The integral incentive system is essentially to stimulate user demand and promote user conversion through some methods. And how to operate the point incentive system to better serve the core data of the product? It's about two nodes – distribution and consumption.
The essence of the incentive system is the motivation to create "I want".
Why create a "want" motivation?
Because this motivation allows people to secrete a substance called "dopamine."
Here's an explanation: In 1989, a professor of neuroscience at Michelgon University named Berić proved experimentally that dopamine does not appear when people are rewarded, nor after they are rewarded, but before they are rewarded.
That is: dopamine does not directly produce happiness, but it can make people "want to be happy" desire. Therefore, dopamine does not produce happiness, but it helps people to produce desires, and is the creator of motivation.
The production of dopamine creates the "incentive system" of the complex machine of the human body, which is essentially the same as the incentive system we are discussing - through some methods to make the user feel "I want", so that the user can complete the behavior, get the benefit, and at the same time contribute to the platform.
Anyone who has played the game should know that common reward systems are: praise, point system, currency, level system, customization, item delivery, collection, unlocking, meta rewards and external rewards.
In general, the simpler the game, the fewer the reward system, and the more complex the reward system, the more complex the reward system.
The concept of the point system and currency is similar, and the integral can also be circulated as a currency within a certain range.
What are the advantages of points?
Several different behaviors can be measured by one standard.
In the platform, user behavior is diverse and the correlation between them is uncertain. Points can be used as a unified standard to measure these different behaviors and counted as different values, which are exchanged for a uniform export value.
Flexible adjustment and dynamic regulation.
For example: in the beginning, the old user of the platform invited a new user to receive 50 points. However, with the development of the platform, the saturation of users, the difficulty and cost of invitations have increased, then at this time we can match the corresponding value by adjusting the points obtained by the task.
From the platform level, whether to do the point system, we must first think clearly: what is the value of the point system to the platform?
I think this problem can be disassembled from the following aspects:
What type of tool is the integration system for the platform?
Can the credit system contribute to the platform's core data?
How much leverage can the point system produce?
Is it used as an on-site currency to reward users, or as a marketing tool?
If it is used as a station currency, then there should be a clear exchange ratio between the points and the cash in reality, such as: Tmall points, credit card points, etc.
Because such points are exchanged or deducted items, the platform needs to take out real money and silver cash from the profits to purchase.
For example, every year, credit card institutions will take 1% from profits as a reward to users (the proportion is arbitrary), so every time the platform issues a point, it must take out a corresponding proportion of reserves. Therefore, the issuance of such points should be strictly controlled. The act of guaranteeing that points need to be issued has enough value for the platform.
The second is: to use points as an event marketing tool, mainly based on traffic play, such as: gold coins, Alipay points and so on.
Although gold coins are directly deducted from money in the supported merchants, this part of the cost is not from the platform, but from the store itself. Therefore, the price deduction is actually a disguised promotional discount play, and most of the app point systems on the market now exist as a marketing tool - through bd to replace traffic, so as to exchange for coupons for merchants or goods.
Such currencies cannot be measured against the gold standard, otherwise the value of points to users will be severely reduced and it will not be conducive to flexibility in marketing activities.
The core data contribution of the credit system to the product.
Anything that pays the cost needs to talk about the input-output ratio and establish a point system, I think: the core purpose of the platform must be to improve the core data of users in the station.
For example, e-commerce platforms promote orders and purchase frequencies, while community platforms focus on active markets and content output, which will eventually fall on retention indicators.
If the points system does not help the core indicators of the platform, then what is the value of the system? Just because it increases the user's interest in using it, it does not cost a lot of labor to develop and maintain such a system.
How much leverage can the integral system produce.
Issuing points to consume points is a business. Platforms must consider: How to leverage maximum value with minimal cost?
If in a platform of tens of millions of dau, there are only more than 100,000 users who use points every day, although the core data of these users is much higher than that of other users, but the value brought to the platform is not large, that is, the leverage effect that the points can bring is too small.
For users, the "value perception of points" is the most important.
As discussed earlier, the essence of the incentive system is to make people have the desire to "I want".
The wants here can be disassembled into two: one is that the task setting can make the user produce "I want"; the other is that the reward for completing the task can also make the user "I want".
This is the consistency principle of the integral system, if there is only the second point, the user is easy to fatigue the product and give up.
Marketing tool-type points, users can easily get, but when consumed, it is easy to make users feel lost - having a large number of points, but can not be exchanged for things that users feel valuable, is the main problem.
However, different platform users have different definitions of "value", and it is often difficult for operation students to find "value".
The distribution strategy for points is a complicated thing if it is to be done well.
Everything revolves around your core purpose.
Use detailed data to determine which behaviors can be used as points issuance tasks.
Flexibility to adjust the issuance plan during the process without interfering with the user's perception.
The first point: any task that cannot be set around the core purpose is a rogue.
Before you begin, it's important to think clearly: Where is your current business? And how does doing this help your business? Is it possible to illustrate value through strong arguments?
But in fact, it is more difficult to operate, such as:
Your core purpose is to improve deals.
The mission is set to: 20 points for each order completed.
The core purpose is to facilitate playback.
10 points for every 30 minutes of video you watch, which seems to be set around the core purpose, but does it work? The result? Part of it depends on the value of the gold coins you're giving out— the degree of desire you want as mentioned earlier— and more importantly, on "what are the real needs of the user?" ”
The user's needs are there, do I use the integral to leverage and promote the generation of demand, or do I create a new demand for the user entirely through the integral as a gripper?
The second point is the analysis and judgment of the data.
Then the first point, the data is not deceptive, through the data + rapid experiment to find a "user already has needs" + "incentive stimulation" = "complete the demand" behavior, and then the point reward as a lever to add, from the efficiency and benefit level to maximize.
For credit cards and other points, it is relatively simple to judge from the data level, and it can be judged more clearly according to the consensus of "every 1 dollar consumed = how many points are obtained".
The third point: as an incentive, it is necessary to flexibly adjust at different stages of user growth at different stages of the product.
Distance yourself with game upgrades: A user who goes from level 1 to level 2 requires only 5 experience points, but upgrading from level 10 to level 11 requires 50 experience points.
At the beginning, picking up an apple can meet 80% of the hunger value; however, in the middle level, an apple can only meet 10% of the hunger value, and the apple can also be divided into large, medium, small, and small, different apples represent different hunger values, by setting the probability of picking up apples, and the user's hunger value at different stages, you can be more free to regulate.
The same is true for points settings, and it is important to make a reasonable and artificially regulated rule without interfering with the user's perception, as if the Federal Reserve has a method of regulating the currency and maintaining the stable operation of the entire monetary system in times of inflation or tightening.
Points redemption or point payment?
Is the ratio of distribution and consumption appropriate?
Redeemor payment? Active or passive?
Point redemption is a passive behavior, and in general there will be a place similar to the points mall - there are fixed redeemable goods, and the user will only enter when they want to redeem.
Point payment is an active act, for example, when I renewed my membership, I just saw that the points could be deducted for 2 yuan, and then used the points.
These two methods are not good or bad, point payment is higher than the points exchange threshold, and the need for real cost investment; and the form of points exchange is more - products like redemption bar is to play the traffic business of points, and some low-value coupons are aggregated together to provide third parties as points exchange goods.
Ratio of distribution to consumption: It means the health of the points system – too high or too low volatility means that the system is in trouble.
The value of most product points is difficult to recognize. If points are not seen as a means of customer reward programs (similar to credit cards), but rather as a tool for activity and loyalty, the company aims to make the least investment and maximize the benefits. Then, users who can continue to earn points and consume them are likely to be users who are already very loyal.
From the user's point of view: if the value of the goods I get back for points is less than the time and labor I deliberately spent, then the user will most likely not continue the behavior.
Although the incentive system comes from the game, it is almost not interesting at all - almost all tasks are "fixed ratio", that is, it is very clear: what to do? What kind of rewards will you get?
Therefore, when points are earned for completing a task, but the points do not bring enough positive feedback and a sense of value, the user's motivation is greatly reduced, resulting in churn, which is very common.
This article was originally published by @Dog on everyone is a product manager, and reproduction without permission is prohibited
The title image is from unsplash and is based on the cc0 protocol