Three Minds On Digital Marketing @ Organic

We often think of user and brand experience in the online space. But what happens when that experience exits the digital realm? I recently came across two pieces of work by two distinctly different agencies that successfully took the user experience off the safe path. One was driven by the brand. The other by the consumers.
 
Brand-Directed Paths
eView360 focuses on the reach of a brand experience and how it should touch print and interactive, and then carry over into physical space.  One pointed example is seamless brand experience Tessera Executive Search in Dubai presents from print to web to office.

eView360 is a unique agency that employs a multidisciplinary approach that includes print, web, interior and architectural design. When creating a branded experience for their clients, they carry their design cues into the physical office environment. For Tessera Exectutive Search, the color schemes on the Tessera website carry over to the wood stains in the office or the seats in the waiting room. The environment "feels" Tessera in all the areas where you interact with the company.

Consumer-Created Paths
Mazda 3 used an Alternate Reality Game (ARG) in Quebec, Canada to build awareness around its launch. Called the 33 keys project, it enticed users to find 33 keys in a scavenger hunt across various mediums. The ultimate prize? A real vehicle. A TV spot created awareness, and seeded through blogs and guerilla marketing. There were a number of web properties built for the campaign including a website, a Facebook group and a blog.
 
Over the course of play, the game changed and players reached out to each other through social media channels outside of the established properties. With this change in strategy, the brand was forced to change how they supported the game. They also worked with bloggers and Facebook group owners to seed clues. Their flexibility only added to the excitement of the game and encouraged more participation. Overall, it was a very successful campaign.
 
Managing the Experience
Both presentations got me thinking about how all-encompassing a user or brand experience can be. Seeing how the 33 keys project grew organically from their own properties to blogs and social networks, I wondered if it's even possible to manage the experience. Also, seeing how eView360 carries the brand through to physical spaces, I thought about how quickly a brand can be lost once outside the print or web space.
 
So, how do we help users experience a brand through multiple mediums?

• Create continuity. Consider all the places where your customers interact with your brand and make sure they're consistent.

• Think about your leitmotif. What cues can your customers feel that let them know when they're in your space, be that physical, cyber or print?

• Plan for change. As with 33keys, customers may pick up on your brand and run with it.

• Generate novel ideas. What would you do (or have you tried)?

Anthony Viviano
Sarah Jo Sautter
 

When new CEO Carol Bartz took the reign at Yahoo she promised to shake things up a bit and she held true to her promise. For the past several month, Yahoo has improved their UI and discontinued less popular services like the 'briefcase". Last week they launched access to "applications" right from your Yahoo inbox. I love the direction they are going. I have been using Yahoo Mail for as long as I can think and must admit I never got used to the Gmail interface. I might be a bit old fashioned that way.
 
Y! Mail also launched the "Connections Bar" a few weeks ago, but it seems to be removed from the interface now. I believe it is an attempt to integrate popular social networking features into your mailbox. The only issue is that you have to invite people to become connections and then it just seems like a filter for your inbox. Hopefully they have some more ideas to make this feature more valuable.
 
I like that they are making an effort to improve their services. I did, however, notice that Yahoo has a tendency to launch buggy services. Maybe they put more emphasis on speed to market and less on quality. I did just get a serious browser error when I tried to active my Flickr account in the application below. Generally I am a firm believer in high quality, because to me, first impressions can make or break a deal. Plus some folks may never go back and try it a second time if it hasn't worked the first time. Well...I cut the folks at Yahoo some slack because I like my Y! Mail.

How do you feel about companies being too quick to launch something that still has a few kinks?

Sonja Scharrer

This video by Google illustrates several issues that have been plaguing product and brand managers, UxDs (user-experience designers) and IAs (information architects) and most obviously, the general public. Google asks "What is a browser," only to find that less than 8% of those polled have an understanding of the term. (It is, by the way, "a software application for retrieving, presenting, and traversing information resources on the World Wide Web" - Wikipedia; e.g. Mozilla Firefox or Microsoft's Internet Explorer (The big blue 'E'))

For Branders
For those of us concerned with brand definition, the example is clear: Google checks to see if people understand how Chrome is better even have a basic understanding of the term "browser," and find that the confusion has hardly cleared up over the past 15 years, since graphical browser use became widespread in the mid-'90s. Back then, users thought they "used Yahoo!" to surf the information superhighway, and as we see here, they still believe the same.

For Google Chrome achieve any penetration in this market, the big G needs to focus on not only defining and demonstrating Chrome's unique value, but also educating the public on the very basic concepts of "browsing," and "applications." This is no small task, as Firefox has long been fighting this battle and making slow gains against the IE giant, mostly through word-of-mouth from passionate advocates, again illustrated in the Google video. (I, personally, have done this on many occasions, wiping IE from friends' and families' hard drives in a Firefox coup.)

For IAers
For those of us concerned with interface design, the interviews illustrate the need for simplicity. This video may make you consider an edit or two if your web site copy includes the call-to-action "Download to your browser," or similar industry-insider phrases. On a more macro level, the interviews highlight the importance of maintaining a holistic view of the web experience.

If your users don't really understand what a browser is, do they know when they are on your web site, or is your vanity URL confusing this; perhaps they're on an "unofficial" site created by a passionate fan?

If your users don't really understand what a browser is, do they think they have to come through Google or Yahoo! to reach your site? Do you show up (positively) there?

If your users don't really understand what a browser is, are they savvy enough to find their way through your site; are they stymied by nomenclature that is cloaked in your brand's jargon or Internet industry jargon?

I don't care what a browser is.

Ultimately, this video illustrates the fact that people don't really care how they get what they want online, just that they get it. The best thing your brand, product or digital experience can do is make it easy and understandable for your customers.

So for product and brand managers; UxDs and IAs, the questions become, does your market know what your brand promises? Do they know what your product does? Do they know what that button does or where that link goes?

Or, does your market make assumptions about your product, lumping it in with a lesser offering, mistaking it for your competition, or for a completely different idea?

If so, you have a lot of work to do. Maybe it's time to hit the pavement and get some real insight from real customers.

Craig Ritchie

Our little Norwegian-based company, Opera, is at it again with a bold claim that it will "reinvent the web" with its new Opera Unite service.
 
Some of the features available to Mac, PC, or Linux/Unix users:

• File sharing -- securely share files direct from your computer
• Web server -- turns your home computer into a web server via Opera Unite URL
• Media player -- direct link to your music collection from any web browser
• Photo sharing -- shares your image library over the web without requiring a photo service
• Lounge -- self-contained chat service running on your computer
• Fridge -- a place where friends and family can post notes

All sounds good on paper. But we have some skeptics here:

"These Swiss army knife apps that attempt to do everything for everyone tend to fall short in the end. The convenience of having all that functionality in one place often comes at the expense of the robust functionality we expect from dedicated apps.

Take the photo-sharing feature. Sounds nice, but are you really going to use go for that over Flickr or Picasa? Especially if it means fragmenting your library? Will the media player have the codec support I have in my dedicated media player?

Looks nice on paper, but I'm not buying shares just yet."
- Dan Neumann
 
"I'm wondering how this would compare to Google Wave. Google Wave is claiming to 'reinvent email', but it sounds like they are trying to do a lot of the same stuff by making it more collaborative, real-time, and enable sharing."
- Marta Strickland
 
"Opera's promo video and new list of features are uninspired, in my opinion. One could replace Opera with Facebook, Twitter, Google, Xbox, and probably countless other platforms, and no one would notice the difference. This is a failure in branding and product strategy.
 
As for this vs. Google Wave, the Wave team has truly examined the experience from the user's perspective, and uniquely rebuilt communication online, while Opera Unite seems to be just adding on functionality that certainly isn't revolutionary. That is, the elements of Wave aren't new, but most people don't use things like Wikis and Twitter... Wave is positioned to take over because of its simplicity and intuitive structure.
 
And btw... 'Fridge?' Dumb."
-Craig Ritchie

 
These are all valid points and they've left us wondering three questions:
1.  Will people really make the leap from their "trusted" current browser?
2.  How long before other browsers copy these services?
3.  And last but not least, the privacy issue. Will people be fearful of sharing their stuff?
 
Opera has been around for over a decade and had features like tabbed browsing and a search bar at the top of the browser before Firefox did and is looked to as an innovator on the web browser front by companies like Mozilla. So the thought about other browsers copying Opera's services is absolutely correct.
 
Opera claims their mobile and computer-based browsers are very secure - even safer with user data than Firefox and any product they develop tends to include the same encryption and security. Even if people trust that, it may not get past the legal barriers. The file sharing aspects of this product may be frowned upon by the U.S. legal system, as they will likely fall into the same category of services like Grokster and Napster. However, with a much larger following for Opera outside of the US, and being Norway-based, we don't really think they're concerned about that.
 
Do you think the new Opera will do as they promise and "reinvent the web?"
 
Tyler King
Sarah Jo Sautter

The U.S. Postal Service recently launched a very nice way to use augmented reality (AR). Their Virtual Box Simulator is unusual in that it offers real utility by allowing users to determine appropriate box size for what they want to ship. Simply print out their eagle logo. Then use your webcam.

Branded AR executions are under fire these days and agencies who use the technology are often derided for buying into a novelty that offers little value to end users. Some critics have even gone as far as to draw comparisons with Second Life.

Dan Neumann notes: Recently, I've seen a few executions that seem to defy much of this criticism. This is one of them.

Karri Ojanen wrote about a mobile application that broke through this with entertainment value. The Virtual Box Simulator is another. And it appears to bring much product and service value. How long before the other shipping companies follow?

Thanks to Dan Neumann for the link.
Sarah Jo Sautter

Adaptive Path, an experience strategy, user research and design firm recently announced the completion of their Mobile Literacy project. They studied mobile device usage in rural Gujarat, India.

As the lead Experience Architect for Chrysler International, I'm anxious to learn the full findings of their study. One tidbit of information agrees with what we learned researching our International mobile users. (Check out the Jeep South Africa site on your phone -- or shrink your PC browser.)

In many parts of the world, low cost mobile phones are more often used than PCs to access the Web. In fact, many international users do not own a PC, so they access the web exclusively from their mobile devices.

So what does this mean for those of us trying to reach these audiences? Here are three crucial tips to consider when planning:

1. First and foremost, do not ignore the need to create an exclusive mobile website. While many users will attempt to access your sites from their mobile devices, this will only lead to frustration. It's very likely that parts of the architecture, page weight, and technology will not work in a mobile web browser.

2. Take the time to consider your navigation and architecture. Top nav, side nav or however you've structured your navigation does not translate to the mobile architecture. Instead, you'll need to create a nested architecture and rely heavily on breadcrumb trail navigation.

3. Be ready to pare down your content. Your mobile website shouldn't be simply a modification of your existing site. Leave out information that isn't relevant to a user on the move. It's not a likely that a mobile user will browse for extended periods of time, so it's important that you surface the information most relevant to them.

Anthony Viviano

The Emerging Experiences team at Razorfish recently unveiled their experimental retail platform Razorfashion. The system is built around a multi-touch enabled surface display that aims at augmenting the user's shopping experience in offline stores. It is indeed an interesting exploration and contains several inspired ideas. However, this "retail experience" that Razorfish created may not actually be a consumer darling in a real retail space. Here's why:

Retail experience that isn't

Due to iPod's dominance, some competitors attempted to unseat it by introducing new killer features. One of these seemingly attractive innovations was wireless song sharing, however it never gained much traction. The problem is that it goes against people's expectation of what "sharing" embodies in physical space. When you are together with your friends, the music is shared by co-listening through the same pair of headphones or speakers. The wireless transmission of files deprives users of the intimacy or camaraderie that the act of sharing traditionally promises. Same problem here. The retail experience for most shoppers is the enjoyment of seeing/feeling/touching merchandises, comparing/matching them side by side, trying them on, and admiring oneself in the mirror. If one wishes to "shop" on a computer screen, he or she can simply stay home.

In the nascent stage of e-commerce, many had the misguided notion of replicating brick and mortar experience in the cyberspace. Some went so far as to champion 3D virtual mall built around the (then) cutting-edge VRML. Now the pendulum has swung to the other end; efforts such as Razorfashion aspire to recreate digital experience in physical space using the (now) cutting-edge touch surface. It just might be as futile. It is my opinion that our digital social lives have evolved to the point that the real world is starting to collide with the virtual one. Experience design professionals now need to take a hard look at how these two realms can compliment and enhance each other. Replication is not the answer.

Crossing the chasm and then back

In order to induce such a tectonic shift in shopper behaviors, a critical mass is needed to create strong enough network externalities. Razorfashion's clever responses are a) to create an inter-store system that facilitate a continuous experience in the same shopping center, and b) to leverage the consumer's personal social networks such as Facebook.

The former would be a vast infrastructure-building initiative. Not only the cost can be prohibitive, it also ignores the differences in branding requirements of all these diverse stores in the same mall. One design does not fit all, and some brands may flat out refuse to be associated with any modern technology. Even if we somehow manage to establish such a network, the user's personal data is portable only through his or her own mobile device. Coupling with the fact that the social network touch points Razorfashion trying to duplicate already exist on said mobile device, one has to question the wisdom of building an elaborated display network in the first place. Why not keep the experience on the mobile device from end to end?

Private touch in public space

There is no question that the characteristics of multi-touch interface such as tactility and direct manipulation lend itself well to small devices that are personal and intimate in nature. Problems however arise when the surface is scaled up. Most early applications of large-scaled touch interface were collaborative "workbench" systems. Since they were often used in semi-private settings with trusted participants, the tension between private and public modes of computing, while emerging, was still well contained. Nonetheless, the simple act of bringing up the surface from its traditional upward-facing orientation to its new full-frontal public posture stirs up that tension to new height. Exactly which parts of people's shopping experience they deemed private and which parts public need to be researched and then addressed accordingly. Razorfashion's social network mashup features further underscore the issue.

The deployment of multi-touch surfaces in public space also faces a couple of problems that are trivial but not any less real. First, due to the size of the display certain operations are difficult or imprecise to operate with just one hand, thus all the two-handed actions that you saw in the Razorfashion demo video. This would spell trouble in its intended environment, where users are likely carrying shopping bags or handbag. The second issue is one of sanitation--real or perceived. Witness how people loathe the finger smudges on their iPhone; now imagine magnifying that smeared screen and placing it in a shopping center where sees thousands of visitors...in flu seasons. It seems a contact-less gesture-controlled interface, not unlike the Xbox Project Natal, is more suitable for large public display.

Despites the aforementioned issues, projects such as this and IconNicholson's interactive mirror are important trials that surely will one day lead to better retail design and services. Integrated online/offline service design is likely to become the new focal point of the industry. It is exciting times to be an experience designer.

Fang-Yu Lin

The 2009 Apple Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) is just around the corner. Rumors of new iPhone hardware and software are running rampant. One frequently surfaced request (or more accurately, complaint) is the lack of Flash support on iPhone and iPod touch. While I can see why the general public raises that question, I am perplexed when it comes from technology pundits/bloggers and interaction design professionals. Simply put: Flash is ill suited for the touch interface.

Consider the following issues:

1. Rollover does not compute
On a touch interface, touching is clicking and dragging is scrolling. There is simply no rollover event. Unfortunately, more often than not Flash-based interfaces rely heavily on rollover to trigger control mechanism or content delivery. This problem serious undermines the practicality of Flash implementation.

This is Hulu player with rollover.


 Without rollover, you can't even pause the video.

2. No assisted text input and menu selection
To alleviate the inherent restrictions of small screen (and fat fingers), Apple introduced some UI enhancements to improve the usability of touch interface. Two obvious instances are the text field and menu "picker." Flash programs cannot invoke these assisted UI components, thus making mundane tasks such as menu selection and keyboard control difficult, if not altogether impossible.

 

You won't be able to access input assistance with Flash.

3. Non-standard UI can be non-functional
Flash designers for years have been pushing the envelope of interactivity by breaking UI conventions. Some of them are so out of the norm that they are barely usable on a computer. Now imagine running them on a small touch screen. UI anomalies as benign as scrollbars without up/down arrows will be broken, not to mention more serious offenses.

None of the Favourite Website Awards winners are likely to function flawlessly.