11th Screen

(Full Disclosure – I am a part of the Chevrolet Texas team who executed the following work.)

A couple of weeks ago, I shared a model that illustrates the different components of what I believe to be the “new” OOH.  The “new” OOH is less about awareness and more about engagement, specifically on the places and things around us.  Technology has reached a point where it can enable anything to become a “screen,” so while I agree that general awareness is still a critical component in any brand’s marketing mix, I think that brands have an opportunity to use those screens to engage consumers, to drive them deeper into a brand experience.

This past week, we had another opportunity to make one of those “things” around us interactive – a car.  We’ve done this before for the same client (Chevy) at SXSW.  Only then, we placed QR codes on the cars so attendees could learn more about the cars just by scanning the code.  This time, we’ve placed a Stickybit on one of the cars.

We’re caught up in the World Series here in Dallas.  It’s heightened because the Cowboys are a lost cause and the Rangers have been so bad for such a long time.  So, the fan fare down here is through the roof.  The Rangers have this inside thing about claws and antlers, so during the Yankees series, we created an “Antler Yourself” site where users could upload a photo and customize it with the antlers of their choice, then send it to all of their friends on social channels.

When the Rangers reached the series, we had an opportunity to extend it in a couple of places and one of the most intriguing was through the use of one of the cars in the fleet.  But instead of just advertising the URL on the car, we knew we could extend the experience even more through a technology like Stickybits.

Quick 101 on Stickybits – it’s a bar code-scanning technology that allows people to attach “bits” (content) to any bar code through scanning it on a mobile phone.  You just need the app and a bar code.  And for those items, like cars, that don’t have bar codes on them, Stickybits provides bar codes that you can put on anything you want.

By attaching the Stickybit to the car, not only are we able to allow people to upload their “Antler” photos directly to the bar code, we’re able to turn the car into a much larger virtual scrapbook.  People can send Good Luck messages to the Rangers via written word, or they can attach a video or a piece of audio, they can even attach different kinds of pictures (which we’ve seen, primarily with tailgating photos).  As of right now, there are 38 bits attached to the code, which means there are 38 different pieces of content that people can experience.  This is much more engaging than just placing the URL on the side of the car, which only serves the purpose of driving awareness.

Technology is giving brands the opportunity to do much more in any channel than they’ve ever been able to do.  We’re seeing this specifically in “Out of Home,” in large part due to the capabilities of mobile phones and all of the different apps that people have created.  We can now place a code on the side of a car and allow consumers to engage with the brand and each other.

So, while it may only be 38 pieces of content, and the content centers around the Rangers and not Chevrolet, it’s still incredibly valuable to the Chevy brand.  They’re bringing this experience to consumers, specifically fans of the Rangers around the most important time in the franchise’s history, that is not only unique, but engaging.

The next time you’re faced with doing something to create awareness, regardless of the “channel” you’re going to use, ask yourself if there’s a way you can turn it into an engagement?  Chances are, you can.

I work in a fairly small group in a fairly large company.  We have about 25 people in our group, specifically.  Come to find out, 4 of us are all alumni of the same college – Texas State University (at the time that 3 of us were going to school, it was called Southwest Texas State.  Although this dates us with the younger kids, it’s something that we’re proud of and never hesitate to distinguish).  As far as colleges go and as far as colleges go in Texas, it’s a smaller school, so it’s unusual (and random) that we find ourselves all working in the same group.  Recently, an opportunity came available to us at our alma mater, speaking at the annual Mass Comm Week.  So, this past Tuesday, the 4 of us loaded up in a car and took the 4-hour roadtrip down to San Marcos for the day and spoke on a panel together about Going Digital:  Changes in the Advertising & PR Industry.  After the discussion, one of the students in the crowd asked me about “gamification” and what our views on it were.  First, it was a fancy word (one that I liked nonetheless) and second, it was fun to answer her!  The concept of life becoming like a game is pretty deep if you truly think about it.  The implications are freaky, and whether we like it or not, not far from reality.  So, today, I bring you the Gamification 4-1-1:

1.  Nike Turns London Into a Game Board to Get People Running – Very simply, Nike makes a game out of running.  They wanted to extend their message on the importance of being active, so instead of creating billboards or other “standard” media extensions, they decided to make the campaign into a game.  Online, everything begins and ends on the GRID website.

I loved this quote from Tom Coates from Yahoo – “GRID is part of a growing category of ideas that sits within, as Tom Coates of Yahoo! describes, the ‘real world web,’” Douglas writes, “connected things that blur the physical and virtual spaces–things that thrive primarily because they excite us as humans, rather than being a vehicle for demonstrating technical capability.” This ability to connect the physical (offline) and virtual (online) worlds is really the “true” potential of OOH.  This “new” OOH is not about making people aware of the message by putting it up as big as you can on a billboard or on the side of a bus or throwing some display technology at it.  It’s about getting that message across through engagement.  This is a perfect example.

2.  Puma Makes Everything a Game – Shoe-makers and their gamification.  What is it?

I found the usability frustrating, but the concept is great.  And it just goes to show that there is definitely something to this gamification thing.  Everyone wants to make everything a game nowadays, and technology has enabled it to the point to where it actually can be.  Look no further than Foursquare, Gowalla, and/or MyTown.  Actually, look no further than Nike or Puma.

3.  Microsoft’s Newest Acquisition is About 3-D Gesture Controls – So, I wrote about Microsoft’s gaming/motion-sensing device, Kinect, a couple of months ago when it was officially announced.  Now, today, comes interesting news that they are acquiring Canesta, “the manufacturer of semiconductor chips capable of sensing movement and gestures in 3-D.”  Just watch the demo:

So, yeah, the Minority Report/Iron Man whiz-bang isn’t too far off now, is it?  These are great strides.  Obviously, technology is mind-blowing.  I don’t know how long it’s going to be until technology like this is part of our normal lives, but it’s coming.  And if the industry is still talking about integrating “Digital” OOH into the marketing mix in a year, I’m afraid “Interactive” OOH into the experience mix is going to be quite a surprise.  By nature, this is (non)tangible extension to the fancy gamification.

4.  10 Reasons Why Smartphones Won’t Kill DOOH – Ever – Another thought-provoking piece from LocaModa, this time a good analysis between mobile and DOOH.  While all of Stephen’s points are relevant to the larger discussion, they are not to the gamification discussion.  Point #8, though – “Multichannel” – is quite relevant:  The smartphone screen isn’t the only screen competing for a user’s attention. With mobile, computers, TVs, cinemas and DOOH, advertisers are taking a multiple channel approach to their messaging. This means that ultimately ALL screens will be connected. Rather than a one size fits all approach, the media landscape is actually becoming more fragemented and micro-targeted as a result. This means that the phone screen is often part of a 360 degree solution – it’s not the entire solution – and neither is DOOH. All screens will be connected.  The places and things around us will become “screens.”  Everyone is connected, too.  See a theme here?  Sounds like the constructs of a game to me.

“Uh-huh” – Last week, I posted a story about how Mini created a “reality gaming” experience around one of their cars in Stockholm.  Yet another example of bringing us and the world around us together in an experience to engage in unique ways with brands and each other.  It’s quite appropriate in this week’s discussion, too.

“Duh” – Although not gamification-related, this is related to our panel discussion this week at Mass Comm week.  I said something that came out wrong and it’s bugged me ever since.  Just for some brief context – one of the unique aspects to the 4 of us alum working in the same group now is that we all come from different backgrounds.  I have an acting degree, another one has a directing degree, another one has a traditional PR/Comm degree, and the other one, well, I’m not sure what degree he has, but it’s different than all the rest of us.  Anyway, when we introduced ourselves, we gave a brief synopsis of our background and our journeys leading us up to working together right now.  I said something like this, “I got an acting degree, and there’s not anything from that degree (“what I learned in school”) that I use to make money other than maybe being able to speak in front of people.”  Ugh.  I knew, as I was saying it, it was all coming out wrong.  But I couldn’t stop.  First, these students don’t need to hear, “what you’re going to school for now, it’s really irrelevant, so why worry??”  No, that’s not the message I wanted to get across.  I’m a firm believer in life experience.  And no matter what you do, what jobs you’ve done, what you graduated with, all of the skills and experiences used during those times can help you in your present situation.  You’ve got to be aware of those things and constantly looking to call on those things, but it can all be used.  And it should.  What I meant to say is, “it’s less about the degree that you get because in reality, the real-world is much different than the college-world.  That said, these classes and this training prepares you for going out and doing your thing.  You’ll have to adjust many times throughout your career, and if you’re successful at adjusting, you’ll more than likely be successful in your career.”  At least that’s what I’ve found to be true.  Anyway, we were there for the students, and I really don’t feel like that one moment from me did them the best service.  So, if any of you guys are reading this now, take note. :)

Well, what a week.  I’m sure that this weekend, it being Halloween and all, with 3 kids ready to go trick-or-treating, I’m going to experience my fair share of gamification, even if it’s not the 2.0 version.

Over the last couple of weeks (and year, really), I’ve tried to wrap my hands around all of the “OOH” thinking going on in my head.  I’ve put a couple of stakes in the ground along the way.  First there was my definition, then there were the basics of displays and their relationship with technology and what those two combined really mean and most recently, I explored the different components of the “new” OOH.

I feel like, conceptually, they’re all pretty close, but they’re not quite there.  They don’t tell a complete story.  That’s the thing that’s bugging me – the incomplete story.  It’s a complex story, no doubt.  Media consumption and consumer behavior and “always on” technology have evolved to such a high point that there is no longer an easy formula for moving someone down the decision/purchase funnel.  That same technology has transformed the places and things around us into consumption & interaction “screens” – “Out of Home” is no longer just the mass awareness platform that agencies and brands have relied on in their media mix to achieve maximum impressions.

This potential of the “new” OOH is something that I’ve explored since day 1 on this blog, but many disparate thoughts do not a complete story make.  I’m a little closer today than I was yesterday.

If you’re a regular reader here, you know how much I dislike the “Digital Out-of-Home/DOOH” moniker.  I’m starting to dislike “digital signage” just as much, but unfortunately, these are the two most widely-used terms in the industry.  Ask anyone in the industry what they actually do, and 9 people out of 10 (if not all 10) will give you a response with “DOOH” or “digital signage” in it.  And if you asked them what exactly that is, I’d put a solid bet on a response that included something like this – “it’s a network of screens held together by digital technology.

Network.  Screens.  Digital technology.

That’s so 1995.

In all seriousness, here’s my newest stake in the ground (and it’s not groundbreaking, but I think it provides clarity) – OOH, DOOH, and digital signage is Awareness Out-of-Home.  Digital signage (technology + a display) has enabled brands to be more effective at creating awareness, with dynamic loop times and dayparting and on-the-fly content updates, but at the end of the day, it’s all about pushing content out to as many eyeballs as they can.  It’s about impressions.  OOH/DOOH can be an extremely effective channel at achieving those impressions.

Here’s the thing(s) about Awareness though:

• Relies more heavily on the channel (or “screen”) than it does on the brand story
• The media component is driven by mass reach, not targeted personalization
• Brand is at the center, communication is to many
• It’s a push message, meaning it’s a “talk-to” communication, meaning it’s a 1-way communication, meaning there is no real brand/consumer engagement
• Consumers are guided down the funnel, literally, by screen (the placement of the screen guides the brand story)
• The technology is the thing keeps everything connected

So, sure, if you want to talk about networks and technology, er “DOOH” & “digital signage”, here’s where we should be talking.  This is what the industry is talking about now – hardware and software and networks and installations and everything else.  If you boil it down, it’s all an awareness discussion.  This is where my thinking differs from many in the industry (communications, advertising and digital signage industries) that I’ve heard.  I don’t see the potential in using the OOH/DOOH channel as an awareness channel.  It’s an evolved 1995 discussion, with the introduction of new “digital” display technologies, but it’s just display.  Display technologies drive more consumption; they don’t drive more engagement.  And this is the big differentiator – do you want to use OOH, even DOOH as an awareness channel?  Or do you believe that the places and things around us have the ability to engage consumers where they are and actually drive them deeper into the brand experience?  This is the “new” OOH and this is its potential.

Engagement Out-of-Home is predicated on the understanding that a) everyone and everything is connected and b) the places and things around us have the ability to be turned “on.”  Everything is a screen, but the screen is not what makes up the network in Engagement OOH, the people make up the network.  They are made stronger by technology – enabling technologies here, not display technologies – and brands can and should take advantage of these developments.

Just last week, I gave my thoughts on a similar concept, something that LocaModa and Posterscope call “Sociable Media.”  (I spoke to a couple of guys at LocaModa late last week and they provided great insight to their POV.)  We’re all talking about basically the same thing, but I think where I differ is that I think Engagement OOH provides a unique opportunity for brands to go beyond just being there and allows them to tell their story in a way that they would not have otherwise been able to tell it – in an individual, 1-to-1 engagement.  (And it doesn’t have to be on a mobile phone.  It can be on a floor in a store.)  It’s less about the technology and more about the interaction.  That’s the nut – engagement OOH enables brands to be more effective at driving interaction – not awareness – on everything around us.

As compared to Awareness OOH, Engagement OOH:

• Relies more heavily on the brand story than it does on the channel (or “screen”)
• The media component is driven by targeted personalization, not mass reach
• In one sense, the brand is can be the center, but communicate to one.  In another sense, the consumer is at the center and the brand has the ability to engage with them.  The key is that it’s a personalized communication
• It’s a push/pull message, meaning it’s a “talk-with” communication, meaning it’s a 2-way communication, meaning there is actually real brand/consumer engagement
• Consumers are guided down the funnel by interaction
• The brand story is the thing keeps everything connected

So, maybe we still need to be talking in 1995 speak.  I have a feeling that the industry is going to continue to talk in these terms, at least for the foreseeable future.  If you look at social media and the way it had been talked about until the last year or so, it was all talked about differently, too.  Now, there are enough buzz words that can make someone feel sick.  But whenever I hear “DOOH” or “digital signage,” I always stop and give it pause and really try to determine what people are talking about.  And most of the time, they are talking about true “digital” Out-of-Home or true “digital” signage.  Interactivity is either an afterthought or void from the thought altogether.

I just look at it a little bit differently.  For every action, there is a reaction and we have the responsibility, not to mention the opportunity, to be there and interact and have a 2-way communication so the relationship doesn’t end as soon as they walk away.  It gets stronger.  I believe that can only happen through engagement.

It’s important to note that I am not a media guy and never have been.  I’ve always been an experience guy, so that’s immediately where my mind goes, regardless of the “channel.”  I love this space because it truly is a blank canvas, not confined by structure or surface, or technology or medium – only by the limits of our imagination and the strength of a brand’s story.  I’m going to be speaking at CETW in a couple of weeks on Incorporating Digital/Interactive Out-of-Home into Campaign Strategy and from my point of view, after we understand who we’re talking to, the very next question I would want to answer is, “is it Awareness OOH” or “Engagement OOH?”  What do we want to create?  Do we want to push messages out?  Or do we want to engage with consumers around our messages?  This would tell me what technology (or not) I need – display technology or enabling technology – thus defining what the “true” OOH was.

My story still isn’t complete.  It isn’t as focused as I’d like it to be, but I think it’s getting there.  I’d love to hear your thoughts, if you care to share them.  This is truly an evolving space that requires evolving thought, so in my opinion, the more the merrier.

Happy Friday, everyone.  Hope your week has gone well.  Mine has been crazy and today is no different.  It’s been a good week, (sometimes you have bad weeks, sometimes you have good weeks – it was a good one for me) one of those where I feel like I’m in the zone for most of the week, doing “good” work, thinking of “good” things, producing top quality whoosits and whatsits, making cool “stuff.”  So, today’s theme is all about quality & cool – striking that balance is difficult, but when done, man, it produces good work.

1.  Mini’s at it again with “reality gaming” and their Getaway Stockholm campaign – this OOH campaign involves people, virtual Minis, geo-location, mobile and gaming.  I consider it OOH because everything happens out of the home.  It’s an experience where you don’t have to be in front of your computer sitting in your house or office.  It leverages the wide open spaces of the outdoor and creates a game around it all.  It’s really awesome.

2.  Now you can “Like” a brand through a QR code – there’s been a roundabout way to use QR codes to get people to “Like” your brand in the past (open up their Facebook page and allow people to “Like” it there – it’s clunky), but now it’s as easy as downloading a QR code reader app on your phone, opening it up, and snapping a picture of it.  If you know what a QR code is (whichI have to say, I’m seeing/reading about them every single week now, so that’s a good thing), Likify has now made an app that can direct you straight to “Liking” your favorite brand.  Nifty.

3. Loyalty cards 2.0 brought to you by Novitaz – this is cool….if you’re a shopper.

You get a credit card-style loyalty card with an RFID chip in it.  When you’re in a store that has the sensors in it, it sends a message to your mobile phone, alerting you of the special deals of the day.  And best, when you buy, there are social hooks in the platform so that you can share what you just bought with your social community.  Cool, and definitely the wave of the future.

4. Shoppers Take a Nonlinear Path to Purchase – carrying on the shopping theme, I thought this article was interesting, although not surprising.  Consumer shopping habits are changing, particularly with the introduction of so many new technologies – mobile and social being top of the list.  Mobile is big in helping consumers make purchasing decisions.  Social is big, too.  Although it’s a great takeaway that “social” does not equal “digital” or better yet, “Facebook.”  Social is word-of-mouth.  And the overwhelming majority of word-of-mouth activity happens “offline.”  But can happen over the mobile phone – you know, that thing where people actually talk to each other on the phone.  Yeah, mobile phones are good for that, too.  Interesting that “digital signage” is not mentioned anywhere in here at all.  Hmm.

“Uh-huh” – The Future of Advertising is about “Making Stuff” – Cindy Gallop, founder-CEO of IfWeRanTheWorld, talks about the real value in execution, not ideas. Amen, Cindy. As someone who is responsible for the execution arm of our agency, I can tell you firsthand how important quick, quality execution sets agencies/people apart from each other.

“Duh” – Read above. Not to take the easy way out here, but it’s an important thing to call out and a no-brainer at the same time. I mean, I am looking at it from the standpoint of “making stuff” everyday, but you’d be surprised how many people “talk” about stuff vs. “make” stuff. I’m a maker. Not a talker. Hope it always stays like this. I like makers much more than I like talkers, unless of course, if you’re one of my talker friends!

Anyway, have a good weekend everyone!

I read an interesting whitepaper today written by Stephen Randall of LocaModa and a partnering agency, Posterscope, titled Sociable Media: Seven ways to connect online and offline social experiences to deliver engagement, advocacy, and brand affinity.  In fact, I’ve read it four or five times, each time with a more detailed eye than the last.  And I find myself scratching my head more than wanting to forward it to all of my colleagues.

The authors, and certainly both companies responsible for the whitepaper, are clearly experienced in mobile and (digital) OOH engagement and by virtue, seem credible enough.  I’ve seen Stephen speak on various panels this year and he is a smart man leading the charge, one that I stand firmly behind.  I have not met any of the contributors from Posterscope, but by the looks of their history, they know what’s going on in the space.

Unfortunately, this knowledge-base and experience might very well be the downfall of the whitepaper.  My first question is, “who is the intended audience?”  This is not a 101-type whitepaper.  This is advanced theory, language, and practice – advanced enough that a good portion (if not a majority) of marketers, communicators, brands, and consumers will not know what in the world they’re talking about.  Brands are having a hard enough time catching up to social media – using it in a way that creates and adds value to the ‘community’ and themselves.  Much less a new, albeit interesting concept – sociable media.  This is way ahead of the curve, and if I’m left scratching my head (I, at least, speak this same language and know/understand all of the practices and technologies mentioned), what is everyone else left doing?  How does everyone else digest this?

From what I have seen in my extensive dealings with brands (big and small), the vast majority are not ready for interactive/experiential OOH right now.  They want to play in the mobile space just to play in the mobile space, and as mentioned above, they are trying to put the infrastructure/process/guidelines in place for their social media efforts.  But many of them are not there yet.  Sure, there are the Nikes and Minis of the world who are out in front, but like geo-location applications themselves (the basis of many of the points in this whitepaper), adoption and proliferation of interactive/experiential OOH is a ways away.  I want brands to get there quickly.  On some days, I feel like we’re on the cusp, with technologies that span various channels like this, but on most days, I realize that we’re far from it.  In fairness, I’m looking through this through an advertising/PR/communications lense, not through a lense that deals with this particular niche (mobile + OOH) everyday.  But my lense grounds me in online and offline social, both of which are incorporated into 95% of what we do and have been doing for years.  And while I appreciate the idea of “sociable media,” I am left wondering, “what else?”

From a brand’s perspective, social media is predicated on the idea of adding value to a conversation that is already happening, and then the goal is to grow it to the point of building trust.  The most successful brands in “social media” are those who understand their story and their voice.  Both are vital components in establishing a credible presence that adds value to the conversation and builds into a trust-based relationship over time.  In an effort not to bang you over the head with social-media-speak, in short – the story is the thing.  Even in “social” media where the brand “doesn’t own the story.”  Look across any channel, be it digital, mobile, OOH, even social, and the most successful brands are those who know their story and merely use those channels as distribution mechanisms.  Even in the case of “social,” the brand’s story is still distributed, just in a more open way.  This right here, this interplay with channels and story and technology is where I’m struggling to shape into what I believe to be true.  At the end of the day, which one of these drives a brand?  Is it the technology?  Is it the channel?  Or is it the story?

I think all three are important and I have thoughts on each of them and their particular interplay, but they’re not baked enough to share right now.  I would love to know what you all think??

Regardless, a connection that I did not get in this whitepaper’s “story,” was the connection of how this sort of engagement continues with brands, after the interaction with this screen, or person.  How is the conversation continued?  Much of it seems like a one-stop hit if it’s based on location, more specifically checking into a location.  The engagement is sustainable if the brand’s story is brought to the forefront instead of the actual location.  And then, continues beyond the location.  Where is the brand’s value here, on these screens, in this social media discussion?  It can’t be by just providing a place or a screen or a reward.  Right?

This is one of the barriers to the new OOH.  It’s all around us, not just on billboards or posters or screens – everything’s a “screen,” really.  Technology is blessing this medium in a way that enables it to be very powerful and “on” more often than not.  It’s easy to be driven by the technology.  And the channel.  And the location.  But do these enable the brand to tell their story in a more effective way?  Or do they just enable the brand to just be there?  Is it enough just to be there?

I have a hard time answering this, but I do believe that the most successful brands will be the ones who go beyond just being there.  As is the case in the social channel, the goal is build enough trust to have a long-lasting relationship (loyalty).  To that point, the paper talks about creating engagement (awareness), advocacy (preference), and affinity (loyalty), but in a way that leads me to believe achieving them revolves around location and channel, and not the brand story.  The authors do point out that the paper is not “completely comprehensive,” and I have to believe that this is not their intention.

It is about the channel, I get that.  That’s really the whole point to the whitepaper.  But here’s the promise on the front page of the paper – “Seven ways to connect online and offline social experiences to deliver engagement, advocacy and brand affinity.”  Those cannot be achieved without the brand story and I missed that whole section of this story.

There is much value to publishing whitepapers like this because the first to say is the first to own.  I applaud them, and anyone else who publishes these.  As a reader and absorber, though, I feel like there is a responsibility to talk to me in a way that can be understood, and most importantly, applied.  I want to be able to forward these to my colleagues.  I want to share the knowledge.  But if I don’t even know what the “7 ways” are, how am I ever going to get what “sociable media” is and how/why it can make an impact with me and my business?

A little late to the game this Friday, but found a great nugget in this article where small business owners discuss the benefits of geo-location-based services.  I’m a big proponent of geo-location apps and like many others, see the natural integration with digital signage.  In this article, a couple of the business owners mention a platform called ScreenScape – a simple, internet-based program (software) that allows “anyone” (like small business owners) to operate digital signage.  This is the first I’ve heard of these guys, and my question is – can they be the X factor in digital signage adoption?  Today’s 4-1-1 is dedicated to one of my new favorite companies (I don’t know anyone there, haven’t met anyone there, but next week, I’m going to reach out to them to learn more about their product.)

1.  Advantage #1 – cost.  I suppose this depends which side of the fence you’re on – $10/month subscription makes digital/interactive signage attainable for just about anyone now.  It makes you wonder how successful they can be based on this model, but there are group licenses available for larger subscribers.

2.  Advantage #2 – ease.  The platform is Internet-based.  You don’t need any special technical skills to work your way around the “administrator” dashboard.  And by dragging content here and dropping it there, with the push of a button (and a computer, and a display, and an Internet connection), you’ve got yourself a digital signage solution.  And network if you need it.

3.  Advantage #3 – flexibility.  I’m talking about flexibility with content here.  Images, video, text, RSS feeds – you can include any of these as pieces of content that will wind up in the end-display.  (The program basically converts everything to a flash file.)  There are drawbacks with this, of course.  Processor, connection, file size, load on the computer, etc…  But look, it’s $10/month so to me, if you’re the right “brand” to use something like this, the value and benefit totally outweighs the downfalls.  One of the coolest things about this system – and it’s core to their business model – is allowing the community to share content with each other (they call it “venue networking.”)  This is yet another “cost” advantage to people like small business owners who are strapped for money and resources.

4.  Advantage #4 – integration.  With Foursquare, in particular.  On September 14, they launched a “Foursquare widget” that allows the software to integrate and pull in check-ins for the location (where the screen is placed).  The widget ultimately allows consumers to see things like who the mayor of the place is, the actual “mayor offer,” total check-ins, and everyone else who has checked in.  To me, this feature is critical – to both the brand and the consumer.  The consumer gets to see their name in lights (“fame” as Stephen Randall says) and the brand has just given another reason for the consumer to interact with them (via their screen).  A simple example:

“Uh-huh” – a year ago, Mashable featured Screenscape in their Spark of Genius series.  It’s interesting reading that article now.  Case in point that no one knows how to talk about “digital signage” though.  The term was not used once in the article and I’m pretty sure it’s been around for much longer than a year.  Kudos for flagging it, though.

“Duh” – am I giving them too much credit?  Or is there any merit to them giving a shot in the arm to digital signage?  I think this is a true “duh” because it seems like to me, as long as the brand has ownership of a screen and a connection, and is in-tune with reaching consumers in new ways, why not?  What’s the drawback here?

I think this is beautiful because it taps into what geo-location has tapped into for brands (especially “small” brands) – it’s no/low cost, it’s relevant, it’s engaging, and most of all, it’s a way to connect with people while they’re “outside of the home” on a device that they’re glued to.  For $10/month, you can advertise it/them for everyone to see and hopefully, keep them coming back for more.

I appreciate drawings.  I’m a big visual thinker.  And particularly at work, I draw more than write.  I’m not a good artist, but I don’t think it takes a good artist to draw effective models – I like to think I make by pretty good.  Anyway, I’ve been working on distilling my thoughts into something that is easy for people to understand what this space is all about.  Here’s where I am:

Basically, I believe that all OOH solutions are made up of 3 main components:

1. Equipment

2. Place

3. Content

The Equipment really speaks to the “How” the message is delivered.  It has 2 components: hardware and software.  I know there are many other pieces included in those two (network, installation, maintenance, etc..), but in the end, you’ve got hardware and software that need to run the actual solution.  It’s as easy as that.

The Place is the actual location the solution will be seen in – the “where”.  From my standpoint, this is a strict media play – it’s either “Paid” media (you have to buy placement) or “Owned” media (you own the place where the solution will be seen).  Again, I think pretty easy.

But the final component – one that is easy in concept, but hardest to execute in my opinion – is the Content component.  Content is the “what” part of the solution and there are different pieces that make up the “what,” most notably Planning and Strategy.  These two pieces are critical to storytelling because it provides the proper context in which to tell the story.  Not necessarily what story needs to be told, but who exactly you want to tell the story to and how.

And around everything, there is an Execution piece.  There will likely be multiple players in the game that are responsible for executing their component.  This model helps identify what kind of players those are so you can create your own OOH solution.

Where this gets interesting, and I have to thank one of my partners-in-crime here, Matt Dickman, for seeing this – it’s the intersection of these components and what they really define.  The result of “How” + “Where” is “Environmental Design.”  What is this installation going to be in the place where it’s going to be seen?  What opportunities do you have based on where it’s going to be seen?  How much does that dictate what exact equipment is used?

The result of “Where” + “What” is the Consumer “Experience.”  This is how the consumer is actually going to experience the solution.  My experience is different if I’m in the middle of Times Square experiencing a billboard than it is if I’m in the middle of a tradeshow booth experiencing a kiosk.  More, if I know where this story is going to be seen, I can optimize it to create the best “experience.”

And the result of “What” + “How” is the type of “Engagement” that the consumer is (or is not) involved in.  This is where enabling technologies come most into play.  What equipment do I need to absorb (and hopefully, literally, engage with) the story?

These results are the deeper components of the solution that I feel need to be thought about if you really want to maximize your OOH solution.  These are the components that really define what I believe to be the power and potential of the “new” OOH.

So, that’s where I’m at.  What do you think?  Would love to hear opinions!

Back in Dallas today after a whirlwind tour this week.  From New York, I flew to Detroit for meetings, then finally made my way home last night.  Just in time to see my kids before they went to bed.  I’m such a homebody.  I love being in my home around my family.  My wife and I just sat in silence and talked.  It was nice.

Now, here we go again.  Back at it.  As I’ve said before, the one thing that I don’t like about live-blogging events is that I don’t really get to put my commentary on what I’m hearing.  I sprinkle things in here and there, but for the most part, I haven’t found a way to successfully manage that part of blogging events.  I think there’s a lot of value to get down what others are saying so all of you can get a glimpse into other perspectives.  That’s the primary reason I approach conferences and live blogging the way I do.  Do you find value in that?  I would love to know if I’m off base.

What I want to do for today’s Friday 4-1-1 is take what I heard from the conference and give you my thoughts on some of the things that stuck out to me.  First, as a digital practitioner, most of the “digital” conversation was basic and not new to me.  I really enjoyed hearing different approaches to the “types” of work that we’re faced with on a daily basis – the crisis management session really stuck out to me.  Perhaps it’s because I’ve been dealing with a few clients on this very thing and it’s a type of work that I’ve never done before so it’s just fascinating in general.  But, there were others:

1.  I heard multiple times something along the lines of “merging the offline with the online.”  This, of course, makes my ears perk up because I want to see how other people are thinking about this concept.  It’s clear that people have an intuition that this is becoming more prevalent and possible, but noone talked about any other “screen” than the mobile phone in relation to “walking down the street.”  If we think there is a huge need for education in the “digital signage” industry, I’m here to tell you there is a huge need for education across the board.  Agencies like mine even have a hard time understanding a) what the “new” OOH is and more importantly, b) the potential of it.  Yes, it includes mobile, but it’s much more than mobile.  It’s much more than “digital signage,” too.

2.  I enjoyed hearing much more talk centered around relationships than platforms.  I believe whole-heartedly this is the right way to think about brands touching people.  It’s not so much what brands touch people on (platform or channel), it’s about how they touch people and with what (content).  Brands need to look no further than what’s already happening on each “platform” for how people naturally use them.  The platforms are already being used and used in a way that allow people to connect (in the way they want to connect) with others and build relationships.  If a brand is going to be successful in today’s ecosystem, they (and the agencies that support them) should understand that to be sustainable, you have to focus on the relationship, not the platform.  Same thing with “digital signage” – it’s not about digital signage, it’s about using this technology in a way that it actively builds relationships between brands and consumers.  It’s powerful if used properly and ineffective, just as any other channel, if not.

3.  Today, more than ever before, people/brands/agencies are making things up as they go along.  This is a new era and people have to come to terms with the fact that there might not be any “example” of a particular type of work – social, mobile, and/or OOH.  This is exciting and daunting, for sure.  This makes relationships and trust more important than ever – not only with communities, but between agencies and clients.  It’s important to think things through and do as much due diligence as possible, but in reality, we are (literally) all learning together.  Be smart.  Be brave.

4.  If you want to be successful in “social” – and this is for anyone – brands, businesses, bloggers – don’t make everything entirely about YOU.  It’s not.  You and your contribution are certainly important.  The way that you contribute can make or break you.  It either builds trust or breaks it.  But it’s important to recognize your community.  Think of ways you can do this.  People just want to belong to something, and they’re willing to have brands involved, too.  Just as long as it doesn’t become a selfish act and “pushing” anything in their face.

“Uh-huh” – man, the crisis panel and the make-up of the panelists was the highlight for me.  If you sat in that session, you would have walked out of there learning more in an hour than you might have in a year.  Here are some of the best nuggets that I took away, and they don’t need any additional commentary.  If you’re ever faced with a crisis, read this and follow what speaks to you:

• If someone asks, “what should my digital crisis management plan be,” your first question back should be – “Do you have a regular crisis management plan?”  The approaches can’t be independent of one another.

• Brands and detractors have the same tools.  Those detractors are smart and resourceful.

• If you do not have a social presence and a voice right now, start creating one immediately.

• Don’t wait for a crisis to start developing relationships.  Again, if you’re not doing this right now, start immediately.

• There are no “special” crisis tools to use in a crisis.  Use simple, common tools that are at your disposal all the time – search, legal council, email, and your website.

• When faced with a crisis, remember 2 simple things – 1) overcommunicate and 2) don’t make the problem worse.

“Duh” – I don’t know if anyone else is tired of it, but I’ve just about had enough of all of this social media speak.  I am around it all the time and we always joke about throwing around the buzzwords – engagement, listening, Facebook, Twitter, funnel, interesting intersection – ugh.  I tried to separate myself from my body and “hear” what people were saying to me and I just thought, this is disgusting.  We should ban those words (not just the above, but all of them.  Good resource HERE) forever.  Call me out, too.  It’s easy to get sucked in and start speaking wah, wah, wah, wah, wah.

Enjoy your weekend, everyone!  And thanks for reading!

OK, shutting ‘er down for right now.  It’s been a long day and I see work emails piling up so I’ve got to spend some time addressing those.

The last panel of the day (that we’re missing) is about “Leveraging Video for Your PR Efforts.”  As a old filmmaker, I understand the power of video in telling a story.  The immediacy of social media has changed the rules in terms of production value, but there is great value in telling stories in pictures, regardless of how highly produced (or not) it is.

The sessions here were pretty good.  The morning started off slow, the afternoon picked up.  Heard some really good things here today and it’s been good to get other people’s perspectives.  Hearing all of this, though, gives me great confidence that the direction we’re going (FH TX, as a group) is the right direction and we will lead the way.  We have much work to do ahead of us, but it’s the right group and we’ve got the right people doing it.  I have no doubt.

Here we go again.  Rapid fire today.

Panelist – John Bell (360 Digital Influence, Ogilvy)

5 trends in Digital Crisis Mgt:  1) Everything happens at lightning speed, 2) People demand hyper-transparency, 3) Dialogue is as important as message delivery, 4) Search reputation delivers multimedia, 5) Brand detractors have the same tools

Understanding what to do in the first 24 hours is critical.  Don’t have to respond/react quickly all the time.

2-way dialogue is essential.  You have to be ready to answer for everything.

Panelist – Dallas Lawrence (Burson-Marsteller) – this dude is no joke.  Seems like a real smart guy, straight-shooter, fast talker.

How you sell this crisis planning in the online space?  We are great storytellers for our clients, but horrible about telling our own stories.

3 key online threats today: 1) accidental 2) deliberate but uncoordinated 3) organized campaigns

You have to be prepared to tackle any of these threats.  Do you have a social presence?  A voice?

Good, interesting stats – 75% receive news, 50% actively gather news, 37% create news.

If marketing is running social media, do they know how to handle crisis?  There must be integration with corporate communications.  If not, it’s fatal.

6 out of 10 members of the House of Representatives are on Twitter and more Republicans on Twitter than Democrats.

Panelist – Gary Spangler (DuPont)

Going to talk about “issues” management, not particularly “crisis” management.  Search is a huge component.  Paid search specifically.  Buy keywords, send them to your content.  Yes.

If you deliver your voice in a valid, transparent, caring way, consumers are willing to hear your point of view.

If brand has negative attack and all the brand does is set the record straight on the negative issue, the issue is still going to remain.  The brands have to turn it into a positive.  Need to leverage relationships/earned media at this point.  When writing a press release, make it a social media press release.  Create that same piece of content in a way that it can be blogged, tweeted, etc… Don’t have to use them, but you have them.

Between issues, you need to be developing relationships with influencers.  Build trust.  This is such a vital component to managing any issue/crisis.

Panelist – Sarah Tyre (Ketchum)

Again, it’s important to have a presence.  Also, as much as you can, set ground rules/expectations.  So, if someone has a complaint w/ their vehicle (let’s say), here’s the person/channel to contact.  Secondly, you’ve got to listen and respond.  Respond quickly, openly, honestly.

If someone asks, “what should my digital crisis management plan be,” your first question back should be – “Do you have a regular crisis management plan?”  The approaches can’t be independent of one another.

Three steps – Diagnose (goals, set focus), Manage (strategize, determine best voice, engage), Redefine (measure, optimize)

Need to train company/organization on crisis response.

Don’t look at social media space in a vacuum.

Questions – what are the most underutilized tools in crisis management?  John – SEO/SEM and video.  Dallas – Twitter and general council.  Gary – email and web pages.  Sarah – SEM. (All of these are basic.  Smart.  Don’t need to overthink “channels.”)

Dallas gives another nugget in the Q&A session:  Over-communicate, don’t make the problem worse.