At ResearchWorks, we talk a lot about customer intimacy. We do our best not just to help clients be customer-intimate, but to practice customer intimacy ourselves. One sign of customer intimacy is when you say you care and show you care, and customers feel it. There is a match between how you intend to treat customers and how customers feel treated.

The sign above pronounces how much this family camp in Northern California cares for its guests. Even though the camp is not much more than a giant patch of dirt, people feel the love. The sign conveys the promise, the camp delivers on it. And guests come back year after year. That's how customer intimacy becomes customer loyalty.

How do we persuade people to do or buy things? In the health and medical field, we usually rely on educating them. This is the "direct" path to persuasion. Give lots of detailed information, the "customer" will scrutinize it, think hard about it, and come to a rational conclusion. Right? Wrong.

Years of research has shown that this approach usually doesn't work very well. For most people most of the time, the "indirect" path to persuasion is far more effective. On the indirect path, people are influenced by things like who the spokesperson is and what feelings are being conveyed, rather than the rational argument. They are not thinking deeply. Instead, they are relying on, say the credibility of the spokesperson, as a shortcut to making a quick decision. The upside is people are engaged. The downside is that the persuasion that does result may be shorter lived. 

I see the real win as what I would call involvement conversion. Use the indirect path to get people initially interested. Then once they are "in the door" so to speak, their positive experience should convert them to care more deeply and find the personal relevance in what you are selling. Just make it worth their while.

Note: I know, I know. There's a popular business book called the 5 Paths to Persuasion. The two paths I am touting are fundamentally based on whether people personally connect with your message or not. Think about what path you take when faced with a barrage of communications.

OK, Twitter-head, can I ask you a question? Only if it has less than 140 characters. This action-packed exchange was in a recent Non Sequitur comic strip. 

Is tweeting good or bad for communicating what matters? I say both. And here's why (in less than 140 characters!). The upside is the good judgment needed to be effective and concise. The downside is no judgment and tweeting about meaningless things.

Check out this very funny "SuperNews!" animated comedy sketch that was on Current TV:

And bonus... here are Soren Gordhamer's four insightful Taoist tips for better and balanced tweeting.