单词请赐教

clearwater wrote:

文章介绍了星巴克采用了go-slow（循序渐进）的手法，让广大顾客逐渐接触其移动支付模式。

clearwater wrote:

谢谢Steven！
在您和Phil的基础上，我再试一下：
托德•阿布洛威茨（Todd Ablowitz）是咨询公司双钻集团（Double Diamond Group）的总裁，也是名支付顾问。他说：“与员工一样，消费者每次只能接受一次循序渐进的变化，更多的变化就接受不了。人们没法同时适应两种变化。要是你一下子将太多东西强加给顾客头上，对方就接受不了。如果你给消费者更多的时间，消费者会给你更多的回报，前提是你所给的是他们看重的东西。”

clearwater wrote:

托德•阿布洛威茨（Todd Ablowitz）是咨询公司双钻集团（Double Diamond Group）的总裁，也是名支付顾问。他说：“与员工一样，消费者每次只能接受一次循序渐进的变化，更多的变化就接受不了。人们没法同时适应两种变化。要是你一下子将太多东西强加给顾客头上，对方就接受不了。如果你给消费者更多的时间，消费者会给你更多的回报，前提是你所给的是他们看重的东西。”

Page 1

Computerworld - Business would be so much easier if we didn't have to deal with human beings, with all their fears, hesitations and general avoidance of anything new. Human beings have a tendency to resist all your great ideas to make things better, be they your employees saying no to your aggressive cloud program or your customers ignoring your attempts to move them to mobile payment or biometric identification. And it can seem that the harder you push, the more they resist.

Maybe the answer is to stop trying so hard. Maybe the model you should emulate is the go-slow -- you might even say decaffeinated -- approach taken by Starbucks. The coffee purveyor seems to have some insight into how humans think.

Starbucks is considered the most successful U.S. retailer when it comes to handling mobile payments and, for that matter, mobile anything. So what makes it so different from everyone else? Pretty much everything. Most retailers interested in moving their customers to mobile payment would have seen the 2013 holiday shopping season as an opportunity to push their mobile app and encourage their shoppers to load dollars onto the mobile apps of their intended gift recipients. Not Starbucks, though. Although it is very interested in moving customers to mobile payment, it chose to not push mobile at all during the holidays. Instead, it encouraged the purchase of old-fashioned, plastic Starbucks cards, the kind that fit neatly into holiday stockings. But wait; how is that a mobile-payment strategy? Ah, well, as soon as January rolled around, Starbucks launched a massive campaign to encourage people to take those plastic cards and use them to pour digital dollars into a Starbucks app. How did things work out? For starters, Starbucks sold a lot of Starbucks cards. On just one day (Dec. 19), the chain saw 2.4 million new card activations. In the fourth quarter, sales of cards totaled $160 million, "a significant increase over last year," said Starbucks spokesperson Linda Mills, who declined to give an actual percentage. She added that while Dec. 19 is now the title holder for new card sales, two other days (Dec. 23 and Dec. 24) also broke company records.

And what about the conversion of all those Starbucks cards to smartphone payment apps? It's still early in the month, so Starbucks isn't saying. But this isn't the first year that Starbucks has pursued this strategy, and the company will say that January is typically its No. 1 month for mobile conversions. And as I said earlier, Starbucks is generally thought to be the mobile-payment king of American retail.

page 2

So just how did Starbucks come to be so far ahead of everyone else on mobile payment? Part of the answer is luck. Many years ago, it decided to get its customers to migrate from paying with credit cards and instead to use those stored-value cards. It was a pretty easy transition, from one plastic card to another. Starbucks had no intent at the time for that to be the first step in a mobile-payment strategy, but that's what it has turned out to be. Now, years later, it is just much easier to move customers to mobile because they have already gotten used to pulling out a Starbucks-only payment "device." They only had to master one new behavior (going from using a Starbucks card to using the Starbucks app) rather than two (stop using a credit card to do something retailer-specific, and that retail-specific thing is on the customer's smartphone, not a bit of plastic in his wallet) that other retailers were faced with.

What Starbucks has figured out is the power of going slow when trying to move people into uncomfortable tech arenas. It pushed the non-threatening plastic, with great success. Once it had sold millions, then, and only then, did it make any aggressive push for mobile. Yes, Starbucks' ultimate goal was to get its customers to load the mobile app, but it moved far more dollars to its counters by taking it slow. The drip-drip of the best coffeemakers also works well for making converts comfortable.

And you want your customers to be comfortable with what you're getting them to do. Your employees too. Everyone is more comfortable with evolution than revolution.

Starbucks' mobile app is itself an example of the evolutionary, go-slow approach. It isn't fancy -- or frightening. The company didn't adopt NFC or leverage Bluetooth. Instead, it simply takes a picture of the barcode on the back of a Starbucks cards and places that image in the app. Not only does this make the transition another exercise in gradualness, but it is also remarkably inexpensive for IT, since the very same scanning equipment that works on the plastic cards also works on the phones. (Over the years, upgraded scanners have made the system more phone-friendly, but those upgrades are the same sort of equipment that other retailers have deployed.)

What are the implications for your own technology transitions? Many. Repeatedly, companies push new technology on its employees and customers by touting the benefits, but rarely do they factor in the change in behavior the move entails. When Wal-Mart pushed RFID on its suppliers, demanding that they place an RFID chip in every product shipped, it was caught off guard by nearly universal resistance. It was true that the chip would ultimately benefit both parties, but that would come only after years of labor-intensive changes made at a huge cost.

page 3

The rush to get to the ultimate goal has doomed far too many technology rollouts. But speed has the unfortunate side effect of making a risky behavior change seem even scarier. Taking baby steps may mean a rollout takes years longer, but if its acceptance is sharply increased, doesn't that increase its effectiveness? I think it does, especially when the alternative is a simple refusal to budge.

"Consumers, like employees, can only handle one adjacency at a time. No more. I can't learn two things at once," says Todd Ablowitz, a payments consultant who is president of Double Diamond Group. "If you give people too much too soon, they can't handle it. The consumer will give you more if you give them more time, provided you're giving them something that they value."

******

Phil Hand wrote:

http://www.strategy-business.com/blog/How-IKEA-Disney-and-Berkshire-Hathaway-Succeed-with-Adjacencies?gko=fa07c

IKEA identifies itself with a mission to provide well-designed products at a lower price than anyone else can offer. And now it’s selling televisions. Is this the typical adjacencies thinking? “Hey, if our customers are buying furniture, they might also be in the market for TVs.

http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/the-paradox-of-adjacency-expansion.aspx
Selling highly related products to customers you know well is one of the most successful adjacency moves.

Consider Olam International, launched in 1989 as an exporter of Nigerian cashews...Through repeated adjacency moves into other producing countries such as Ghana and Cameroon, Olam rapidly became a leading supplier of cocoa beans and products.

http://marakon.com/images/uploads/documents/Marakon-Commentary-Entry-Into-Adjacent-Businesses_vf.pdf
Adjacencies are new business areas that most often build from a company’s established assets.

Consumers, like employees, can only handle {one adjacency} at a time. No more. I can't learn two things at once,
消费者与员工一样，只能接受品牌一时做一种延伸，不能更多，他们不能同时消化两种新概念。

[Edited at 2014-06-26 02:57 GMT]

David Lin wrote:已经解释清楚了



adjacency ＝ 一个品牌／行业的相关（附属）产品 （是市场学用语）。

好像清洁服务行业也可以同时售卖地板垫、抹窗服务、办公室／家庭空气清新用品等相关产品。同 “循序渐进” 没有直接关系，因为 “循序渐进” 只是公司企业用来进入 “相关产品” 市场的手段。 “相关产品” 是其目的。

正如 QHE 在 page 1-3 的原文描述。

老练的市场学专家 marketing 都晓得不能一下子推出太多相关产品给现有的消费者，不然会引起反作用，因为一些现有顾客可能已经购买其他公司的产品，产生了忠诚感，不会轻易改变购买态度。所以原文说要采取 go-slow 方式来进入相关产品市场，给人们有时间去适应改变所带来的影响。

对顾客考虑的问题也适用于公司自己的员工，例如推销员。因为大家都是人，对于新事物的改变，存在相同心理因素。

正所谓，欲速则不达。

Phil 的理解其实已经很正确。

The janitorial service business is not glamorous. These companies send crews to clean commercial buildings. I spoke to one a while ago. He was an entrepreneur with a franchise. He asked me about adjacencies and what I meant by that after hearing me speak.

“They are businesses right next to yours. Your customers buy things from other business right now.”

“What do you mean right next to?” he asked.

I said, “The same people you call on for cleaning services could be buying floor mats and runners, plant care services, recycling services, window washing services, safety products, air filtration products, etc. If you figure out a better way to supply these things you not only acquire some of the business but you can leverage the expense of sending out a crew and increase the ROI of your company.”

http://www.growthwizards.com/the-most-powerful-strategy-adjacencies/

QHE wrote:

Read: Page 1 → Page 2→ Page 3


Evan Schuman: Starbucks and the art of persuasion

By Evan Schuman January 14, 2014 08:35 AM ET







http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9245392/Evan_Schuman_Starbucks_and_the_art_of_persuasion?taxonomyId=240&pageNumber=1


[Edited at 2014-06-27 00:38 GMT]

clearwater wrote:

谢谢QHE帮着理清脉络！