Customer

“Number 1 app in UK, France and Germany…”. Those who regularly browse the Apple AppStore hunting for applications (apps) will undoubtedly be familiar with this type of catch phrase.  It’s generally what users first read when they land on app description pages (as if they were all number one!). Developers and designers use this type of technique to lure candid users to download the app by making them believe it’s the best of its kind on the market. This also illustrates how the success of an app is often assumed: the higher in the ranking, the more successful it is. But as you may probably know already, this approach is entirely flawed.

First of all, one can wonder how these rankings are built. As it is rarely clearly stated, we can only suppose that the number of downloads of an app governs its position in the table. But again, over what period of time? Number of downloads in the last month, quarter, year? This brings in the process a lot of vagueness and can surely not be used as a success measurement tool. Moreover, as Jakob Nielsen suggests in his column about iPhone App (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-apps-initial-use.html), users download more app than they actually need and use, which corroborates the idea that the number of downloads is not representative of the usage and can be resorted to as success criterion.

Then comes the question of the popularity of an app. App owners can write comments on the app description pages of the AppStore and rate them on a scale from 1 (negative) to 5 (positive). As a user experience professional, I strive to get the voice of the customer heard by my clients but I don’t consider it to be a viable success measurement method. Personal opinions are very subjective and tend to be only expressed when something goes wrong or incredibly well. Moreover, most of the app ratings derive from the ‘rating prompt’ that pops up on the iPhone when a user decides to delete an app. This biases the results in a negative way.

So how should the success of your app be measured? From a business perspective, the response is simple: the success of an app should be measured just like the success of a website, i.e. by defining and tracking KPI. Most of the apps provide a web-based service, which implies a digital connection between phones and web servers, just like there is a connection between PC and web servers. This allows data to be captured, such as number of information requests, conversion rates, app usage duration, app usage frequency, etc. In terms of web analytics tools, the capture of mobile phone applications usage is only at an embryonic stage but the trend is on the up and some of the current tools on the market are already capable of monitoring app usage.

Boasting about an app being the most used rather than the most downloaded would surely be more credible to end users!

At an event for Social Media Week London last week, a question was raised over whether responding to people on Twitter and similar social media sites would encourage more customers to air their complaints in public. In my opinion, the answer is that it probably does, particularly if people see others being responded to effectively. However, this should not be a reason to ignore disgruntled customers. People will still have their grievance, whether or not they choose to voice it. Read more…

As mobile penetration increases and sophisticated handheld platforms mature and develop it’s extremely interesting to study the impact of trends in consuming published content, and how printed media is adapting to changing times.

As we went to press this week, we awaited the imminent release of a long-awaited new iPad device from Apple. This will join existing published content consuming devices available in the UK which include Apple’s own iPhone, the Sony eReader and the Amazon Kindle in vying for the eyes of readers worldwide. Read more…

This article, written by Neil Mason, was originally published on Clickz.com on 20/11/09 and is republished here with permission.

Last time I looked at some of the challenges around understanding the dynamics of marketing activity when using the standard “attribution” models provided in most web analytic systems. Most of the time web analytics systems use a “last click” attribution model which credits the last marketing touchpoint with the sale or conversion and can give a highly misleading view on the role that different channels play in the awareness building and consideration phases of the purchase decision making process. One approach to overcoming this challenge is to view the various different attribution models that are found in some web analytics systems to understand the role that different channels play or an alternative approach is to use data feeds to extract the data from your web analytics systems into a database and to analyse the data there. Read more…

By Marty Carroll

This month’s newsletter combines November and December. In this last newsletter of 2009 we reflect on a difficult but eventful business year.

We saw customer experience play a critical role for many organisations strengthening their digital presence and cross-channel offering in order to provide the best possible levels of service for existing and new customers alike.

Looking back at 2009, Paul assesses how predictable the current landscape was at the outset, and then looks positively towards a tricky but exciting 2010. Meanwhile Amanda shares her insights from a conference on mobile, for those more concerned about sweating the small-screen stuff, and Lis takes a look down both sides of the narrowing divide between mobility and accessibility. Also, I look at the non-rational consumer, a lucrative segment.

Finally, Clare has been analysing our research into online retail habits ahead of the festive shopping season. If you would like a copy of the whitepaper as soon as it’s released, please e-mail info@foviance.com

I hope you have enjoyed your regular newsletters throughout the year. I’d also be very happy to hear from you directly with any feedback.

Marty.

In this issue:

• Looking back on 2009 and forward to 2010
• Researching the mobile experience
• The fine line between mobility and accessibility
• Tapping a lucrative segment: the non-rational consumer

Oracle commissioned research by Foviance, which was conducted to better understand online security measures and their impact on customers.

Foviance conducted consumer research between April and May 2009 into people’s attitudes, behaviours and understanding in the context of online security. Oracle used Online Survey, Diary Study and Focus Group methodologies in this research. 

The results were announced in July 2009 and are now available for downloaded

If you have any questions in connection with this research, we’d be happy to hear from you.

 This article, written by Neil Mason, was originally published on Clickz.com and is republished here with permission. 

Last week I was over in San Jose for the Emetrics Marketing Optimisation Summit for three days of input and output on all issues around digital analytics. As usual there was a wide variety of content to absorb and a breadth of issues to discuss. As I sit and write this at the airport on my way home (got to meet those ClickZ deadlines…) I get a chance to reflect on some of the key themes that came out of the conference. Read more…

I recently had dinner with 3 tech-savvy girlfriends at a high-tech restaurant where you can order food and drink, change the table’s look, play games and summon a waiter to pay the bill whenever you want using an interface projected onto the table. Theoretically, the restaurant reduces labour costs through automation, and customers get speedy service without much effort. Also, customers get to play with a cool interface while waiting.

The interface was similar to a Flash website with animated navigation. Each of us had a circular ‘trackpad’ area at our right (catering to the right-handed majority) which we used to control a red cursor to browse and order menu items, change the background colour or pattern of the whole table (so people sharing a table could impose their choices on each other) and play games like Solitaire (although we could not play games against each other, which would have been awesome).

Unfortunately for us, the customer experience did not live up to the hype, which is a shame because the concept is fun, innovative and customer-centric. The food was delicious (if slightly overpriced). However, the problem arose with service: while drinks, starters and main courses appeared within 10 minutes of ordering (each of us ordered dishes as we wanted them, and they arrived at our table separately), we waited 20 minutes for dessert before becoming impatient and worried. Without confirmation from a real person, we were unsure whether our electronic orders had disappeared into the ether or if the kitchen was just busy. It took us a while to flag down one of the few waiters, and dessert finally arrived another 10 minutes later.

Given the peak-end rule, it’s not surprising that problems at the end of the meal influenced our perceived customer experience much more than our delight at the beginning of the meal, highlighting the importance of the last interaction between companies and customers. A good concept needs to offer a consistent experience. Regardless of what channel the interaction is in, it must end as positively as it begins for it to be one that you wish to repeat, or better still, recommend to your friends.