11th Screen

Enabling technologies like QR codes have the ability to drive deeper brand experiences. Unfortunately, we’ve seen many poor QR code executions over the past 1.5 years. As brands have experimented or observed what’s worked and what hasn’t, they’re starting to develop smarter, more effective executions (see Macy’s Backstage Pass campaign.)

Now, Diesel is doing something nice with QR codes. Not only are they using them to drive deeper brand experiences (which is really the byproduct of using any enabling technology – it’s really in how effective brands are and how deep they go in using them), they’re using them to connect people through a shared passion – fashion.

Good video, by the way. I think they do a great job telling a story, so their payoff – with the QR codes – makes a lot of sense.

There are a fair amount of shoppers out there, specifically those who I would imagine are Diesel shoppers, who like to tell other people what kind of clothes they like and/or purchase. For them, fashion sparks good, solid conversation. Here, Diesel is giving their customers an easy opportunity to start and/or engage in that conversation, centered around their brand (which could be a good or a bad thing.)

The virtual catalogue feature in the experience is a nice addition and the only feature that can actually drive additional sales. But to me, this is more of a connection play. And Diesel is smart enough to recognize how easy that can really be through QR codes.

Smart execution. And it’s important to remember that the technology merely enables the experience. The experience is the thing. Here, it’s the connection. The extended shopping. The conversation. There’s meat there. Not just a website.

The ongoing conversation about measurement will always continue. The question is, is it the right conversation?

Clickthroughs, page views, and registrations.

Recall, intent, and purchases.

Impressions, sentiment, and share of voice.

These are all things we can measure.

But do they all matter? Especially if they’re being achieved by the wrong people?

What about things like relationships? Or that one comment by the top influencer in your industry? Or that issue that didn’t occur because of the way you communicated?

The thing about measurement is to try your best to measure the right things in the right way. The only way you can do that is to clearly define goals. The more specific the goals are, the more noise you can eliminate.

And the more we can work toward the right conversation.

NOTE, A WORD ABOUT THE OVERSIMPLIFICATION – I know that I’m oversimplifying this. I don’t really have a desire to get into the details of measurement here. But I think a simple step can be taken to direct the conversation in the right direction – and that is clearly to define goals. I’m not talking about, “I want to sell more product,” or “I want more people coming to my site,” or “I want more fans.” (If those are the goals, paid advertising is your answer in most cases.) But what are the specifics?

The downfall to a real world 11^th Screen solution reared its ugly head this weekend. Unfortunately, it was from one of my favorite brands and a fun, albeit novel, experience: Coke’s 106 Flavor touch screen soda fountain. We were eating at a casual dining restaurant and I noticed that they had a couple of these kiosks. And that’s when I noticed the problem – they only had a couple of these kiosks.

Yes, the footprint of these babies is at least twice the footprint of a regular ol’ soda fountain. So, the restaurant is losing out on precious real estate, especially when they’re trying to jam these into the existing real estate.

While size is an issue, the real problem is that these are just not as simple as the regular ol’ soda fountain. With this big daddy, there’s only one way to get ice and one way to get (any one of the 106 flavors of) soda. And it’s through one dispenser right in the middle of the thing.

At least with the old fashioned fountains, they were set up in a way that once you get your ice, you can move down the line to get your soda. The line has a nice flow to it. Here, the patrons are just forced to wait while the others fumble through the right process (pressing the right buttons) to get their ice, then fumble through picking their selection out of an overwhelming amount of flavors, and then, literally a minute later, might have their own go at it. Unless, of course, multiple glasses are in need of a fill-up, and then there’s a longer wait.

I think this contraption is great. But when I want a soda, I just want the soda. I don’t want to wait in a line longer than 10 seconds for someone to get their ice and move down the line. I certainly don’t want to see them figuring out how to work their way through this experience.

When I first saw this machine, I was at a movie theatre and they had about 10 of them. If we waited in line, another machine quickly opened up. Here at the restaurant, with only 2, it was a different story. The movie theatre experience seemed cool and fun. This one just seemed annoying.

While this new fountain gives me the ability to choose from 106 flavors and work my way through it via a touch screen, it makes the simple process of getting soda more complicated. And that, my friends, is a bummer.

I believe technology like this can make our lives easier. Here’s an example – at least for the here and now – where it’s proved to do the opposite.

There are two things I know to be true right at this moment: 1) I have slacked severely at keeping up with this Friday 4-1-1 series and 2) QR codes are everywhere. And they’re mysterious. Because they don’t include any instructions alongside them. They’re just there. So, I thought it was perfectly appropriate to marry the two to resurrect my Friday’s 4-1-1.

1. Starbucks hides a gem behind their mysterious QR code - while waiting for my coffee one morning, I glanced over to my left and saw a QR code sticker haphazardly slapped on a Frappuccino ad.

When I scanned it, I was sent to a digital scavenger hunt game called SRCH. After playing around with it for a little bit, it’s an awesome experience. You’re given a series of clues that you need to solve and at the end, you could win a number of different prizes. The clues are served up as videos, scrambled words, riddles, and photos. It’s a gem of an experience that seemingly can only be discovered through this unmarked, mysterious QR code, slapped onto this ad like an afterthought.

2. Bubby’s hides a coupon behind their mysterious QR code – I recently had the pleasure of eating a great farm-to-table restaurant in NYC called Bubby’s. On my way out the door after dinner, I looked down and saw a flyer with a QR code up in the left-hand corner. Completely unmarked.

When I scanned the code, I was directed to a coupon to get a free appetizer or 2-for-1 cocktails during their midnight brunch. What a find. Too bad, I didn’t know what was waiting for me behind the code, since there was no context on the flyer. But is it too bad? I’m starting to feel like I want to scan these codes, just to see what kind of gems I can find. But then, when I do, I get a dud like this…

3. NYC Realtor hides housing details behind their QR code – specifically, housing details that I find when directed to a Google search page. Boring.

This is what I’d expect to see behind a QR code like this, especially one with no instructions or call-to-action. But here’s the interesting thing – after scanning the two above before this one, I was expecting a nice surprise. And when I didn’t get it, I was let down. Down to the point that I don’t want to scan again? Of course not….

4. The Canal Room hides their website behind an MS Tag – standard fare again. At least the site behind the code is optimized for mobile.

On the site, you can see everything that the Canal Room has to offer – acts, events, showtimes, etc..And I suppose, in this context, right beside their other web properties, this tag makes perfect sense. This the first time I’ve seen a tag placed right alongside the social extensions for a brand, but I think it’s interesting in the sense that it could become as recognized as the Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace logos.

“Duh” - if QR Codes are just going to be another version of a URL shortener that sends consumers to the brand website, I have serious questions about whether or not they’ll ever catch on. Especially if they’re not accompanied by any instructions, enticements, and/or calls-to-action. I see them everywhere, but I never see anyone scanning them.

“Uh-huh” – I think QR Codes are an ideal enabling technology to catch consumers when they’re out and about, in exploring (and shopping) mode, to drive them to take some sort of action. I also believe that they are a great way to drive a deeper brand experience, but as Starbucks and Bubby’s has shown us here, they can be effective at driving purchase decisions. They’re efficient. Even if these are mysterious.

Actually, that could be the key to larger adoption. If they’re synonymous with mystery, would the average consumer scan these things?

What do you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Have a great weekend, everyone. Thanks, as always, for reading!

I’ve explored many examples of what I would consider to be the 11^th Screen solutions here – those that are in some way interactive, by nature, and occur outside of the four walls of your home or office.  That’s a bit of an oversimplification, but the result of interactivity outside of your home is bridging the real world with the virtual world. And as you might have seen here, or observed on your own, there are many different ways that the bridge can be built.

I think one of the simplest examples of this bridge is Redbox (the red movie kiosks). I’m sure you’ve all seen many different Redboxes along your daily journey. I probably have 6 of them on my way to the train station to/from work. In many ways, Redbox is the quintessential 11^th Screen example. It’s an Interactive Out-of-Home (IOOH) solution that is enabled by touch. You don’t have to own the device to participate in the experience. It’s a solution that has achieved (mass) scale and perhaps most of all, it’s a revenue generator. There might not be a better utilitarian kiosk solution out there.

Recently, I’ve noticed a few additions to the Redbox kiosks near me and I find them fascinating. Because they’re scratching the surface of becoming effective multi-channel devices. They’re only scratching the surface, though, and I wonder if Redbox is at crucial tipping point. With the introduction and accessibility of live streaming through services like Netflix, the act of renting movies is becoming more and more about the convenience than anything else – more than the true cost associated, more than the experience, and more than the physical disk. And while Redbox has served as a convenient and accessible utilitarian device, the game is constantly changing, in terms of technology and consumer expectation. So, these additions that Redbox has introduced and continues to explore are good, but they have some bad and just plain ugly characteristics that they need to address – and in short order – to have a chance in this rapidly evolving technological world of ours.

First, let me start with the GOOD – as I mentioned, I’ve noticed their effort to become more accessible cross-channel. It makes perfect sense because the one thing that everyone carries with them when they’re outside of their homes is their mobile phone. So, they’re likely to have it right there with them when they interact with the Redbox kiosks. Over the weekend, I saw a special promotion on the front of the Redbox kiosks that drove people to use a SMS shortcode for special offers.

This is not a new tactic, but an effective one, especially for a physical kiosk like Redbox. The shortcode promotion instantly provides another channel to drive people back to the kiosk.

In addition to the shortcode, Redbox is using QR codes to make it easy on people to download the Redbox mobile app for iPhone and Android.

There could be a better way to drive people to the apps, but say what you will about QR codes, they provide instant, easy access directly to the app. And I think they’re more actionable than a standard text call-to-action.

Once you download it, the app is pretty handy. It shows you all of the Redboxes in your vicinity and allows you to search movies, which is an important feature since they’re not stocked with the newest releases right off the bat (which I think is one of the major downfalls).

All in all, these two extensions/gateways through mobile are both solid ways to keep people connected to the Redbox experience and drive them deeper in it.

But in my opinion, they are missing a major piece as it relates to connection, which is the glaringly BAD. Watching movies is a social activity. Where are any of the social hooks in the Redbox experience?

In many ways, the Redbox experience is a 1.0 web experience. There are no ways to connect with other people with similar interests, yet the sheer act of watching movies is a shared interest. What would this experience look like if the sign-up mechanism were initiated through Facebook Connect? Not only would sign-up be streamlined, people would have the ability to instantly let their friends/family know what they’re watching, what they like or dislike, and even tell or see others what they think about the movies. And I think that’s just the beginning of something like that.

IntoNow – the audio-recognition mobile app – does a good job of providing a deep experience on a seemingly surface-type of action. There, once you check-into the show that you’re watching, you have the ability to learn more about the show, the actors, the episodes, etc. They include a direct link to imdb.com, which is a deep experience into itself, especially for movie buffs. They’ve gone beyond the audio recognition and incorporated many smart social features, more than just sharing. What if Redbox had some sort of check-in and/or deeper “learn-more” experience like IntoNow?

Maybe Redbox has done just fine the way it’s been operating, in its 1.0 experience. But aren’t we at the point where playing the game has gotten more intense? Aren’t consumer expectations way beyond this type of experience?

I know I want more.

Then, there’s the UGLY. Redbox is an efficient machine. The fabrication and engineering of the box is really top notch. I think it’s a model for so many self-serve kiosks. But in all its glory, what is up with the sun flap?

That is the most awkward piece of fabric that I’ve ever had to deal with – even more than the baby sun shades for your car. If they would just create a simple latch, the process of renting movies in the sunlight would be so much more enjoyable.

The sun flap is an afterthought. And afterthoughts, to me, are short-term solutions. And short-term solutions tend to turn into headaches. This is what I think Redbox is dealing with now. A headache that perhaps they don’t want to get rid of.

But here’s the question – in the game of convenience, why create an experience that might just be good enough? In the end, that’s what I walk away from Redbox with – it’s a good experience.

And the problem with good is that it’s not great.

As marketers and communicators, I think balance is key to so many things we do. I’m going to explore some of those things here, over the coming days. My first post was around the balance between sales & relationships (marketing & communication). Today’s is one of the favorite topics among my colleagues and myself – the balance between personalization and privacy.

One of the common themes here at the 11th Screen is the ability for consumers to connect with each other and the brands they love all the time, especially when they’re out and about, on-the-go. We don’t need physical screens outside of the home (“digital signs”) to deliver messages and enable engagement. The places and things around us have the ability to be turned on and it’s more of an exercise in strategy & creativity (in how to connect consumers) than it is in figuring out technology.

The notion that  the real and virtual world can be more hyper-connected  than it is today (which is light years more than it ever has been in the past) is something that is both exciting and scary. It’s exciting because:

• We can talk to anyone, anytime, on/through multiple devices, and we like this
• We aren’t confined to a computer screen or a TV screen to connect and engage, and we like this
• Mobile, to me, is becoming the screen of choice. And it doesn’t have to be a mobile phone – iPad anyone? And this is what we want.
• We can efficiently fulfill tasks that previously required us to go to a store, stand in lines, and deal with people (see Redbox, or better yet, see Netflix streaming service on your TV), and we like this

We can, essentially, control the terms of engagement with everything and everyone in our lives. While we might have a different level of control placed on friends/family than we do services/brands, the major benefit for all of this is that we’re having to alter our lifestyle less and less. It’s just easy. All of these connections now fit into our crazy, busy, on-the-go lifestyle. (This actually opens up another balancing act, which is disconnecting while always being connected – we’ll get to that in another post.)

From a brand & marketer/communicator standpoint, with this hyper-connection comes the potential to hyper-target. Outside of the computer. It provides the ability to personalize experiences based on past experience, preferences, demographic, and a slew of other personal data. “Right message at the right time” is something that I hear all the time in the digital signage circles. This is not a new concept, but it gets everyone excited with the possibility of truly reaching people with the right message at the right time, regardless of where they are. This is one of the things I find most exciting about the true potential of interactive out-of-home (IOOH). Right now, I think everyone would agree that there’s a lot of noise out there. Even on the web. But certainly when you’re outside of your home. Personalization helps reduce the noise.

But herein is the balancing act – personalization requires consumers loosening their grip on (potentially many) aspects of their privacy. And this is the scary thing about an always-on, hyper-connected world. This has a tendency to freak people out. Rightfully so. There are some creepy things that happen out there on the web and it doesn’t take many stories to scare people into not exploring or completely shutting down. This behavior is counterproductive to the potential of the new out-of-home. If no one will interact with the places and things around us, those places and things will be rendered worthless.

Here’s my take on privacy – if you can experience the benefit of giving up more information about yourself, you’re more likely to, in favor of a better experience. But you’ve got to experience it. And it’s got to benefit you.

I think Facebook and LinkedIn have done a wonderful job of letting people experience the benefits of giving up more of their private information. Facebook makes connections seem seemless, particularly around interests. LinkedIn enables you to connect very specifically with the type of people you want to connect with. Both are more powerful for you with more of your information. This power is in the personalization.

So, does it just boil down to benefit and experience? I’m afraid not. I think we still have a ways to go until giving up more personal information than less is the norm. I think technology will drive a lot of this, as it has in the past few years, but people don’t want to be creeped out. It’s just that simple. They want to feel safe. At the same time, whether or not they can verbalize it, I think they want to reduce the noise.

Transparency always helps. Utilizing systems where people have given personal information (Facebook) is good, too. This enables the experience to be seemless and easy. Education will be critical, especially from all of those involved in the out-of-home channel, because those turned-on-places-and-things-around-us can positively effect our daily lives. It’s going to require personal information, though.

As much as I talk about personalization, it’s important to realize anything can only be made personal through information. And that’s letting go of pieces of privacy. And that’s the balance that we all have to find.

So, that’s my take. What about yours? I’d love to hear it!

As marketers and communicators, I think balance is key to so many things we do. Over the next few days, I’m going to explore some of those things.

First one up is the brand’s end goal. At the core, I believe brands want 2 things:

1. Sell products

2. Create and develop relationships with consumers

Each can lead to the other, if done right. But without an eye on both, the sale can happen with nowhere to go.

I believe that it’s in “going” where the growing occurs. Growth can lead to more brand experiences or telling other people about it or best, loyalty.

But this growth is soft. It’s not as easy to see as a sale, especially after the sale occurs. We’re in a time, though, where technology makes it easier and easier to see this growth. There are many tools (specifically social media tools) and specialized talent that can help see beyond the sale.

The sale and the relationship are achieved through different strategies, different tactics, different people, and different tools. There is no one-size-fits-all approach, and I don’t think any of my agency and/or brand colleagues would argue that point. But this is where the balance comes in. Sales come and go and yes, they drive business. But I think, more and more, the heart of the business is becoming the fans, the actual people who want to have a relationship with the brand. If the brand turns a blind eye to them, whether out of choice, ignorance, operations, or council, where does that leave the brand in the end? It leaves them in a position where they’re perceived to not care. And caring is a personal thing. An emotion. It’s soft.

But, it’s something that can influence thousands or millions of sales.

This is something that I’ve experienced makes people feel uncomfortable. It’s hard to understand and it’s hard to do. There is an ongoing debate on how you actually show real value to this relationship part. It’s not easy.

Here’s the deal, though – in our world where selling stuff is so important, there’s never been a greater bridge to form relationships as there is now, with the open web, on-the-go technology, and the people’s desire to be connected and grow with the brand.

It’s about seeing these relationships as equally important as the sale. And that’s the balance that you have to find.

I’d love to hear what you guys think about this. Is this a balance that you see as important, or better yet, strive to maintain?

What a past couple of weeks it’s been for the digital signage industry. I don’t even know if I’m referring to the industry correctly anymore, given one of the key figureheads recently proposed renaming the term “digital signage” completely. Truth be told, I’ve never been clear on what to call this industry and even whether or not to call it an industry, much less what the industry is defined around. But in the end, I come back to the same thing – it’s the digital signage industry. Because it’s centered around digital signs – er, signs that are digital – and the industry is larger than a group and busineses are made around the components to run digital signs. So, it makes sense and it’s easy. I say “digital signage” (with or without industry) and everyone I talk to understands what it is, at least on a basic level. Semantics.

The true waves – those that could have a real impact on changing the face of digital signage, far beyond words – are being made by the people running business in this industry. Three major players, rVue, RiseVision, and Screenreach, have all recently hired individuals who live and breathe engagement. Not digital signage. Engagement. These are individuals who will benefit the industry because they have specific digital signage experience, too, but they are not about the sign. They’re about the engagement. That is an important distinction, especially for an industry that ironically seems to behind the technology-enabling-engagement curve. These individuals are awesome for the industry.

I think it’s interesting and admirable that each one of these companies created positions for these individuals. These were not positions that have existed before. They were made for these individuals. Before I get into that, let me just tell you a little bit about these individuals. I have the pleasure of personally knowing each of them and I’m better for it.

First up is Jennifer Bolt, who, for years, has been the head honcho for the media department at Tracy Locke. She has immense media planning and buying experience and knows more about the media side of digital signage than anyone I’ve met from an agency. She just joined rVue as Chief Strategy Officer. She knows, firsthand, the challenges that agencies face when guiding major brands through allocating and buying Digital Out-of-Home (DOOH) (a la digital signage). She knows how to ask the right questions of brands to understand where advertising dollars can be pulled from. It is complicated – from a brand perspective and agency perspective – and as a result, the digital signage industry suffers. Jennifer is a wonderful addition to the industry because she knows how to talk to agencies and exactly where to go within them to be a guide and help provide clarity all around.

Next is Paul Flanigan who recently joined RiseVision as VP, Marketing & Business Development. Paul is one of my first and best friends in the industry. He comes with a wealth of experience in branding, marketing, and communications and is just an overall bright and seasoned guy. He worked with the guys at The Preset Group and before that he ran Best Buy’s in-store network. Paul is an engagement guy. He gets the power of digital signs and how if they don’t create engagement, they’re not realizing their full potential. Now, by working with a digital signage software provider, he will not only be able to shape the actual product, but he’ll also be able to speak to prospects about the true potential of reaching and connecting people when they’re outside of their homes.

Which leads me to my boy, David Weinfeld, who, too, was with Preset before going on to Obscura Digital and just last week was named Chief Strategy Officer of Screenreach. The first thing you see when looking at the Screenreach website is, “Turn any screen into a 2-way interactive experience.” This is a perfect fit for Dave – a place where social, mobile and digital signage collide. He gets it completely and even more, eats it up completely, and Screenreach and the industry will benefit greatly from David having such a visible role within it. He should be able to directly infuse social and mobile connections into what’s expected from digital signage immediately.

All three of these individuals should have an indelible impact on the industry. I find myself energized knowing as much. But this could not have happened if the leaders of the respected companies – Jason Kates, Byron Darlison, and Paul Rawlings – did not recognize the need, potential, and competitive advantage that these individuals could fill/enable. These leaders had the wherewithal and courage to create positions for other leaders.

And that’s what changes and defines industries.

People.

Not words.

Last Friday, I had the pleasure of speaking to the Dallas/Ft. Worth American Marketing Association with 2 extremely talented and smart individuals in the digital signage industry – Brian Hasenbauer from Indoor Direct and Jennifer Bolt, formerly from Tracey Locke, now from RVue. We spoke to the AMA’s New Media Special Interest Group about the “Evolution of Digital Out-of-Home.” Here is my portion of the presentation.

Location-based services (LBS) – like Foursquare, Gowalla, and Yelp – made a big splash last year as a fairly successful, yet niche, mobile tactic for brands aiming to reach consumers in the real-world. They are great platforms for rewarding loyalty, real-time consumer reviews & tips, and for those who like such a thing, keeping track of your friends/family. I’ve “played” Foursquare consistently for a year now and dabbled in the others – Gowalla, Yelp, Loopt, SCVNGR. There’s interesting potential with this sort of technology, particularly when integrated with placed-based signage. But as I’ve wandered over the last year, I’m left wondering if these technologies will stick and ultimately reach the average consumer. And more than that, what it will take for them to reach that point? Here are my chronicles.

This is not a blog for the data seekers. I just don’t get into much of that here. But I read something the other day from eMarketer that was filled with lots of interesting data around location-based services apps and I think it’s only appropriate to share in this forum. Especially, since part of the “wandering” is actually “wondering” if these apps will catch on.

It’s no surprise that so few people are actually aware of LBS apps. Almost half of all of those surveyed did not know about these apps.

What I found to be somewhat surprising is that 2/3 of those who do know what they are do not use them. So, this suggests – outside of an awareness issue – that these services are perceived to provide little to no value.

What I found to be really surprising is the actual platforms that people use. My intuition would tell me Foursquare (since they’ve been successful at securing large partnerships) is the clear leader. And I know about the Facebook factor  in everything social, so they’d be up there, too (I even see my uncle – someone I would consider as the “average consumer” – using Facebook Places). But the numbers tell a different story.

Facebook and Google – both not particularly known for their LBS presence or prowess – make up over 2/3 of the platforms used by those using LBS apps. To me, this puts in perspective how hard it is for the little, niche players in any industry, especially one that is already little and niche. Could the same be said about the little guys in the digital signage industry?

But the most fascinating thing in here, to me, was the “why.” Why do people use these apps? Many of my colleagues – in and out of work – have always pointed to incentives as the main ” why.” But according to this survey, the main value driver is connections.

The tools that marketers typically use to entice check-ins, deals and discounts, did not hold much appeal for respondents to the survey. Most smartphone users believed social connections were the biggest draw to location-based apps. Among those who were familiar with them, 41% said connecting to people they knew or could meet was the main benefit, followed by finding places their friends liked (21%) and being able to keep track of their movement patterns over time (17%). Just 8% thought discounts and rewards were the most important benefit, and only 4% cared about the gaming elements of checking in.

People want to be connected. It’s just that simple. Technology – be it LBS apps or digital signage or anything in between – is only the barrier when it does NOT enable connections. I think this is an important note and growing trend that I hope my friends in the digital signage industry recognize. The key is to enable connections. Connections cannot be made through static, push, one-way messages. It’s just that simple.

Here’s the rub, though. And it’s in the privacy. Which, according to the article, is the biggest problem with consumer adoption.

Nielsen surveyed US app downloaders in April 2011 about their feelings around location-based apps and privacy and found those fears ran throughout the population. In every age group broken out, at least half of respondents said they were “concerned,” with no more than 13% saying they were “not concerned.” Analyzed by gender, the results were the same: Majorities of both men and women were concerned.

As interaction with screens around us become more and more expected and the places and things around us become more and more turned on, adoption might be slow going. Especially to the point of diving deep into a brand experience. But I think the point is made in the data and it is a human point. It’s a connections point. Regardless of what technology is new today and tomorrow, we want to be connected with each other (this is even more a truth with the younger, millennial generation).

And I suppose that should never be a surprise.