Company loyalty and brand loyalty: to the question of difference.
Based on the classification of loyalty programs presented in the previous topic (About behavioral and affective attachments, customer loyalty, etc., etc., remember?)
In the framework of loyalty programs in marketing, “the buyer is satisfied and buys” indicates not loyalty, but commitment, satisfaction. Generally speaking, satisfaction, commitment, and loyalty are not the same thing.
“Satisfaction” & mdash is “satisfied,” but does not mean “loyal.” Satisfaction may indicate satisfaction with one criterion & mdash here can be drawn what in this classification is called “false loyalty”: if in another place it is satisfied more, faster and better, it will leave (although this, of course, depends on the speed of commitment and switching costs to another supplier of services or goods). in the case of a pharmacy or convenience store, this is the only criterion possible & mdash location. Such satisfaction is unstable - open an analogue in the neighborhood (the same by the criterion of "location"), but steeper in price, service, quality, etc., satisfaction will be covered immediately.
"Commitment" & mdash warmer. So & mdash is inclined to buy from these, and not those, and not just like that, but for some reason. Although, generally speaking, satisfaction and commitment are very close.
')
But loyalty ... Here, and satisfaction, and commitment, "and something else." Namely - the most powerful emotional component. In “true loyalty” I would add an element of self-identification through the selected company, a personal relationship (I’m clarifying: this does not mean that the loyal character has a friend in the company to which he is loyal), it means that he perceives it personally, “mentally” . Key to loyalty & mdash is not only insensitivity to the actions of competitors (this is a cool criterion for loyalty & mdash), but that the client RECOMMENDS the company. BUT & mdash and this is a very important "but" & mdash loyalty will NEVER line up ONLY on emotions. We must first build the processes, service, quality, to the point where the company's offer satisfies the need - that is, to fix the rational prerequisites of loyalty. And already further, when loyalty will cease to grow as a result of these actions, engage in the emotional side of the issue. A simple example: does your loyalty to a mobile operator grow from the fact that he sends you a text message on his birthday? Does it matter? For me, it’s absolutely no matter if they do me a service well enough. Communication is bad, technical support operators are rude, it's impossible to get through to them ... Will some pseudo-attention correct the situation? Of course not!
Emotional things will increase my loyalty if and only if in the experience of my relationship with the company will be:
1. They do for me what I need (regarding the satisfaction of my basic need, because of which I came to them) & mdash is critical;
2. They do it no worse than the average market standard (better than mdash is beauty at all!) Mdash is uncritical, since I may not have enough expertise to evaluate the average market standard;
3. But if already after all this “they love me” appears, then this will increase my loyalty. Without satisfying the need - zero emotion.
And then I will start not to notice their flaws, not to react to price changes and the actions of competitors.
I intuitively, the classification does not seem to be very correct when applied to customer loyalty and loyalty programs. It is simply ... not clean, not systemic. Brought into her everything, and it can be confusing.
And here's the problem: this classification is not about customer loyalty, but about brand perception. The stated “attachment” & mdash is to a large extent not a component of loyalty, but a kind of checkpoint positioning of the brand. How true is the company, through marketing communications, declares “covering” customer value and needs. This is a "virtual" satisfaction of need. Which can completely disperse when it comes to the use of services. In order to improve the perception of the brand by the audience, they are holding branding and positioning events. Loyalty programs & mdash is another song, a bit not from this repertoire. This event is aimed at customer loyalty & mdash and this is not the same as the perception of the brand.
Customer loyalty is associated with the experience of interacting with the company, rather than with the perception of brand positioning. That is, with how it really satisfies this need.
Loyalty characterizes how much the client is ready or not ready to change the supplier due to the quality of satisfaction of his needs and emotional commitment of the company.
If he does not buy from the company, then there is no need to talk about loyalty, he just likes the brand, he gets into the target audience (although not always), or the positioning “gets” into it. Although controversial - does it fall if he does not buy? ..
False loyalty & mdash is generally nonsense. You can not be "a little pregnant." Loyalty is either there or not. So false loyalty and lack of loyalty are the same thing. Because loyalty is neither there nor there.
And in general, include the lack of loyalty in the classification of loyalty & mdash nonsense. Same as including black in the white classification.
This is not a classification of loyalty, it is a classification of options for the relationship to the brand and / or company.
Loyalty & mdash characteristic ALREADY the existing relationship between the client and the company. The purpose of the loyalty program & mdash client to keep, rather than attract. But branding and positioning - just to attract.
Therefore, the above classification is suitable not for theoretical generalization on the issue of loyalty, but rather as a key to research on assessing the success of the company's marketing activities in general. And positioning, and the strength of the brand, and quality management, and service. So we will not answer the question "what loyalty options exist at all", but "as our company as a result of our marketing activities, the audience relates, how many people from those to whom our marketing is focused have become loyal customers." This is a brand commitment. And not customer loyalty. Do you understand the difference? It is better not to confuse, when developing a loyalty program, the classification of attitudes towards a brand is not the best helper ...
Confusion in marketing is not only useless, but often & mdash is harmful. In a good way, customer loyalty should not be classified, but earned.
And & mdash loyalty program & mdash is not a panacea, but an additional (and strong) way to increase competitiveness. Without quality management, it is zero without a stick.
Conclusion:
1.Do not use this classification when developing a loyalty program, it is not intended for this.
2. before introducing a loyalty program, evaluate how your company objectively satisfies the client’s need. If not, repair the quality first (or in parallel). The loyalty program alone will not save anything. As an additional tool - great.
Finally - sorry for the "many beeches." I wanted to express my vision as fully as possible.
In the framework of loyalty programs in marketing, “the buyer is satisfied and buys” indicates not loyalty, but commitment, satisfaction. Generally speaking, satisfaction, commitment, and loyalty are not the same thing.
“Satisfaction” & mdash is “satisfied,” but does not mean “loyal.” Satisfaction may indicate satisfaction with one criterion & mdash here can be drawn what in this classification is called “false loyalty”: if in another place it is satisfied more, faster and better, it will leave (although this, of course, depends on the speed of commitment and switching costs to another supplier of services or goods). in the case of a pharmacy or convenience store, this is the only criterion possible & mdash location. Such satisfaction is unstable - open an analogue in the neighborhood (the same by the criterion of "location"), but steeper in price, service, quality, etc., satisfaction will be covered immediately.
"Commitment" & mdash warmer. So & mdash is inclined to buy from these, and not those, and not just like that, but for some reason. Although, generally speaking, satisfaction and commitment are very close.
')
But loyalty ... Here, and satisfaction, and commitment, "and something else." Namely - the most powerful emotional component. In “true loyalty” I would add an element of self-identification through the selected company, a personal relationship (I’m clarifying: this does not mean that the loyal character has a friend in the company to which he is loyal), it means that he perceives it personally, “mentally” . Key to loyalty & mdash is not only insensitivity to the actions of competitors (this is a cool criterion for loyalty & mdash), but that the client RECOMMENDS the company. BUT & mdash and this is a very important "but" & mdash loyalty will NEVER line up ONLY on emotions. We must first build the processes, service, quality, to the point where the company's offer satisfies the need - that is, to fix the rational prerequisites of loyalty. And already further, when loyalty will cease to grow as a result of these actions, engage in the emotional side of the issue. A simple example: does your loyalty to a mobile operator grow from the fact that he sends you a text message on his birthday? Does it matter? For me, it’s absolutely no matter if they do me a service well enough. Communication is bad, technical support operators are rude, it's impossible to get through to them ... Will some pseudo-attention correct the situation? Of course not!
Emotional things will increase my loyalty if and only if in the experience of my relationship with the company will be:
1. They do for me what I need (regarding the satisfaction of my basic need, because of which I came to them) & mdash is critical;
2. They do it no worse than the average market standard (better than mdash is beauty at all!) Mdash is uncritical, since I may not have enough expertise to evaluate the average market standard;
3. But if already after all this “they love me” appears, then this will increase my loyalty. Without satisfying the need - zero emotion.
And then I will start not to notice their flaws, not to react to price changes and the actions of competitors.
I intuitively, the classification does not seem to be very correct when applied to customer loyalty and loyalty programs. It is simply ... not clean, not systemic. Brought into her everything, and it can be confusing.
And here's the problem: this classification is not about customer loyalty, but about brand perception. The stated “attachment” & mdash is to a large extent not a component of loyalty, but a kind of checkpoint positioning of the brand. How true is the company, through marketing communications, declares “covering” customer value and needs. This is a "virtual" satisfaction of need. Which can completely disperse when it comes to the use of services. In order to improve the perception of the brand by the audience, they are holding branding and positioning events. Loyalty programs & mdash is another song, a bit not from this repertoire. This event is aimed at customer loyalty & mdash and this is not the same as the perception of the brand.
Customer loyalty is associated with the experience of interacting with the company, rather than with the perception of brand positioning. That is, with how it really satisfies this need.
Loyalty characterizes how much the client is ready or not ready to change the supplier due to the quality of satisfaction of his needs and emotional commitment of the company.
If he does not buy from the company, then there is no need to talk about loyalty, he just likes the brand, he gets into the target audience (although not always), or the positioning “gets” into it. Although controversial - does it fall if he does not buy? ..
False loyalty & mdash is generally nonsense. You can not be "a little pregnant." Loyalty is either there or not. So false loyalty and lack of loyalty are the same thing. Because loyalty is neither there nor there.
And in general, include the lack of loyalty in the classification of loyalty & mdash nonsense. Same as including black in the white classification.
This is not a classification of loyalty, it is a classification of options for the relationship to the brand and / or company.
Loyalty & mdash characteristic ALREADY the existing relationship between the client and the company. The purpose of the loyalty program & mdash client to keep, rather than attract. But branding and positioning - just to attract.
Therefore, the above classification is suitable not for theoretical generalization on the issue of loyalty, but rather as a key to research on assessing the success of the company's marketing activities in general. And positioning, and the strength of the brand, and quality management, and service. So we will not answer the question "what loyalty options exist at all", but "as our company as a result of our marketing activities, the audience relates, how many people from those to whom our marketing is focused have become loyal customers." This is a brand commitment. And not customer loyalty. Do you understand the difference? It is better not to confuse, when developing a loyalty program, the classification of attitudes towards a brand is not the best helper ...
Confusion in marketing is not only useless, but often & mdash is harmful. In a good way, customer loyalty should not be classified, but earned.
And & mdash loyalty program & mdash is not a panacea, but an additional (and strong) way to increase competitiveness. Without quality management, it is zero without a stick.
Conclusion:
1.Do not use this classification when developing a loyalty program, it is not intended for this.
2. before introducing a loyalty program, evaluate how your company objectively satisfies the client’s need. If not, repair the quality first (or in parallel). The loyalty program alone will not save anything. As an additional tool - great.
Finally - sorry for the "many beeches." I wanted to express my vision as fully as possible.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/6088/
All Articles