Goodbye Ozzie and Harriet: Psychographics, the Geo-Cultural Imprint, and Why people like to Play in the Woods

by Ken Will
Technical Manager
D & A Solutions, Ltd.

There’s an old saw that goes something like this: “Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.” So it is, too, with experiences: experiences are so pervasively buzz-wordish today in outdoor recreation marketing and service that the uninitiated might believe the concept to be common knowledge, well understood, employed everywhere by everyone.

Not so. Close inspection reveals that, true enough, experience is being talked about and written about a great deal; but when it comes to the doing something about it part, outdoor recreation management is, in the main, a no-show.
Surely the author blasphemes, yes? No.

There are three very good reasons why it isn’t blasphemous to suggest that relatively few of us in outdoor rec management place experiences in an applied operational or marketing framework. First, surprisingly few people genuinely understand what experiences are…and what they are not. Second, even when they do understand, few managers are able to identify the salient experiences operant within their particular consumer and prospect population. And third, as professional as they otherwise may be, few in outdoor rec management have the specific education and training (not to mention computer software) needed to measure something as intangible as “experiences.” The following mix of opinion and fact discusses these three points in greater detail.

First: What experiences are…and are not. Most outdoor rec professionals, whether they work the sales side of the street or service delivery side, tend, in practice, to place an equal sign between activities...and experiences, and while they obviously are important, activities should never be confused with experiences. Let’s say that again: Activities should never be confused with experiences. And one more time: Activities should…well, you get the idea. Activities are not experiences; rather, activities are experience delivery mechanisms. Where activities are the actions people take, the things people purposefully do in order to achieve an experience, the experience itself is a positively perceived, anticipated, and ultimately received change in an existing personal condition or state. Admittedly, folks, that’s a mouthful, but it is well worth digesting.

A simple illustration: Why does a comedian tell a joke? Obviously, to evoke laughter from the audience. Is the joke the activity…or the experience? From the perspective of the comedian, telling the joke is the activity; from the perspective of the audience, attending the show is the activity. The experience? In this example, from each perspective, while the end result is the same—laughter—the experience achieved is different. With the joke teller, the experience associated with the laughter comes from seeing it, hearing it, causing it. From the perspective of the audience, however, the experience derived from the laughter comes from doing it.

Because it is the desire of the joke teller to maximize the experience associated with causing laughter, it quickly is learned that to know the audience is to know the type of joke to tell; and to tell the right kind of joke is to evoke the greatest laughter and generate the greatest experience, the greatest satisfaction.

On the other hand, because it is the desire of the audience to achieve the experience that comes with laughing, it is quickly learned that to know the kind of humor desired is to know which show to attend in order to achieve the maximal laughter experience—fundamentally, to derive the greatest experiential satisfaction.

Now, the big question: How many Dice Clay fans would we likely find at a Bob Newhart show? Not many. Ditto, the other way around. Whereas one is an in-your-face, often profane, and hugely irreverent humorist, the other is gentle, subtle, bemused. About the third time the “f-word” leaves the Dice Clay stage and wafts wickedly toward the ears of an errant and unsuspecting Newhart listener, the exits probably would fill in a frenzied panic—yet the truth is, with each in his own realm, both individuals are perceived as funny—but just not by the same audience. The rather obvious moral here is that whether consumers are in search of humor or any other product, service, or experience--including outdoor recreation--they will know (or learn) where to go to get it.

Different strokes for different folk, indeed. Every automobile manufacturer knows it; every restaurateur knows it; every maker of tennis shoes, watches, and bottled water knows it; the music industry, film industry, and publishing industry know it. It’s axiomatic: today’s consumers, when spending discretionary dollars, are attracted to products and services that offer choices, options, and difference. But most of us in outdoor rec continue to develop activities and amenities around a dated view of the “average” outdoor recreation consumer, an Ozzie and Harriet, one-size-fits-all throwback to the first half of the 20th century—and this perception is fundamentally flawed, mischaracterizing as it does a consumer who not only does not conform to that nearly featureless stereotype, but very possibly may not even exist at all. As a group, we labor under an antiquated point of view functionally identical with telling one kind of joke, making one kind of car, filming one kind of movie, recording one kind of song, serving one kind of sandwich—and that begs the question: if everyone else knows that dog won’t hunt, why don’t we?

Second: Specific Experience Identification. Relatively few professionals in outdoor rec management have been trained to specifically identify the salient experiences operant within their customer base. In other words, it is one thing to know what experiences are not (as suggested, they are not activities); but it is another thing entirely to know how to ascertain what they are. What is certain is that the ones in play at your park are not identical with the ones in play a hundred miles to your north…south…east…or west. More about that in a few moments when we explore the “where = who” corollary.

Third: Measuring Intangibles. The third reason managers talk about experiences but do little about them arises with the question of measurement. For ease of illustration, we’ll use for an example here a pair of somewhat related experiences that have been shown through extensive research to be highly associated with outdoor recreation and travel, to wit: escape from the stress and tension of the daily routine. How do we measure something so amorphous as escape from stress? How much does tension weigh? To what extent do our customers want its relief…and how much relief are they currently getting from us? In short, how do we place all of that in a scalable context?

There are two schools of thought about this, two dispositions. One holds that it cannot be done; feelings, beliefs, emotions, wants, needs, attitudes, motivations…cannot be quantified, don’t even bother to try. The other school, however, a hardier, curious bunch, says…well, wait a second, let’s take a look: if we put a man on the moon, we ought to be able to put a scale under motivations. If the reader is in the first camp, you need read no further; thanks for reading this far. Those in the second camp…your ship has come in.

The answer to the question of measurement is, in a word: psychographics.

Now, having seen that succinct, one word answer, be forewarned: if you ask 10 different people to define psychographics, you likely will end up with 10 different definitions; and it’s even worse if you ask 10 experts, because then you’ll probably get 20 different answers. Still, a definition is needed, so here we go: Psychographics may be thought of as the items, variables, constructs and technical methods incorporating an analytical system the fundamental premise of which is that non-trivial consumer behavior, regardless of the product or service in question, is heavily influenced by motivation(s). It is a qualitative and quantitative perspective that teaches us that consumers first and foremost are people and that their actions are not the result of chaotic happenstance, which is to say, outdoor rec participants do not suddenly wake up and find themselves inexplicably in the middle of the woods hugging trees, smelling flowers, taking photographs of the wildlife. They are where they are, doing what they are doing, because they have been motivated by a desire not for an activity, but rather by a desire for an experience. And, while these motivations are not yet perfectly understood, it is believed that they are generated in a psychophysiological process largely unconditioned by the utility-driven feature/benefit linearity of rational consumption. It is suggested that the motivational process compelling the actions of outdoor recreation consumers is neither capricious and arbitrary nor arrived at with the clinical detachment and cold light of an algebra equation. Neither fish nor fowl, neither random nor ratiocinative, this is a complex methodology, psychographics, and beyond its brilliant and often controversial underpinnings begun more than 60 years ago by Ernest Dichter, the Austrian psychoanalyst and founder of modern motivational research, the study of consumer behavior continues by others today at a furious pace. While much is known, much remains to be learned.

Closer to home, research conducted by D & A Solutions, Ltd., provides actionable insight to the decision-making process of outdoor recreation management. Upstream consumer segmentation predicates downstream development of resonant programming which in turn informs a deliberate transition to experience management from activity management. The cornerstone of the D & A philosophy is that outdoor recreation consumers, when provided with the experiences they seek, will become more meaningfully leisure-invested; and formerly marginalized, infrequent consumers will become re-enthused participants. Ultimately, whether the venue is a park, campground, or resort, this will impact the bottom line.

With regard to the potentially complex range of experiences desired, there are three essential questions to ask: What do consumers really want? How much do they want it? To what extent do they (believe they can) get it? To that end, the analytical component of the research incorporates first and second generation statistical methods in an effort to (1) identify relevant motivations and experiences; (2) evaluate the efficiency of the existing delivery system respondent to those motivations and experiences; (3) ascertain the uniquely derived experiential disconnect within that delivery system; and, after further review, (4) assist in the development and implementation of informed, experience-supportive programming.

An addendum to the preceding plays a critical role in experience management: all the number-crunching and elaborate statistical modeling in the world will not in and of itself create happy campers. That has to happen in the service delivery part of the process. It takes well-informed, properly motivated managers and staff operating as a highly self-aware team working from the same page to make every visit the most satisfying one, so that customers and members are glad they came, excited to return, and freely, generously willing to tell their friends and family about…guess what: their experiences.

How is experience management different from activity management? In the traditional activity management model, where less attention is given to the notion of experiential fulfillment, the consumer must conform to the activity set. Under an experience management plan, however, informed by the discovery of the consumers’ desired experiences, it is the activity set which conforms to the consumer. We are reminded of a story about Henry Ford (the original), when he was asked by a prospective buyer whether his automobiles came in colors. “Why, yes they do,” legend records his reply, “So long as you ask for them in black.” Which worked well enough in the nascence of automotive mass-production, but can it be imagined now that Ford or any other major car manufacturer would succeed with but a single color, black or otherwise?

Earlier, a “where = who” corollary was promised regarding the identification of specific motivations, specific, desired experiences. This corollary is an accommodation of what may be called the geo-cultural imprint, which is to say a methodological belief that, where consumers are, in large measure, influences who they are. Does this mean that there is a location aspect to outdoor recreation decision-making? Of course it does: the importance and impact of the local culture and climate on recreational and other consumer choices cannot be overstated. Please permit some simple examples. Where is more surfing done: Redondo Beach, California—or Boise, Idaho? In which of those towns would we likely find more cowboy (and cowgirl) hats, per capita? And where are we more apt to find restaurants serving crawfish etouffee…Baton Rouge, Louisiana—or Massillon, Ohio? And which of those towns for years had a community hospital that gave footballs to the parents of newborn baby boys? As recently as 2004, it was Massillon, birthplace of Paul Brown...and for locals the true home of professional football." You won’t find that in Baton Rouge…but you will find some lovely crawfish etouffee. Where we are, in large measure, influences who we are—it influences the choices, selections, and decisions we make whether in music, politics, religion, food, clothing—or outdoor recreation; and a properly developed survey helps to pick up the distinctions and peculiarities that differentiate Boise from Redondo Beach; Baton Rouge from Massillon; and these differences make up what is called, in D & A parlance, the “geo-cultural imprint.”

On the other hand, outdoor rec venues operating under the Ozzie and Harriet cookie-cutter perspective succeed best where competition is least, owing to an activity and amenity development philosophy largely unevolved from the “everybody else does it this way” mold. The logical question asks that, if we are not noticeably different from the guy down the street, if what we offer is no more fulfilling on an experiential level than what everyone else is offering, why should outdoor rec consumers go out of their way to choose us? How are we different…and how are we better? The short answer is that, egos aside, very few of us are different, and very few of us are better. It may not be pleasant to hear, but the majority of today’s outdoor rec professionals, nice people though we are, and good looking to boot, so long as we continue to confuse activities with experiences likely will continue to confuse patronage…with success. As long as we keep doing what we’re doing…we’ll keep getting what we’re getting, and if outdoor recreation persists as a business to operate under that standard, it cannot long succeed in today’s increasingly competitive economic environment.

Contemporary consumers are wealthier, more discerning, more educated, and more demanding that at any time in the past, and we providers of outdoor recreation now find ourselves arrived at a point where we no longer enjoy the luxury of a seemingly endless supply of undiscriminating, “park’n’snooze” RVers willing to accept as a memorable “experience” little more than a flat place to throw the picnic blanket and, oh yes, Bingo. The salad days of that kind of outdoor recreation are fading fast, disappearing down a dusty road right alongside big tailfins, beehive hair-dos, hula hoops, and venerable old television shows. That’s the bad news.

The good news is: we do not have to continue to do things the old way. Times have changed; technology has changed. With the advent of small, powerful desktop computers and the sophisticated functionality of PC-oriented statistical software packages, motivation/experience-centered marketing and service delivery are not only possible—they are practically begging us to apply them. We are six years into the 21st century, here in America, at least, and the emerging socioeconomic climate which animates our culture of leisure and recreation increasingly is one in which it will be informed providers who prosper. The information age isn’t just upon us: it is already at a hard gallop. In this, the modern era of experience management, with dazzling technology and sophisticated software, we are able to describe and create not merely an improved activity set with which to satisfy consumer expectation, but more importantly, we now have the capability of visualizing what it is that motivates our customers to seek out and participate in leisure and outdoor recreation activities in the first place; and with this powerful new and newly wise perspective we hav e it within our grasp to utterly transform the outdoor recreation experience.

What will bring old customers back and new customers on board is the same principle that is at work this very moment for McDonald’s and Tommy Hilfiger and Chrysler, and all the other “bigs” who swim in the deep end of the pool because they long ago adopted a product or service philosophy sensitive enough and clever enough to recognize and capitalize on the understanding that different people laugh at different jokes, and enjoy different food, and wear different clothes…and when those of us in outdoor rec finally lay down the old ways and become part of the new mainstream by recognizing that our customers, too, have a hunger for choices, options, difference, then and only then will we have said goodbye…to Ozzie and Harriet.