I would agree with your view on the success and depth of the campaign. From a relationship perspective, a relationship is over when both sides no longer care what the other thinks. Even the naysayers cared enough to say something negative.
Maybe GM will even take it to heart enough to make changes that will convert some of the anti-GM folks.
Think of the campaign GM could tout, if they could show the negatives, and then show how they improved based on the feedback they received. They could show that they actually 'listened' to their critics!
All in all it goes back to the concept that you always get some good with some bad and vice versa.
A professional can handle both, and seek out the nuggets of gold via truths and insights from both.
Dominic Jones
· 3 years ago
When I wrote my original piece in support of how GM was handling the "crisis," it was very much in the heat of the action. I was roundly condemned by many "marketing types" for suggesting that GM was coming out looking rather good.
It is great to see you analyze this with the benefit of time. I think you hit the nail on the head with the following:
"GM has been very smart in how they've handled the situation, but I don't think they were smart enough to have planned it. And in some ways that's for the best. I once heard the quote "When times are hard, we find out what we're truly made of". We've seen what GM is truly made of, and it's three things:
* Respect for consumers * The desire to not shy away from tough issues * An understanding of the way the blogosphere thinks"
Most astute. Thanks.
Jake
· 3 years ago
Thank you! I saw that many were commenting immediately, but it was nice to see a differing opinion on the subject in your blog.
I purposely let you take the heat (gee, thanks right?) while I sat back and watched how things played out.
Interestingly, I heard on Friday that on the other side of town the Tahoe factor is working overtime to keep up with demand...
Welcome to the site Dominic and Brett!
karl
· 3 years ago
I'm so glad you picked up on my point about conflict often contributing to deeper and often better relationships.
I thought GM handled it well, and they got a tonne of publicity, I mean it was even on nightline, in the NYT, on rocketboom, it was everywhere.
Mind you IMHO the one thing they have totally screwed themselves with is taking down all the content now the competition is over. Think about all those incoming links that they've squandered with a 404 page now.
My favorite, which was Brokeback Tahoe, no longer exists and I just get a 404 page. Surely GM could have garnered more opportunities to engage with customers if they'd left some of this stuff up.
I guess its the old marketing mentality of "big bang" and diminishing returns vs. the micromarketing concept of small investment in cultivating interest with increasing returns.
Interested in your thoughts on my piece on micromarketing vs. marketing: http://customersonfire.com/archive/marketing-vs-micromarketing-moving-from-mass-market-to-the-massive-market/
Cheers,
Karl
Jake
· 3 years ago
I have a feeling that the forward looking marketing team had freaked out upper managment calling them on the carpet to answer for their "mistakes". Old school thinking trumped new school success, and the process ended (content removed, no further content expansion, etc.)
Sad to lose so much after having achieved so much.
All Comments
Maybe GM will even take it to heart enough to make changes that will convert some of the anti-GM folks.
Think of the campaign GM could tout, if they could show the negatives, and then show how they improved based on the feedback they received. They could show that they actually 'listened' to their critics!
All in all it goes back to the concept that you always get some good with some bad and vice versa.
A professional can handle both, and seek out the nuggets of gold via truths and insights from both.
It is great to see you analyze this with the benefit of time. I think you hit the nail on the head with the following:
"GM has been very smart in how they've handled the situation, but I don't think they were smart enough to have planned it. And in some ways that's for the best. I once heard the quote "When times are hard, we find out what we're truly made of". We've seen what GM is truly made of, and it's three things:
* Respect for consumers
* The desire to not shy away from tough issues
* An understanding of the way the blogosphere thinks"
Most astute. Thanks.
I purposely let you take the heat (gee, thanks right?) while I sat back and watched how things played out.
Interestingly, I heard on Friday that on the other side of town the Tahoe factor is working overtime to keep up with demand...
Welcome to the site Dominic and Brett!
I thought GM handled it well, and they got a tonne of publicity, I mean it was even on nightline, in the NYT, on rocketboom, it was everywhere.
Mind you IMHO the one thing they have totally screwed themselves with is taking down all the content now the competition is over. Think about all those incoming links that they've squandered with a 404 page now.
My favorite, which was Brokeback Tahoe, no longer exists and I just get a 404 page. Surely GM could have garnered more opportunities to engage with customers if they'd left some of this stuff up.
I guess its the old marketing mentality of "big bang" and diminishing returns vs. the micromarketing concept of small investment in cultivating interest with increasing returns.
Interested in your thoughts on my piece on micromarketing vs. marketing:
http://customersonfire.com/archive/marketing-vs-micromarketing-moving-from-mass-market-to-the-massive-market/
Cheers,
Karl
Sad to lose so much after having achieved so much.