Monthly Archives: May 2011

The Stories WE Tell

Posted by

0

When research folks talk to clients about their findings they, we,  frequently take on the role of omnipotent, unseen author and expert. The text, sound clip, or video narrative is filtered through his or her eyes; eyes that are, if trained properly in the tenets of the anthropological discipline, self-reflexive and committed to the honest and ethical treatment of the information gathered.  And in this lie the subtle politics of power and the subject/researcher relationship.  Our words alone, for right or wrong, frequently lack credibility in the minds of business executives and designers who are intent on validating their work or personal views.  What we have to say can be ignored in the light of “common sense” experience held by the business and design teams.  Conversely, while the statements of participants have credibility, their thoughts are often seen as disjointed, irrelevant, or dismissible as singular anecdotal moments.  By constructing stories, both parties (researcher and participant) gain credibility and influence.  The narrator/editor gains the status of author and guide, moving from being perceived as irrelevant to the business situation to a position of authority.  The participant is given greater significance in that he or she is understood as representational of a wider range of meaning, cultural patterns, and behavior.  The participant or participants used in a final work convey a coherent message that can, when the “story” is told well by the author/editor, be implemented by members of the audience.  Video in particular serves to provide specific direction while enticing the audience to tread into deeper waters, thus sparking greater innovation.

In conducting fieldwork, we as anthropologists are asked to share the concrete experiences of the participants’ environment, shared behavior, language, social relations, etc.  In sharing that rich and complex world, new ideas and deeper understanding emerge on the part of the client.  We as the experts see, hear, write, and film what are the most important aspects of the field experience and distill them into something that can be used by the various members of the business, development, and design teams.  And because video is such a potentially influential tool, showing the drama of daily life, the dramatic and artistic side of the story can create waves in the business community that the traditional, omnipotent style of presentation cannot.  Presentation styles, choices of material and stories, lighting, viewing angles, organization, etc. all work to structure the portrayal of a culture or population in ways particular to the ethnographer or team of ethnographers and in ways the client can relate to.  There is an inherent story-like character to all ethnographic accounts of the field.  This is doubly so when research is presented in the video format because of limitations of the lens and the limited timeframe of most cinematic pieces; the convention of film is to present information to an array of senses in a relatively short amount of time.  This does not imply that the videos we create are fictions or that the goal is simply to dazzle the audience.  It simply means that ignoring the story-like nature of the video results in dry, dull work that does little to impact the attitudes, expectations, and development directions of our clients.

As with the impressionist tale (see VanMaanen  1988), the story is recounted including all the “odds and ends that are associated with remembered events.”  The audience is drawn into the story created both by the author/editor and participant(s).  They hear, feel, see what the researcher experienced – the audience is meant to relive the experience, insofar as that is possible, rather than interpret it.  The problems, issues, and meanings have largely been worked through in the background by the ethnographer and the story being told is meant to draw in the audience and build a collaborative solution to design and business issues.  The emotional impact of seeing and hearing such lush descriptions and events sparks interest, forcing the audience to more openly engage with the researcher, the research, and other members of the development team.

Ultimately, this means that the researcher applies conventions of art as readily as he or she does those of science. Tension must build, foreshadowing must occur, contextual details must be condensed without losing their power, and the story must have a logical flow as with a written piece.  Details and subtleties are set aside or given greater attention in regards to how they impact the audience’s ability to engage with and grasp a topic.  The overarching issues are how well the story hangs together, how easy is it to extract information (or inspire the viewer to read the larger report), and how believable the material is.  The issues by which the final material is judged are derived from cinematic and literary worlds as much as they are from the anthropological discipline.

The power of the emotionally influential, dramatic story in the beginning of the design process can mean the difference between seeing innovation and the dismissal of the research.  The story serves as a launching pad for teams attempting to turn qualitative data into something concrete that can in turn be productized or turned into a viable business model.  Bore them and there is almost no chance of affecting change.  Selective packaging of field data to exemplify generalized constructs is a standard practice, even though the precise empirical situations in which the field data are developed are perhaps far less coherent or obvious than the concepts they serve to illustrate.

Of course, it is certainly possible that less than ideal development and design occur due to mistakes of interpretation, both on the part of the researcher and the audience.  However, businesses are frequently concerned less with perfection than they are with getting a product to market.  If done well, it is unlikely that the story told will result in disastrous business models or product designs.  In the end, the fieldworker must decide whether the risk outweighs the possibility of having the entire piece of research dismissed because he or she failed to engage the audience.  The final decisions as to which stories to tell and how to tell them falls to the ethnographer’s ability to understand the audiences for whom the video will played.

Gavin

If the Technology Fits…

Posted by

0

Retailers and designers need to think of the application and the technology to be incorporated across channels in terms of how it can fundamentally change the retail dynamic.  The application needs to be more than an interesting novelty, it needs to address the unspoken, contextual realities of the people selling products. The application strategy need to be indispensable to store associates. That means thinking about how the tools will be used on the sales floor – will it detract from the interpersonal interaction or add to them; will it make the job of the sales associate more difficult physically as they go about their day with a device in hand; will it be an improvement or a hindrance?

In the rush to add the newest device to the marketing mix we often overstep the cultural and psychological limitations of the people to whom we are selling.  We design with what we think would be useful in mind.  But think for a moment about something like a farmers market or on a national scale, whole foods.  Part of the reason for being in these locations is to escape the overly technologized world in which we live day to day.  The people shopping are looking for a form of escape from mass production, using the setting and the food as a way of connecting with a romanticized sense of the past.  They use the environment as a stage on which to teach their children and their friends about “purity” and “simplicity.”  They use it as a form of self-validation to reaffirm that they are doing their part to be green.  Does a digital display work in this context?  It may, but it has to have more thought than simply adding an application or interactive sign.

The application, the device, the media may be interesting or novel, but will they help customer/shopper interactions? So understanding the culture of shopping and the larger context is the first step in developing a useful set of tools and a real strategy (as opposed to a set of tactics disguised as a strategy). Designing for an environment means thinking about more than designing a solution to a task.

Gavin

Retail Strategy By Any Other Name

Posted by

0

Strategy is a word that gets used freely anymore, but it is rarely employed.  What people are talking about is a series of tactics that are strung together and because the people who own those tactics reports to a single person in an organization, it is called a strategy.  This is particularly true for retailers.  But there are exceptions and they stand out.

Look at Doc Marten’s.  They have a small retail presence, but their stores have become destinations for subcultures, people who were part of a subculture and are now looking for nostalgia, and people aspiring to appear somewhat on the fringe. Their digital presence is designed to push product online and in retailers to whom they sell, of course, but it also provides location-based incentives and the ability to post information about yourself (and your new shoes or boots) to the world.  The point is that they recognize there are a range of customers that buy in a range of venues. People buying for themselves and others.  Rather than addressing them in a way that segments according to channel, they use multiple touch points to drive the experience, enhance the brand and take advantage of a limited brick and mortar footprint.

The point is that the company recognizes that the context in which a person shops shapes the decision of whether or not to buy, be it today, tomorrow or next month.  It isn’t about immediacy and it isn’t about one division within the company. It is about a holistic understanding of both the organization and the customer — it is about the dialog and the partnership of which we are a part.

_g_

Multi-channel marketing and Retail Applications

Posted by

0

The other day I was asked “How can retailers leverage loyal shoppers to increase share of wallet across touch points?”  Beyond getting away from consultant-speak, a few thoughts came to mind.

Specials and promotions delivered across a range of media is probably the most obvious, but I think that at a more subconscious level, this is about moving from loyalty to advocacy.  I might be loyal to a company but that loyalty can be purely transactional.  It’s at the point of devotion that I become an advocate. That doesn’t come from simply providing tangible “stuff.” Everyone is providing obvious incentives. It is about creating a “family” and tools that allow people to engage in the exchange of psychic and social capital.

Take Doc Marten’s.  They have a small retail presence, but their stores have become destinations for subcultures, people who were part of a subculture and are now looking for nostalgia, and people aspiring to appear somewhat on the fringe. Their digital presence is designed to push product online and in retailers to whom they sell, of course, but it also provides location-based incentives and the ability to post information about yourself (and your new shoes or boots) to the world.  The point is that they recognize there are a range of customers that buy in a range of venues. People buying for themselves and others.  Rather than addressing them in a way that segments according to channel, they use multiple touch points to drive the experience, enhance the brand and take advantage of a limited brick and mortar footprint.

Know your customer as something beyond a sale.  Know they contexts that shape their lives and then worry about how the different channels can be used to talk to them.  And to increase sales.

_g_

Tablets and Retail: If You Build It Will They Come?

Posted by

1

Everyone is moving toward incorporating tablets into their larger mobile and digital strategies.  65 percent of Fortune 100 companies plan on it. And whether or not they execute on it in the near-term, the fact that they’re talking about it means something.  But this is a wild new frontier, just as the emergence of the web was a new and wild in the 90s.  Getting the strategy right means digging a little deeper into what you design and why you design it.

First and foremost, it’s about the application and the context in which it will find itself used. Retailers and designers need to think of the application in terms of how it can fundamentally change the retail dynamic.  The application needs to be more than an interesting novelty, it needs to address the unspoken, contextual realities of the people selling products. The application and tablets need to be indispensable to store associates. That means thinking about how the device will be used on the sales floor – will it detract from the interpersonal interaction or add to them; will it make the job of the sales associate more difficult physically as they go about their day with a device in hand; will it be an improvement or a hindrance?

The application and the device may be interesting or novel, but will they help customer/shopper interactions?  The application may help from an operational standpoint, but it may not be something the sales person wants to use. In fact, it may get in the way.  So understanding the culture of shopping and the larger context is the first step in developing a useful tool.

Second, know well before launch how the app and the device will factor into your back-end infrastructure.  How good a job does the provider and/or developer of supporting enterprise efforts? Can the company infrastructure accommodate the new technology and everything it brings with it?  How much will it cost to integrate it with the existing system?

Third and last, decide the platform with more than technology in mind. Think about context.  One strategy is to focus on applications that will run on any tablet through the browser.  Be platform agnostic.  But let’s take a moment to examine the reality of tablet sales.  Apple has an early lead in design, ease of use and developer participation.  It has brand fanaticism and is a focal point of discussion between people, including sales staff and shoppers.  It owns the category, just as Kleenex owns tissue. It certainly wouldn’t be wise to dismiss Google’s open platform model, forget about the brand equity of Motorola, or ignore the weight of Microsoft, but it’s important to think about how the device and platform will factor into brand image and the sales process.

By Gavin

Art and Science

Posted by

0

I recently heard someone talking about the difference between art and science.  While I have no intention of dragging out that tired debate (it’s been done to death), I thought that the lines between the two, based on the description given, were more blurred than this person thought.

  • Science is about fact (until it’s no longer a fact, at which point it is often relegated to humor, unfortunately).
  • Art is about arguing meanings, feelings, and contesting views.
  • Science is about understanding the world, what’s in it, what’s beyond it.
  • Art is about searching within, expanding the world, and determining perceptions.
  • Science is about reason and development.
  • Art is about reason and development.
  • Science is creative.
  • Art is creative.

The debate seems rather pointless.  It isn’t about finding truth, it’s about finding a truth to fit a personal need to make sense of the world.  To validate and justify the self. Perhaps the point.

Taking In the Tao

Posted by

0

Philosophy has a difficult time finding its way into the business skill set.  It is the pursuit of academics and dreamers, not serious-mined business folks. But the truth is we can indeed learn a great deal from picking up the Schopenhauer, the Sutras, the Bible, the Vedas.

As an example, take a moment to reflect on the Taoist approach to living and meaning. Three of the central principles can significantly influence a business and its ability to innovate and grow.

Tranquility

The Taoist teachings emphasized tranquility, and practiced meditation and exercises to obtain the Tao (way). In today’s hectic and stressful business world a tranquil mind is difficult to obtain, but essential to avoid both reactionary practices and burn out. We often work excessively long hours, fixating on a problem to the point that we lack clarity. The end result is stress, disillusionment, bad ideas and a failed business..

Remember, it’s not the quantity of hours you put into a business, it’s the quality of the hours that determine how successful your idea will be.

To achieve a tranquil mind you need to take time to relax, meditate and look at the world from a fresh angle. Innovation comes from the least likely places.

Adaptability

A central tenet of Taoist philosophy is the ability to adapt to any circumstance. The world is increasingly fluid. As we become more connected and conditions change on a minute by minute basis, being rigid in our approach to understanding leads to failure. You need to be able to adapt to changing circumstances or you will not survive.

Be aware of the changes that are going on around you and the world at large. They may be cultural, political, social or economic. This awareness will help you to identify trends that may be critical to your success in business. Be aware of how the information you take in can change your business. This keeps you up to date with current trends and creates an opportunity for you to adapt and think more broadly, creating better solutions and developing genuinely new approaches to addressing the right problems.

Enlightenment

Enlightenment is the spiritual awareness that transcends personal wants and needs. From a business standpoint, it is the awakening of the mind that allows you to keep your product and service in perspective. An enlightened attitude is one where you give without expecting anything in return. It creates an awareness and appreciation in your customer’s mind that you are not just all about making a profit. It develops a business ethic that money can’t buy.

Why I want to slap everyone in design

Posted by

0

I read this following quote today and it got me thinking. There is an obsession with disciplinary ownership that we’re all guilty of, be it ethnographers, designers or CPAs. It’s grounded in arrogance, in part, but it also stems from fear and small-mindedness. And unfortunately, it is a reality we always need to keep in the backs of our minds. It’s all about power:

“Design today has been infiltrated and hijacked by many different disciplines that are not related to the creation of a superior design. They become a curtain to vail and sell an average design to a client who is not versed in the design process. A good design is always led by a design creator who is willing to listen to other inputs and consider their value to the basic concept but who will champion the final result.”

I’d laugh if it weren’t so sad. This is another example of one-size-fits-all thinking. It is binary and rooted in a product development culture that assumes user feedback and user-generated ideas should be either dismissed or taken at face value rather than being tools which can be used to inform us about deeper concepts. Black and white solutions and self-obsessed disciplinary approaches lead to stellar art, but they rarely lead to real innovation – or good design. There are numerous examples of products that failed or were poorly designed because of what users said or because of how information was misinterpreted. There are an equal number of products and campaigns that would show otherwise. Gogurt, Listerine Citrus, the marketing campaign for the Mini Cooper, the MacBook Air as a fashion statement (not just a computing tool), and the list goes on. The idea that user-centered design, or context-centered design means “user-as-leader” is absolutely false.

Unfortunately, too many designers, business “leaders,” account planners, etc. equate ethnography and other observational methods with surface-level statements rather than the depth for which these methods were designed. 

The quote is yet another example of obtuse thinking and an obsessive need to force the world into an either/or pattern of design. It assumes that somehow individual inspiration and informed research methods are at odds. Got a headache, take aspirin. Got a gunshot wound, take aspirin. If the design is bad, say that people “just don’t get it.”  It serves as a reminder that there will always be champions for the same old linear thinking.

_g_