A few days ago I was leaving a meeting with my boss. We were in dire need of petrol. No problem I announced, iPhone to the rescue! Perfect scenario for the smart phone: in an area of town I didn’t know very well, no idea where the closest petrol station might be, not near any obvious main roads or shops. So off we set, blue dot blinking happily on the screen indicating our current location, with a choice of dots indicating petrol stations. Too easy!

Or so you would think.

To cut a long story short, we did find a petrol station before the car started coughing and spluttering, but just barely. It was a good 20 minute drive from where we started. Completely missing the petrol station that was a mere 30 seconds drive away.

New technology is a splendid thing, offering us easier ways to get around, easier ways to keep in contact, etc. You no doubt know all of this. So what happened??

It seems that the lovely comforting blue dot was just slightly off. Only a few metres mind you. But this meant that we turned left instead of right. And we drove for a ridiculously long period of time in the wrong direction before realising that the petrol station dot was not getting any closer.

Sounds like one of those stories where people drive into a swimming pool because their sat nav told them to, right?

I’ve always laughed at those stories in a smug superior sort of way, thinking ‘idiots’. Ahem, it appears I have now joined their ranks! It was not just my reliance in technology and not just my trust in the technology that steered us wrong. It was the fact that I abandoned my common sense along with it. If I had actually taken a minute to look around at the actual road and surroundings rather than the blue dot, the mistake would have been obvious much earlier on.

So why is this relevant in a blog about research? This incident got me thinking. Partly because I keep getting teased about it… ;)

But seriously. We embrace lots of new technologies and new techniques in our research. Because of the multitude of benefits that they offer us and our clients. But this has inherent dangers. The danger of relying on the technology in the absence of common sense and abandoning ‘old school’ ways of doing things just because they have been around for a while. To remember that sometimes a pen and paper questionnaire is actually the best way of doing something. To look up from the blue dot and think ‘does this actually make sense’? To notice the real world and not just the virtual. To remember that new techniques and new technologies are great. But should be an addition to our repertoire, not necessarily a replacement for other ways of doing things.

Basically, I will be reminding myself not to blindly drive headlong into the research swimming pool.

Copy of my presentation from Merlien conference in Berlin, MobileMR 2010: Market Research in the Mobile World

“Can you pass me my iPhone?” a friend recently asked me when we were out together.
What is noteworthy about this sentence is that she referred to her mobile by brand – have you ever heard anyone say ‘can you pass me my Samsung?’

Apple doesn’t produce phones. It produces iPhones. You don’t own a phone, you own an iPhone.

Substituting a brand name for a product is not uncommon – think Coke or Glad. However, the difference here lies in the fact that Coke can refer to any type of cola drink, and Glad to any type of cling wrap. Only phones produced by Apple are iPhones. The iPhone exists within a category of its own.

Now, it’s no news that Apple has been able to achieve massive brand presence and a strong loyalty base. So, what can we learn from Apple’s marketing victory? And can it be replicated?

Most Apple loyalists will tell you that Apple offer functionally superior products, and are thus a more successful company. However, when consumers pay double for white Apple headphones, something other than functionality is at work. In marketing terms, reducing the success of a brand to the products it creates is a simplistic view. Products can be imitated. It is the brand that holds the unique relationship with their consumers – whether they acknowledge it or not.

It is about building something bigger than your product. Something people can use to connect to each other. Red Bull connects its customers through a common interest of extreme sports. Blackmore’s is currently building an online community dedicated to health and well being. Like Apple these brands are creating tribes – where emphasis is on people, not product.

What do you think of this tribe mentality? Can it work across all categories?

It’s widely recognised that the success of Apple’s iPhone has a lot to do with iTunes and the mammoth number of apps in the App Store. With more than 100,000 apps available across many categories, it seems there’s an app to suit everyone, for every need.

However, despite apps being a legitimate and increasingly powerful distribution channel for content, services and brand experiences, iPhone users are seemingly reluctant to spend a lot of money to access paid apps.

So, can brands charge for their apps?

Apps are gradually being recognised as a new distribution channel for brands, particularly those that can deliver content, or provide access to their services via mobile Internet. Furthermore, many iPhone users are looking for more brands to engage with them via their mobile device, however, not at a cost.

iPhone users are looking for new interactions or ways of dealing with companies anywhere, at anytime, and branded apps provide companies with another opportunity to connect with their customers. But, most brands cannot charge for access to their own distribution channels, or for content that is not unique – why pay to access something that can be obtained elsewhere for free?

There will be, of course, exceptions, particularly when a branded app can be a primary distribution channel for unique content or intellectual property, and/or the experience has significant benefits and value to the consumer. Although, at this point in time, consumer brands are yet to fully explore how they can become part of their customers’ lives via owning app territory on their customers’ Smartphone.

While many iPhone users may pay for apps, and download them directly to their phones, there is some reluctance to make other purchases via a mobile device. Concerns about security are an issue for many, however functional barriers also contribute to lack of mobile transacting. Apps which are purpose built for transacting are readily used by some people, but they are few and far between.

iPhone users essentially fall into three groups when it comes to shopping via their smartphones:

Security concerns mainly relate to sending data over public or unsecured WiFi networks, which iPhone users avoid (when transacting) online by using their own WiFi, or sticking with 3G. However, if they’re going to transact at home, then a computer is usually accessible, so the concept of mobile purchasing is somewhat irrelevant. Purchasing via a computer also offers the benefit of being able to easily print receipts for proof of purchase.

Interestingly, security is not just related to a fear of having their details stolen, but also user error when it comes to entering data on a mobile device. The small screen and touch keyboard are seen as being more likely to result in typing errors – especially if attempting to purchase from a classic site, rather than a mobile-friendly site, or via an app.

“I am a bit reluctant to make purchases from my iPhone due to security concerns and just in case I incorrectly type in my payment details – e.g. a $20 donation becomes a $200!”

Fit for purchase

iPhone users were more likely to make purchases from their devices via purpose built apps, like eBay or Dominos Pizza, than to attempt to purchase via the internet on their smartphone. These apps not only make it easier to undertake a transaction because of their design and features, they also, importantly, communicate that the app is fit for purpose.

It’s critical that apps which are used for transactions are branded and deliver a positive customer experience. In a virtual environment, the trust markers will predominantly be the brand, and the quality of the app design and functionality – without these elements, doubts about security and authenticity are elevated. Branded apps are also more convincing than mobile sites, when it comes to transactions, again because of a sense that they are designed specifically with the user context in mind (versus merely scaling down a web experience). A clear example of this can be found with banking apps versus purely mobile internet banking.

People who are already comfortable purchasing through the iPhone are looking for more opportunities to use their device in this way. Particularly for items such as tickets for movies or events, or for books or small items where the desire to purchase might be triggered spontaneously, rather than being planned. Apps provide the user with a chance to do it ‘here and now’, thus reducing the time between consideration and purchase if they’re on the the move.

“I feel totally secure making purchases with my phone: I’ve bought apps, music, eBay items, from Amazon, done banking, concert tickets, movie tickets…It’s especially good if, say I’m out with friends, we’re talking about a concert and we can look it up and purchase right there…no more ‘note to self’ to look into it later”

While some nervousness will prevail amongst cautious consumers, the iPhone operating system is perceived to offer some inherent protection against cyber fraud and the like. There’s an belief that, being a Mac product, the iPhone is not yet a target for viruses, malware or internet scammers. Again, belief in the brand provides a sense of security.

It’s early days when it comes to mobile purchasing, but when estimates are that by 2011 85% of handsets shipped globally will have some sort of browser, and given the ever-increasing reach of 3G networks, smartphones will become a huge opportunity as a distribution channel. The challenge is for companies to invest early in creating great app and mobile sites that deliver trusted customer experiences, where we won’t think twice about tapping ‘buy now’.

Apple’s iTunes App Store has in excess of 100,000 apps across a multitude of categories. There’s apps for fun, for making your life easier, for saving time, for sleeping better, for unleashing your creativity. Basically, there’s an app for just about anything you can think of doing via your iPhone (and for many things you’ve never thought of doing).

The problem is, how do we find these apps when there’s so many of them in there? It’s like being in the biggest shop in the world, but all products fit into 20 simple categories. For new apps, whether free or paid, branded or unbranded, the real challenge is being found in the first place. In a digital shop where browsing is very linear, from one click to the next, it’s difficult for apps to rise to the surface so that they are found before ‘shoppers’ move on.

Latitude Insights conducted an online research community amongst iPhone users from March to April 2010, in which finding apps was an interesting topic of discussion. The main method used to find apps were the Top 25 lists, and word of mouth recommendations from other iPhone users.

App downloading can be either planned or spontaneous. Sometimes people will specifically look for an app they know the name of, or a type of app (but do not know its name) by using a key word, or category search. Other times, browsing the app store may be like window shopping – purposeless, but sometimes resulting in a new acquisition.

iPhone users recognise the inherent problem in relying on the Top 25 list to find new apps. Following the ‘crowd’ when it comes to apps means that the most downloaded apps, continue to be the most downloaded. There’s a certain level of ‘cred’ associated with having a more unique or rare app.

“I would imagine that there are a lot of great apps that never make it into the Top 25. Especially, considering that most of the apps in the most popular list are so amazingly stupid”

Branded or commercial apps need to utilise other communication channels to promote their apps, to facilitate uptake/downloading. Ironically, it may be that non-mobile media, particularly websites and print in the form of both advertising and reviews, are the best way to tell the target market you have an app for them. And then a good app can begin to rely on recommendation to build its fan base.

Ultimately, a good recommendation or a positive experience with an app on someone else’s iPhone is the strongest driver of app selection. That’s why ‘what apps have you got?’ could be the universal catch-cry for iPhone users.

Our presentation of insights from our iPhone online research community.
Stay tuned for a few more insights over the coming days.

Latitude Insight’s case study of iPhone users uncovered just what consumers find so fascinating about the iPhone, why they use that four-letter word – LOVE, and how brands can become part of this ‘affair’.

The study revealed that Smartphones change user’s lives. Initially thinking they are getting a new phone, with email and web capabilities, they find iPhone gives them so much more.

It helps them communicate. It makes them more connected because of its web capabilities. But going even further, the real benefits are about being more entertained, more efficient in what they do, having more freedom because they are not stuck to a computer, and having more ability do things away from home and work. It’s a whole new world where users can do things anywhere, anytime.

Smartphone users also admit to relying less on their computer now they have a mobile device. With predictions that by 2011, 85% of handsets will have some sort of browser, it’s important brands recognise the opportunity mobile devices gives them in terms of another distribution channel to engage with their customers.

Furthermore, with over 100,000 apps available, many free, it’s important apps have lasting traction. They need to ‘do’ something and have a tangible impact on time or convenience to be worthwhile and valued by users.