“Many Steps” by Takayuki Akachi for Onitsuka Tiger

MANY STEPS from Takayuki Akachi for Onitsuka Tiger.

Possibly our most successful piece of digital marketing ever, if you want to call it that. Relevance in a specific cultural context is a given for our products, and we‘ve now brought this around to the marketing. Less self-involved, more generous, and trying to express our brand’s care for Japan-inspired creativity. Thanks Akachi-san for the great piece of work!

Posted in Showcase | Comments Off on “Many Steps” by Takayuki Akachi for Onitsuka Tiger

Talking about Japan

Talking with Ian and Marxy over at Néojaponisme about the heritage of Onitsuka Tiger, around work they’re doing with us this year. What is the point for a brand like ours to promote a certain idea of Japan? What message are we trying to bring across?

Ultimately, I’d like people to think of deep cultural traits that are bigger than any brand, and that defy a little bit the traditional image of Japan. Everyone curates their own private Japan in their heads, lumping together some subset of geishas and tamagochi and Shinkansen and kamikaze and earthquakes and sushi and the 80s and Hokusai and whale fishing and death by overwork and Hiroshima and in general a sentiment of completion and perfection, but excluding or ignoring the porous quality of Japanese culture and its ability to assimilate ideas and recontextualize them (golf, technology, ivy league fashion, the 50s), its store of less prominent pillars of existence (craftsmanship, seasonal traditions, shogi, deference to a diffuse authority and the power of peer pressure, the 70s) and the thirst for external influences that will be chewed up and integrated. I’d like to nudge the western world’s understanding of Japan, make it a tad more complex and more interesting.

And I feel Onitsuka Tiger was then a spectator as well as a participant, as a brand and as a company. Let’s pursue the same motivation.

Posted in Commentary | Comments Off on Talking about Japan

Real beauty

Today, I was reminded of how much I dislike advertising: having depleted my supply of fancy soap, I’m currently using a bar of Dove I picked up at the supermarket (no choice).

Dove is often talked about with awe or envy in marketing departments, for the bold departure it marks from Unilever’s other statements about beauty, photoshopped into a constant alienation of real people. The colorful back story has family members of senior brand executives enrolled in a boardroom coup, a dramatic climax in the internal battle for the campaign, before it was shown to the public. How daring, how genuine, such amazing trailblazers! Activists at the heart of the machine! And obviously, everybody loves business success.

But for all its high-brow (and well-executed) advertising, Dove is a range of medium-quality industrial detergents: it washes poorly and feels unclean, and makes me smell funny. And this simple fact matters very little in the marketing scheme of things.

Posted in Commentary | Comments Off on Real beauty

Not talking about My ASICS

I posted about the new Onitsuka Tiger web site, but not about the new My ASICS service I’ve been working on, with Mairéad, Loucas, our colleagues at the Institute of Sport Science and particularly Tagawa-san, Tokyo-based web design studio AQ, Tokyo and Hangzhou dev outfit The Plant, and the very fine people at Adaptive Path (and the help of Lisa, Underwired, and In2sports, with language expertise from translations.com and myGengo).

I haven’t, because we’ve been too busy offering user support and launching across Europe (in Dutch, French, Italian, German, and more yet to come!), and I’m not overly fond of boasting before the work has been delivered.

But I gotta say: I’m quite proud of the work we’ve done. Compact (the bulk of the work was done in about 9 months), based on ASICS research (i.e. not outsourced or crowdsourced), faithful to the original idea, and without ugly, glaring, gaping holes (well, okay, we’re missing one tab, but it’s coming next week or soonish).

So: I will probably post more on My ASICS in a while. In the meanwhile, sign up, then go out and run!

Posted in Sites | Comments Off on Not talking about My ASICS

Onitsuka Tiger: now in HTML5!

A couple of weeks ago, we launched a revamp of the Onitsuka Tiger web site:

Built for us by CloudRaker (of Montreal) in HTML5 and powered by The Plant (of Tokyo and Hangzhou) using their new Qor content management system, it’s not a huge departure from the previous site (designed in 2008).

However, there is one huge technical step: where we previously used Flash to give the overall experience a “licked” feeling, we’re maintaining the slick look in HTML5, without the pains about embedding content, URL management, search engine optimization, and the rest of the pains associated with full-page Flash sites.

This is a good opportunity to plug my age-old article on Evolt that explains why well-formed HTML matters. We could of course do more: rich snippets for example, and we broke the half-way decent mobile version we used to have, and we could replace it with a game of media-specific stylesheets rather than with a distinct set of pages…

The other big step is in content. This year, we’re turning the spotlight on creators who are influenced by Japan, to give more depth to Onitsuka Tiger’s message “Made of Japan”. Again, I think there’s much to be done, but I think this is great progress already!

Posted in Sites | Comments Off on Onitsuka Tiger: now in HTML5!

Technology to enhance shoppers’ in-store experience (hint: don’t bother!)

Recent reports of a tie-up between Adidas and Intel to enhance the shopping experience with technology are leaving me cold.

I think this is largely irrelevant, and a waste of money.

The best shopping experiences deal with store setup (merchandizing, architecture, fixtures design, lighting, soundscape, etc.), and with service (knowledgeable and personable staff in particular).

In business terms, this translates in a store’s sales per square meter, and sales per staff.

If the technology doesn’t increase those two metrics, it’s useless. From a brand’s perspective, you can add other metrics (such as future sales, for example to buyers who create an account and can later be touched by further marketing efforts). But retail has specific strengths which should be used by any in-store initiative.

The best retail experiences out there have no technology at all whatsoever (Ikea, Apple, Molton Brown, or fashion boutiques in city centers).

Technology is a glittering lure, tempting and very satisfying in marketing or boardroom presentations, but I’ve yet to see an example that has genuine impact on consumers and actually improves their shopping experience.

I’m a bit of a grumpy old man, but I firmly believe that knowing the right place of technology is very important.

That right place is backstage. A few examples:

  • awesome stock management (I can get what I want from this store, now or tomorrow at the latest)
  • a decent loyalty card system to ensure staff knows relevant information about the most valuable shoppers, enhancing the conversation
  • in-store shopper behavior analysis to optimize merchandizing and store organization
  • order online and pick up in store
  • strong training tools to ensure staff are totally fluent in the features and benefits of each product on offer
  • and obviously on suggesting and preparing the visit before it actually takes place (promotion, information)

All of this requires massive investment in infrastructure as well as people to run it, and that’s where the value is.

But don’t mess with the relationship between the shopper and the products, don’t mediate it with screens and gizmos, you’ll just degrade it. Picking up the product from a shelf and holding it in your hands, talking about it with a sales clerk, actually trying it on, this is the impregnable pinnacle of the shopping experience, an intense, personal and meaningful moment, and we are gravely mistaken if we think we can enhance it with consumer-facing information technology, which is a substitute.

Posted in Commentary | Comments Off on Technology to enhance shoppers’ in-store experience (hint: don’t bother!)

Holiday gifts for user experience amateurs

A colleague asked me for some reading tips, here are a few books I recommend for people who have an interest in user experience. Nothing bleeding-edge, but solid references with plenty of relevance for today’s UX work.

A good novel would help, too. I recommend Marguerite Duras’s The Ravishing of Lol Stein, Philip K Dick’s The Man in the High Castle, Natsume Soseki’s I am a Cat, and John Le Carré’s Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

A merry holiday, y’all!

Posted in Miscellaneous | Comments Off on Holiday gifts for user experience amateurs

Like it’s 1999: the rise of mobile marketing

A few days ago, Harald Neidhardt of MLOVE invited me to speak at the Sportswear International E-Fashion summit, in the mobile breakout session. The topic of my presentation was “The Authentic and the Effective”, and aimed at covering brand heritage in the age of mobile marketing. (This blog post is loosely based on my presentation.)

Harald’s passion is contagious: he’s obsessed with mobile devices and the changes they are bringing to society. He made the point that 2010 (for mobile) has a whiff of 1999 (for the web): we’re not there at all, but this side of the information and media industries is attracting colossal amounts of energy, talent and capital. The result is an amazingly vivid ecosystem, much of which is represented at MLOVE.

All attendants of the session believed in the tremendous marketing potential of these awesome little devices connected to data and voice networks. Not “phones”, as Jerome Nadel of Sagem Wireless rightfully pointed out, but mobile devices, in the broadest sense of the word.

They’re everywhere, and their hardware has become increasingly attractive. My own phone has a truly stunning screen, which makes it a daily pleasure to look at, and enhances my ability to consume information. It gives me access to plenty of content, in just a few taps.

Between the screen and the network, mobile devices are offering capabilities that we have just barely begun to explore.

Competition

However, the competition around this screen is stiff. When handled at a reasonable distance of the user’s face, the device’s screen shares attention with a hugely demanding environment. It’s only just a few degrees of my field of vision, the rest being crowded with events of a varying degree of intensity. The visual competition is intense.

But there’s also an interesting conversation you were just having with a neighbor, a budget meeting coming up that you really ought to prepare for, that’s mental competition. Mobile devices don’t monopolize your attention, because they’re visually underwhelming, and therefore are particularly prone to being one of many tasks being carried out in parallel — more so than computer use or a face-to-face conversation.

Augmented reality

Amidst this challenging environment, we’re proposing to add further layers of information: “augmented reality” is a tremendous buzz word that people around marketing departments worldwide are toying with. Implementation is underwhelming, and I have yet to come across a genuinely useful case, but it’s undoubtedly hot.

We’re going to solve all the technical problems and there will be, someday soon (any day now right?!), a way for users to whip out our device, and get an extra layer of information about our immediate environment: people, places, things.

But if we proceed along the lines of some current experiments, we will end up with a remarkably complex system, crowded with advertising, that expect us to behave awkwardly, and deliver questionable information, painstakingly reformatted and perpetually out of date.

Remember Web TV?

A major engineering project in the 90s and early 2000s, into which electronics manufacturers poured millions. It didn’t evaporate. Actually, it came to fruition: Web TV is now a reality.

It’s only isn’t the reality we were envisioning, by which the whole park of TVs would have to be upgraded to blend the two experiences into one screen. What happened instead is that media properties now know how to build companion content online that enhances and extends a TV viewer’s experience, that encourages participation, that works on different timelines than TV does, that recognize that people do stuff on their own terms, rarely on yours.

But the Web TV experiments were part and parcel of developing this understanding of cross-channel involvement.

The MLOVE attendees this suumer heard from Beverly Jackson how the Grammy awards build up dedicated groups of people sharing their enjoyment of a certain artist. Bev’s work is about making efficient and human use of an array of unconnected pieces of infrastructure.

Mobile devices aren’t immersive

We need to recognize that mobile devices are not easily immersive. Nagging is their strongest trait. And because they are always on, and don’t really know what the user is doing at any given time, they can be quite invasive. On the balance, mobile devices actually offer a weak experience.

Weak is a characteristic, not a value judgement, and can be positive. Mobile experience is not overwhelming, and lends itself to “snacking” or casual involvement.

A mobile device poorly integrated as a channel for marketing messages can damage the brand it is supposed to serve. For example, a mobile experience designed without taking into account the reality of the network speed will irritate and taint the brand with negative emotions.

But network availability, speed and latency, coverage, costs to the users, battery life, accuracy of geolocalization — those are all complicated infrastructural problems that are being tackled. They are huge roadblocks, but we’ve seen consistent and dramatic improvements over the past 10 years, and I trust we’ll see solutions progressively being offered.

Qualities

But what we will do with this infrastructure, what will it allow us to do? The obvious answer is: useful. Make actually helpful tools, and enable users to achieve tasks they want to perform. Low-tech applications such as SMS are quite relevant to enable this.

But the most important quality of mobile devices is the intimate experience afforded to the user. Touch interfaces have profoundly changed the nature of the interaction with mobile devices:

  • the basic gesture is a caress, performed by the fingertips, rather than the more mechanical keystroke, encouraging a gentler, less functional interaction
  • the device’s response is taking place in the same location as the finger’s touch, strongly reinforcing the anthropomorphism and emotional involvement
  • direct manipulation of information and features, rather than symbolic access with the mouse or conceptual devices such as scroll bars, reduces the computer’s presence

For me, this intimate character of mobile devices is extremely powerful. No matter how crude the underlying technology, the interaction is still taking place at your fingertips, a delicate, sensitive, subtle part of the body. Increasingly literal interfaces further reinforce the intimacy.

Emotions

Strong emotions can be conveyed at the fingertips, and this really was the point of my presentation: weak yet intimate, mobile devices are conducive to emotion, and therefore offer a strong potential to carry brand messages, which need emotion to have any impact on people.

This will certainly prove to be a challenge, because so far, brands have usually just turned up the volume, to try and cope with an increasingly noisy environment. Buildings wrapped in advertising, blanketing of all media channels, “below-the-line” advertising that ensures messages are seen and heard outside of the usual avenues of brand communication, recruitment and grooming of celebrities and widespread sponsoring of causes and events, user profiling and ad targeting — nothing is too expensive to reach consumers.

Mobile is definitely a new channel, something brands and advertisers aren’t very good at yet. I contend that brand truth, the genuine behavior of a group of people who are brought together by a brand, will be the factor that unlocks the power of mobile devices.

Posted in Commentary | Comments Off on Like it’s 1999: the rise of mobile marketing

Quality drop on the iPhone

I’m in iPhone-analysis mode, will get this out of my system! Since the introduction of the spellchecker, I’ve experienced a significant drop in speed and accuracy of typing.

My spelling is usually pretty good, and the initial iPhone models’ input processing was focused on fixing “fat fingers”, i.e. the wrong key pressed, and it felt a little bit like magic. I’d just type away and I’d get what I meant appearing on the screen.

But with the spell checker, my input gets changed to words that aren’t near what I mean, usually because my incorrect input is closer to another poorly-spelled word than to the poorly-keyed word I meant. Perhaps they’ve identified that the majority of users would be better served — but it definitely degraded the experience for me. Switching spellcheck off has helped, but it kind of goes against their interface principle of getting the defaults right.

Posted in Miscellaneous | Comments Off on Quality drop on the iPhone

iOS: de-abstracting the interface

Apple’s choice to remove the concept of files from the interface of the iDevices strikes me as a huge step. For a large number of people, the file (along with the folder, or “directory” for the old-fashioned people out there) has become an intuitive tool to relate to the computer.

However, it is a concept, and is no more real than the concept of “record” (some database systems), the “social graph” (Facebook), “cards” (HyperCard), or “pages” (the web). These are all just metaphors that convey the nature of arbitrary groupings of data and help users make sense of features that are offered.

The concept of “files” has spawned a number of related terms, such as “open” and “close” (which rely on the metaphor), and have been given additional support, such as the icon and the desktop on which icons can be arranged. “Drag and drop” is understood in many circumstances, but it’s particularly intuitive in the context of files.

All this galaxy of interface syntax is removed from iDevices: there is no “file browser” on the iPad. Some individual applications (Mail.app for attachments, DropBox or Docs To Go for example) explicitly mention of files, but they’re not available system-wide and are clearly not favored by iOS.

Applications are now the focus of the interface, and each application is responsible for offering the appropriate metaphor to approach the information it contains. Files are still part of the system (jailbreak your iPhone, and you’ll have a command line, complete with files and folders), but they are abstracted.

The antiquated “save” button

In the best applications, persistence is often achieved without mentioning it at all. In fact, the “save” button is really antiquated: it refers to the transfer of data held in working memory onto permanent storage, and dates back to the era when permanent storage was so slow there was a significant cost in writing.

Now, with the speed of hard disks or solid-state drives, as well as with multi-threading which enables an application to save while the data is also being manipulated, this concept could simply disappear, and has from many apps.

It’s a little ironic: compared to DOS and Windows, the Mac has been historically “document-focused”, with the right application launching to open the requested file, rather than launching an application and opening a file from within it. And now iOS devices are going the other way.

Applications are actually working with files (or database records, or working memory, or whatever they want), but data manipulation and persistence is achieved without making that underlying mechanism explicit to the user.

On the whole, this entire movement makes use of new technical possibilities to simplify the users’ life and their understanding of the function of the device. The interfaces can claim to be more “natural”: they have fewer and fewer quirks induced by technical conditions, and therefore no longer need metaphors to give average users purchase on those quirks.

While the technology keeps adding layers that abstract the inner working of the technical systems, the interfaces become more and more literal, and strip away the symbolism previously to convey content and functionality.

I think this is kind of a big deal.

Posted in Commentary | Comments Off on iOS: de-abstracting the interface