« Canadian Based Business Differences -- Responding to June Li, Christopher Berry and Jacques Warren | Main | Lost Dog - Please send this on to anyone you know in the Nashua-Merrimack, NH area »

Jun26
Responding to Christopher Berry's Vexing Problem, Part 3 post
NextStage: Predictive Intelligence, Persuasion Engineering, Interactive Analytics and Behavioral Metrics Christopher Berry wrote The Vexing Problem, Part 3 and included much of my Canadian Based Business Differences -- Responding to June Li, Christopher Berry and Jacques Warren in it (any my thanks to him for doing so).

I wrote a response to Christopher's Part 3 and, being a Luddite, couldn't post it to his blog hence am posting it here and hoping he'll once again quote the parts he feels worthy.

Hello again,

Nice thoughts here!

I hope it is understood that my use of "fiscal conservative" was not from a socio-political perspective (NextStage has worked for politicians and political parties and I don't follow politics much), it was from a neuro-economics, psycho-socio-linguistics perspective.

That offered, it seems the two overlap based on your comments. Funny how often that happens, yes?

"The power of the status quo" -- very well stated although I'd never heard the phrase before. I'll be sure to use it liberally and reference you as the source.

"Every single amendment to a bill permanently changes it." Someday remind me to give you the semioticist's version of that statement. So close it scares me.

Do I agree with what you've written? Some of it, yes, and purely from research and observation as well as another set of paradigms.

Thank you for suggesting that necessity is the key. I'm not sure that's the entirety of what I meant, though. I believe I wrote "...there is not a strong enough case made for adoption...". Necessity is part of the mix, I'm sure, and I would be failing you if I encouraged the thought that necessity was the sum of it.

I also offer that it's not a losing battle, nor do we need to sensationalize or exaggerate, or resort to fear tactics. Definitely not fear. Not with a pioneering mentality and not as is suggested (the competition is doing it). The response to that would be "Really? Good, let's see what happens and if they really absolutely positively get an advantage that we can't duplicate or approximate without going through everything they went through, we'll do it. But only then. Maybe."

I'm also quite sure logic (at least as we're using it here) isn't the answer because the language of analytics (as exemplified by this blog, June Li's, (oh, just pick any one but not Stephane Hamel's or mine because Stephane and I use different language models, me all the time and Stephane much of the time) is to effect action, not promote logical processes. Effecting action rather than promoting logical processes is not specific to analytics although analytics really enforces that former aspect of language.

I would offer that effecting action rather than promoting logic is another reason why (pulling from some other disciplines I study) this type of analytics is all over the place in the States and catches on more slowly everywhere else (with exceptions being Asia, India and Australia, probably).

Is it a combination of all three? Let me offer the following for example purposes; "if any of you are interested in putting NextStage's analytics on your own sites we could probably tell you in a relatively short period of time exactly what your customers (potential and otherwise) are thinking, tell you their objections and hot button items, and provide methods for overcoming conscious and non-conscious objections (if any) as well as activating their "buyer" mental states."

I offer the above for example purposes, not as a sales pitch. The above paragraph is a demonstration of a "sales" methodology that works very well with Canadians (has so far, anyway, and everywhere from Atlantic Canada to the Pacific). The case for adoption (in the above paragraph) has little to do with necessity, much to do with understanding and usability of the information supplied. To date one Canadian client (just one!) asked us to provide an idea of ROI on their investment in us. This is extremely revealing as we know they ask it of others (and we've worked with large and small businesses, in educational settings, politics, ...).

Readers who've seen my eMetrics presentations might remember my emphasis on the {C,B/e,M} or Cognitive, Behavioral/effective, Motivational matrix. These posts/discussion are/is an example of interpreting a behavior (reluctance to adopt) through a set of filters that may not be the same filters (that's the cognitive and motivational parts of the {C,B/e,M} matrix) used by the target audience in their decision making. "Necessity" to a pioneering mentality is a much richer concept than most people are trained to recognize. I once explained to someone that no farmers I know of or farms I've worked on have snowblowers or even snowplows. What they have are tractors with CVDs and PTOs. The CVDs and PTOs allow the farmer to attach an amazing variety of apparatus to their tractors, hence one purchase -- the tractor -- allows the farmer to accomplish a great deal and variety of work. Yes, the apparatus must be purchased (or are often made by the farmers themselves in the off season from spare parts) and again, only as the need arises. (and who would recognize that the tractor-apparatus concept is based on a biologic, anatomic paradigm? ie, sell what is familiar)

What I'm suggesting is that analysts start selling tractors with CVDs and PTOs rather than snowplows and snowblowers. I believe one reason NextStage can get in to companies that are ignoring, doing away with, reconsidering their investment in, etc., traditional analytics is because we're offering them a tractor with CVDs and PTOs along with a set of apparatus that not only thresh the field but also plow, plant and accurately predict the harvest all in one operation. If there's something a (potential or otherwise) client wants to know we can usually fashion that apparatus in our off season (many of our reports came from specific client requests). None of what we offer falls under "necessity", me thinks, because the separate pieces can probably be found elsewhere with a little work. It definitely falls under "understanding and usability" because our tractor also determines optimal field size, fertilizer spread, sowing pattern, etc., and then calculates harvest after being driven across the field once.

Canada is much more a networked society than the US is (again, a perceived weakness is actually one of the country's great strengths) and recognizes that "understanding others better" has value. Is it an analytics sale? No, it's a "better understanding/networking/usage" sale.

To me (emphasis on "to me") this comes under the category of understanding how the customer thinks and tailoring the sale to the customer's thought processes. I know you're all shocked that "understanding how someone thinks" would be my take on it. I know you're all also shocked that I'd work a farm metaphor into this. Hey, at least I didn't write it all in Gaelic.

Thanks again - Joseph

Please contact NextStage for information regarding presentations and trainings on this and other topics.

Sign up for the NextStage Irregular, our very irregular, definitely frequency-wise and probably topic-wise newsletter.


4 Comments/Trackbacks




Hi my friend,

To me, this conversation is interesting from two standpoints:

1. "Making the case" in a sales process is certainly different in Canada than in the US, as it must be in Europe and Asia. And I would offer this is not specific to web analytics. We already know the art of "selling" is not the same way in each of those regions, largely due to cultural differences (the strict hierarchy and formal process in Asia and to some extent in Europe, the win-win attempt in Canada vs the legal binding in US, etc.). A topic we touched a bit in our Toronto panel: this is the "cultural context" of the web analytics market.

2. From a web analytics perspective, we keep hearing there is a lack of resources/demand is high. I remember a great discussion (which turned out to be a passionate argument!) that happened in one of our Web Analytics Wednesday: a consultant suggested that "if the company is not ready to do it/not serious/not willing/not educated enough, I simply move to the next client", which obviously offended some "clients"... I guess the challenge is to match the right solution (entry-level or high-end?), the web analytics maturity of the organization and the approach of the consulting partner. This is what I would call the "market context".

In one of my web analytics class a student (fellow consultant) asked about tips on marketing his services. From this perspective (and I might be very biased here!), I think "marketing" and "making the case" for web analytics might be, for the most part, a waste of time in the current "market context". In a market where demand is so high and offering is so low, I tend to agree with the "you are not ready to order, I’ll give you some more time to look at the menu" approach (and I actually refused to work with some potential clients or postponed my implication with some existing clients because their level of commitment was too low). Of course, I’m saying that because I have plenty of work... the day the market context change I will obviously need to adapt my approach...

The other aspect of your reply that intrigue me is "just pick any one but not Stephane Hamel's or mine because Stephane and I use different language models". I’m not sure if I should feel privileged and honored or scared! :)

When you say "the language of analytics is to effect action, not promote logical processes" I’m ambivalent... analytics doesn’t go anywhere without the process, and I’m a strong believer of applied analytics to optimize business processes. Ultimately, delivering a nice plan with all the actionable steps is not worth it if they are not implemented (this is one of my main issue with my clients! They know what they should do... but they don’t do it!). Can you elaborate on my/our different language models and action/process aspects?

Best regards from Quebec city!
Stéphane

» My Easter Eggs Critiqued from BizMediaScience
At least we laughed about it [Read More]

» The Language of Web Analytics - The Hard(er) Sell in Canada from BizMediaScience
Analysing the language of analysts [Read More]

submit a trackback

TrackBack URL for this entry:

post a comment

Name, Email Address, and URL are not required fields.





Comment Preview

« Canadian Based Business Differences -- Responding to June Li, Christopher Berry and Jacques Warren | Main | Lost Dog - Please send this on to anyone you know in the Nashua-Merrimack, NH area »

Advertise

sponsored ads



subscribe


Prefer Email?
Subscribe below-

Enter your Email:


Powered by FeedBlitz What's this?

Current News

Support This Blog

My site was nominated for Best Business Blog!

business social media

Use these fast growing business social media sites to promote your business, feature your products, spotlight your business leaders, create links, and drive traffic back to your company site, all for free!

BIZZlogos - Add your logo - free link to your site
BIZZphotos - Add photos of your products and people
BIZZprofiles - Submit your profile and build your online visibility
BIZZspotlight - Spotlight your business with free links
BIZZvideos - Videos about businesses, products and business people.
BIZZbites - "Digg" for Business - Submit your articles and posts

know more media network

View Network Map

Network Feed List (OPML)

Know More Media Network
Feed


we support unitus

PRWeb

Influencer



BizMediaScience is a member of the Know More Media network of business related blogs.

Here are some current headlines from some of our business publications:

ProductivityGoal

CallCenterScript

AdHurl

TheBizofKnowledge

LandingTheDeal

CustomersAreAlways

HealthCareVox

BrainBasedBusiness

TheInsurancePolicy

MarketingBlurb