With so many options, how do you decide?

The speed of technological developments introduces new devices into the market very frequently. While this can be exciting, new capabilities bring new ways to interact with the user, which can make it more difficult to target all the variations. No two projects are ever the same so it often boils down to which options are right for the current needs.

With a recent project here at Teehan+Lax, we decided to start the discussion using a simple visualization and listed different options to examine the pros and cons for each alternative. It was helpful to see how different selections could target the same devices to decide which option or combination of options would work better for the specific project.

Mobile vs. Desktop

When designing for multiple screens, determining a starting point is key. From there, the design can be scaled up or down, adapting the design and flow accordingly. For many years, the 960 grid was sufficient for targeting the most common resolution sizes. However, with the exponential increase in the use of the web on mobile devices, is it better to approach a mobile first strategy?

There are vast differences in the amount of space available for mobile browsing versus desktop browsing; starting with mobile first forces you to decide what’s most important and can therefore impact the design and content strategy greatly.

When thinking beyond the desktop, another consideration for mobile should include whether to add enhancements such as touch gestures. Although, if touch navigation is available, there should also be an alternate call to action such as a button or link in the event that the touch actions are not immediately discoverable by all users. For example, Twitter’s mobile site for the iPad uses a two-column layout that gives the option of swiping the second column to the left to close it; alternatively you can use the back button.

Responsive Web Design vs. Mobile Web Site

With the introduction of Ethan Marcotte’s responsive web design approach, there’s been a flurry of excitement around the idea that one website could target multiple screens. Fluid websites are nothing new but with the introduction of CSS3 media queries, one site can now adapt gracefully between different resolution sizes and respond accordingly to the context being viewed by the user. Fluid grid designs also allow for a consistent multi-screen experience while maintaining one codebase.

While responsive web design is a great alternative to creating a separate desktop and mobile site, it’s not simply about changing fonts and images to fit smaller or larger screens. This concept requires collaboration between designers and developers to determine how to redistribute the elements. Content strategy is also important to determine how content is shifted or even removed based on how each device is used. Even for a single website, upon the initial creation, three to five mockups will be needed to plan the layout for all the different target resolutions. Also, some additional work is required to ensure that older browsers that don’t support CSS3 will degrade gracefully.

A good resource to see responsive web design in action is http://mediaqueri.es.

The main drawback for creating a separate desktop and mobile site would be the need to maintain two sites’ content and codebase. However, this may still be the best option for content heavy sites that require more simplicity or a layout for mobile users that goes beyond shifting and scaling content. Flickr is a great example of how the desktop site includes the whole kitchen sink while the mobile site simplifies the homepage to a basic search and login, while adding additional content in a tabbed structure. Responsive web techniques wouldn’t be the right approach for developing a desktop and mobile design that’s so distinct such as this.

Web app vs. native apps

If you decide to go with a separate desktop and mobile site, there is yet another option to consider: Native apps or web apps?

Native apps are specific to the device and can access the phone’s resources such as the address book, geolocation, and camera. It also doesn’t need to be connected to the internet, although some features may require a connection. Also, it can gain visibility and be monetized through the phone’s marketplace. However, native apps are built in the specific programming language of the device (Objective-C for iPhones, Java for Android for example), which can make it expensive and time consuming to maintain and develop different apps for various devices in a variety of languages. Native apps also require third party approval by the phone’s store, and can be a long process and in some cases, the app does not get approved.

Web apps run in the phone’s browser under a subdomain, usually m.domain.com or mobile.domain.com. It’s built using standard HTML, CSS and JavaScript so developers can use their existing skills to build the site. Because of this, it’s accessible across devices and doesn’t require any downloads or updates which can result in a wider audience reach. However, the phone’s resources cannot be accessed through a web app and requires connection to the internet.

A third option is to use a combination of the two, a hybrid mobile app. A hybrid app is native, and must be downloaded from an app store or marketplace and runs from the device. However, the application code can be written with HTML, CSS and JavaScript and embedded. Frameworks like PhoneGap can be used to tap into the features accessible in a native app. This option can help bridge the gap between native and web apps.

So what’s the verdict?

Going through so many options may feel overwhelming and guess what? There are no right or wrong answers. There are those who would argue that some techniques are better than others but it really boils down to target audience, target device usage, resources, time and budget. Whatever the final strategy may be, one cannot assume that a multi-screen approach is a thing of the future. It is here, now.

Creating personas is something that I find interesting and rewarding — combining third party research and data with primary interview subjects and intuition is a delicate balance. On one hand, you want your personas’ value to be obvious and grounded in fact. On the other hand, you want to create a compelling narrative that doesn’t slip into stereotype and that is nuanced enough to be real.

But something tricky happens when you try to conceive of multiple personas interacting with the same interface on their respective journeys. Meeting needs and anticipating behaviour in triplicate can become a juggling act and designing an emotional interface can be even more difficult. How do you separate who you’re communicating with and when?

What is umwelt?

I stumbled across the concept of umwelt while reading on my holiday. Isn’t that always the way? You’re trying to escape into a book that has absolutely nothing to do with your daily life and instead you accidentally find a new way to frame a difficult task you’ve left behind. In my case, it was while reading John Vaillant’s book, The Tiger: A True Story of Vengeance and Survival that I first read about a century-old theory developed by Estonian physiologist Jakob von Uexküll.

Von Uexküll uses the German word umwelt to describe the unique perceptual world of different living beings. Vaillant borrows the concept to examine how tigers and humans interact in some of Eastern Russia’s most remote communities. Both the tiger and the human occupy the same umgebung, or objective world. But inside of that physical space, the two species notice and pay attention to different things or signs that are vital to their survival. Their subjective realities are completely different and as such, they may respond to the same stimuli differently. What is important or significant to the tiger may not even be perceptible to the human.

There is a long, established history between the two species and rules for interacting with each other and respecting each other’s needs and power. Vaillant’s book looks at what happens when that understanding disappears between them. But I digress.

What does this have to do with personas and emotional interface design?

As soon as I read about the idea I thought about how I might apply it to the project I was working on – could it apply somehow to how we use personas?

Maybe.

I started by thinking about how different personas might perceive the same place, or umgebung in the context of a digital environment.

One person might scan a page to find the Store Locator or a phone number. Another person might be in the same space to check in with their community to see what they think about a new product. The functionality available to each user is the same, but what they sense, need and anticipate is what makes them different.

I can imagine, once defined, trying to map the umwelts of different personas to specific pages or use cases. Maybe by creating screen-specific heat maps that correspond to different personas’ awareness levels, needs and emotional resonance, we can further avoid designing all things for all people. Instead, we can use the umwelt concept to examine the primary needs of each persona in specific states and focus on those.

For interface designers, this kind of metaphor might be too vague to be useful. I’m not suggesting that I’ve discovered something revolutionary or that it’s fully fleshed out as a tool. It’s just that, particularly for someone like myself, in a strategic role without a lot of boxes and arrows – I like the concept as a lens. Who are these people in relation to the interface? Where do they overlap? How do they intersect? Can we meet the needs and emotional expectations of some of these people in the same way?

The difficulty still remains defining the right personas and doing so in a valid and believable way. Because really, how do you begin to understand someone else’s umwelt, especially if it is significantly different than your own?

That, as they say, is another story.

Last week Forrester released a report advising most marketers wait to use location-based social networks (LBSN) as only 4% of the US population is currently using platforms such as Foursquare (the current market leader), and that the networks skew heavily male. They advise that brands that target young males experiment with the services and other brands adopt a “wait and see” approach.

I couldn’t disagree more. Here are my 5 reasons why it’s smart to start experimenting now.

1. First Movers.

There’s something to be said for getting a head start on your competition in the digital space. Brands like Starbucks, Dell, Pepsi, and Nike have all taken advantage of the emerging channels and reaped the rewards of building a strong early foundation with consumers.

While you should not rush into a new tool without understanding your strategic goals and how it integrates with your business objectives, experimenting with emerging technologies that are opt-in and potentially have a direct customer impact is smart.

When Facebook opened their gates to the general population in 2006 they had a small user base of university students. Four years later they are a behemoth. Twitter adoption rates have been increasing exponentially year over year since their launch in 2007 and the tool is now considered a “must use” for social business. Considering Foursquare launched about a year ago, can we expect to see the same type of growth curve as the early adopters begin to influence the early majority? (see “Crossing the Chasm” adoption curve)

2. Google. Facebook. Oh My.

Location-based services are not limited to the current apps we have been hearing about. Facebook has expressed they will add a location-based offering soon, Twitter has added “Tweet with your location” to their service, and the biggest news is that Google is adding a Places API to their eco-system, as well as adding LB data extensions to their mobile advertising product.

LBSN will become mainstream sooner rather than later, and it will be the big players, not the niche networks that will drive the adoption. Testing and learning now, before it becomes ubiquitous should be something on every marketers radar.

3. Data and utility.

There is an enormous amount of insightful and actionable data that can be gleaned about your customers and prospects from mobile & LBSNs. Eventually this data could be used to inform inventory control, staffing levels, consumer tastes and trends, etc. The data can also be used in loyalty programs, to identify influencers, test new products, and as real-time service focus groups.

Companies already testing the waters include:

Nike with True City; Starbucks with their Foursquare offers; The Pepsi mobile branded app; and the City of Chicago with their Tourism campaign.

4. Sales, Coupons, Offers, and more.

Part of the Forrester analysis identified that mobile couponing is widely successful with the users currently using the services, which is interesting as the base is primarily young males, not the average coupon-consuming demographic. Gone are the days of clipping coupons in the Sunday paper, now you can serve relevant offers and drive foot traffic and purchase directly to a mobile device. These offers are opt-in, and contextually relevant, not SMS spam. Testing offers, tips, and messaging via mobile should be on every retailers plan for the next year.

Of course one size doesn’t fit all and ensuring that your product or service fits within the make-up of the demographic, depending on service (existing or branded), is a must.

5. Mobile usage.

Of course mobile, and specifically smartphone, usage is soaring year over year. Ignoring mobile at this point is like ignoring the Internet in 2002 because broadband wasn’t prevalent yet.

Bottom line for marketers:

Experiment. See what fits, what your customers are looking for, and where you can add value. Don’t wait until it becomes mainstream, because that will be sooner than you think and you’ll be playing catch-up.

photo credit: john weiss via Flickr

It all started with the insight and a deep understanding of the market and the consumer.

The objective, as Leigh rightly points out, was to re-position and re-invigorate the brand.  To do this the team needed to understand the competitive landscape, the perspective consumers had of the brand, and the territory they had to play in. The market was saturated with female unfriendly AXE advertising, and as women are the primary consumers for male scent gifts, turning that into an advantage would have been mandatory for Old Spice.

With that as the starting point the Old Spice team (with a receptive client) decided to do the obvious: appeal to women without alienating men.

Old Spice cast the perfect actor for the new positioning. A former NFL player, a nice guy, and someone who wasn’t so perfect that men would feel threatened. Genius casting. Based on, I imagine, a perfect casting brief.

The next step was to create a seriously funny commercial that turned all the cliche’s of advertising and film on their heads. “Look at your man, now back at me”. “It’s now diamonds”. “I’m on a horse”. They made a commercial that was frankly better than 90% of the TV shows it appeared alongside. I first heard of it because my partner was watching TV and told me I had to see it. So what did I do? I went to YouTube and there it was. Word of mouth at it’s finest, but it would have been dead in the water if the team hadn’t thought to seed it online first.

They let that roll and roll it did. Everyone who saw the commercial started sharing it, and a character was born.

Now what to do with the follow up? The character was a success both online and offline and while they could continue to let it ride as a TV spot, the proof was there that they could take advantage of how much the spot resonated with the folks online.

The plan was to create a new TV spot, let that simmer for a bit and then pounce. The social media marketers did their homework and decided what the right outlets were to start spreading the character. The fact they took on 4Chan and won speaks volumes about how integrated and on the ball they were. While everyone talks about how they took over Twitter in a day, they really started seeding the campaign before that. They laid the groundwork. And it paid off. Big time.

It came on my radar with @jakrose tweeting that he’d received a video reply early Tuesday morning. “Fry it up and eat it down JakRose. Fry it up and eat it down.” The network effect took over and for the next two days it was all I cared about that was happening online. The social team did a brilliant job monitoring responses and working with the creatives to write compelling copy. They didn’t just target celebrities and “influencers” but responded to comments, Diggs, tweets and blog posts that they felt fit with the character as a whole. They were obviously fully immersed in the language and cadence of the social web because their video responses contained references only a geek would love (or get). They respected all the unwritten rules of the culture and tailored their responses to match the brand, and the mediums they were using.

They embraced the mash-ups and promoted them. They let the community roll with it. They poked fun at themselves (Old Spice responding to @isiahmustafa) And they set a time limit. Any longer than 2 days and it would have become tired. Any shorter and it would have been disappointing. The mash-ups continue to roll in, with the most recent being Mel Gibson calling the Old Spice Guy.

It was brilliance that came from the initial insights and work they did a couple of years ago. And deep understanding of how the social web works.

The challenge will be what they do next and if it moves the needle at the top of the purchase funnel (awareness & consideration). But I have faith, and am looking forward to every moment of it!

[Update August 13, 2010] W+K just released their case-study of the campaign: Old Spice is now the #1 brand of body wash for men, with sales increasing 107% in the last month alone.