The future of customer interactions is yesterday

One of the interesting aspects of the rise in mobile devices is how these are reinventing established ways of doing things.

Things that we've been used to for decades have suddenly been made accessible and interactive by being combined with mobile devices like a smartphone.

Take the payment cheques for example.

This was a technology waiting to die. The thought of filling out a piece of paper to make a payment to someone else that then took days to transfer between accounts was an idea rooted in the last century. We're much cleverer now - allowing payments via a tweet or a simple bump of the phones. One of the most popular innovations however is remote deposit of cheques whereby customers can pay in a cheque simply by taking a picture of it. Banks such as US Bank, Chase and USAA have introduced it, with USAA originally pioneering this back in 2009 and now introducing the service to the iPad2. Having processed nearly $4bn transactions in just 2 years, this reinvention of an old technology has proved a hit with customers.

Taking this one step further, start-up Card.io have introduced a solution which allows a customer to make a payment by simply taking a photo of their payment card.

Another innovative use of the smartphone was demonstrated by Tesco in Korea when they transformed outdoor media from being passive to interactive. Recognising that people didn't always have time to visit a store, but had to make time to stand, waiting for a train, they decided to bring the store to them. Using outdoor media within the station platforms that mirrored store shelves, customers were able to add goods to their virtual basket by taking a snap-shot of items they wanted. These were then delivered that day so that orders made on the way home could be enjoyed that evening. With sales reportedly increasing by 130% and registered users up 76%, this cross-over from old school media to new media struck the right note with customers.

This can also be applied to loyalty interactions between customers and a brand.

Startup Punchd is looking to change how traditional paper-based punch card promotions work. Moving the card to the smart-phone and replacing the punch with a QR code - and in the process they are revitalising punch card loyalty programmes. Recently purchased by Google, this start-up is offering retailers a cost effective (free) solution for tracking and rewarding customer frequency. Better still, they are then utilising this data to provide retailers with reporting and the opportunity to target communications, something the paper based solution alone could never provide.

Another start-up has done the opposite of Punchd and used a paper based solution to create a cutting edge loyalty programme. Blitzly uses paper cards with unique codes on them to let retailers reward customer purchases. Aiming to create loyalty for smaller retailers who don't have the POS infrastructure in place, the Blitzly solution is both simple and elegant. Each retailer is given a set of cards which are uniquely linked to them, this then allows Blitzly to track customers by retailer, providing reporting and insight for the business and ensuring that only points earned at that retailer can be spent there.

It's not just silicon valley start-ups however they are using the mobile phone to augment traditional customer interactions.

Within the Nectar programme for example, the standard paper coupon has been moved onto the smartphone. This not only allows customers to see all of their coupons in one place but also provides a means of having more up to date coupons based on current behaviours. The usage of coupons is further simplified by not requiring the customer to present them at the time of purchase and instead, simply opting in when they see it.

Sears are currently testing the integration of QR codes with traditional catalogues to let customers get more information such as product videos. This combination of offline media with online content is something loyalty programme catalogues could also utilise.

Although some solutions such as QR codes or Punchd need an app installed which typically isn't there by default, this doesn't deter many customers. In a campaign run by Australian product coupon specialist Letterbox Deals, they reportedly saw 25% of customers using a QR code to submit their entry for a deal - for a campaign that went to 1.3m Sydney households. Even more interesting, 60% of customers who entered via the QR code downloaded a QR reader for the first time.

Sometimes using offline solutions, whether it's printed catalogues, unique printed codes or paper punchcards can be the most effective choice to reach customers. However, combining these with online technologies such as smart-phone/tablet technologies can bring a different angle, increase speed of response and allow ongoing tracking of those interactions.

Article first published as The future of customer interactions is yesterday on Technorati.

Flipboard - Reinventing the advertorial

Imagine a magazine or newspaper which has articles you're really interested in. Whether it's the latest industry news - in your industry - or the latest news from your friends and family. Combine this with the best media content you like - don't want sport, remove it. Now make this near real-time, in a glossy, tactile, user friendly format.

This is Flipboard. The much hyped - and in my opinion deserving - new application for the iPad.

Building articles based on your social network content including Twitter and facebook, Flipboard presents a highly personalised and relevant experience. With the content you read being based on your network, it means that those who's opinions you trust, value or enjoy are literally building and collating the content for you.

More importantly though it provides a whole new way of interacting with social media. Using Flipboard makes traditional Twitter streams look more akin to reading news on Ceefax.

It obviously doesn't replace Twitter for two way interaction or posting of thoughts, but does provide a fantastic way to consume the information that flows by.

In a recent article Flipboard co-founder Evan Doll said:-

"With the information overload, people are doing more sharing and it is more difficult for the signal to get through the noise"

Although it is currently free and revenue streams are yet to be realised, it is clear that this will be revenue generating. CEO and co-founder Mike McCue says:-

"We think we can bring a totally new form of advertising to the table that will allow publishers to monetize their content by a factor of ten from what they’re currently doing with banner ads".

However, for brands there would appear to be two opportunities. The first is to use standard advertising, much as they would do within traditional media - although given McCue's comments I'd expect this to be a lot more intelligent and relevant.

The second though is really about leveraging the power of social media.

If you create content and opportunities which get people talking about your brand, linking to your brand and sharing your brand within their social networks this will translate into articles in Flipboard.

Essentially a modern day advertorial - except without the cost and with more credibility.

With server capacity reportedly reached within 20 minutes of launch, over 130 media companies contacting them within 4 days and riding on the back of the iPad which is breaking all sales records, it's clear that Flipboard is both the one to watch and the one to get watched by.

Is Google about to pull a Kansas City Shuffle on Murdoch?

Do we purchase from a brand because they have the products we want or do we buy the products because we frequent the brand?

When surveyed, the number one reason for using many brands centres around rational reasons such as convenience - typically location in the case of a retailer and price.  However, if all brands are in the same location and stock the same kinds of product at the same prices, then what drives loyalty between one brand or another?

Well this is probably a question many TV broadcasters have asked themselves.

With television, the viewer essentially has one location in which to consume many different brands - whether thats ITV, BBC, E4, etc.  Each brand fighting for consumer loyalty by providing relevant content for their target audience.

There is really no reason to be loyal to a given TV channel when you can simply change over at the click of a button - but with an increasing number of channels, many viewers will have a small number that they "scan" when looking for content, knowing that these channels typically have something of interest to offer.

Writing in American Demographics back in 1998, Catherine McGrath pointed out that:-

Fifty years ago, households devoted nearly 12 hours a week to each channel viewed. Today, households spend a mere 4 hours a week per channel.

Time has moved on however and now it's not just more TV channels competing for attention, but also other media via the internet.  Recent Nielsen research showed that an increasing number of people are using the internet at the same time as watching TV, reporting:-

Simultaneous use of the Internet while watching TV reached three and a half hours a month, up 35% from the previous year. Nearly 60% of TV viewers now use the Internet once a month while also watching TV

But ultimately, what is the purpose of a modern TV channel?

Outside of any regulatory requirements in terms of programming, is it simply a way of aggregating content that has some link - whether this is specific like Travel, Shopping or Comedy channels or a wider lifestyle segment like Entertainment or Family channels?

If in essence a TV channel is simply a way to monetise content and you provide the right content that attracts viewers then this will be more likely to attract advertisers and with it revenue.

So the better you can make that content fit a target audience, the more likely you are to get long term loyalty or brand preference and more stable viewing figures.  This rationale results in more channels catering to an increasingly targeted and niche audience - all chasing after a share of that ad revenue.

At an estimated $70bn dollars of advertising revenue within the US alone and over 4bn TV viewers worldwide, that's a number worth chasing.

However, if this is the case and a channel is more focused on content aggregation than content creation, then their days may be numbered - there could be a new sheriff in town who's looking to re-write the rules.

With Google's recent announcement of Google TV, the need for a channel to aggregate content, to sign-post it for viewers may disappear.  Google aims to make it as easy to find a programme to watch on TV as it is to find something on the web - using search.

In fact, it will be as easy to find and consume the TV show you want as it currently is to find and consume the news content you want - something which has already been making the headlines, with Rupert Murdoch being very vocal about what he sees as the damage that Google is doing to the printed media industry, saying:-

We are going to stop people like Google from taking stories for nothing.  They take [news content] for nothing. They have got this very clever business model.

That however may be the least of his worries if Google pulls this off - while he's focusing on saving the printed media - and looking left - Google is about to move right and launch an attack on that best loved media channel - and Murdoch stronghold - the TV.

This isn't just a technical innovation like streaming content or the BBC iPlayer - it  could also fundamentally change the relationship between content creators, broadcaster and the viewers.

As Murdoch says, Google has a very clever business model and you can imagine they also have a very clever one behind this innovation.  Famous for being free at the point of consumption, whether its search, mapping or email, they make their money on personalised, targeted advertising - and they'll have their eye on a large slice of that $70bn in ad revenue.

For TV broadcasters to survive they are going to have to do more than just aggregate and sign-post content.  They'll need to start building relationships with consumers.

There are great examples of this already - whether its Film4 who have a strong brand spanning from film production to distribution or Hallmark who have a "loyalty lounge" which provides viewers with access to content, forums and competitions - creating a social channel around a TV channel.

The printed media have only just realised that they need to build stronger relationships with their consumers and brands such as the Telegraph are already experimenting with programmes to do this.  The jury is still out on whether these will work and whether this style of programme is ultimately the right approach.

However, if TV broadcasters don't build relationships now you can bet Google will and while broadcasters are still looking left (or worse simply navel gazing), Google will pull a Kansas City Shuffle and swoop in from the right - swiping a large share of the loot at the same time.