Editor's note: This article is the author of the New York Times bestseller, "Spreading: How pop is produced (contagious:why things Catch on)," Jonah Berger, a marketing professor at the Wharton School of Business.
Why do some companies, products and services get more verbal publicity than others? Is it luck? No, there is a science in it. Social networking gurus have always instilled in us a sense that boring products or ideas are not discussed. So you might think that more interesting products and brands are discussed more. Novelty is mentioned more than ordinary.
The survival of startups depends on Word-of-mouth. Whether it's a new website, a revolutionary recruiting service, or business-to-business, consumer awareness starts off low. No one is aware of your existence, so you must have someone to help you advertise. But most startups don't have high advertising budgets. They have to grow organically: get existing customers or fans to help recruit new ones-one at a time.
So why are some companies, products, and ideas more discussed than others? People often think that the difficulty of Word-of-mouth marketing is like taking a bottle to catch lightning. Have luck. The market must be just right. Or you need 3 or 4 indescribable combinations of qualities to create magic through some unexplained means.
This is a great theory. Except one thing is completely wrong.
There is a scientific mystery behind word of mouth. Why do people talk about something more than others? This is neither random nor unlucky. As behavioural economists have studied why people make specific choices, or statisticians dissect human behavior from "Big data", researchers have been trying to analyze the human behavior behind what we decide to discuss or analyze.
For example, in a recent survey, I and my colleagues studied almost 10000 products and brands of Word-of-mouth data, large to Coca-Cola, Wal-Mart and other giants, small to a variety of start-up companies. The scope covers everything from technology companies to services, from business-to-business to consumer-packaged goods. We also analyzed the viral spread of almost 7000 online content on another project. There are both political and international news, including interesting content, sports, fashion and so on.
But these studies are not just about documenting which products are being talked about most, or what type of online content is getting viral. But to understand the motives behind these results: the underlying human behavior that prompts something/something to be discussed more or spread viral, and how different emotions (sadness and anger) determine what people want to share, and whether online and offline communication can affect the content of the discussion on the brand. How does it affect? The psychology of discussion, the science of social transmission, etc.
Take the cause of promotion (triggers). Disney is more interesting than Cheerios. This is indeed a fascinating emotional experience. But the problem is that everyone is not triggered to think about it frequently. Of course, after a visit to a Disney theme park, everyone talks about a lot of Disney things, but unless they are reminded of the experience in the next few weeks or months, they won't keep mentioning Disney.
Cheerios is not that interesting, but everyone has to eat breakfast every day, 1 years and 365 days to eat. Even if they don't buy a Cheerios, they will see it every week as they push the cart through the cereal aisle. This makes Cheerios more likely to be remembered for the first time, adding to the probability that it is mentioned. A product or idea may indeed be very interesting, but if you are not triggered to think of it, it will never be mentioned. Remembering (Top-of-mind) means saying something (tip-of-tongue).
This is just one of the key drivers of word of mouth that I and my colleagues found in the study. In my research, I've repeatedly found that 6 of the same principles motivate people to discuss and share things. These 6 principles can be referred to as Stepps: Social currency (Social Currency), promotion (triggers), emotion (emotion), public, real value (practical value), and stories (Stories).
Social currency (Social Currency). Like the clothes we drive, what we say affects how others see us. So the more that something makes someone look good, the more it gets passed on.
(triggers). If something is always remembered at the first time, it is often mentioned. Just as peanut butter reminds us of jelly, the more times we are triggered to think about a product or idea, the more we will discuss it.
Emotions (emotion). We share when we care. Whether it's positive (excitement or humor) or negative (anger or anxiety), a high arousal mood prompts us to share.
public. People tend to imitate others. But as the old saying goes, the easier it is to see what someone is doing, the easier it is to imitate it. Public observable can drive imitation (such as the IPod's white headset).
The actual value (practical value). We are not only looking for good looks, but also hope to help others. So the more useful things are shared, the more. For example, 10 ways of financing or 5 big negotiation skills such articles must be eye-eye.
Story (Stories). No one wants to be seen as a live advertisement, but if something is part of a broader story they will be willing to talk about it. So make a "Trojan horse" story to convey your brand information.
These 6 principles form the formula for winning more Word-of-mouth. This is a recipe for making infectious content and getting more people to discuss products or ideas.
Is this formula guaranteed to win viral transmission? No. But it can improve the average success rate. No one can hit the home run every time, but after understanding the science of making a splash, we can improve the success rate by hitting more first base hits, second base hits and even home runs.
This is also true of word-of-mouth communication. Understanding why people talk and share the science behind them, business organizations can make their products and ideas a better word of mouth, and help these products and ideas become popular.
(Responsible editor: The good of the Legacy)