Posts Tagged ‘Research’

The Positive Side of Negative Reviews

by Ron on Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Actor, author, shortstop or chef, no one likes a negative review. But when we were developing the Zavee business model we decided early on that we would have to include negative as well as positive reviews. The goal we set for ourselves was to create a framework for reviews that were accurate, timely and fair – and that meant including negative reviews.

Our commitment to getting reviews right stemmed from our insight that reviews were another form of Social Media and, as such, were going to be a vital component of the Zavee experience and value proposition. We also learned, based on research with merchants, that many business owners who expressed concern about potential harm from fraudulent, malicious or even accurate negative reviews also intuitively understood the benefit of hearing about issues directly from the customer affected.

As marketers are learning, people will say whatever they want to whomever they want, and merchants don’t have the power to control their customers’ conversations. They can, however, do two important things.

First, they can listen, learn and respond. Thanks to Social Media, including reviews, merchants can make necessary adjustments to their business almost in real time. This is something that every business should be doing, all the time, through every available channel. Twitter and Facebook are great listening posts, but reviews are a channel that exists solely to provide feedback about the customer experience.

Second, merchants can participate in the conversation. By actively engaging with their customers merchants can address problems quickly and publicly; they can provide perspective that helps customers evaluate reviews; and they can favorably shape perceptions about the business.

  • Responding quickly is important because unresolved issues tend to fester. Responding publicly is important because it gives the merchant the chance to address at one time a concern that may be shared by many customers.
  • Actively participating is the only sure way to get the merchant’s perspective into the conversation. Both the manner and the substance of the merchant’s response can help customers determine how much weight to give a negative review, while the absence of a response does nothing but add credence to the reviewer’s complaints. A measured, factual response may not erase the impact of a negative review, but at a minimum the merchant will have extended the relationship with the customer and demonstrated both interest and respect.
  • Simply committing the time and effort to engage customers in conversation sends a positive message to all customers and can go a long way toward shaping perceptions of the customer experience. This can reinforce the positive experiences of current customers and build loyalty, but it also can lead non-customers to have a favorable impression of what it would be like to be a customer. In other words, an impressive response to a negative review can actually bring in new business.
Creative Commons 2.0

Reviews (via fengergold)

In benchmarking Zavee against other sites that feature reviews we observed a wide disparity in the treatment of key issues. Some sites filter reviews while others list them all chronologically. At least one site that uses filtering algorithms has had to defend itself against allegations that it improperly manipulated the placement of reviews. We decided not to filter or change the placement of reviews, because we believed that the less we intervened in the substance of reviews, the more confidence shoppers would have in them and, ultimately, in the Zavee brand.

We also observed that some sites permitted reviews (both positive and negative) that described experiences that had occurred long before the review was written. We thought reviews that were dated were so likely to be inaccurate that it would be unfair to both merchants and shoppers to have them on our site. We also were concerned, as many merchants seemed to be, that on some review sites there there were insufficient safeguards against fake reviews or even fake merchants.

We addressed these problems by requiring that any shopper who wanted to review a merchant had to have made a purchase from that merchant within the previous 30 days and by permitting only one review per purchase. Zavee solicits a review after every transaction, and the shopper’s My Zavee page lists recent transactions and the time remaining to submit a review. Zavee automatically rejects reviews that do not meet these rules.

We also were concerned about reviews that, while perhaps not fraudulent, seemed hostile or malicious. We initially considered moderating reviews, the way we moderate comments on Zavee Thinking, but we decided not to. There is nothing wrong with having editorial standards for reviews – we are, after all, responsible for the content on our site – but we thought the better way to deal with potential problems was to let shoppers and merchants have their say but remove reviews that violated our Terms of Use.

Because we passionately believe that reviews should be a dialogue, we also made it easy for merchants to post responses to shopper reviews. Merchants are automatically notified whenever they are reviewed and have 7 days to post a response. Responses appear with the original reviews and always show up together in a search. Shoppers can respond the the merchant’s response, and the entire conversation is threaded so it can be seen by everyone who sees the original review.

The Zavee takeaway:

  • You can’t control what your customers say, but you can listen, learn and respond to concerns – almost in real time.
  • Use negative reviews as a conversation-starter, not a relationship-ender.
  • How you handle unfavorable reviews can shape perceptions about your business, for future as well as current customers. Treat reviews as an opportunity to be impressive – you may be surprised by the results.

Update (4/14/10): MediaPost’s Marketing Daily reports that S.C. Johnson has been receiving substantial negative feedback, including reviews, about a new pet care product – and tells Marketing Daily that it is bringing the feedback to its product development team for consideration.

Who Uses Review Sites? You Do (And So Do Moms)

by Ron on Tuesday, November 17th, 2009

LexisNexis has issued its 2009 Online Ratings Survey, an online survey of 561 legal professionals, small business owners and consumers that was conducted by Lightspeed Research in April 2009. The survey has been reported on extensively online, including at XML Journal and WebProNews. The full results are available here. The surprising results of the survey are that small business owners are active users of these sites – even more so than consumers.

Here are some of the highlights:

  • 87% of small business owners surveyed and 63% of consumers have provided feedback on review and ratings web sites.
  • More than half of small business owners and 43% of consumers believed that review and rating web sites mean businesses are held to higher standards.
  • Businesses tended to trust independent third party ratings, while a majority of consumers considered reviews from actual customers to be more trustworthy.
  • Businesses’ greatest area of concern was false and malicious reviews.

More recently, a “mom-centered” site called momconnection.com surveyed 583 mothers with children under 12 (out of their panel of 5,000 moms) about social media and its role in helping them make buying decisions. The study found that utilization of social media was very high: 81% of the respondents said they were members of Facebook (but only 23% had Twitter accounts) and 60% reported visiting a social networking site in the previous 24 hours.

Moms Already Social Shoppers

via momlogic.com

The study also found that personal recommendations were by far the most powerful drivers of purchasing behavior, a phenomenon we have noted before. In its research brief on this study, Mediapost found it “surprising” that only 24% of respondents reported using Facebook in making a purchasing decision, and that far fewer used MySpace or Twitter.

We don’t find this data surprising and we certainly don’t find it troubling. First, social shopping is relatively new, especially on social networks like Facebook and Twitter which only recently have become business-friendly. Just as overall utilization of social networks has increased dramatically over the past few years, we fully expect that utilization for exchanging information and experiences about brands and products will catch up. Especially because, as the research indicates, moms interact with brands at a very high level. Not only did 81% report visiting a marketer’s web site for product information, 36% reported becoming a fan of a marketer on Facebook (which is a little difficult to reconcile with the 24% figure cited above).

What does surprise us is how many major brands haven’t fully committed to social networks as a marketing medium. How can moms be expected to use Facebook to connect with marketers if marketers in the categories moms care about aren’t using Facebook to connect with them? So if a mom says she doesn’t use Facebook to help her decide which breakfast cereal to buy, it may indeed be that she just isn’t comfortable using social networks to crowdsource purchase decisions, but it could be that the brands she cares about haven’t given her a reason to try.

Another interesting finding from this study is how moms get and share information about products. Although personal recommendations are by a wide margin the preferred medium, 41% of respondents report consulting “mom-focused web sites” for information (presumably including the sponsor of the research) and 34% get information from shopping web sites. 54% have shared their opinions by rating or reviewing a product online and 37% have posted about a product in an online forum or blog. For a group that doesn’t obviously include large numbers of early adopters, we think this shows a reasonably high level of engagement with social shopping.

If moms are already using socially-oriented web sites – but not Facebook or Twitter – to help them make better purchasing decisions, it may be that they have figured out which sites offer relevant content and a valuable experience and aren’t limiting themselves to the big social networking brands. That suggests two things: first, that as marketers make better use of Facebook and Twitter they will find a ready audience of social shoppers. And second, that consumers are willing to use social shopping web sites that don’t have the brand strength of Facebook and Twitter, at least so long as they provide value to the consumer. As observers of social media marketing we are confident about the first observation. As developers of a new social shopping platform we are optimistic about the second.

Update: This post about the Maclaren stroller recall illustrates how active moms are on social networks, and how much influence they can have over marketers.