ChaosScenario

How We Satisfice

The Happiest Guy on Earth

Paul and CK recently wrote touching stories about their grandmothers, and it got me thinking about those things that we wish we had done but didn't, because we were trying to play it too safe. We were waiting for something to happen, for the "perfect moment," or for the right person to tell us it was okay to take a risk.

I would like to introduce you to someone I met, but since it's been a year since I met him, I don't recall his real name. Bob is as good as any. It's easy to remember, and it's a palindrome.

What I do know about Bob is that he picked Disney World to be his very first theme park experience, and he (bravely? foolishly? brazenly?) chose what is arguably the most intense roller coaster in the entire resort to be his very first ride.

Ever.

Now take a closer look.

Bob isn't faking this, and he's no spring chicken, either. He was at the park by himself; he had no family and no friends with him. There are scores of parks across the nation, and many more fairs that have all sorts of rides, yet he picked the Rock 'n' Roller Coaster, which accelerates from 0-60 in 2.8 seconds, as his first ride. Before you suggest that his expression indicates he regrets his decision already, judging from his next choice of rides (The Twilight Zone Tower of Terror), he loved every moment of it!

Bob doesn't mess around.

Although I really don't know what Bob's motivations were for choosing to come to Disney World for the first time, alone, at this moment in his life, and to ride one of the most thrilling (some would say scary) roller coasters the entire resort had to offer, I can't help admire him for his commitment to live that moment -- that opportunity -- to its fullest! He waited about a half-century to visit a theme park, and he was determined to make it something he would remember for the rest of his life.

I'm ashamed to say that, if he had solicited my advice beforehand, I would have suggested he ride something a little tamer for his first time, like "It's a Small World" or some such nonsense.

"Play it safe, Bob. You don't know how you'll react. You're putting on the years, Bob. Are you sure you're up for this? Why don't you get your feet wet with a smaller ride, first?"

Thankfully, Bob didn't ask for my advice. Nor would he have, I suspect, taken it had I offered.

I wonder if sometimes we play it too safe -- if in an effort to not lose, we forget to try to win. Disney World succeeds as a theme park where others fail because, among other reasons, they remove the barriers that would prevent the Bobs of the world from making similar commitments. It's not about the rides. It's not even about the marketing. It's about the absolute dedication to make Bob feel good about himself -- like a kid again.

Also, Disney encourages its cast members to behave in ways that, in other venues, would commonly be considered socially unacceptable. They are encouraged to go for broke, to sell the experience, to "bump the lamp" in ways both big and small. Can you imagine what the difference would be if the cast members were afraid about what others might think of them for behaving in such ways? I believe they are able to maintain such joviality over time because of their apparent success in making people like Bob feel good about themselves. Success at serving other people is very often its own reward.

We have no idea what will happen tomorrow. Let us resolve to make use of today. No one was ever remembered for being ordinary. How will those you serve remember you? - Cam Beck

Doing it again and again

Let's see, it's been a few months so it's probably time for a rant about website research.

It continues to amaze me how many marketers want to build websites with little or no research. Everyone wants to jump to the creative (screen shot concepts) as soon as possible so they can comment on the colors and fonts. The same people wouldn't dream of putting a television ad out without some type of strategy and focus group. For some reason a company's or brand's website just doesn't get the same attention.

It should.

Take a look at this old post from Andy Budd's blog. It's all the things you'd like to tell a client but don't because you don't want to get fired. My favorite is from someone named melmyfinger (who apparently has his or her own blog)

1. Design is built around the content, not the other way around. You can’t just tell us, “build me a site and I’ll fill it up with stuff later.” I'd add that having the right content requires knowing what your business, customer and brand objectives for the site are. And that doesn't mean being stupid about it, you have to really understand these before you begin even the highest level design.
2. Designers need something to work with. Tell us your plans, your vision, your web design likes and dislikes. Give us an outline of what you want the site to have. Give us something to work with, god damnit! See, I told you so
3. Not everyone approaches the website the same way as you.  Usability testing is f’ing important, god damnit! So you focus group your copy, your TV ads, but not your website that will be around much longer? Bad idea.

We'd all like to get something for next to nothing. Unfortunately, a good website, means a good design which means it's designed for audiences with a purpose. Don't just slap something together, do the research up front. - Paul Herring

New Blog roll

It's been a while since we've updated our blog roll. We've referenced a few blogs in a lot of posts, so it's time to add them to our list. I asked Cam to also provide a list and nearly all of ours were the same! Here's a list of blogs that we think you should add to your RSS feed:

Adverb - Mack Simpson, creative director, writes about all things advertising and design. Gotta love the perspective of a Creative Director outside of NY or SF, and he's been writing for nearly six years.

Bill Tancer, Hitwise - A great blog that uses online activity to monitor trends both online and offline.

CK's blog - She covers all types of great strategies and executions. Also part of the Marketing Profs gang.

Freakanomics blog - Love the book, and the blog updates topics covered in the book as well as discusses new ones.

Hee Haw marketing - Paul McEnany's blog about what's going and advertising in general. Again, another great view of advertising outside of your traditional Madison Avenue guys.

Logic+Emotion - David says it best "The intersection of Marketing 2.0, Brand Engagement and Experience Design". Not that it's anything to brag about these days but he's a fellow agency.com alumni.

Marketing Profs Daily Fix - What if one of the most respected new marketing research group put together a bunch of great minds and had them blog?

Servant of Chaos - Rants on on the world of storytelling and branding. A great planner's blog from down under.

Russel Davies - Is there a planner out there who doesn't read this blog? If anyone 'gets it', he does.

- Paul Herring

Popcorn 2.0

Last month, I looked at several problems and tried to apply some new media thinking to them. My son, a member of the Webelos, a subset of the venerable Boy Scouts of America, was asked to sell popcorn for his pack, as all scouts are asked to do. However, given some logistical challenges we faced (as well as simple patriotism and curiosity), we decided to seize this unique opportunity to  use this yearly event as a means to raise the spirit and morale of U.S. troops visiting the United States from Iraq and Afghanistan.

As a result, I started PopcornScholar.com, and handed over the reins to my son. I am very happy with the results. Avery is composing his sentences better, he's organizing his thoughts better, and he's thinking about what he's willing to disclose (and what he's not), but as a fundraising tool, it's fallen a little short of expectations.

Here are some conclusions I drew about the "secrets" to blogging back in August after witnessing the success of the blog for Mothership BBQ in Nashville (Credit HotAir and RealVerse).

1. Just having a blog doesn't guarantee success.
2. Authenticity and commitment are key.
3. Develop relationships with other bloggers.

The authenticity was easy enough, but with my son's bedtime set at 8:30 p.m., with my wife on bed rest waiting for our second child to be born, it's been difficult for me to get Avery home in time to ensure his homework gets done, cook dinner, clean the dishes, and get him online to post -- especially when I have to work late, and Avery still types slowly (even though he's improving). Thus, we've missed our goal of posting three times a week consistently.

Also, some people expressed difficulty with the PayPal process. It worked fine for me, but if there's one thing I've learned since taking up the mantle of usability, my experience does not necessarily reflect what others' experiences will be. Still, with less than a month to put this effort together, enough time hasn't passed to determine conclusively if it's a real problem or if there is some other explanation for the difficulty.

Therefore, we're going to keep the blog open for at least another year. God willing, the Boy Scouts aren't going away anytime soon, and neither is our military. As long as they need our help and we can be useful in that regard, we're going to do our best to give it to them.

If you would like to help, please visit, post a comment, link to PopcornScholar on your blog, or make a donation. - Cam Beck

R.I.P., IA

David Armano brought another great topic into the discussion about the evolving role of Information Architects (IA). Joshua Porter of Bokardo.com thinks IAs are on their way out. Says David:

Now before you take either side of the debate regarding the role and future of Information Architects (IA's), I would ask this question. Does the term accurately represent what a (insert title here) does?  Or if you are an IA, do you feel it does?

Not to sound too "New Age-y" here, but I believe job titles to be overly limiting. Yes, it's a good idea to have roles and decision-making authority defined beforehand, but it's also a bit arrogant to suggest that people's intellect is limited by the role they are assigned by a narrow-minded organizational structure. I know that I don't have a lock on any knowledge, and I am often enlightened by those in my team as well as what some would consider unlikely sources -- namely, users.

Users aren't "experts" in the same sense that we are, but they are the ones who must ultimately be satisfied with our final product. Four to six years of school and a decade of experience creating websites cannot account for subtle nuances that may, to those unaware or unappreciative of our "expertise," render collective elements of site design ineffective.

David's suggestion for a new title, which is as good as any, is "Experience Architect." My struggle with that is that experience is truly everyone's responsibility. I'm reminded (okay, it's a stretch) by Thomas Jefferson's first inaugural address, when he said, "We are all republicans; we are all federalists..."

Just so, we are all experience architects; we are all concerned with usability. The moment we demand our roles be cast in stone, we hamper our growth and capacity for innovation.

If this discussion teaches us anything, it is that we cannot become too comfortable in predefined roles, nor are we worthy of accolades and adulation because we may have accomplished something in the past according to our predefined roles. The game changes constantly. The bar is raised with every new project, and as such, we are forced to increase our level of output or get left behind. - Cam Beck

You Really Need to Go Here

If you haven't found this already and are in the mood for a little distraction and perhaps a laugh, visit AdVerbatims, a blog about the dumb things we say without even realizing it. Every post has a list of things people have actually said. Each quote includes who said it, and to whom it was said.

My favorite from today, which I've heard many times in my career:

#310- "We need this to look really amazing - it's really got to stand out and wow the client. But the budget is small so don't spend any time working on it."
(Agency, Account Manager to Designer)

If you read something and don't understand why it deserves mentioning or ridicule, talk to a person in the same discipline as the message recipient. Please.

We've all said things that need to be put in there, I'm sure. I can sense my own guilt through the looks I get from our programmers and project managers when I ask to add just one more thing without extending the deadline.

Don't take this as a slam on stupid questions. By all means, if you have a question, ask it, even if you think you should know better. But if we can't laugh at ourselves, we have no business criticizing others.  - Cam Beck

Starting at, "Up to"

Eugene Loj has a great comment about honesty in advertising, and I think it's long past due that someone came out and said it. There is nothing that is metaphysically dishonest about saying that DSL download speeds are "up to" a certain number, but it is inherently misleading to advertise such rates in big, bold terms when typical speeds are much slower.

Auto companies are the same way, but their disclaimer is, "Starting at." Never mind that you can't get a thing you want at the "Starting at" price, even air conditioning. These days, air conditioning isn't much of a problem, because most, if not all, American cars come with AC standard, but this wasn't always true.

(No AC, no deal. That's my mantra. As an aside, haven't we become supremely spoiled? I guess that's one of the consequences of progress.)

Lower prices are inviting. So are faster speeds, which is why they are the ones that get promoted. But what happens after the service or product is purchased and it doesn't live up to expectations? Or what if, upon going to the dealership, a customer learns that they have to shell out another 20-30% of the car's "starting at" price to get a vehicle worth anything? How can they not look at the car salesman and say, "Okay, you got me here with your promise of a low price, you dirty rat. Now you tell me that I'm going to have to tap into my savings to get the car I actually want." No wonder car salespeople have a bad rep (behind, I'm sure, advertisers and lawyers).

Those lawyers would be quick to point out that all the relevant disclaimers are in the legal copy. But advertisers - and especially online marketers - are or should be aware that hardly anybody reads the legal, or even the important qualifiers "starting at" or "up to." That's the intent, or else they wouldn't put them in small, thin, reversed type as they put the unattainable price or speed in big, bold, block type.

Consumers see only a promise. And when they get into it, they see it as a promise unfulfilled. The old Bait and Switch. And while you might comfort yourself with the "knowledge" that people have come to expect such behavior, take heed of this little insight the next time someone complains to you that no one is loyal to brands anymore, or that one service or product offering has been "reduced to a commodity."

You've already established that it's okay to screw with customers because they expect it. What reason have you given them to be loyal? - Cam Beck

Yahoo! and Google's newspaper deals, get real

Both Google and Yahoo! have announced deals where they will allow newspapers to sell ads on the networks classified service. I think this is a great deal for both the newspaper as well as the networks. But what about the real problem, like declining subscriptions and advertising revenue?

Internet advertising is already taking over other media outlets. Of any of these outlets, newspaper is the most susceptible. It's the least interactive, and takes the longest to update. Bloggers are increasingly becoming investigative journalist and a lot of journalist are feeling like more mainstream media is becoming too timid. After watching 'The Insider' (I know it's an old movie), I'd argue the press has been 'timid' for quite some time.

It's sad because arguably the best journalism is still done in newspapers (although bloggers are catching up fast). Let's just hope that those great newspaper folks make the transition and get picked up by online content providers, or better yet make careers out from their own blogs or contributing to others. (link via The Agency Blog) - Paul Herring

Microsoft, Milkmen, Net Neutrality, and Being Evil

I give Microsoft some grief to time to time, but I really have to admire the effort they've been showing of late. MSNBC is reporting that Microsoft is teaming up with MetroFi to provide ad-supported wireless Internet access within the boundaries of Portland, Oregon. What's more, Microsoft is also exploring the same sort of deal with 13 other cities across the United States.

In return for free Internet access, users' browsers will display a one-inch ad across the top of their browser window, which helps explain (or at least justify) Microsoft's minimalist approach to its new browser, IE 7. I'm not 100% certain, since it hasn't been launched yet, but it also appears as if users will have to go to MetroFi's designated homepage when logging in, exposing users to more advertising.

There are a lot of questions unanswered here, but the idea of free Internet access invites intrigue, if not participation. If the advertising becomes too much of a burden, and if the speed, reliability, and security justify it, $20 per month is a reasonable price for high-speed, portable Internet access.

But will the courts let it stand?

Maybe it's the cynic in me, but something tells me that it's only a matter of time before the Verizons, T-Mobiles, Sun Microsystems, and AT&Ts of the world sue Microsoft for offering for free what they wanted to charge consumers for (Why they don't just give their consumers the finger, I don't know).

In a free market, the model for making money constantly changes with innovation. Just as home refrigeration and supermarkets negated the need for milkmen (who, notably, didn't sue GE for selling refrigerators), so does the feasibility of ad-supported access negate the need for overpriced telco access.

To compensate, the ISPs will either have to drop their prices, offer better service, or both. I doubt better service will include something like - I don't know - slowing down access to certain competitive websites, like Net Neutrality is supposed to prevent, (but if they just shut down the nodes that spam comes from, I wouldn't particularly mind).

Or they'll just file an injunction to get a judge to prohibit that evil Microsoft from  gaining a competitive edge.

The point, of course, is that the market is showing itself to be much more efficient than government could ever hope to be. And although it will be awhile before ad-supported access makes its way to all the major urban hubs in the U.S., if my cynicism is misplaced, at least, I think we can all sit and drool over how we can make use of this channel to better match the right products with the right consumers without needing to shout at them.

For the record, if Microsoft were to seek to use the government to prevent anyone else from offering similar service, I would have a problem with that, too. - Cam Beck