Tag Heuer dipping their toes in the QR code water. My first reaction was a little bit surprised. This was the first time I’d seen a luxury brand utilize this type of technology. So, of course, I snapped the code and was taken to their mobile site:
There, I found a solid mobile-enabled/optimized experience, complete with image galleries, specs, videos, social & e-commerce hooks, as well as an option to stay updated via email.
No holes.
The interesting thing here was my expectation, both in the offline and the online worlds. In the offline world (the magazine ad), I didn’t expect a brand like Tag Heuer to use this type of technology. They have a loyal customer base, the brand speaks for itself, and since it isn’t exactly an impulse-shopping brand (for the majority of consumers), it doesn’t seem like they need to worry about connecting with people through this on-the-go, convenient technology.
But, you see, once I engaged, in the online world (where I was directed once I scanned the code), I expected the brand to deliver a top-notch experience, one reflective of their brand. And they did.
Here’s my takeaway – with new technologies emerging in and out of the home every day, consumer expectation is changing just as rapidly. It’s no longer a matter of whether or not brands use technologies like this to connect, it’s a matter of how they use technologies like this to connect.
Tag has a solid handle on their brand and as a result, any channel they use to extend their experience is going to be a benefit because they’re meeting expectations on the how.
I really didn’t know what to make of this when I saw it. I was in a rush and I caught a glimpse of something familiar on my way out the convenience store door (and it wasn’t the girl!) That tag.
I mean, I can see the value of using code and/or image recognition on your packaging to drive a deeper experience, but I find it interesting that Coors Light chose to do the same exact thing their biggest competitor – Bud Light – chose to do only a few months ago.
I stood for a split second in disbelief – the others in the store thought I was just staring at the display – then, I took a photo and went on my very way. I thought it was such a blatant rip-off that I didn’t want to snap the tag on the box or have anything to do with Coors Light, but the next time I found myself in a grocery store, I had to stop by the beer and see what it was all about.
I got a text message back, directing me to a site, and an option to receive more texts. So, now I’m in their communication stream. We’ll see what happens.
I thought I’d spend today’s Friday 4-1-1 reflecting a little deeper on this experience – because there are solid components here – instead of instantly shutting them off since I’d seen this before.
1. On the surface, all codes are created equal – the one thing that is different between all of the image and code-scanning technologies is whether or not you need a special app on your phone to engage with it. And really, you just need the app to read the image (i.e. Google Goggles) or code (i.e. QR code/MS Tag). They all open the door to the same content. I’ve found these image recognition technologies (SnapTag and JagTag) need a couple more clicks to access the content, but to me, it’s not an inconvenience in the experience. Question for Coors Light is why use the same exact technology (SnapTag) that Bud Light just used? I doubt there was such a huge wave of success from Bud Light’s campaign that they felt they needed to ride it?? I would have picked another one. Because they all do the same thing.
2. Codes are a key to unlocking multi-channel experiences – from the scan, I get instant access to:
.com (digital)
Facebook, Twitter (social)
iPhone game app (mobile)
Plus rich content like videos and sharable memes – the Ditka Cold Call to your friends is my favorite.
And I’m in their communication stream via text message.
See the power of codes? More and more, marketers are realizing this low-cost technology can enable deeper brand experiences. And big brands like this don’t need to create special content for these extended experiences. They just need to drive people there.
Welcome the code. I just would have picked another one.
3. Do consumers care? – Consumers want value and ease. These codes have the potential to provide value by unlocking deeper content, be it more brand content or coupons, and some of them are easier to use than others. These SnapTags don’t require a smartphone or an app, they just require an awareness and desire from the consumer to interact with them. So, you can’t get any easier than it already is. I would just love to know how successful these are. Anyone know the “snap rate” for the Bud Light or Coors Light campaigns?
I would still recommend tags in addition to/replacement of URLs in a lot of cases because they provide instant access to the content, typically with only one click. It’s really more about consumer adoption at this point.
4. OOH has a definite place in the ecosystem – and more than that, has a definite place in code-based campaign ecosystems. And the OOH component doesn’t have to be “digital.” As we see here, with this static in-store display, they’re stopping consumers and making them aware. I think anyone who’s considering implementing a campaign like this should take note of the simple solutions used here. You can’t get any more lowfi, but in my opinion, it’s incredibly effective .
“Uh-huh” – so, if 2 major beer makers are using technologies like this, will all the others? I think it’s only a good thing – whether or not I agree with Coors Light’s choice – for these sorts of technologies that such big brands are using them. They enable a more focused, purposeful OOH component, and I think agencies will have more and more opportunities to show off creative executions in bringing these technologies to life. What we’ll see, I think, is a different way of thinking about “traditional OOH.”
“Duh” – I just don’t get the decision here. In fairness, I’m not involved in any of the brand/agency conversations, but you’d think someone would have raised this and really questioned using the same code technology. I think, more than anything, this shows how wide-open this space (code/image scanning) is, with no clear leader. And consumers haven’t tipped to one technology over another. There’s still a lot of experimentation going on.
At the heart, this is another good example of a multi-channel brand experience (and a pretty deep one at that). And for me, it all started with an OOH component.
It shows how important it is to stop people when they’re out and about and engage them in some way. Here it was through the image-scanning technology.
This is the final part in a multi-part series this week on Mobile Scanning Technologies. I think these types of technologies are powerful in the “new” OOH because they bridge the offline (real-world) with the online (virtual world). And the “new” OOH, to me, is all about connecting others with the places and things around them AND each other.
For the 2nd time in this Friday-series, I’m late. I’m sorry for that. My wife is leaving for a 2-day trip today and I’ll be playing Mr. Mom, so last night was all about the two of us preparing for completely different weekends. The only time I could really find to write is in the quiet hours of early morning. So, here we are.
While I certainly haven’t covered everything about code/image scanning technologies this week, I hope that I have covered some main topics that you find helpful – there was exploring their value, there were a couple of recent examples, and then there was looking ahead to what the future my look like for them. The only big thing I think I missed were some best practices of using and implementing these types of technologies into campaigns. I have documented best practices from my POV before, though, and if you’d like to see them, check this out. In the end, I hope you have enough information to know what they are/what they do/how to use them (from a user’s standpoint) and things to think about/practical execution guidance (from an implementor’s standpoint). There is lots of information out there on the interwebs about these technologies so all you really have to do is pull up your handy Google page and go to town. To make things easier for you, I thought it would be helpful to share some of my favorite places to get this type of information in this week’s Friday’s 4-1-1. Without further adieu, here it is, Resource style.
1. Socialwayne.com – I briefly met the author of this blog, Wayne Sutton, at SXSW last year (he was on the Chevy Roadtrip that I was working on), and I’ve followed him ever since. He’s put a lot of thought and focus on QR codes this year and always has insightful posts about them. He creates and doesn’t just talk, which I appreciate greatly. His latest post on these technologies is called, “10 new QR Code generators with analytics to bridge the mobile social online worlds and increase consumer engagement” – the title truly says it all and it’s worth checking out.
2. 2dbarcodestrategy.com – I don’t know how I feel about the author because I don’t see much engagement from him on the blog and/or on his Twitter channel, but he’s a machine in showing examples and providing some good thought behind 2D codes. His blog is laser focused – it’s only about 2D codes and he posts almost every day. If only he would engage with his audience.
3. pongrblog.com – I virtually met these guys earlier this year and once I found out about them, had to check them out. They started out as a pure image-recognition technology and now they’ve turned it into a image-recognition, social, mobile game. It’s very interesting. You can see all about them here.
4. Microsofttag Twitter feed – I’m a huge fan of MS Tags and think they’re the type of 2D code to use in place of QR Codes – there’s only 1 code & reader, they work on every phone, they look better, and overall, have consistently worked for me. In terms of the information they share, I find their Twitter feed to be active, engaging, and informative (they aren’t active bloggers.)
“Uh-huh” – early on in the life of this blog (and periodically throughout), I introduced a term – “enabling technologies.” Basically, these technologies, to me, enable an otherwise static display or article to become interactive. In this case, both of these technologies – code scanning and image scanning – are enabling technologies. Without them, the experience couldn’t be had. My view of “OOH” includes two different types of technologies – 1) display technologies (that just make something “digital” – 1 way) and 2) enabling technologies (that make something “interactive” – 2 way) and moving forward, this concept will be even more critical to the direction I want to go next year.
“Duh” – there are many more resources that I’ve found helpful throughout the year. There are smart people out there who explore these very things and unfortunately, I’ve only listed 4 above. I’m giving myself the “duh” this week because I’m sure to have left off some great peeps.
So there it is kids, the wife is up and is about to leave and the timing is perfect. Here’s to a stress-free weekend. (BTW – the kids are still asleep so this is probably about the closest to “stress-free” that I’ll get.) :)
Happy Friday, everyone! Another week is over and we’re one more closer to the end of the year. I can’t believe it. It’s getting to be the time where the mad rush starts to “wrap things up” this year and everyone starts to look forward to the new year. I find this time of year to be both exciting and maddening because of this month-long dance between effort and anticipation. I’m choosing anticipation for this week’s Friday 4-1-1, coming at you with a first look at other’s looks into 2011.
1. 2011, A Tipping Point for DOOH? – very well rounded post from Ken Goldberg at Neocast. From someone who does not operate within the DOOH industry (particularly the media side of things), it sure does already seem like we’ve reached that tipping point. Look around and note how many digital screens you see. On my morning commute alone, I see 1 at the courthouse, 1 at a church, 1 on the train, 1 in my office building lobby, 1 in the elevator, and 1 on our office floor. Everywhere I turn, there’s a screen with content. I feel like consumer’s expectations are to see physical digital screens around them more often than not. Now, the question to me is: is 2011 going to be the tipping point for “everything’s a screen” and “Interactive Out-of-Home (IOOH)”?
2. A True Outsider’s Prediction of 2011 – this post comes from someone that has no affiliation to the OOH/DOOH industry. Dave Snyder at digital/tech agency, Firstborn, presented one of the first “looks” at 2011 in one of my favorite publications. The entire list is worth reading, but the couple that I focused on:
Privacy – “we will say goodbye to privacy. Actually that happened long ago, it’s just that people will stop caring.”….This is one of the big concerns about truly targeted place-based advertising – how creepy and invasive the thought of it is. My thought is aligned with Dave’s. People like to complain about it, but I’m not convinced that they really care. They want their lives to be made easier and more convenient, and if that involves giving up more and more of their privacy, so be it. I don’t know if people will ever “embrace” it completely, at least not for the foreseeable future, but I think they’ll “accept” it. They already have to a large extent.
Flash vs. HTML 5 – this is big, too, to the DOOH industry. Much of the moving content in digital screens is created in Flash. Now, HTML 5 opens up possibilities that don’t have some of the handcuffs that Flash has, particularly in terms of compatibility. Who cares? Consumers don’t care. They just want to see moving, dynamic content. We – on the storytelling side – can’t lose site of the most important thing – telling the story in the most compelling way. The story’s the thing, not the technology to create and deliver it.
Frivolous Technologies – ie QR codes – agree and disagree with him on this. More and more, QR codes are being introduced to the mass public by big brands. Will they stay? Or will they evolve into something else? Don’t know. But to me, the most important thing here – these types of technologies are not frivolous. They serve a critical need in today’s ecosystem by connecting the offline (real-world) with the online (virtual-world). I hope 2011 will be the year of the shakeout with these technologies (will there by 1 universal code or will codes begin to have similar, more comprehensive capabilities, will readers automatically be installed on all phones???), but I sure do hope they don’t disappear. Personally, I don’t see it happening.
3. 11 Consumer Trends for 2011 – this time brought to us by TrendWatching.com. Shout out to them for noting that trends don’t begin/end on a particular date. They evolve. Hope you get that message here, too. #1 “Trend” – Random Acts of Kindness. This is great because at the core is the idea that people are good and appreciate appreciation. This requires connections – between people themselves and between brands with people. Particularly important to the OOH industry because it’s this connection – this real connection – that people crave, not dynamic, place-based ads. It’s the 2-way communication that they appreciate, not the 1-way push. It’s knowing, and seeing via action, that “someone’s on the other end,” not the dreaded black hole of awareness-driven, self-serving advertising. It’s the purposeful engagement that really matters.
Another trend mentioned – Pricing Pandemonium. This section of the report talks about “always-on technology” and “connecting consumers to deals closer to the point of sale,” but never mentions any other screen than the mobile screen. True digital signage can make this new type of experience even more dynamic, working in concert with the mobile phone. I really think that the reason physical screens are not being mentioned by almost anyone outside of the industry is that a) we don’t really need them and/or b) the screens up right now are not providing the type of value to make others notice. Yes, they’re everywhere, but are they effective?
Bringing every-surface-can-be-turned-on-and-made-into-a-screen right to your pocket. Doubt we’ll see something like this in 2011, but what will these devices be like a year from now, and more importantly, what kind of effect will they have on the places and things around us?
“Uh-huh” – I’m big on infographics and becoming big on the idea of data visualization. I presented a version of this infographic a few weeks ago – my vision of the components that make up any OOH initiative and insofar as the overlap goes, some of the finer things to think about when planning.
But this week, I found the infographics of all infographics and its focus is on data visualization. INTENSE –
For a complete explanation, check this out. It’s smart and makes a lot of sense, once you get over the overwhelming feeling. So, I ask myself the question – what if I turned mine into something like this? What “components” would each one of the sections of overalap result in? I think it could get real interesting.
“Duh” – I talked to my team this past week about reflecting on the last year and specifically taking note of everything they’ve accomplished. As is the case for many of us, it’s been a long and trying year, but certainly not without reward. I find it easy to get bogged down in the disappointments and/or struggles that will inevitably be there each and every day, but it’s important to recognize the good things, the accomplishments, the blessings that we have experienced in our lives over the past year.
Well, as always, I’d love to hear any of your thoughts. Just drop me a comment or a tweet, whatever you’re comfortable with. Thanks, again, for reading. Have a great weekend!
Thumbing through the latest Sports Illustrated (print edition), I came across 4 different ads that included some sort of enabling technology – technology that enables a static experience to become interactive. 2 of the ads used QR Codes, 1 of the ads used a Microsoft Tag, and the other used Google Goggles. They’re all based on the same premise – bridging the offline (real-world) with the online (virtual world) – but technically, the technology is a little different – QR Codes and MS Tags are 2D Barcodes and Google Goggles is an image-recognition technology. It’s the difference between the information/content being stored in the code vs. in images in the ad. For all intents and purposes, I consider them both effective technologies in merging offline (non-digital) with online (digital). Interestingly, though, I think image recognition technology like Google Goggles would enable a better digital to digital experience. I’ve never understood putting a 2D code on a digital medium to drive to another digital medium. But if I could take a picture of the image on the originating digital medium to drive into another, ideally deeper digital medium/experience, I could see the value. Anyway, it was interesting to see so many different interactive ads in the same place and it allowed me to compare and contrast them in a way that didn’t seem so disparate (like others that I’ve done here).
First, I should point out that I’ve never seen this many interactive print ads in the same publication to date. At the beginning of the year, you would’ve been hard-pressed to have found 1 interactive ad like this in 10 publications. As the year has gone on, it’s not unusual to find 10 publications with 1 interactive ad each (some brands are using these consistently in their print pieces – Ford and Asus, to name two). Over the past couple of months, I’ve noticed a couple in each publication, but never FOUR. I really think this trend is going to continue growing into next year and we’ll see the majority of these ads including some sort of technology like this that enables a deeper, interactive experience with the brand. It’s a no-brainer, in my opinion. However, I do think it’s going to force brands to think about the entire experience rather than just plopping a code onto their print pieces, as it seems is the case more often than not now. The brands who will be successful in using technologies like this are those who put the experience first and let it lead the technology vs. putting the technology first and letting it lead the experience. Overall, when looking at each of these 4 executions, it seems as if the latter is more of the case.
Before I get into dissecting the experiences, I do think it’s important to acknowledge these brands for using these technologies. There are at least 20 other advertisers in this same publication who aren’t using anything other than a URL (if that) to drive consumers deeper into the experience. The catch here, though, is that consumers are smart – when they start using these technologies and scanning codes/images, if they don’t see value on the other end (it can come in many different forms – content, offers, coupons, connections, etc…), they’re going to equate them with being invaluable, and once that happens, it will be hard to change their behavior and get them scanning again.
So, let’s get into it – the biggest consistency was the inconsistency. From the directions that they do/don’t give on the actual print piece to the site they send you to to the content on the site to the extensions beyond the site – none are the same. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing – no two brand experiences should be the same – but I do expect some level of standardization on what I believe to be elementary components of this type of experience.
Let’s start with the ads themselves and two things right off the bat – 1) how prominent is the code/ability to know that the ad is interactive and 2) how clear and useful is the call-to-action/instructions?
The 3 ads that include codes, you can clearly tell that they include something unusual-looking that you can probably do something with. (Unlike Stickybits, I think the form factor of both QR Codes and MS Tags are different enough that consumers stop and actually look to see what they’re all about. They might know that they have to do something with them, but they’re not exactly sure what they are and/or how to use them – this is a start. They know that they can take an action.) The ad that included Google Goggles, however, made it difficult to see that there was something interactive about it. Google’s Goggles logo is small and within the context of the ad, it gets lost. So, here, advantage to the 2D codes.
But it doesn’t stop there. Perhaps the most important component of using this technology is the instructions. It’s simple people – don’t get cute with instructions. Say what to do and how to do it in the simplest, most clear terms. Don’t make consumers guess at what they’re supposed to do. Tell them exactly. There’s nothing useful about enabling interactivity if the user can’t figure out how to actually interact with it (same can be said for not knowing what to do with touchscreen experiences). I found all 4 of these to miss the mark on instructions, some a little less drastic than the others. Google Goggles was the clear winner here – their instructions were the closest to being simple and clear.
The only thing they’re missing here is being clear that Goggles is an application. They make the assumption that users will know what “Google Goggles on Android” is, and besides that, they completely ignore iPhone users. I think it’s best to approach these directions with an ultra-conservative mindset in these early stages – be explicitly clear with them. Approach them like no one knows anything about anything. (Then, don’t make them into a book.)
Coming in a close 2nd is Lane Furniture and their MS Tag. One of the clear differentiators, to me, between MS Tags and QR Codes is Microsoft’s proprietary technology to scan and read their codes. There’s only 1 type of reader, only 1 place to get it and anyone can use it. This combination makes instructions easy. I don’t think anyone using MS Tags should stray from the, “Get the free app for your phone at http://gettag.mobi.” Simple, clear, and short. Where these guys go a little astray is in their other instructions – “Snap this icon to snag a coupon…”
“Snap?” “Snag?” “Icon?” Talk about colloquialisms. Why use fancy words when normal words will do? “Take a picture of the code for a coupon…” sounds much more clear and to the point, don’t you think?
The other two – OnStar and Axe – failed miserably on the instructions. OnStar takes the casual language to the next level, to the point of being utterly confusing.
“Just snap this QR code with your phone. If it doesn’t have a QR reader, there are lots of free apps to download.” I think the basic concept in anything, particularly instructions, is making it seem simple and not complicated. “Lots of” anything automatically implies that there are more than a couple. If there are more than a couple, I might very well get overwhelmed, and if I don’t even know what exactly a QR code and/or reader is, I might not even know where to start. I think this is a case of wanting to be cute and not having a word editor that says, “we need to cut everything in half.”
Axe, on the other hand, needs a few more words. “Scan this code to watch the video.”
For the experienced and savvy, this is beautiful. Only problem is that there is an ultra-minute fraction of consumers who are both experienced and savvy with QR Codes. I would bet that here, they’re likely just to use the URL to get to the video instead of scanning the code – that would be a great piece of data to see – when presented with 2 options like this, what do consumers tend to do? What do you want them to do? Yes, go to the website, but why put the QR Code on the ad in the first place unless you want them to scan it?
I’m also of the mindset that this sort of technology can become extremely beneficial if it’s the gateway to something (content or offer) exclusive, only to be seen/accessed through this channel. If anyone can see the same content just by going to the website, I think it devalues the experience.
So, now that we’re on content, let’s turn our attention to that which makes or breaks these experiences – the actual content behind the code/image. All of these 4 brands utilized video in their experience. Makes a lot of sense since video viewing on mobile is a) good and b) expected. I think it’s about the type of video that separates these experiences more than anything. And here, Axe is the winner. The first video you see is an edgy, just-what-you’d-expect-from-Axe video.
I don’t think we’re here yet, but before too long, we’ll be talking about how “on brand” these experiences are. It’s not enough to have this type of technology or video content, it’s going to become about how in line with the brand these experiences are. This sort of content from Axe is definitely “on brand.”
While the others – G2, OnStar, and Lane – included relevant video, there was nothing special about their content. In OnStar’s & Lane’s case, I found the videos to be long, boring, and overall, not compelling.
The actual site from which these videos originated from, and the experience through the code to get to the videos was another point of differentiation. On the positive side, they all sent me to a mobile version of a particular website, be it the product website or a YouTube channel. So, I didn’t have to futz around with navigating through a normal website experience on my mobile phone. That said, the only experience I found to be substantial and complete was the G2 experience. It’s the same experience that I highlighted through another ad last week.
In addition to the video, there are:
Product features
Consumer reviews & forums (social component)
Sharability
Email signup
Store locator
Purchase options
It’s really as complete of an experience you can expect.
The OnStar and Axe experiences, on the other hand, were not complete and honestly, pretty underwhelming. They both took me to a YouTube page where the experiences were similar.
The only difference was that through Axe, they asked me to “Subscribe” to the channel first. It was kind of annoying, but from a brand’s standpoint, I think it’s a smart thing to do. It’s a different form of data collection and through the subscription, the consumer experience with the brand doesn’t stop after this particular experience. Every time a video gets uploaded to the channel, all of the subscribers receive a notification and in turn, go watch the video, and you’re they’re that much deeper in the brand’s experience. I think they could have done so much more, though (at the very least, included more of a clear social – other channels – extension).
Lane’s experience included the ability to sign-up for a coupon (which is always a great enticement) via email and aside from the vague (in this case, absent) opt-in language, enables consumers to receive updates and information from Lane beyond this experience.
There are 2 other things about this particular experience that I appreciated:
The ability to find a store close to me. This is a simple utility that offers another channel (the right one, mind you) to drive consumers into the store.
A mobile experience that is only a sub-set of their normal .com website. Consumers don’t need everything a brand offers on their website through their mobile device. Just the right things. Lane has done a good job here.
I think it’s appropriate to say at this point, if you’ve made it this far in the post, THANKS. It’s the longest post ever. I didn’t want to break it up into 2 different posts because the opportunity to view (and review) this many experiences in the same setting hasn’t come along before and I didn’t want to separate any part of my thoughts.
All that said…drumroll please….I think the winner here is G2 and Google Goggles. But this is what I’d expect out of them. It’s their phone and their enabling technology. I’d be surprised and disappointed if it were anything less than this type of experience. The others ranked this way for me:
2. Lane – their offline (on-page) call-to-action was clearer than the other 2 and their online (on-phone) experience was more valuable and simpler.
3. Axe – their experience was the most “on brand” but I expect more out of Axe, all the way around.
4. OnStar – just think they need to spend a little bit more time thinking through the entire experience and paying off their awesome service in a unique way – they can do some interesting things through these enabling technologies, given the capabilities of their own technology.
Again, it made me happy to see so many in one place. I think there is much potential in this sort of technology. Most importantly, it allows for something that would have otherwise NOT been interactive or a 2-way engagement to be so. It’s opens up an entirely new communication channel. But as we can see here, most everyone has a long way to go to make a complete, compelling, valuable experience through this type of engagement.
So, now that I have belabored this in more ways than one, I’d love to hear your thoughts. What do you think???
As I’ve said before here, I think technology has enabled what was once static to become interactive, particularly as it relates to the “OOH” channel, which up until recently has been a static, “offline” advertising and communications channel. On one hand, you have the digital display technology that enables those static ads to become digitized and as a result, more dynamic, relevant, and meaningful (digital signage). Those digital “screens” have become more efficient advertising channels for brands, and can even help push consumers along the purchase journey, depending on their placement in a particular environment. I don’t talk much about that kind of OOH here. In the coming year, I want to put more of a focus on it here, but that aspect of OOH has never excited me to the point that the other aspect has. Which is the other hand – on the other hand, you have various enabling technologies that enable those static ads to become interactive, and as a result, actually engaging. It’s the difference between a 1-way push message (the former) and a 2-way push/pull communication (the latter). One is passive. The other is active. It’s the active that really excites me. So, I’m always looking for examples that do just that – take what was once passive and make active through these enabling technologies.
I’ve noticed many of these examples this year through print ads. Whether it be QR codes or MS Tags, brands have really started experimenting with this type of engagement. By no means has it taken off, but it’s an easy technology to include from a production standpoint, so I suspect to see the trend continue to grow slowly in the coming year. I think we still have a ways to go to reach critical mass, but the consumers who actually recognize these codes and take a picture of them have the opportunity to engage with the brand in a way that they wouldn’t have had otherwise.
I came across another such technology in this month’s Wired – Google Goggles. I learned about Google Goggles earlier in the year, and as an Android smartphone owner, it was one of the first apps I downloaded. But I haven’t ever had success with it until now. HTC “enabled” their most recent ad with Google Goggles.
If you’re not familiar with Google Goggles, it’s an image recognition technology that enables you, as a user, to snap a photo of a variety of things – landmarks, logos, print ads to name a few – and then learn more about them through mobile web without “searching.” As with other image reading technologies (like the aforementioned codes), it’s designed to be a convenient way to get information you want about anything in the real world. They’re an ideal technology to bridge the offline (real world) with the online (virtual world).
This particular experience was a good one. HTC, supported by their friends at Google (it runs the Android platform), really thought through this and actually maximized the full potential of creating a deeper experience. Once the picture is scanned, you’re taken to the G2 mobile site (yes, it is a mobile site) where you can:
view multiple angles of the phone (awareness)
learn about all of its features, mostly through copy – there’s 1 video that takes you to YouTube – not a great experience (awareness)
see news releases (awareness)
see reviews – as of tonight, there are no reviews on the site (awareness)
see Twitter feed (awareness)
see G2 Forums (awareness/consideration)
share with your social communities (awareness/consideration)
BUY – via your phone, in the most convenient store, and/or later (consideration/conversion)
They have designed this experience to mirror an effective e-commerce site and aside from the Microsoft mobile site I recently experienced, this is the best I’ve seen through any technology like this.
Agree with everything everyone said here, but I don’t think the only answer is Google Goggles. Like I said, up until now, I haven’t had a good experience with the application. It’s had a hard time reading the “real world item” and I’ve found QR codes/MS Tags to be more responsive, and ultimately convenient. The one thing about Google Goggles is that it is designed to enable to “wordless search” via image recognition – what happens if you’re a brand and someone takes a photo of your product and through Goggles is taken to a Google search where right there in the first listing is a bad review? It seems like there are elements of the openness of this that could work against the brand instead of for them. What do you guys think? Have you used Google Goggles? I would love to hear about your experience, if so.
First, SXSW. Then, Facebook. Then, NYC. Now, it looks like the holidays are bringing QR codes with them. It’s the time of the year when we receive loads of holiday circulars and it all started this past week. I like these magazine-type circulars. I like looking through them to see the sales and this year, at least, I like to see if the brands are making any effort to drive consumers deeper into the brand experience. Well, judging by what I saw this week, they’re jumping all over the opportunity.
First, it was Best Buy. I opened it up (I take as many opportunities as I can to remind my wife where she can get me an iPad), and the first thing I see is a big, fat QR code staring me in the face. This really didn’t surprise me because I’ve noticed that Best Buy is now printing QR codes on all of their shelf price labels.
Then, it was Target. We’re on the lookout to help Santa, so of course, I had to see what kind of contribution Target could make. And, bam, right there, 3 on 1 page. I started to get real excited at this point, scanning codes, talking to myself, kind of freaking my family out.
And then, because I felt like we were on a roll with finding these little treasures, when I got our Geico newsletter/magazine, I just knew they had to be using them in some way. So, I opened it up, and sure enough, QR codes sprinkled throughout.
This whole 3-day experience really brought to light a few things for me, all of which made me happy:
Brands (and the agencies supporting them) know what QR codes are.
They’re not afraid to expose them to any type of consumer (tech, toys, insurance.)
They’re taking the opportunity to drive consumers into a deeper brand experience.
I think these basic fundamental acknowledgements are important because it shows a level of comfort, from a brand’s standpoint, to introduce these codes to consumers, in such a mass-visibility way. I suspect there is a little bit of experimentation going on, but they’re exposing them nonetheless. Next question is whether or not consumers will know what to do with these. I wonder how far off I really am – along with the general consumer – in expecting these codes to be included in print pieces like this? By the time I got to the Geico magazine, I expected them to include QR codes. And they did.
So, I believe sooner rather than later, consumers will expect these crazy-looking codes to be in magazines like this and perhaps more print pieces than not. By seeing them in this type of collateral and on windows of their local businesses and at airports, they’re going to know that they can “unlock” some sort of information. It’s really the “payoff” now – the content on the other end – that is going to drive expectations and perceived value. The content is certainly more important than the code, but we have to start with the code and getting consumers familiar with them.
We’ve implemented quite a few code-based initiatives this year and have learned from each one of them. Here are some best practices that we follow:
Before creating the codes, understand what you are going to offer to the consumer once they scan the code. Is it going to be a mobile version of your site? Is it going to be a video? Is it going to be a text? Is it going to be a VCard? You must answer this question before you get into creating the actual code.
Creating the codes is the easy part. We’ve used Kaywa and I’ve seen ScanLife a lot lately. It’s a simple process, just follow the directions with whichever service you’re going to use.
Understand where the code is going to be placed, when printed. Is it going to be circular like this? Or is it going to be on a poster? Or is it going to be on a magazine ad? You’ll need to include instructions for consumers to understand what it is and how to actually use it. What kind of piece it’s going to be printed on will dictate the amount of instructional information you can include. At the very least, let consumers know that they can a) scan the code for something else (more content, special offers, etc…) and b) how to do it. This includes telling them what QR code reader application they need on their smartphone and that they need to take a picture of the code.
If you have the means to use/implement a text messaging service, it would give the consumer another way to “unlock” the information without scanning a code. Include this option in your instructions.
Let consumers know – very clearly – what they can expect by scanning the code. This can be a simple text description next to the code.
And finally, if at all possible, make sure the content offered up on the “other side of the code” is appropriate to experience on a mobile phone. If you can help it, don’t send them to the regular .com. Send them to the mobile version of the site or even directly to a Vimeo/YouTube playlist. The more valuable the content on the other side is, the more value consumers will perceive to be behind these codes.
QR codes are an ideal technology to enable the offline and the online to converge. They’re so simple to create, if you have the wherewithal to use them and good content to use, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t include the codes on all of your printed pieces. It’s good to see so many brands using them. At the beginning of the year, I don’t feel like anyone really knew what QR codes were, certainly not the average consumer. But if these holiday circulars are any sign of the times, it hasn’t taken long to learn.
Happy Friday, everyone. Hope your week has gone well. Mine has been crazy and today is no different. It’s been a good week, (sometimes you have bad weeks, sometimes you have good weeks – it was a good one for me) one of those where I feel like I’m in the zone for most of the week, doing “good” work, thinking of “good” things, producing top quality whoosits and whatsits, making cool “stuff.” So, today’s theme is all about quality & cool – striking that balance is difficult, but when done, man, it produces good work.
1. Mini’s at it again with “reality gaming” and their Getaway Stockholm campaign – this OOH campaign involves people, virtual Minis, geo-location, mobile and gaming. I consider it OOH because everything happens out of the home. It’s an experience where you don’t have to be in front of your computer sitting in your house or office. It leverages the wide open spaces of the outdoor and creates a game around it all. It’s really awesome.
2. Now you can “Like” a brand through a QR code – there’s been a roundabout way to use QR codes to get people to “Like” your brand in the past (open up their Facebook page and allow people to “Like” it there – it’s clunky), but now it’s as easy as downloading a QR code reader app on your phone, opening it up, and snapping a picture of it. If you know what a QR code is (whichI have to say, I’m seeing/reading about them every single week now, so that’s a good thing), Likify has now made an app that can direct you straight to “Liking” your favorite brand. Nifty.
3. Loyalty cards 2.0 brought to you by Novitaz – this is cool….if you’re a shopper.
You get a credit card-style loyalty card with an RFID chip in it. When you’re in a store that has the sensors in it, it sends a message to your mobile phone, alerting you of the special deals of the day. And best, when you buy, there are social hooks in the platform so that you can share what you just bought with your social community. Cool, and definitely the wave of the future.
4. Shoppers Take a Nonlinear Path to Purchase – carrying on the shopping theme, I thought this article was interesting, although not surprising. Consumer shopping habits are changing, particularly with the introduction of so many new technologies – mobile and social being top of the list. Mobile is big in helping consumers make purchasing decisions. Social is big, too. Although it’s a great takeaway that “social” does not equal “digital” or better yet, “Facebook.” Social is word-of-mouth. And the overwhelming majority of word-of-mouth activity happens “offline.” But can happen over the mobile phone – you know, that thing where people actually talk to each other on the phone. Yeah, mobile phones are good for that, too. Interesting that “digital signage” is not mentioned anywhere in here at all. Hmm.
“Uh-huh” – The Future of Advertising is about “Making Stuff” – Cindy Gallop, founder-CEO of IfWeRanTheWorld, talks about the real value in execution, not ideas. Amen, Cindy. As someone who is responsible for the execution arm of our agency, I can tell you firsthand how important quick, quality execution sets agencies/people apart from each other.
“Duh” – Read above. Not to take the easy way out here, but it’s an important thing to call out and a no-brainer at the same time. I mean, I am looking at it from the standpoint of “making stuff” everyday, but you’d be surprised how many people “talk” about stuff vs. “make” stuff. I’m a maker. Not a talker. Hope it always stays like this. I like makers much more than I like talkers, unless of course, if you’re one of my talker friends!
I’ve been meaning to get around to this since my vacation in July, but I’m just finding the time. I’m always looking for examples of brands utilizing offline materials (places & things) to drive deeper engagement “online” (not necessarily on a computer). I’m most fascinated when this online experience occurs on something other than a standard computer screen (ie. the places and things around us). Mobile, however, has really changed the game. This offline/online convergence doesn’t always drive experiences back to the world wide web; as mobile shows us, this convergence is often enabled through apps and simple tools like SMS/MMS. So, it was in July, when my wife and I were sitting in a bar in St. Augustine, and I looked down at the coaster sitting on our table.
Mobile promotions like this are standard fare. So standard, in fact, they might be overlooked more often than not. We can debate the effectiveness of coasters like this driving conversions (opt-ins), but here’s the thing – this is such a “no duh” utilization of pieces like this in the brand’s advertising mix. Coors Light is going to print coasters regardless. Why not plan to print something that drives a deeper brand engagement on the coaster vs. just putting a logo and artwork on it? Same thing can be said for posters or magazine ads. How many posters do you see that enable you to have a deeper brand experience beyond the “paper”? Magazine ads? Not many.
I have been surprised at how many magazine ads I’ve seen this year (some featured on this blog) where brands have experimented with things like QR codes/MS Tags, JagTags/etc.. And while I still don’t know how effective they are (I don’t see many brands paying it off that well), I have to give them credit for at least opening up the gate to go deeper into the brand. That’s what I mean by mobile changing the “OOH” game. Brands don’t need a “digital” origination point to drive interactivity. Out of Home initiatives, whether traditional or digital, can always be made interactive, in large part due to mobile capabilities.
In the end, it’s important to understand that all of the “channels” (Out of Home being one of them, coasters being a delivery mechanism for OOH) in a brand’s advertising mix are just part of their ecosystem. The brand’s challenge (and agency’s partnering with them) is to make sure their story is a) consistent and b) evolving across all of the channels and mediums. Often times, initiatives are developed, implemented, and activated in silos – OOH, DOOH falls within their own silo – and regardless of how big or neat or (even) effective they are, if they’re only happening in 1 silo, many opportunities are missed. So, next time you see something as simple as a coaster or a poster or a magazine ad that capitalizes on the opportunity to drive you deeper into the brand, take a minute and go through the experience. Try not to judge the experience, just appreciate the fact that they’re not missing an additional opportunity to take you, as a consumer, deeper into their brand via this standard-fare, see-it-everyday, ho-hum, gotta-advertise-on-it-anyway gateway.
It’s Friday and time for the 2nd Friday 4-1-1 series. This installation is all about mobile, particularly the specific enabling technologies associated with mobile that have an opportunity to make brand interaction richer & deeper when coupled with OOH/DOOH/IOOH. If you’re a new reader, I think there is a difference between what makes “digital” Out of Home and “interactive” Out of Home – “digital” is made possible through display technology, “interactive” is made possible through enabling technologies. These technologies enable deeper interaction with a brand and its OOH/DOOH installation. You can think of it like this:
Enabling technology (and there are many of them) + OOH/DOOH = IOOH (Interactive Out of Home)
Display technology + OOH = DOOH
My premise is “Digital” Out of Home cannot be made interactive without any of these enabling technologies. So, today, I’ll focus on 3 mobile enabling technologies – augmented reality, geo-location, and of course, QR codes. Here’s the 4-1-1:
1. Facebook Places Propels SCVNGR to 100,000 Downloads in 48 Hours – reality check, first of all – the “general” consumer doesn’t use geo-location apps like FourSquare, much less a new app like SCVNGR. The penetration numbers for “digital” users who use geo-location apps are low (~4% according to Forrester). However, I believe there is loads of potential for geo-location apps like FourSquare, Gowalla, FB Places, and SCVNGR (and the others). These apps really enable a feature that I believe is core to a brand’s success in the new “Out of Home” space – reaching consumers where they are (out of home) and driving deep(er) engagement with the brand. There are few brands who have really figured out how best to do this, but there are many who are experimenting. As far as SCVNGR goes, their platform is really based on the idea of a Scavenger Hunt – users go around to different places (called “Treks”), when there, they have to complete a challenge, get rewarded via points, and then ultimately get rewarded with badges. For brands, this platform is significant because it’s a built-out mobile platform, specifically intended to provide challenge-based scavenger hunt game-play experiences. Yes, you can pretty much do the same thing with FourSquare (you have to work through FourSquare) and Gowalla (users themselves can set up “trips”), but they weren’t built for this very thing (neither of them are based on “challenges”). In my opinion, it’s a better way to reward consumers who are loyal enough to your brand to go through a challenge-based scavenger hunt (again, outside of their home) vs. just checking in repeatedly at a single place.
2. Four Seasons Joins Geo-Social Gold Rush With California Campaign – I’ve put together a number of campaigns with Gowalla – it’s not the Austin-based connection that I am high on with them, it’s really the experience they provide vs. FourSquare. (In fairness, if I could put together any geo-location-based campaign, regardless of budget/time constraints, I would probably look at using both of them, but Gowalla is easier/more accommodating to work with. FourSquare has sheer numbers, Gowalla has a more engaging experience, particularly on the brand side, in my opinion.) So, it was nice to read about a brand like Four Seasons hopping on the geo-location bandwagon. Again, this is yet another example of a brand driving engagement with consumers while they’re out and about, going through their normal day-to-day activities. Who would have ever thought that just by “checking in” some place through your mobile phone, you could get rewarded with a hotel-stay voucher.
3. Toys “R” Us Unveils Multichannel Mobiel CRM Tactics – here’s my QR code example this week. Only problem with this is that it’s launching in Hong Kong only. At least right now. Solid concept though – targeted at their loyalty card holders, those loyal consumers can unlock exclusive content through these “R” (what Toys R Us is calling them) codes and from the sounds of it, with each scan, can earn more “loyalty” points, which is of benefit to them with real-world merchandise. QR codes are commonplace in that part of the world, so I suspect this is going to be widely used. Hopefully, the campaign will make its way here and even more hopefully, US consumers will actually know what to do when they see this weird code in front of them.
4. Augmented Reality Campaign for Lustucru Pasta in 500 Supermarkets – pasta + a martian + tomatoes + Augmented Reality = AWESOME. Forget about checking into places, whoever thought they could play a game with a martian just by purchasing a box of pasta? Augmented Reality has come so far in a few short months. Now, instead of needing a black-bound box that serves as a marker and a webcam, all you need is an AR application on your mobile phone. It’s really unbelievable. For this, though, I guess the question is, “does this drive more sales?” Don’t know. After I play the game, would I want to play it again? Does it build? Is there anything deeper? If so, it could be the reason that I’d want to continue buying this pasta when I need pasta. If not, on the surface, it’s a good engagement, but what does it do to achieve longer-terms goals? It makes me smile, though. Check it out:
“Uh-huh” – Reggie Bush hit the Holy Grail by combining geo-location (FourSquare) with social media (Twitter/Facebook) and the real-world (with StickyBits). This is the perfect combination of driving Reggie Bush-brand engagement through the use of various mediums/channels, including a strong OOH play. Basically, Reggie used FourSquare like a scavenger-hunt service (should have used SCVNGR!) so that fans could find autographed footballs around the city of New Orleans in anticipation of last night’s opening NFL game. They could then attach messages to StickyBits for Reggie. Great cross-channel program.
Before I get into this week’s “Duh,” I’ll say this – I think that “OOH” as a media channel has changed drastically in the past few years. My definition of “OOH” is “anything that the user doesn’t have to own to have an experience with.” In these cases, a user needs a mobile phone, but the point in which that experience originates is always OOH and from something that they don’t need to own – checking in at a location doesn’t require you to own the location, using a QR code doesn’t require you to own the QR code, and even playing a game from a box of pasta doesn’t require you to necessarily own the box of pasta. Lines are certainly more grey than they used to be in terms of “OOH” and it’s in this grey area that I believe lives the 11th Screen.
Now, my “Duh” – it’s not an example this week, it’s a piece of advice based on a few experiences that I’ve had this week. Slow down. Life and work move very fast and most often, we make decisions in split seconds. Those decisions can have a profound impact on other people and your own work (substitute “life” with “work” if you want to). There is nothing wrong with slowing down, taking a deep breath, having a think on it, and then moving forward.
I hope you guys have a great weekend. Would love to hear anything you’ve got to say about any of this. Just shout!
