Squared Online Module 2 ‘Think Commercial’ Best Bits
With Module 3 - ‘Think Like a Brand’ - of Squared Online under way, now is a better time than ever to take a look back at the best bits of Module 2, ‘Think Commercial’. Taking a more practical stance compared to the slightly philosophical ‘A Connected World’ Module 1, it was enlightening in a number of different ways. Despite being allured by the idea of entrepreneurial life - something I’d seriously contemplate succumbing to, to the surprise of a Director of a communications agency I’ve recently spoken to, in a later stage of my life (I want to gain valuable experience, he thinks I should just go for it) - due to various choices I’ve made my educational institutions, I’ve never actually been taught even the basics of business or economics (something I’ve got in common with George Osborne, then). As a result I embraced topics like business models and customer journeys like it was the first time I’d ever come across them. Mostly because it was the first time I’d ever come across them.
Fortunately for you (the reader), though, my enthusiasm for such (literally) school-like subjects does not shadow my appreciation that, in most cases, these particular sorts of affections are nearer to being few and far between than they are daily occurrences. With that in mind, please find below the highlights of Squared Online’s Module 2 that are likely to feature at a more attractive - and therefore readable - height in the ‘grandiose scale’, with a comment or two from myself where applicable.
Is ‘disruption’ evolution or revolution?
The concept of ‘disruption’ - particularly in the digital side of life - was heavily touched upon in the early stages of the module. It was asked: is ‘disruption’ evolution or revolution of an idea?
Going by the nature of the word, ‘disruption’ could appear to be a rather aggressive phrase. In this instance, though, it is quite the opposite: it is retrospective, it is analytical, it is sensitive to people’s wants and needs. ‘Disruption’ is reflecting on what is unnecessarily difficult for the consumer and changing it for the better. A few examples of companies that were suggested to have done this successfully include Airbnb and Graze. One that has done so and rather shot itself in the foot in the process, though, is Kodak; it was Kodak which encouraged the transfer from physical to digital in the world of photography, and it was Kodak’s heavily physical cashcow which suffered as a result.
It’s a clichéd line but it’s one that rings truer - and, with the emergence of digital, more accessible - than ever: it’s the companies that have a product the consumers need before the consumers realise they need it that are the success stories.
Is automation of knowledge work the next big thing?
Module 1 had us believe that the ‘internet of things’ is to be the ‘next big thing’ - hardly surprising, though, given its title was ‘A Connected World’. For Module 2, however, it’s the ‘automation of knowledge work’ that’s tipped highly - in other words, the idea that knowledge that was previously supplied by humans will soon be supplied by technology. Think Siri or Google Now. In fact, Microsoft’s Joe Belfiore recently compared Windows Phone’s Cortana to a real world personal assistant. Yes, to a large degree this is exactly the kind of marketing spiel you’d come to expect from any announcement of a new product but, at the same time, it is claimed that Cortana can interact with her user in a way that previously only an actual real life personal assistant could do, dubbing this USP ‘people reminders’. I expressed my scepticism about wearable technology in the Best Bits from Module 1 but, if Cortana really can interact with people in the way Microsoft says she can , then I’m all for it and think it could be of real use. I say so hesitatingly, though - a common theme that cropped up time and time again in the Best Bits from Module 1 was my fascination-come-fear of where technology is going. In places it’s beginning to get a little too ‘I, Robot’ for my liking. You’ll have noticed I implied Cortana had a gender without batting an eyelid, for example.
‘Garbage in, garbage out’
When it comes to people managing, the phrase ‘garbage in, garbage out’ was mentioned. Whilst it could be applied to HR strategy - employ a certain quality of character and get a certain quality of work in return - it was actually put next to the topics of company philosophy and ethics: be crystal clear about the values and objectives you wish for the company to embody and they will be resonated across the board. My current employer, 3 Monkeys Communications, have been very effective with this - the philosophies they hoped to engage with (influencer marketing and working smart) for the following year were announced and explained at the AGM that took place during the festive season and, every now and then, we’re sent subtle reminders as to how we can achieve them - we’re sent surprisingly humourous guidance e-mails for the latter whilst our conscious efforts to engage with the former are brought up every other meeting.
The ‘Two Pizza Rule’
Another topic that was touched upon, one that is all too often not given the attention it deserves, was what makes a team work. Notably, though, we did not focus on what personal qualities and characteristics are needed for successful teamwork (respect, patience etc.) - we aren’t lectured by marriage counsellors and the like, after all - rather we discussed the practical qualities and characteristics needed. Whilst we might initially chuckle at Jeff Bezos’ ‘Two Pizza Rule’ (that if you can’t feed those at the meeting with two pizzas, the meeting is too big), I find it to be a suggestion that is as considered as it is relatable.
Are we looking at our phones or are our phones looking at us?
With it being touted by Cisco that there will be more mobiles on Earth than people by the end of 2013, it’s hardly surprising an entire live class was devoted to mobile. A point that I found almost humorous was that it seems equally inaccurate and daft to refer to mobile phones as just that; of course the ‘mobile’ aspect I have no reservations about, but ‘phones’? Texting is still rather high on the agenda - although, with WhatsApp being bought for a whopping $19bn, and the buyers claiming it to be worth far more, it looks like instant messaging is soon to rule the roost - but does anyone use their mobile to actually phone people these days? The obvious culprits are baby boomers and, with no offence intended, how much longer are their ways going to be relevant in this ever increasingly digital world?
Like seemingly everyone else out there, I see real potential in mobile. With the technology used in the actual hardware of mobile devices (tablets included) forever evolving at an increasingly aggressive pace (it was recently suggested to me that tech advances on a weekly basis), and the emergence of 4G and even 5G in Asia (the latter allows you to download a full-length movie in just one second, for God’s sake), I envisage that we are soon to consider mobiles not as mobile phones but mobile computers (if we don’t already). In a rather cruel, ironic twist, it looks like this change of perception is putting the features that actually comprised the mobile phone we once knew (calling, texting etc.) in danger, and yet is giving the concept of mobile as a whole a whole new lease of life.
I claimed in the Best Bits of Module 1 that it is telling that, for a good deal of us, the item we first look at in the morning and last look at in the evening is our mobile phone. But are we coming to the stage where even this isn’t extreme enough of an illustration? Do we actually need to look at our phones, for example? Or is it our phones who are looking at us? Is us going to sleep enough reason to consider our device as inactive any more?
61% of consumers say that if a company doesn’t have a mobile-optimised website, they’ll be happy to go straight to a competitor
Whilst mobile phones are evolving into devices that are more accurately described as mobile computers seemingly week by week, it’s still important to remember they aren’t replacing actual computers for good (not least for the time being anyway), rather they are providing a temporary solution to our immobile hardware whilst we ourselves are mobile. The reason why this is important? We use our mobile devices far differently to the way we use our more stationary ones. An effective way Mike Berry described this distinction is ‘sit backwards, sit forwards’. The former meaning you’re taking your time whilst on your device, enjoying yourself, most likely using a device for fun and at a leisurely pace, whilst with the latter you’ve got an objective in mind which you are to complete on an ‘as soon as possible’ basis, taking little notice of distractions that otherwise might have caught your eye whilst ‘sitting backwards’. Although there would be various factors at play, in my opinion the one that ultimately determines in which stance you are ‘sitting’ is screen size - whilst the various manufacturers and operating systems are doing their utmost best to prove otherwise, it still remains the case that browsing is a far more pleasurable experience the bigger the screen. Reasoning says, then, that only when you’re on your mobile are you ‘sitting forwards’ and, for everything bigger than your average phone, you are ‘sitting backwards’. With the popularity mobile phones are currently enjoying, though, it seems a bit daft for users to only be able to sit in the one mindset, with these limitations offering somewhat of a gap in the market. This perhaps explains what most would describe as the unlikely popularity of phablets - you get the best of both worlds: a decent(ish)-sized screen on a mobile(ish) basis.
But why is it worth digital marketers taking all of this into account? With the dominating emergence of mobile comes the inevitable rise of mobile sites and, with it, the importance of finding the right balance of how your consumers want to see and use the latter. Given the distinction between ‘sitting backwards’ and ‘sitting forwards’, in most cases a mobile site ought to be far different to its sibling desktop version. Misjudge this or, even worse, ignore it altogether and consumers can become a cruel bunch: 61% say that if a company doesn’t have a mobile-optimised website, they’ll be quite happy to go straight to a competitor.