We need to decide whether we want to survey few users in-depth, on many user groups on a variety of issues in a shallow way.The latter appears more appropriate considering the rich content of LE. In this case, a simple attitudinal measurement instrument is needed. Ref [1] divides groups in 5 categories of receptivity: hostile, neutral, uninterested, uninformed and supportive. Each group requires a different approach:
- hostile: find areas of agreement, use solid science, phrase proposals in value terms. The goal is to divert negative activism into neutrality.
- neutral: spell out benefits, focus on the downside of not accepting a proposal, discuss alternatives. Keep it simple. The goal is the convert neutrals into supporters.
- uninterested. these people are informed, but simply don’t care. Appeal to their self-interest.
- uninformed: lack information. Establish credibility. Keep it simple. Find an emotional link (stories, anecdotes, case studies, …).
- supportive: keep them on your side. Recharge them, remind them of the stakes, help them with arguments against opponents.
The criteria of a dream case is a positive answer to 5 questions. However, in the real world, such cases do not even need selling – they fly by themselves. So it’s a matter of approaching the ideal as much as possible:
- is the case logical, and consistent with facts and experience?
- does it favourably address the interests of people who have to decide?
- does it eliminate or neutralise competing alternatives?
- does it recognise and deal with politics?
- is it endorsed by objective, authoritative 3rd parties?
[1] Harvard Business Essentials, Power, Influence and Persuasion, HBS Publishing 2005
Blogged with Flock
Again interesting stuff and the majority of which you just have to agree with. The only comment I would make refers to the first sentence – both approaches have their role to play in what we want to find out for LE, for example a] setting up a putative benchmark and b] checking it out against on-going reality.
The encouraging thing is that most of what we have all written over the past few posts is consistent, albeit addressing different parts of the mix from different angles.
Here’s a suggestion – let us take one element of the LE total offering and put all this to the test, see if it flies, if it does go with it [whatever "it" is] and if it needs course correction use the experience to do just that.
If you think this could be worthwhile, I suggest that Colin and I form a mini-working group [hopefully he has time!] with a view to having a working prototype by end Q2.
If Colin’s game for it, then it sounds like a plan. Just I’d like to be involved in the selection of the niche market or campaign.
While the pilot goes on, discussion on this blog need not to stop.
Colin – how about it?
The final group analysis shown in this string is just that – final analysis of survey findings to find a set of groups – ie the end product/insight. Through our benchmarking and surveys we will define our own new groups. They may be characterised as hostile, neutral etc. but the group names will come from the survey content.
Jonathan, lets get together as discussed and thrash out a way forward. I still like your overall strategy.
Great – will do – in the meantime I’ll do some fiddling around and prepare something to act as an agenda for our meeting 17.4.08.