Perhaps what makes direct marketing feel so ‘dirty’ is the use of a funnel methodology outlined as: “research, analysis, building relationships, establishing trust, determining pricing, distribution and much more.” Perhaps that is why you have added the ‘and much more’ bonus to the definition as though we can expect more to come.

I can ‘t claim any great knowledge over the domain of marketing. That said when I read through my own ’stack of books’ on the topic, it includes ideas like creative strategy, postioning, public relations, promotions, events, and well to borrow a phrase, much more…

What feels glib in this argument is the use of term ‘people’. Who a given message is intended to reach, is often what feels broken with direct marketing. Am I the only reader of this article that receives on average 26 pcs of unwanted mail a week? Direct Marketing tends to operate on metrics of anywhere from a .5% to 2% success rate. I hope that heuristic analysis can aspire for better. When is the last time, gentle reader, that you received a meaningful or memorable piece of DM communications? I know. It’s rare. In spite of that dogged pursuit of metrics.

And performing the design work of ‘providing what people really need and want’ can present vexing problems that aren’t so quick to satisfy in a ‘just add water’ kind of way. Metrics or no. As I mentioned earlier, thinly scripted analogies such as this one, that propagate that ‘dirty feeling’ that people experience will only force consumers to keep on loading up trash bins with unwanted direct mail. (And dodge telephone surveys at dinner)

Why is it that people like us who know so little about marketing feel like they know what marketers seek to accomplish? We can do better by leveraging the core of these disciplines than by looking for thinly applied analogies to consider. We can do better by using our empathic tools to enable them to accomplish more pleasurable and purposeful communications.

One new subscriber from Anothr Alerts…