Communications Marketing Company

When you communicate, how do others evaluate what you say? Effectively transmitting ideas is vital in business. Executives with important initiatives need to get buy-in from colleagues, superiors and agents. Marketers need to get the company’s message across to insureds and prospects. 

The answer is yes! So blogging for SEO purposes, as legitimate lead generation methods go, is a good thing, right? Not if you don't do it. For some reason, it has fallen further and further down my radar screen as I get wrapped up and entrenched in the "day-to-day". The cost of not being "heard" is not being "found".

You may get a little overwhelmed with all the new technology and, potentially, face some resistance from those "old school" colleagues of yours who "pound the pavement" and don't rely on those "blueberry's" and "spacebook" stuff. And while I'm not one to completely abandon the tried and true, it is becoming more and more clear that the payoff of some of this new technology is evident. As a marketing communications company, or for any company for that matter, it is imperitive to continue talking. The expression "silence = death" is true!

Remember, the fundamental goal of a business blog is to generate and publlish informational/educational/interesting content that is laser focused on strategic key words/phrases enabling you to be found by search engines. Followership is great, but there are millions of people out there looking for your products and services. There are only a handful of people you can personally connect with or are part of your extended network. Sound marketing communication strategies are rooted in the ability to deliver content the motivates an audience to action.

So there's nothing wrong with "pounding the pavement" or even implementing some tried and true tactics as part of  your business development plan. But remember, if you don't get with the times, you won't be heard. And if you're not heard, your not what?   

Whether good or bad, rumors can have a big effect on a college. Stories about your institution’s positive results can send its stock soaring with students and parents. Negative gossip can hinder yield programs and enrollment.
 
Rumors don’t have to be true to have impact. According to eminent social psychologist Elliot Aronson, PhD and colleague Anthony Pratkanis, PhD, in the 1980s the “Leaflet of Villejuif” began circulating in France. This plain typewritten pamphlet exhorted parents to boycott popular soft drink brands like Coca-Cola, Schweppes and Canada Dry, charging they contained dangerous chemicals that could harm children.
 
The power of rumor and innuendo
 
A survey of 150 French housewives found that 19% had stopped buying the brands mentioned. Another 69% said they intended to support the boycott. Elementary school teachers and physicians were surveyed; half of the doctors and nearly all the teachers agreed with the leaflet’s statements. Fewer than 10% of these educated professionals bothered to check the truthfulness of its claims. That’s sad, because virtually all of them were false. E330, the food additive claimed to be highly carcinogenic, was actually the European Union’s code for harmless citric acid, found in oranges and grapefruit.
 
Mark Twain wrote, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” It can do a great deal of damage along the way. Because we hear rumors from people we know or learn about them through trusted media sources many don’t bother to check their validity. But they can have a big impact on reputations, applications and yield.
 
One study asked participants to rate political candidates after reading fabricated headlines. Some contained a direct accusation (“Bob Talbert Linked with Mafia”), a damning question (“Is Karen Downing Associated with a Fraudulent Charity?”), a denial of impropriety (“Andrew Winters Not Connected to Bank Embezzlement”) or a completely neutral statement (“George Armstrong Arrives in City”). Aronson and Pratkanis relate:

The results showed, not surprisingly, that candidates linked with a directly incriminating headline were perceived more negatively.  Strikingly, however, merely questioning whether a candidate had performed an undesirable behavior also resulted in negative perceptions of the candidate – just slightly more positive than those evoked by a direct incrimination…The source of the innuendo made little difference. The candidates were still rated negatively even if the source of the headline was a newspaper lacking in credibility (the National Enquirer or the Midnight Globe as opposed to the New York Times or the Washington Post).

 What can you do about rumors?
 
According to marketing professor Allan Kimmel, one key to rumor control is: “Talk!...For the most part, a refusal to talk, whether it be to journalists, [students and parents]…or other concerned parties conveys the message that the [institution] has something to hide and adds to uncertainty, or sometimes merely serves to confirm the fears underlying the requests for information.”
 
But, “In order to stand a chance of succeeding," say Drs. Aronson and Pratkanis, “such refutations should not overstate the case, should embed the rumor in a negative context (or damn it, refute it, then damn it again and replace it), and should not repeat verbatim particularly memorable rumors.” Quick action by high-ranking college officials can limit the damage false factoids may cause. Institutions with established records of integrity and community service will find it easier to protect or restore their reputations.

The Allied Group is an innovative, award-winning marketing communications company offering Search, Conversion, Stealth and Yield programs as well as full-service fulfillment to colleges and universities.
 

Whether good or bad, rumors can have a big effect on an organization. Stories about a company’s positive results can send its stock price soaring. Negative gossip about a firm can seriously hurt sales. 

Rumors don’t have to be true to have impact.  In the 1980s the “Leaflet of Villejuif” began circulating in France. This plain typewritten pamphlet exhorted parents to boycott popular soft drink brands like Coca-Cola, Schweppes and Canada Dry, charging they contained dangerous chemicals that could harm children. 

The power of rumor and innuendo

A survey of 150 French housewives found that 19% had stopped buying the brands mentioned. Another 69% said they intended to support the boycott.  Elementary school teachers and physicians were surveyed; half of the doctors and nearly all the teachers agreed with the leaflet’s statements. Fewer than 10% of these educated professionals bothered to check the truthfulness of its claims. That’s sad, because virtually all of them were false. Eminent social psychologist Elliot Aronson, PhD and colleague Anthony Pratkanis, PhD state in their account that E330, the food additive claimed to be highly carcinogenic, was actually the European Union’s code for harmless citric acid, found in oranges and grapefruit.

Mark Twain wrote, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” It can do a great deal of damage in its travels. Because we hear rumors from people we know, or we learn about them through trusted media sources, we often don’t bother to check their validity. But they can have a big impact on both reputations and sales.

One study asked participants to rate political candidates after reading fabricated headlines.  Some contained a direct accusation (“Bob Talbert Linked with Mafia”), a damning question (“Is Karen Downing Associated with a Fraudulent Charity?”), a denial of impropriety (“Andrew Winters Not Connected to Bank Embezzlement”) or a completely neutral statement (“George Armstrong Arrives in City”).  Aronson and Pratkanis relate:

The results showed, not surprisingly, that candidates linked with a directly incriminating headline were perceived more negatively.  Strikingly, however, merely questioning whether a candidate had performed an undesirable behavior also resulted in negative perceptions of the candidate – just slightly more positive than those evoked by a direct incrimination…The source of the innuendo made little difference. The candidates were still rated negatively even if the source of the headline was a newspaper lacking in credibility (the National Enquirer or the Midnight Globe as opposed to the New York Times or the Washington Post).

What can you do about it?

According to marketing professor Allan Kimmel, one key to rumor control is: “Talk!...For the most part, a refusal to talk, whether it be to journalists, customers…or other concerned parties conveys the message that the company has something to hide and adds to uncertainty, or sometimes merely serves to confirm the fears underlying the requests for information.”

But, “In order to stand a chance of succeeding," say Aronson and Pratkanis, “such refutations should not overstate the case, should embed the rumor in a negative context (or damn it, refute it, then damn it again and replace it), and should not repeat verbatim particularly memorable rumors.” Quick action by high-ranking officials can limit the damage false "factoids" may cause. Organizations who have established a record of integrity will find it easier to protect and restore their reputations.

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company offering full service fulfillment programs ,innovative marketing communications strategies and marketing support services to insurance and financial services companies.

This isn't a new question...people have been asking this question for years - even before email marketing was standard marketing practice. Every company needs a prospect list and it needs to be targeted. 

The next question of course would be...how? How do I develop this amazing targeted prospect list Melanie? Well, I am not saying I have all the answers but I can help a bit. Two simple tasks...

First - make sure that you are making the most of all of your online forms. Capture the info on the people who are following you. Don't give content away for free - gate it! If you released a white paper or case study, gate it with a form for download. That's one of the easiest and best ways to start building a list. Just be aware that if you ask too much you will likely get a whole lot of droppers (people who don't fill out the form and leave the page). It doesn't matter how good your 'offer' is, if you ask for more than a few pieces of info they will leave. 

Second - have someone build a targeted list for you using predicted modeling. Your marketing communication strategies can be amazing but if they are falling on deaf ears then it doesn't matter now does it? As a top direct marketing agency, Allied deals with this challenge constantly and we have been successfully building lists for clients for years. Predictive modeling takes your current customer list and builds a highly targeted prospect list based on the data from your customers. It's a bit more complicated but it works.

If you want to discuss this in further detail give us a call or submit your info on our 'form'...

The Boston Globe reported last Wednesday that  a federal judge blocked the new FDA requirement that tobacco companies put graphic images on cigarette packaging. The article outlined the judge's ruling that requiring the images, which include "a sewn-up corpse of a smoker and a picture of diseased lungs, on cigarette packs violates the free speech amendment to the Constitution.”

This raises a serious issue, presenting all, including educators, with a dilemma. On the one hand, evidence that smoking kills is overwhelming.  I had to watch it destroy my mother’s favorite uncle. Efforts to help smokers stop and aid teenagers to avoid smoking are commendable. Clearly, we’d all be better off if smokers quit in droves.

Reducing smoking-related illnesses is a worthy goal.  But is it worth eroding the cherished freedom of speech on which all Americans, especially educators, depend? That’s a question for the Supreme Court. Despite the health issues, the specter of government edicts forcing organizations to publicly say negative things about their activities is not a pleasant one. So, we must ask – is the reward worth the risk?  Do graphic, fear-arousing images actually help people quit smoking?

What the research shows

There is no question that graphic images on Canadian and Australian cigarette packs have proven to make smokers think about health hazards and consider quitting. A WHO bulletin stated, “The research on pictorial warnings show that they are: (i) more likely to be noticed than text-only warning labels; (ii) more effective for educating smokers…and for increasing smokers’ thoughts about the health risks; and (iii) associated with increased motivation to quit smoking.”

But motivation doesn’t necessarily translate into action. Consider how noted social psychologist and textbook author Dr. David Myers summed up the research: “Many people who have been made to fear an early death from smoking continue to smoke. When the fear pertains to a pleasurable activity, notes Elliot Aronson (1997), the result is often not behavioral change but denial.”

In fact, the eminent Dr. Aronson states that studies show smokers who’ve tried to stop and failed are the group most likely to deny or minimize the hazards of smoking. They rationalize it away. Aronson and his coauthors cite research showing ways that frightening pictures can actually reduce smoking. Smokers shown graphic images of lung cancer and then given a pamphlet outlining ways to quit lowered their daily cigarettes by 77% (from 69 to 26). Those who saw disturbing photos without specific instructions smoked less for a time, but soon returned to smoking nearly as much as they had before (64 daily cigarettes merely dropped to 54). 

But even the group who substantially reduced their cigarette intake continued to smoke during the three month study. I could locate no data showing that graphic images on cigarette packaging really helps people quit. In fact, a Prevention First report states that fear tactics are ineffective in deterring young people from smoking. Is it worth eroding freedom of speech for a smoking cessation strategy not proven to help substantial numbers to stop? 

An alternative

Influence expert Robert Cialdini, PhD told me in personal correspondence that one way to reduce negative behavior is to link it to a disliked or disrespected outgroup. Nicotine is a highly addictive drug. Perhaps we need ads comparing tobacco companies to drug cartels and cigarette dealers to those who sell dangerous drugs in neighborhoods and schools. That exercise of free speech might get results!

The Allied Group offers innovative marketing communications strategies, Search, Stealth and Yield programs, marketing support and full service fulfillment.
 

Many were shocked and saddened by the sudden, unexpected demise of singer Whitney Houston. Most wonder about the cause of death. While answers will undoubtedly come from the toxicology report, the news media tells of the presence of strong prescription meds in her hotel room. Those at her last impromptu musical performance testify that she had been drinking and appeared under the influence. Some medications combined with alcohol can be deadly, especially for those bathing in a hot tub. The singer takes her place in a long line of talented people whose lives were cut short or ruined by drug and alcohol addiction.

Perhaps Houston’s death can provide the vivid example needed to make changes in the drinking habits of many college students. Admissions officers and college marketers do a great job in helping young people from a variety of backgrounds get an education that can enrich their future. But the unrestrained party atmosphere on some campuses can prove to be a trap leading to alcoholism, squandered opportunities and wasted lives. According to a Center for Science in the Public Interest report:

• Annually some 30,000 college students overdose on alcohol, requiring medical treatment.

• 44% of students attending 4-year colleges engage in binge drinking.

• 19% of college students ages 18–24 met the criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence.

• Every year, 599,000 students from 18-24 are unintentionally injured while intoxicated  More than 696,000 are assaulted by another student who has been drinking.

• 5% of female students reported that they were the victims of sexual assault, 75% of them raped while under the influence of alcohol.

And although a number of institutions have made efforts to curb binge drinking, it is still the norm at campuses across the nation. CSPI further reports, “Low price and very easy access to alcohol are strong correlates of binge drinking.” When discussing ways to get college seniors to attend a campus event, one official observed that offering cheap beer would guarantee a large crowd.

The result

Research shows the habits learned on campus can last a lifetime. The American Journal of Public Health reports that binge drinking rates of college students closely correlate with those of adults living in the same state. “The rate of binge drinking among college students was about 32 percent lower–36 percent compared to 53 percent–in the 10 states with the lowest rates of adult binge drinking compared to the ten states with the highest.”

This could mean that students are imitating behavior they’ve seen at home. But studies also show that many enduring adult attitudes and behaviors were formed in the college years. Regardless of where they learned to drink irresponsibly, many promising young people may well experience the truth of Mark Twain’s statement, exemplified by Lindsay Lohan, Amy Winehouse, Chris Farley and Whitney Houston: “It is easier to stay out than to get out.”

Possible solutions

Colleges already make commendable efforts to stop binge drinking. Can they do more? Raising liquor prices at campus pubs might be a good start. Also, making effective use of social psychology research can increase the impact of student information programs. Renowned communication psychology expert Dr. Robert Cialdini suggested to me in private correspondence that one tactic to lessen the allure of excessive alcohol consumption is to link it to “a disliked or disrespected outgroup.” He wrote, “One way to reduce binge drinking among college students might be to inform them that binging is the norm for high school students.”

The Allied Group is an innovative marketing communications company offering personalized direct marketing, Search, Conversion and Yield programs along with along with full-service fulfillment.
 

The Magnetic Middle

How can you get people to listen to the facts?  What can move them to action?  Previous blog posts showed why some resist or ignore factual evidence that contradicts their viewpoint and gave some ways to combat that tendency.  Once you’ve opened the minds of colleagues, team members, customers and prospects, how can you best present the facts and gain their buy-in?  This has been the subject of considerable research and a number of effective methods have emerged.  One important communication strategy is:  recognize and make good use of the power of the “Magnetic Middle.”

When the Magnetic Middle works against you

The Sherif study at Columbia University found that when the facts were unclear and groups of people had to make a judgment call, they quickly arrived at a compromise position and then stuck to that opinion, even when asked individually a year later.  Participants actually substituted the group’s judgment for their own.  This and similar studies led researchers to coin the phrase, “the Magnetic Middle.”

This would be no problem if a board or committee was deciding where to go to lunch. We would hope when an important matter is on the table, people would study it carefully and form knowledgeable opinions.  Thankfully, that often occurs.  But studies cited by eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson and others revealed that the more important the decision, the more likely we humans are to rely on the judgments of others. 

One researcher asked each member of a group to publicly state the answers to a series of questions. Several members of the group had secretly agreed beforehand to give the same wrong answers.  When the stakes were low actual subjects, who were not in on the subterfuge, agreed with the group’s incorrect responses to 35% of the questions.  When the stakes were high they substituted the crowd’s bad judgment for their own 51% of the time.

Thus, when presenting unfamiliar facts on an important issue to a board or committee, an executive will often find individual members eager to stick to their established beliefs (confirmation bias).  Additionally, the group opinion, once expressed, will be very hard to change.

Making the Magnetic Middle work for you

While people’s tendency to follow the group can go against you, it can work for you as well.  For instance, a VP of IT may find it easier to gain approval for a major software purchase if he/she points out, not only the reasons for selecting it, but a list of similar companies who have already done so. 

Rather than relying on an expert to convince staff members of the need and benefit of implementing a new procedure, communications psychology expert Robert Cialdini, PhD recommends that wise managers employ the strong influence of a coworker who has already used this method in another situation.  As their fellow worker and colleague, he or she can often sway their opinions in ways an outsider could not.

Showing affiliates, like independent insurance agents, that others just like them already participate in a new program can greatly increase their willingness to adopt it themselves.  One major pharmaceutical company’s head of training asked trainees to write down one thing they really liked about the workshop they attended.  He then printed many of these testimonials on large posters and asked new participants to review them to see what their colleagues had said about the program.  According to Dr. Cialdini and his coauthors, this trainer wrote:

I was a little skeptical at first about whether such a simple thing would work, but the impact was incredible…What was interesting was that this catalog of testimonials also helped me to influence senior managers to support future projects I was leading.

The urge to join our colleagues and friends in the Magnetic Middle can be powerful.  Wise executives and marketers can use it to great advantage in moving others to take needed action.

The Allied Group offers full service fulfillment programs as well as one to one communications and other marketing communications strategies and marketing support to the insurance, benefits and healthcare industries.

“Why Won’t People Listen to Good Ideas?” discussed research showing that those with strongly ingrained views won't mentally process sound evidence presented by the other side. Is there anything we can do to encourage parents, students, colleagues or faculty to consider solid facts we raise?

First, it’s important to understand why many won’t listen. One reason became apparent in a series of studies starting in 1959. Eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson explains that research began in a southern town deeply divided over racial segregation. Most today clearly recognize the evils of apartheid, but in 1959 it was a burning issue, particularly in the South. Researchers selected people with strong feelings for or against segregation. Then they presented a series of arguments on both sides of the issue. Some were plausible, others were lame. A survey on the points each recalled was telling. People remembered the logical arguments supporting their position and the illogical arguments that backed the opposing view.

A number of follow up studies produced similar results. The answer was clear. People ignored or quickly forgot points that might prove their opinion wrong. They focused on the opposition’s lame arguments because these strengthened their position. This phenomenon is called Confirmation Bias. Finding the right answer took a back seat to proving they were right. The highly respected Dr. Aronson explains:

During the past half-century, social psychologists have discovered that one of the most powerful determinants of human behavior stems from our need to preserve a stable, positive self-image. Most of us want to believe that we are reasonable, decent folks who make wise decisions, do not behave immorally and have integrity.

Thus, when confronted with factual information that might show us mistaken or foolish, we automatically tend to ignore or dismiss it, focusing instead on any piece of data that might prove us right.

One study found smokers who tried but failed to quit were least likely to recognize the dangers of smoking. Clearly, dismissing inconvenient facts can prove destructive to individuals and businesses. It’s important, then, to recognize that while those on the opposite side of an issue may ignore sound evidence, we too are fully capable of making that mistake.

Removing the blinders

First, we must realize that every party in a discussion, including us, may display confirmation bias. How can we combat it? One way is to remind ourselves that our willingness to honestly consider all evidence takes moral courage and strength, highly admirable traits. That realization may help us past the tendency to protect our ego by defending a position. Researcher Dr. David Myers recommends that senior managers require their staff members who present arguments to give one good reason why they could be wrong.

To help others avoid ignoring valid evidence, we can try a psychological technique called “labeling.” We could begin a discussion by praising our associates for the open-mindedness and fairness they’ve previously shown. This technique was used to great advantage by former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Communications psychology expert Robert Cialdini, PhD relates,

Before international negotiations began, Sadat would assure his bargaining opponents that they and the citizens of their country were widely known for their cooperativeness and fairness.

Did his technique work? Despite the notoriously entrenched positions in the Middle East, Sadat and former hard-liner Menachem Begin negotiated the only modern peace treaty between an Arab nation and Israel.  I rest my case.

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company providing integrated marketing communications programs and full service fulfillment services including Search, Stealth and Yield programs as well as publication design, printing and distribution to colleges and universities.

“Why Won’t People Listen to Good Ideas?” discussed research showing that those with strongly ingrained views won't mentally process sound evidence presented by the other side. Is there anything we can do to encourage our colleagues to consider solid facts we raise?

First, it’s important to understand why many won’t listen. One reason became apparent in a series of studies starting in 1959. Eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson explains that research began in a southern town deeply divided over racial segregation. Most today clearly recognize the evils of apartheid, but in 1959 it was a burning issue, particularly in the South. Researchers selected people with strong feelings for or against segregation. Then they presented a series of arguments on both sides of the issue. Some were plausible, others were lame.  A survey on the points each recalled was telling. People remembered the logical arguments supporting their position and the illogical arguments that backed the opposing view. 

A number of follow up studies produced similar results. The answer was clear.  People ignored or quickly forgot points that might prove their opinion wrong. They focused on the opposition’s lame arguments because these strengthened their position.  This phenomenon is called Confirmation Bias. Seeking the right answer took a back seat to proving they were right. The highly respected Dr. Aronson explains:

During the past half-century, social psychologists have discovered that one of the most powerful determinants of human behavior stems from our need to preserve a stable, positive self-image.  Most of us want to believe that we are reasonable, decent folks who make wise decisions, do not behave immorally and have integrity. 

Thus, when confronted with factual information that might show us mistaken or foolish, we automatically tend to ignore or dismiss it, focusing instead on any piece of data that might prove us right. 

One study found smokers who tried but failed to quit were least likely to recognize the dangers of smoking. Clearly, dismissing inconvenient facts can prove destructive to individuals and businesses. It’s important, then, to recognize that while those on the opposite side of an issue may ignore sound evidence, we too are fully capable of making that mistake.

Removing the blinders

First, we must realize that every party in a discussion, including us, may display confirmation bias. How can we combat it? One way is to remind ourselves that our willingness to honestly consider all evidence takes moral courage and strength, highly admirable traits. That realization may help us past the tendency to protect our ego by defending a position. Researcher Dr. David Myers recommends that senior managers require their staff members who present arguments to give one good reason why they could be wrong.

To help others avoid ignoring valid evidence, we can try a psychological technique called “labeling.” We could begin a discussion by praising our associates for the open-mindedness and fairness they’ve previously shown. This technique was used to great advantage by former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Communications psychology expert Robert Cialdini, PhD relates,

Before international negotiations began, Sadat would assure his bargaining opponents that they and the citizens of their country were widely known for their cooperativeness and fairness.

Did his technique work? Despite the notoriously entrenched positions in the Middle East, Sadat and former hard-liner Menachem Begin negotiated the only modern peace treaty between an Arab nation and Israel.  I rest my case.

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company providing marketing, marketing support and full service fulfillment services to the insurance, benefits administration and financial services industries.

Well, I'm sure by now you have probably realized from my last post and now this one... I love starting my day with a nice cup of coffee.

So, I thought I would share an experience I had the other day. I pulled up to my local Starbucks drive through for the first time in months and the barista, Starbucks employee, who took my order sounded hurried. I thought it was a little odd given Starbucks has a brand identity of being laid back and focused on making good coffee and not necessarily of being in a hurry. Since there was no one behind me, I shrugged it off as they must have a big line inside.

Then as I was patiently waiting to pull up to the window the barista chatted it up with the car in front of me. I thought it was nice that she spent the time being personable with probably one of her regulars. When I did eventually pull up to the window, only 5 minutes later, I was greeted with a big smile and asked how I was doing. Then I was handed a free drink card for the next time I visited a Starbucks. Score! I'm definitely going to come here more often!

The next day I came across an article that highlighted how Starbucks had strayed away from their typical ambient setting and was focusing on how to serve people faster. In doing this, they alienated some of their regular customers. Realizing their misstep of straying too far away from their brands core values, they asked their customers for help with the launch of a website, mystarbucksidea.com.

In launching this as part of an integrated marketing communications program, they gave their community a place to give the brand some feedback on what they are doing right & wrong, what coffee flavors they want them to bring back & different promotions they think Starbucks should offer, such as free coffee on election day and mini Starbucks cards.

Obviously - the barista who gave me the free coffee card has achieved the perfect balance the launch of the website was striving for. She realized she had rushed me and in doing so, had strayed away from their brand identity. To make up for it, she offered me a free drink. Starbucks found what their customers were looking for by using a personalized virtual place for people to give feedback and then strategized and implemented plans to keep their customers happy.

We can all take this into consideration when it comes to our daily interactions as marketing and sales support professionals. We don't need to be the one to provide the fastest or the cheapest quote. It is more important to have personal relationships with our clients by focusing on the one to one communication, finding out what's important to them and offering them a personalized experience with their marketing communications company that they don't receive anywhere else. 

Stick to your core brand values.  That's what keeps the regulars coming back.

Senior administrators, admissions officers and college marketers frequently have to persuade others to agree and act on their point of view. At times that can prove extremely difficult. Senior staff members may want to include important new initiatives in their institution’s priorities for the coming year. Admissions officers need to influence colleagues, faculty, guidance counselors parents and students. Senior marketers are required to come up with marketing communication strategies to achieve the college’s goals and evaluate plans for individual campaigns.

In each case, the key players involved must agree. But at times agreement can be extremely hard to achieve. Sometimes it seems that people just won’t listen to good ideas. Researchers have carefully studied this phenomenon using controlled scientific experiments. The results may surprise you.

Why can’t they see the point?

Social psychologist Lee Ross’ research led him to conclude that people often express what he calls “naive realism.” Each person assumes that they perceive events as they really are. Eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson explains that since we are sure we recognize reality, our tendency is to assume that others who are reasonable should be able to see things our way. If they don’t, we assume that they aren’t reasonable. But are we ourselves always able to see the facts clearly?

NBC news reported on a study done on “seeing the facts” in the political arena. During the 2004 presidential race between George W. Bush and John Kerry, Drew Westen, Director of Clinical Psychology at Emory University conducted a study using functional MRI (fMRI) equipment. This machine allows researchers to monitor blood flow to different parts of the brain, revealing how people’s minds react in various situations. One study found, for example, that the brain area normally involved in reading did not activate when those coping with dyslexia attempted to read. Another neural region tried to do the job for which it was not equipped (like star quarterbacks Tom Brady or Drew Brees playing nose tackle).

In Dr. Westen’s study, staunch Republicans and Democrats heard contradictory statements released by Bush or Kerry on important issues while monitored by the fMRI equipment. When hearing their own candidate’s points, supporters’ brain regions involved in reasoning and emotion lit up. They paid close attention and liked what they heard.

But when listening to the opposing candidate, the reaction was quite different. "We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," the researcher reported. People paid little attention to a viewpoint that contradicted their own. According to NBC, “The test subjects on both sides of the political aisle reached totally biased conclusions by ignoring information that could not rationally be discounted, Westen and his colleagues say…The study points to a total lack of reason in political decision-making.”

That’s a scary finding. And if people whose minds are made up can discount or ignore inconvenient facts in a crucial matter like national leadership, what hope do we have of winning colleagues to our point of view on institutional initiatives or admissions matters? Fortunately, research has not only revealed human biases, but some helpful approaches for overcoming them as well. Stay tuned.

The Allied Group is an award-winning marketing communications company that provides search, conversion,yield and stealth programs for college admissions. Allied is a leader in employing one-to-one communication programs for admissions and advancement based on important research in marketing and social psychology.

Executives frequently have to persuade others to agree and act on their point of view. At times that can prove extremely difficult. Senior managers may want to include an important new initiative in the organization’s priorities for the coming year. IT executives have to agree on the most efficient way to manage company data as well as evaluate, purchase, implement and customize software that will run day to day operations.  Senior marketers are required to come up with marketing strategies to achieve company goals and evaluate plans for individual campaigns. 

In each case, the key players involved must agree. But at times that can be extremely hard to achieve. Sometimes it seems that people just won’t listen to good ideas. Researchers have carefully studied this phenomenon using controlled scientific experiments. The results may surprise you.

Why can’t they see the point?

Social psychologist Lee Ross’ research led him to conclude that people often express what he calls “naive realism.” Each person assumes that they perceive events as they really are. Eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson explains that since we are sure we recognize reality, our tendency is to assume that others who are reasonable should be able to see things our way. If they don’t, we assume that they aren’t reasonable. But are we ourselves always able to see the facts clearly?

NBC news reported on a study done on “seeing the facts” in the political arena. During the 2004 presidential race between George W. Bush and John Kerry, Drew Westen, Director of Clinical Psychology at Emory University conducted a study using functional MRI (fMRI) equipment. This machine allows researchers to monitor blood flow to different parts of the brain, revealing how people’s minds react to various situations.  One study found, for example, that the brain area normally involved in reading did not activate when those coping with dyslexia attempted to read. Another neural region tried to do the job for which it was not equipped (like star quarterbacks Tom Brady or Drew Brees playing nose tackle).

In Dr. Westen’s study, staunch Republicans and Democrats heard contradictory statements  released by Bush or Kerry on important issues while monitored by the fMRI equipment. When hearing their own candidate’s points, supporters’ brain regions involved in reasoning and emotion lit up. They paid close attention and liked what they heard. But when listening to the opposing candidate, the reaction was quite different. "We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," the researcher reported. People paid little attention to a viewpoint that contradicted their own. According to NBC, “The test subjects on both sides of the political aisle reached totally biased conclusions by ignoring information that could not rationally be discounted, Westen and his colleagues say…The study points to a total lack of reason in political decision-making.”

That’s a scary finding. And if people whose minds are made up can discount or ignore inconvenient facts in a crucial matter like national leadership, what hope do we have of winning colleagues to our point of view on company initiatives, enterprise software or marketing strategies? Fortunately, research has not only revealed human biases, but some helpful approaches for overcoming them as well. Stay tuned.

The Allied Group is a full service fulfillment and marketing communications company that provides marketing and marketing support as well as transactional document programs to companies in the insurance, benefits administration and financial services sectors.

Have you or your staff ever had an experience like this one? You have a conversation with a high school student who’s appears to be a perfect fit for your institution. He/she is responding with enthusiasm to your message. You’re certain that this student will be a member of your incoming freshman class. And then…you never hear from them again.

What happened? Did you say or do something wrong? Often, the answer is no. Everything you said and did clicked with the student. But in the time between your conversation and the time to inquire, apply or enroll, something or someone else got in the way.

Technology to the Rescue

Fortunately, as often happens, new technology can help you prevent situations like this one from happening over and over again. That technology is mobile marketing. Mobile marketing allows you to capture a response from students while they feel like responding. Is there an event you’d like them to attend? Tell them about it, and then give them an easy way to register right there on the spot with their mobile phones. Do you want them to visit a website to respond to your college’s offer or inquire in some other way? Mobile technology can allow them to do it while they’re in the mood.

Mobile Rated Effective

The Noel-Levitz report “2011 Marketing and Student Recruitment Practices at Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions” shows that 64% of admissions officials responding rated mobile apps as “somewhat effective” or “very effective” in recruiting freshmen, yet only 16.9% actively use them. Could this be due to the fact that mobile apps must be created by talented but overworked college IT departments? 

An Easier Way

Using QR codes (two-dimensional bar codes) can provide an easier way to reap a major benefit of mobile marketing – immediate response – while avoiding the hassle of creating your own mobile apps and getting students to download them. Every smartphone user can download a free QR code reader, and new initiatives by Coca-Cola, Best Buy, Macy's and other major retailers will encourage your prospects to install them on their phones.

Displaying QR codes on admissions marketing materials or posters can allow students to immediately visit mobile websites created and sponsored by qualified partners. There they can respond to an offer, get a customized electronic brochure for the program of their choice or register for an on-campus or online event. This can prove an excellent way to “strike while the iron is hot,” increasing qualified inquiry, application and yield rates.

Is your institution looking to improve in any of these areas? Using mobile marketing and QR codes might just be the way to accomplish it.

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company that offers mobile marketing along with Search, Stealth, Conversion and Yield programs for colleges and universities.