This question came to mind today when I saw an article on MobileMarketer.com regarding the success of Coca-Cola’s MyCokeRewards program, specifically the mobile component. Opt-ins are apparently increasing 5-10 percent monthly, helping grow the available ways Coke can market it’s popular loyalty program. The article, citing research into mobile marketing, holds up Coca-Cola as a shining example, or “best in class” employer, of mobile marketing.
To me it’s a question of relevance to the many lesser known brands that may be interested in exploring how mobile can help maintain and grow their businesses. Firstly, Coke adopted mobile after experiencing quite a bit of success with its loyalty program via web, email and other media, and so had a ready-base of registered participants to rather easily obtain mobile opt-in status. Secondly, as arguably the world’s strongest brand, you would expect Coke to achieve this level of mobile success with a product geared toward youthful consumers.
I think the lesson for brands competing for mindshare with large established players is that mobile is a tactic – albeit an important one – that should be considered part of a broader program to engage with consumers on the go. In other words, let the goal (customer loyalty) dictate the tactics (mobile), not the other way around.
There is an element of “guerilla marketing” involved with mobile today, given the low cost of entry and ease by which marketers can get started. I would suggest lesser-known brands avoid this low value approach and consider how best to develop an interaction strategy around customers, and use knowledge capture as the foundation for evolving such a strategy.
