AI in email automation – Marketing and Sales

A Carleton University study surveyed 1,500 people across six organizations and found some interesting data points regarding emails:

Employees are spending 33% of their time on email in the workplace.

When they work from home, they spend 50% reading and answering emails.

Moore says the most surprising thing the team learned is that responses drop-off significantly for emails that use language above about a sixth grade reading level, but emails that are too simple tend to be ignored as well. A 3rd grade reading level is optimal. He was also surprised that neutral emails tend to receive fewer responses than positive or negative emails. In short, being too negative is bad, but being slightly negative is better than being boring.

The probability of closing a sale increases dramatically when a salesperson is able to (a) reach the decision maker and (b) be able to set up a meeting.

The study says, salespeople today spend anywhere from 30% to 50% on activities that have nothing to do with the actual act of selling (i.e., answering emails, meeting with clients, calling them up, doing demos, etc.).

If AI can knock that number down by 20 or 30%, total sales and the company’s revenue will be significantly impacted. I have come across apps like Respondable or Phrasee to help in snoozing mail, subject checker, sentiment analysis and reading level checkers.

The mundane, time-consuming, but still necessary task of managing email communications will largely be relegated to the machine. The upshot is that the derived benefit of just this AI tool alone is huge!

Email marketing, not just sales, will go through an AI transformation. These applications can also be used to construct newsletters, press releases, annual reports, and so on. The future of Language Processing, Predictive Analysis, and Sentiment Analysis are already converging.

Ads and impact on consumer

Ads And Public

Companies spent huge amount of resources to showcase products in audio visual ads, and the more creative the ads are, the more audience it will have. All the audiences might not be the consumer but it definitely impacts publicity of the product. However, some time too much ads also irritate public and in return public switch of the device or move to other channels to get rid of such ads. Recently I have observed how ads are perceived by public, here is my experience

During rush hour, most of the FM radio channels in Bangalore put more ads and less songs. But there is a new FM mirchi 95, which has very less ads and I generally don’t change the channel while listening. I am sure the value of such ads would be more compare to the other FM channels. Radio mirchi would selectively put ads with higher value to get more revenue and it makes sense to public too. This is called win-win for both, fm and public. However, in some other channels, its like playing music in ads and some time I switch off my car audio system because its so irritating. In this case, the relative value of the ads would be much lesser irrespective of how much creative these ads are. But with competition and publicity, the two topmost priority, companies tend to pay for ads.

And then some times, ads are so factual that I wish to have a central authority to monitor the ads. E.g. there was a fairness cream ad and your skin color with be fairer within 2 weeks. This also reminded me a movie(Traffic Signal), a dark skinned kid saved all his money and bought a fairness cream based on the ad. After 15 days, no change in skin color and the kid got so much angry, that he tried to throw stones to a nearby hoarding with this cream. Quite funny though.

But some time, ads are quite realistic too and shows the important features of the product. Irrespective of how the ads are perceived by public, the companies will keep on spending more and more on this.