Tip of the Week

For a business to exist and continue, some main areas need to be effectively managed constantly:

1. Increasing sales revenues.
2. Decreasing marketing and sales expenses.
3. Increasing the value of the customer relationship.
4. Managing risk.

None of these four elements are more important that the other three. They must all be achieved together, simultaneously.

Maybe you've heard the saying: "You can't manage what you can't control. And you can't control what you can't measure."

The more you can measure your marketing results, the more you can control your marketing results. The more control you can maintain, the more certainty you will have. Simple enough?

Direct Marketing has become the leading form of marketing because it allows marketers, big and small, to conduct their marketing with more certainty in their results.

...WITH MORE CERTAINTY. What does that mean?

WITH CERTAINTY means marketing results are achieved...
with minimum risk.
with more consistency.
with more predictability.

With minimum risk... What does this mean?

"With minimum risk" means if some marketing results are not effective, there's still alternative ways to be effective. Minimizing risk means not "betting the farm" on only one marketing strategy option. Mininimizing risk means developing - or trying out - various marketing strategies on a smaller scale rather than on a full or larger scale.

What if you don't have the time to "try things out" before hand? What if your situation is "all or nothing" NOW?

Then, that's your situation. In that case, you have no choice to minimize your risks. Your opportunity is "one time" and relies more on luck than on a development process. Your back is to the wall. You're painted into a corner. If this is your situation, if there's little or no opportunity to use a process to develop and improve your marketing beyond a "one-shot" opportunity, then that's your situation.

Ask yourself... how did you get in this situation? Who put you there? Are there really no options, no alternatives? If not, you're stuck.

Direct Marketing's chief benefit - the ability to isolate which strategies work and which strategies don't - is not available when circumstances demand constant, rapid-fire marketing execution without the benefit of some minimum marketing planning.

For the rest of you, read on...

With more consistency... What does this mean?

"With consistency" means if results are effective, how certain is it that results will be effective EVERY TIME? Have past marketing results reoccurred more than once? Were the circumstances of the past results success favorable in the past only? How many times have the same marketing circumstances been reapplied with virtually the same results?

With more predictability... What does this mean?

Have results become repeatable enough that you're comfortable they will reoccur at the same level? Has generating repeatable results become predictable enough that you can begin to isolate and discover, on a small scale, which elements or factors cause results to go up and down?

Do you approach your marketing with an orientation toward customers and towards results rather than with an orientation of telling and telling and telling about your company or about the features and benefits of your products and services?

With the validation of measurable and repeatable results, marketing strategies become ever more predictable with increased accuracy and reliability. The "science" of Direct Marketing Testing then allows further discoveries of what improves marketing results and what doesn't.

Is Testing expensive? Yes it can be, although most testing should pay for itself many times over when testing results become repeatable, predictable and applied on a large scale. Part of Testing is discovering what DOESN'T WORK. And even these costs get repaid many times from the rollouts of WHAT DOES WORK.

Is Testing cost effective? Direct Marketing testing is THE PRIMARY REASON why Direct Marketing is the most effective form of Marketing in the world. And the key to Direct Marketing success is understanding that "expensive" means "less cost-effective". The least expensive form of marketing is that which is most cost-effective.

Yes, Direct Marketing Testing requires significant investments of time and funding, but Testing is not as expensive as high risk general awareness advertising that reaches everyone and anyone. Testing is not as expensive as substantial marketing investments in printing, space ads, telemarketing and other marketing strategies THAT DON'T WORK or whose effectiveness can't be isolated and repeated.

Once direct marketing testing isolates and validates key marketing strategies that are repeatable and predictable, these marketing strategies can be "rolled out". "Rolling out" means increasing the level of usage a step at a time, to allow more control.

As "proven" marketing strategies are applied on a larger scale, more sales and profitability are generated. As larger scale revenues and incomes are generated, funds should be budgeted and set aside for continuous testing, refining and further discovery of why and how effective marketing results ARE effective. Testing never stops. Improvements can alway be improved further.

The more you can measure and control the effectiveness of marketing results, the more you can manage your business growth with consistent predictability - or WITH MORE CERTAINTY.

This is the same process used by major corporations. Bigger companies NEVER take the kinds of risks smaller companies do. They MINIMIZE their marketing risks whenever they can. Too much is at stake - like careers, jobs and millions of dollars - to take chances with unproven marketing strategies. That's why bigger companies were the first ones to embrace Direct Marketing - because it's so measurable, repeatable and predictable - because Direct Marketing provides MORE CERTAINTY.

The $64,000 question is "what do we test?". How and where do we determine which strategic factors are worthy of testing or not? That's where your customers, or your ideal customer prospects, help you address this question. But we'll deal with that in the next Tip of The Week.

Maybe you agree? Maybe you disagree? Any discussion of these points? Any cases you'd like to share that illustrate points you agree or disagree with? If we get enough feedback, maybe next week's Tip Of The Week can share your feedback with other TOW readers.

Want to review past TOW's?  Request by email.