Communities Not Demographics
Tech | 1 comment | March 24th, 2009
For years companies have created customer bundles based on age, ethnicity and gender on the assumption that if a group of people share some physical attribute, they must all think and behave similarly. In the distant past, maybe that made some sense. Today it doesn’t.
This is not to say that groups of people cannot think and behave similarly. A group of people that share a common interest or objective is called a community, not a demographic segment.
There are many distinctions between a community and a demographic segment. Let’s look at a few and consider why the continued use of demographics makes less and less sense in today’s connected society.
Interests vs. Attributes
By definition, a community is created based on shared interests. If a company can identify a community whose shared interest is relevant to the company’s objectives, you have a nice hand in glove fit. Here is a self-defined group of people that are already talking about something the company wants to learn about.
On the other hand, a demographic segment based on attributes, is just a random heap of people that will have a variety of opinions on any given topic.
Many vs. Single
By definition, individuals can only be associated with a single demographic group at a time. It is kind of hard to be “35 – 44″ and “45-64″ at the same time. The problem with this is that if your interests and opinions differ from the majority of your “Group”, then you have essentially no input.
An individual’s opinion can be represented many times by being affiliated with multiple communities.
Choice vs. Defined
People choose to be a member of a community or not. It is their choice to engage and be heard, or not.
As a demographic statistic, you are defined by a characteristic that has nothing to do with your thoughts or opinions, and you have no option but to be affiliated with a specific group.
Engage vs. Research
Companies are looking for information from groups. Gathering information from a community is a rather straight-forward, and cost-effective process. Simply join in the conversation the community is already having. A company can just listen, and obtain significant understanding. Actively engaging in the community conversation yields even more benefits.
Getting information from a demographic group is a tedious and expensive process; focus groups, surveys, etc. Once you gather the data and process the information, you only have a snapshot in time, that is probably already out of date. To maintain current data, the process needs to be repeated over and over again.
Emergent vs. Stable
Communities are emergent, meaning that they form spontaneously as necessary, and disappear as the need diminishes. This means that when you find a community, it is by definition active, full of energy and ideas.
Demographics are nice and stable. Men are men, women are women, a nice straight-forward way to collect data. IMHO this leads to a false sense of security about the information you collect, because there is an underlying premise that stability connotes meaning, and therefore is good.
Current vs. Unknown
Because of their emergent nature, communities inherently deal with what is current. Discussions are about current events; conversations address current issues.
A demographic group has no center, so there is no focus of discussion, or even a discussion for that matter. The group only exists in the data tables of the demographic researchers. The only conversation among the “group” is one that is forced and artificial, in settings like focus groups. So what do you really know?
Conclusion
This all reminds me about the old joke that asks why do dogs lick their (well you know) …because they can. Why do companies collect demographic data … because they can, not because it provides the best insight. I believe that all the nice structured data collected in demographic research provides a false sense of security to company decision makers, and ultimately does a disservice to the company’s stakeholders.
Engaging with communities is new, it feels soft, non-analytic and not very comfortable to company decision makers, but in the long run it will lead to better decisions and yield better results than over-reliance on demographics.
Renee | March 25th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Thank you for this post. This quote is the best part of the whole post:
“The problem with this is that if your interests and opinions differ from the majority of your “Group”, then you have essentially no input.”
I have been waiting for marketers to realize that demographics absolutely do not define all of who we are or what we like. As a young black female who does not particularly like rap/hip hop music or “urban” themed films, marketing to me based on my demographic is going to have no effect. In fact, it’s likely to have a negative effect because I might feel stereotyped, as what I actually like does not correspond to what marketers think my demographic is “supposed” to like.