Download Part 4

PART FOUR—Contemporary Topics in Consumer
Behaviour
Viral Marketing—To Get it Right You Have to Stop Trying
The term ‘viral marketing’ was coined to describe a ‘network-enhanced word of
mouth’ (www.dfj.com/viralmarketing). The ‘viral’ element refers to the contagion
effect that can occur through this type of marketing. Consumers pass the message,
idea, advertisement, song, movie clip or service to their friends. Depending on the
degree of value the individual consumer places on the communication it can be spread
to as few as one friend or to every person in their email address book. Those who
receive the email can choose to ignore it or pass it on their friends and so on.
The virus metaphor gives rise to a range of questions. What sets a virus off? Are all
viruses bad? Are there different levels of virus? Does the consumer have any
protection against them? Is it possible for the consumer to build up immunity against
such viruses? Do marketers have any control over the spread of their virus?
The short history of viral marketing (since the mid 1990s) has given rise to a number
of key cases to illustrate concept in action. The explosion of Hotmail in 1996 was a
result of the attachment of a clickable URL at the bottom of each email, taking the
company from zero to 12 million customers in 18 months at a cost of US$50,000.
John West became famous through the humorous UK television advert showing a
fight over a salmon between a fisherman and a bear (www.adcrtic.com). A.I.
(Artificial Intelligence), the Steven Spielberg film, was able to entice science fiction
fans by creating a chase across multiple websites and other media in order to find the
clues necessary to discover the identity of the mysterious Jeanine Salla, ‘sentient
machine therapist’.
Each of the above examples reflects a different use of the elements of viral marketing.
In the case of Hotmail the spread of the message was based around the functional
benefit of the offer; consumers were able to have their own private email address free
of charge. Alternatively John West, like the many that have followed it, utilised
humour as the currency consumers could trade with friends. A.I. (Artificial
Intelligence) on the other hand used intrigue to engage potential film audiences,
setting them a challenge through which they developed a desire to see the film.
The success of each case was dependent on the consumer perceiving value within the
viral transmission and deeming this value worthy of passing on to others.
However, the ability to create successful viral campaigns will be diminished as the
concept spreads. Consumers are finding themselves bombarded by funny, interesting
or intriguing items from friends, often receiving the same items several times. As the
‘network-enhanced word of mouth’ incidence increases, consumers will begin to
build immunity. The effect of the virus will diminish as consumers delete them,
choosing not to pass them on to friends.
To by-pass this immunity, marketers will have to create stronger or more
sophisticated viral campaigns. One example that may be adapted to an electronic form
was that used by Sony Ericsson for the launch of the T68i mobile telephone with
PowerPack Online Cases t/a Consumer Behaviour 3e by Neal et al
Part 4
camera. Sony Ericsson spent US$5 million on a campaign that in part utilised 120
actors who frequented popular tourist locations such as the Empire State Building in
New York or fashionable bars and nightclubs. The actors would identify those from
the desired target segment, approach them and ask them to take the actors photograph.
Getting the product into the hands of the potential consumer, having them experience
its ease of use, possibly having them ask questions about the product would be
objectives of such a campaign. Sony Ericsson were criticised by consumer groups on
the ethics of the campaign as the actors did not identify themselves as paid
representatives of the company.
A campaign such as the above is possible within the viral domain. Marketers could
identify opinion leaders within a target segment and provide them with incentives to
network the message throughout the target segment. The consumer, unaware of the
marketer’s involvement, would likely regard the message favourably given the
credibility of the source.
Some marketers may see such an approach as a viable means of reaching the
consumer. However, if consumers believe that their right to vet marketing information
is being subverted, the backlash may have a significant negative impact on the
product or brand. Just as marketers can utilise the interconnectedness of consumers
through the web, so too can consumers.
IKEA, the Swedish furniture manufacturer, experienced this first hand. In 2000,
IKEA North America launched a viral marketing campaign offering a discount up to
US$75 if consumers emailed an online postcard to 10 or more friends. Within the first
week 37,000 cards had been emailed. Successful as such a campaign may appear,
consumers began to complain, perceiving that the postcards to be a form of spam—
unsolicited and of no perceived value. If marketers create sophisticated ways of
executing their viral marketing campaigns so that consumers lose the choice of opting
into campaigns, it is likely that consumers will respond negatively. In this case,
complaints from consumers led IKEA to withdraw the promotion, citing it as too
controversial.
Consumers do organise themselves when companies have fallen short of what is
expected. Sites such as www.notgoodenough.org in Australia canvas a vast array of
consumer complaints. In the United States sites such as www.untied.com reflect the
concerns of users of United Airlines. Finally, in the United Kingdom
www.badpension.com provides a vehicle for those dissatisfied with the activities of
financial institutions. In the electronic domain, for example, there is significant
activity to reduce the level of spam. Consumers are being encouraged to complain
about spam activity that violates privacy or is deceptive (www.accc.gov.au). If viral
marketing is perceived by consumers negatively, it would not be a surprise to see the
development of sites similar to those above.
The best minds can spend years and millions of dollars trying to understand all the
variables that influence the diffusion of a biological virus and still have no idea of
what exact factors caused the virus to spread. Similarly, marketers can spend large
sums of money and vast amounts of time devising a viral campaign. Yet the marketers
may find the campaign does not meet the objectives set for it. Success maybe limited
as consumers build immunity to viral marketing activities. Maybe viral marketing is
PowerPack Online Cases t/a Consumer Behaviour 3e by Neal et al
Part 4
being limited by the ‘me too’ approach many campaigns seem to possess. Or maybe
success is being limited by the ability of consumers to organise themselves and
complain.
Discussion Questions
1.
Discuss how consumers might respond if they perceived viral marketing was
threatening their right to choose whether they receive an organisation’s message.
2.
Consider a suggested approach for viral marketing where opinion leaders are
targeted. Identify a good or service where this approach could be used. Discuss
consumers’ likely response by consumers if they discovered the workings of your
viral campaign.
3.
Develop a list of elements you see as necessary for a successful marketing
campaign. Having completed the list, type ‘successful viral marketing’ into
www.google.com and research what others consider important. Compare the two lists
and discuss any points of difference.
Sources
Anonymous (2001), ‘Fish in a can comes in second in Cannes’, Marketing Week, 28
June, p. 22.
Flintoff, John-Paul (2002), ‘When buzz is not quite what it seems’, Financial Times,
London, 20 September, p. 16.
Jurvetson, Steve and Tim Draper (1997), ‘Viral Marketing’, Accessed 19 August
2003, http://www.dfj.com/epress/epress_factsfrset.html
Landau, P (2001), ‘A.I. promotion’, Mediaweek, 12 November, p. 13.
Olsen, Stefanie (2000), ‘IKEA cans spam-like postcard promotion’, CNET News.com,
13 March. Accessed 2 September 2003, http://news.com.com/2100-1017237937.html?legacy=cnet
PowerPack Online Cases t/a Consumer Behaviour 3e by Neal et al
Part 4