Recently Peppers and Rogers (insight@peppersandrogersgroup.com) weighed in on the Advertising Research Foundations’ (ARF) definition of customer engagement. Apparently the ARF definition is “Engagement is turning on a prospect to a brand idea enhanced by the surrounding context.”

   I agree with Peppers and Rogers. What does this mean? How does this definition clarify anything? Furthermore, how does it help anyone enhance the level of engagement?
  
   Peppers and Rogers offer up this alternative: “Engagement is a series of customized informational and financial transactions that 1) occur over time and 2) increase both the customer value to the company and the value of the company to the customer…”
  
   I like 2) but the rest seems very general.
  
   Am I engaged when I walk into a coffee house and pay for cup of joe? As my lawyer and accountant are fond of saying, “it depends.” In my book, if the event or things surrounding it did not cause an emotional response or did not get me mentally involved, the answer is no. I completed a financial transaction to which I was indifferent. Sure, I wanted the coffee and made an economic exchange to get it. There is nothing here that will contribute to a propensity for repeat business.
  
   If I got emotionally involved, that’s a good thing from the coffee purveyor’s perspective. The event had some meaning to for me the customer. If it was a positive emotional experience, that’s also a good thing and will increase the likelihood of repeat business. The emotional trigger could be a genuine smile by the barista, which is likely to cause a reciprocal smile and the corresponding shift in brain chemistry. Positive emotions could have also been triggered by my anticipation of the first sip or the aroma in the shop or both.
  
   Alternately, the experience might have elicited a negative emotional reaction. I might have entered the coffee house subliminally riled up because of a recent phone call. In this state I might have more easily become annoyed when I discover the cream container was empty. Or, the barista might have served up a lukewarm latte. Negative emotions stimulate avoidance behavior and therefore are not a good thing. However, negative emotions, when expressed, signal that the situation mattered to the customer and therefore gives the vendor a chance to improve the customer experience.
  
   Mental involvement, getting the customer to exert mental effort, like emotions, is a double-edged sword. Suppose I want to buy some beans. If I am outside my psychological comfort zone, being confronted with a confusing array of choices is not a good thing. However, if I am in my psychological comfort zone, choice can be intriguing and the opportunity to learn and learning lead to an emotionally gratifying experience, a very good thing. In fact, when it comes to contributing to future desire, I would argue that gratifying experiences trump sensory pleasures. Increased desire, I believe is the whole point of a focus on customer engagement and desire is emotional.
  
   It is not about repeating a financial transaction over and over again. When a customer’s desire increases, the value of the vendor to the customer goes up. So does the value of the customer to the vendor.
  
   For more on the Psychology of the customer experience, check out my forthcoming book Addicted Customers: How to Get Them Hooked on Your Company. (www.AddictedCustomers.com).

Posted by John Todor on Thursday, July 13th, 2006 at 7:01 am.