SmartPancakes

The Merits of Pre-discovery.

Many of the most significant discoveries in science happened looking for something else (e.g. penicillin, Coke, Teflon, saccharin, vulcanized rubber). It’s probably safe to say — in these occurrences — the formal discovery process was abandoned and dumb luck was root cause.

No time for happy accidents.

When searching for the best marketing solution there isn’t time to count on dumb luck. We need our innovations to be both groundbreaking and discovered quickly. So why do we always begin the discovery phase hoping for these accidental breakthroughs? Discovery phase in marketing is a loose term these days. Many agencies blend the phase to include everything from research and strategy to creative concepts and design mock-ups. Others consider the design phase alone a discovery process. Some even drop the term completely comfortable with calling it Strategy.

Discovery = Observation + Experimentation.

Consider the real process of discovery — at least scientifically — as the combined effort of observation and experimentation. It’s experiencing what’s out there. Asking lots and lots of questions. Trying out simple ideas. Failing and recognizing failure for what it is and learning from it. Uncovering new patterns. Applying unrestricted thinking. Playing, in a sense, with new possibilities. Keep in mind discovery is NOT application. Loading up a whiteboard with tactical ideas hoping one will jump-out-at-us is not discovery, it’s design. Save your markers for that next step. Additionally, we can’t afford to have:

• Unfocused discovery: spending too much time generating ideas unrelated to our goals
• Narrow discovery: spending too much time on too few ideas
• Blind discovery: spending too much time with an idea someone else has already discovered or implemented

What does our Discovery Phase need to thrive in our fast-paced environment?

We need Better Pre-discovery.

Pre-discovery is deciding HOW we are going to observe and experiment. It’s the framework for Structured Observation and Focused Experimentation. Before we start exploring we must unpack all of our thinking and organize our effort. We must map out the best path to follow so we are able to discover more effortlessly. This suggestion may seem obvious, but so often this step is rushed, skipped or blended in with other phases — teams likely feeling pressured to get to the real work. Agency culture can often dictate this, but it’s really a human need to feel more productive. Consider pre-discovery as the first critical step to ideation that should never be short-changed. Pre-discovery is NOT a “pre-kickoff”. Sometimes disguised as one, it really needs to be more than just a quick meeting of functional leads. Pre-discovery is NOT business strategy — although strategic thinking is helpful in this phase. Strategy is analyzing the competition, identifying the key audience(s), articulating key business insights. Pre-discovery is more internal in nature, it’s identifying the way we want to work and the traps we want to avoid. Pre-discovery is that brief time between formed business insights and finding the best solution. It’s taking a deep breath before a long run.

Getting Started with Pre-discovery.

Some things to consider:

1. Prepare for structured observation. Assemble a list of your best observers — those who are good at cataloging their findings and can also add insight to what they find. Consider grouping what you want to observe (e.g. discovery schemes) and assign each observer to look for different things.
2. Prepare for focused experimentation. Schedule time for and encourage a trial/error period. Everyone on the team should see experimenting as an investment not an expense or liability. Prioritization is key. Create an evaluation process. How will you determine what is worth experimenting on and what should be left alone?
3. Give it an owner. All project phases encourage ownership, without it there is little accountability. Solidify pre-discovery as a real phase by assigning it an owner. Who on your team right now is the best to serve as its leader? Ideally it’s not an observer or an experimenter. Instead, consider someone with talents in planning and prioritization as well as a good grasp of the strategic findings.
4. Give it a deliverable. Produce a document for this phase (not necessarily client-facing). Something to take with you into the discovery phase — a real “treasure map” of sorts to follow. Simple is better, but something that visually organizes the discovery effort, identifies key discovery schemes and the evaluation process.

Discovery is the path taken to unearth a solution — timely breakthroughs only happen when this path has been well defined. Pre-discovery shows us the way.

Game on! Game off! Should you gamify?

Having some mixed feelings toward the whole movement of gamification lately. For those of you not yet hip to the trendy-tech-speak, gamification, is the term given to any non-game effort which applies video game theory and/or game mechanics to its audience motivational efforts. The problem is that the term is an over-simplification of a concept that is relatively meaningless unless adopted properly.

Originally coined back in 2008, it has become even more popular in recent months. Just last September, New York held its first-ever Gamification Summit. The idea started innocently enough, but now it is flagrantly tossed around as a solution for helping any stale online presence.

An easy way out?
Is suggesting gamification really just a quick way of dealing with lackluster audience participation? Just “badgify it” — introduce hurdles to “fun” achievements and people will feel “compelled” to interact with our content, right? Not necessarily. Sure there are nice stats out there suggesting that any form of game play will attract users and drive engagement even if it’s only temporary. But who is really playing? Are they YOUR customers or just social butterflies who can’t help but play any game that flashes across their screen? More likely the latter. How much time and effort do you want to spend accommodating this transient audience?

Does everyone have the same motivation for game play?
It has been suggested that individuals, who find a game interesting, can have very different reasons for playing the game.

“…different people choose to play games for very different reasons, and thus, the same video game may have very different meanings or consequences for different players.” Yee, N. Motivations of Play in Online Games from Journal of CyberPsychology and Behavior.

Games are typically designed to draw in two audiences: achievers and explorers. According to Heeter, C., author of Game Design and the Challenge-Avoiding Impression Manager Player Type,

“Achievers are motivated by extrinsic rewards such as leveling up and earning high scores…[they] learn as much as they can about a game to help them achieve more. If that learning does not connect back to achievement, achievers will lose interest. Explorers are motivated by intrinsic factors such as curiosity, role play, and learning…[they] learn as much as they can about a game because they are curious and like learning.”

According to Nick Yee, achievers are primarily interested in the “achievement components of a game: advancement and competition” where as Explorers are motivated by “the social and immersive components of a game: socializing, relationships, teamwork, discovery, customization, and escapism”. By simply providing badges or awards for simple achievements, we are likely ONLY engaging those in our audience who appreciate games for their extrinsic rewarding opportunities. How do we engage those who are not “challenge-seekers”? Must we in order to be successful?

Additionally, we need to be aware that any disproportionate benefits for achievement can have disastrous effects (i.e., the value of the award does not reflect the effort put towards the achievement). This could be even worse for a brand than simply steering clear of game play altogether. Not only did the customer need to be incentivized to participate with your content, but now they can also attribute it to a poor attempt at motivating them. You’ve just created all the fodder needed for negative social spread: the sharing of a lame social experience.

Building a game can be complex and costly, is it worth the effort?

• Fulfillment
  Fulfillment alone can be a expensive and complicated. How will it work? Are the rewards virtual or material or both? Are new partnerships required? Shipping costs? How long must I wait for my new iPad for being “King Fancy Click”?
• Fraud considerations
  All scenarios of cheating need to be addressed, monitored and prevented.
• Game promotion
  How will people find the game? Are there additional media costs? What will it cost to get people to engage with the game?
• Social network rules
  Are there any social network rules or terms to be aware of? These social rules are always changing, who is watching them for you? Are people on your team watching for social platform changes which could effect the functionality of the game?
• Customer service
  How will the game effect customer service efforts? Are representatives available for game specific questions and concerns?
• Legal
  Are there any legal implications? Can people play outside of the U.S.? Can their rewards be legally fulfilled?
• Data
  Any new data management costs and storage procedures? Who is in charge of the ongoing management of the game data? Will you need to merge game data with other customer data? Real-time? Batch process? Can you purge data easily and timely in case the social network requires it?
• Long-term needs
  How will you continue to “feed” the game to keep it interesting for advanced players? How long do you intend to keep this up? Is there an unspoken promise that the game will go on forever?

Let’s be fair There are situations that may be RIPE for gamification:

• Sales recognition; behavior that is already based on similar real world achievements
• Employee campaigns; an internal corporate initiative could always use some fun, plus it’s non-public facing and usually has an end date

When to consider avoiding gamification shenanigans:

• Little is known about the target audience; no real understanding of what motivates them online
• Looking to convert a specific audience rather than just generate awareness; the game could get in the way of conversion
• The content itself may not be appropriate for game-like mechanisms (e.g. a complex offering, introducing a new product or service)
• Extremely tight budget
• Other business initiatives are already employing game-like tactics;  introducing another game may cause confusion unless there is an clear integration between them (e.g., shared achievements, transferable game currency and data)

Conclusion
One could say that it is not only irresponsible but downright dangerous to casually mention gamification as a solution to a client. The compulsion may be innocent enough at first, but unless it’s rooted in a clear strategy that tracks back to a solid audience insight, it’s best to be tight-lipped about it.

The Dilemma of Providing Choice.

In the coming years technology will continue to bring us closer to complete on-demand consumption. However, it is also apparent that with unlimited options at their disposal, people will begin to suffer from the paralyzing effects of “over-choice”(1). Customers like to be given a choice, but more importantly customers want to be satisfied with the choices they make.

How can choice be more effectively delivered to an already engaged customer? Additionally, when it comes to providing options, how much is too much?

In promotional marketing there is often a limited window of opportunity to deliver choice — as marketers we need not consider that lightly.

Suggested criteria for an effective presentation of CHOICE:

1- Limit Choices The more options that are presented the higher expectations go and this eventually produces less satisfaction. When everything is an option, nothing is good enough — the perfect choice can never be achieved(2). This will lead to procrastination or worse non-committal. It’s best to determine the right amount of options for a given offering.

2- Create Impermanence People are more likely to commit to a choice when there is ability to later change their mind. When choice feels permenant procrastination often occurs to avoid making an unsatisfying choice.

Finding flexibility when interacting with a contactable consumer base can be very effective in gaining continued engagement.

In loyalty marketing, a promotional choice is usually attached to a window of opportunity along with a measured activity (e.g. hotel stay, flight mileage). This audience is already part of a communication cycle and thus can be given the unique opportunity of changing a decision during an ongoing promotion.

3- Determine Optimal Timing Find the best time to present a customer choice. Every active member of a loyalty or promotional program is part of a life cycle. Since behavioral data can be derived from a member’s life cycle or from ongoing activity in other communication cycles, we are able to better define the appropriate time to engage a member in choice. For instance, has a member recently engaged in a similar promotion? Are they new to the program? Are they currently “active”? Have they provided engagement preferences in the past? It may be more optimal to simplify the promotion and remove choice for the time being until they have risen to the level of engagement where choice would be valued.

4- Avoid Additional Complexity When options are introduced in a promotion, the member has already been given something to carefully consider before proceeding. It is important to limit any other forms of complexity during this decision-making stage of engagement. Even limited confusion can start the procrastination effect and lead to eventual abandonment.

5- Suggest a Choice When possible, guide decision-making by providing information that suggests an appropriate pick for a given customer — a “choice helper” of sorts. Since the audience is engaged and active, we can assume — determine for them — some options will be better than others. Keep in mind, the “choice helper” should follow all the same criteria (e.g. limited to 1 or 2 options, timed appropriately, and simple). Netflix does a great job of this within its visual recommendation engine as does Amazon. Often times the “helper” is disguised as a “related item”, “what other customers are buying”, or a recommended product.

Choice is valued among customers and will continue to be, but only when it is delivered in a useful and rewarding way.

References: (1) Toffler Associates. Future States Forum. 40 FOR THE NEXT 40: A SAMPLING OF THE DRIVERS OF CHANGE THAT WILL SHAPE OUR WORLD BETWEEN NOW AND 2050. (2) Schwartz, Barry. The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less. HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. New York, NY. First Edition. 2004b.