Tag Archives: DOOH

Kinect (and others) – “DOOH” Killers?

3 Replies

How far away do you really think we are from mass adoption of interacting with the physical spaces around us?

Can this be the year of mobile and “interactive out-of-home?”

Has technology made “medium” really irrelevant?

My answers:  Closer than we actually think.  Yes and quite possibly (who would have thought?).  Technology has shifted each medium’s relevancy from consumption to experience, thus shifting the necessity of each.

For anyone who does not know what “out-of-home” (OOH), “digital out-of-home” (DOOH), or my own “interactive out-of-home” (IOOH) is, or does not believe its place or efficacy in today’s media environment, I believe you will learn very quickly otherwise.

I’m struck by examples of new technology that I have seen in a short 12 months, each adding another element of seamless human-to-computer interaction, directly affecting our experiences in the spaces around us:

Layar – through the use of your mobile phone, you can simply hold it up in any environment and instantly see, through this “augmented” reality, people around you, what they’re saying, what they’ve said, where they want to go, where you should go, etc…The open space around you instantly becomes interactable.

Audio Graffitti – here, you can walk up to any surface, speak or make a noise, and “tag” it for others to hear/experience from that point forward.  The surfaces around you instantly become audible.

Project Natal/Kinect – this gesture-based controlling system brought to us by Microsoft/Xbox was formally announced last night at the E3 conference (although the technology has been open to developers for at least a year.)  This is a game changer (pardon the pun, it’s just the right thing to say) – it allows users to control their experience in games without pressing a button of any sort.  Nothing.  All actions are controlled by the user’s gestures.  The displays around you instantly become responsive.

This Kinect news is really groundbreaking in my opinion.  Now, this technology is available for gamers, just a fraction of the general population, but in a year from now, how much bigger does that fraction get?  Who else is this kind of technology available for on a mass scale?

Technology is no longer the barrier.  Yes, it’s going to continue to get better and take different shapes, but as evidenced by the three examples above, it’s at the point where we no longer need to touch anything to interact with the spaces around us.  Just take a minute to think about that.

The other common thread among these three – they are all inherently social.

I’ve said before that “DOOH” as a medium is talked about wrong (“digital” just means display and without interaction, it is dull, tired, and un-sustainable) and I’m afraid that it is already becoming extinct, before it even gains traction.  We are rapidly moving beyond one-way, static displays, digital or not.

Take a look at the spaces around you when you’re on your way to work, or at the grocery store, or at the park.  Think you can interact with them?  If not, think again.

Social Media is alot like Filmmaking

Leave a reply

In my previous life, I was an independent filmmaker.  And in the life before that, I wrote.  I still write, but I don’t make films anymore, mainly because of time.  Making films takes every ounce of brain power, much less time, you can give it, especially if you’re doing it all by yourself.  I miss that type of creating.  I miss being in something that deep for that long of time. 

I experience similar acts of creating with my job, and have ever since I can remember.  One of the great things about marketing and communications is the creating aspect.  We tell stories and solve problems and ultimately create relationships through pictures and words – the same tools filmmakers use to bring their stories to life.

I can’t help but liken social media to filmmaking.  Brands can go the independent route and spend a fraction of the cost to do it themselves.  Or they can go the studio route and hire “professionals” to monitor, manage, reach out to, engage, report, and analyze every aspect of their social media presence(s).  Studios have the infrastructure in place to churn out film after film.  Independents have themselves and a few of their friends to make a film at a time.  Both can produce really good films, but the amount of time that it takes doesn’t differ between the two. 

Quite often, I believe there’s a misperception that going the independent route enables organizations to get it done quicker, cheaper, and perhaps even just as effective (if not more) than hiring someone else to do it.  There is no formula, regardless of who does what, for success.  But, just like films, social media requires time.  It’s a serious commitment and someone’s got to be down deep for an extended period of time to even put themselves in a position to succeed.

Films have an advantage over social media because their stories end.  In social media, the stories grow and evolve and continue on indefinitely.  They turn into relationships.  And relationships, no matter what direction you go, can’t be skimped.

AR & QR – Here to Stay?

Leave a reply

I just read a great re-cap post on “super brand’s” use of Augmented Reality from Chris Lake on Econsultancy and it got me thinking.  Specifically about AR & QR codes.  I call both technologies enabling technologies because they both enable the offline to be merged with the online.  And they both enable deeper experiences with the brand.  But QR codes – really any barcodes – just don’t seem to have the attraction, nor the experimentation to scale and use that AR has.  Why do you think this is?

Aside from the end-visual difference between the two, I think it’s simple – QR codes don’t do for a brand what AR does.  In other words – QR codes are just another way to access information.  AR is another way to experience a brand.  It’s quite a big difference.

At the end of the day, do we really need QR codes?  We can duplicate the same experience through advertising a URL or a short code.  Some would even argue that accessing a deeper level of information through a URL/short code is a better experience than through a QR code.  You don’t have  to understand what it is, how it works, download an app, take a picture.  Just simply type or text for the information you want.

AR, on the other hand, is an experience unto itself.  You can’t duplicate the experience any other way.  And because AR is what it is, it allows brands to either create an experience or utility that can show things in ways that no other medium can.  And that’s one of the fascinating things to me about AR – it transcends the mediums/screens we use to consume media.  It lives, literally, somewhere between your hands in the real world and your eyes on whatever screen you experience it on.  It can immerse someone in a brand far more effectively than any barcode can.  And depending on the actual solution, it can probably immerse someone more than a TV commercial can, or a website, or a banner ad, or a “static” video.

QR codes & AR both have hurdles for sure.  Start with the technology needed and the effort required to access either of them.  But because of what each provides, do you think one will outlive the other?  Or do you think that they’re both here to stay?

Are You an Expert Learner?

1 Reply

I heard something the other day in an Innovation session put on by my company that has stuck with me ever since.  “It’s not about being expert knowers.  It’s about being expert learners.”

I believe that we, as professional marketers (and particularly strategists), have a responsibility to know what to look for and understand in how we can solve our clients’ challenges.  We know “best practices”, we know what questions to ask, we know technologies and mediums, and we can know that in order to be most effective, we should understand audience behaviors and attitudes.  We tend to know the right way to do things and the wrong way to do things and when we have no idea if we’re doing the right or wrong thing.  And many things in between.  Our knowledge and experience set a good baseline for everything we know.

But today more than ever, with the interconnected delivery and consumption ecosystem that we operate in, it’s unrealistic to know everything.  Evolution – in communication, technology, and consumer behavior – occurs every single day.  What is one way today could be another way tomorrow.  There’s just no way we can even pretend to know all there is to know, even about one particular subject/industry/vertical.  Malcolm Gladwell, in Outliers, wrote about research that discovered for someone to be considered an expert on anything, they had amassed 10,000 hours on that particular subject, or roughly 10 years of doing nothing else.  But it’s important to recognize that in that 10 year-span, they are not just doing.  They are continuously learning.  By the end of that 10-year-I’m-an-expert-on-X period, that person is also an expert learner. 

This is the cool thing about learning – we learn everyday, no only when we are “doing” whatever it is we “do.”  I suppose it just takes awareness and the wherewithal to recognize moments of learning and the filing away in the mind’s filing cabinet, assuming one wants to learn, first.  And this is me.  It’s more important to me to be an expert learner because the result of all that learning puts me that much closer to being an expert knower, not the other way around.

When it really gets down to it, do you like to learn?  Do you like to soak up information?  Do you like to be surrounded by people who you can learn from?  Do you think you can learn from anyone?    

If your answer to these is yes, I would encourage you to continue, regardless of how long you’ve been doing that thing you do.  If it’s no, come on, give it a try.

Build-A-Bear Doesn’t Do “Just Because”

6 Replies

This is the second part of this two-part series on Build-A-Bear’s complete brand experience, one that I totally dig.

Now that I’d left the store, Tex in tow, I was directed to continue my (& Tex’s) experience online at Build-A-Bearville.  My behavior/attitudes as a 35-year old male is a bit different than Build-A-Bear’s target – a tech-savvy 10-year old girl – so I didn’t go straight home and hop online to visit the community.  But when I was ready, the first thing I did was take a look at something I received in-store – Tex’s birth certificate included two codes on it that allow me to register him in Build-A- Bearville.

This Build-A-Bearville is a great community for the audience.  It’s set up like a virtual world with custom avatars – both of you and your new best friend – where you can explore, make friends, buy things, and make your own home, among many others.  Some quick stats that I found to be very interesting, via Brandon at Kioskcom – users of Build-A-Bearville have created 1.5 million avatars (mine is below), 1.2 million unique visitors a month, avg. 30 min visit in the community.  They have created a sticky experience online. 

This process, getting set up in the community, personalizing it and everything, takes a bit of time, but once you get set up, you’ve created the foundation of your presence in the community.  Everything you do from that point forward builds and strengthens your presence in the community.  All of these actions drive you, as the consumer, deeper into the brand.  Every moment of engagement is an opportunity to build loyalty.  Their essence is woven through this entire experience in such a great way.  It’s even evidenced by their user agreement – their “Golden Rule” – that everyone who joins has to agree to:

Be kind.  Treat others the way you would like to be treated.  Never give out personal information.  As a parent and as someone who gets/understands/encourages the use & impact of technology on my kids’ lives, these are rules that I want them to see everywhere they turn, certainly rules that I want them to see in an online community.

The “Be kind” and “Treat others the way you would like to be treated” must be engrained in their corporate culture, too, because everyone in-store embodies these characteristics.  Some might see all of this – the kindness, the language, the spirit of everything – as a little hokey, but for a brand who is made for a 10-year old tech savvy girl, they do so many things right.

I think one of the keys to this success is that they completely understand their audience.  They know exactly who they’re talking to, they believe it, (and it’s right), so everything they create as a brand is purposeful.  And as a result, is meaningful to their audience.  Purpose and meaning transcend technology and trends and slick marketing.  They enable much more probability to be sustainable over the long-haul.

This also enables them to be “channel agnostic.”  They don’t care about “screens” (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, whatever), they care about their experience.  And they let the experience drive particular messages/content in each channel, whatever they perceive to be the best to deliver those messages to this audience.  If digital signage doesn’t make sense to the experience, they don’t utilize that channel.  If it does, they do.  This alleviates the “just because” syndrome that many brands and marketers tend to fall victim to, particularly with DOOH/digital signage.

Brandon said they are looking for the right ways to integrate mobile into this equation.  Since these guys can be purposeful in everything they do, I would only expect this mobile integration to be another fitting piece to the puzzle.  I said earlier that they have created a sticky experience online, but in fact, they have created a sticky brand experience all the way around.  Kudos to them.

PS – some of the cool things offered in the community are:  online newsletter/paper, tasks & challenges, virtual badges, mini-games, pre-written chat messages.  My avatar can do things like wave and dance (yes, the dancing is fun!)  Tex can even roam around the community with me and play fetch.  There are lots of things to do in a safe environment.

Would love to know your thoughts, impressions, etc…Shout if you want.

Three Bloggers’ Perspectives

Leave a reply

Was on a panel with Adrian Cotterill from DailyDOOH and Dave Haynes from The Preset Group.  This is our perspective.

14 people at beginning, easily doubled in 5 minutes

We all went through intros first.  I could have framed myself a little better.  Lav mic is weird.

Dave – been around for a really long time, 2006 started blogs, 1,500 posts, much more of an opinion piece – why you should look at this, bit of a filter for the industry

Q1:  How digital media can improve customer engagement and increase sales lift?

Adrian:  Does digital really need explaining?  Surely, we’ve seen sales lift

Dave:   Digtal media still a little mysterious to people…when we talk about sales lift, we see in the past year that results that are shared around.  Walmart showed up at conference last year and showed results on their smart network – they were getting phenomenal sales lift…industry avg 10 -15 % lift

Mike:  I think you have to separate those two objectives.  Engagement is very different than conversion – it can certainly play off of each other.  Dynamic, moving images have an impact.  When talking about OOH, placement is part of the equation.  Then, f/u with the most appropriate content so it can achieve that goal – sales lift. 

Q2:  Examples of successful implementations and their impact on brands?

Adrian:  Harrods – amazed at how well they’ve done retail…screens embedded into the fabric of their environment

Dave:  Believes that there are more unsuccessful implementations vs. successful…Tim Horton’s (donut shop in Canada) – they see real sales lift on just “digital” amid their menu boards….Microsoft’s retail stores, baked right into it

Mike:  Mini/BMW – digital billboards, RFID, AR

Nike – virtual shoecase, matching shoes kiosk, Chalkbot

 These brands have a very good understanding of their audience so they’re able to use various mediums really effectively.

Q3:  Measurement methodology & ROI?

Adrian:  taken from keynote this morning, the emotions

Dave:  not so down on the research and analytics, yes it’s imperfect, but it does a good job of showing how long people are looking at screens…typically the viewer engagement on these screens is 3 seconds…wow

Mike:  DOOH is passive so measure it like any OOH installation – eyeballs, traffic, etc..

IOOH is active so measure it on actions

 This is why I think interaction is so important.

Q4:  Successful trends we are seeing?

Adrian:  People don’t need an excuse or prompt to touch a screen these days.  Mobile interaction is something that is also taking off.  Audio/music/sound – this being explored more now, too.

Dave:  Mobile & social….extremely early days for that….this industry has to open its eyes a lot wider as to what’s going on around them……the days of “captive” audience is over…no one is really captive anymore

Mike:  I think you have to look at social and mobile separately from OOH.  Both are gaining traction and both will play a large part in OOH.

Aside from that, people are getting more familiar with expectations that they can interact with their surroundings.

Q5:  Who needs to be involved in the process for success?

Adrian:  Surely everyone in the company!  Merchandisers, marketers, IT, and don’t forget retail staff!

Dave:  All about objectives and are you getting return on those?

Mike:  Client side – Brand managers – marketing, communications

 Agency side – brand teams, advertising teams, media buyers, research, analytics

 Implementation side – content creators (developers, designers), system admins (tech)

 End user from the standpoint of acceptance

Q6:  What makes a project a winner?

Adrian:  Microsigns…put them underneath mobile phones in stores

Dave:  Most of the really good projects in this space have come from outside the industry…..

Mike:  Depends on what the objectives are.

 If you want to change perception, can do.

 If you want to deepen engagement, you can.

 If you want to drive sales/conversion, you can.

 It’s all about:

Who are we talking to?

What are we trying to say?

How are we going to say it?

 Q7: What brands and venues can do to succeed through the use of digital signage and DOOH? 

Adrian:   Spend money, don’t try to do anything on the cheap, get good advice, think creatively, don’t forget content, integrate mobile..

Dave:  change in business models

Mike:  Have to be clear about your objectives.  What are they trying to do?

Hope that they have smart people around them.

Agree with cheap and the content.

Q8:  What does the future hold?

Adrian:  Where you now see cardboard and print, you will now see digital.  More installations will be interactive, responsive by touch and gesture, and mobile.

Dave:  I don’t know what he said.

Mike:  Technology gets better, people get smarter.  It’s not about “digital” out of home screens, it’s about interacting with our spaces around us.

The Simple Difference Between DOOH & IOOH

Leave a reply

I have come to a realization – or better said, I have verbalized a thought into simplistic terms.  And here it is:

DOOH is passive.

IOOH is active.

By now, you probably know my love for the “DOOH” moniker.  I think it confuses everyone in the industry and no one corrects it.  The closest thing I’ve heard is from Keith Kelsen – he defines “DOOH” as a digital OOH ad network and “Digital Signage” as a digital OOH platform that does not include advertisements.  He, at least separates them.  I would argue that even “non-advertising”-based platforms are grey, at best, in inherently being an advertising platform.

To me, “digital” out of home means nothing more than applying a digital display to an OOH installation.  As such, you have a very passive experience.  Is it more dynamic than static?  Yes.  Is it more effective than static?  Has a good chance.  But at the end of the day, both of them are passive solutions.

It’s very simple – if you want to engage your audience, you have to be active.  Include interaction.  Implement an IOOH solution.  Not a DOOH solution.

Applying Technology to my OOH Basics

2 Replies

A couple of days ago, I shared my vision of OOH.  It’s pretty simple.  In my view, OOH is broken down into 3 buckets – categories of displays if you will – billboards, posters & kiosks.  They are separated by 3 differentiating factors – amount of information, length of engagement and potential for human interaction.

This view is important to me because of what happens when you start to add technology onto it.  What exactly does that technology do?  And what is the true impact of technology on this medium?  So, first, to show my view on the most overused moniker in the industry – Digital Out of Home (DOOH):

When you add digital to this model, you get the same exact model with just a little different shading.  It doesn’t change much other than the fact that there is now some sort of technology applied to the medium.  In this case, “digital” is just the addition of display technology.  As I’ve said before, display technologies are a finite list of technologies – LCD, LED, projection.  All it does is enable a static display to become dynamic.  For advertisers, this, of course, has a substantial impact, both with advertising-based displays/networks and non-advertising-based displays/networks.  But the true effect on the consumer’s experience isn’t drastically different.  When you apply a display technology to a billboard, you get a different type of billboard, but by and large, it has the same effect.  Ditto for posters and kiosks.  As a consumer, I’m still getting the same amount of information, I’m still engaging with it the same length of time and the potential for my interaction with it hasn’t changed.  The primary difference is that it now moves.  Is it more effective?  Maybe.  If I respond better to moving images rather than static display.  If the content is compelling.  But I don’t think it moves the needle by itself.  The true magic happens when you make OOH & DOOH interactive, which I’m calling Interactive Out of Home (IOOH).   

 

Now, not only is the model shaded even more differently, it takes on a completely different form.  Interactive billboards become something closer to posters.  Interactive posters become something closer to kiosks.  And kiosks become something they’ve never been.  Interactivity and the technologies that enable it have a profound impact on OOH & DOOH.  I call these technologies enabling technologies – technologies that enable personalized experiences from each of these displays.  Technologies like touch screens, motion sensors, RFID, NFC, Bluetooth, mobile and its enabling technologies like GPS, 2D/3D barcode scanners and Augmented Reality – the list is certainly larger than the display technology list, but still finite (at least right now.  I have no doubt it will grow with time.)  But they all drastically effect the experience in the same fundamental way – they enable a level of personalization that is deeper than any of these displays provide in their raw, even digital, forms.  This personalization is really the key to effective communication, which is the key to creating and sustaining relationships between brands and their audiences.  This is the special effect that I believe OOH, as a medium, can and will have on marketers and consumers in this new day and age, particularly as newer technologies are introduced.  But it’s all about the interactivity.  A traditional OOH installation can be made interactive, just as a DOOH installation can be made interactive.  In some cases, I believe the technology inherent in DOOH makes it easier to incorporate enabling technologies, but this is not always the case.  It does not need to be “digital” to include interactivity.  A perfect example of this is our QR code initiative at SXSW.  A static (non-digital) QR code was added to a static display (car, which in this case, I would consider a “poster” in my model – not that it includes a wealth of information, but a static car like that, in that type of environment, provides a level of human interaction and length of engagement similar to a traditional poster) and with the use of mobile as the enabling technology, attendees were able to experience a deeper, personal engagement with the brand.  This is why I think it’s critical to make a distinction between “digital” and “interactive” in this way.  Interactivity allows the consumer to experience more information, and engage and interact with it in a deeper way.  It is worlds different than just “digital.” 

This sort of engagement opens up an exciting and scary world of possibilities.  Brands will sooner or later understand that they can (and should) use the spaces and things around us, in our everyday lives, as effective communication tools.  It has a drastic impact on them and their ability to touch their audience anywhere they want/need.  We’re a ways off though, as you’ve heard me say before.  But make no mistake, technology – specifically enabling technologies (not display technologies) – transforms the OOH world into something that has only truly been applied in books and movies.  For now, we keep pushing and experimenting.

Recognizing the Art of Communicating

1 Reply

I read many trade magazines.  Wired, Fast Company, Harvard Business Review – these are some of my favorites.  But, my real favorite is Communication Arts.  It’s my favorite because it focuses on the art of communication, which truly is an art.  If you’re not familiar with it, I recommend it.  It features high quality work from all industries, all verticals, in all mediums – print, photography, video, animation, motion graphics.  

My favorite issue every year is their Interactive Annual (they just published the latest one last week).  Here, they award the best interactive experiences executed in the industry over the past year.  Guess how many IOOH initiatives were recognized this year?  6.  Out of 40.  This is good.  It might not seem that high, but it is double the number of IOOH recognitions last year.  To me, this is incredibly encouraging.  Industry experts consider these to be among the best interactive experiences executed, regardless of medium. 

And there were 2 more – very unique – recognized this year that had elements of OOH/digital/interactive, although I don’t know that I would completely consider them IOOH.  The 6 are really nice.  All interactive through touch and gesture, but really nice.  (2 of which I experienced for myself at the Hard Rock Café in Vegas).  However, it’s not these 6 that I want to talk about.  It’s these 2 very-unique experiences that I want to talk about. 

One is from Nike.  Say what you will about Nike, they are great marketers.  Medium agnostic.  Emerging media experimentalists.  I enjoy most everything I see from them.  This example is no different:  Chalkbot.  The concept is simple – let the collective public decorate the roads during the Tour de France (which is a tradition) through the use of various digital media, namely computers and/or mobile phones. 

This experience occurs outside of the home (so it’s partly there through my definition of OOH), but the actual experience does not originate from a device, medium, or platform that the user does not own.  In this case, it originates from a user’s computer or mobile phone (which does not completely fit my definition of OOH).  So, I ask, is this a true OOH initiative?  I believe yes, it is.  As a spectator (and not an enabler/participant), I experience it outside of my home on a device, medium, or platform that I don’t own.  I can’t turn it off.  It might as well be a billboard.  But the real question that I struggle with is, is it an IOOH initiative?  And to me, given my definition of IOOH, it is not.  Here’s the thing – as an enabler/participant, I must control what the chalkbot does on the street through a device that I already own.  Without that device, I wouldn’t have an experience.  So, unlike a traditional billboard, where you would have an experience – you would see the billboard on the side of the road – the road is essentially bare without my interaction.  In this case, I choose to turn everything on.  And I think that’s the biggest difference between the two.  If the chalkbot was a billboard (and already “on”), I would have an easier time accepting that it was an IOOH execution. 

But it’s very interesting for sure.  It turns interacting with the physical spaces around us on its head. 

The other example is just as fascinating, called Thinking Inside the Box.  This is brilliant, really.  Eight “thinkers” locked themselves inside a huge box in the middle of a busy public space in Toronto, solicited creative challenges by the general public, and solved them on the spot.  All of their interactions were filmed and culled down to make a site.  So, let’s go back to whether or not this is IOOH, according to my definition.  I think that we can most certainly say it isn’t.  In fact, it’s much more clear cut than Chalkbot.  But let’s break it down – it occurs outside of the home on a device, medium or platform that you don’t own.  So, OOH?  Yes.  But there is no interactivity through technology.  So, IOOH?  No.   However, they streamed video and Q/As on digital billboards in the square, so DOOH?  Yes, definitely.   And very intriguing DOOH, due to the real-time nature of feeds and the content itself.

Both of these examples truly illustrate the art of communicating – with each other, between brands/consumers, and most exciting – the spaces around us.  I think that it’s encouraging to see so many “untraditional” digital/interactive executions being recognized.  I think we can all learn something very valuable from all of these stories – don’t constrain yourself to the little grey box on your desk.  Think big.  Be smart.  You can do a lot with a thinking mind.  And it doesn’t always break the bank.

So, what do you think of these examples?  Do you agree with my differentiations?  Or do you lump them into all OOH?

Top 5 Moments of DSE 2010

2 Replies

As you’ve read from previous posts, I found DSE to be very rewarding.  My top 5 moments:

1.  Hard Rock Café Access – My first impressions from everything there were mixed – overwhelmed, underwhelmed (in a weird sort of way), giddy, and confused.  Stepping away from it all, I’m able to digest all that I experienced there.  No matter what, that Rock Wall really does rock.  MS Surfaces are fun to play around with and I’m sure that if I were dining there, I would play with the booth touch screens to the point where it would probably be annoying.  Truth be told, with all of the interactivity there, there might not be a better place for lovers of the 11th Screen world to go, including me.  Interestingly enough, I just saw that these were featured in what I consider to be the gold standard in industry recognition – the new Communication Arts Interactive Annual (yet to be published online).

2.  One-on-one discussions – the information and knowledge that I took away from the formal sessions paled in comparison to all of the one-on-one discussions I had.  Guys at the Preset Group, Symon Communications, Reflect Systems, Muzak, Digital Signage Today, Daily DOOH, Arinc, and Daktronics – I enjoyed meeting you all and I look forward to continuing the conversation.  We are all excited about the future of digital/interactive out of home.

3.  The different & consistent perspectives of the future of DOOH – everyone talked about the future of digital out of home being bright.  They also talked about the barriers we face – lack of consistency, measurement, and stories.  There are many companies in the industry doing the same exact thing, but there are far too few stories and proven success.  The industry, agencies, media planners/buyers, and clients need all three of these things – consistency, measurement standards, and stories.

4.  The on-the-floor workshops – I attended Keith Kelsen’s and Gary Kayye’s small workshops and they were, hands down, the best formalized sessions offered at the show.  Both are industry leaders and visionaries and I would recommend everyone hear them talk.

5.  Mobile and social integration into digital signage – by extension, mobile and social integration into digital signage makes it interactive signage.  I look at this as interactive out of home – 11th screen.  I believe that this is the immediate future of DOOH.  Content will always reign, and the better, more relevant the content is, the more people will be compelled to interact with it.  But once you connect people through content, you have deeper engagement.  And with deeper engagement, you strengthen relationships.  With strong relationships, you have trust and with trust, you have loyalty and advocacy.  I saw two companies integrating mobile & social – LocaModa (who you’ve probably all heard of, thanks to Jumbli) and Aerva (who I just heard of) – watch out for them both, especially Aerva.  They have a great offering(s).

Again, none of this would have happened without the folks at DSE.  They were really good to me and “thanks” on paper just doesn’t seem like it can capture my gratitude.  I look forward to seeing them again.

How about you guys?  What were your top moments of DSE?