Archive for the ‘innovation’ Category

  • The Kingdom of Awesome

    We were milling about at @LenKendall’s @the3six5 meetup at The Ginger Man here at SXSW last night when Greg Christman, aka @reelspit, came over to say hello. Greg had recently taken part in a creative workshop we held at BBH NY to generate ideas and test thinking for the next phase of Metrotwin, a site we created and run for British Airways. What a dude.

    The place was packed with South By’s itinerant freak scene of start-up makers, innovators, journos, digital and new model advertising folk. I was hanging out with Utku from Mint Digital and, in jest, we discussed how awesome it would be if this group could be a country or city-state. This prompted Greg to whoop loudly that we should call it the Kingdom of Awesome and design our own awesomeness flag, and run the whole place using Foursquare. As an aside, I’ve heard a few people recently suggest that the word “awesome” is over. My friends, you misunderstand the meaning of awesome if that’s what you think – but that’s another blog post.

    The idea of a Kingdom, Republic or Nation of Awesomeness – depending on your political persuasion – is funny (especially after quantities of booze on a warm evening), but it reminded me of a tweet I’d seen earlier in the day from Jeff Jarvis:

    I don’t want to get carried with all this but I think The Kingdom of Awesome is real – real in an allegorical, Utopia sense: a metaphorical ‘State’ of hive-mind.

    Read full post

  • Time for a reassessment of the human-computer interface

    A great blog post by Lukas Mathis has been floating around Twitter for a few days now. In it he talks about the removal of features in software development. Specifically:

    If you don’t pay attention, what started out as an elegant, simple application that perfectly solves a single problem, can quickly turn into a huge behemoth of an application that solves a ton of problems, but solves all of them poorly.

    This, and some other tweet comments, got me thinking about the iPad (who isn’t?) and how I believe it’s a glimpse of the future for how we interact with personal computers.

    In the 35 years since the arrival of the personal computer we’ve been on a continuous upward trajectory of feature enhancement and specification bloat. It’s not just the software, it’s infecting the very machines that we run the bloated software on.

    Read full post

  • The Nike+ for … sleeping

    There’s a pretty cool iPhone app that I’ve been trying out for a few days nights which seems to capture the imagination of everyone I talk/Twitter/Facebook to.

    It’s called Sleep Cycle and it purports to analyse and track your sleep patterns and then wake you at the optimum time in the morning (ie at the lightest sleep phase. You can check it out here (or purchase directly from iTunes for £0.59).

    You set it up by placing your iPhone on the mattress (next to the pillow but not covered by it), and then the app uses the accelerometer to measure tiny movements in the mattress as you toss, turn and generally shift around.

    Here’s my sleep snapshot from 3 nights ago:

    sleepgraph2425

    I woke up feeling pretty awful, certain that it had been a bad night’s sleep, and Read full post

  • Creative Review, D&AD and Adobe round table discussion on the Future of Advertising

    Back in the summer William and I were invited to take part in a Creative Review round table discussion to debate the ‘Future of Advertising’. Chaired by Patrick Burgoyne, Editor of Creative Review, we were joined by the great and the good from agencies across London.

    Over the hour and a half chat the topics we talked about varied from measurement mechanisms for digital campaigns, payment models, client-agency relationships and a load of other stuff.

    Read full post

  • Tear down this wall! Crowdsourcing comes of age

    Hello. I’m Sara and I joined Made by Many last month. My forte is content, so it seems appropriate that my first post should be all about conversation… specifically the two conversations that go with just about every digital project.

    Never simple, is it?

    The first of these is all about the customers, the people for whom we’re building this product or service. This conversation is pretty user-centric: essentially, what do they need? What are their problems, and how can we help solve — or at least minimise — them?

    Then there’s a second conversation — the behind-the-scenes, creative-type stuff about how things actually work. What functionality do we offer? Do our user stories tell the whole story, and does it have a happy ending? What about typeface and layout? And finally, how the hell do we iterate this beast? Read full post

  • Life after Verdana

    Typekit launched recently amid a tremendous buzz from designers and bloggers across the web.
    What typeset offers are ‘real’ fonts on the web. Don’t quite know what this means. Surely Arial, Verdana, Georgia, Tahoma et al are all ‘real’ fonts. I think what they mean is that there is now access to a huge library of extra fonts to employ in browser-based design.
    This sort of follows on from my previous post about Art Direction on the web. This wider choice of fonts should allow greater freedom for the designer to inject some personality into their designs and help achieve some differentiation. As, arguably, one of the nicest serif-fonts online Georgia is used all over the place for online publishing. The arrival of Typekit should help reduce the reliance on Georgia for this purpose.
    So how does Typekit work?  It’s actually very clever. You see, the problems with fonts online are the same as digital music publishing, namely DRM. As soon as I install a font on my web server and use it on my site then I need a license for the distribution of that font. And those licenses don’t exist. Ot they do but their prohibitively expensive.
    Typekit have got round this problem by allowing you to rent the font from their servers for use in your site CSS and HTML. You pay a monthly subscription (on a freemium model), the level set depending on how many fonts you want to use and how many sites you want to publish those fonts on. Once you’ve chose your fonts and enter the URL of the destination site and it spits out a couple of lines of javascript for you to place into the <head> of your HTML file. It looks a bit like this…
    <script type=”text/javascript” src=”http://use.typekit.com/etn1iee.js”></script>
    <script type=”text/javascript”>try{Typekit.load();}catch(e){}</script>
    This works in all major browsers (Firefox 3.5 and up, Safari 2.4 and up) and even IE (version 5 an up).
    It’s all quite ingenious really. And a very elegant solution to a problem that looked insurmountable a few years ago.
    However, I’m slightly wary of where this might lead. The old saying ‘just because you can, doesn’t mean to say you should’ needs to be plastered all over the Typekit site. The font catalogue may be extensive but there are some absolutely hideous examples of the typographers art on there. Allow the user to set them small onscreen any they’ll be completely illegible.
    This may also open up the floodgates for some crimes against typography. Remember when, in the early-mid 90s the PC became more and more pervasive. The world became filled with rainbow coloured, Times, Comic Sans and Brush Script-rendered signs in corner shops? The same people who used the <blink> tag and texture-mapped animated gifs. I fear we may be treading the same path again.
    Whatever, in the right hands this opens up a very exciting future for web-based editorial design and art direction. A future that may be even brighter when some of the larger foundries come onboard with the likes of Garamond, Franklin Gothic, Clarendon etc.
    For those that care about typographic nuances I found this useful tool for seeing exactly how the font will render in a browser, at different sizes, white out and at varying shades of grey.
    It’s probably worth pointing out that there are others doing similar things to Typekit. Some use a different method of linking back to the font file (@font-face) but the principles are the same. These include, Kernest, Fontdeck (coming soon) amongst others.

    Typekit launched recently amid a tremendous buzz from designers and bloggers across the web.

    What Typekit offers are ‘real’ fonts on the web. Don’t quite know what this means. Surely Arial, Verdana, Georgia, Tahoma et al are all ‘real’ fonts. I think what they mean is that there is now access to a huge library of extra fonts to employ in browser-based design beyond the standard set of ‘browser-safe’ fonts.

    Screen shot 2009-11-17 at 14.10.50

    This sort of follows on from my previous post about Art Direction on the web. This wider choice of fonts should allow greater freedom for the designer to inject some personality into their designs and help achieve some differentiation. As, arguably, the nicest browser-safe serif-font, Georgia, is used all over the place for online publishing. The arrival of Typekit should, if nothing else, help reduce the reliance on Georgia for this purpose.

    Read full post

  • Grow a spine you wimps

    Are you as tired as I am of these people who whinge on about the Web being too big and free and open and rich for their fragile little brains to cope with?

    After centuries millenia of restricted access to knowledge being something every hipster should be heard moaning about, it’s now suddenly cool to complain that there’s just ‘too much information‘ out there and that you can’t cope. Yeah man, it’s just too heavy. It’s like you could spend all day every day online, but you still can’t take it all in and it’s completely ruining your life, and making you feel worthless.

    To be fair, it’s the same type of people now complaining that there’s just too much knowledge who always tell you – unprompted – about the the unearthly hour they got up as a way of asserting their moral superiority over anyone who got up at a more sensible time. They’re the same people who never miss an opportunity to tell you how many days they’ve had without any sleep because they are SOOO busy, and how little they’ve eaten… ever. Now, the Web offers these idiots a new opportunity to demonstrate self-worth – through another melodramatic and yet pointless piece of self-denial. But it’s better than that, the Web also provides a massive new audience of gullible fools people to bore on to.

    I had to check to see if this article from the NY Times website was some sort of hoax – it’s called “Stop Your Search Engines” (headline writer possibly suffering from Continual Partial Attention disorder). In it, they describe an Apple Desktop App called Freedom -  created for people who feel the need for a “strategy” to help them deal with the temptation of the modern world’s super-abundance of knowledge.

    It works like this.

    I can’t believe anyone wasted any valuable moments of their lives programming Freedom. Your modem and your system preferences will both do this. You do not need an App. And there is also this button on all computers that just turns them off. If you that’s not good enough for you but you live inside the M25, then why not DM and I’ll come round your house with a baseball bat to smash your equipment up.

    I call this programme of self-realisation ‘Total Freedom’ and it costs £50 a pop. Drop me a line.

  • Pulling Off The Optimal Platform Job

    Another week, another blog post on the subject of “why creative advertising folk need to embrace ‘technologists and their geeky ways’” once again ignites vigorous debate.

    The post in question is by Joe Mele, VP Client Partner at Razorfish, and received a great many comments and a huge number of re-tweets of the @BBHLabs‘ tweet that contained a link to it. The citizens of Twitter seem to react with a combination of self-loathing and schadenfreudian glee to the disruption that social technologies are wreaking on advertising. It’s a little bit dull and frankly misses the point – and it wasn’t quite (I don’t think) what Joe was saying.

    Of course, how advertising responds to the digital challenge is a roasting hot topic. Joe’s blog post quotes a recent article from Ad Age provocatively titled ‘Agencies Need To Start Thinking Like Software Companies’ that talks about hybrid creative techies bringing digital know-how to Madison Avenue. If only it were that easy. It seems overly simplistic to claim that everything will be okay if they hire in some digital savvy, perhaps even ‘developers’ – let them attend client meetings and, you know, even help out with creative ideas and stuff.

    Unfortunately, I think it’s a lot more complex than that – and whilst I totally agree with everything Barbarian Group Co-founder Rick Webb, says in the Ad Age article, I’m not convinced he *totally* nails it either:

    What they should have been taking away all of this time — and have increasingly begun to — are the concepts of the constant beta and agile development. Marketers need to abandon the time-limited campaign online and start to think of it as a constant application of a rigorous discipline.

    Rick’s completely right about needing an agile, adaptive, evolutionary approach, but I’m starting to believe that you need more than that to deliver the kind of long-term living platforms and platform-campaigns – and value – that clients need and agencies must get better at creating. I’m starting to believe you need four things, the first two of which are well-known and increasingly often quoted:

    Read full post

  • Agile measurement

    Anjali’s blog post on ‘Measurement versus engagement‘ made me think.

    We’ve spent a great deal of effort over the last two years smashing painstakingly integrating Agile thinking into the strategy and design practices, but at the other end – the delivery end of the process – Agile is too often neglected soon after launch.

    This shouldn’t be surprising.

    It’s difficult, if not impossible, to keep all that innovationism going for extended periods of time. Often, the innovation team within a client organisation moves off onto new projects and hands the service to less risk-friendly teams, where people have KPIs set by line-managers who don’t know about very much about the project and almost certainly have no idea of probably much less understanding of the Customer Value.

    Sometimes the fervent adoption of Agile methodologies that happened during the Vision and Service Definition phases turns out to be superficial and temporary. Who doesn’t like Agile when there’s tons of new code and excitement being demonstrated on a daily basis, and when you can get things done with less pain and far more rapidly than you ever did before? It’s definitely more difficult infinitely more challenging to adopt Agile as a culture, over the long term. “Iterative” and “emergent” are best intention ideas that make total sense during the Vision phase – but are VERY difficult to do on an ongoing basis, especially if the culture at large within the client business doesn’t get it, which is a big ask let’s face it!

    But occasionally, even on innovation-geared projects, it’s the metrics what kills it.

    Typically, there may have been a conversation early on in the project where you were asked to make some guesses about traffic and registered users. You may have been reassured that these would not be treated as promises, and you probably made the point that it’s very risky to make those kind of predictions with an innovative and emergent service like yours, I mean – how could you possibly predict these things, and they’re not the right things to measure anyway..? Whatever. A metrics time-bomb has started ticking.

    Agile gets rid of fixed scope/fixed budget which is great – but that means nothing if you replace them with some dumb fixed metrics. So, I’m arguing here not for less measurement or no measurement, but for an Agile approach to measurement – which, obviously, I absolutely understand the need for.

    Agile measurement should focus on simplicity and Customer Value. It should make it easier to measure the things that matter to make the service better for its users – to improve the value exchange. Instead of asking what success looks like, ask what value looks like.

    It follows then that Agile measurement should measure fewer things. There is a risk – especially with all the new tools and dashboards and diagnostics – of measuring far too much. Measurement is in danger of becoming an end in itself. A smaller set of metrics and diagnostics – “just enough”, in exactly the way as Agile methodologies treat other types of documentation – should help. Even trying to find the “one key metric” that rules them all – and is tied to the economics investment and supported by executive management – is suggested in this awesome paper I found online and have plundered ruthlessly for this blog post. That makes so much sense.

    You should also try and measure “outcome” rather than “output”. It’s not about big numbers, it’s about having the biggest impact on Customer Value. A small community of incredibly engaged, high-value customers is much more valuable than 1 million people who registered to win a car. Obviously, you’ll have first needed to have defined upfront what Customer Value actually is – for you, your project and the business sponsoring it. If you’ve been working Agile from the outset, you should have a pretty good idea of your customer/end-user and their needs, and the value exchange that’ll get them returning hopelessly addicted.

    Maintaining a living, ongoing dialogue with users will certainly help – and is essential where the one key metric is for example a softie, like brand perception. But you should generally focus on a small set of engagement health indicators: like the number of visits per user per month, dwell time,  participation, recommendations to friends, positive buzz across other social networks leading to sustained referrals. I’ll also add receiving offers of help from partners and people wanting to be involved, and good ideas from users – and the holy grail: people start using the site for purposes never envisaged. Remember, EBay realised there was an online market for cars when they found customers selling grown-up cars in the toy section.

    Lastly, you should be able to review targets, metrics and diagnostics to optimise your ability to understand Customer Value as the service evolves. Within an emergent, iterative innovation-geared project, you may not even understand the true value and how to achieve it until much later.

    What does anyone else think?

  • Designing motivational services

    We use Basecamp to manage projects. It’s great for creating tasks and milestones that can be assigned to those responsible. It keeps conversations neatly organized in threads while you can attach documents/screen shots to these.

    There’s loads of similar web based services out there. But although they might be easy to use, this is in no way a guarantee that people stay on top of recording (or even completing!) their tasks.  A few weeks into the project you often find that the whole group, previously collaborating in one space, have moved the whole thing offline, into their separate in-boxes and what have you. Now things have turned a little bit Texas.

    Perhaps this happens because most systems are designed around the users functional needs while the motivational and emotional bits are completely ignored. Well, you may say… does it matter if a system is boring to use if it does what it says on the tin..?

    That’s true if you’re happy to get on with things, tick the check box when the job is done and don’t worry much about the mundane aspect of it all… But if you’re one of us ‘daydreaming slackers’ who are driven mad by this humdrum type activity then you might need a little ‘kick’ to get going.

    In spite of having the same functional needs to complete a task, we’re rarely motivated by the same stuff. Some take pleasure in seeing a completed check list, others can only recall what a painful job it was to get there. You can split these groups of preferences into even smaller ones. That’s why it is an enormous challenge to design motivational aspects into services.

    Reward and punishment are two very common strategies for motivation. Often only one is in use at a time:
    picture-124

    picture-1301

    Sometimes, the two are in use simultaneously… “If you eat all your peas, you’ll get dessert…”

    I don’t think there’s any doubt that collaborative systems would be much more effective if they were designed with motivational features. Just look at games – using both strategies, they’re designed to make us desire to progress to the next level.

    An example of this is Farmville on Facebook. Keep on top of your farmer responsibilities and you’ll earn money. Forget, and your crop will wilt. The horror. It’s unpleasant.

    Obviously farming won’t be everybody’s cup of tea, but neither will, uhmm, time sheeting…

    Anyway, Famville is a FB application that cleverly gives the user a clear incentive to frequently spam their walls with game info at the same time as giving their friends a reason to lurk around their wall, waiting for this to happen…

    The game keeps you fussing and caring for your farm by giving you ribbons whenever you’ve accomplished a goal. In true FB style, there’s a ribbon for nearly everything – harvest enough to build your cash reserve, then buy a few buildings and hey hey presto – you’re awarded a great architect ribbon and a gift.

    picture-127

    Pick fruit from at least 5 trees and you’ll get the amazingly rare “knock on wood ribbon”. The ribbons are then posted on your wall so you can bask in a well deserved glory – but wait! Just because you’re so great, your friends should get rewarded too…. click [ Get a bonus from Elin ] and a bonus sum will be added to your game money. Clever. Now I feel guilty when I don’t share these posts on my wall.

    picture-126

    (I’m not going to mention names, but there’s quite a few loiterers hanging around my wall these days….)

    There’s lots more to Farmville, but that’s not the point of this post. Neither is to turn Basecamp or similar services into Farmville…

    For all of us who design services, it is very important to put aside purely functional needs for some moments and think about how to motivate users.

    I’d be gutted if I logged into Basecamp and found all my tasks wilted. On the other hand, life would be quite alright if every hour entered in my Harvest timesheets resulted in some beautiful, personal data visualisation at the end of the month.. or better yet, I could pick up a bonus reward every time @stueccles completes his:)

You are currently browsing the archives for the innovation category.

Our latest tweets

Categories

Archives

Find us on the web