An absolutely critical element of successful predictive marketing is determining the contextual relevance of a discussion or other content. The sheer volume of data available online is overwhelming. In addition, a great majority of that data that can be collected is not relevant from a marketing perspective. Estimates are that less than 5% of consumer-generated content is relevant to marketers.
Keyword searches taken out of context can be extremely misleading. Following is a very simple example of how words removed from their contextual relevance can skew research results:
The Correct Interpretation |
The Wrong Interpretation |
| “I need a great deal on a laptop, but that laptop you recommended was a great deal of money.” |
“I need a great deal on a laptop, but that laptop you recommended was a great deal of money.” |
| “BrandX drug I’ve been researching looks promising for temporary relief, but I just don’t know.” |
“BrandX drug I’ve been researching looks promising for temporary relief, but I just don’t know.” |
| “That car was a booming ride, it was really bad, I’m telling you, I loved it ” |
“That car was a booming ride, it was really bad, I’m telling you, I loved it!” |
Additional contextual factors revolve around assessing the types of respondents and their vested interest (or animosity) on a subject. In the online world, a strong positive reaction to a given event or product by a larger group does not necessarily translate into sales. Nor does a strong negative reaction necessarily translate into failure.
Additional contextual factors revolve around assessing the types of respondents and their vested interest (or animosity) on a subject. In the online world, a strong positive reaction to a given event or product by a larger group does not necessarily translate into sales. Nor does a strong negative reaction necessarily translate into failure.
Example:
When Snakes on a Plane was released online consumer anticipation scored extremely high. Despite all the positive dialogue surrounding the film’s release, it proved to be a disappointment at the box office. The reason for the disparity was the fact that the discussions were not contextually relevant.
|
 |
|
