Museums,  A)rac-ons  &  Zoos:    Marke-ng  to  Gen  Y  

 Colleen  Dilenschneider  

Director,  IMPACTS  Research  5  June  2012  

Overview  

1)  Genera-on  Y-­‐  Who  are  these  people  anyway?    

2)  Marke-ng  to  Millennials  

3)  Value  of  WOM  and  emerging  marke-ng  trends  

4)  The  Four  “T”s  of  Online  Engagement  

5)  Five  Case  studies:  “The  Best  of  the  Best  in  Online  Audience  Engagement”    

Who  are  Millennials?  

•   There  are  currently  over  90  million  Millennials              (born  1980  –  1995;  “true”  Millennials  born  1981-­‐  1989)    

•  Characterized  as:    •  Entreprenuerial    •  Public  service  mo-vated  •  Connected  and  protected  

•  Tech-­‐savvy  •  En-tled  and  “over-­‐educated”  •  Community-­‐oriented  

 

•  How  they  stack  up  against  Genera?on  X  and  Baby  Boomers?  •  Meaningful  work  as  “workplace  reward”  (vs.  freedom  or  -tle)  

•  Had  helicopter  parents  (vs.  distant  or  controlling)  •  Crave  community  (vs.  independence  or  a)ack  oppression)  

•  Difficulty  with  tradi-onal  hierarchy    

What  do  Millennials  do  and  care  about?  

*Pew  Research  

Tip  #1)  Sell  your  admission  

74%  of  Millennials  are  more  likely  to  pay  a)en-on  to  a  company’s  messages  if  the  company  has  a  deep  commitment  to  a  cause   Source:  Cone  Millennial  Case  Study  

83%  of  Millennials  will  trust  a  company  more  if  it  is  socially/environmentally  responsible  

66%  will  recommend  products/services  if  the  company  is  socially  responsible    

69%  consider  a  company’s  social  and  environmental  commitment  when  deciding  where  to  shop    

89%  are  likely  or  very  likely  to  switch  from  one  brand  to  another  (price  and  quality  being  equal)  if  the  second  brand  is  associated  with  a  good  cause    

Tip  #2)  It’s  about  the  experience  

What  you  can  you  do:  •  Create  mul-channel  

interac-ons    •  Personalize  experience  by  

knowing  your  audience  

Source:  Convergy’s  Customer  Management  

Millennials  are  members  of  the  “Experience  Economy”  

73%  of  Millennials  will  leave  ajer  one  bad  experience;  85%  will  tell  others  about  poor  experiences    

Sa-sfac-on  does  not  equal  loyalty  

Millennials  want  personalized  customer  service  or  intelligent  self-­‐service  

Tip  #3)  Get  to  the  point  &  do  it  quickly  

A  picture  is  worth  a  thousand  words  

Millennials  have  A.O.A.D.D.    Always-­‐on-­‐a)en-on-­‐deficit-­‐disorder    

(coined  by  Pew  Research)    

Make  it  relevant  and  do  it  quickly  to  capture  a)en-on    

 More  informa-on  than  ever  before;  a  lot  to  get  through.  

“Connected  and  distracted”    

“Mul-tasking  machines”  

Tip  #4)  Be  tech-­‐friendly  &  get  social  

Using  social  technology  is  natural  life  occurrence  to  Millennials.  They  are  connected  and  they  grew  up  with  it  

50  =  median  number  of  text  messages  Millennials  send  every  day    (Pew  Research  2010)  

43%  of  18-­‐24  year-­‐olds  say  that  tex-ng  is  just  as  meaningful  as  an  actual  conversa-on  with  someone  over  the  phone  (eMarketer  2010)  

 

41%  of  Millennials  have  made  a  purchase  using  their  smartphone  (Edelman  Digital)  

24%  of  Millennials  say  that  ‘Technology  use’  is  what  most  makes  their  genera-on  unique    (Pew  Research  2010)   74%  of  

Millennials  believe  that  technology  makes  life  easier  (Pew  Research)  

54%  think  technology    brings  them  closer  to  friends  and  family    (Pew  research)  

56%  of  Millennials  think  technology  allows  people  to  use  their  -me  more  efficiently  (Pew  research)  

Tip  #5)  Let  everyone  be  a  curator  

Remember:  everyone  on  a  Millennial  soccer  team  was  an  MVP  

Social  media  means  business  revolves  around  the  consumer    

In  large  part  due  to  social  media  and  interconnec-vity,  Millennials  have  “Warholism.”  Anyone  can  be  famous.  

Millennials  value  transparency,  engagement,  reputa-on  and  communica-on    

For  Gen  Y,  technology  and  connec-vity  rule  

33%  of  Millennials  more  likely  to  buy  product  if  it  has  a  Facebook  page  compared  to  17%  of  non-­‐Millennials    (Boston  Consul-ng  Group)  

48%  of  Millennials  say  word-­‐of-­‐mouth  influences  their  product  purchases  more  than  TV  ads.  Only  17%  said  a  TV  ad  prompted  them  to  buy    (Intrepid  Study  2010)  

43%  of  18-­‐24  year-­‐olds  say  that  tex-ng  is  just  as  meaningful  as  an  actual  conversa-on  with  someone  over  the  phone    (eMarketer  2010)  

41%  of  Millennials  have  made  a  purchase  using  their  smartphone  (Edelman  Digital)  

27%  =  approximate  decline  in  email  usage  among  those  ages  12-­‐34  over  the  past  year    (ComScore  Study  2010)  

19%  of  Millennials  have  voted  on  American  Idol  (Pew  Study  2010)  

The  Bass  Model    

“Q”  -­‐  the  coefficient  of  imita-on  -­‐  has  a  value  12.85x  greater  than  that  of  “P”-­‐  the  coefficient  of  innova-on.  This  is  cri-cally  important  to  understand  as  there  is  no  amount  of  adver-sing  or  other  forms  of  “P”  that  will  overcome  a  deficiency  of  earned  media  (i.e.-­‐  “Q”)  

Public  sources  of  informa-on  Reach:  Via  what  channels  do  people  acquire  informa7on?  

443.2  

287.6  

233.8  

157.2  

108.4   111.6   109.6  

76.2   74.3  

54.5  

12.3   9.8   8.7  

495.9  

403.5  

237.0  

120.6  

179.6  

148.7  

109.1  

71.3   69.6  

50.3  

9.4   9.5   8.8  

0  

100  

200  

300  

400  

500  

600  

Web   Social  media   WOM   Email   Mobile  web   Peer  review  web  

Television   Radio  -­‐  satellite  and  terrestrial  

Newspaper  -­‐  print  

Periodicals  and  magazines  -­‐  

print  

Direct  mail   Other  print   Other  (miscellaneous)  

Jun  2011   Mar  2012  

INDEX  VALUE  

Public  sources  of  informa-on  Trust:  How  credible  are  the  respec7ve  informa7on  channels?  

134.5  

112.2  

289.6  

187.6  

121.6  

199.5  

143.2   141.0  

245.2   243.1  

43.8  51.1   44.4  

152.5  

119.8  

284.3  

192.3  

128.7  

211.1  

112.3  

138.8  

242.9   244.5  

29.6  

48.7   44.1  

0  

100  

200  

300  

400  

500  

600  

Web   Social  media   WOM   Email   Mobile  web   Peer  review  web  

Television   Radio  -­‐  satellite  and  terrestrial  

Newspaper  -­‐  print  

Periodicals  and  magazines  -­‐  

print  

Direct  mail   Other  print   Other  (miscellaneous)  

Jun  2011   Mar  2012  

INDEX  VALUE  

Public  sources  of  informa-on  Amplifica7on:  What  is  the  re-­‐distribu7on  poten7al  of  the  respec7ve  informa7on  channels?  

98.7  

186.0  

91.2  

177.4  

89.4  99.7  

31.3  

12.8   19.4  

55.8  

24.3  9.4   10.3  

99.2  

235.5  

92.7  

175.8  

92.0  101.8  

29.6  13.4   19.1  

64.8  

22.7  9.2   9.6  

0  

100  

200  

300  

400  

500  

600  

Web   Social  media   WOM   Email   Mobile  web   Peer  review  web  

Television   Radio  -­‐  satellite  and  terrestrial  

Newspaper  -­‐  print  

Periodicals  and  magazines  -­‐  

print  

Direct  mail   Other  print   Other  (miscellaneous)  

Jun  2011   Mar  2012  

INDEX  VALUE  

Public  sources  of  informa-on  Overall  Value:  What  are  the  weighted,  rela7ve  values  of  the  respec7ve  informa7on  channels?  

269.0   274.4  282.3  

239.2  

53.9  

101.5  

22.5  6.3  

16.2  33.8  

0.6   0.2   0.2  

269.7  

409.3  

224.6  

146.6  

76.5  

114.9  

13.0  4.8   11.6  

28.7  

0.2   0.2   0.1  

0  

100  

200  

300  

400  

500  

600  

Web   Social  media   WOM   Email   Mobile  web   Peer  review  web  

Television   Radio  -­‐  satellite  and  terrestrial  

Newspaper  -­‐  print  

Periodicals  and  magazines  -­‐  

print  

Direct  mail   Other  print   Other  (miscellaneous)  

Jun  2011   Mar  2012  

INDEX  VALUE  

The  four  “T”s  of  online  engagement  

1)  Tone  

–  Let  folks  get  to  know  you  •  Is  there  a  human  being  back  there?  

2)  Touchability  –  Make  it  relevant  

•  Is  this  ini-a-ve  accessible  to  me?  

3)  Transparency  –  Be  real  and  authen-c    

•  Can  I  trust  you?  

4)  Timeliness  –  Tie  it  to  current  events.  Make  it  -mely  and  urgent  

•  Why  can’t  I  pay  a)en-on  to  this  later?  

Creating excitement for a new project Winner: Museum of Science and Industry’s Month at the Museum

Why it’s the best:  

Tone:  •  Kate  was  chosen  by  public  -­‐  silly  and  curious  

Touchability:    •  Fun  videos  built  awareness  of  the  ini-a-ve  •  Accessibility,  personal  buy-­‐in  •  Increased  a)endance  36%  in  November,  20%  in  December    

Transparency  •  Wrote  a  blog,  posted    videos,  and  was  available  on-­‐site  

Timeliness  •  New,  garnering  a)en-on  •  1  month  -meframe  

•  Compe--on  to  live  one  month  in  a  glass  room  at  the  Museum  (Oct  –  Nov  2010)  •  Over  1,500  applicants  posted  60  second  YouTube  videos    •  The  winner,  Kate,  was  chosen  by  judges  and  the  public  

•  460  million  impressions  •  Conducted  again  in  2011  with  Kevin  Byrne  

The Basics: The play-by-play

Turn-around of a possible PR crisis Winner: The Shedd Aquarium vs. high

dolphin calf mortality rates

The play-by-play •  The  Shedd  Aquarium  shared  birth  of  dolphin  calf,  despite  high  mortality  rates  •  The  dolphin  calf  didn’t  make  it  •  Received  over  103  Facebook  comments  within  one  hour  of  pos-ng  on  Facebook  •  Comments  were  very  personal  and  empathe-c,  crea-ng  strong,  personal  -es      Why it’s the best:

Tone  •  Spoke  in  layman’s  terms  (empathy)    •  Displayed  emo-on  (human  value)  

Touchability  •  Allowed  themselves  to  be  sad  (did  not  distract)    •  Responded  with  thanks  (as  a  person  would  respond)  

Transparency  •  Publicized  the  birth  (crea7ng  rela7onships  with  audiences)    •  Made  audiences  aware  of  threats  (addressing  them)  

Timeliness  •  They  shared  the  news  on  all  channels  at  once  (respec7ng  all  audiences)  •  They  followed  up  (keep  audiences  engaged)  

The Basics:

Public ditching of a social media strategy that didn’t work

Winner: The Brooklyn Museum’s switch to Meetup.com

Best  

The play-by-play •  Brooklyn  Museum’s  1st  Fans  ini-a-ve  dropped  Twi)er,  Facebook    and  Flickr    •  Turned  focus  to  using  Meetup.com  •  Other  channels  were  causing  problems:  

The Basics:

Why it’s the best:

Tone  •  Prac-cal,  behind  the  scenes,  unapologe-c  

Touchability  •  Had  goals  to  be  “touchable/relatable”  in  different  ways  •  Found  an  online  playorm  that  worked  

Transparency  •  Assessed  playorms  and  shared  findings  •  Help  move  industry  forward  while  keeping  audiences  in  the  loop  

Timeliness  •  Shared  informa-on  as  it  happened  

•     Wanted  on-­‐site  engagement    

•     People  were  not  responding  online  •   Li)le  communica-on  among  audience    

•   High  administra-ve  overhead  

Showing off pride & personality Winner: Museums Betting Artwork on the Super Bowl (originally by Indianapolis Museum of Art and

the New Orleans Museum of Art)

The play-by-play The Basics: •  Indianapolis  Museum  of  Art  (Max  Anderson)  and  the  New  Orleans  Museum  of  Art  

(John  Bullard)  made  public  bets  on  who  would  win  2010  Super  Bowl    •  Bet  famous  works  of  art  from  collec-ons    •  New  Orleans  won,  IMA  lent  Turner’s  FiIh  Plague  of  Egypt  for  three  months  •  Milwaukee  Art  Museum  and  Carnegie  Museum  of  Art  wagered  a  Renoir  

(Carnegie)  and  a  Caillebo)e  (Milwaukee)  in  2011  Super  Bowl  

  Why it’s the best: Tone  

•  Directors  are  the  voices.  “Talked  smack”  •  Art  museums  have  a  sense  of  fun,  risk  and  adventure    

Touchability  •  The  bet  mixes  unexpected  popular  cultures/interests    •  Align  value/pride  with  community  

Transparency  •  Began  with  open  communica-ons  for  all  to  see  

Timeliness  •  In  -me  for  Super  Bowl  

Use of online evangelists  Winner: California Academy of

Science’s NightLife Insiders

Best  

The Play-by-play The Basics: •  California  Academy  of  Sciences  recruited  six  NightLife  Insiders  for  weekly  program  •  Insiders  selected  by  based  on  originality,  humor,  quality  of  wri)en  essay,  and  

ac-vity  in  social  media  •  Insiders  trade  “insider  experiences”  for  posi-ve  word  of  mouth  and  social  media  

Why it’s the best: Tone    

•  Use  voice  of  “creators”  and  “cri-cs”  for  amplifica-on  and  credibility  •  NightLife  Insiders  have  different  voices,  maximize  reach  

Touchability  •  Known  online  personali-es  help  make  accessible  •  Provide  insiders  with  relevant  experiences  •  Organic,  promo-onal  content  

Transparency  •  Outlined  ini-a-ve,  applica-on  and  “payment”  

Timeliness  •  Three-­‐month  -me  period  •  Prep  for  each  NightLife  event  

Have  ques-ons,  ideas,  or  resources?  Please  contact  me!    

Know  Your  Own  Bone  colleendilen.com  

@cdilly  twi)er.com/cdilly  

facebook.com/colleendilen  

linkedin.com/in/  colleendilenschneider  

cdilenschneider@  impactsresearch.com  

pinterest.com/colleendilen