The next phase of this concept was presented by Microsoft at the Authentication and Online Trust Alliance Conference in 2008 (PDF). Microsoft’s Anti-Spam General Manager indicated that in the future they would prefer to use recipient behavioral metrics like open-rates in addition to their other spam-related metrics to determine sender reputation. While the idea was still hypothetical at the time, the mere fact that they made these statements to a room full of email senders was worth noting.

Now, we have confirmation from Yahoo! that some of these same metrics that AOL and Microsoft have considered are now implemented into Yahoo!’s anti-spam reputation processes. Of course, we’ll never know exactly what percentage of non-openers or other behavioral factors will impact deliverability, but we can say with certainty that dormant addresses and inactive users are now playing a role in determining your Yahoo! inbox success.

When I first heard Microsoft’s comments and Yahoo!’s confirmation, my initial reaction from a privacy perspective was that this arrangement would interfere with civil liberties. We first went through this privacy debate when Gmail (and later AOL) noted they would scan email content to deliver ads, yet neither ever indicated they would be reading or profiling user behavior in connection with the sender. This new effort to tie behavior to sender reputation is not much different than scanning content, but it does add another concern that it will also be used for advertising purposes. Clearly this is a privacy issue if there ever was one, similar to the one the EFF is raising today against Google Books.

While it is too early to give any concrete strategic program advice, I would advise that email marketers who are not making it to the Yahoo! inbox should factor inactive recipients into their reputation analysis mix. It should go without saying that Yahoo! (and every other email provider) will continue to weigh complaints and bad data more than inactive or unresponsive users. Even so, now appears to be a very good time to consider re-activation strategies for dormant users and I would advise all marketers to further prioritize that ongoing effort.

Part III – Segment by acquisition channel

One of the most effective yet often overlooked methods is segmentation by acquisition channel. From my experience working with clients across various industries, I have found that customers acquired through different channels tend to have different behavioral characteristics. Here are some thoughts to consider:

• Email subscribers acquired through co-registration pages will usually respond or convert differently than organically acquired email subscribers.
• Subscribers who have been acquired in-store have already indicated that they are at least somewhat likely to purchase both at a local POS and online. Take the ZIP of the store into account and be sure to coordinate your multi-channel marketing efforts to maximize customer value.
• New email registrations acquired via mail-in forms and call centers may indicate that the customer is looking to shift from print to online shopping. You may consider a “go paperless” email offer to these customers that builds a positive, eco-friendly reputation for your brand – not to mention saving you print costs along the way.

With any segmentation program it is important to take a step back and realize that there is a real person on the other end of each email address. Every time you create an email, ask yourself whether your email content is addressing the specific needs of your audience. Email segmentation is not a one-size-fits-all discipline, but with a little tweaking here and there, you can find the right method for targeting your customer base.

Here’s my real-life example that illustrates the issues surrounding web analytics/email integration:

I am a frequent shopper of the online retailer Amazon.com, where I have purchased books, electronics, and baby items exclusively. Last week, however, I received an extremely targeted and somewhat perplexing email promoting Amazon.com’s variety of gourmet and specialty meat selections. Wild Boar 10 Rib Rack anyone?, asked the email. The first line of the message was “As someone who has shown an interest in gourmet meat…”

What? Gourmet meat? Me? From Amazon.com? Huh?

Then I realized what had happened. About three weeks ago I was doing a search on how to best cook beer can chicken.  After re-tracing my steps, I recalled landing on an Amazon.com meat page, clicking around about five times, and leaving. I do not think this makes me a lover of online gourmet meat…but maybe it does?

Items to consider:

1. Personalization was not used in the subject line. If Amazon knew I clicked on a handful of pages, surely the company knows my name, right? Would name personalization make this message more or less intrusive given that it is based on browse behavior?
2. How do we differentiate a user’s definite “interest” in a particular subject area versus just casual browsing?
3. The timing of the message was smart and relevant – this is prime BBQ season, after all. Had it been sent in the dead of Winter, I would have found the message less useful.

Takeaways:

1. Browse behavior messages should be targeted, but not so targeted that users are looking over their shoulders to see who is watching them.
2. Marketers need to be selective in choosing which pieces of behavioral data are used in an email.
3. Be sure to carefully define what “showing an interest” means. Long browse durations, cart abandonments, repeat visits, etc. all seem to be strong indications of user interest rather than casual browsing.

I’d like to hear from you. Can an email be overly targeted? Where should email marketers draw the line?