AMA: Ramp Head of Product Marketing, Nami Sung on Messaging

I need to unpack this in therapy but for some not-yet-fully-explored reason, I hate messaging houses and marchitecture like that. Perhaps it feels like it's forcing structure. Perhaps it feels too permanent and untouchable (because it's housed??). Not sure. But I do concede that they can be useful and are helpful for many, many people. So, for me, if I'm trying to get internal buy-in on messaging, I try to keep it as simple, concise, and as contextual as possible. * Target audience, * value prop, * 3 benefit or RTB pillars, * and corresponding proof points (like a product or feature). Then, I take that and set it in context to provide positioning guidance and build a larger, more interesting narrative. * What's happening out there in the market and why are we talking about this? What's the challenge our audience is facing in this market? * Then insert our claim we just worked on. * Include validation (customer quotes, product metrics, analyst reports, etc.). * And articulate your CTA - inspire your audience and give them a call to arms.

Besides segmenting customer groups by any number of more static characteristics (industry, role, geography, tenure, company size), you can personalize based on behaviors and actions. * If they've taken an action (they just signed up for X), or need to (trial is ending) * By the extent of impact or value they'll see if they take an action (likely to be big spenders? likely to see major savings?) * Features they're already using or not using * Off-platform behaviors But if you're asking about how to personalize messaging not related at all to targeting or grouping customers? Hmm. I guess external factors: seasonality, date/time, current events, economic state, known networks (mutuals with X, etc.).

Important! Otherwise, messaging is just a mess of words and concepts that you're pulling out of your head (or the other end) to sound smart. Okay, that was a bit crude, but once again, thinking and typing fast right now. This question is a bit vague, so I'm going to take some liberties with my answer. 1. Yes, it is important to validate messaging. Ways to validate messaging: * Prospect and customer research - interviews, surveys, focus groups. Is what you're saying relevant and resonating? * Competitive comparisons - is this messaging differentiated or more of the same? Is it defensible, and can you back this up with proof points like product metrics, customer examples, analyst reports, etc.? * Is there a hook? Can we be a bit controversial/edgy? - How does this fit with the current tailwinds and market context? Are reporters hot on this right now, are there opportunities to get press pick up here? What does your comms team think? * Forward looking - How does this message ladder up to / reinforce the category you're trying to build or win? Is this providing a path to creating a moat or inspiring the product team? Or is this messaging stuck in the now? 2. Yes, it is important to measure the impact and efficacy of messaging. Ways to attempt that: * Check on channel performance - if new messaging is on the website, what's the impact on traffic, seo, time on site, conversion, etc. if new messaging is being used on ad copy, compare performance. Yada yada yada. * Message pull-through - Are the major messaging points getting pulled through in external content, like other blogposts, news articles, media coverage? Is the sales team using this? Can you use a sales listening tool to pull out what the themes are? * Copy cats - Are your competitors stealing your messaging? No one likes a copy cat but it also gives you a sign that you did something interesting. * Research - depending on what ongoing research initiatives you have in play + the goals of the messaging in the first place, you can see whether it's made an impact with your customers on awareness, consideration, understanding. Include questions in your ongoing user surveys to measure before/after over time. Probably more, but gotta run into a mtg.

Ha. Take off your marketing skin and try to channel your inner human. Is this how a normal non-marketing person would say it to their ride share driver or Trader Joe's bagger? Read it aloud. Then, read it aloud again to your friend or partner. If you can't say it with a straight face or any tinge embarrassment, then scrap it. Okay, but also, some cliches exist for a reason. They're convincing to enough people. Lots of companies say #1 for a reason. Some people might roll their eyes or ignore it completely, but others will believe it. Healthy compromise is: speak like a human, use regular words, but don't shy away from promoting your business - people believe what you tell them to believe.

Typing quickly, so excuse any typos! Competitors will always have a common set of features. Every pizza needs a crust and some toppings – what they are, how they manifest, how they taste – that's what's different. So, first, I'd think: 1. What's unique about my set of features? Are they solving for exactly the same use case? How do they play alongside our other products and features, in ways that they unlock a different set of use cases? This relates to a previous question about marketing a group of products instead of just focusing on one. Combinations of ingredients can lead to different solutions. 2. What's unique about how my company approaches the problem set and delivers for customers? Think outside of the set of features for a minute. What are my company's differentiators? What's been different and defensible about our approach? (For example, intuitive design and user-centricity? or tied to a greater platform? or velocity of development and improvements? or administrative oversight? intelligence built into every step? etc). Think about how that unique approach (overall) makes the set of features more differentiated. 3. What are the competitors' weak spots? What have they gotten flak for from users, from the press? How can we show that our solutions are different in just that way? Let's poke them. 4. Some features are going to be tablestakes. If they're complete mirror images, won't lead to any competitive advantages, moats, and more of a reassuring-yeah-we-got-that, then include it and don't fret. You can't focus on every little feature. Hype up what is different, defensible against competitors, desired and beloved by users.

Put the product aside and think about your audience (whether they're buyers or end users). What are their JTBD? What are the major challenges they're facing? Then, examine the products you have at hand. What are the various use cases they unlock? Think of the products and features as ingredients - and the value you're trying to show case to your audience as meals. You're trying to come up with a dinner plan. You wouldn't create an entire meal with just one type of ingredient (let's say broccoli). And what kind of meal are you trying to create in the first place - a soup? A roast? Once you get your head out of just thinking about your product, and just focus on your audience's challenges, needs, wants, JTBD, you'll be glad to have more than on product to work with. Structurally, what I have found also helps is having folks in-seat whose remit is to work across the portfolio - to build messaging across a number of products. A PMM dedicated to product X is just going to think about X, even if they try not to. But having a few PMMs dedicated to marketing overall innovation or across a number of products is ensuring that your organizational structure supports your messaging goal.