the client credibility of online access panels ... the trend, combined with the rise of online communities and blogs, has increased the rate of individuals conducting research online without applying statistical methodologies or research techniques essential to quality."

P&G is reported to spend $200 million annually - so no wonder there is concern with recent ComScore research findings which showed how a relatively small number of 'professional' respondents determine the results of online studies - their research showed that 0.25% of the online population accounted for 32% of responses, while less than 5% account for more than half of the responses.

Not before time, the newly formed Online Research Quality Council (USA)(made up of clients and research companies) will hold its first meeting on Sept. 10 this year. Their objectives are to establish a set of industry standards for evaluation by early April 2008, when the ARF holds its annual convention in New York.

We look forward to their findings but have a suspicion that there will be some quite radical changes to the way some on-line (paid) panels will operate in the future. We also suspect that identifying, seeking opinion and engaging so called 'lead users' will become a more important part of the research agenda.

'£5000 in £10 and £20 notes were recently individually dropped around the streets of London with a removable sticker that read ...

"Carlsberg don't do litter. But if they did it would probably be the best litter in the world".

... supporting its strap line for the world famous Carlsberg brand.

Even though there were probably less than 400 lucky 'winners', the impact of this campaign on stimulating word of mouth/mouse will be significant -(if the number of blogs/comments in the blogesphere are an indicator) and well worth the relatively modest £5000 investment.

Even the Queen is talking about it!

Came across this the other day, from one of my favourite blogs.

"Sounds smart but isn't?" ... Evidence?
>Just attend the next corporate strategy group's board presentation.
>or your next 'sales-force' new brand launch presented by marketing.
>or ask the agency's creative director why he thinks CGM doesn't work.

There's a simple equation that is often used in word of mouth marketing - it goes something like this ...

Advocacy = Actual experience - Expected experience

(expected) Telephone companies don't give existing customers things for free.

(actual) I just received an sms from Vodafone asking me to go to www.vodafone.com.au/delightme , enter a code included in the sms message and be offered a choice of 14 different items ranging from free wine to Myer vouchers to Movie tickets to 4 trees being planted on my behalf to help 'save the planet'. It seems Vodafone has learnt that 'delighting' its customers can pay dividends. (Here am I, telling a few thousand people about my experience - that's not a bad return on a circa $20 investment for Vodafone)

Being a good corporate citizen I chose the '4 trees' option - so not only did I get an unexpected gift from Vodaphone - they also made me feel virtuous! - Thanks Vodafone

Twitter recently changed 'friend' to 'follower'. Perhaps the next move should be 'stalker'.

Tim Keiningham interviewed by Justin Kirby of Connected Marketing

Key points from the interview
>Many popular customer loyalty ‘maxims’ have been grossly over simplified or are just outright wrong - NPS a myth – too simple / most evidence presented in HBR not scientifically supported.
>Need to integrate the functional and emotional aspects of customer experience to define brand loyalty.
>Most customers are not profitable – but key is to migrate non-profitable customers to profitability by using loyalty based tactics.

I recently signed up with Facebook.(When it comes to www social networking I am a laggard - but better late than never, I guess!)

I decided to personalise my new place - where friends would enjoy coming to 'visit' - so added some photos of me, family, friends - happy snaps of holidays, birthdays, good times. Also added a bunch of personal detail - likes, favourite music/books, interests etc

While still arranging the 'furniture' in my new FB home I received a number of invitation emails from 'friends' wanting to come over and pay me a visit – (I assume the FB email address search function had alerted them to my arrival at FB or perhaps they had found me some other way.)

Unfortunately some of these 'friends', I would more accurately describe as ‘acquaintances'. (dilemma) Do I accept ‘acquaintances’ as ‘friends’ and let them into the personal details of my life – or do I simply ignore their requests and run the risk of offending them and losing the relationship (my business relationships are generally constructed from acquaintances - so they are important to me even if they are not 'friends')? Worse still, should I accept ‘acquaintances’ as 'friends' and run the risk of devaluing genuine friendship? Or should I just water down my personal disclosure and accept anyone who wants to be a 'friend' (feels like this defeats the purpose of being there in the first place)

After ruminating over the issue I decided that I preferred my ‘friendship’ with ‘acquaintances’ to remain ambiguous – there was absolutely no benefit for anyone in drawing a line in the Facebook sand. ... and my genuine friends would remain friends. We would would ‘meet’ as we always have - chat on the phone, go to the pub, a BBQ at my place, play golf, go out for dinner .....

Exited FB 48 hours after joining! (I still happily remain a member of other 'networks' where motivation is based solely on common interest - not on 'friendship' - strange though - even on these networks we are still compelled to call each other 'friends')

Ever since Pete Blackshaw invented the term ‘CGM’, marketers have been paranoid about losing control of their brand. While some have buried their heads in the sand hoping it will all some how go away, others have been caught pretending to let go, but only ending up looking silly when they got exposed. (WalMart comes to mind)

There’s no arguing that consumers have become more influential because they now have the tools and the platform (web2) to make their views and creative expressions known to anyone who cares to listen.

But the smart marketers are starting to realize that even in this apparently out-of-control world they really still can excerpt control – it's just a matter of choosing the right agenda. The table below is from Pete Blackshaw’s blog – it brilliantly illustrates the point.

Some wise feedback from patrick Gibbons - Senior VP marketing and BD at Walker Infromation
If you want to take action on customer feedback and see customer strategies come alive, effective communication is a must. This means getting the right message to the right person at the right time – delivered in a way that is relevant and actionable. It's far more than drawing some conclusions and delivering an impressive report. Rather, communication must be a comprehensive component of your overall program.
Here's a rundown of five common mistakes – and a few ideas on how to avoid them:

It's an afterthought.

Too often customer advocates don't worry about communication until late in the process. Companies that do it best weave their communication planning into their entire voice-of-the-customer program. Key audiences, messages, and delivery methods are determined well in advance. Not only does this result in more relevant communication to a range of audiences, but it also ensures that the right information is gathered to serve the organization.

It's big on data and short on insights.

It's one thing to show a chart and say "Sixty-seven percent of our customers say our competitor's quality is better." And, it's another thing to say, "We're getting creamed by our competitor – now what are we going to do about it?" Too often presentations and reports are loaded with charts and graphs. Companies can overcome this by establishing the key takeaways they want to communicate. Then, use the data to back up each major point and recommendation.

It's not actionable.

How many times have you walked away from a presentation saying, "That was interesting." Interesting is fine, but what do you do with the information? Unfortunately, too many times that's the reaction when stakeholders receive reports and listen to presentations on customer feedback. Structure your reports, training, and presentations around the desired action that must take place. Then use the "interesting stuff" to support why action is necessary.

There's no support.

As a customer advocate, do you ever feel like you're an island within your company? While you have the best intentions of the customer in mind, it's typically hard to get buy-in from others. Leverage a team or customer advocacy network to be ambassadors for the voice-of-the-customer program. Get people involved to create broad acceptance for the program. The team should include an executive sponsor to provide the credibility needed for a program to have the necessary resources and attention to be successful.

It doesn't break through the clutter.

If you are like most customer advocates you're wading in an ocean of corporate communication. To communicate key voice-of-the-customer initiatives, you have to rise above the clutter. To do this, mix it up – use e-mails, videos, the intranet, presentations, online reports, and other methods to get the word to your stakeholders. Consider "branding" your program – give it a name like "Customers First" or "Customers for Life" so this program can be easily recognized as an important initiative within your organization.
Overcoming such obstacles can transform your voice-of-the-customer program from being just another initiative to something that can truly have influence your corporate culture and generate bottom-line results.

Interesting Blogging Stats compiled by Adage

Nine MSN is currently trialing a Beta Version of Your Cut - a service where anyone can submit a video and get paid according to the number of views your video receives. YourCut uses a video-sharing platform built by Revver.

When you upload a video to the site, NineMSN attach an advert to it - whenever anyone clicks on that ad (presumably while they are watching your video) the video owner shares in a 50/50 split of the ad revenue. There are other conditions like the viewer has to watch your video right to the end for you to qualify for payment.

The business model has some similarities to free to air TV - ie the user watches a program and sees ads - the difference here is that the viewer doesn't have to watch the ad and the programme content costs are virtually zero.

Copyright will definitely be an issue but it will be interesting to see if the model works.

Star Wars just came back to the 21st century! The makers of this timeless series are asking fans to Shoot, Mix and Share their own verisons of Star Wars. Fans can upload their own video and music and then mix and mash it with clips and music from their favorite Star Wars movies! There are more than 250 clips from the Star Wars movies to play with.

It's been a while since I visted my favourite blog - Hugh says his most read page is "How to be creative" It's brilliant.

Telecommunications regulator (ACMA) today reversed its prohibition on legitimate research calls on Sundays. See AMSRS press release here

Perspective: Of course the issue now will be convincing target interviewee's that Sunday's are OK for researchers - also convincing those who registered on the 'do not call' register that research calls really are legitimate. It's all been made far more confusing than it really needed to be.

Toohey's New launched a viral email campaign this week - a couple of months after their launch of the original 'Tall Men' ad. The email invites you to send a message to your 'mates' using the ad. When you send the message your 'mate' first has to watch the advert - before reading your message.

Perspective:
Execution of this CGM attempt can only be described as 'lame' - for one of Australia's best known and highest spending brands surely the advertising agency could come up with something a bit more interesting and original. Everything feels 'contrived' - firstly your mate has to watch the ad before he gets to see your written message - which by the way had to go to the Toohey's content sensors first and there's nothing original or creative about the execution (It would be better just to send an email to your mate) It just feels like Toohey's are trying to force a few more people to view the ad. Come on Toohey's - love your beer - but you can do much better than that.

Last year I wrote a story about my experience in trying to renew my car insurance. "Which Insurance Company would you choose?" I ended up choosing AAMI because of their 'human' approach - compared to the NRMA who seemed to be happy to have a machine interact with their customers.

I recently came across this study by Associate Professor Mark Ritson - Melbourne Business School who published an independent report on the Net Promoter Scores of Australian companies.His Australian Insurance company table is shown below.

Perspective:
The research seems to confirm my own experience with the two companies -each at opposite ends of the NPS spectrum - but, it's also worth noting that no insurance company had a positive NPS - AAMI at the top of the table managed to record a negative 22 - not exactly inspiring stuff.

But it made me think - as my experience with AAMI was very positive (at least in relative terms)- rather than just focusing on an absolute NPS score and perhaps jumping to incorrect conclusion based on an absolute number or even deriving meaningless comparisons against companies in other categories (is it 'reasonable' to compare NPS scores for Apple - based on a fun ipod experience - with an Insurance Company which is a grudge purchase at best?)- the NPS score is probably a more useful metric for comparing similar companies (scale, maturity ...) operating in similar environments (target customers, cultures...), each selling similar products (in this case car insurance)

The NPS score has been claimed to be a predictor of future growth. (there is almost certainly a correlation) but it would seem that applying a category calibration may make it a more useful predictor metric.

Pete Blackshaw chief marketing and customer satisfaction officer of Cincinnati-based Nielsen BuzzMetrics with Ten Reasons why he should stop blogging All good reasons Pete - but your blogs are thought provoking, interesting and relevant - have a break , go on holiday, give it a rest, but please don't give up!

These days, nothing is kept secret for long and that truism is especially the case for poor customer service. Used to be that just a few people found out about a company's poor service - you and a few friends. Now everyone knows - you and a few hundred thousand of your closest 'friends' - in the time it takes to record and post a video on YouTube.
Seems like all the more reason for company's to be obsessed with brand credibility and flawless customer service.

The SMH is running a simple yet enticing competition. All you have to do is make the SMH your home page and forward an invitation to 3 friends to do the same thing and be in the running for a free trip to space (or $140k if you prefer to keep your feet on the ground).
Some simple math ... if I forward this invitation to 3 friends and each one forwards to 3 more friends - and so on - with just 10 steps the reach would be 177,147 people. If just a tiny franction of the SMH readership participate, the impact could be out of this world.

Beware the empty promise! 'Warranty' is supposed to mean you can get your product fixed if - during an agreed period of time - it breaks down . Accordig to the folks from Not Good Enough,that's a promise that some manufacturer's find hard to keep.

Perspective:
What's the point of a warranty if you have to wait weeks or even months for the manufacturer to fix the problem? It's experiences like these that damage a brand's reputation and create brand detractors. Better never to have sold the product in the first place