Permission, not manipulation

It’s all about the relationship

I came across a blog post a little while ago, that uses the Trojan Horse as a metaphor for marketing. That metaphor annoyed me, because there’s a significant difference between permission marketing and taking advantage of reciprocity.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with the story of the Trojan Horse, it is told that during one of the many wars between city states in ancient Greece, the Trojans hit upon an idea for taking a walled city without the huge losses that come with assaulting a fortified position. They constructed a huge statue of a horse that was hollow, and had warriors concealed inside. The statue was left before the city gates, looking like tribute from an army conceding the fight, and brought inside the walls by the jubilant city. After night fell and everyone was asleep, the warriors inside the horse climbed out, opened the gates of the city for their comrades, and the city fell.

The metaphor was that this is how you gain attention and customers — you offer them a gift, and by virtue of that gift, you get to make a bigger pitch, sell them something, or whatever it is you’re trying to do. Like the Trojan Horse, you’ve gotten inside the walls that usually keep marketers out.

The problem with the metaphor, though, is that the Trojans built the horse and carried out the ruse in order to capture and rule the city, it was an act of aggression for their own benefit, not for that of the city. Too many marketers don’t seem to understand that crucial difference — giving a gift as a manipulation tactic to aggressively close a sale, or giving a gift as proof of value as a basis for building a long term relationship.

Someone doing permission marketing (or building one’s audience, in the case of an author such as me) is working to build trust and relationship. I (and many others working this way)give products away because I am trying to show you that I can deliver value, so that you willingly and happily spend your money on my books (or other products or services), because you are confident that you will receive more value in return. Thus you, the customer gives us permission to market to you, by giving your email, or other contact details. Good permission marketers always respect that permission.

Someone taking advantage of reciprocity is the person who hands you a free pen, then expects you to stop and listen to them. It’s the sales person who comes in with cheap swag and a high pressure sales pitch, with no intention of maintaining a relationship with you, the customer, but is just intent on today’s sale. Reciprocity, that is, returning favors, is deeply hard-wired into human psychology, because for most of human history, we’ve lived in groups and needed to cooperate; giving and returning favors are fundamental to that cooperation. We don’t do it so much now, living in a money society, but it’s still a part of our deeper psychology.

One is taking advantage of a fundamental human impulse to make a sale. The other is offering an invitation to a long term relationship that will benefit both parties.

It’s much like dating. On a bad date, the guy approaches it like it’s reciprocity, like a salesman handing you cheap swag — I bought you dinner (or whatever) therefore you owe me your attention, or worse yet, you owe me sex. Those guys are usually dismayed and offended when the woman in question tells him she doesn’t owe him anything.

On a good date, the guy approaches it like permission marketing, like an indie publisher (such as me, or many others) giving the first book in a series away for free, to start a relationship and show proof of their quality. In the case of the writer/publisher, its to prove to the reader that they can produce good writing that’s engaging and entertaining. In the case of the date, it’s to prove his ability to have an interesting and engaging conversation, and his ability to be a decent human being.

Going back to the Trojan horse analogy, there’s also a fundamental difference between conquering soldiers using a ruse to get into the city, and a merchant train coming to sell a load of supplies from a distant place. They are both welcomed into the city, but the one is using deception, and leaves the city devastated, the other is clear about their intentions, and leaves the city better off than when they arrived.

I’d say that’s a significant difference.