Best and worst of email interaction design, 2009 : Forrester applies its email interaction review methodology to 16 major firms
Contenido multimedia no disponible por derechos de autor o por acceso restringido. Contacte con la institución para más información.
| Tag | 1 | 2 | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| LDR | 00000nam a22000004b 4500 | ||
| 001 | MAP20090104846 | ||
| 003 | MAP | ||
| 005 | 20191202111851.0 | ||
| 008 | 090428s2009 usa|||| ||| ||eng d | ||
| 040 | $aMAP$bspa$dMAP | ||
| 084 | $a217 | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | $aBest and worst of email interaction design, 2009$b : Forrester applies its email interaction review methodology to 16 major firms$cby Adele Sage... [et al.] |
| 260 | $aCambridge$bForrester Research$c2009 | ||
| 490 | 1 | $aFor Customer experience professionals | |
| 520 | $aForrester applied its Email Interaction Review to the email interactions of 16 firms: four each of the largest auto insurers, discount retailers, footwear manufacturers, and online travel agencies. Only one of the 15 companies that actually responded to our emails passed the evaluation: Nike. As a group, footwear manufacturers outperformed other industries, while discount retailers fell to the bottom of the list. We also found a number of best practices, such as Orbitz's in-context link to the privacy policy, Target's proactive explanation of potentially confusing terms, and Expedia's clear instructions for how to respond. To improve email interactions, firms should evaluate their own email experiences | ||
| 650 | 1 | $0MAPA20080584405$aCorreo electrónico | |
| 650 | 1 | $0MAPA20080609542$aCanales de distribución | |
| 650 | 1 | $0MAPA20080593483$aServicio al cliente | |
| 650 | $0MAPA20190001328$aMárketing de la empresa de seguros | ||
| 700 | 1 | $0MAPA20090013513$aSage, Adele | |
| 710 | 2 | $0MAPA20080436582$aForrester | |
| 830 | 0 | $0MAPA20080528355$aFor Customer experience professionals |