14.4.10

The Evolution Of Game Based Marketing

Advergaming is a video game experience brought to you by marketers. It’s been around for ages but recent tactics are now blurring the lines between entertainment and unconscious persuasion. The evolution of advergaming strategy is Funware, which describes the use of video game mechanics in everyday, non-game applications. Funware is an intuitive concept: If you turn work into game, people willingly participate.

Gabe Zigermann coined the term Funware to describe the use of video game mechanics in everyday, non-game applications. It was a big idea that has now become a rallying cry for the spread of video games beyond their traditional borders into industries that seem remotely related to games.

What Zichermann, chief executive of beamME and a 12-year game industry veteran, realized was that games motivate people to do things that they wouldn’t ordinarily do. The book (subtitled “Inspire customer loyalty through rewards challenges and contests”) debuts this week and is a must read for marketers, including the folks who are attending the MI6 game marketing conference in San Francisco on Thursday.

Funware is an intuitive concept. If you turn work into game, people willingly do it. If you make a tedious school assignment into a game-like competition, kids will become engaged with it. If you add a rewards-based loyalty program to your product, people will choose it over rivals. The time has come to “game-ify” all of the boring industries so that users will be motivated to use products and services because they want to, not because they have to. In fact, the authors argue that just about any task can be designed so that it can be more fun.

Over the past couple of years, the idea has gained steam. Venture capitalists such as Bing Gordon, former chief creative officer at Electronic Arts and Kleiner Perkins partner, believe that Funware has the potential to change all of advertising.

Game-based marketing is one of those things that has been around forever, but is only now getting recognized for what it is. Games have grabbed a bigger share of the entertainment market because they’re sticky. They get people to come back over and over in a way that ordinary ads or marketing programs do not. (Pictured right: Zichermann).

The book begins with a couple of telling anecdotes. One relates how one of Zichermann’s former bosses in the ad industry just didn’t understand the point of marketing to gamers. Another shows how the Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Gates commercials — advertising the launch of Windows 7 — failed horribly in winning over audiences. The authors say that the failure of these commercials harkens the death of traditional ads.

Brands are starting to catch on. The old way of reaching people through 30-second commercials isn’t working anymore because people are skipping commercials with their digital video recorders. And a new generation of young people isn’t watching TV at all. About 80 percent of these youths are playing video games, so they are naturally amenable to game-related motivations, such as competitive leaderboards, enhanced status in a community, or achievement points. They are a generation that looks at things like and wonder why it wasn’t designed more like a game. One example: a leaderboard inspired Brazilians to boost their usage of the Orkut social network so their country could be the top of the leaderboard. As a result, Google’s Orkut is the No. 1 social network in Brazil, not Facebook.

Some of this is basic psychology. If you put up a velvet rope and create a VIP area in a bar, people will want to get into it. They will be nice to the host and offer bigger tips if they can get the better service and status associated with being a VIP. The bar makes more money and can charge higher prices in the VIP area. The fundamental product, alcohol, is still the same. The marketing of the product is what changes, and that’s what companies should realize, says Tim Chang, principal at Norwest Venture Partners. (Pictured right: Linder).

Part of the problem with today’s marketing is that marketers grew up thinking that brands should be inserted into games as commercial breaks. And game companies grew up thinking that their games were only for hardcore players. But now the growth of the mass market for games means those lines are blurring. Zichermann and Lindner say that the marketers should realize that the BRAND CAN BE THE GAME. In this melding, game experts can lend their expertise to the brand marketers, who in turn can help the game companies reach the non-gaming masses.

An example is the NBC trivia game, iCue. For years, NBC wanted to find out how to make money from its archive of videos. No one was watching them. Then NBC created a video trivia game where players had to guess a movie’s details based on watching a clip. The result was a sticky application with 100,000 users per month.

This book rests on the shoulders of others that have come before it, such as Changing the Game by David Edery and Ethan Mollick, and Total Engagement by Bryon Reeves and J. Leighton Read. Both of those games argue the same case as Game-Based Marketing, though with different examples about how to turn work into fun.

One of the common examples that comes in all of the books is America’s Army, the online combat game created by the U.S. Army as a recruiting tool to reach young people who grew up playing video games. America’s Army costs very little to run, but it has had a huge impact in educating youths about the ways of the Army. Nike, Coca-Cola, Mary Kay Cosmetics and lots of other companies are sharing in the fun by designing Funware.

The fact that other books have come before this one suggests that thesis of the book is part of a larger movement. The ideas that were once considered radical are now becoming an accepted canon. Bunchball, founded by entrepreneur Rajat Paharia, is actively helping brands to game-ify their web sites.

But Zichermann and Linder point out out that some of the pioneering ideas behind Funware are, in fact, really old. They were embedded in the old Green Stamps program where you could earn stamps by making purchases at participating stores and then redeeming the stamps for merchandise. The germs of the Funware idea were also in the first frequent flyer program created by American Airlines in 1981. And they were part of addictive nature of slot machines in Las Vegas and sweepstakes contests as well.

That gets us to the good thing about this book. People who know games should read it because they’ll learn about other industries which have already done what the game marketers want to achieve. And people who know brand marketing should read this for the new tips that the game companies have created to hook users. I must admit I got sleepy when I read so much about frequent flyer programs, but I also learned a lot that I didn’t know.

Game makers may think that they have learned all of the ropes, but the research in the book shows they would do well to study the effects that rewards programs have on users. The Boy Scouts, for instance, figured out that giving out low-cost badges instead of big monetary awards was more than enough to keep young boys motivated. Indeed, in everything from sweepstakes to reality TV, it is a fact that large prizes are not required to encourage continuous engagement and loyalty. And the game makers may have to watch out. As the designers of social networks have figured out, it is possible to create an experience such as Facebook that is possibly more fun than games. It’s also worth noting that gamers will try to game any system; just ask Las Vegas casinos why they have huge security staffs devoted to cracking down on cheaters.

Meanwhile, the creators of loyalty programs at institutions such as McDonalds would do well to modify their contests to be replayable, as most games are, to inspire long-term loyalty. Why can’t the Internal Revenue Service create some incentives so that filling out your taxes is fun?

If the game makers and the brand experts get together, figure out how to create long-term brand loyalty through engagement, then everybody is going to make a pile of money.

Source - GamesBeat

The Social Media Bubble

Here’s a controversial perspective on social media. Social media is overvalued and online relationships are grossly inflated. Despite all the hoopla around social media, we aren’t nearly as connected as we think we are. The following is a cultural examination on our perceived value of social media and highlights a lot of the things we are doing wrong. The debate continues. Read & discuss.

I'd like to advance a hypothesis: Despite all the excitement surrounding social media, the Internet isn't connecting us as much as we think it is. It's largely home to weak, artificial connections, what I call thin relationships.

During the subprime bubble, banks and brokers sold one another bad debt — debt that couldn't be made good on. Today, "social" media is trading in low-quality connections — linkages that are unlikely to yield meaningful, lasting relationships.

Call it relationship inflation.
Nominally, you have a lot more relationships — but in reality, few, if any, are actually valuable. Just as currency inflation debases money, so social inflation debases relationships. The very word "relationship" is being cheapened. It used to mean someone you could count on. Today, it means someone you can swap bits with.

Thin relationships are the illusion of real relationships. Real relationships are patterns of mutual investment. I invest in you, you invest in me. Parents, kids, spouses — all are multiple digit investments, of time, money, knowledge, and attention. The "relationships" at the heart of the social bubble aren't real because they're not marked by mutual investment . At most, they're marked by a tiny chunk of information or attention here or there.

Here's what lends support to my hypothesis.

Trust. If we take social media at face value, the number of friends in the world has gone up a hundredfold. But have we seen an accompanying rise in trust? I'd argue no. Now, perhaps it will take time for gains to be visibly felt. But social networks have already been around for half a decade, and society seems to be little better off.

Disempowerment. If social tools were creating real economic gains, we'd expect to see a substitution effect. They'd replace — disintermediate — yesterday's gatekeepers. Yet, increasingly, they are empowering gatekeepers. Your favorite social networks aren't disintermediating PR agencies, recruiters, and other kinds of brokers. They're creating legions of new ones. The internet itself isn't disempowering government by giving voices to the traditionally voiceless; it's empowering authoritarian states to limit and circumscribe freedom by radically lowering the costs of surveillance and enforcement. So much for direct, unmediated relationships.

Hate. There's this old trope: the Internet runs on love. Equally, though, it's full of hate: irrational lashing-out at the nearest person, place, or thing that's just a little bit different. Read any newspaper web comments sections lately? Usually, they're giant puddles of bile and venom. Check out these emails to Floyd Norris. Far from fueling meaningful conversation, today's "social" web is a world full of the linguistic equivalent of drive-by shootings.

Exclusion. Hate happens, at least in part, because of homophily: birds of a feather flock together. The result is that people self-organize into groups of like for like. But rarely are the gaps between differences bridged. Yet, that's where the most valuable relationships begin. To be "friends" with 1000 people who are also obsessed with vintage 1960s glasses isn't friendship — it's just a single, solitary shared interest.

Value. The ultimate proof's in the pudding. If the "relationships" created on today's Internet were valuable, perhaps people (or advertisers) might pay for the opportunity to enjoy them. Yet, few, if any, do — anywhere, ever. Conversely, because those "relationships" aren't valuable, companies are, it is said, forced to try and monetize them in extractive, ethically questionable ways. That's because there's no there there. I can swap bits with pseudo-strangers at any number of sites. "Friends" like that are a commodity — not a valuable, unique good.

What are the wages of relationship inflation? Three cancers eating away at the vitality of today's web. First, attention isn't allocated efficiently; people discover less what they value than what everyone else likes, right this second. Second, people invest in low-quality content. Farmville ain't exactly Casablanca. Third, and most damaging, is the ongoing weakening of the Internet as a force for good. Not only is Farmville not Casablanca, it's not Kiva either. One of the seminal examples of the promise of social media, Kiva allocates micro-credit more meaningfully. By contrast, Farmville is largely socially useless. It doesn't make kids tangibly better off; it just makes advertisers better off.

Let's summarize. On the demand side, relationship inflation creates beauty contest effects, where, just as every judge votes for the contestant they think the others will like the best, people transmit what they think others want. On the supply side, relationship inflation creates popularity contest effects, where people (and artists) strive for immediate, visceral attention-grabs — instead of making awesome stuff.

The social isn't about beauty contests and popularity contests. They're a distortion, a caricature of the real thing. It's about trust, connection, and community. That's what there's too little of in today's mediascape, despite all the hoopla surrounding social tools. The promise of the Internet wasn't merely to inflate relationships, without adding depth, resonance, and meaning. It was to fundamentally rewire people, communities, civil society, business, and the state — through thicker, stronger, more meaningful relationships. That's where the future of media lies.

Now, this is just a hypothesis. Feel free to disagree with me, challenge me — or to extend and elaborate upon it. Next time, I'll discuss what we can do about it.

Source - Harvard Business Report

Love Angry Customers

Brands have always claimed to put their customers first and it’s no surprise that quotes like “the customer is always right” are commonplace. In today’s media landscape, brands are forced to live up to consumer centric claims or risk the wrath of the crowd. Fear not, this is an excellent opportunity for brands and their consumer relationships. As this article highlights, disgruntled customers serve a compass once you’ve charted a course of authenticity.

For a long time advertising has operated on a conceit that brands and consumers were in dialogue when, in truth, brands were dictating consumer behavior, pushing messaging on the public and often exploiting their trust or gullibility.

Phrases such as “We’re here to help you”, “We put you first” and notions like customer-centric companies sounded good, but as brands discovered more profit could be eked out of customers by manipulating their messaging, such language lost much of its meaning.

Thanks to information on the web and social media connectivity, consumers are now better informed and media savvy. By organizing themselves within social networks they have found their voice. The phrase “be careful what you wish for” comes to mind. Brands finally got the two-way dialogue they’d been talking about.

That two-way dialogue means brands can monitor in real time the hopes, frustrations and opinions of consumers – something they had to second guess before with the aid of research and focus groups. This is enormously valuable. On the downside, it means consumers are calling out brands for duplicity, disingenuous advertising or unconscionable behavior.

Yet brands shouldn’t fear angry customers. In fact, now that a two-way dialogue is in place, the dynamic functions as a self-correcting mechanism that can ensure the longevity and profitability of brands.

If a brand has a defined purpose, clear core values, and consistent communications (wow, that’s some steeplechase), its consumer base can serve as an invaluable feedback loop to keep the brand on track. As that authentic dialogue deepens, mutual trust grows with it.

A great example of this is the t-shirt company, Threadless. While its been rightly lauded for its crowdsourcing economic model, the integrity of the company is what strikes me as most revolutionary. Not only do they make sure that people want their products before they make them, but they never compromise their commitment to their original mission and community, both in terms of who they hire and how they run their business.

Brands that remain committed to their core values will keep and expand their community around shared values. If a brand makes the wrong strategic move, and every one does at some point, the community will set you straight. When they do, the correct brand response is, “Thank you”.

Disgruntled customers serve a compass once you’ve charted a course of authenticity. Better yet, consumers want to help and they’ll do it for free. As this new two way dialogue gets further entrenched through mainstream adoption of social media, the single most important defining quality of successful brands will be the quality of their listening.

Let me know of any good brand listeners? Are there any out there?

Source - Simon Mainwaring

The Internet Of Things

Objects are invading the Internet! It may sound a little ridiculous to have Big Ben or a Barbie doll communicate online like a living, breathing person however it’s a trend that will continue to grow as technologies such as radio frequency identification (RFID) become mainstream. The outcome is a whole new realm for advertisers as interactions between people and objects become a whole lot smarter. Here are a few examples of brands getting a head start on this trend.

Big Ben has been steadily keeping time in London with its distinctive "bong" for over 150 years. But unless you were in the famous clock's proximity, you most likely remained unaware. That is, until late last year, when Big Ben joined and now keeps time virtually for nearly 50,000 people through Twitter's API.

While we can all have a bit of a laugh at Big Ben's presence on Twitter, our newfound ability to communicate with what were previously inanimate objects is no joke. Advances in a host of technologies like radio frequency identification (RFID), near field communications (NFC), electronic product codes (EPC) and, most importantly, Twitter and its API are enabling an array of smart interactions and connections between objects and people.

Not too long ago, unless you knew how to write code, the primary way that we communicated with objects was decidedly one way -- beep -- a simple signal for us to pay attention. AOL ingeniously took a step to humanize the beep in the '90s by alerting us to an incoming e-mail with a chipper "You've Got Mail." But since then we haven't made much progress.

Twitter is helping to change all of that by allowing developers to add intelligence to devices and inanimate objects in a surprisingly warm and human manner. We saw some of this with early experiments like BakerTweet, a system made by U.K. agency Poke that allows bakers to dynamically send out tweets to customers alerting them when a fresh batch of buns have emerged from the oven, and Botanicalls, which uses networked open source hardware and software to allow plants to communicate with people in human terms (e.g. "water me please") by either using the telephone, text message or Twitter.

Sometimes called "The Internet of Things" or "Web 3.0," the possibility of smarter interactions between people and objects is opening up whole new realms for advertisers and product developers alike. Here's a look at some of the more noteworthy attempts.

NIKE+ and the HumanAPI
Athletes are notoriously data-focused so it makes sense that one of the first entrants into the space was the combo of Nike and Apple. Nike Plus is a clever piece of technology that allows people to transform their iPhones and iPods into personal trainers, collecting real-time workout data, allowing them to react in real time and letting them track their performance on their PCs. Taking the concept a step further, independent developer Nikolai Onken has created an iPhone app prototype for the HumanAPI that collects heart rate data and transmits it via Bluetooth to an application for real-time visualization. You can view a series of videos here.

Sony
The interplay between physical space or location and online events is ripe with possibilities. For the Sony Hopper Invasion campaign in the UK, Dare Digital and Tinker.it demonstrated how physical objects could become a real-time visualization tool for an online event. The team built a grid that allows 49 Space Hoppers (colorful balloons, really) to be inflated dynamically through the use of hashtags on Twitter and through the Sony website. You can view a video of the campaign event here.

Mattel and Barbie
Can a product speak? Taking a much more analog approach, Mattel decided to give their iconic doll an online persona for her 50th anniversary. The company created a presence on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube for Barbie and even gave her a voice, sort of. While consumers couldn't actually hear Barbie speak, they could certainly read her tweets which, in today's culture, might just be about the same thing.

Blue Dot
Location-based services are becoming mainstream, but surfacing the information in real time is not. Blu Dot, a small but stylish Minneapolis-based furniture maker, scattered 25 of its chairs across the streets of Manhattan for its Real Good Experiment campaign.The company enlisted a creative shop called Mono, camera crews and GPS devices to track the chairs' travels. Real-time updates were provided on Twitter at bludotnews and realgoodchairs and on a map at realgood.bludot.com. Better yet, Blu Dot even made a touching documentary about its efforts.

FedEx
FedEx is clearly a leader in using real-time data to allow people to track their packages throughout the world, but the company is taking it further with its SenseAware. Using an in-package sensing device (about the size of a drink coaster) with a web-based information platform, the company can now let users know if a package has been opened or exposed to light, its exact location via GPS coordinates and even if it is too warm or cold. FedEx hasn't set up the service to broadcast package whereabouts or comfort via Twitter yet, but it certainly could.

Guinness
Talk about a human API. Guinness continues to expand upon its groundbreaking use of RFID technology with its Ireland rugby team sponsorship. The company just launched Area 22, a site that hosts data on the rugby team and its players performance, an iPhone app and even a Facebook page. The site boasts in-depth data with excellent visualizations on the key areas like kicking, possession, penalties ("Sin Bin") defense and performance. In preparation for the run-up to the Rugby World Cup in 2011, Guinness has even launched a new TV spot that highlights a futuristic -- a la "Minority Report" -- playing field.

Clearly it's still early days for "The Internet of Things" but the possibilities continue to grow as the technologies are becoming cheaper and more accessible. It's also becoming easier to find all sorts of connected consumer devices now, like the dog collar that tweets locations or the Wi-Fi-enabled scale that provides progress updates via Twitter.

Pachube, a company that provides a web service that enables developers to both virtually and physically tag and share real-time sensor data from objects, devices, buildings and environments. Another is Violet, which makes Mir:ror, an RFID reader USB-attached mirror that enables any PC to react to the presence of an object. The company also makes Nabaztag, a very cute connected device that delivers all sorts of audio and visual and information, including readings of your e-mail or RSS feeds.

Source - AdAge

How To Start A Movement

Some very successful campaigns have emerged from strategies that focus on creating and facilitating movements. Take Dove’s Campaign For Real Beauty as an example. There are a number of variables that go into creating a movement and they’re all readily available to brands. The following video looks at what it takes to get people behind a rallying cry.

Video link here.

Source - TED

10 Essential Rules

We’re willing to bet that you’ll walk away from this article with at least three things you didn’t know about consumer behaviour and attitudes in social media. This article is particularly insightful because the ten essential consumer truths consumer are grounded in empirical evidence. It’s always a good policy to adopt marketing principles based on quantitative data, particularly in emerging platforms.

These days, everyone seems to have advice about how to run your social media marketing program. There are so many tips floating around, it’s hard to know what truly essential strategies you should follow to effectively use social media to build your business. Questions abound: do Facebook fans drive sales? Why should I fund forums for consumers to pillory my products, ridicule my service, and tout the competition? And, whatever I decide to do, how I will I know if it’s working?

In the search for Truth, sometimes Social Media is its own worst enemy. With a self-credentialed guru waiting at every click and blog, finding actionable, fact-based insight is tricky.

So, in a modest attempt to bring a dose of sanity to this intellectual frat party, I’ve reined my impulse to lob more “personal picks” into the fray. Instead, I’ll follow the wisdom of an august data mining colleague to just “let the data speak”.

Our process was to query data from hundreds of our brand clients to see what testable truths emerged – and here’s what we found: 10- rules that hold-up across category and time.

1. The 1% Rule

In category after category, our data shows a small fraction of site visitors are responsible for a substantial portion of total site traffic. On average, the percentage of influential users (defined for our purposes simply as a visitor who’s subsequent sharing actions result in at least one additional site visitor) on a given site is .6% and rarely above 4%. However, these influencers regularly generate 20%-50% of total site traffic and an even higher share of conversion (defined however a site owner so decides). To make social media marketing effective, marketers to identify and engage --and better, recognize and reward -- these Super Influentials.

2. The 2-4X Rule

When it comes to conversion, visitors driven to a site by influencers are 2-4X more likely to convert compared to visitors from other sources, such as display advertisements or paid search. That means your landing pages for people coming from shared links and social sites should reflect these visitors’ interests and offer enticing deals that will encourage these social visitors not only to convert, but to share the deals with others.

3. The New Media – New Pipes Rule

In today’s socially-driven internet, it matters far more what consumers do with your content than what you do with your content. What they say about your brand means more than what you say about your brand. Our data shows that content spread from consumer-to-consumer through word of mouth is far more powerful at driving brand preference and purchase intent than content distributed by the brand itself. This has profound implications in Social Media. To illustrate, if a brand puts content on its Facebook fan page, it is far less likely to go viral than if an influential consumer puts that very same piece of content on his or her page or posts it to a relevant community of enthusiasts.

4. The Martha Stewart Rule

Throw your own party, don’t just cater someone else’s! If you base your social campaigns in venues you don’t control – such as Facebook or YouTube – you may get great “attendance”, but data shows it’s hard to convert and retain these partygoers. If your goals are anything beyond building brand awareness, it’s better to have a house of your own where friends can find you -- such as your own branded social site, contest site, or customer forum.

5. The Power of “Weak Links” Rule

Influentials generally do have many direct “friends” and “followers”, but what makes them truly valuable is number and relevance of their extended or indirect connections. As Albert-Laszlo Barabasi illustrated in Linked, you are far more likely to find your next job through a friend-of-a-friend than through an intimate contact. These “Weak Links” matter in the “real world”, and they matter even more online. A critical implication for marketers is the need to track the extended social graphs of their content if they are going to be able to understand and activate the dynamics of influence.

6. The Feed the Fire Rule

Consumers love to share relevant, engaging, useful, and entertaining content with their friends. Make it easy for them to find your content and make it easy for them to share your content. >90% of internet pages have fewer than 10 links pointing to them – making them effectively unfindable. Avoiding this abyss of irrelevance requires more thought and effort than just pasting a sharing tool on your pages. It means actively syndicating and curating your content and distributing it not only through your brand’s social graph, but through the graphs of your most influential advocates and fans. Easy ways to do this include following/friending your influential’s followers/friends and retweeting/posting content even if it’s not yours.

7. The More Things Change Rule

Our research consistently demonstrates that email and IM remain popular ways to share content. So don’t throw out your old email marketing methods just because Facebook and Twitter are the newest communication platforms du jour. The tried-and-true methods of getting customers to share links via email and IM are still extremely valuable sources of traffic. Furthermore, incorporating social elements into your email, such as incentives to share, can dramatically enhance an investment you’re already making.

8. Horse before the Cart Rule

Success in Social happens when brands infuse their content with Social dimensions (Facebook Connect, most notably) NOT when they simply stick their ads and content in Social forums. In other words, if you want to succeed in Social Media, your brands and content need to have social attributes – content worth sharing, brands worth talking about, sites that encourage consumer participation and dialog. If your Social strategy relies on advertising in Social, probably better to hang onto your money.

9. The PR Pitfalls Rule

Blogger outreach and content seeding may be popular ways to get your message out into the social world, but our data shows that more than 90% of seeding has no material impact. Up to 5% gets some response, but less than 2% of seeding drives valuable traffic. In other words, if you can’t track efficacy of these efforts, don’t bother.

10. The Customer Service Rule

Social marketing programs succeed when they provide a service to the consumer. Traditional media planning processes that begin with Reach and Frequency targets are largely unhelpful in Social Media. Reach and Frequency – as well as engagement, preference, and conversion – are positive consequences of giving consumers content that is sufficiently relevant and useful that they propagate your message across their own social graphs. Focus on providing useful content and offers to your target audience and they will spread your messages for you.

Social media isn’t a science, but applying data-backed principles to your social efforts provides a structured framework that will enable you to improve effectiveness and ROI over time. And one final note: every rule has exceptions. We live in dynamic times. Find what’s true for you – and share.

Source - imediaconnection