« Take Your Cue | Main | Will Mozart Man Replace Mighty Mouse? »
How Audiences Use Information to Reduce Risk
Those of us who work in the cultural sector are blessed by ready access to information and experiences that help us to learn and grow in our awareness and understanding of art and artists. If we take advantage of what’s available, we grow into pretty sophisticated cultural consumers. While this is a wonderful thing for us, our expertise can lead us to make assumptions about our audiences and communities that can undermine our effectiveness.
When we assume that our audiences know what we know, we’re not likely to serve them the way they want to be served. While there are unquestionably audience members out there who are experts in particular art forms – we all know jazz listeners with the encyclopedic knowledge usually only found among baseball fanatics – most people fall into the "I-don't-know-much-about-art, but-I-know-what-I-like" category.
Love and knowledge can be marketing disabilities when we forget that not everyone knows what we know and not everyone feels what we feel. It's up to us to acquire information, distill it,organize it, clarify it, and deliver it. Bottom line: when we process information to assist our customers in sensemaking, we add value. As my friend Jerry Yoshitomi reminds us, communications professionals are increasingly expected to function as info-mediaries.
An effective info-mediary must anticipate the informational needs their customers require, then provide it: on-demand. Effectiveness in this role requires not only substantive and informational expertise, but also a clear understanding of the form in which consumers want the information delivered and the channels through which the information feels most accessible and credible.
When audiences think about buying tickets to an arts event, many of them perceive a certain amount of risk in making the decision. Risk perception is usually driven by some sort of scarcity-consciousness. For many audiences today, more than money is risked in cultural consumption. Time is the most precious resource for many people. So what else are people risking?
They’re afraid of wasting their precious leisure time doing something that doesn’t recharge their low batteries. They’re afraid of boredom. They’re afraid of feeling stupid when they don’t understand what’s going on. They’re afraid of falling asleep and looking like a drooling dolt who is uncultured and tired.
I'm reminded of a book club experience I had once. I was a newbie to the group and that evening's gathering was all about a book I hadn't read. The entire conversation - the group dynamics, the discussion shorthand, references to previous books the group had read - proceeded as if people thought I knew what they were talking about. I just stood there feeling like a complete outsider who had nothing to contribute. It isn't one of my fondest memories. If I'd known that by going that evening I would risk looking so stupid and uninvolved, I may not have gone. I've seen this same dynamic play out at intermissions and after-performance gatherings a number of times.
Then there are your expert audience members. They want to assure themselves that there isn’t a better choice out there for them to make. These are the people who scan all the opportunities to try and make the best choice. To understand this audience, one must know that the ability to make the “best choice� is part of this audiences’ identity. Art expert is a facet of their identity.
Both of these target audiences want and need information to feel like they’re managing risk. They have a high need to know and a high need to understand. Like us, they want to both feel and look smart in the world. If we assume they know what we know, how likely are we to give them the information they crave?
Marketing researchers have studied risk dynamics in purchasing decisions for decades. We have a lot to learn from their work if we want to improve our ability to attract audiences.
Understanding the dynamics of risk is important because consumers develop adaptive strategies to minimize risk. One strategy is to buy a name brand. That’s why Yo Yo Ma and Itzhak Perlman are relatively easy sells in the classical music category – they have transcended personality and have become synonymous with their instrumental category.
Another strategy is to pay a lot. Price tells people that “if it’s expensive, it must be good.�
Another important consumer strategy is to acquire information. People seek information to satisfy themselves that their purchasing goals will be fulfilled by the choices they make. Audiences look to marketers to provide the information they need to make good decisions.
Perhaps we think they already know what they need to know. My experience tells me something else. Here comes the debate about long copy versus short copy.
Tom Peters wrote that the profit strategy of the 90s would be to Add value through information. I believe the strategy still works, though the 90s are long gone.
When we are bombarded with the message that time is scarce, we’re afraid to ask people to take time to read longer copy.
Copy should be as long as it needs to be to do the job. Today, given how little arts consumers know about the plethora of artists and companies out there, there is a compelling case to be made that we need to give them more information, not less. But with this caveat: long copy must add value. It must be informative, well-written, and help consumers in their information acquisition needs.
For decades, most long copy strategies I’ve used have worked wonders. They consistently outperform short “blurbs.� Consider this, when someone is plopping down several hundred dollars and several precious hours, is it unreasonable to give them the information they need to make an informed choice?
When we do brand strategy work, one key objective is to determine which channels of communication and what printed materials audiences value most. Almost always, people rank the season brochure as very valuable. They rank it ahead of performance programs and newsletters. Why? Because it is there to help them make purchase decisions.
While we perceive a brochure as a sales vehicle, audiences see it as an information source to help them determine whether a particular event will meet their purchasing goals. Yet many brochures I see are poor informational vehicles. They’re full of short, meaningless blurbs that gush and exclaim. There isn’t much information about what the artist or company will bring to the experience.
Our prospective audiences use information as a strategy to manage risk. They can’t succeed in that without our awareness of their goals and strategies. In a world where those who have information look smart, and those who don't have it feel stupid, we are obliged to give people the information they need to derive the value for which they are paying.
Posted on March 3, 2006 07:30 AM | Permalink
Bookmark with: 
del.icio.us, 
StumbleUpon, 
digg
Comments
Your post today is very compelling. I'm sure there will be many comments from many different directions. My initial observation is from the broad perspective regarding design and literacy.
As a communication designer, I have wondered for a number of years whether our industry has perpetuated a culture of non-readers or perhaps even aggravated the problem of illiteracy by engaging in this myth that we should design around the assumption that people don't read longer copy.
Once while attending a design conference panel discussion, I asked a noted designer of MTV visuals this question -- are we in the design field perpetuating a sort of aversion to reading, starting with the youngest audiences today, by replacing it with purely visual messages? I'm not sure, but I think I offended her. I certainly didn't get a real answer to the question.
Your observation today is encouraging. I have hope that design can help the audience linger over copy longer, recognize it's importance, impart the value of information you're pointing out. Too often, unfortunately, it distracts from it.
Mr. Peters' strategy of Adding Value Through Information, then, applies not only to the copy content, but to the way the design of a piece supports the copy, draws attention to its key points, calls out bits that will give the audience instant clues to the value of spending the time on it. This sounds obvious and simplistic, but I don't think we practice it diligently enough.
Thanks again for your thought-provoking work.