Irene Kwok's Profile
Jade, thank you for this eloquent piece on Glossier — I learned quite a bit. I wonder if your proposal for Glossier’s social-selling app actually addresses your concern about Glossier maintaining personal connections with its customers. Glossier could be strategic about its customer interaction by identifying and engaging select high-value customers via the app, as measured by data relating to members who could be/are brand ambassadors, product predictors, frequent buyers, etc., while still having the benefits of machine learning to digest comments en masse.
Thank you for the enjoyable read! To your suggestion that Glossier should achieve a higher participation rate from a diverse set of consumers, do you see Glossier having to make a tradeoff between breadth and focus? For example, if the consumer set is so diverse that they should belong to different client segments, how would Glossier then make the decision as to which product to develop as its category-defining product (e.g., the milk jelly cleanser was the result of 380 responses, but as Glossier engages more consumers, can you still produce the one ideal cleanser)? If they end up making multiple products to cater to the diverse set of consumers, I wonder if Glossier is in danger of slipping into the existing problem you identified in the beauty industry: having too many options!
Thank you for organizing your thoughts so well! While crowdsourcing is Glossier’s “magic formula” and they are known to designate “consumers as experts”, I wonder whether this will still be Glossier’s advantage over time. Does crowdsourcing actually dilute the brand given it allows unchecked input from anyone — for example, mixing experts with amateurs, blending different customer segments, etc., and if so, how can Glossier combat this? How would Glossier’s approach of crowdsourcing for product development compete with that of an established beauty brand, which may have experts leading the way but use crowdsourcing to collect feedback to refine products further?
Sada, thank you for your post on AI in Marketing! What’s curious to me is that Creative Development (“How to Say”) in advertising is not just the copy in isolation but also the context. To the point of other commenters, AICO and AI in copywriting will be heavily influenced by the data they’re fed, but part of what makes advertising interesting is how the same words can send a different message depending on the context, imagery, and cultural references of an ad. Going back to your great comment for the Nike case, the symbolism and emotional provocations of an ad are things that humans can more easily connect and create, and so the copy must be married to the context. Where do you see AICO and AI going with this? Could that be where humans continue to be relevant for some time?
Thank you for writing such an enjoyable piece! I’m curious as to what you think will be additive manufacturing’s biggest value proposition for Chanel — cost savings or brand growth, or perhaps Chanel is planning to explore first and answer the question along the process of discovery. There is generally a benefit to having the first-mover advantage, but in the case of 3D printing, if each haute couture house were creating their own pieces through additive manufacturing, what is the advantage you see Chanel having and maintaining by being first? To Justin’s point, are they at risk of being in a rush without considering the brand damage they may incur?