Similarly, guiding consumers into the funnel via exposure to above-the-line marketing and through the other end at direct below-the-line communication, necessarily needs that consumer to have interacted with the ATL, either directly or otherwise. And there is the marketers challenge.
And that is where mobile can play a fundamental role.
Yesterday I sat for 5 minutes looking out of my office window, onto Garrick Street:
And in that 5 minutes, I saw a total of 138 people. 26 of those, just under 20%, were holding their phone in their hand - some on calls and some just looking at it. You can be pretty certain that the vast majority (if not all) of the remaining 80% of people had their phone within easy reach (many clearly had Apple headphones in so are likely to have been listening to music on their iPhones). Now I know that a 5 minute snapshot of a Central London street is in no way representative of the wider population, but it does hint at the great thing about Mobile...
If you can produce a poster, ad or piece of guerilla activity compelling enough that people want to respond or react to it, and if you include an appropriate and intuitive mobile call-to-action, then you can drive consumers to interact and initiate a dialogue with you there and then - in the moment - when their interest is piqued and they are most responsive. Confirm and acknowledge their contact and maintain the dialogue, or if more appropriate, do so later that day or the next.
Either way, you have in the space of a minute or two, moved the consumer from being an anonymous viewer of your ATL to being a real prospect that you can have a direct, and one-to-one dialogue with.
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...
Last week, I saw a press releases in one of the marketing email updates that I get announcing the launch of an "integrated" campaign for a particular brand (to be honest, I can't recall the activity in question but, to be honest, it could have been any given brand in any given week). As I often do, I thought "That sounds interesting. 'Integrated' they say. I wonder what mobile element they have.". Well, being a curious chap, I had a look and much to my surprise the activity had an online element in conjunction with some press/print above-the-line activity. And nothing else. Cue rant....
Above-the-line and online all too often isn't integrated, it's just online activity in parallel to ATL! How can you call activity "integrated" if it doesn't integrate...?!?
There was no logical, or seamless customer journey between ATL and online, so unless you're sat at your desk in front of your computer reading a magazine, see an ad and log on to the site, the path from initial exposure to response and conclusion (e.g. purchase) is going to be disjoint. For someone to participate in the online element (barring online discovery of course) the activity is relying on someone seeing the ATL and remembering to go online later.
And so how many people are not responding simply because of this?
How many may think "That looks good", but by the time they get home or into work and in front of a computer have forgotten the URL, become engaged in something else (be that work or another advert), or just lost their initial interest? In such a case, the ATL works purely as an awareness piece and the "integration" simply does not exist.
(* To be pefectly honest, there is no point to this image other than I was looking for a picture of David Brent with his hands interlocked like George Dubbya does above. Blow me, I couldn't find one but did chance across this beauty which I couldn't not include)
So why not allow consumers to interact there and then, when they see the ATL and their interest is aroused? Why not let them "click" on the print ad and provide them a means of responding or interacting immediately? Why not include a simple SMS (or if it's appropriate MMS) call-to-action or even a QR code that drives them to an optimised mobisite and so delivers the best experience for their device? This mobisite need not be anything spectacular - it can just act as a conduit to the online activity, bridging the gap between ATL and online, for example by capturing an email address in order to send the consumer an email that then drives online or just giving them an an insight into the online activity and so cementing it in the consumers mind and better ensuring that they will visit online.
And why not in the process, augment your understanding with information such as which media drives better response? And when? And where? Why not profile your traffic by device type and use this to inform future activity (device type is a useful indicator for socio-demographic profiling)?
Unfortunately, too many marketers fall into the trap of thinking that mobile can, or should, only be used when consumers are in a "heads down" (**) state - using or looking at their device (a symptom of the wider issue of mobile being an afterthought in marketing planning as I previously discussed here). This forces mobile into being a silo'd part of the activity, with all discovery and interaction happening in isolation in the channel or bolted on the end of an online journey.
But mobile need not be the heart of the activity. It is often at its most effective when it plays a catalytic role, operating when the consumer is in the "heads-up" (**) state, not looking at their device (but as we know with their device with them) and links the offline with the rich and engaging online. Then you really are providing an "integrated" user journey that connects print/offline via mobile to web/online.
And only then can you honestly say that you have an "integrated" campaign.
