|
|
It may happen that some cohesive groups decide to unofficially adopt the same products. For example, art students are adopting the Mac en masse, while technology students are installing Ubuntu. Here is the side of the coin that can be considered the negative aspect of homophily. While similarity helps you focus your efforts on a group of customers with whom you have an inherent level of familiarity, it also allows you to exclude those groups of customers who have backgrounds and experiences that diverge from yours. If homophily is not taken into account, content with a strong appeal to the designated buyer personas could exclude large portions of customers.
Who were not part of the categories to be excluded. Let's take a trivial example. Anyone born before certainly remembers the Paninari , the individuals who were the protagonists of the social phenomenon born in the s, who were characterized by their obsession seo expater bangladesh ltd with a certain type of designer clothing and their assiduous frequenting of McDonald's fast food restaurants. McDonald's probably benefited from this phenomenon which also kept other young representatives of society who did not identify with that lifestyle or were not part of a certain social class away from its premises.
Fashions, as we know, are fleeting and McDonald's subsequently produced much more inclusive communication by focusing on the Italian aspects of the products and on reassurance regarding health issues. Some brands have based their marketing on "people like us", not adequately valuing the customers they were alienating in the process. In cases like this, the risk from a marketing point of view is that a product is so adopted by a group of individuals that offering it to other groups becomes almost impossible. Such an approach will not be as effective in the future and the trending formula is the one that contains the concept of inclusiveness.
|
|
發表於 17:25:51