HeaderImage

A wider digital perspective (part 3: new business models )

How does digital communication affect business outside marketing?

    In this three-part article I will try to explain the changes I’m seeing in the convergence of emerging digital communication, branding and business.

Read part 1 here.
Read part 2 here.

I’ve divided the future of digital, the way I see it, into three concepts. In the process I have purposely left out the natural extension of traditional digital communications as it is already accepted, debated and in excellent shape.

And I’ve focused on “emerging” concepts. I’m guessing most of these are already familiar, but I’m hoping that setting them in relation to each other will give additional inspiration in regards to how they can be utilized.

a-wider-digital-perspective

3. New business models
We need to change our perception of what a service is, from thinking of it as marketing, to becoming an integrated part of our business models:

    From part two:
    “The main thing though is not … trying to better the experience by adding a service to the product. But the perception of what a service is: From thinking of it mainly as a cost to becoming a direct means for generating income.

    The problem with marketing is that it is perceived as a cost. And as long as digital communication is perceived as a marketing tool it is inevitable that it will be perceived as a cost as well:

    “I also suggest that the problem with most [digital] initiatives today is that they are designed as marketing and by that inevitably will be perceived as a cost. If we are to see more money and more innovation being put into the digital and connected activities, we need to start helping companies identify, design and benefit from new business opportunities, not new marketing opportunities.” – http://www.180360720.no/index.php/archive/connect-everything-else/

In short: Digital communications needs to move from selling products to being products.

How can we accomplish this?

    The communications industry perspective:
    First of all, we need to create a new discussion and movement around digital. That discusses how to generate tangible value FROM brands, not intangible value FOR brands.

    I’m not arguing that the latter is less meaningful, but that digital communications should start partaking in processes further down the business value chain.

      “We need to get people to pay for products and services, not just talk about them”.

    Secondly, we need to change the current impression that developments and investments in marketing technology is concentrated on finding new creative ways to hand out free stuff (http://is.gd/1NVVGc).

      It’s as if digital’s own brand has become “FREE [stuff]“.

    We need to prove that the platform is mature enough to support a business model, not a coupon model.

    And doing this by demonstrating the value from acquiring members, not freeloaders, and understanding what real value these people will be willing to pay good money for.

    As Tim Malbon states in this clip interview with Edward Boches:

      “When people think about digital in traditional advertising agencies, … basically what they think about is communications first. … What is the coms idea? … We’ll actually they are missing the biggest opportunity, which is often: Can we create a new business here? Can we create entirely new revenue? Can we change the business model of the company that we are helping? Can we help them by bringing people in making their product and services better?”
      - Tim Malbon of Made By Many interviewed by Edward Boches

    The client perspective:
    Going back to the second part of this article, I suggested that there was two ways of looking at the goal of any business:

      Traditionalist mindset: Lowering the cost of customer acquisition.
      Services mindset: Increasing the value of each customer (member).

    From this we can take that the goal of the services mindset is to increase the long term value of a customer, most often by offering them an opportunity to pay by subscription.

    The New York Times wrote about this back in 2009:

      “EVERYWHERE you look these days, businesses are selling subscriptions. Cable television, Internet and cellphone services are sold that way. So are business software, office printing and car rentals like Zipcars. … Marketers like them for good reason: Convince someone to take a subscription, and the revenue flows in for months to come.” – http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/business/11every.html?_r=1

So how does a company used to selling physical objects move on to sell abstract intangible software solutions, or services?

In my mind the solution to this challenge lies in the core of each company. Going back to the origin and idea behind the value of the original offering. Something often forgot by marketing departments, accountants and CEO’s as the company moves from its idealistic first stages and into the conformity of big business.

In the presentation When marketing becomes the product 2, I give this explanation:

    A product is worthless. It is not before it is introduced to a situation where it offers something valuable that the object becomes meaningful and valuable to people. This is the origin of most business: Some dedicated individual[s], seeing an opportunity to create and offer something valuable to people. That is how we got the toothbrush, the toilet brush and the air brush – they were all designed by people who identified a need or an improvement. Designed the solution and implemented it into the market.

This is the core of any business – understanding how to ad something valuable to a situation. And this is the core of the services and subscription mindset: Understanding the businesses core value and how to modernize, strengthen, increase or extend on it.

View more presentations from Helge Tennø

Trying to make this more tangible I offered four/five simple directions (at the very end of the presentation Connect everything else) where companies could start looking for products and services to increase the value of their situations:

    1. Fixing broken models
    In the first direction companies are urged to look for broken models. These might not be obvious at first, as we are used to working around them or accepting them. But they are often there and finding digital solutions to simplify them or avoid them completely might create an opportunity for the business.

    As an example hotel checkouts are often crowded and an unnecessary wait for regular business travelers. Mobile applications allowing for direct checkout via your phone might help customers skip the whole reception area and walk right into the waiting taxi – ordered automatically by the same service.

    Imagine car-sharing schemes. Having to go to two physical locations in order to pick up the car, the first one being the physical keys, the second the car itself. Zipcar solved this problem by removing the unnecessary stop at the key depot. Every driver could just download the car key app on their mobile and concentrate on finding the car.

    2. Combining digital and real world initiatives
    The real world is filled with limitations. What would happen if we employed a non-physical layer with the ability to record and personalize data? The goal would be to enhance the physical experience by the opportunities offered by digital.

    This is the kind of thinking that went behind the Nokia Push / Burton project explained in part two. Where adding sensor technology to the snowboarding clothing and equipment boarders will be able to not only make radical jumps, but also collect points for awesomeness and compete against their friends by comparing scores in the evening (or live on their phone).

    3. Adding services / Extending the experience surrounding the product
    Where the second direction is saying that the real world experience could be changed by combining it with a digital layer. This direction is saying that the real world experience is the same, but we need to ad additional stuff to it – in order to expand it.

    An example of this is how the Albion bakery, in London, made sure, through Twitter, that every potential (and subscribing) customer on the closest city blocks got a message when Albion’s products where best served – steaming hot directly from the oven.

    A second example is the National Railway in Norway. Who not only put Internet connection and WIFI on their long distance trains, but also wanted to ad digital services to this connection. They ended up building a content portal where travelers could download anything from music, to videos or games. All adding to the already paid for product (and with the opportunity to further monetize.)

    4. Thinking in terms of relationships – when people are more important owning and using your product, than thinking about buying it.

    Do you treat your customers as members? Ask yourself this: what can I offer my customers every day, or every week, which would increase the value of the situation I’m designing my offer for?

    It needs to be understood that inviting your customers to become members is not a one time thing. It demands a program and a system that is able to offer them subscribable value.

    Spotify is a good example of this, where they understood that as soon as music became something that got hidden away on your hard-drive – as opposed to decorating your bedroom wall. Music would stop being something worth treasuring. It would turn into a commodity you listen to and then throw away. Spotify understood how digital changed the music experience and started designing a business model for it – a subscription model.

Connect everything else
View more presentations from Helge Tennø

These were all generalizing ideas to kick start an ideation process in order to figure out how to monetize digital opportunities in your company.

If you are still stuck, and if all else fails, then ask yourself these final questions.

    - How do we create members – not customers.
    - How do we create loyalty to our brand that nobody can take away from us?
    - How can we earn money doing things that didn’t exist five years ago?

Now, get to work!

New Business Opportunities in Retail

Digital’s introduction to retail, be it a slow one, will accelerate as the understanding of the width of web and mobile broadens from being all about destinations, to integration into every aspect of business:

Find the presentation below or at slideshare.net/helgetenno.

As always find the individual slides under CC-license here: flickr.com/everythingnewisdangerous

I’ve included the part of the script describing the three areas of retail I’ve concentrated on; product, in-store and business opportunities:

    Product opportunities
    The product is not just a “brand” living on a shelf or being consumed by a member of the public. It is a character, which within the framework of a strong identity changes its characteristics to fit different roles through the stages of its own lifecycle; from the initial idea, the spark, to its realization (design), its distribution, shelf life, shared product experience and recycling (sustainability). Digital amplifies the characteristics, and helps the identity adapt at each stage.

    In-store opportunities
    The retail outlet is the most important arena for public choice. It is intense in its range of decisions, and numbing in its range of (similar) products. Inside this arena there are limited opportunities within frameworks. Frameworks put in place by the non-digital, non-organic world of cardboard and floor space. Digital transcends the limitations of the shop infrastructure, serving communication through personal devices controlled by a digital brain in “the cloud”.

    In the advertising mindset the retail communication belongs to the “call-to-action” category. But this limits itself both in its expense on resources (financial and labor), scarcity of real estate and limited time span. In the design mindset the goal is rather strength through identity, creating a long lasting top-of-mind preference through establishing an interesting story, sharing values, creating memberships and avoiding the retail rock concerts of advertising.

    Business opportunities
    There are new business opportunities to be explored and discovered through the extension of digital and organic platforms. From engaging the crowds to taking the store to the world – not limiting access to it by physical destination. In categories where products follow patterns and become remarkably similar, it is digital and organic platforms that not only invite customers to explore and discover new, unique experiences. But also develop more layered identities, establishing thicker product relationships, and unwrap new business opportunities.

A special thanks to PSFK which as with a stroke of coincidence launched their brilliant PSFK Future of Retail Report just last week, adding a whole section to my presentation – I’ve been extensively referencing the source.

PSFK Future of Retail Report

I would also ad these brilliant people and publications as they all helped in filtering the cases and surfacing the best ones:

springwise.com
popsop.com
mashable.com
rubbishcorp.com
adverblog.com
Ingmar de Lange
mobilemarketer.com
digitalbuzzblog.com
Zeus Jones
storefrontbacktalk.com
cpbgroup.com
techcrunch.com
Seth Godin
Richard Murray (for giving us the best insight on retail)
and for his brilliant and extensive posts, *Supercollider at geoffnorthcott.com.

Our future identities

If our future friends are our objects, how would we communicate with them?

In his lecture from SXSW Douglas Rushkoff discusses how the population at large is always one step behind the evolution of mediums:

    “We got text, we got a 22 letter alphabet, and what kind of society resulted from that? A bunch of Israelites who go to the town square and hear the rabbi read the Torah to them. So we get the technology to read, and what ability do we get? The ability of the generation before. We get the printing press, does everyone become a writer? No, we get a civilization of readers and an elite of writers. Now we get the computer, do we get a nation of programmers? No, we get a nation of bloggers … My issue is that at each stage, when we get a new medium, civilization seems to be one step behind.” – Douglas Rushkoff

Now Rushkoff suggest that in order to keep up with this pattern in evolution, our next step is to learn to program. But what/why will we need to program in this “next iteration”?

(video via Boing Boing)

Trying to figure this one out, I have grasped a part of the ideas that Rushkoff presents and found from my archives the article I’ve written for the Age of Conversation 3 – soon to be released, where I suggest that in the future our friends are our objects. (Heavily inspired by the minds of Matt Jones, Kevin Slavin, Timo Arnall and Rafi Haladjian).

Rushkoff’s point, as I understand it, is that we in a world where we are able to talk and communicate with our surrounding environment – saturated with objects, need to be able to program our environments so as not to let anyone else program them for us – and by that relinquishing our identity – programming would not only be useful, but a given.

As a teaser I’ve added a snippet from my article to Age of conversation below:

    “A conversation is more than just the exchange of vocabulary language between two or more people. Rather a conversation is a rich exchange of ideas through several languages expressed synchronously and consciously, subconsciously or unconsciously between identities.

    What we define as the social web today is not the future of the conversation. The future of the conversation is everywhere, as digital is everywhere and marketing is everywhere. And our future friends are identities, which might as well be people as objects. “

Design and identity part 1: Organic

This post is the first of three arguments presenting a perspective on what will be important and interesting in regards to identity and design the coming two to three years: Which is how identity and design transforms as the artificial barriers of technology disappears and people change their behaviors.

And how this affects the natural, constant and unstoppable evolution of what it takes to remain valuable as a company.

Part one: Organic

“Digital” as a term is obsolete and unhelpful, because it invites us into a mindset where the technology defines the purpose of the product.

    Technology historically, in regards to design, is a consequence of our conceptual process, not the purpose of it.

    “Digital” is just a reference to a form of technology on which the surface is supported, equal to paper, plastic or metal.

    “Digital” does not reference any specific use or motivation, such as; business card, packaging or book would in regards to paper technology. It only references some abilities in regards to its structural compound.

Why is it then that “digital” as a term – no matter how misleading it is, no matter how little insight and understanding it invites us to take with us into a process, stands as this beacon on top of a desperate range of stuff?

In the words of Steve Taylor and Christian Ruland from their brilliant new book “The Case Against Ideas”:

    Take ‘digital’ for instance: an amorphous catch-all term that fails to distinguish between dozens of distinct new forms of communication, each requiring a distinct approach.”

Where on the one side, defining stuff as digital is as unhelpful as defining design for other surfaces as “paper” or “rubber”, we are by over using the term “digital” removing or failing to see the motivation behind the design – which is the essential insight.

the-motivation-behind-the-design

When all this is said; stuff designed on surfaces supported by digital technology have some abilities which are not unique for this technology, but descriptive of a lot of the stuff that is there:

    Organic – the surface itself responds to environmental influence. This can be interaction, updates, monitor size etc. But the process has to include the idea that an important product ability is to adapt and/or morph – while still preserving the designed identity.

    Activities – digital technology opens the door much wider in regards to how design can help build better products and services. How identity, visual language and designed activities can make companies and their efforts more valuable, appreciated and sought after through adding valuable services around their existing products or activities.

The goal is to start looking for a more useful terminology, to identify motivation, not generic labels, and to see how new technology opens up new opportunities – while not ignoring, but enhancing existing crafts.

An example from Berg, Bonnier and Mag+:

future media

A presentation on the future opportunities in media, turning threats into insights into opportunities.

The presentation future media – no more middle men, is an accumulation of a range of relevant thoughts from this blog, put into system.

It’s built as a master slide set (to pick and sort from), but I tried to ad some structure to it by identifying six major “forces” affecting media, and then a short final chapter summarizing a suggested future mindset.

I’ve also chosen to ad a lot of the explanatory text – not just the headlines – into the slides this time, hopefully this will create more context for the people reading the thing online.

Find individual slides available for download under a CC license on my flickr.com account everything new is dangerous.

Find the presentation below, or on my slideshare account slideshare.net/helgetenno.

View more presentations from Helge Tennø.

When the marketing becomes the product 2

A new presentation on the role of marketing in the post digital landscape, with a special focus on developing the product relationship into a membership based marketing business model.

Presented Tuesday for the SAS Institute in Norway.

As I find my slide style being remixed (and loving the fact that it is :) on slideshare.net, I am currently trying to redevelop some stuff. I’ve added a lot of text from this blog to the slides, and hope this will provide more context for the readers and participants.

If interested you can, as always, find most of the individual slides on my flickr.com account everythingnewisdangerous.

As always, I’d love to hear what you think, especially your favorite slides – and why.

The presentation is embedded below, or find it on slideshare.net.

View more presentations from Helge Tennø.

The product relationship and the marketing relationship

Products have always been important in peoples lives. Most of the stuff we own and talk about is stuff we have purchased. There is a deep and profound relationship between people and a lot of their stuff.

Unfortunately it’s easy to get the impression that this relationship hasn’t been the focus of marketing, which has spent most of its energy on positioning, availability and sales promotion. To some extent one can suggest that marketing has ignored the existing relationship between people and their products, and instead built it’s own marketing relationship, different from the product’s and built on a different set of values.

profound

This has led marketing and products apart, and often created a cleft between them. This cleft has been further forced by the traditional media mindset where it has been impossible for companies to connect with their audience and participants, where media has become an obstacle, a superfluous middle man, where the marketing and the advertising has become messages – not exchanges.

(And one might also suggest that where the product relationship is based on personal and individual narratives, the marketing relationship is based on a generic and artificial narrative)

There are two negatives here, the first one is that marketing is set on creating its own relationship – ignoring the really valuable one already in place between people and products. The other is the traditional communications landscape, which is increasing this distance between the marketing relationship and the product relationship.

Luckily the shift that has been going on for the last four years aims at correcting this. Where marketing changes from focusing on its own agenda to enforcing the values set by the product. Where we are seeing focus moving away from messages and to exchanges and relationships. Which brings marketing and products back together again. Creating a better environment for products, people, companies and the relationship between them.

Marketing and business model thinking

If marketing is to become a more integrated part of the product experience/context, baked in and/or eventually become more important than the product:

    “Marketing becomes the value people want to connect with, the product is merely an invitation into this relationship”. – link

Then it means a different set of demands needs to be put on marketing.

an-invitation

Digital services can’t be measured by downloads, clicks, uses or other advertising-type measures. Marketing integrated with the product needs to be measured by its ability to create value in and business from the relationship with the participant. Marketing needs to be measured by its own business model.

When the marketing becomes the value provider in the company/participant relationship, it needs to define its idea, value proposition, revenue stream and how this is going to measured. Not merely how much attention and use it has generated from being available.

In short, marketing initiatives need more business model thinking integrated into their design process. (And of course this is not exclusive – forcing the BM-ideas to collaborate or grow from narrative ideas creates an environment set to earn from the combination of both worlds).

businessmodel

The physical augmentation of digital services

We might be cautious of forcing new behavior on our participants, because of a reasonable fear that it will be difficult for people to adapt. So we try to find and design solutions inside people’s existing behavioral pattern. But this limits our ability to create better value in our relationships with our participants.

Behavioral psychologist Donald Norman says people adapt to technology; we have always made things that people had to learn – like a doorknob – which attributes new behaviors in their lives. It may have made their lives more practical or better – but they had to learn it.

phyical-objects

In the context of company/customer relationships and through the lens of services, Tim Brown, of IDEO, ads to this train of thought:

    “Any Service organization has got to get over the idea that a great service is something where the consumer doesn’t have to do anything. That’s a really bad service. A great service is where the consumer actually participates, and where they get drawn in, and where they become part of it.

People following this blog might have already seen some of my frustration with today’s standards for graphical user interfaces, which I find are almost exclusively based on anything else than the human aspect:

As the quote suggests we might be at the end of this era, forced through by a greater understanding for the human aspect as technology is immersing into our everyday life. And as a consequence of new platforms inviting us to interact without mechanical augmentations, such as the mouse and keyboard.

But this should not apply to only stuff happening on a two-dimensional screen, where the ability to involve and engage are limited, we should start thinking how to take our services outside the screen, and into the physical environment.

rafi haladjian screens

If one looks at a video game console like Wii, or even the physical augmentation of games like Buzz or Guitar Hero, we can ask ourselves, why aren’t banks, retailers or FMCG doing this? What is the barrier to thinking about physical objects when thinking of digital services?

There are already a range of brilliant and inspiring examples:
(Some of these are just concepts or prototypes)

The Copenhagen Wheel

Phillips – Direct Life

Charmr

The BP Photobooth

Sniff

The wrong business model?

Delivering immediate effect might not be the best business model for designing long-term valuable marketing initiatives.

Advertising is known for getting peoples attention and affecting people’s anticipation of an experience or product. Advertising is media related, the effect is purchasable through unlimited scope.

Advertising is direct, unwanted, often irritating and too often exhaustingly repetitive. It’s short compact stories or direct messages, highlighting exaggerations and often packaged in a clichéd pun. It’s responsive, and provides hot bursts of immediate effect, which cools down quickly.

Brilliant storytellers used to change millions of minds for decades, today they gather millions of views on youtube.

milions-of-views

In my mind, advertising is faced with a challenge; it’s own business model, label or sales pitch: We move people and products – fast.

There is a need for long term marketing initiatives; digital concepts and ideas need to carry the longevity of product relationships. Which also implies a different way of measuring value. (What are the metrics identifying the value of a relationship? Are they the same as used for our ability to traffic people back and forth from, and around in, cyberspace?)

the-longevity-of-product-relationships

The question is, if the advertising industry is in a place clients come with the preconception to create long term marketing initiatives, or if one needs to alter the idea of what the advertising industry does if we are to acquire and lead these projects.

As a friend of mine, David Reid, told me yesterday, referencing a quote by Martin Sorrell: “We are not in the advertising business, we are in the marketing communications business”.

I would say Zeus Jones and Berg London certainly aren’t advertising agencies, but they are doing some of the most interesting stuff out there in this regards. On the other hand you’ve got Razorfish, CP+B and AKQA proving me wrong.

Any ideas?

Next,

Presentations

Visit on Slideshare.