Monthly Archives: May 2016

0 Market Position

Your market position forms your approach to marketing.  There are four basic positions: Leader, Challenger, Niche and Follower.  Most small or local businesses are likely to be Niche or Follower.  However, there may be some Leaders or Challengers.

Leaders

The market leader in any market is usually seen to be the business that provides the highest quality products in the greatest number.  They seek to maintain their market position and their reputation.

Someone approaching a leader can be confident they are dealing with an established business and if something goes wrong it has the capacity to put it right.  Leaders are the safe option and likely to be expensive.

They are likely to offer a standard product or service.  If they turn over a lot of customers, the chances are they offer a “one size fits all” approach.

Challenger

These businesses are the closest competitors to Leaders and seek a share in their markets.  The Challenger will try to produce either a higher quality product or service or else they will seek to undercut the Leader in price.

To get to where they want to be, the Challenger will compete with smaller businesses so they can get their customers and build a market share to challenge the Leader.

For many years Apple was the Challenger to Microsoft.  I’m not sure which of these is the current Leader but how did Apple challenge Microsoft?  They used design.  Their computers were well-designed both in their appearance and their operating system.  As Microsoft became bogged down with a system that under-performed, Apple thrived on learning from Microsoft and designing a robust system from the start.  A third element to their success was identifying the type of device that appealed to people, their customers appreciated their latest models as trendy.

Microsoft found itself embedded with traditional users who couldn’t afford to change systems and people like me who simply use what they know, despite its limitations.

Niche

The niche market position is open to smaller businesses.  It identifies a market too small to attract other businesses’ attention.  They offer a high quality product or service specifically tailored to that market.

Their main marketing point is they know their market and so provide excellent service.  When someone in their market encounters their marketing pitch, they know it is for them.

Because they are providing a bespoke service, tailored to their customer’s needs, these businesses can be expensive.

Followers

These are the pile it high, sell it cheap school of marketing.  The idea is to copy the Leader but at low quality so that costs can be kept low.  This can be a borderline dishonest approach and so it is important to keep an eye on reputation.

Whilst some people may stand back through fear of purchasing something substandard, most people will buy because they can afford to take a loss if it turns out to be substandard.

The problem with this approach is that it lacks a creative approach to business, seeking to emulate the success of others.  Are there any circumstances where it can work?

I suppose some people use this approach to generate capital quickly so they can build a niche business.

It may be worth checking from time to time, which of these positions your business occupies.  Given most small local businesses will be niche, this model is helpful not so much for self-diagnosis as helping us understand the market position of other businesses.

Have you experience of working in a market Leader or Challenger?  How does it differ from working in a Niche market?

0 How Referendums Threaten Democracy

Thriving local economies are a guarantee of democracy.  When there is enough money in circulation to enable people to participate in the economy, they can fully participate in politics.  Gimmicks that mimic democratic participation but limit the terms of debate are becoming more popular.  Governments may seem to be taking decisive action but gimmicks mask political accidie, spiritual and practical sloth.

The three referendums held in the UK since 2010 is evidence of our democratic deficit.  None more so than the current European referendum.

The purpose of business is not solely personal wealth but common good. A few months ago I reviewed Christian Felber’s book, Change Everything that describes a new international movement to build an economy for the common good.  Another Europe is Possible is a campaign for a united Europe around a radical alternative economic model.  These two resources show there are radical narratives, real alternatives to the European Referendum debate.  What follows is solely my view and not endorsed by these or any other campaigns.

The Alternative Vote

The first referendum of our brave new democratic era was the Alternative Vote referendum in 2011.  Unlike its predecessor, the 1975 European Referendum, this committed the government to a course of action, should the vote have gone in favour of change.  The earlier referendum was  consultative.  This change applies to all three recent referendums.

I’ve never been impressed by referendums.  If it is consultative, why hold it?  If not, why do we elect Members of Parliament, if not to debate the detail of these issues?  I prefer to vote for politicians with a programme.  I may not agree with every detail of their programme but it is important to have politicians who can be trusted to promote a programme.

The vote went against AV.  Observe what happened.  Whenever anyone raises proportional representation, they tell us we’ve already had our referendum on that topic.  This neatly glosses over the fact that AV is not a form of proportional representation.

There was no consensus about the options on offer in this referendum and just like all referendums, the government interprets the results.

The Scottish Referendum

This referendum did not offer an option favoured by most Scots.  They voted for the status quo and then at the General Election overwhelmingly voted for the pro-devolution SNP.

It seems the majority wanted to stay in the union but on some different basis.  What basis?  We don’t know because no-one has tried to find out.  This is the attitude of politicians who are not prepared to put in the spadework, to find out what people want before calling a referendum.

Felber’s model of three pillar democracy, suggests that it would have been better to hold a constitutional convention and then a referendum on the results.  Such a convention could cover the whole UK, considering not only Scotland’s governance but the other countries’ too.  Somehow England has been fobbed off with the Northern Powerhouse and is still not going to get its own national assembly.  (I’ve no idea whether this is what people want but they haven’t been asked and so how am I or anyone else supposed to know?)

Such a convention could look at all aspects of governance including proportional representation.  It would also have the big advantage of uniting the Union.  It always seemed odd they allowed Scotland a vote to introduce more democratic governance and the rest of us have never had the opportunity.

The European Referendum 2016

The same observation applies to the European Referendum.  Why not a Europe-wide convention followed by a Europe-wide referendum?  Look at what we have now:

The Brexit campaign seems to feature no two supporters who have the same model for what happens after a vote in their favour.  They have been so fixated on getting out, they have no plans for what happens when they do.  This is the Wile E Coyote approach to politics.  This character never looks where he’s going and periodically runs over the edge of a cliff, hangs in the air with his legs running, looks down and then falls.

If these so-called politicians are successful, the poverty of their vision will become apparent after the referendum.

Meanwhile we have the Remain campaign.  Is it any better?  The Prime Minister visited the leaders of European Governments and extracted a few concessions from them.  This was hardly a people’s convention!  Whether we like it or not, if we vote to remain, they will tell us we voted for the Prime Minister’s fix.  For those who vote remain because it is a marginally better option than the other, this is galling.

Loss of Sovereignty

The fact is this referendum does not have any bearing on the role of giant corporations, drawing finance out of national economies.  The idea that voting leave will make the corporations go away is ludicrous.  Neither will voting to remain.

If this debate is about national sovereignty, why most politicians ignore the last thirty years have seen an ongoing campaign to hand over sovereignty to unelected corporate elites?  This is not going to stop if we leave the EU or indeed if we stay.

I do not see how a decision between two options neither of which will make any difference to anything that matters, can be described in any way, shape or form as democratic.  Voting to remain perhaps keeps the door ajar for real change but Another Europe is going to face a long hard road, with the prevailing political consensus across Europe.  The same consensus will prevail if we leave although it is even harder to see how the UK alone will tackle loss of sovereignty to corporate power, more effectively than united European people.

Political Accidie

This unnecessary, divisive and reckless referendum was called to resolve party political issues by a party not prepared to do the spadework to find out what the people want.  They don’t want to do it, the opposition don’t want to do it and it seems other European leaders don’t want to do it.

Accidie is spiritual and mental sloth.  It means our politicians simply do not care about our future.  They do not trust the people and so three times in the last six years have offered us false choices.  The last two times, they batted back the politicians’ proposals as simply unacceptable.  Maybe this time the same will happen, which is better than joining Wile E Coyote at the foot of the cliff, I suppose.

The thing that worries me most is: what happens in the event of a victory for the leave campaign?  The chances are the politicians leading the Brexit campaign will lead the UK government.  They have shown a poverty of vision only comparable to their bombast when they claim to be radical.  These are not radicals.  They have no plan and no vision beyond an idealised image of Britain.  They can see there are problems in Europe and have leapt to a solution without understanding the problem.  If they want to be taken seriously as politicians, they should lead us – that’s what we elected them to do.

And the opposition?  It seems their internal divisions make them terrified to find out what the people want.  A broken and divided government requires an opposition with vision.  Would that we had one.  Since 2010, not one politician has come up with a programme that unites their party and appeals to a majority in the country.

Scenarios – No Thanks!

Hypothetically, what would happen if the vote went to leave and then at the next election (which could be sooner than we think) the opposition were to win?  Now we have a party in power, overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in Europe and mandated by referendum to leave.  What then?

Not possible?  It happened after the Scottish referendum.  OK if you think that’s far-fetched: what if the vote at the referendum is very close?  If that happens, it is possible for most politicians to find their constituents voted the opposite way!  A few huge majorities one way and lots of small majorities the other.  When the vote goes to parliament, do you vote with your constituents or the overall majority?

I do hope someone somewhere is thinking through these scenarios.  It is deeply troubling the government does not appear to have done so.

It is outrageous we are in a place where we have to decide between two sides of a political party who do not have one viable idea between them.  The one thing we can depend upon is the corporate élite will take advantage from either outcome.  The politicians will continue as they are, helpless in the path of the corporate juggernaut.

I can’t be the only person thinking along these lines.  What do you think?

5 In-Person Marketing: Referral Marketing

Last Wednesday, I wrote about networking and how to arrange one-to-one meetings with relevant people.  These meetings are opportunities for referral marketing and that is my topic today.

What is a one-to-one meeting?

Usually, you arrange a one-to-one to get to know someone who you have not met before.  You want to tell them about your business or cause and usually they will want to tell you about theirs.

So, here are some common reasons for a one-to-one:

Referral Marketing Reaches Further than the People in the Room

Referral marketing happens when you meet to exchange information about your businesses.  It is where you learn about someone else’s business because you might have contacts you can refer to them.  Similarly they learn about your business and may have contacts they can refer to you.

Realistically, your one-to-one is the start of a relationship and this is why a lot of referral marketing takes place in the context of a business breakfast or lunch.  This means participants can build relationships over time.  It can take a while for people to understand your business and who your market is likely to be.

It is easy to forget they need to know both what you offer and who it is for.

Don’t assume the other person understands referral marketing.  One common problem is people look only at the people in the room.  They do not consider the possibility that people in the room know many other people.  They very likely do know people who would be interested in your offer; it’s just that sometimes it takes a while for the penny to drop.

If they do refer you to someone, do not forget to ask for credentials.  Can you mention who referred you to them?  Sometimes they will arrange an introduction for you.

Making Referrals

If you are part of a group of people committed to referral marketing, you will find when you have sales conversations, sometimes it is right to refer the prospect onto another business.  It is as if in one conversation the prospect is talking to several businesses.

It is always helpful to make a good referral.  The prospect will be grateful, assuming it is a good referral, and so will the person to whom you make the referral.

Remember that whilst they are not likely to be a prospect, you can ask them if they know anyone who is.  Occasionally, you may find someone interested in your offer, at which point you can arrange another meeting or switch into your marketing conversation.

I never turn down an offer of a one-to-one because I know this is the way I can spread the word about my business as well as maybe find another business to which I can make referrals.  I am often turned down by businesses when I ask for a one-to-one.  There are lots of reasons why this happens.  It is common that they look at what I am doing and decide my business is not compatible with theirs.  Several times I have been turned down by people who initially say yes.  Usually, I have something in mind that might benefit them.  If I don’t share it, normally it will be because the conversation take us to a new place and I think of something even better.  This is what referral marketers do, they link people to useful contacts.

Use E-Mail to Follow Up

One thing I have started to do is a follow-up email.  This allows me to

Very few people are this organised, I find.  But I want to take this aspect of my work seriously because to me it is a developmental role.  It is very hard work, finding prospects and the more people who are looking out for your business, the easier it becomes.  It also takes time.  You need to work out how to market your offer.  Understanding what people need to know to find prospects for you takes time to work out.

Have you examples of times when referral marketing has worked for you?  What practices have you found effective?

1 Using Urgency to Your Client’s Advantage

Urgency is closely related to scarcity.  Urgency implies lack of time and in my last post I wrote about being honest about scarcity, of any type.  It is legitimate for things, including time, to be scarce so long as you’re honest and upfront about the reasons.

Once they are convinced of the value of your offer, get the prospect to act as soon as possible.  There is a state of mind, we’ve all experienced it, called “buyer’s remorse” that sets in soon after someone makes a substantial purchase.  You don’t want buyer’s remorse to set in before someone makes a purchase because then they won’t do it.

Hang on, you may be thinking: isn’t it better to allow people time to think it through?  After all, if it is not beneficial, surely it is better they don’t make the purchase in the first place.  There is some truth in this and there may be some value in allowing a short cooling-off period.  But 24 hours should be more than enough.

The problem really sets in where there is a third-party involved in a decision, maybe a management committee.  Your prospect is to be your advocate with them.  Asking your prospect to stay enthusiastic over maybe a couple of weeks and then to sell your offer to a management committee is a big ask!

Advantages to the Prospect

Let’s start by asking why making a quick decision benefits the prospect.  Usually there are plenty of reasons the vendor would prefer a quick sale; slow sales are more work and likely to result in disappointment.  But why does it benefit the prospect?  Let’s assume objectively the offer will benefit the prospect.

How to Accelerate Decision-Making

Stay in Touch

A final word to prospects.  You can change your mind.  If you do, the thing to do is contact the vendor and tell them!  The worst thing small businesses encounter is the warm prospect who goes silent.  Most businesses want to keep communication open, a definite no allows communication to continue.  The cold shoulder does not help that to happen.

Moving things along from a “yes” to payment can be one of the hardest tasks facing any business.  How do you approach this critical stage in your sales funnel?

0 Resources for the Local Economy: Living Over the Shop

Traditionally, Living Over the Shop (LOTS) was the obvious thing to do.  Before the era of mass pubic transport, commuting was limited.  What could be easier than rolling out of bed, downstairs and into your work area?  Students of the history of architecture will no doubt have records of several types of housing that allowed workers, their families and employees to live and work together.

Living Over the Shop in Sheffield Town Centre

Speaking of students of architecture, I met some this week on Fargate in central Sheffield.  They were displaying some of their work on uses for empty buildings in the city centre.  They have a Facebook page, Fargate Co-Studio 2016.  (I don’t know how long this page will be live, so if you are a historian of twenty-first century local economy bloggers, please don’t be disappointed if you don’t find it!)  If it is there, scroll down to see some of the students’ work.

Their work is most welcome.  We need a new generation of people able to re-purpose our city centres and indeed all the neighbourhood centres in our cities.  We don’t appreciate how much unused space is above the shops we use.  Look carefully at the shops in the photos on the Facebook page, find Paperchase and four or five stories above it are empty.  Julian Dobson covers this issue in his book “How to Save Our Town Centres“.  (This link is to one of three posts, go to Book Reviews and scroll down to find the others.)

Consulting with the Public and Communities

The students were asking for comments.  It is really hard to take in complex ideas on the fly.  You can see the level of detail in the students’ plans on the Facebook page.  To be asked to take this in and then respond constructively was a challenge.

Furthermore, when I got home and read their leaflets I discovered similar displays and activities were live on that one day in four other areas!  If I had known I would have followed their route and had a look at all their displays.  I still might not have had much to say, I like to have some time to ponder stuff before commenting.

So, simpler summary displays and more time would be really helpful and is likely to result in more constructive responses from the public.  The originals could still be available for inspection – they were beautiful to look at but hard to digest!

I don’t know the detail of the consultation that went on before the public displays this week.  However, yesterday I attended a conference about Co-Production, put on by the University of Sheffield’s Social Sciences Department.  This included some exciting models for participatory work between academics and communities, many of them in Sheffield.  It would be good to see some collaboration between these departments (or even better to find out it is already happening).  I shall blog about the co-production conference some time soon.

In summary, I liked what I saw and believe with good relationships with local groups, some ideas might get off the page and become reality.  The challenge is to move from an academic exercise to something that makes a real difference.

Inter-Disciplinary Solutions

Picking up my comment about co-production, let’s take it further.  Julian Dobson describes the need to integrate several factors to regenerate urban centres.  You will see some of them if you follow the above link to my review of his book.  If we are going to regenerate our city and neighbourhood centres, we need plans that support all aspects of the local economy.

Certainly way back in the fifties and sixties, small retailers would live over the shop.  It was the natural thing to do.  I suspect it was the new supermarkets that reduced the numbers of traders living over their shops.  Maybe the increasing mobility of populations and aspirations to live in leafy suburbia also led to its decline.

Even earlier, “over the shop” meant “over the workshop”.  Goods would be manufactured, perhaps to order, in the same buildings where they retailed.  In some times and places, the master (or mistress) would own a whole block.  Family and employees would live together and share communal facilities.  Clusters of such “shops” would form the agora, the marketplace where the public gathered for business and just about every other activity.

My father’s grandmother owned a hotel (technical name for a doss house apparently) and a nearby row of terrace houses.  They are now beneath University of Sheffield buildings, having been bombed during the war.  My father remembered as a child carrying buckets of water up the stairs in the hotel.  The family business is not such an ancient practice!

New Models for LOTS

What I am driving at is the need to build new models that allow for complexity of human interactions.  You will note I’ve introduced Living Over the Shop under my general heading of “Resources for the Local Economy”.  My aim is to build a database of ideas that will help regenerate local economies.  It is unlikely any of these approaches will suffice alone.

The architects must design spaces that accommodate both contemporary and future developments in the local economy.  Communities are not just spaces but essentially the relationships within them.  Financial arrangements between people form these relationships, as much as the nature of the spaces they occupy.

This is why as living over the shop opens up new spaces, we also need to see new financial arrangements that allow money to flow in new ways around our towns.

How can Universities work with local people to support and develop local economies?

1 In-Person Marketing: Networking

Networking is fundamental to community development and community-based marketing.  Many businesses find networks of local contacts a great platform for marketing their business.  I found much the same as a community development worker, supporting community groups building their membership.

Businesses have enshrined the one-to-one over coffee, whilst as a community development worker I met a lot of people in their workplace or home.

The first step is to meet people.  This can be hard if you are, like me, introvert.  I can happily hide out in a crowd and not talk to anyone.  This is never particularly helpful.  There are broadly two ways to do networking.

The Networking Event

These are often advertised as network events but any events where people gather will do.  At a big event you will speak to a small number of people, even if you are extrovert.  So, the first point for my fellow introverts is you will never get to speak to everyone so don’t worry if it doesn’t feel as if you are meeting enough people.  No one speaks to everyone at networking events.

Once you’re in a conversation and you’ve found some common ground, here are a few things to remember:

Referral Networking

Another approach to networking often used by community development workers is referral networking.  You make first contacts and arrange one-to-ones with them.  These might be members of a management committee or officers of local groups.  Anyone who is willing to meet with you.

During the conversation you ask if they can think of two relevant people who might be willing to meet with you.  Also ask if it is OK to tell the referrals they recommended them.  This latter is your credentials.  They are more likely to meet you if a friend or associate recommends you.

Get their phone number, call them and explain your previous contact suggested they might like to meet you.  (Usually email is not a good way to make first contact.)  The last four bullets in the list above can then be followed.  Don’t forget to ask your new contacts for their two contacts and credentials during your meeting.

This approach works well if you are familiarising yourself with a neighbourhood.  It can help you reach people you would not otherwise contact.  You will eventually have more contacts than you have time to contact but usually some people can’t think of anyone or some contacts drop out for various reasons.

Both these approaches are good ways to make contact with people.  What I haven’t really mentioned is what you discuss at the meetings.  That will be my topic next time.

Do you have an approach to networking that works?  What are your tips for making networking more effective?

1 How to Market Using Scarcity

There are two approaches to scarcity and you muddle them at your own peril!  It can be

The latter is to be deplored.  I’ll explore scarcity as a marketing ploy in more detail in my next post because it is a real issue for the entrepreneur.  My firm recommendation is you deal solely in genuine scarcity.

Types of Scarcity

Less Convincing Scarcity

These are sometimes used by online marketers but should be approached with caution.

Take Care Using Scarcity

Be aware, you will turn off potential customers with any constraint for which there is no credible reason.  Be upfront if there is a genuine limit.  “To be sure I can provide the excellent service I promise, I have to limit my client numbers to xx per quarter.”  Something along these lines communicates that you are aware of your constraints and limit your offers accordingly.

Scarcity is a powerful marketing tool when used properly.  Don’t use it unless there is really no alternative.

Can you describe how you have used scarcity successfully?  Or have you used it improperly and been found out?  It is easy to do, without realising what you’re doing!

0 Resources for the Local Economy: In-Store Proximity Marketing

Will In-Store Proximity Marketing support local economies?  The idea is you download an app that suggests items to explore when you enter a shop, according to your interests.  When you visit a store, the app will tell you of offers that might interest you, via beacons attached to the products in the shop.  A helpful introduction to this technology can be found at Will Shoppers And Developers Adapt to Proximity Marketing In-Store?

So, let’s be clear.  This app works once you enter a store.  It doesn’t necessarily help you find the store in the first place.  What it does is connects you with items in the store, the app knows will interest you.  It can also make special offers.

So, does this technology potentially support the local economy?  My answer is a qualified yes.  One major threat to local shops is the Internet.  In my post Our Town Centres Today, I reference Julian Dobson’s book, How to Save Our Town Centres, where he describes three threats to neighbourhood centres and one of them is the Internet.

How so?  Well, some people look at products in stores and then search for them online where they can purchase them at a more favourable rate.  Proximity shopping can to some degree mitigate this by making the in-store experience more like the online, offering favourable deals to people known to be interested in the product.

So, imagine being in a bookshop and you are looking at a particular book that interests you but it is a bit pricey.  The app knows your past purchasing and that you enjoy that type of book.  It pings you with a special offer, perhaps a 10% reduction if you buy it now.

This could easily be combined with local currencies.  The 10% discount could be made conditional on a purchase with a local currency.  If the local currency provided the app, it could build a local database of information about local customers.  In effect the app would help shopkeepers get to know their customers.  (Normally, a large store will have its own server to manage proximity marketing.  For small businesses, smaller stores could share a server and even allow the app to take customers between shops.)

To some extent this is speculation.  Whilst there is no doubt people are working on these apps, there is no guarantee they could be integrated with local currencies.  But then we never know if anything works, unless we experiment.

Serendipity

However, I have one reservation.  One common feature of apps that personalise the retail experience is they reduce potential for serendipity.

One big advantage paper books have over electronic books is they are far easier to browse.  Similarly a bookshop or library can be browsed.  This increases happy accidents, finding things you would never predict would be of interest.

To what extent would proximity marketing form or shape our preferences?  The effects could be subtle, after all the app working well would point us towards things we know we like.  Who would argue with that?  What if a shop opened and no-one went in because their proximity apps told them, it contained nothing of interest to them?  The shop closes and no-one would miss its contents.

So, what do you think?  Would proximity marketing mitigate the effects of the Internet on local centres or would it subtly impoverish our lives?

0 In-Person Marketing Techniques

So far, most of my posts under the category “Technique” have been about online marketing.  Online marketing is hard to escape these days, especially if you are in business.  Customers do not have to go online but if they are online they are aware of marketing daily.  However, online marketing is secondary to in-person marketing.  It always will be so because in-person interactions will always have a more profound impact.

This is especially true for local marketing.  We can use the Internet to market offers nationally and even globally.  In-person interactions will be fewer under these circumstances.  Cost is the reason for this.  Few people can afford to fly all over the world and meet people in expensive hotels.  The traditional approaches to marketing on this scale such as newspaper or TV advertising, are still very expensive.  The Internet has opened up global marketing to many more people.  It is cheaper.  It is still difficult but certainly possible.

However my focus is on community-based marketing and there are many in-person techniques you can use to build a marketing strategy locally.  Mostly these remain unchanged.  The Internet can support most of these approaches but they are much as they always were.

Marketing

In this blog, I apply the language of marketing to community development.  The way I see it, local businesses need to market to communities, while community organisations need to recognise business as an essential element within their neighbourhoods.

When I write about promoting or campaigning, what I say is just the same.  There is, however, one difference between marketing and promoting / campaigning.  Marketing aims to make a sale, usually in a business context.  It may make sense to keep this distinction.  I market when I’m aiming for a sale; I promote or campaign when I seek to do something else.  This is fair enough if only because it allows these three words to retain distinct meanings.

Marketing in its narrow meaning has a business context and aims for sales.  In its more general sense, marketing means any kind of promotion.  Why?

1. Whether you are marketing towards a sale, promoting or campaigning, the methods are indistinguishable.
2. The marketplace is central to community development and not solely for financial transactions. Fundamentally I want to distinguish between genuine marketplaces, where people have a right to promote whatever they wish (so long as its legal) and the private shopping centre where the campaigner is moved along.  The private shopping centre is not a marketplace because it lacks the fundamental right we all have to live our lives in public; they are leisure centres, where the primary leisure pursuit is shopping.

Promoting

In its specific sense, promoting is where you are seeking support for an activity.  So, you are organising an event where there is a guest speaker and you want people to attend.  A flyer or email to a list informs people of the venue, time and place.  You’ll say a little about the speaker and their subject and hope people turn up.

There are many activities that need to be promoted.  Here are a few:

There may be a charge for some of these but the main point is the political message; charges cover costs.

Conclusion

Whilst most people agree these are distinct approaches, there is significant overlap of the activities involved.  The in-person marketing techniques I will describe in this sequence of posts can equally be used to market, promote or campaign.

Do you agree all these approaches are marketing methods?  How do you set about promoting your activities?

0 Soft Evidence

While hard evidence is researched and independent, you generate soft evidence as you go about your business. It is sometimes called social proof because those who use your products or services produce it.  Soft evidence, reproduced in your marketing materials, is usually quotations from people who have used your services.

Use soft evidence to show that people are doing business with you and what they say about your business.  It is likely you will have little soft evidence when you start your enterprise.  Everyone has this problem but over time it becomes less of an issue.

Remember soft evidence is an essential output from the work you do.  Think of it as part of the payment for your services or products.  Ask for it at the outset and get agreement to provide it before you start work.

Examples of Soft Evidence

• Testimonials are perhaps the most common type of soft evidence. They can be presented as text, video or audio.  Testimonial interviews are often most effective and can be used in various ways.
• Anecdotal evidence may seem the least convincing type of soft evidence. However, you may find you are able to use this approach effectively.  The place to use it is where you are describing examples of work you’ve done with clients.  Their testimonial might not go into the level of detail where a particular incident, you need to illustrate a point, will be mentioned.  You’re saying, “this is what I did under these particular circumstances”.
• Celebrity endorsements may be helpful I suppose. Your celebrity need not have universal appeal.  If you know someone in your field, with a significant track record, they may be willing to endorse your offer.
• Reviews of your work can be helpful. You could, for example, ask someone to review your blog or ebook.  This could be published as a blog post and quoted on your site.

All of these accumulate as and when opportunities present themselves.  You need to be alert to such opportunities and be ready to ask at the right time.  If you need a couple of sentences, some people may be able to write it on the spot.  Longer documents, such as reviews, take time to prepare.  They can be recorded in about 20 minutes on the spot or drafted at leisure.  The risk is promises of long reviews are not always delivered, so any support you can offer is likely to be productive.

Have you any tips about collecting and publishing soft evidence?