Trust in others -NZ Data

Trust in others
New Zealand Social Report 2009

Definition

The proportion of the population aged 15 years and over reporting that people can "almost always" or "usually" be trusted, in the Quality of Life Survey.

Relevance

Trust in others is an important indicator of how people feel about members of their community. High levels of trust facilitate co-operative behaviour among people and contribute to people’s ability to develop positive relationships with others.

Current level

In 2008, 78 per cent of New Zealanders aged 15 years and over said that people can be trusted, a similar proportion to that recorded 2006 (76 per cent). Those who said that people can usually be trusted made up the largest group (60 per cent), while those who said that people can almost always be trusted made up 17 per cent. The corresponding figures for 2006 were 58 per cent and 18 per cent, respectively.

Figure SC3.1 Proportion of people reporting that people can be trusted, by level of trust, 2006 and 2008

Source: Quality of Life Survey 2006; Quality of Life Survey 2008

Age and sex differences

The proportion of New Zealanders aged 15 years and over reporting that people can be trusted was similar for males (78 per cent) and females (77 per cent). Eighteen per cent of males and 17 per cent of females agreed that people can almost always be trusted, while 60 per cent of both males and females responded that people can usually be trusted.

Young adults aged 15–24 years (74 per cent) were slightly less likely than people aged 25 years and over (78 per cent) to report that people can be trusted.

Ethnic differences

People of European ethnicity reported a slightly higher level of trust in people (79 per cent) than Māori (75 per cent). Pacific peoples (72 per cent) and those of Asian ethnicity (71 per cent) had the lowest proportions who said that people could be trusted.

Figure SC3.2 Proportion of people reporting that people can be trusted, by ethnic group and level of trust, 2008

Source: Quality of Life Survey 2008

Socio-economic differences

Across all income levels, a large majority of New Zealanders indicated that people can be trusted. Overall levels of reported trust increased with personal income levels. People with incomes over $100,000 reported the highest overall level of trust (84 per cent), while people with incomes of $30,000 or less reported the lowest level (76 per cent).

Figure SC3.3 Proportion of people reporting that people can be trusted, by personal income and level of trust, 2008

Source: Quality of Life Survey 2008

Regional differences

Across all New Zealand’s big cities, a large majority of New Zealanders indicated that people can be trusted. Reported levels of trust were highest in Wellington (87 per cent) and lowest in Manukau (68 per cent).

International comparison

New Zealanders’ level of trust in other people in 2006 compared well with those of people in European Union countries in 2005, and to that of people in Canada in 2003. Out of 25 OECD countries for which there was data, New Zealand had the sixth highest reported level of trust in other people.¹¹¹

New Zealand’s reported level of trust in other people (76 per cent in 2006) was above the median of 56 per cent for these 25 OECD countries. Norway had the highest reported level of trust in people (87 per cent) followed by Denmark and Sweden (both 84 per cent). Canada (53 per cent) and the United Kingdom (55 per cent) reported lower levels of trust in other people than New Zealand.

 

Source

http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/social-connectedness/trust-others.html

 

Posted via email from cjlambert's posterous

To Food Show Or Not To Food Show

When I was brand manager for a national supermarket brand, I remember organising many a trade show. The proposals would come in and I would always decline them. Then those higher up the totem pole would approve them and I’d get stuck trying to figure out how to feed thousands of people with little plastic cups and spoons.

Because that’s all you do at most trade shows.

Feed and water people. Trade shows can be fantastic and a great way of introducing certain new products to market. You have one major issue though.

Clutter. Big time clutter. They are usually jam packed with people and the demonstrators have no time to sell the benefits of your product. You’re also generally grouped by category (e.g. wine) so customers jostle down the wine row knocking back thimbles and have no idea what they just sampled.



Things to think about:

If you’re going to do a show GO HUGE and invest properly. A half-baked stand will do very little for you. Macs Brewery often do full bar tap installations and take over the whole corner of a convention centre. As a customer, you know that you’re having a Macs brand experience. Think of the stand cost like buying a section of land. You still have to build a house, plumb the loo and throw in some furniture. Staff, marketing collateral, samples and AV equipment can soak up budgets pretty quick. Allow 4-5 times the stand cost as a starting point. Corporate stands often run at 20 times.

Demonstrators are salespeople. Make sure the people on the stand can sell. Make sure they pitch the product, then give the sample. You’re not there to feed people and hand out free stuff!

Consider demonstrating outside your category or industry. Do food at a home show. Do pet food at a baby show. At least you’ll be different and not get lost in the clutter.

Retailer demonstration packages are generally far more cost effective. Most supermarkets will let you demonstrate starting from around $50 per store. Smaller retailers will let you demo for free. Why pay for an exhibitor site with little customer engagement?

Don’t attend because everybody else is. I used to often hear “but our competitor is going to be there so we have to have a presence". Rubbish. Let them have it and go somewhere else, why shout over each other?

Founder of the advertising sampling movement Claude C Hopkins (1866-1932) says it best:

So with sampling. Hand an unwanted product to a housewife and she pays it slight respect. She is in no mood to see its virtues. But get her to ask for a sample after hearing your story and she is in a very different position. She knows your claims. She is interested in them else she would not ask. And she expects to find the qualities you told.

New Zealand Media Wars!

Bring it on traditional media.

Your desperate attempts to pull your nose diving little cash cows out of the spiral amuses me.

Today's Herald on Sunday?

The screeching battlecry of an aggrieved drowning wilderbeast. Page after page devoted to discrediting new media content providers. It amuses me even more that your lazybus journalism reported these stories in the first place and gave them legs. The fakie TradeMe nude mum. Where did I first see the photos?

I must admit that I too was cynical of the 'digital paradigm shift.' But it's real, and it's happening and the traditional media blood letting will continue until you guys get it and start giving the people of New Zealand decent content.

Preparing Key Messages for SpaceWalking Astronauts

Houston- we have a problem. Prepare for key messages.

At first rumblings that there’s a media issue on the horizon, Houston communications cranks out four pages of key messages It’s horribly inefficient and more importantly, ineffective. Especially when most communications Houstons don’t write key messages, they write laundry lists of facts. I was asked to sign off on one of these laundry lists this morning developed by a junior Houston.

She is a very good Houston, but had got into the habit of cranking out four-page lists to keep up appearances for the Astronauts.

I had to remind her that key messages are:

1. For internal use only

2. For use by company approved Astronauts or Houstons only i.e. people that have an understanding of the issue already to act as media spokespeople

3. For communicating an established organisational, strategic position.

For example: "We aim to find water on Mars by 2040".

Is a project fact

"I think humans will reach Mars, and I would like to see it happen in my lifetime". Buzz Aldrin
Is a project key message (that’s why it gets quoted-that’s what you want).

Three of four maximum. Not pages, messages.

If the astronauts are out spacewalking, they don’t have time to read four-page documents when Oprah rings for a chat. Keep it simple, understand the issues, and make sure you nail the biggies on the media call.

"I believe that every human has a finite number of heartbeats. I don't intend to waste any of mine running around doing exercises." Neil Armstrong. You and me both Neil.

JetStar CEO Takes Media Tips from Veitch

After listening to CEO of JetStar Bruce Buchanan on Radio New Zealand this morning I'm quite convinced that the has been taking media training tips from Tony Veitch. The best piece of media management advice I've ever been given: "say sorry!". Turns out both Buchanan and Veitch have been given this chestnut too, but do you think they could say it?

Buchanan had a shocker in the Herald on Sunday last week with the excusefest megamix:

"We are apologetic." Is not SORRY

"Air New Zealand is being MEAN to us." Is not SORRY

"Air New Zealand made a a BIG DEAL of Prime Minister John Key being left in Queenstown." Is not SORRY.

So Radio NZ gave you another go this morning Mr JetStar CEO Bruce Buchanan. And how did that go?

"We understand that people just want us to say sorry"....(BUT YOU DIDN'T).

Live replay of the excusefest megamix, remashed with some 'we're all wise in hindsight'. He threw in a little bit of weather and fog and airports and slow border management (?) and then tried to bribe everyone with a '$50 if your plane is late'guarantee. Whoopee!(Um, and didn't Air New Zealand do that first to pull your pants down a couple of weeks back?). Check out their LAME deal below.

http://tinyurl.com/lv5bch

Posted via email from cjlambert's posterous

'Entergagement' for Dummies

I need a new word that’s not 'entertaining'. I keep saying it in meetings, sometimes I say 'entertainment'.

Your content needs to be 'entertaining'. Or -there is an 'entertainment' aspect that you can’t ignore in your social media strategy.

The usual response, when I unleash the magical E! channel word, is a physical twitch of disapproval.

Sometimes a bumped coffee and an under the breath mutter from my no longer captivated audience. On Wednesday I got a stern, "that’s not relevant to this campaign.”

If you are a serious pinstriped suit financial services company then I can understand the flashes of horror about mixing up your products with a spoonful of Paris Hilton. That’s not quite what I mean though. Geeky, interesting, informative content is—‘entertaining’-it doesn’t have to be Las Vegas.

In government PR 2.0, no one wants to campaign on the dancing clown ticket. I get that. You do need to be a real person though. Real people that are dry, boring, preachy and negative don’t get invited to the Friday night drinks. Obama is ‘entertaining’ to me; and he’s no dancing clown.

Relevant, engaging, what other words can I use? I have the attention span of a goldfish when I’m hoovering through online content. I get through a lot of it everyday and you’d better be cooking something tasty if you want me to park up and stay for dinner.

So from now on it's 'entergagement'. Your content needs to be 'entergaging'. That’ll really confuse them.

Women Love Cars, Boobs & Stripper Poles

Stroppy Tart Alert
I'm a huge Tom Peters fan and have just reminded myself why after a quick rescan of the 2005 'Trends' book. It's astonishing how accurate he is. The chapter on the opportunities around marketing to women has always been something I've found highly puzzling. It seems OK to talk about 'Gen' this and 'empty nest' something but as soon as you start talking about 'marketing to women' you get the 'uh oh, stroppy tart' eye roll. Tom Peters beleaguers the point that it's not about being patronising and WYMNSY; it's about opportunity. Yes Tom,you are right. Why can marketing departments full of women not get this?

It's also interesting how the examples he uses all echo my own experiences: hotels and cars. I've also added a wee gem I hear women in marketing departments moan about every day: ad agencies.

So you think I'm a slapper?
Hotel:Is it just you?
Me:Yes
Hotel: How many for breakfast?
Me:One
Hotel: It's OK if you order two (wink)
Me:Why?
Hotel:We don't mind ,it won't show on the tab (winks again)
Me: One is fine.

Please hotel people there is a massive opportunity to market to women business travellers. I was impressed recently by a hotel that had a Cuisine food magazine waiting for me, Diet Coke aplenty...you get it. Talk about secure access from the car park, crank up the heater and have low-fat cereal. Women like warm and pretending to eat healthy.

Fast Cars and No Money
I come from a family of car dealers. I've driven hundreds of cars. I love cars and know a bit about them. I do my own oil changes. All car dealers know that the woman is the decision maker- 'Sell the car to the wife'. I went to the dealer to select my company car. Some of the guys from the office came for a trip because they were bored. I was standing there with a generous car allowance ready to hand to someone and being completely ignored while the three male tyre kickers test drove sports cars. It wasn't until the dealer asked for one of the guys licenses to do the change of ownership the penny dropped: 'Um, it's actually for me-I'm their boss."

Open Letter To Ad Agencies
Dear Ad Agencies,

I don't need an account manager with hot legs and big boobs. Please give me one that knows about marketing or in the least, one that can send and receive emails. Help/support/collaborate/LISTEN is important. I don't need my ego stroked. regards, your chick client (and all the other mainly chick clients that make up this department). PS. Your Christmas party with topless strippers on poles was hideous, tacky, and distasteful. The 5% male attendees got some great pics, the 95% chick attendees are still reeling. It's Easter. (*true story).

Most Women In Marketing Are Women
Shocking I know. Trust your instincts and don't approve things that don't make sense to you. It's not WYMNSY, it's understanding your customers. Right, off to ShowGirls (?!)