Informing or Evangelizing: Turn Down the Volume.

We often talk about brand, products, and services evangelizers and tout evangelizing  as a great way to build brand. But can it backfire on us? Can evangelizing equate to false prophets in the minds of those touched by evangelizers?

I ask these questions because many of us consultants work daily to put in place processes that result in evangelizing our client's brand, products, services and value propositions. We might need to take a step back and ask ourselves if we sometimes do more harm than good.

Recently, I was asked to conduct a workshop called "Old Media vs. New Media." The immediate feedback from attendees was that we achieved success. However, the workshop surveys showed a somewhat different general response. One person struck a high chord. He equated what was being said as social media evangelizing, not as a forum for information, which was the workshop's purpose. And for him, and several others, evangelizing leads to skepticism. Having never thought about that previously, I now have cause to wonder if evangelizing leads us where we want to go.

Now, let it be said, I was passionate in the workshop. Any speaker should be, no matter the subject matter. However, I also made it very clear that social media needed to be approached with caution by businesses and that social media does not represent anything more than new tools that allow some different approaches to engaging customers. To at least a few, that message was lost. Not surprising. Our experiences result in our perceptions of what we hear, read and watch.

Knowing that, we must be careful in evangelizing and in creating brand evangelists. In fact, I believe evangelizing is not what we should be seeking. All of us know that the word itself carries baggage, as many people see evangelists as blinded to reality by their beliefs. The last thing we should want for our clients are company and consumer spokespersons who create that perception, which results in three groups of people carrying three perceptions of our clients:

1. Those who believe our clients are great.
2. Those who are unmoved by our clients and the evangelists.
3. And those who are pushed to lash back at our clients because of the evangelism.

To some extent, groups 1 and 3 cancel each other out. Not a good business result.

To avoid that, we marketers and brand consultants should first rid our vocabulary of the words evangelizing and evangelists, and replace them with an older phrase: word of mouth marketing. Then, instead of producing strategies and tactics to create brand evangelists, the strategies and tactics should be lowered in volume with the goal to create realistic and believable company and consumer spokespersons who see the good and the bad in what we and our clients do.

The results: Instead of evangelists, we will have loyal customers, who when asked or offered an opportunity to comment on a brand, product or service will appear as a trustworthy and credible admirer of the business we represent or of our business. In other words, let's inform, not evangelize. Let's turn down the volume just a notch.

Comments

[John Maver]

When did evangelizing for products come to be a viable term? We used to have spokesmen or spokeswomen or even continuing characters. Today we have lots of “endorsers”. Look at all the star athletes. They get paid to promote the product.

But evangelists?? I don’t think so.

As for consultants, if we do what we say we will do and do it well, there is no reason why we shouldn’t tell people the truth about the product. There is no faster way to destroy a poor product then to promote it. So if it is good it will stand up for itself.

In the terms you described I do a lot of word of mouth advertising. I recommend many items to friends and I ask them for their recommendations in return. Check out the recommendations that I made for people and businesses I admire and respect on LinkedIn. Some even returned the favor. I consider this to be spreading the good word.

Lewis, you in particular are one who’s opinion I value but I wouldn’t consider you to be an evangelist for goodness. Well maybe in that case you are.

I am in agreement that the words be banished and saved for the fanatics on street corners. After all we marketing people are only there for the good of the product, right??

John

[Lewis Green]

John,

I honor and appreciate your loyalty to my blog. And that’s what I’m talking about. We don’t need blog evangelists; we need loyal blog readers. And the same can be said for our brands, products and services. Loyal consumers will spread the news the old-fashioned way, like you, by sharing tips and recommendations.

Lewis

[Karen Hegmann]

Lewis

I agree that we should turn down the terminology just a notch. In my experience, words like "evangelizing" are understood by most readers of Fast Company, but use this term in a more corporate environment and (unfortunately) you're more than likely to get a few funny looks.

Marketing by nature is hype, but I think after a while it helps to get back to its grass roots to see why and how people react to things.

In a world already overloaded with experts and marketing gurus, could we not make a case to just "keep it simple?"

[Lewis Green]

Karen,

Keep it simple, don’t create hype and perhaps we marketers and communicators may discover that readers and clients trust us a bit more than they do today. Thanks Karen. As always, you offer smart advice.

Lewis

[Bobbi Simmons]

According to dictionary.com, the first five out of six meanings for evangelist relate to religion. It's simply a misplaced term in marketing.

Enthusiasm, or being an enthusiast, on the other hand, can connote understanding and appreciation for a product or service. In this day of an overwhelming quantity of messages, I want enthusiasts for my brand because their support is based in experience and reality -- and that's compelling.

The right word, rightly spoken, conveys facts accurately.

Bobbi Simmons, APR -- and English major

[Lewis Green]

Bobbi,

Agreed! We often take words out of context to make a point and end up distorting the message.

Lewis

[Chris Kieff]

Lewis,

Two points:

#1 This post makes me think of my own promotion techniques. I'm passionate about things I believe in and I promote them relentlessly. Don't go to lunch with me, or meet me at a party because I'll find a way to talk about what I want you to hear. But I know that at times I'm over the top and need tone down my rhetoric. This post will help me to do so.

#2 Vernacular, or colloquialisms allow the "in" crowd to feel the emotional attachment to others who are also "in". It also allows them to feel to superior to those who don't understand what they are talking about. These social structures are necessary and inevitable in a crowded modern western style civilization for the individual to feel they are unique.

In conclusion, I agree that we should temper our evangelism but not with banning the new definition of the term. Language is living and we can't put that gene back into the bottle.

Thanks for making me think,
Chris

[Lewis Green]

Chris,

And now you’ve made me think. My point wasn’t really to banning the word as we use it in our communities. Although when we blog in public forums (as opposed to presenting to an audience whose make up we know well), we probably should find a better word. My point, as you understand it in your #1, was one I made because my presentation seemed over the top to at least one attendee. I, too, need to be aware of my style.

Lewis

[Mark Logan]

Guy Kawasaki at Apple was the first person I recall using the word evangelism in a marketing context. Personally, I think it's a perfectly fine and intentional adaptation of the term. It connotes a deeply held belief and a passion that transcends mere advocacy or enthusiasm. It also connotes an intent to pass on that passion to others.

When I joined my current agency, Interactive was a separate department. We have since integrated Interactive into the core agency. In the process, I told people who were skeptical or afraid about the transition that there were two models of managing specialized knowledge -- priesthood and evangelism.

In the priesthood model, supplicants kneel before the altar and receive the good word from a sacred figure. In the evangelical model, everyone is encouraged to spread the word and in turn encourage others to spread the word. So, I encouraged all of the Interactive specialists to become evangelists, to spread interactive thinking and passion for interactive media throughout the agency.

Some people are more effective at evangelizing than others. Good evangelists listen as much as they speak and can temper their tone to suit the circumstances without diminishing their passion or convictions.

[Lewis Green]

Mark,

Thank you for sharing. I agree we should listen, but when we are listening, we are not evangelizing. We can’t redefine words to fit our wishes, and evangelism is spreading the word. To do that, we talk, not listen. That said, I have no interest in semantics and believe that when the use of a word is effective use it; when it isn’t effective, stop using it.

My point was only that the perception of at least one member of an audience felt I was evangelizing, and that is a bad result. That wasn’t the first time that I’ve heard or read folks who thought that a speaker or a writer was evangelizing as a result of their passion. And that is not a result we seek.

One of the challenges you face by using a word such as evangelism is that its meaning carries a religious connotation and everyone knows that, leaving those who use the word a need to redefine it. That doesn’t seem like an efficient use of a word.

Lewis

[Rahna Barthelmess]

This is a related comment I posted on my blog at
http://beacon-marketing.com/rahna/

“A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”

To me, it’s just semantics, whether you call them evangelists, ambassadors, junkies, or enthusiasts. No one seems to have difficulty with the term “fans.” How is that any different? “Fans” come from the term “fanatic,” which certainly connotes someone a little “over the edge.” Go talk to a Chicago Cubs “fan” if you want to talk to someone “blinded to reality by their beliefs.”

Regardless of what you call them, they are all people who are advocates for your brands–people who believe in what you have to provide and so will tell the rest of the world. Any marketer worth his salt should want to provide this. If you are in business, you should be providing such a service that everyone thinks you’re fabulous.

Over-deliver.

Exceed their expectations, and you will build loyalty beyond belief. People should be delighted with your product or service experience. This is the pinnacle of marketing—of any business. Creating passion for your product or service is the most cost effective way to go to market because:

-You don’t have to pay for someone else to talk about how great you brand is.

- It is authentic. People will believe someone else telling them how great a product or service is, much more so than you telling some one great your product or service is.

In the article, he talked about “Turning Down the Volume” and using the older phrase “word of mouth marketing”. The problem I have with that phrase is that it doesn’t connote the passion that “evangelism” evokes. Now nobody wants to hear from someone who is “blinded” to anything. I understand the negatives associated with the word, but it is used precisely because it connotes such strong feelings. Everyone should be looking for a way to provide a product or brand experience that delights the consumer such that they would tell someone else how fantastic it is.

Rather than worry about the semantics, worry about what you are creating. Does anyone talk about your brand? Great! If not, get to work! There is tremendous opportunity to do this in today’s media market. If you can find a way to get people talking about your brand, you’ve done something right.

Delight your customers and you will create evangelists/fanatics/ambassadors/advocate/enthusiast/junkies.

Most importantly, you will have created revenue. And THAT smells very sweet!