Interruption vs. Self-Service Marketing
April 22nd, 2008 by Bob Bly
In an article in DM News, Tom Rapses, a creative director, divides marketing into two separate categories:
1. Old-school response marketing (although Rapsas does not use the term, this is often referred to as “interruption marketing” because it intrudes into other activities such as watching TV or sorting your mail).
2. “Self-service” marketing — including word of mouth advertising, blogging, podcasts, and social networking sites such as Facebook.
“Self-service marketing is all about putting content where people will find it,” writes Rapsas. “It makes sense to go where the customers are.”
On the surface, the notion of putting content where the customers are looking for it — instead of forcing it upon them when they AREN’T in search mode — seems unbeatable.
However, if it works so well, why is so much more money spent on magazine, newspaper, TV, and radio advertising — which are intrusive — rather than on Yellow Pages ads, which once were the primary medium for self-service marketing?
Rapas suggests that you need multiple channels — a combination of traditional direct response with non-traditional self-service marketing — to capture more attention, traffic, leads, and sales.
Do you agree that both old-school direct response and new school interactive marketing have their place?
Or do you think the continued use of intrusion marketing in the 21st century makes one a dinosaur?
Source: DM News, 4/21/08, p. 10.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008 at 2:17 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Interruption marketing will stay with us as long as its return exceeds its cost. I expect that to continue for the rest of my lifetime.
April 23rd, 2008 at 5:30 am
I agree with Mr. McLean. After all, not everyone is such an early adopter. For instance, I am very much sure that my mother will never be online, and yet, she has money. How do you get your message to her?
Also, many people don’t know where to look and expect us to deliver them the message.
Just my 5 cents.
April 23rd, 2008 at 7:17 am
ZV: Among other things, I find that the new media pundits completely ignore your point: many people either are not online or do not look to the Internet as their primary information source. But that’s in the consumer market. In B2B, it’s a safe and accurate assumption to assume your prospects are online. Although in some markets (e.g., physicians), prospects are not habitually sitting at a desk and PC, and in those markets, offline methods may work better.
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:12 am
For American consumers, it is, and always will be, all about choice.
As long as the budget allows, we should never limit our channels. My opinion.
Re: B-to-B. What do you think of a direct mail piece to, say, prod B-to-B’ers into going back to that email promo about a conference, or to click on the conference site? Is that approach still working?
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:27 am
Bob, interesting post, but I think you’ve created a bit of a false dichotomy.
“Magazine, newspaper, TV, and radio advertising” is intrusive, but it can be somewhat self-service if it’s RELATED to the subject of associated content. Readers often find ads for bikes in bike magazines, for example, as interesting as the articles themselves.
In fact, MarketingSherpa (with which I have zero affiliation) just released a summary report (http://www.marketingsherpa.com/sample.cfm?ident=30386) showing that CONTEXTUALLY TARGETED ads have the greatest ROI. The conclusion: “The key takeaway for advertisers is that the context in which an ad is served is at least as important as the ad itself.”
Pop-ups and pop-unders, which are two of the most interrupting types of ads on the internet, have the second-worst ROI.
And the absolute worst?
Banner ads.
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
SS: Yes, contextually targeted ads lean more toward self-service marketing, while most ads (e.g., a Nike commercial during the evening news) are interruption marketing. Thanks for pointing this out.
April 25th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Hi Bob,
Good topic. Well, you asked “…rather than Yellow Page ads” but I don’t think you can compare Internet marketing with the telephone book.
Google is the new Yellow Pages, as I see it. My gut tells me that if you had to prioritize your ad budget, direct mail and internet marketing would come before a phone book ad.
Of course, I can’t say whether direct mail would beat out internet marketing (the new generation of “self-service”) – it depends on your industry and where target buyers most likely congregate. As Zoran V. pointed out about his own mother, some people just don’t go online.
I also agree with Writer CC’s comment about Americans wanting choices.
April 27th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
What I find interesting is that among the geeky there is a big drive to reduce exposure to interruption advertising. Yet, at the same time the geeks are very open to deeply rooted permission marketing scenarios.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:09 am
Phil: Would you agree that ALL e-mail marketing is interruption marketing, even when permission-based? (I would.)
April 28th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Yes – first contact email marketing is interruption, for sure. Even the permission stuff interrupts. It’s kind of different if it’s something you’re expecting, however. For example, you signed up for a seminar or something, and you receive sound files, a guidebook or something. But techncially, yes, interruption (positive or negative) is interruption.
Among the Facebook crowd, I hear that the younger generations don’t use email unless they need to connect to a geezer. They all use SMS, MMS, Twitter and social portals/social networking sites. Plenty of advertising on those sites…. fairly tightly targeted, however, based on profiles, interests, etc. Rapidly changing world.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Another great post, Bob.
Two comments:
1. You can’t squeeze your market into a media pigeon hole just because that’s what’s convenient for the marketing director. You can do things with email you can’t do with print, and vice versa. You’ve got to take a good hard look at what you’re selling and who you’re selling it to and find the media they’re most likely to respond to.
2. I see the advantages of “self-service” marketing, but I can’t see what’s wrong with a good “interruption marketing” ad. Seems to me a good ad does the reader a service, whether it interrupts or not.
What do you care if someone interrupts you… if they’re helping you find the product or service you’ve been looking for??
- Aryeh
April 30th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Aryeh: I love and agree with your comments, especially #2. My rule of thumb: self-service marketing works with products which consumers actively search for information (including pricing) on — for instance, installing solar panels on the roof of your home. Interruption marketing works with products people want when they hear about but weren’t thinking about beforehand — e.g., designer handbags, a home-study course on becoming a locksmith.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:54 am
* Posted with permission from Bob Bly
Bob,
I was reading your blog and saw the post, ?Interruption vs. Self-Service Marketing.? I enjoyed the post and the question that you posed. To answer your question, yes, I do believe that both old-school and new-school marketing have their place. I think each business has to look at, and identify, their marketing and advertising goals, and then develop a strategy that best suits their goals and needs. This may include a combination of both of the old-school and new-school methods.
I know that you have worked with RainToday.com in the past, so I thought that you might be interested in our newest research, Fees and Pricing Benchmark Report: Marketing, Advertising, and PR Industry 2008.
In this report, we surveyed 343 professional service firms within the marketing, advertising, and PR industry regarding common pricing challenges, discounting norms and how they affect margins, pricing strategies and tactics that hallmark profit and brand leaders, average hourly book rates by level of professional, and much more. It also provides keen insight into what the leaders in marketing, advertising, and PR – premium-price firms, profit leaders, brand leaders, and price increasers – are doing differently to stay ahead in a crowded market space.
The following are key insights that I thought might be of interest to you:
Does Brand Really Make a Difference?
Firm marketers are always touting the value of establishing a brand?and now they can have the hard data to back it up.
In the Fees and Pricing Benchmark Report: Marketing, Advertising, and PR Industry 2008, RainToday.com found that firms that are well-known in their target markets receive higher fees, see their revenue grow, and earn higher profits than their lesser known counterparts.
Making the financial case for branding ? our research shows:
Brand leaders were more likely to price their services at a higher level than their competitors in the market (41% of brand leaders were premium-price vs. 24% of lesser-known firms). And, they were more likely to actually get higher fees by up to 35%.
79% of brand leaders experienced revenue growth in the last two years versus 65% of lesser known firms
69% of brand leaders are profitable versus 56% of lesser known firms
According to the data, brand leaders have a better chance of generating premium fees, growing their business, and realizing a profit than lesser known firms.
I thought that you and your readers might be interested in some of these results for your blog. As such, I have included the following information for you:
Press Review Copy: Upon your request, a press review copy will be provided to you. I would be happy to email you a PDF of the review copy as well.
Media Page: Here you will find quick facts, figures, and graphs found in the report. Please feel free to incorporate any of this information that you feel might be of interest to your readers. The media page is available here: http://www.raintoday.com/mediapagemarketing.cfm.
I hope you find the data in the report to be useful to your readers. Please feel free to use whatever sections of data, analysis, or graphs that you think will be of interest. Once again, the link back to the report for anyone who would like to read more is here: http://www.raintoday.com/feesandpricingmarketing.cfm.
I would also be happy to get you in touch with Mike Schultz, Publisher of RainToday.com and report author, if you would like to speak with him about some of the report findings or interview him for any of your posts or articles.
Best regards,
Laurie Stafinski
May 8th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Bob,
I like where you are going here. My answer is yes i think they both have their place. I think that place may even be to compliment each other.
Interuption marketing, however intrusive infulences decisions made in self-service marketing.
Lets say you are looking for a bike and go to the yellow pages. The ad you saw talking about a particular bike may influence your decision to persue that brand. Even if you are not conscience of the ad when you have the yellowpages open.
On the other side self service marketing helps intrusive marketing by providing the connection at a step closer to the potential sale.
May 10th, 2008 at 4:14 am
good sites.