Tag Archives: DOOH

“Digital” OOH is Right Around the Corner, but is it Good?

1 Reply

Before this year, guess how many digital billboard I passed on my way to work from my home in the Dallas suburbs to downtown Dallas?

Answer: 0

Sometime early this year, guess how many I started seeing?

Answer: 1

Now, getting into the latter part of the year, guess?

Answer: 5

While 1 to 5 might not seem like a big increase, driving down that stretch of highway and now seeing 5 digital billboards as opposed to 1 actually has a big impact.

1. I’m automatically processing more digital.

2. I’m getting used to more moving images vs. static.

3. I’m interested to see (while not driving, of course) what’s next in the loop of content.

4. I’m starting to feel like I’m in a digital-forward city/environment.

My eye is automatically drawn to them because of all of these reasons. That’s the biggest impact it has. On a personal level.

I can’t help but think about the cost of putting in digital billboards vs. static billboards, but I’m starting to get convinced that cost is certainly not going to be a barrier. In a short 8 months, it hasn’t seemed to be, given the increase from 0-5.

I’m really feeling and believing that this is just going to be the norm. Digital/moving image signs on the sides of highways. It’s right around the corner.

But I also start to wonder if we’ll grow (somewhat) immune to these digital/moving messages, too? Just like we have to static billboards. Over time, once they’re commonplace, will moving images provide even more noise than 1 static image? And in that way, how good (read – effective) has “digital” become?

OOH needs more than just “Digital”

Leave a reply

“Out of Home” is quickly becoming a tired advertising channel.

“Digital” is quickly transforming into something more powerful than “always on.”

People are active. Not tied to any single “channel” and certainly have the expectation that communications they want from a brand/organization is “always there.”

Digital + OOH does not necessarily fill that need. Not at all.

Relevance & timely + “right there” (at that moment in time) fills the need. This is what the new OOH can be.

Unfortunately, though, as a channel, OOH is only a check-the-box thing. We must change this.

“Digital” can help. But it’s much, much more.

DOOH + mobile + social is not always THE great formula

Leave a reply

Digital billboard + mobile + social

I think this is a great formula. The holy grail, in fact.

This is where I see the real potential in truly using the places and things around us to engage. Not just through one, but all three.

ING recently created one such experience in Germany:

Here’s the thing – the problem right now is not whether or not the technology can do it. The real problem is cost and complexity. This is what prohibits scale. But you can even see how compelling something like this could be out in the real world, and then the reach it could potentially have in the virtual world. It’s a combination that could really spark engagement beyond an “experiential” level – something that we could see as a normal part of our everyday lives as we go about the real world around us.

Here’s the other thing, which to me, is more interesting. The tie-in between virtual basketball – regardless of how novel it is and how integrated the experience is – and ING is completely lost on me. They indicate that they wanted to “demonstrate how easy and efficient banking can be” with ING, but how that idea manifests itself through a virtual free throw is beyond me. I get that they wanted to reach a younger demo, but even still, is this demo going to remember ING is the one that brought this experience to them? It just seems too disconnected.

So, something like will get attention for sure. Right now, only a relative few might use it. I suspect it’s only a matter of time before more “non-technologically-curious” people would interact with something like this. But, the bigger concern should be to remain on brand. This, along with great technological integration like this, will be the true holy grail.

On brand communications/idea + integrated technology solution

This is where it’s at.

Don’t forget “Also”

Leave a reply

Yes, we are:

  • Connected
  • Social
  • Not stationary
  • More technologically adept

 

But we are also:

  • Dazzled by a “show”
  • Looking for ways to be entertained
  • Not tolerant of wasted time

 

As it pertains to connecting – in whatever way – when someone is outside of the confines of their home or office, perhaps they are more driven by the “also’s” than the initial “are’s.”

Digital Out-of-Home Demand and Noise – in 7 Parts

2 Replies

11th Screen | The Interactive Out-of-Home Blog

Part 1

Last week, I read an intriguing article by Garrick Schmitt of Razorfish, titled How Demand for Physical Experiences is Transforming our Physical Spaces. In it, he points out how the entire physical world around us is becoming a screen and that consumers’ expectations have reached a point to where that physical world should be turned on in some form or fashion. This is a viewpoint that I have mostly gotten behind many times on this blog. I say mostly because of those consumer expectations. I’m not sure that, even now, in August 2011, consumers expect the physical spaces around them to be turned on, and even more, transformed into interactive experiences. I don’t know that average consumer capacity is ready for that. What do you think?

Part 2

Guess when that article was written? 2 years ago, in September 2009. Awesome. In my opinion, Schmitt has always been on the forefront of these technology-led experiences in the real world around us. This is case-in-point.

I remember back during that time, it was around the time that I was leading the software development at imc2, for our interactive Out-of-Home solution. I always admired how Schmitt recognized the potential – and future demand – for these types of experiences.

Time is a funny thing, especially in regards to technology adoption. At the end of the day, that’s what we’re talking about here. Consumer demand is directly tied to their comfort level with any particular technology. We’re just now seeing smartphone use creep their way up to the majority. Smartphones have been around for years. But just now, after all these years, the average consumer is not intimidated by them. They know how to work them and, even more, know how they can make their lives better. It also helps that everyone can now afford them. Kinect is another great example. I wonder how comfortable people would have been with the idea of gesture control, at such an immersive level, two years ago?

Part 3

In the article, Schmitt points to “Out-of-Home” examples that are driven by enabling technologies (mobile and RFID) and people themselves (social media).

I think it’s easy to think about touchscreen-this-and-that when you think about the world around us being turned on. But, as shown in the Schmitt article, and in some of the more recent engaging examples, actual public touchscreens are not part of these experiences. The place or the thing is the canvas and the interactivity is controlled outside of it, either through mobile phones or computers.

The effective thing with all of these examples – and the thing that I think we can all learn from – is that consumers want it all, in the most convenient way. What I mean is, consumers want information and connections and whatever else they deem valuable. And they’re always going to be driven by what they’re comfortable with because it’s usually the easiest. They’re used to being on computers, connecting with other people through their social networks. They’re used to navigating to whatever they want on their mobile phones. Are they used to walking up to a touchscreen and interacting with it?

Part 4

Also last week (the same day I read the Schmitt article), I saw that Cinemax deployed an immersive touchscreen experience in the heart of New York City.

As you can see, the experience spans the front of an entire NYC building. It’s obviously noticeable. Consumers are enticed by it. And, by the looks of this video, comfortable enough to go up and play with it.

Having lived and worked in NYC, to get anyone to stop and interact with a storefront, is a feat in and of itself.

Yes, people can also interact with this experience through their mobile phone. But this is largely a public-facing, touchscreen experience. And it doesn’t seem like anyone in the video is a) intimidated or b) unaware of how to use it.

Is this indicative of Anytown USA?

Part 5

QR codes. What can be simpler? In the past year, they’ve gone from nothing to everything, at least in terms of visibility. My wife knows that “those are the things you can scan with your smartphone.”

They’re a great bridge between the real world with the virtual world and quite effective of turning those places/things around us “on.”

They’re everywhere now.

But the question is, despite their simplicity, why am I the only one who I ever see scan them?

Part 6

Simplicity and comfort are not the only two linchpins to this demand that we all know is coming. You can bring up the Minority Report analogies all you want, but this is not a far-fetched representation of our future world. Glorified, perhaps. But not unrealistic.

Two years ago, all of these interactive Out-of-Home activations were novel enough to garner attention. Are we still in that novel stage?

Part 7

Value. That’s really the question, right?

In this constantly-on physical world, what’s going to be noise and what’s going to be valuable?

By virtue, demand always creates noise.

Are consumers ready for all that noise?

 

An Innovation Question for the DOOH Industry, Thanks to Google+

Leave a reply

11th Screen | The Interactive Out-of-Home Blog

All we’ve been buzzing about around here, in my world, is Google+. I’m not going to get into all of the opportunities or redundancies that it might or might not bring to the table, but I will say this – here’s what it shows us – even Google, who seemingly has been left behind in the social space by Facebook is constantly innovating.

This is not just another Facebook. It is fundamentally different.

When looking at the DOOH industry, I think we can all agree that there has been its own fair share of innovating, especially in the recent past, as seen here, here, and here. The experiences that occur outside of the home, through technology, is fundamentally different than it was even a year ago. And with new innovations, just as Google shows us, it’s going to look different sometime in the (near) future.

Here’s my question – since the technology fundamentally changes the game, are the DOOH industry and its players poised to keep up?

 

People, not Words, Will Change & Define the “Digital Signage” Industry

2 Replies

11th Screen | The Interactive Out-of-Home Blog

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.

The Evolution of Digital Out-of-Home – My View

Leave a reply

Awareness vs. Engagement OOH

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.

The Evolution of Out of Home

View more presentations from Mike Cearley.
As much as I can, I like speaking to pictures, not words, so the presentation might be a bit difficult to understand. For regular readers of this blog, my story and view of the Out-of-Home space has been chronicled here many times and the presentation is a brief consolidation of those thoughts. For those new readers, there are a few key themes in my view of Out-of-Home that are reflected in this presentation:
  1. I am not a media person (like Jennifer). I don’t make my living working for a DOOH network (like Brian). I work for a communications company and I am an experience person. I’m very much in the connections business and one of the opportunities that I am faced with is how we can connect people with each other and the brands/organizations they support while they are physically outside of their homes. In a way, I have a grassroots approach to Out-of-Home, but that’s primarily due to the realistic application I can affect given my job. I’m fascinated by the space and the experiences brands can now create Out-of-Home so I think I have a pretty broad perspective, based on experience and study.
  2. I’ve heard “Digital Out-of-Home” (DOOH) referred to as the 4th Screen (Nielsen dubbed it as such) and the 5th Screen and even the 6th Screen. People are coming up with “screen” names for the space that are pretty funny. So, when I started this blog, I picked a random number and ran with it. Thus, the 11th Screen. It’s actually been kind of serendipitous because in the past two years, I’ve realized more and more that we will not need physical screens to interact and engage with while outside of our homes. Technology now enables the places and things around us to be turned on and I think the future is not going to be defined by “screens” at all. So, the idea of the 11th Screen speaks to this notion of our physical world being projected on, interacted with, and made into rich experiences. At least that’s the story I’m running with. :-)
  3. I see this “Out-of-Home” space as a blank canvas to create connections. Our society (and world) is based on human connections. Technology (especially mobile) has enabled broader and more efficient connections. It’s no longer the barrier. In fact, it’s a powerful enabler. So, the opportunity for brands to connect with people while they’re outside of their homes, on the go, is greater today than it ever has been. At the heart of connections is communication and effective communication is 2-way. This is important. Because it requires listening and engaging. Both ways.
  4. Out-of-Home has typically been a great Awareness channel. Effective at getting as many eyeballs on an ad as possible.
  5. The introduction of “digital” to the Out-of-Home mix, insofar as making the display digital, does nothing to channel other than to make it more efficient. Moving images and bling make it into “Digital Out-of-Home,” but it does not fundamentally change the channel.
  6. What does fundamentally change the channel is a different kind of technology – “enabling” technology. Technology that enables connection with the brand or with other people. Technology like touch or gesture or Bluetooth or geo-location or image recognition. There are a fair amount of technologies that enable something digital or non-digital (bling or not) to drive connections. This kind of technology changes the channel from an effective Awareness channel to an Engagement channel, and this is the true potential, and the future, of Out-of-Home. In my opinion.
  7. Then, some examples – the first Walgreens example represents the difference between non-digital Out-of-Home and Digital Out-of-Home. Adding a display technology onto the sign does nothing other than provide more space to advertise.
  8. But, as soon as you introduce a short-code to drive connections on that digital sign, it instantly becomes another way into the brand, a way to connect with them.
  9. Then, you can see other examples of the “Awareness” execution of the space compared to the “Engagement” execution of the space. And the space, again in my opinion, is no longer just billboards, posters, or kiosks. It’s the places and things around us in the real world – like products and packages – that are becoming channels into the brand experience themselves. This is the future. And to me, I’m afraid it can’t be defined as “Digital Out-of-Home.” That is much, much too limiting.

If you have any questions on the presentation, feel free to drop me a line. I’m more than happy to discuss in more detail. As always, thanks for reading!

What Exactly are Table Stakes Today?

Leave a reply

Is digital always better? Especially in terms of signage?

From my perspective – one that is pretty dialed into the digital signage/digital Out of Home (DOOH) industry – I often feel like there is a misguided notion that digital is always better. Yes, digital can deliver more messages and adjust based on time of day, demographic, and/or location, but more and even more targeted messages don’t necessarily translate into better. To me, it’s all about how good that message is and whether or not it enables an opportunity for the consumer to be driven deeper into the brand.

A few weeks ago, my friends Will Amos and Kyle Porter from NanoLumens sent me a link to a new table top digital signage solution intended for casual dining restaurants. It’s a decent looking product and I can imagine the network (COMMCaddy Network) is an efficient way for restaurants to deploy and change specials, offers, etc. Here’s a static shot of the CommCaddy:

CommCaddy

I’ve also worked with and seen an interactive table top solution for the same type of restaurants. It, too, provides an efficient way to deploy and change specials, offers, etc. Patrons can even pay from this Ziosk device. Here’s a static shot of the Ziosk:

Ziosk | TableTopMedia

While both of these solutions – and any digital solution, for that matter – can create efficiencies, cut a whole slew of costs and ultimately help to drive more sales (by serving up images of drinks or desserts, for instance), I just wonder if they’re addressing the real need? Which, to me, is to drive loyalty, deepen the brand experience, and get patrons to come in again. From this perspective, digital has nothing to do with it. And message and connection have everything to do with it.

Last night, I saw this boring, laminated table top sign at Houlihans.

Houlihans Table Tent

While I understand that these examples seemingly have a different purpose on the table, I’ll go back to the real need. Is it to drive sales or deeper connection?

The answer is both. I know.

But when you think about table stakes in today’s always-on, digitally-driven world, in casual dining restaurants like this – what’s most important to have? Something digital? Or something that enables connections?

I think the industry (and restaurants within) should take a look at what Houlihans does, with its non-digital, boring little laminated table top sign. They focus on staying connected. Specifically through:

  1. Mailing list – It’s the first thing on the sign. And you can do it just by asking your server for a “sign-up slip.”
  2. Mobile – The next thing on the sign. Text a short code in to receive specials. And just by signing up, get a free mini dessert.
  3. Social – Twitter & Facebook identities right out in front to connect with the brand in their social channels.
  4. Geo-location – Fourquare specials here. And it’s one of the only restaurants like this that I’ve eaten at that provide specials for checking in (it’s good, too).

I have no idea what restaurants choose to show on digital screens at the table, if in fact they have them. The ones that I’ve witnessed myself, and then seen through their own advertisements, miss this connection point completely. There is value in having such an efficient display system, for sure. But if the message is all about food, food, food (or, really, sell, sell, sell), I believe patrons aren’t going to feel one way or another about your brand, especially as it relates to your fancy digital table top solution. They might buy more food when they’re sitting there that one time. And maybe even next time, if they come in. But in the end, that’s all they’re doing. They’re not connecting to the brand, which can impact the way they feel about the brand, and ultimately drive loyalty.

There is a simple notion that cannot be misguided – people, in some way, want to be connected. So, shouldn’t table stakes in today’s casual dining restaurant world be all about those connections and not the technology?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Friday’s 4-1-1, Signs on My Morning Journey Style

Leave a reply

I live in the country. No two ways about it. So, when I look around at all the (or lack of) technology in my everyday path out in the real world, on a daily basis, I’m certainly seeing the lite version. When I go closer to the city, or god forbid, in the city itself, it’s drastically different. Last month at SXSW in Austin, everywhere I turned there was a different technology, either displaying something in my face or enticing me to interact with it. And Austin, as a city, is completely different from Dallas as a city, as far as outdoor technology goes. I’m often actually amazed at how naked downtown Dallas is compared to other major cities like Austin or Chicago or NYC. Still, technology is all around us, everywhere we look, even in a naked city like Dallas, and even in the country where I live.

This morning, I stopped by every digital sign and interactive kiosk I noticed on my journey from my house to the train. And even though I live in a rural part of the country, I still encountered technology all along the way. Here’s that journey:

11th Screen | The Interactive Out of Home Blog

The sign outside the City Hall/Library, then the local Walgreens sign, then the Redbox outside its front doors, then the church’s sign, then the bank ATM, then the (boring) car wash clock, followed by the train ticket kiosk, then the train station sign, and finally, the sign inside the train. That’s the journey every morning.

So, I want to use today’s Friday 4-1-1 to reflect on the good, the bad, and the ugly of this technologically-fascinating & rich journey.

1. Snooze-fest – man, oh man, how boring can you get in terms of digital signage/interactive kiosks? These are the quintessential examples. The 1.o of both. And they’re all around because I mean, if they’re all the way out here in the country, they’re surely in the city, too. But you know what? I notice them because they’re….

2. Attention-getting – even if it is for a split second, I notice digital signs like these. Because they’re moving and/or colorful. Not for any other reason. Whereas it takes something more for me to notice a traditional billboard or poster – it usually has to stand out creatively. So, digital has that going for it. But the thing is – after I notice it, there are many times I instantly turn it off. If it’s not something and/or somewhere that interests me, I don’t care. So, in this regard (at least to  me), digital signage is more effective at getting eyeballs (awareness) to see more messages (reach), but not necessarily more effective at affecting consideration. Regardless, there is still an opportunity to drive consumers deeper into the brand through the sign…

3. As a connector – even boring signs like these have the ability to drive consumers deeper – at the very least, to a website. I’m amazed at how many of these signs that don’t do anything other than slam those (scrolling) messages right down our throat and pay no attention to the opportunity to do a little bit more. It’s ironic that whoever is making those decisions – like the one to install digital signage – is choosing not push the consumer farther down the brand experience path. I know it’s hard. But welcome to 2011.

4. Utility machines – yes, digital signage and kiosks like this are good for something. And it’s utility. Not experience. I talk a lot about always looking for ways to create an experience through channels/platforms like these, but it can’t, and shouldn’t, be done all the time. I do wonder what the 3.0 version of these will be, though.

“Duh” – technology makes delivering messages more efficient. That’s probably the most obvious thing I’ve ever said on this blog?!?! But here’s the thing – how fancy do you need to get when the only objective is to deliver more messages, more efficiently? Seems to me that there would be a couple of solutions out there in the market that could handle all of the different ways and scale to achieve this objective. As it is now, it seems like there are 100’s of solutions. Why?

“Uh-huh” – sometime in the (near) future, these signs will all be connected – to each other and to us. The Internet of Things, while futuristic and fantastical, is real and coming. If we don’t see a 3.0 version of these signs before then, well, I guess we will then. I wonder if network operators and the whoosits and whatsits in the industry understand?

Yes, my daily journey is low-fi, in terms of DOOH/IOOH. But I notice it all and on a level, appreciate it. For the most part, it serves its purpose.

What do you see on your regular daily activities? Is it anything like this?