part 14. the ONE thing nestle did right in give-me-a-name

there is one thing nestle did right in their give-me-a-name effort. it is right from the point of view of the brand but wrong from the point of view of the website visitors. it is something i missed myself as you can read in the beginning of the discussion on the effort, somewhere in the first three installments.

here it is -- the fact that votes by website visitors for their favorite entries will not determine the winner. first, note that the website nor the mechanics posted in the website do not categorically say the votes will not matter in determining the winner nor does it categorically say it will. i am concluding the votes will not matter because NOTHING ABOUT IT was mentioned in the mechanics. i am assuming that since it is not contained in the mechanics, then it will not matter.

it is good for the brand as it makes sure nestle has all the power to choose the winning entry using the criteria they have identified in the website and the mechanics. they are not duty bound to consider any of the votes cast.

as i had written earlier, the danger of allowing website visitors to vote is that consumers might choose the lousiest name or the most inappropriate name in the list. the voting mechanics in the website is very loose, any one email address can vote at least once a day. that means all you need to do is have multiple email addresses and get all those email addresses to vote everyday.

that was actually done by obviously the author of the entry that got the most number of votes "tropical burst". the author initially has around 20 to 30 email addresses and that allowed the entry to climb to the second most number of votes. but after awhile, the author realized it wasn't enough as the highest it reached was 2nd place. the author eventually opened 50+ more email addresses, for a total of what looks like 100 to 170 email addresses. in due time, towards the end of the effort, that entry got 1,000+ votes.

it's bad for the visitors to the website as they will eventually get disappointed and feel cheated by nestle when it announces the winner which is not necessarily the entry that got the highest number of votes. nestle can choose any name in the list, even any one of the entries that did not get a single vote in the website.

as mentioned previously, including a voting facility in the website and asking visitors to vote automatically created the impression that the highest number of votes will determine the winner. not only did the website ask visitors to vote, nestle posted the rankings or the number of votes each entry got. the positions in the list changed as the number of votes changed. voting accumulates number and when numbers accumulate, the mind automatically thinks the most number will win. it becomes a very natural conclusion to make that highest number of votes will determine the winner.

the behavior, voting patterns and comments in the website obviously show that website visitors are on the impression that votes will count. and when nestle announces the winner and it's not the entry that has gotten the most number of votes, many if not all will be disappointed and will feel they were set-up by nestle.

this ONE right thing that nestle did, is it worth it that it's good for the brand but bad for its target audience?

(note: as of declared end of effort, the entry that got the most number of votes is "taste of summer". "tropical burst" accumulated votes after the declared end of promo date. nestle actually ended the effort but allowed people to vote and give comments some more weeks. it is during this extended period that "tropical burst" got 1,000+ votes and ended as most voted.)


to be continued.....