Archive for the ‘experience design’ Category

Nice Placement: “floor ads” located on waiting spaces : Ambient marketing and merchandising using “opportunity” spaces

Monday, December 13th, 2010

In the Park City Mall this weekend I saw a “floor ad” that was in front of some vending machines.

These ads seem to be located throughout in the mall in front of spaces that people would be standing and waiting. The Pepsi one might be considered POS (Point of Sale) merchandising, but the elevator isn’t.

Floor ads aren’t new, but I thought the placement of the elevator ad was perfect. The location of ambient marketing floor ads becomes more important than if it it POS which is based on the product and put on the floor using the rule of thumb that people look where they are walking.  Ambient marketing needs to consider where the “opportunity” spaces and times are and put placements there.

Reflections

  • Possible Improvement – QR codes for follow on information and feedback.
  • Possible Enhancement – Pair smartphone feedback with more interactive floor display like by EyeStep (ambient retail marketing)
  • Possible Risk – the ad itself could get torn/broken since it is in a high traffic pathway and of course the risk of the technology not working.

Related Posts

Part 2: Visual Merchandising: Storefront Window Displays & Online Promos

See Also

Advertising; Fruit to Walls to Floor, Ads Are on the March – This article from NYT “98 talked about it, but most of those ads (excepting the bathroom one) didn’t seem to take advantage of the “waiting” time/space opportunity that the elevator examples does.

Floor Ads Company

Raising the Roof with Floor Ads

Matthew Milan of Normative interviewing Dennis Schleicher Jr. of UX Sears at IDEA09

Monday, September 28th, 2009

Here is a link to a video of Matthew Milan of Normative interviewing me about Innovation Parkour.

On YouTube
On Vimeo

Below is transcript of this segment of the interview
Matthew:

So you went in and did this on your own with another group. What did you try to improve with the practice of this method.

Dennis:

Well, I am a big believer in the concept of requisite variety. If we would task you all to go an invent a better fork. And you would go back and say “Oh yeah, it has 4 tines, let’s put 5 tines on it, let’s put 6 tines it.” That is a simplistic way of innovating. “Oh, you can eat more food. You can eat it faster. Isn’t that great!” But if you know lots of different ways of going about doing something such as you can do it with chopsticks like the Chinese. The Ethiopians eat it with flat bread. Royalty don’t eat at all, some one feeds it to them. Having that extra variety of approaching a problem and of seeing what the solution is allows us to innovate even more.

So I see the innovation parkour as a way to explore and to practice in a safe environment or a less non-risky environment, many ways of seeing or being creative. And it is having those obstacles are key to that experience. That is why you are taking about JJR (Jean-Jacques Rousseau) “living in chains, born in freedom” (which I paraphrased from the original “Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains”). That we always live within walls. Most of the walls we live in are, if we would start walking to them, it would take our lifetime plus one day to get there. We are not going to get there. So we have to artificially bring these walls together just like wall-walkers. You know if you bring two walls close enough together, you can shimmy up them with both of your legs and rise to the top. How do we find these obstacles and bring them close enough so we can think about things in new ways.

And the walking around and being together with people and going to these different places, you know the existentialist standing-up of the essence with you and people working together is like an epistemic game where these people together, they don’t have each answer all them-self, but working together in a group they are able to bring for some how some reason their tacit knowledge starts to come out and come together and the solutions are absolutely incredible. Its based on collaboration, people coming together, each having maybe part of the solution or part of the idea and then not just the people, but the different places or spaces in which they are playing. That comes up. And going around to these places, you can’t “imagine” the stereotype of what that monument is. That is just too easy, you are going to the actual place, you see what’s there, what works, what doesn’t, and it’s in your face.

So I think that aspect of being there in person and working with the other people, both combine incredibly to allow us to do design thats not the synthetic logical thought of first this step and then this step kind of a recipe, but it’s something of you are opening up the refrigerator door and saying ‘What’s for dinner with what you have.”

Decision Makers Don’t Have Time for Wireframes

Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009

The people who make the funding decsions don’t have time to read and “understand” the usual documents such as use-cases, detailed wireframes, and PRDs.  Some common situations are:

  • No one has the time to print out let alone read the use-case document, AKA use-case book.
  • The wireframes are too detailed to follow for those who don’t live and breath them.
  • The PRD is really just a cut&paste from a previous PRD.

What can you do? Take a look at the Function-Structure-Process Diagram.

Function Structure Process Diagram

 

 

The goal of this diagram is to do five things.

  1. Show a clear understanding of the goals (function) of the business or organization.
  2. Show a clear understanding of the process (activities) for the users and how they change over time. Change over time could involve learning something (as in this example), building brand awareness or loyalty, or conquest of new customers.
  3. Show the overall structure of the solution you are proposing which could be a web presence or web application.
  4. Show which specific parts of the structure you are proposing support which functions (goals.)
  5. Show which specific parts of the structure you are proposing support which processes (activities) that the users are engaged in. 

References and Further Reading (esoteric warning)

Yes, this is systems thinking with plurality.

Design and Philosophy by Peter Kroes, Pieter E. Vermaas, Andrew Light and Steven Moore

The Amish & Experience Design

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009

Amish Experience 1In the train station today I saw this flyer advertising visits to see, meet, and talk with Amish people. Wow. I have heard that agri-tourism is a growing business in my area, this proves it. It is almost like visiting “Disneyland” but “authentic.” It reminds of museum exhibit design. I like the idea and I wonder how much time/effort they spent “planning” or “designing” the experience. This reminds me of an idea that Steve Portigal had at one time. I like this “cultural immersion” as a way for people to see their own culture as well as learn about other cultures. For $50 bucks that sounds like a good deal to me. I think I might have to try this out.
Amish Experience 2

References
Amish Experience Visit-In-Person Tour Webpage

An article in the local Sunday News