Fatal flaw in study of consumer attitudes on mobile advertising

Just read another forward-looking study on consumer attitudes toward various evolving aspects of mobile and mobile advertising. My thoughts apply equally to any emerging and rapidly evolving field. Like many such reports, taken at face value it might be read as giving clear guidance to go down a certain path. That may help sell reports, but it would better serve its audience if the research weren't written up that way.

Be careful listening to consumers answer hypothetical questions about what they might do with something they've never experienced.

'Tis true, you'd be a fool not to ask.

You'd be a fool not to look for insight in their answers. Be open to new directions.

You'd also be a fool not to keep moving forward to try putting something in their hands and see the results. Then go back and ask (and listen) again.

In general, qualitative research seems more useful for forward looking hypotheticals. Something feels irresponsible about providing quantitative results here. But survey percentages are less expensive to produce and sound more authoritative, so we got plenty of them. Instead, let me hear what people are thinking, in their voices, unshaped by multiple-choice boxes.

Either way, take hypothetical studies as just that: something to prove wrong or right. Use them to look for possible insights, not for answers.

GigaOM's Mobilize more interesting than CTIA?

I'm looking forward to my fourth CTIA next week. I've made great friends and contacts there in years past. Hopefully there will also be some interesting launches and things to learn. Last year it was great to hear Steve Ballmer's keynote and the launch of Facebook's Blackberry app from the front rows.

I'm even more excited about GigaOM's upcoming Mobilize conference two weeks from today (Sept 18). Well focused, with a concentration of fantastic speakers and topics distilled into a day of single-track panels, a format I really enjoy.

They all look interesting enough to keep me glued to my seat for the day, but perhaps this is the one I'm most looking forward to:

Money and Friends: The Promise of Social Networks on Mobiles Social networks work on the pc web. The 100 Million users that Facebook are about to reach is testament to that. Many in Silicon Valley are rubbing their hands at the prospects of riches being mined from mobility meeting the social graph. But the real question is will it work? Will people want it? Many transitions from the web to mobile have landed with a wet thud. We ask the people at the frontline of making social networking work on mobile what obstacles and oases they see on the road ahead	Sebastian Rupley, PCMagCast	John Faith, MySpace Mobile
		Chamath Palihapitiya, Facebook
		Noelia Amoedo, Hi 5
		Evan Tana, Loopt

I've been asked to talk to several startups in the mobile social space. Despite being a mobile advocate, I often walk away scratching my head about why I'd use them at all, much less how they'd integrate with my existing networks and the experience on my laptop, or how they really take advantage of anything mobile. John Faith and the rest of this panel are absolute tops in the field who will have fascinating thoughts to share. Can't wait to hear them.

Mad Men, Zappos, O'Reilly: Brilliant use of Twitter for Marketing Doesn't Look like Using Twitter for Marketing

On Twitter I follow several people who have profiles associated with their brand. Not because I want to know how they use Twitter or even because I was particularly concerned with their company (to start, anyway), but because they have interesting things to say. That's the key to successful marketing in this medium.

Even though I have a professional interest in how they market with Twitter (I've given talks at conferences on the subject), I'll get bored with them quickly and stop Following if they aren't interesting. 

Through their personalities and authenticy, I've become more interested in their companies and bought things I might not even have known about otherwise.

One of the best examples is CEO Tony Hsieh. He posts as Zappos, but tweets less often about the company (with annual sales of $1 Billion) than the nachos he's eating before a meeting, or to show pictures from his trip to the Olympics. He's simply sharing himself as a real person (and several of his employees also do the same under their own Twitter accounts), or offering to buy me a drink on the roof of Medjool (thanks, Tony!). This degree of transparency is consistent with his amazing focus on customer experience. From Inc. magazine:

"We're a service company that just happens to sell shoes...." I'd rather spend money on things that improve the customer experience than on marketing. If someone is looking for a specific shoe and we happen to be out of stock, we have employees direct those people to competitors' sites.... We interview people for culture fit. We want people who are passionate about what Zappos is about--service. I don't care if they're passionate about shoes.

(For more about building that culture, Harvard Business explains how Zappos even Pays New Employees to Quit. They mention the marketing success: "It's not good PR, it's humans acting humanly.")

Transparency allows Tony to market by sharing what he's doing (and letting his customers do it for him), and allows him to directly get feedback crucial to understanding how he can continue to improve experience. He replies personally to those who reach out to him. The human face he wears makes him feel like a friend, and makes the business things he passes on just more sharing himself and his passion.

Tim O'Reilly is CEO of O'Reilly Media, but also contributes to many businesses I didn't know about before I started following him on Twitter. He's another brilliant example of Twitter used perfectly to a marketing effect. You never get the sense that he's thinking about marketing, just being himself. I know about his daughter's wedding, his political views and many other small details of his fascinating life.

Very small details since tweets all fit in 140 characters. Which is also part of why this works so well. I have a small degree of intimacy and connection with folks who I know what they're doing when they're doing it, in such tiny slices that Tim has taken maybe 5 or 10 minutes of my time total in Twitter over many months (though I've also heard him talk at conferences or read articles he's linked to). I can afford that time across more people than I could otherwise follow in blog posts or other long forms.

Each person tends to use Twitter uniquely in some ways. A great thing that Tim does particularly often is to Re-Tweet, passing on interesting things that he sees from people he follows on Twitter. I learn things about who and what he finds interesting and see that he clearly uses this tool for himself personally. He is listening, not just broadcasting.

If someone posts too often with stuff I don't care about deeply, I tend to Unfollow. Tony and Tim both post more frequently than most of the people I Follow in Twitter, but I don't mind at all. They're so spot on about the variety of things they post on and how open they are about sharing their true selves. I'm glad they post often.

But some posters put them to shame with volume. The lastest, biggest example of how a brand is promoted effectively using Twitter unfolded over the last couple days and involves the hit TV show Mad Men.

Twitter accounts for each of the folks on the show shared aspects of their fictional lives and responded publicly to comments from other Twitter users, always perfectly in character. I'd been following Don_Draper (after my friend Betsy at FocusCatalyst told me about him over tea) and then was followed by many of the other characters. Already a fan of the show, I thought it was brilliant, despite the volume being heavy, and not choosing to follow most of the characters myself, and told several other people about it.

I was ready to congratulate the show on a stroke of genius. They'd extended the fictional world they'd created on TV (through meticulous research leading to nailing every details of an early sixties ad agency and office life). They'd allowed interaction with the characters, commentary from the characters. They'd done it in a short form that made it practical even for the volume that a major TV show can generate. The Word-of-Mouth was about to go through the roof.

Then I found out that the accounts were being deleted. It seems that they weren't actually from the show, but were a kind of fan fiction, and the AMC network served Twitter with DMCA takedown notices. Those who'd taken on the characters were fessing up.

Fortunately, this turned around in less than 24 hours:

Deep Focus, the Web marketing group that works for AMC, tells us that they gently nudged their client into rescinding the DMCA takedown notice they'd sent to Twitter.

See, in Web marketing parlance, the Twitterers assuming the names of Mad Men characters are actually "brand ambassadors" meant to be cultivated, not thwarted. "Better to embrace the community than negate their efforts," says a Deep Focus spokesman.

I'm back to calling it brilliant. Once you've created something worth talking about, people will talk. Share in the own conversation or get out of the way, but this isn't about control. It's about letting go. Letting go of controlling the message. Letting go of the sense that you have to be perfect -- embracing the humanness of making mistakes, of listening, and of responding appropriately and without ego.

Update: Thanks for extra info and credit in your post over at CNet, Dan. [I really have to upgrade to WordPress so I have trackbacks and other great features...]

VP announcement via Txt: Do we care?

This afternoon I received a text message from the Obama campaign (I'd opted-in to text messaging programs for all candidates from both parties early in the year):

Barack will announce his VP candidate choice through txt msg between now & the Conv. Tell everyone to text VP to 62262 to be the first to know! Please forward.

I imagine this is intended mostly to try to get some extra publicity out of the announcement, to position Obama as being in touch with how Americans communicate, and to expand their list of txt opt-ins so they can ask for support and money throughout the rest of the campaign.  Mostly yawn.

I'd be interested to hear how this does in terms of new opt-ins, but is this news really compelling enough that people will want to sign up for it in particular?

As well, it's too bad they continue to treat text as a broadcast medium and don't invite any feedback, interactivity or community.  I've often suggested that a wonderful feature of text messages is that they force brevity. That frequently results in better thought out, poignant responses, and always makes it easier to read though what more people have to say.

When Obama reads and responds to some of the best SMS messages he's received, then I'll suspect his campaign might really be different and his White House more accessible to the people.

UPDATE 1, 10:26pm Friday, Aug 22:  So much for Text messaging being first... wire services report CNN says Biden will be the dem's VP.  I'm still waiting to see the text message from Obama, but then I guess he hasn't actually announced...

UPDATE 2: 1:02am Saturday, Aug 23: Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee. Watch the first Obama-Biden rally live at 3pm ET on www.BarackObama.com. Spread the word! I like that they tried to respond quickly to the breaking news once there was a leak, but I'm not sure it is ever a good idea to send commercial or political text messages at 1am (4am ET).  I'm pretty sure that the only text messages kosher to send at that hour involve a booty call.  

They announced on Twitter even later. 

If all you are going to use SMS and Twitter for is broadcasting, at least be polite about when you do it. Better yet, get an @reply in your tweetstream once in a while, or mention feedback you read in a text message when you're responding to a question or putting out a statement.

Once you start actually having a conversation with me, maybe I'll feel like you've earned the right to hit me up for a 1am booty call.

Animated magazine cover: reality mimics Harry Potter

A real magazine on newsstands available to Muggles this October will have an animated cover, just like The Daily Prophet newspaper read by Harry Potter.

Since this isn't fiction, no surprise that it's sponsored by an advertiser.  Ford will be the first company in history to have an animated print magazine ad.

What comes next?  

I know I'd rather read anything good (but longer than a text message) on paper rather than skimming it on screen.  Especially if I can flip through it like a real magazine, not load each page like on a Kindle.  

How long until we have a fully digital magazine allowing me to download a new issue on a regular basis then flip through pages and browse content and advertising targeted specifically to me?  

Would this be the best of both worlds, allowing publishers a new outlet for distributing and selling customized content while giving advertisers the longer attention span of a magazine reader combined with the targeting of interactive advertising?

Information Week reports:

Esquire First Publication To Use Electronic Ink

Esquire plans to publish the magazine's October issue using so-called electronic ink. The issue will feature a cover across which various words and images will scroll "news-ticker style" -- thanks to technology developed by Cambridge, Mass.-based E Ink

E Ink uses segmented display cells to show simple images and alphanumeric text on a paper-like material. The system requires a small battery. In the case of Esquire's October issue, the battery should last for about 90 days

"We've spent 16 months making this happen," Esquire editor David Granger said in a statement. Granger said the issue's content will eye how digital technology is affecting the world. "The entire issue is devoted to exploring the ideas, people and issues that will be the foundation of the 21st century," he said.

Hearst's effort is being co-sponsored by Ford. The automaker is running a double-page spread on the back of Esquire's October cover that also will use electronic ink and will promote Ford's new Flex crossover vehicle.

The technology "offered us the chance to show the vehicle in a way we never could have imagined," said Jim Farley, Ford's group VP of marketing and communications, in a statement.

Magazines have been steadily losing advertising dollars to the Internet as marketers begin to favor the Web's interactivity and personalization potential. Electronic ink, if it catches on, could help the print industry reverse the trend -- or at least hold its ground -- in the contest for ad revenue.

They Murdered the Experience: iPhone purchase and activation

One of the first things that gave me joy about iPhone 1.0 was the purchase, activation and setup experience.

If you've ever bought a cell phone, you've probably experienced pain going through all the many confusing options (in store or over the phone) for plans, dealing with upselling for warranties and accessories, answering all the questions and waiting for computer problems, credit checks, etc. Then onto quirks activating and setting up. Nothing about the process seems considerate of the customer, their time and frustration. Before iPhone 1.0, this was true across all the carriers and handsets out there.

iPhone 1.0 and AT&T changed all that, simplifying plans and choices, allowing you to purchase a phone with a credit card in seconds (like buying groceries), and providing for activation at your home computer with just a few simple questions.

I'd often evangelized this part of the experience as setting iPhone apart, as a brilliant move by Apple, and as something that would hopefully have an impact on the industry as a whole.

Unfortunately, it seems that in solving a business problem, AT&T and Apple have dropped that focus on the customer and their experience and taken us back to the days before iPhone 1.0. I can only hope that they will consider this a mistake, learn from it, and find a way to put the experience first again while addressing the business problems. They still have it in them to change the industry.


I'd love to hear from Apple or AT&T how they went about deciding this way to do things, retreating so far from the brave stand they took with 1.0.

Experience: the essential competitive advantage

I camped on the street last night in front of 1 Stockton, the San Francisco Apple Store.  I'll be here until 8am tomorrow.

Reporters ask "why?"

It's a great question.  And it occurs to me that every business should be answering this question, too. 

What would make anyone want to camp in line for a new product release?  

What would make someone do that in my industry or for one of my products?  

What do people in line say?  

What do those who pass by say?

How do they feel after the line is done and they're buying and using the product and service?

(I've had some great conversations with the homeless about what a one-man tent costs, or where they sleep and how they live.  What's it like to talk to people you don't think of as part of your market, or you wouldn't normally have a conversation with?)

Of course, the answers must extend beyond marketing, to every aspect of the product, how it is sold, delivered and serviced.

I may be preaching to the choir, but only dinosaurs will keep competing primarily on price, features, or ad dollars. Others have gone on at length about some of the reasons (Seth Godin, for example).

Watching an Apple Store for 24 hours, and talking to people about it is a great example of how all the little details are accounted for, from the security guard who says goodnight to the friendly staff who all greet you with a smile, to the window cleaner who spends 90 minutes here each morning at 6am and the free internet I'm using to type this on a store computer while charging my old iPhone.

I'm not a fan of Apple in particular.  I'm a fan of anyone who understands the power of good design (understood in the broad sense) and delivers a fantastic end-to-end experience.

If you aren't asking these questions for your business, it's just a matter of time until someone comes along and eats your lunch by delivering a dramatically improved experience. And they'll do it without using any special magic, just by paying attention and asking different questions.

If your organization operates in silos with no way to account for the experience a user has throughout the process, expect the same.  Saying "we're customer focused" doesn't make it so.  What do your customers say?

The answers you come up with today may be less important than continuing to ask the questions, to be curious, and to be out there talking to people and watching them.

So come join me in line, start asking the questions, looking, and listening, and lets talk about some of the answers.

(I've written several posts about the iPhone and User Experience that you might find interesting, perha