What "Brüno!" Can Teach Us About Incentive and Reward Program Measurement

I had a nice chat yesterday with a friend that works at one of my old employers.  He's been very good about letting me know when a typo slips through on one of my posts.  I appreciate the fact that he reads the blog - and I really appreciate the fact that he knows that typos drive me crazy.  We're all subject to them - even when we proof and proof and proof.  So Kudos to you Don.

During our conversation we touched on the fact that programs need to be reviewed to ensure that they are achieving their intended goals.  I said something about reviewing the program after the first quarter and he said he'd review the program at 30 days to make sure it didn't start out poorly - giving the program manager a chance to react quickly and improve/change the program.  I thought for a minute and agreed. 

I was caught up in "old school" business thinking.  Again, none of us are immune to traditional SOPs (standard operating procedures) - those rules of thumb that are ingrained in us from early on.  I'm glad someone called me on it.

But the real "aha" moment came this morning as I was reading some overnight tweets.  One caught my eye - "Did twitter Bury 'Brüno!'"  From the article:

"...but "Brüno" saw almost a 40% drop in ticket sales from Friday to Saturday, and an even steeper drop in viewership moving into Sunday, which is incredibly unusual on opening weekend."

The industry thought the movie would do $50 million plus and ended up only doing $30 million or so.  A huge disappointment.  The article doesn't directly blame twitter for the drop off but it does offer this bit of warning...

"...It seems a bit hasty to blame Twitter for the failings of "Brüno" at the box office — the "Brüno" Twitter stream currently has plenty of positive mentions for the film — but it does point to a shift in consumer response times. When people can immediately voice their opinions, there's going to be less room for branding and marketing to go unchallenged."

Twitter - and a variety of other connecting technologies have seriously shortened the time frame for information and feedback.  And as more people have the technology in their pockets to connect, the cushion a company has for reviewing, measuring and correcting programs has shrunk significantly.  While the "old school" would say review quarterly... the new school would have been in class, taken the final, applied for graduate school and graduated long before you got your first whiff of a problem with your program.

My new thinking based on my conversation:

• Solicit feedback immediately upon launching the program with an on line survey to check if the message was delivered and if your audience understands the intent and goal of the program.
• Solicit feedback weekly for the first 4 weeks to make sure there isn't a drop off in attention to the program and get feedback as the audience gets more accustomed to the program and how it works.
• Monthly check in on the progress of the program.  Is there anything new popping up that would limit the program's effectiveness?  Are the messages still clear and understandable?  Did anything change in the market or the organization that would necessitate a change in program structure, design, direction?

I don't think any of these time lines are etched in stone - but I do think that we need to reevaluate the time line for soliciting feedback. 

Our feedback loop should be as short as the communication loop - and that my friend - is getting pretty damn short these days.

gubw6snj45

 

Related articles by Zemanta

• Social Media Will Change Incentive Programs - If Companies Allow It (incentive-intelligence.typepad.com)