Persuasive e-mail invitations

Editor’s note: Bill MacElroy is president of San Francisco-based Socratic Technologies, Inc. and is president of the Interactive Marketing Research Organization (IMRO).

One of the most eagerly debated topics at IMRO (Interactive Marketing Research Organization) conference breakout sessions has been the role of the initial e-mail invitation in gaining participant cooperation for Web-based surveys. A wide variety of opinion has emerged as to what constitutes best practices for writing the perfect e-mail. On one side of the debate are those researchers who feel that a strong appeal to respondents’ desire to get paid is a winning strategy. Others feel that the most successful approach is to the potential participant’s interest in giving his or her opinion.

After much trial and error and some experimental research, I have come to the conclusion that the decision to participate is based on a complex interplay of motivations that must be addressed. The tricky part is that not all people react positively to the same messages. Therefore, the secret appears to be to communicate a number of details very quickly, hoping to hit on at least one of the key elements that will act as the definitive persuader.

This article will go through 10 of the issues that we feel must be addressed in an e-mail invitation to a Web survey and the order of precedence that these points-of-information need to be presented. The order of presentation is important, because several usability studies have shown that the average time that someone spends reviewing an e-mail to determine whether it is worthy of attention is about three seconds.

Step 1: Don’t look like spam
Of course it should go without saying that your e-mails should not BE unsolicited spam (e-mails sent in bulk to people with whom you or your client has no ongoing business relationship). However, even if you have contact permission, the No. 1 reason that people do not respond to e-mail invitations to Web surveys is that the invitation is mistaken for spam.

What are some of the ways you can avoid the appearance of being junk e-mail? For one, use text, not HTML. The HTML e-mail format, with fancy graphics (and long load times) has become so closely associated with spam that any benefits from “looking nice” are lost. Second, use the full, correct e-mail address for each invitation sent. Do NOT use a populated BCC field or bulk mailing options.

Familiarity with the sender is a prime influencer of the decision to participate. Send invitations from a domain that will be recognized by the recipient. Researchers should avoid sending e-mails from domain names with elements known to cause spam filters to prevent their delivery. Some spam filters look for domain names with key words such as: offer, free, cash, blast, private, bargain, discounts, daily, deals, promo, win/winner, shop, dollars, lotto, marketing, rewards, wholesale, unique, thrifty, value, direct, buy and many other “salesy” come-ons.

Step 2: Three critical subject line components: sponsor, topic and survey
Dealing with a known and trusted source is also a major factor in getting an e-mail survey invitation opened. Several industry association and academic studies indicate that the sponsor of the survey and the general topic of the area of inquiry are very important considerations in the critical three-second window for the recipient’s decision as to whether or not to open the e-mail and review it.

From personal experience, I have found that adding the word “survey” helps to amplify the fact that this is research, not an errant spam message. This is somewhat controversial, in that some IMRO members prefer “market research.” But from follow-up survey satisfaction questions, however, I find that “survey” sounds less burdensome than “research” and that anything with the term “marketing” in it tends to be a mental filter leading to deletion.

Step 3: First sentence
As mentioned earlier, once someone opens an e-mail invitation, we have between only two and five seconds of reading time to get the person’s decision whether or not to participate. Research on phone-based studies suggests that a live interviewer has slightly longer, perhaps five to seven seconds to reach the same decision. Online, this translates to about one sentence’s worth of content.

The ultimate question then becomes: what message to send within those critical seconds? Our recommendation is to overtly distance the research from direct marketing and/or a sales pitch. Here is one variation of that message that appears to work well:

“This invitation is to take part in a survey project and is not a sales solicitation.”

Step 4: Salience points
Many scholars have studied the factors that influence people to open mail survey envelopes. Some of those findings can also be applied directly to e-mail invitations. In essence, there appear to be four issues that account for the majority of the process of deciding to participate. We have come to refer to these as salience drivers, in that they influence the degree to which people feel the research is salient or relevant to them personally.

In order to communicate all of these key points quickly and effectively, we recommend a bullet-pointed list of all four salience drivers:

  • What are we researching?
  • How much are we offering for your time?
  • Who is the sponsor (or affiliated industry)?
  • How much time/effort will this take? (Note: Be truthful!)

Step 5: Recognition of non-qualified terminates
If your sampling strategy calls for the screening of individuals for demographic or other characteristics, we highly recommend giving an indication of what will happen if the person doesn’t qualify. We have found that people who terminate without recognition of their efforts report feeling disrespected and are less likely to participate in future research.

Even an entry into a small drawing is usually enough to say thank you and express an appreciation for their effort. We have used the following verbiage with success:

“If you do not quality to participate in the entire survey, you will still be entered into a drawing to win $xxx just for trying.”

Step 6: Contact for help or more information
Today’s respondents are faced with an avalanche of spam daily. This creates anxiety about the legitimacy of a research request. In part because of all the spam come-ons barking that you can “make up to $50 an hour for your opinions,” respondents do not trust third-party online researchers as much as they used to. Therefore, we have seen an increasing need to provide a “contactable” human being live or online, who can assure potential participants that the study is authorized and legitimate.

For this reason, we strongly recommend an e-mail address for online contact and a toll-free number for “questions you may have” about the study. Some effective wording might be as follows:

“Please contact antonio.sanchez @XYZ.com, our member services manager, if you have any questions and reference project number 123-1234. Antonio also can be reached at 800-555-1234.”

Step 7: Privacy policy/confidentiality statement
A very strong, clearly-worded statement regarding the researcher’s respect for privacy and confidentiality is crucial for people not intimately familiar with the research organization. Privacy concerns center primarily around two questions: Are you going to sell my telephone number? and Are you going to sell my e-mail address? Confidentiality concerns are also expressed by two pervasive fears: Who is going to see my answers? and Will I be confronted by someone if my reactions are negative or be direct-marketed to based on the information provided?

A clear and unambiguous statement that we recommend is as follows:

“We are a market research firm that values your privacy. All of your responses will be kept strictly confidential and reported only in aggregate. Your personal information will not be sold or traded to anyone.”

Step 8: Privacy policy link
Over time, more and more people are checking formal corporate privacy policies prior to entering any type of personally identifiable information. These policies need to be much more detailed and specific than the simple statement shown in Step 7. A link to the broader policy should appear in your e-mail invitation.

If you have not published a Web-based, formal privacy policy, there are numerous sources for templates and definitions. Some examples can be found at the following sites:

Step 9: Opt-out e-mail address and toll-free number
Increasingly, state laws are requiring a free opt-out mechanism for removal from lists. Fourteen states now require a toll-free number in addition to an e-mail reply system; in some cases a $5,000 per-incident fine for not providing this information is levied.

A second, private regulatory system, incorporating spam filters or black hole lists, checks to see if opt-out e-mail and telephone numbers are working if complaints arise. Although this is just one point on a checklist to identify chronic spammers, domains that do not comply with working e-mails and telephone numbers can be blocked at the ISP levels for multiple e-mail delivery systems.

A statement that provides the required information, and that allows you to track problems with specific sample sources, reads as follows:

“If you would like to be removed from our contact list, please reply to this e-mail and type ‘Remove’ in the subject line, or call 1-800-555-1234 and reference project number 123-1234.”

Step 10: Industry affiliations and ethics standards
A great deal of comfort is lent from association with a national or international industry group with a broader mission for ethical standards and the enforcement of those standards. If your company or department is a member of such an industry association, we recommend that you publish the following:

  • The name of the organization (with a hyperlink) in your text-based e-mail invitation, and
  • The association logo both on your privacy page and on the first page of your Web survey.

Note: If you use a hyperlink within your live survey to your industry group, be sure it opens the link in a new window.

As an example, in order to highlight the association with an industry group, we recommend the following wording, with a highlighted link, within your e-mail invitation:

“XYZ Company is a member of the Interactive Marketing Research Organization (IMRO) and we subscribe to the privacy policies and code of research ethics published by that group.”

Simple steps

Following these simple steps in crafting your e-mail invitations can significantly improve the comfort levels of your invitees, result in higher response rates and will cover you in terms of important legislative and regulatory demands.

Figure 1