Archive for February, 2008

h1

Mobile Engagement

26 February, 2008

Just done a presentation on Mobile Engagement at the Laboratory for Advanced Media Production (LAMP), which is a cross-media lab project from the Australian Film Television and Radio School (AFTRS). I’ve done a few LAMP projects now – they are immersive residentials where we spend a week expanding a variety of projects (this week, seven), making them consider immersion, Second Life, narrative, social networks, interactive TV, engagement and, of course, mobile.

I usually talk about Social Networking (and touch on mobile and Gen C) but this week Laurel Papworth is the social networking guru, so I’ve concentrated on mobile and some Gen C stuff. As a result, I’ve redone my presentation on Mobile Engagement for a (even if I say so) pretty good 30 min preso that really covers my thoughts in this area.

 Of course, I lean all over the ‘radio with picture’ frustration with mobile internet, and start to think about what the next steps might be. Here is the slide that I showed for this:

Mobile Engagement

Following on from this (and the whole presentation can be yours if you ask), I’ve come across a whole bunch of blogs that talk about mobile social networks (one dedicated to that elite community of iPhone owners – Fon11), the use of bluetooth (oh, if only the handset manufacturers would implement it fully within the USERS control!!) and, this morning, one on how the mobile application is now dead(long live the mobile internet).

I do believe in the mobile internet – I just don’t think it is everything. I also continue to believe in mobile applications, but not the humongous, complex ones. If we are going to engage with consumers – we’re going to do it through good experiences, not just clever devices. So anything that helps make a better experience (that personal aesthetic) has got to be part of the equation.

Advertisements
h1

Enterprise 2.0 forum (and the mobile)

20 February, 2008

The Exec Forum was a great day, full of fascinating (and fascinated) people and, as usual, a huge amount jam-packed into a short time.  For more info, see here: http://www.futureexploration.net/e2ef/blog/

There’s been enough comment on what happened on the day, but there are clearly a lot of conversations that are going to continue. Some of them are:

  • * Can organisations take advantage of existing social network applications? (eg Facebook)
  • * Should we allow open access to these at work (are they legitimate tools, social or otherwise)?
  • * Is Gen C really that different? Can their energy be harnessed the way we want?
  • * (and if so, does technology really have a role to play in this?)
  • * Is Enterprise 2.0 for everyone? And what makes it meaningful for you?
  • * Will mobile really take off as a enterprise device (other than communications) and will this be in “2.0”

I don’t know the answers to these, but asking the questions is always useful. I see “new media” companies which are really “old media through a different interface” (thinks: TV == ‘radio with picture’). Now we hear people talk about the mobile internet and I think (you all know this) “radio with pictures”.

In Australia, we are a PC-centric country – unlike most of Asia which is more mobile-centric. This means that our embracing of technology, rich experience, interaction – is almost always going to be through a PC (and even my iPhone was a pain to blog on yesterday).

To me, Web 2.0 was allowing the user to engage in a conversation with other users. Enterprise 2.0 needs to be about the users engaging in a conversation with their suppliers, brand, employers or dealers.

And next week, we’ll start on Web 3.0 (which I think is about engaging in a conversation with the content)….

But first, the conversations between you and me about all this. When’s the next one?

h1

There is a place for everything (even advertising…)

13 February, 2008
I got send this link earlier today http://bokardo.com/archives/why-social-ads-dont-work/ with the comment “i can’t say I completely agree. It takes a very one dimensional (i.e. transactional) view of online advertising and largely ignores the concepts of campaigns and brand-building.”This started a dialogue it is worth repeating here. I think it is true that we search because we are looking for something and therefore, as the offer may well be for that specific thing that you are looking for, advertising works .

In the same vein, when you are doing something (like socialising, reading news, looking at pictures etc), you are not in acquisition mode (whether for product, service, information or experience) as you are currently having the experience you want. So these ads are less like to perform for us.

The issue for social networks, as well as for many destination sites – both online and mobile, is that while ‘branding’ is fine as a concept (campaigns, recognition, placement, exposure etc) – with the rise in performance based advertising (CPC or CPA as opposed to straight CPM) – there is a difference in ‘performance’.

So, in discussing whether ads work or not, we ned to konw aht we mean by work. If we are to be rewarded on performance and not brand-awareness or presence, then ads provided as part of search search – when you are actively seeking something – will always perform better.

I just wonder if they do as much good for your brand.