Your 1-year-old Merrell Radius shoes

I got an email today that was impressive in its simplicity.  The subject line read: "Your 1-year-old Merrell Radius shoes".  The body of the message read:

           Dear Alison Heiser,
           One year ago, you ordered the following product from Zappos.com:
           Merrell Radius - Dark Taupe/Rust Nubuck - 15/D - Medium
          We wanted to let you know that right now, your size is still available from Zappos.com

It was from the Zappos.com Customer Loyalty Team.

It's hard to overstate the importance of customer loyalty - vast bodies of research, thousands of business strategies, and common sense all tell us that the smart money is on keeping your current customers.  Yet so few organizations execute well against this concept - it continues to provide an enormous opportunity for competitive advantage.

I think most organizations envision complicated programs, rewards, incentives.  So they get started, falter, reinvented, abandoned.

Sometimes the obvious answers are so simple that they are often overlooked.  What if we took the time to tell our customers that we know they bought something specific from us in the past, and we have an idea for something specific they might be interested in buying from us now?  This type of data mining hardly even seems like data mining...it's too simple to carry that description.

Do something simple - write a personal note to your customers and offer them a suggestion that tells them you know who they are.  See if you can follow the Zappos.com model and make it 35 words or less.  I think the results will surprise you.

By the way, I do not wear a 15D.  I bought those for my big-footed husband.

I'm having a strong reaction to the news from GM this morning.  Yes, after firing Campbell-Ewald after 91 years, they are now putting a fourth US marketing leader at the helm in 12 months time.  GM's spokesperson reports that Ed Whitacre's thinking "is that we need to grow as vigorously and aggressively as possible, and he expects the company will grow market share."

There are so many problems with this leadership move and GM's situation...but I will limit my thoughts to a few points.

1. GM cannot "grow share" until they "hold share".  US market share fell again to 18.7% from last year's 19.1% - it just keeps falling.  Stopping the bleeding from the customers that are defecting from GM is problem number one.  I am completely amazed that customer loyalty is not the highest priority.  And since GM has nearly perfect information about who their customers are and where they live (thank you, VINs), it seems that 1:1 marketing is the most important path forward.  High profile ad campaigns?  I hardly think so.

2. The marketing profile at GM is baffling.  Let's start with the fact that they are all automotive insiders.  Mark LaNeve, Bob Lutz, Susan Docherty, and now Joel Ewanick from Hyundai.  I think Joel did a fantastic job at Hyundai, along with a product line-up that has steadily won over consumers and impressed competitors over the last decade.  However, Hyundai is all about new customers - the missing skill set is loyalty and retention.  If GM ever gets serious about customer loyalty, they will need to look outside their own industry to find the best models.

3. Do I really need to say that 4 marketing leaders in 12 months is ridiculous?

4. Finally, I have the distinct impression that the marketing leadership issues at GM are fundamentally linked to a misguided understanding of what marketing is all about.  "Clever campaigns" may be important, but this misses the larger point. Marketing's role is about guiding the company to develop a compelling value proposition for each of their brands and the company.  Brand experience - in all of its complexity - is incredibly hard work, and touches every area of the company.  More importantly, it touches every customer.  GM needs to be careful about looking for a Midas touch solution from the hands of a single new marketing hire.