Feeds:
Posts
Comments

I had the opportunity to attend BayCHI on March 20th, where Brennan Browne from AnswerLab presented three trendiPads and five lessons that user experience designers need to consider with tablet experiences. Although the focus of the research was on the iPad, I believe the research is largely extensible to other tablet platforms unless otherwise noted.

Here is a synopsis of the insightful talk.

Trend 1: Trading Computer Time for Tablet Time
Prior to introduction, there was a question as to whether the iPad was just going to turn out to be a big iPhone. That question has been answered with a big no. It has become more of a replacement for the laptop; not a rival to the smartphone.

Trend 2: The Tablet and Shared Experiences
The majority of people share their tablet, which means a big security question looms for iOS users since there is no multi-user account service built in. As a result, people are more reluctant to save personal information or authenticate.

Trend 3: Apps versus Web
People can access the web comfortably these days. The tablet-based web browsing experience is considered more pleasurable than boring old desktop browsers.

People need an incentive to download an App with the expectation that it provides more than the Web experience. That being said, Apps are here to stay. App enthusiasts exist and will remain.

Lesson 1: Small Laptop, not Big Phone
7-inch tablets are treated more like big smartphones, but not the 10-inch counterparts. The tablet is becoming more of a multi-use device and a replacement for a laptop/PC in many situations. Its portability makes it particularly useful around the house and in trusted locations with free WiFi such as Starbucks.

Lesson 2: Full Web
It is expected that the full Web is provided on a tablet, not a reduced set of content and functions. This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t improve the Web experience on tablets with relevant tactile features.

Lesson 3: Content over Context
People use their tablets as extra portable laptops, but don’t necessarily bring them everywhere. This means that the tablet state and location dictating specific experiences are secondary to core functionality, rich content and a superb interface.

Lesson 4: Shared Device
The fact that the tablet serves as a shared device presents unique challenges, so be sure to consider how features and use cases (e.g. one click purchases) may be affected by multiple users sharing a single device.

Lesson 5: Security Fears
Security is a major concern for tablet users as many are still unfamiliar with the platform. Plan accordingly.

John Schneider at the Shopper Marketing ConferenceI attended the shopper marketing conference at Old Navy Pier in Chicago from October 16 – 18. Shopper Marketing focuses on the shopper’s path to purchase, or said another way, the moment when people are in shopping mode. There is an important distinction between consumer marketing and shopper marketing with respect to focus, since the shopper is not always the same as the consumer of the product.

On face value, one might think shopper marketing theory largely focuses on the in-store shopping experience with marketing tactics such as point of sale displays. It was refreshing to see how much shopper marketing is evolving by embracing the entire shopper ecosystem. With 91% of smartphone owners less than 3 feet away from their phone year round, rich ecommerce experiences can be had instantly. To support the point that offline and online commerce are blurred, I was a bit surprised at the statistic that 54% of Wal-Mart shoppers visit walmart.com before going into the store.

People are seamlessly swimming through channels from consumer to shopper to advocate and back again, giving them all the power. Mobility enables product, pricing, and promotion transparency at an unprecedented level even though 70% of purchase decisions are still made at the shelf. Although in-store POS displays will continue to play a pivotal role in the sales process, they will reinforce the digital message as opposed to following it. This strategy is particularly resonant for the 50% of shoppers who already use the Internet, while physically shopping in-store.

This new connected consumer forces firms to shift from a brand centric strategy to a solution centric approach that is focused on a much broader and deeply connected system of in-store and online brand touch points.

X.commerce

I’ve had the opportunity to redesign multiple sign-up and checkout experiences over the years. You might think it couldn’t be that hard, but it is never simple from my experience. The sales team may want loads of registration data at sign-up even if it means there is a huge associated bounce rate. Worst case, sales might think, “if they don’t finish the form, then who wants the prospective customer anyway?” On the opposing side, savvy business models such as fermium models may dictate that you capture as many users as possible, even if you don’t know much about them.What is exciting to me is that it looks like we may have a new solution to our registration and checkout woes. Last week, I had the opportunity to attend the X.commerce Innovate conference where they announced PayPal Access. Unlike Facebook Connect’s focus on sharing the social graph with merchants, PayPal Access brings a user’s authentic e-commerce profile to the registration and checkout process. I use the word authentic, because a person using PayPal is a real world individual with a bank account and purchase history. This product allows users to checkout without sharing their private financial information with the company or physically going through registration. On top of that, the retailer doesn’t have to give up valuable social graph data Facebook provides to merchants since they also announced a partnership with X.commerce at the conference. In a nutshell, a person brings both their wallet and their friends to the shopping experience.

I’m not saying that registration will cease to exist. What I am saying is that PayPal Access may reduce friction in the registration and purchase process for the 100m+ and growing PayPal users. For SMBs, this just might level the playing field a bit with larger companies that have much bigger technology budgets. A few lines of code is all you need to create frictionless checkout for many prospective customers.

Ever since his passing on October 5th, I had the strong desire to see where he had lived. I took the opportunity to stop by Steve Jobs’ house in Palo Alto before my Saturday yoga class nearby. The neighborhood is very tranquil and his home is rather understated for the leader of the biggest tech company in the world. An early morning jogger stopped by to admire the memorial. She said she didn’t even realize he lived there after all the years of jogging past his house.

Steve Jobs' House

Steve Jobs' Palo Alto Home

The memorial around his house was an emotional site to witness. Candles were still burning 4 days later and more half eaten apples than I could count surrounded me. An apple orchard surrounds his small yard. Something tells me he didn’t work to attain status, but rather worked hard to make his dreams a reality. He didn’t seem to lead the opulent lifestyle that he could have. A friend said that she saw him just 6 – 8 weeks ago eating sushi by himself on California street.

I wasn’t a die hard Mac fan from childhood. I was raised on an 8086 IBM clone that I saved for in 5th grade. I switched to Mac at the time that I considered the Windows OS to be in decline – the dreaded Vista years. Tired of the hassles and lack of reliability of Windows, I gave Mac a shot when a friend of mine at Apple extended his friends and family discount to me. Since then, my house is filled with beautiful Apple products that help me do a lot more of what I want to do.

I’m sad that he is gone, but nothing does last forever and Steve had an incredible run. He did things on his own terms and had a vision that will always captivate me.

As consumers of digital content, we are all overwhelmed with a myriad of subscription and a la carte procurement options for accessing the movies and TV we want. Unfortunately, no one has the complete solution just yet. Hulu gives us a lot (not all) of the content from Fox, NBC, and ABC but generally lacks support of the cable operators and CBS due to unresolved conflicts with their respective business models. TiVo and other connected TV devices are reaching many agreements with content consolidators such as Hulu and Netflix, but no one has a fully integrated experience where content comes before the content provider’s brand, creating friction in the user experience.

What’s it going to take to get to the Utopia vision of watching whatever you want, wherever you want, without navigating multiple content silos or maintaining an excessive number of subscription services? Here are a few of the primary industry issues outstanding:

Effective revenue model for all parties involved

Content owners need to be fairly paid, which hasn’t happened yet. Netflix’s growth is amazing, as they have captured 60% of the movie streaming market; however, they have windowing rules that keeps desired content out of the hands of consumers too long. Without a dual subscription and ad model, they will likely struggle to establish a model that attracts desirable content and keeps everyone fairly paid.

Hulu’s ad effectiveness with respect to brand and message recall is 55% more effective than traditional advertising. This is translating to higher revenue returns for Hulu per half hour of prime time episode as compared with cable, cable DVR, and broadcast DVR; only broadcast is earning revenue higher per half hour of prime time episode today and the gap is closing quickly. For Hulu, breaking from its JV relationship with its founders is the critical next step to expansion.

It will be interesting to see what packaging and merchandising options develop with the union of Blockbuster and Dish, given the opportunity to marry strong content provider relationships with multi-channel distribution capabilities.

Maintain brand identity, but let go of brand dominance

Making users go to dozens of websites and apps will not work. Content silos must be broken down. TiVo is currently one of the best devices to make this happen as it owns the coveted “input 1” position on our TVs, meaning even our grandparents can easily get to the stuff they want to watch. TiVo’s latest product makes huge strides towards putting the content in front of users before the distributor’s brand and makes great strides at breaking down the windowing issue faced by Netflix by giving users multiple content access points. While TiVo has had many great successes, it is still a heavily considered purchase in comparison to its cable operator owned generic DVR counterparts. Recent partnerships between TiVo and operators indicates that this issue may resolve over time, as its patents and its phenomenally superior user experience are showing signs of winning out.

Emergence of open standards?

From payment systems to ad platforms, the industry may have to adopt open standards to allow everyone to play. The benefit? Ease of use for users and access to content will result in more use. Proprietary business models are great if you can make it work, however, network effects are somewhat questionable, which means being the keeper of all technology components may not be the right strategic move because movie and TV viewing has not proven to be particularly social, at least yet. We don’t care much about how many people are accessing content through the same distribution channel. We simply want the content. The fewer bills, logins, and time spent finding things, the more likely usage will increase for each player.

Blog Sources
Facts stated in this blog were gathered during executive discussions in John Schneider’s Management 162 Business Capstone course at Santa Clara University during the Winter and Spring 2011 school terms. Guests include Margret Schmidt, Vice President of User Experience at TiVo, Tom Fuelling, CFO of Hulu Networks, and Peter Moore, President of Electronic Arts. The point of view expressed in this blog is solely by John Schneider.

Electronic Arts LogoThere is a lot of emerging competition for traditional video game makers. For instance, Zynga’s estimated $10B valuation is larger than EA’s, yet the firm only has a tenth of the revenue in contrast and a possible over-dependency on Facebook. This almost sounds like the dot com era again to me. How will this story end?

This is the question that my class discussed with Peter Moore, President of EA Sports, when he visited my class on May 16, 2011.

Peter opened by saying digital is the growth driver in the gaming industry. The gaming industry is expected to grow an estimated a 5-10%* from the years 2010 to 2014; while digital gaming alone has grown at a 67% pace to $20B in just the last two years of business. It sounds great, but there is a big challenge – growth isn’t coming from a single digital source.

What is inspiring about EA’s approach to digital is that they are taking it on with enthusiasm – no heads are buried in the sand. Everyone knows that they adapt or become irrelevant. The digital transformation for EA means that they must face disruption on multiple fronts. New revenue generating business models include micro-transactions, downloadable console content, game add-ons and advertising; shifting revenue away from traditional physical disc sales. Platform proliferation dictates an expansion strategy that crosses just about anything that enables true ubiquity for the gamer; allowing them to play where and when they want.

With such a wide array of changes and challenges present, Peter doesn’t ignore the business case for making smart digital decisions across ecommerce, merchandising and device platforms. His rigor is demonstrated in the ability to deliver 30% margins as an operating business unit.

Peter Moore in John Schneider's Spring 2011 MGMT 162 Class

Peter Moore's visit to John Schneider's MGMT 162 course

With Peter’s second visit over the past year, one thing becomes evident. EA and the gaming sector are in for a wild ride. It is truly exciting to watch a large firm embrace Schumpeter’s theory of creative destruction; one that encourages the opening of new markets by tearing down traditional business models and placing emphasis on redesigning industry boundaries as new technologies introduce tremendous growth opportunities.

* Source: PwC Global Entertainment & Media Outlook 2010-2014

Photograph: Susana Bates/Reuters

Analysts are questioning Microsoft’s $8.5 billion purchase of Skype this past week for good reason. Skype isn’t turning a net profit and Microsoft wasn’t truly in a competitive bid. This sets up the question as to what synergies can be created between these two firms that drives such a valuation. We’ve all heard about Skype’s role as a key technology across many Microsoft technologies such as Xbox and Outlook, but I think there is one focal area that takes the lead over all others – mobility.

Microsoft announced Windows Phone  7 Series at Mobile World Congress in February 2010 with the goal of re-invigorating their position in the smart phone space, one they pretty much created but have since lost. In a recent opportunity to meet Robbie Bach, Retired President of MS Entertainment & Devices, he emphasized the point that they learned that MS had made a key mistake in the past by allowing handset manufacturers and carriers to manipulate the user experience on the phones with little to no restrictions (which can be likened to the approach Android is taking today). Now Microsoft is tightening controls and limiting what modifications, if any can be made. With this new strategy and reach into both enterprise and consumer markets on a global scale, what was missing until last week?

Microsoft did not have a unique value proposition. Nothing to disrupt the space. Apple has the tightest user experience and ubiquity across devices. Android is in just about everything now. In order to thread the needle between these two heavyweights, Microsoft needs something that changes the current market trajectory which looks to be building towards a duopoly a few years out.

Let’s look at the dynamics on the buy side of the industry, specifically the carriers, as an example of what could happen next. With AT&T’s recent proposed acquisition of T-mobile, Sprint is concerned with extinction due to its relatively low market share. Until now, no carrier has been a big advocate of changing their lucrative business model by allowing highly integrated VoIP calling that negates the use of their airwaves for voice transmission. Why would Sprint or another carrier consider disrupting the industry with a low cost VoiP solution that uses MS Windows 7 and Skype? The simple reason is that that Microsoft can create cross subsidies with search advertising through Bing. Suddenly, the carrier doesn’t lose financially. The consumer wins as well with lower subscription costs. Thus, the industry is disrupted with a network effect between search advertising and VoiP.

Microsoft captures market share, perhaps just enough to be worth $8.5 billion.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.