As a marketer, "integrated campaign" is a term I have grown weary of. More often than not, what such campaigns typically boil down to are simply efforts in various channels taking place simultaneously. But how often does the effort in one channel actually benefit the activity in another?
When applied to direct response, and more specifically offline programs such as direct mail, we are asked often to comment on how the web can improve performance. It's a simple question: How can technology be leveraged to improve the performance of traditional channels?
The simple answer is that online tools allow for far greater monitoring and value add. But done correctly, they can also be a "channel bridge" (and you thought you would make it through another day without a new industry term) that can exponentially increase the value of the effort as a whole, both near and long term.
Direct programs, in their simplest form, divide the cost of the program by the return, as calculated by a clearinghouse or POS system, to justify the investment. At the same time, you can test the efficacy of various list profiles, copy, or offers. The problem is that there is a large amount of incredibly valuable data to be found among the individuals within a segment that didn't test well. Online tools such as registration, receipt verification, and loyalty enrollment allow retailers to move the conversation from the mailbox to the inbox. But recipients will not play along simply for the purpose of making your future correspondence cheaper. There has to be an exchange of value that makes the proposition worthwhile.
A lot of people say that recipients of direct mail will rarely (or never) go online due to a direct mail piece. But if there is a low expectation that a person will go online, why is there any expectation that that person will go to your store to redeem an offer? The quality of the offer dictates interest, and our filters as consumers are getting stricter. No amount of coordination will surmount this challenge. But without online assets, redemption will linger south of 1 percent.
Tools for monitoring direct mail performance are available, and more are being added every day. These range from the simplest tools, such a delivery verification barcodes, to POS aggregation, allowing up-to-the-minute reporting on revenue specific to certain initiatives by a marketer.
For example, SendTech Inc. offers the ability to track online purchases caused by offline activity. And a number of vendors, including OnDialog, sell persistent URLs that allow direct marketers to customize online addresses to the individual. But the problem with after-market resources is that they are not truly integrated into programs with the recipient in mind. There is no doubt that they improve things for the marketer, but "response" is supposed to refer to an action taken by a consumer. How do these tools benefit them? What elements are being developed specifically to benefit the individual recipient's experience? Bringing advances such as these to programs no doubt affect control, but they are not the magic bullet to truly remarkable turnarounds in the industry.
One element that has been missing is performance indicators between receipt and redemption. Not every gift card or coupon that goes unredeemed equals a bad customer; we have all had great offers expire in the consoles of our cars. Hence, it's important to consider tools that coordinate real-time reporting of performance from activations to purchase intent. Marketers also need to understand how the offers sent in the mail were shared online or customized by feedback made on the site. In order to truly capitalize on the investments being made, programs should maximize returns and capture every point of instructive data.
All of this was true even before the economic meltdown. In light of the need to coordinate offline and online components of direct response programs, I talk with many marketers about the channel bridge that can exist between, in this case, direct mail and interactive.
With true coordination between online and offline elements, marketers are able to open new universes of potential customers without sacrificing the efficiency, accountability, and legacy of their past activities. An online aggregator of fashion manufacturers that decided to use direct mail seemed to be making an unlikely move in light of the disconnect that exists between the media. But when mail and the web work together, it becomes much easier to see how online entities benefit from such traditional offline efforts. And the channel bridge can work both ways.
For retailers that are historically steeped in direct mail as a standalone customer acquisition medium, programs with a logical integration of channels can serve as a bridge to the future of direct marketing. Specifically, future programs should integrate technologies such as persistent URLs, postal optimization, personalization, and enhanced trackablity.
In the end, the channel that is hungriest for a revolution is now starting to find the new path it so desperately needs. But technology that does not benefit individuals is simply not enough to change the game meaningfully.
Scott Couvillon is president, marketing and product development, at Dukky.
