Politics in America is hotting up and I’ve been curious to note that with all their charisma and pedigree the Clintons have started falling behind and even though Hillary did rally in New Hampshire primary they still trail Obama. Now I’m not into politics but what did interest me was what John Sviokla had to say on a new post in Harvard Business. He has identified that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama treat their supporters differently. Clinton considers her backers as “customers†while Obama sees his supporters as “membersâ€
For example, Sviokla points out that their two web sites differ radically. On Obama’s you received “points†for each activity you do such as creating a profile, making your profile public, logging in, or befriending a link and you can “climb†this social/political ranking by engaging more–hosting events, linking to others, raising money and many other forms of participation. To anyone in the MySpace/Facebook generation this type of functionality is expected. In contrast, joining the Clinton web site gives you an identification tag like TZ3QQ7, so that any donations can be tracked – sounds just like the old style “frequent purchaser†numbers that everyone from CVS to American Airlines uses.
What Barack’s online team understands is that creating connections is not just about money passing between hands, it’s how you relate to your customers on a peer-to-peer level. In an era where what you are selling (politics in this case but it could be anything!) is becoming less and less important, and “who you are” and how you connects with people and how they connect with you in return is increasingly becoming the differentiating factor Obama seems have the edge.
And the lesson here… is your company making the same mistake by not recognizing generational differents in your customers, and are you treating your customers as members of your social network?
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Dean, great posting and insight. Interestingly enough, I was in the USA for the 6 months preceding the 2004 election – Bush/Cheney vs Kerry/Edwards. I think this very same principle of connecting with his voters contributed a great deal to Bush’s vistory. Irrespective of his shortfalls, the people liked him because he was just like most of them – they too say stupid things occasionally and like to drink a few beers.
John Kerry was just too slick, professional and reserved and many people felt they couldnt relate to him. The voters want to know that if they bumped into their candidate on the street he could tell them what the football score was or that he was on his way to visit his mom.
What is interesting in a local context is seeing this principle once again proving its truth with the Jacob Zuma election. Irrespective too, of his shortfalls, his charisma and connection with the people have meant that he has beaten candidates who outrank him in most other areas. It shows that often people decide with their hearts, not their heads.
If people in all spheres can combine intelligence and wisdom with this connection, they are bound to world-changers, because they are able to both rally support as well as act wisely in their area of expertise.
Hi Nic
Thanks for taking the time to make such a great comment. You have painted a powerful picture using some great examples of the importance of connecting with people – politically or commercially – it’s not about what you do it’s about who you are and the connections you make with people.