Email personalization is bad? Hmmm....not quite the whole story.

So there was a post on ReadWriteWeb yesterday about a new study that says too much personalization in email can backfire.  Now, I'm convinced that technology pundits are never happier than when they are decrying something so I went to the original article on the study they cited and found the following: The level of personalization had LITTLE to do with people's reaction - instead, it depended on the VALUE the message offered them.  

Gratuitous personalization + value = good!

Gratuitous personalization + no value = bad!

No personalization + value = good!

No personalization + no value = bad!

This isn't rocket science, folks. 

All this study is really saying is what good marketers should have already known - speaking to the interests of the users is the way to go.  I think that sometimes, this may come from personalization.  More often though, I think it comes from segmentation. Instead of overloading an email with content that is irrelevant to the user, why not use that information to segment your campaigns to better target the  message to the user's needs?  For example, for you admissions email marketings out there - send different segmented messages to your inquiries, applicants, accepts and deposited students instead of one blanket e-newsletter.  For development, use class  year to segment messages with different iconography that is familiar to the user depending on what era they attended your institution.  This can make them feel like you know them without being overt about it, while at the same time offering the value this student actually recommends.