{"id":10018,"date":"2022-10-24T04:56:14","date_gmt":"2022-10-24T04:56:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.behaviouraleconomic.co.uk\/?p=10018"},"modified":"2022-10-24T09:01:06","modified_gmt":"2022-10-24T09:01:06","slug":"more-conversions-with-social-media-targeting-lessons-from-behavioral-biology","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.behaviouraleconomic.co.uk\/more-conversions-with-social-media-targeting-lessons-from-behavioral-biology\/","title":{"rendered":"More Conversions With Social Media Targeting: Lessons From Behavioral Biology"},"content":{"rendered":"
By Lachezar Ivanov and Eaon Pritchard<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n To target or not to target? If yes, then to whom? Or what? And by how much?<\/p>\n The notion of reaching the right people at the right time with the right message has been one of the most established strategic goals in advertising and marketing since day one.<\/p>\n And rightly so.<\/p>\n The use of data-driven targeting aided by technology has now become an important tactic in marketing. In theory, this kind of targeting of individuals or groups seems to make sense. It should allow an advertiser to identify with higher accuracy the customers who are likely to be interested in a product, which would surely lead to the more efficient allocation of marketing resources.<\/p>\n Digital channels offer \u2018better\u2019 targeting than traditional mass media. Search targets users with keywords, locations, or other cues based on browsing history. Social channels offer advertisers targeted audiences according to things like location, demographics, claimed interests, and look-a-like<\/em> audiences.<\/p>\n Sadly, most of these digital data signals are not great predictors of actual customer behavior.<\/p>\n Moreover, we propose here that the problem with so much targeting (and its close cousin, segmentation) is not that they are not valid marketing practices, but that the common understanding of how they work is both thin and narrow – lacking depth and breadth. Targeting can end up being ineffective and sometimes even harmful to brands. Too much \u2018precision\u2019 targeting can make a high-quality brand appear low-quality.<\/p>\n Going deeper into human psychology, an evolutionary approach suggests that targeting based on customer needs (the small group of fundamental motives that drive customer behavior) can be both more efficient and more effective. The simple truth is that most products and services are bought by customers of all types. Segmenting these audiences to the nth<\/em> degree might be interesting for data wonks and look impressive in PowerPoint decks but even the best only manage to segment on a very thin and proximate basis.<\/p>\n Proximate influences are typically very specific to a particular product category, often even to a brand. Identifying the specific proximate needs to target for one brand, or even category, typically has little or no use for other categories. Although, this does keep a big chunk of the market research industry in business.<\/p>\n However, using an evolutionary framework of ultimate needs can provide a solution to these problems. Whilst every one of us is a unique individual, we are all the same species; we all come out of the box with the same hardware, mental software, and the same universal set of evolutionary motives, the same fundamental drivers of customer behavior.<\/p>\n The decision to choose one of these two luxury car options might sometimes have little to do with the products themselves but might depend on a customer\u2019s currently active motive and on whether the option represents the choice of a majority vs. a minority of other customers. A much-cited study<\/a> demonstrated that customers primed with a self-protection motive choose the option presented as the choice of the majority of other customers (i.e., a \u00b4strength in numbers\u00b4 response that supports self-protection), irrespective of which this car brand option is. When primed with a mating motive, male customers choose the option presented as the choice of a minority of other customers (a \u2018desire to stand out\u2019 response that supports mating success).<\/p>\n This example underpins the notion that motive and need states can shape our preferences, decision-making processes, and behaviors. These effects can sometimes take place behind the curtain of consciousness. The example also suggests many opportunities for targeting customers under the influence of specific motives, particularly on social media, where these deep-seated desires often surface and are nurtured.<\/p>\n Research<\/a> by Les Binet and Peter Field suggests that marketers need to balance the goals of long-term brand-building and short-term sales activation to achieve optimal effectiveness and efficiency. The seminal work by the duo implies that brand-building benefits from emotional messaging and broad audience targeting. For short-term conversions, Binet and Field suggest narrow targeting to meet the needs and preferences of distinct customer groups with greater precision. What might be the underlying behavioral biology of these effects?<\/p>\n The limbic system is not only central to emotion but also to learning and memory formation. Hence, when your goal is to instill brand codes in the mind of the customer, it might pay off to activate this part of the brain through emotional messaging.<\/p>\n The neocortex carries out an executive function and is involved in decision-making. Customers often don\u2019t want more choices but to be more confident in the choices they have already subconsciously made. Rational and narrowly targeted messaging close to purchase might give cognition the confidence to \u201crubber stamp\u201d the emotional decision. It is vital to note that the connection between the limbic system and the neocortex is bidirectional. Emotions and rationality are strongly interlinked.<\/p>\n Seemingly irrational choices, often regarded as biases, such as the shift in the choice between Mercedes and BMW, can make perfect sense when you consider the adaptive motives influencing customers and their context.<\/p>\n While it is unlikely that you can use traditional segmentation data collection techniques, such as surveys, to determine the currently active motive states of your customers, these motives often surface on social media. Facebook<\/a>\u2019s targeting options for life events (e.g., new job, new relationship) are particularly intriguing. There is a growing body of research revealing how fundamental motives<\/a> are particularly evident in social media behavior. To be fair, almost all social media activity is attempted signaling by users (and often faking) of their desirable personality traits or status that they want to display to others.<\/p>\n Gaining status in the groups to which we belong has been one of the enduring truths of our species. From our hunter-gatherer ancestors on the Savannah to the office workers and Twitter trolls of the present, the human need to compete for status is ancient, universal, and deeply ingrained in all of us.<\/p>\nThe Mercedes or BMW Conundrum<\/h3>\n
When to Use Narrow Targeting and When to Reach a Broad Audience<\/h3>\n
How to Use Social Media Targeting Options to Reach Customers With Different Motives<\/h3>\n
Status<\/h4>\n