It may be that I'm getting caught up in the general romantic atmosphere that prevails today (and I thought that I was past all that!) but I think that I am falling in love with Ocado.
Can you fall in love with an online grocer you may ask? Well... maybe not, but they are certainly ticking as many of my boxes as it is possible for an online grocer to do, and my wife is becoming increasingly jealous of the way I talk about them so maybe we can have a future together...
Ok, so maybe I've over-played it slightly but I've just seen another great example of why Ocado seems to "get" mobile and is integrating it into their activity so nicely. I've already talked about their use of SMS notifications, to remind their customers about a delivery and advise them of the details of the delivery (including the driver's name and the van they'll be driving). They were also one of the first retailers off the mark in releasing transactional apps for the iPhone (store) and Android (store) devices. In fact, considering the general service and quality of the food (I'm sure covered in blogs/articles elsewhere) the one blemish that I can note is their lack of a mobile optimised site - they have retired their 'lite' site, stating that because of "huge improvements in mobile technology" most customers shop with Ocado "via our main Ocado website".
I think that this is a bit of a missed trick as a mobile site would better, and more appropriately, support the mid and lower range smartphones.Certainly, they realistically have the majority of their potential mobile traffic (and indeed revenue) tied up with the iPhone/Android apps and yes, other phones can use the main website, but it would be good to see a mobile optimised site nonetheless.
Anyway, the latest tick in one of my boxes came along this afternoon:
An Ocado delivery truck, with an SMS call-to-action, whereby new users can get £15 off their first shop.
Sure enough I gave it a go and received an SMS back with a unique code that can be redeemed online.A simple mechanic to set up, executed nicely, and driving new users from ATL to online and with tracking of unique codes to prevent mal-redemption and ongoing analysis.
Doesn't it make you wonder why more companies don’t do the same...?
What? Is Bod banging on about bleedin' QR codes again? Will he let it lie - we get it, he doesn't like them...
Ok, so the last couple of times I've commented about QR codes I've been critical of their execution, but that is not because of a problem with QR codes per se, just their execution in those examples. So you know what? Sod you all. I'm going to flip-reverse it and talk about an execution of QR codes that I really like. You see, I don't dislike QR codes - they are a really effective way of driving users to a destination (or indeed to provide them other information such as contact details). The caveat being that they rely on the user having a smartphone; having an appropriate app to decode the code on their phone; and being savvy enough to understand what they are and how to use them.
QR codes have been around for a good few years already. They were massive in Japan in 2007/2008 and there have been moves to try and establish them over here for years (anyone else remember the attempt by The Sun a couple of years back?). The issue in the UK has always been that the penetration of smartphones (and installed apps) didn't support their use as an effective call-to-action. It's for this reason that I've had to talk a client down from using them on more than one occasion - not because they are not effective, but that they are only effective under the right conditions, to the right audience and when executed in the right way.
And blow me, I've only found an example...
If you've picked up a copy of the Metro today (name-check for Mat Meir who found it and showed me) you may have seen this ad for Sky TV's Little Crackers (a season of autobiographical comic shorts from a few of Britain's better known comedians). And so what makes this such a good example of the use of QR? Well, let me explain...:
It's used in the right channel Print is spot-on for the use of QR codes. It means that the code can be scanned easily and you can provide information along with the code that needn't be digested and acted upon in a split second.
They educate how to use the QR code
The ad doesn't just say how you use the code (scan it with your phone), but it also explains what you need to be able to do this (a QR code reader). So as well as supporting the CTA in this ad directly, it is educating the audience and so indirectly supporting the ongoing use of QR codes as a CTA in the future.
They provide an alternative CTA for those not familiar with, or unable to use a QR code
So if you don't have a QR code reader or don't want to get one, for example, you can still participate. No-one is excluded. And they don't just give you a single alternative, they go and give you two! You can either send and SMS and receive a URL back by reply, or you can type the URL directly into your browser. What more could you ask for?
Each different CTA is tracked with a URL parameter
In conjunction with providing multiple CTAs, each one uses a different URL. The one provided for users to enter into their browser is http://pda.sky.com/LittleCrackers, and the QR code and SMS URLs are distinguished by an additional parameter (source=qr and source=sms respectively). This is really important. It means that they can see how each of the CTAs is being used, including by which devices, and then integrate these insights into future activity. I am really pleased to see this kind of (simple but often overlooked) thought going into the execution here.
The use of QR is contextual
Yes, a print ad in the Metro is not targeted so everyone/anyone sees it (a criticism I levelled at the Waitrose execution). But in this case the context is clear - users are invited to preview exclusive content on their phone. The ad is for the series in general, but it is offering something additional for those that are capable and have devices that support it. This is clear in the ad so the user's expectations are set perfectly.
So in what may be my last post of the year (I'm thinking of writing a 2011 predictions piece but am struggling to decide between one that is serious and thoughtful or just outright frivolous and sarcastic - thoughts welcome) it is great to talk about something like this that I think has been really well executed.
Thank you Sky TV and may your response rates be high (I'll wager they're better than those for Waitrose or Moleskine)...
This weekend Waitrose ran what has been touted as a UK first - a TV ad including a QR code call-to-action. That's pretty big news isn't it? Well, I guess so yes. But not for the right reasons...
There it is. An Epiphany for Mobile Marketing. The defining point in the acceptance of a mobile call-to-action in what is, one of the most jealously guarded pieces of advertising real-estate. Mobile has reached the big-time. Everyone in the Mobile industry should raise a toast.
Well... err... I don't think so...
When I heard about this on Friday I got a little bit angry. In fact, I needed coaxing down from the light fittings by one of the Account Manager here. Why? Because it it this kind of inappropriate use of Mobile that really really riles me. As far as I am concerned, it is another example of what I mentioned in my post back in August about the number of poor executions of Mobile in marketing.
Let me explain... The ad is very much in keeping with the recent Waitrose ads - one of Delia or Heston showing a 35 second recipe which, obviously, needs a series of ingredients from Waitrose which are nicely bundled up in-store for you. As I understand it, the run has been very successful for them and an effective response to the "food as sex" M&S ads. And if you watched the video, you will probably have noticed a funny looking square in the final frame. Here it is again:
There, in the final frame is a QR (quick response) code. A 2-dimensional barcode that, when scanned by an application on a mobile phone can include plenty of information (such as a contact record) and do plenty of things (like auto create an SMS), but is most frequently used to launch the phone's browser to a particular URL.
So let me explain with why this isn't as good as it should be...
The QR code is on-screen for 2-3 seconds and, as you can see, is accompanied by absolutely no explanation. So given this, who could respond? Well, you're looking at smartphone users (c.30% of the phone-owning population) who either already know what a QR code is, or are so intrigued by the funny looking square that they do some research to find out about it, and who have (or know that they have) a barcode-reading app on their device. Oh, and they have to get their phone, open the app and scan the barcode within 3 seconds.
When it comes to CTAs, particularly mobile ones, I like to apply what I call the "Bedford Test" - I like to imagine that were I to walk into Bedford town centre (the nearest town to where I live) and ask a random selection of the people that I come across what a QR code is, would they know what to do. Well, what do you think? Does this pass the Bedford Test? I don't think so.
So, just taking the ad and the placement of the QR code at face value, I wonder who the target consumer is? If it's Digital Executives based in London then we're all good. If it's 35-45 year old females then we're not so good...
Ok, so let's assume that the consumers are savvy in this kind of thing, and are able to scan the code using their phone in the 3 seconds that is available to them (or have Sky+). What happens? Given there is no explanation, you may assume that you get pushed to the waitrose.com/christmas URL that is alongside it in the ad (and is not mobile optimsed BTW). Nope. You get pushed to a URL to download their Christmas app. It's pretty clever in that if you have a supported device (iPhone or Android only) you get pushed to the app in the appropriate app store/market. But what if you don't have an iPhone or Android device (there are more smartphones that aren't than are...)? You get pushed to a page like this:
* Sorry for the poor image quality. It was from an N97 after all...
Basically, a page called "Other phones", that says the Christmas app is not supported on your phone. Oh. Thanks for that Waitrose!
So, in short, it'll generate a low response rate and for those that do respond, a fair proportion are likely to get a poor user experience.
There's a few (kind of) counter arguments that have been levied at me over the last few days, so let me address these:
But this is great for Mobile. It's a mobile CTA on TV. Think about the exposure.
Well, I can't argue that the exposure is large. But that is the frustration - there have been a significant amount of projects that I have been involved in where we have deployed something really nice but which has suffered because the client has failed to back it with activity to drive awareness or activity. ATL media space is jealously guarded and there is often a real reluctance from the lead agency to include a mobile call-to-action. So when you do get the chance, you should use it wisely - it's like being given a test drive in a F1 car and crashing on the first corner. If the activity is going to be measured on response, then there is a danger that a poor response will result in all Mobile being tarred with the QR-brush and being consigned to BTL comms.
The exposure at image this gives to Waitrose is great.
If Waitrose want exposure in the Mobile or Digital press then fine, this may very well give them what they want. However, I've also seen an awful lot of "why oh why" type comments from the Twitterati... But I would be very surprised if there isn't a metric around response rates (this is a direct response CTA after all) and I would also be surprised if it meets it. As I argue above, if you've got the chance to include a Mobile CTA, please use it more wisely.
But QR codes are cool. Everyone is talking about them and they're going to be huge.
No they're not. And no they're not.
QR are codes are a nice mechanic, they're a quick and easy way to drive users to an online destination. Used at the appropriate time, in an appropriate way they can be very effective. But they are not widely recognised and the broad consumer understanding doesn't exist - the UK isn't like Japan (where I've seen QR code tattoos!), and the uptake of QR codes will only ever be slow. Let me dispel the thought that these are cutting edge - does anyone remember The Sun trying to introduce them into the mainstream and including a pull-out all about QR codes? In 2007! I just love the line "your technology-crazy Sun is going to be at the forefront of the revolution". If the combined force of The Sun and Keeley don't manage to bring them to the fore of the collective consciousness then I'm not sure what will...
So what would I have done?
Pretty simple really, I'd have included an SMS call to action "Text WAITROSE to 8NNNN":
- Everyone with a phone can send an SMS (it is the only killer-app for mobile) and so no-one is excluded.
- It is memorable, so the consumers don't have to grab their phone and respond whilst the ad is on-screen.
- It allows you to respond to the consumer via SMS, meaning you can set the consumers expectations with your reply.
- You start a conversation - you've got their mobile number and so can have a dialogue with them, and so engage with them in other ways.
At it's simplest level, SMS is the most democratising of channels, as everyone can engage if they want to. After all, what does using a QR code say to Waitrose's customers?
Surprisingly, I don't like knocking other Mobile activity. But equally, I do like to see it done well as, for whatever we say, it is still an industry that is fighting hard to be recognised alongside other channels. And so because of this, everything that "we" do, on whatever scale, needs to be as appropriate and effective as we can make it...
A little over a week ago I wrote a post about how brands, agencies and the mobile industry in general needs to stop regarding the "mobile internet" as something distinct and unique, as this only serves to continue the isolationism that all too often is projected by the industry.
The key point being that consumers don't differentiate so why should we? Those that are in the know may understand that there are some fundamental differences between both the way that different devices access an internet site/page and what a consumers motivation/needs are when doing so - but any differentiated treatment based on the device should be completely hidden from the user and their experience should be seemless. It's like suggesting you should drive a car differently on the basis of whether there is unleaded, diesel or 4-star (maybe LPG would be a better example) in the tank.
Increasingly, brands need to try and operate in that space that is the union of innovation and inclusivity in order to achieve this (I'll re-print my canny diagram that best illustrates this space below):
Well, blow me, Tesco are only going and helping to set the pace aren't they?
Tesco you say? Yes indeed. Tesco.
The NMA today reported that the world's third largest retailer has launched its first transactional mobile website, an optimised version of Tesco Direct, their non-food operation. This follows swiftly on the heels of the launch of the Tesco mobile apps for food purchases - currently on both Ovi and iPhone (somewhat notably, Tesco chose to launch on the Ovi, which provides broader reach, before a "cooler" iPhone version). So if you go to direct.tesco.com on your mobile, you'll get redirected to the m.tesco.com and be able to browse and purchase as you see fit.
Of course, this move sits as part of a wider strategy within Tesco as they look to branch out into other markets that are currently dominated by the likes of Argos and Amazon (both of whom have mobile on their agenda too of course), but it does serve to demonstrate how important it is to support browsers using a mobile device. Tesco have stated that 7% of traffic to Tesco Direct was from a mobile device (it would be interesting to know if this includes tablets) and that this has grown by 300% over the last year. It is that kind of evidence that all brands, not just those with the big kahunas like Tesco, will need to take heed of or risk being marginalised in an increasingly digital, and mobile device centric, future.
Note: Whilst I am very pleased to see what Tesco are doing, the fact that their main website (www.tesco.com) is not optimised for mobile devices, is a black mark I'm afraid. But maybe I shouldn't be so fussy...
I'll preface this blog post by saying that I haven't really got the time to write it. Although I haven't posted an update for a while (meaning that it is well overdue) I still have a pretty large pile of things to do instead. However, a Twitter exchange with my ex-colleague, good mate and fellow mobile enthusiast Murat resulted in me climbing so high on my soap-box that I needed to let it all out - he does have that kind of effect on me I am afraid. So we can probably consider this as a cathartic post...
Anyway.
Along with the fantastic Grapple, I was sharing a stand with the lovely Hayley (another ex-colleague) from Nokia at Ad:Tech on Wednesday. She was talking about a new product that Nokia have released, the Ovi App Wizard, which enables you to create your very own mobile application, test it in an emulator, submit it for review and (with luck) subsequently publish it to the Ovi Store - making it available across supported devices. I gave this a go yesterday evening and am pleased to say that it was a pretty smooth and pain-free process, resulting in me creating and submitting my app in little over 5 minutes.
I confess that I was pretty impressed by this. If there is one thing that Nokia (usually) do well it is process - I have had more than a few afternoon conference calls talking about "ways of working".
This follows relatively swiftly on the heels of similar platform/product releases by the likes of Kilrush and Golden Gekko (with Tino) and possibly preceding one from Google . Whilst there are variations between these offerings, in relation to their target audience, platforms and feature sets, the common denominator is the ability to create your own app without needing to do a jot of coding.
So what's the issue?
Well, I am all one for the democratising power of Mobile - everyone has one, most people understand them and their use (and usefulness) will only increase over the next few years. And I am certainly also someone who at times despairs about the way that Mobile, as a whole, can obfuscate and over-complicate in order to set itself apart and be seen as "special" - and in doing so, only succeed in putting brands and agencies off the effort.
But I do believe that there is a real danger of letting anyone create an app and put it out there. For starters, the default position of "I must have an app" is something that, as an industry, we have a obligation to redress. More often than not with questions like "Really? Why? What exactly do you want to achieve?".
There is most definitely a time and a place for an app, but this needs to have been reached through a process of assessing and analysing the brand, the objective, the budget and most importantly, the target audience. If those factors point to an app being the right choice then go for it. But until you have been through that, don't discount SMS, MMS, a mobile internet site, or any of the other capabilities that exist with Mobile.
Just producing an app for an app's sake, really is a case of the Emperor's New Clothes and my own app is a case-in-point...
I created an app that simply pulls the Atom feed of this blog.
So, it just shows this blog.
An app.
To just show this blog.
Nothing else.
No other features.
Just this blog.
In an app.
So why on God's Green Earth does it need to be an app?
Just to be clear, I really like apps and I use them all the time. They enable you to provide features that you just cannot yet do in any other way. Take my post about a day in London courtesy of Google as an example - it just wouldn't have been possible without apps (NB: mobile browser support of HTML5 will in the future address this). There are any number of apps that I could talk about endlessly. One of my favourites being the Museum of London "You are here" iPhone app - I urge you all to have a butchers! But the point is, the features that make an app so good (e.g. GPS, accelerometer, camera, compass, local storage, external or 3rd party integration etc.) are not all able to be utilised/deployed with a DIY app builder. To create a rich, engaging and innovative app you need to spend time and money developing one.
But the problem with apps is that what you make up for in functionality, you lose in reach. Not all devices (easily) support apps as we know them and, taking Ovi as an example, although in theory you get reach across a large number of Nokia devices how many Nokia users will actually utilise this? So an app can immediately restrict your target audience. This is fine if an app is part of a muti-faceted strategy and so you are achieving this reach with other activity; or if you recognise this limitation and it still delivers for your target audience.
But it is not fine if you are simply responding to the demand of "I need an app!".
An app that is as one-dimensional as a restricted RSS reader will not engage, it will not bring a brand closer to it's audience. Indeed, it is more likely to disengage and disappoint your consumers. So I would say yes, do create and app. But only if it is the right thing to do. Otherwise, harness the power of the ubiquity of mobile and look in other areas for you engagement and innovation.
If you were fortunate enough to see my fellow Movement-er (or should it be Mover?) Mark Freeman's standing-ovation-worthy talk at IAB Engage for Mobile (note: IAB membership required for this link, but not for this one) then you are certainly a much better person because of it.
At the post-event schmoozing Mark was collared by Ewan MacLeod and asked a bit more about his views on mobile and the current compulsion for apps.
We took in Covent Garden, the Natural History Museum, the Science Museum, the Diana Memorial kids playground in Kensington Gardens and a meal at Bella Italia before catching a train home. What's the point in telling you all that apart from the vain hope that by linking to them there may be some freebies in it for me? Well, apart from the detail being vital in padding out this blog post beyond a paragraph, it helps to demonstrate the usefulness of Google on my mobile.
Being an Android owner (HTC Desire), my device came with a fair few Google services built in and those that weren't I soon installed. So armed with the full suite of Search, Voice Search, Maps, Navigation, Translate, Goggles and Street View (and a good 3G connection of course) I was pretty much able to organise the day on the hoof.
Not sure what the opening hours for the museums were? Thanks Google.
Not sure where the museums were and how to get there on the tube? Thanks Google.
Not sure how to get to the playground? Thanks Google.
Not sure where the nearest Bella Italia was (we had vouchers) and how to get there? Thanks Google.
Not sure what times the train back ran? Thanks Google.
And all that with only needing to put up with the odd advert here and there...
So come the end of the day, in addition to having a couple tired and happy kids, we avoided any of the usual friction points such as "where are we going?"; "are you sure this is the right way?"; "what do you mean it's closed?"; and "HOW LONG do we have to wait for the next train?". And so we had a couple of tired and happy parents too!
I can't help but admire Google for the way that they produce apps and services that are fundamentally useful. Yes, there are some misses along the way (Wave being a good example) but they find a way to produce hit after hit after hit. Putting the mobile focus aside, what about Search, Gmail, Maps and Street View, Docs, Calendar etc. etc....?
Over at Mountain View they have certainly hit upon a formula for innovation and success. And it's built around one thing - ADVERTISING. Yes, there is the accumulation of user and location information, but that is all used in order to make the advertising more relevant (i.e. more useful to the consumer and costly for the advertiser).
So thanks for nailing it for me Google. Oh, and well done on achieving near-omnipresence!
