Critiquing “Instrument maker invests in 3-D demos”

I just recently saw an article by Karen Bannan at B2B-Online entitled “Instrument maker invests in 3-D demos“.  It is great to see the word getting out regarding the success that companies are having who recognize the investment in online product demos.  The article presents some of the typical argument for going this route, such as cost and logistics savings.  The important parts are clearly that this company, Malvern Instruments, is

• Reaching many more people than it could ordinarily do so with demo units
• Helping customers understand a sophisticated device in an easy way
• Seeing that prospects/customers are using the online demos to gain confidence in the purchase
• Saving a lot of money.

Regarding the particulars, Malvern Instruments is using a 3-D modeling software from Kaon Interactive, but I don’t believe the results are necessarily special to that software.  When I visited Kaon’s web site, they have demos of 3-D renderings of products, but as far as I could tell, little real interaction apart from zoom, pan, and rotate.  So much more so, then, the arguments should be for demos in which prospects, customers, and salespeople can really try out the product, in a simulated real environment.

The article barely scratches the surface about what is possible, for example, the enhanced tracking and user behavior monitoring possibilities that can help companies understand how prospects are evaluating their products.  Nonetheless, It’s always good to see these kinds of stories because ultimately companies considering going this route want to know there are real results.

Building data dashboards for customers

I just saw a blog post on Seth Godin’s blog recommending that companies build data dashboards to help track usage.  It is right on, and the short post is a worthwhile read.

About 1 year ago, I was asked to evaluate a tech company for a significant investment, and I was so impressed with their data tracking dashboards used that it was clear they really were thinking straight about their business.  They were managing/selling text services in Europe, and their control center was impressive.  They had a tracking dashboard that monitored sales close to real-time, and compared current results with historical data (and statistical deviations) in an easy-to-see, visual graphic.  They could tell very quickly if problems occurred with their technology so they could take decisive action quickly.

Regarding equipment simulations, a few years ago we built a simple tracking software program (SimTracker) and our clients love it — they can see in real-time how their demos or training are performing.  Our interface is pretty simple, but then we also let clients download the data as CSV if they want to do more involved analyses.  The more savvy marketers can create a ‘mini-focus group’ by serving several versions of a piece and seeing which performs best compared with their goals, based on real user behavior rather than what the group thinks the researchers want to hear.

In many of our industries (which tend to be around manufacturing), however, we’ve found that our prospective clients sometimes don’t value this because it seems web/tech companies are not doing a good job of saying why such tracking data is useful, and how to apply it effectively in marketing campaigns.

Product simulation for cross-selling and up-selling

I just ran across an interesting blog post entitled “Measuring and Improving Cross-Sell and Upsell” at GetElastic.com.  It gives fascinating numbers and insights about existing online retailers’ current abilities to cross-sell and up-sell products.  What struck me is how well product simulation covers all of the take-away messages:

1. “we think you’ll also love…” — by putting products in real-world situations, you can expose customers to related products they may not have considered, just like the “we think you’ll also love…” items currently tagged onto shopping cart items.
2. Quoting Mike Svatek’s webinar of effective merchandising on Elastic Path, the post says cross-selling works well for “considered purchases”, the ones with higher cost and higher involvement.  The consumer who uses simulations to evaluate products will almost certainly be ones prepared for higher involvement in the procurement process (whether in B2B or B2C) — natural candidates for cross-sales (and the consumer will likely be appreciative of the relevance of related products or services).
3. Again quoted from Mike Svatek’s webinar, the post says up-sells work best when there is “a small difference in dollar value or a small nominal percentage difference – 10-20% max. You need to show some incremental value for the increase in price.”  Including optional product features in the simulation is a great way to lead consumers to the complete product they need.

The results are in from the virtual trade show

I won’t leave my readership (perhaps my mother) hanging…our experiment was a complete success at the show.  Our booth was rated #1 (or very close to #1) of all the participating exhibitors, in categories such as unique visitors, time, user ratings, etc.  It was directly attributable to the interactive sims we had (don’t take my word for it — this was real feedback).

Visitor time in our booth was over 150% of the average time spent at a booth, except for the prize booth.  Also, we did a little experiment in which we modified our simulations from Day 1 to Day 2 and actually got real user behavior demonstrating how we can tune performance.  I think it was a resounding success from the data point of view, and now it is time to go to potential customers with these results.  Of course the virtual trade show is like a web site, and so a lot of what we observed in the show microcosm I think can be applied to web site behavior (of course we intend to measure that as well, and compare behavior).

We’ve been talking with manufacturers who are interested in more virtual shows (some are not interested, and some publishers we understand are not convinced about the virtual show value).  I can’t say I believe the virtual trade show is here to stay, but it does offer some interesting advantages over merely having a web site, and I think it’s a wonderful opportunity to leverage simulations.

Virtual Trade Shows — the perfect venue?

Clearly simulations have a great place on Web sites, CD’s, etc. but in the past couple of years, I think the resurgence of virtual trade shows can provide an almost perfect venue for marketing simulations. I am in the process of vetting this idea, and have discovered a few things along the way.

First, from a technology point of view, the main software systems seem to all be Flash 8, so for me, that’s great news. I am in the process of updating my libraries to AS3, but realistically it will take a couple of months since that activity has to go on in the background (i.e., while I do the work that puts food on the table!).

Second, I’ve discussed the prospect of creating sims for various manufacturers, and while they are interested, there are some “trade show” goals that might get in the way. Almost invariably, the marketers want visitors to contact the booth sales people, naturally. So the marketers want visitors to be able to try things out, but not be too independent. I’ve found the message that resonates most being using interactivity to enter a prize drawing, or something that takes 30-60 seconds for someone to do, the endpoint being contacting a salesperson. This makes the most sense, since the ultimate goal of the show is the lead generation.

Third, surprisingly, I got an under-whelming response when I asked about tracking user behavior. I would have thought that understanding what people are doing in the booth would be a high priority. I don’t know if this response is due to my limited sample, my inability to ‘paint the picture’ for them adequately, or some real reflection of the market’s interest. I imagine their interest will be consistent with how much marketing intelligence they conduct ordinarily, and some industries will lead others. The question is how to sort through all these factors and find the visionary industries and companies within those industries. My impression is that it would be more useful to look at company profiles rather than expect an industry as a whole to get it.

I will be participating in my first virtual trade show next month (www.fdiconline.com), and I’m planning on running some interesting experiments.