2D Bar Code Strategy

Yesterday, I wrote an article about customized QR Codes and today, I found an advertisement in The New York Times for SPDR Gold Shares, an investment product called an exchange-traded fund (ETF), which features just such a code.

Question to the marketers at State Street Global Markets, which is more important or of greater concern, the placement of the ETF's ticker symbol (GLD) on the QR Code, which means very little to the consumer and does virtually nothing to further the brand, or to increase a consumer's ability to scan the code? If it's a matter of the latter then why bother to make use of a customized code and, more importantly, why not generate the code with a shortened URL which, in turn, will enable for more successful scanning? Due to the density and color of the code, it took me several attempts to scan it, so I wonder if a 2D first-timer would be as patient? Probably not.

Two more questions to SSGM. If the QR Code stood alone, away from the SPDR brand icon and the advertisement itself, would a consumer really recognize and know what the GLD logo on the code represented? My hunch, probably not. And, knowing that SPDR offers many different ETFs, does this mean that each fund gets a customized QR Code when advertised? If that's the case, how does this reinforce or further promote the SPDR brand? My hunch, it doesn't, it can't.

As mentioned in yesterday's article, there are a number of technology and marketing related best practices to know about and implement, in order for customized codes to work successfully and optimally, but it does not seem as though SSGM wishes to pay heed. Can anyone say, bandwagon?

Recently, an interesting article by Rachel Lamb was published on Luxury Daily titled, "How Customized QR Codes Can Drive CRM" and there are a few items written in the article, and quoted by others, that I would like to address and comment on. For background purposes, the article focuses on how luxury brands, in particular, have been using customized QR Codes.

Ms. Lamb: "Luxury brands have been using QR codes in out-of-home, print, in-store and online displays, but those that take it a step further by customizing them can increase brand loyalty and build CRM. Since there is usually no doubt knowing whose code it is when they are customized for brands, this technique will help to increase brand awareness and encourage customers to engage. Furthermore, since affluent consumers enjoy being a part of an exclusive experience, they may be more apt to scan a code if they see it attached to a famed luxury brand."

2DBS: First, Ms. Lamb, how can you prove that customizing a QR Code can increase brand loyalty and build CRM, whatever building customer relationship management means? Please don't get me wrong, I am all for proper brand management and the use of customized or designer 2D codes, when and where appropriate, but on what grounds can you base your statement? As far as I know,  no one company has conducted thorough research in this specific area. Second, the vast majority of QR Codes are displayed in an advertisement or on a product label along with the advertiser's logo or imagery so, why would a consumer not make the connection and know who stands behind the code? Third, in many instances, a customized code was created by an advertiser and, because the logo used in the code was so small or so nondescript, your guess is as good as mine as to what company was behind the code.

Mr. McKenna (Matt McKenna, founder and president, Red Fish Media): “Customized codes are creating brand recognition and inspiring user engagement because the whole thing about a luxury brand is the name. It’s a prestigious thing. Black-and-white QR codes are anti-productive. When you see a black-and-white code, you don’t know where it’s going or who it belongs to."

2DBS: Mr. McKenna, as with the above, how can you prove that customized codes are creating brand recognition and inspiring user engagement? Have you done any A/B split tests with your luxury brand clients? Yes, a customized code might serve to reinforce the recognition or awareness of a brand's logo, imagery, colors, etc. but, where's the proof? With respect to black and white codes being anti-productive, I can site a number of campaigns which used generic codes and they were all rather successful in the eyes and minds of the advertiser and/or the agency. Also, it's not the code itself that is anti-productive, it's really the scan resolve content, offer, call-to-action, etc., and how the campaign was executed from end to end, that controls productivity, effectiveness or efficiency. Mr. McKenna, consumers can look at hundreds of customized codes and they won't have a clue as to where each one links to unless the advertiser takes the time and makes the effort to inform them. So, to make that claim regarding generic codes really doesn't hold up.      

Mr. Alexander (James Alexander, founder/CEO, Vizibility): “This [customized QR Codes] can be quite valuable for luxury brands that want to be associated with traits like technical savviness, leadership, usefulness, playfulness or youthfulness. The value to luxury brands is even greater when you consider that QR codes are effectively free to use and don’t present uncontrollable risks to the underlying master brand.”

2DBS: Mr. Alexander, I agree that 2D technology can help associate the traits you mention with a brand, but when it comes to the freedom to use and the risks, controllable or uncontrollable, to an underlying brand, something has to be said. Take a look at my 2D Barcode Litmus Test Scorecard to the right and you'll see that campaigns judged as failures far out pace those that are judged as passes. Why? Because in all too many instances, free does not equate with know how, experience or best practice, and one advertiser after another thought they knew enough to develop and implement a 2D-based campaign, but, in reality, they were not even close. There are a number of technology and marketing related factors involved with implementing a truly effective 2D-based campaign, and if these are not addressed appropriately and accordingly they can be seen or interpreted as risks.
     
Mr. Alexander: "The biggest mistake that luxury brands make is developing promotions just for the sake of doing so. This is still true with customized QR codes."

2DBS: Mr. Alexander, I agree. Many companies create and use customized codes for no real reason or purpose. In many instances, a generic code could have worked just fine, or better.

Ms. Lamb's article raises a number of good points regarding customized QR Codes, and mentions a couple of 2D best practices to keep in mind, but falls short on proof of concept (i.e., proof that customized codes increase brand recognition and engagement). My two cents, sure a customized code makes for a more complete brand statement and/or image, but if customizing is not implemented correctly, similar to a generic code campaign, it will end up meaning very little and costing even more. Lastly, as mentioned above, know that there are a number of technology and marketing related best practices to put in place when considering customized codes. It's not just a matter of cutting and pasting a logo into a code.

What's your experience with customized QR Codes?

Capital One has launched a new print campaign which features a QR code and, as much as I would like to comment on the 2D experience, I would also like to comment on the advertisement as a whole.

First, the 2D experience. When the QR Code is scanned, the reader of the advertisement is linked to a mobile website that displays the bank's current yield/offer (a whopping 1.01%) and beneath the rate copy there are three touch tabs titled: The perks, Compare our rates and Call Us. Beneath the three touch tabs is a paragraph of disclaimer copy. Touch the "The perks" tab and a consumer can read more about the features of the offer being made. Touch the "Compare our rates" tab and a consumer can read a chart that compares rates with other well-known banks. Touch the "Call us now" tab and the bank's 1-800 phone number is preloaded into the mobile phone, waiting for the call to be activated. 

One of the issues I have with the content of the scan resolve is the 1-800 number. When dialed, the 1-800 number connects to a general customer service menu prompt, there is absolutely no mention or direct connection with the 5X offer made in the print advertisement. Why? Why not treat the phone call as though it were a web landing page, where the phone message is directly tied into the print advertisement? Or, shun the thought, why not have a live customer service rep answer the 1-800 number and speak directly to the 5X offer? More meaningful, personal, relevant, is it not? In so far as the rate comparison page and the perks page, no real value being offered here. Yes, the rate comparison is somewhat helpful, but not truly valuable, and the perk information is the same information that's found in the ad's disclaimer copy so, why just repeat it?

Second, the ad as a whole. There used to be a time when "high yield" meant 5%, 10%, 15% so, how does 1.01% equate with "high yield?" Coming from the financial services world I realize that rates and performance are all relative and dependent on many macro and micro factors, but seriously, is this the best a bank can do with respect to "high yield?" While the use of 5X in the ad's headline may pique a consumer's curiosity to learn more, how interested will the consumer be once they take the time to scan the QR Code and learn that the yield is only 1.01%? Clever use of copy on the company's part but, from the consumer's perspective, where does this leave them post-scan?  

Read the other perk's being offered and I wonder, are they really perks? Perk 1 - Lock in the promotional yield for one year. Why not offer the promotional yield until rates go above 1.01%? Perk 2 - Free ATMs. Most, if not all, banks offer free use of their ATMs so, how is this a perk? Yes, Capital One will reimburse up to $15 of other bank ATM usage fees per month, but this does not sound like free to me past $15. Perk 3 - Free checking. Many banks offer this service, so how original and/or unique is this perk? Perk 4 - Great for combined balances. When the bank is telling consumers that in order to reap the benefits of this account a minimum of $5,000 needs to be kept on balance across all deposit accounts, how does stipulating a minimum constitute a perk?  

What irks me the most about this advertisement is that the bank is offering nothing of real substance and forces consumers to either scan a code, text a short code, call a phone number or visit a website to find this out. Why not be creative, innovative when it comes to personal checking accounts? Surely there must be a way, but then, we are talking about a company that uses Viking-like personalities to promote part of its business. Lastly, at what point does the 2D provider step in and say something regarding scan resolve content and the interactive experience as a whole, because there is a well-known company behind this ad?

Would love to hear from the bank post-campaign and learn how many checking accounts were opened as a result. Surely that must be an objective above and beyond just scans.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

Recently, I read the website of a company that consults on brand management and marketing strategy and, in doing so, it dawned on me that with all that has been written or spoken about 2D barcodes, and how they are used for advertising and promotional purposes, no one has touched upon the fact that a 2D code, and the interactive experience that goes along with it, is really an extension of a company's brand.


As marketers, we know that a brand is an encapsulation of just about anything, tangible and intangible, that a company projects into the marketplace, whether it be a logo, corporate colors, a promotional tag line, a print advertisement, a product or service, a phone representative's voice, a mission statement, a URL address, an in-store display, a customer service policy, a technological application, a shipping box, a website, a public relations statement, a direct mail package or a live event, etc. so, why should a 2D barcode, and the interactive experience that goes along with it, be any different? Additionally, when a brand related component or element is used in an advertisement, the company's brand reputation, credibility, image and value are put on the line so, here too, why should it be any different with 2D barcodes? To illustrate how 2D codes and the accompanying experience is an extension of the brand, here are a few examples. 

Company 'A' displays a 2D barcode in a print advertisement, but the code is printed too small and cannot be scanned. The consumer walks away frustrated in attempting to access the code's contents. The result: brand value decreases.

Company 'B' displays a 2D barcode on an out-of-home advertisement and, when the code is scanned, the consumer is linked to a 30-second self-promotional corporate video which, when finished, links to nothing (i.e., no additional product information, no special offer, no information about retail locations, etc., etc.). The consumer feels as though his/her expectations were not met and spreads negative comments socially. The result: brand value decreases.

Company 'C' features a 2D barcode on an in-store product package label and, when the code is scanned, the consumer is linked to a mobile website that provides all of the product and company information that a consumer would want or need, as well as an incentive for purchasing the product right there and then in the store. The consumer is more than satisfied by the experience and spreads positive comments socially. The result: brand value increases.

Of course, these are simple illustrations of what may or may not happen in the real world, but they are not that far off. Companies work long and hard to craft, produce and foster a brand image, and a positive one at that, but all of this can be easily ruined if, when using 2D barcode technology, the code resolves to content and/or an experience that does not offer and/or deliver value, relevance, meaning, worth and benefit to the consumer, as well as a seamless, well-executed end to end mobile experience. It's that simple, or should be.

The main take away for those considering the use of 2D barcodes, make sure that the people involved in the decision making process (e.g., marketers, creatives, developers, etc.) fully understand that it's not just the ad's return on investment that's at stake, but the much larger and more important corporate brand as well.

Last week, Digiday hosted a conference in New York, which focused on "the potential and the pitfalls of mobile marketing and asks whether the third screen will take center stage or be relegated to mini-web status and limited to mini-web budgets." One of the conference's sessions debated the topic of mobile barcodes and, on the session's panel, were Bill McQuain (Director of Business Development, Microsoft Tag) and Abbe Cherkaoui (General Manager, Media, GoldSpot Media). While it seems as though a lot was covered during the session (I did not attend, but have read excerpts), there are a couple of items that I wanted to question and comment on.

First, the issue of, which barcode scanner app works with which code, came up and Mr. McQuain was quoted as saying, "...there are more than 200 different code readers available, making the market fragmented." In my opinion, the market is only fragmented by the type of 2D barcodes that are on the market (e.g., QR Code, Microsoft Tag, Data Matrix, etc.), not by the number of reader apps. And, for those who wish to claim that there are all too many code readers on the market and consumers get confused by them, all that needs to be done is for advertisers to disclose the name of the code type used in their advertisement or promotional piece, and to offer the name and/or location of a reliable and credible code reader app to download and make use of. What can be more difficult? Also, if an advertiser believes that the field of code reader apps is too difficult for consumers to navigate, why not consider the private labeling of an app?  

Second, as Mr. McQuain discussed the value that is delivered, or should be delivered, in a 2D campaign, he cited Allure magazine's annual "giveaway" issue, where about 35 Microsoft Tags were used throughout the publication. Question to Mr. McQuain and others at Microsoft Tag, when will you stop using the Allure "giveaway" campaign as the only campaign to reference scan numbers? Okay, over 400,000 scans took place, great, but how many readers of the magazine actually scanned the codes, how many more magazines were sold or subscribed to due to the use of Tags, how much product was sold by advertisers post campaign, how much web traffic was driven as a result of Tags, how did the Tags affect social media and/or social sharing of the campaign, over what time period were the scans made, etc.? These are the questions we would really like to know the answers to, not just that X number of scans took place. Besides, there must be other high profile Tag campaigns to talk about from a case study perspective. Yes, no, maybe? 

The above aside, it seems as though Mr. McQuain and Ms. Cherkaoui were both very much behind 2D barcode best practices in that they urged audience members to make certain that value was being delivered via the 2D experience, a strong and relevant call-to-action was being used, the target audience's use of mobile should be well understood and consumers need to know what to expect, or where they will be linked to, once a code is scanned.

If you attended the event, your first-hand comments are welcomed.

Why do some advertisers like to waste people's time? Oh yeah, because they think they are being so clever.

The other day, I received a direct mail package from InfinityAuto.com, a car insurance company. At the top of the "personalized" letter (Dear Roger Marquis, not even Mr. Marquis), a QR Code was displayed on a detachable card (see image below). When I scanned the code, I was linked to a page that had some copy and a large "Call Now" button, as well as the company's 1-800 number and a URL address.


A couple of questions for the marketers at InfinityAuto:

1) Do you believe you are saving consumers time and/or steps by having them 1) locate a code reader app, 2) wait for the app to open, 3) scan the code, 4) read the landing page, 5) touch the "Call Now" button and 6) touch the "call" button on my phone, all in order for them to call your company and speak with someone about rates, as opposed to them typing the 1-800 number into their phone and making the call themselves? Why make consumers jump through a 2D hoop if it's not necessary?

2) Do you believe this is a real 2D/mobile experience and best use of the technology? Sadly, you probably do. Why not use the code to link a consumer directly to a product page, a quote form, a rate comparison chart or, at a minimum, the company's website? Anything that would resemble a real experience, and a worthwhile one at that.

Once again, a very lazy and uninspired use of 2D barcodes.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

Recently, an interesting question surfaced on a LinkedIn discussion board, which read, "What set of criteria or indicators are used to determine the success of a barcode campaign?" Perhaps this is an area that you and your company are struggling with as well, so I will attempt to answer.

Advertisers can all look to number of code scans, number and type of pages clicked on, site entry and exit pages, bounce rates, number of products sold, etc., etc., but while the list of metrics may be the same from one 2D-based advertisement to the next, the actual determinants of success will vary, because the goals and objectives of the campaigns will, or should, vary. Here's an example: Advertiser "A" and Advertiser "B" both want to generate B2B sales leads via a 2D barcode campaign. Advertiser "A" sets a goal of 100 leads, whereas Advertiser "B" sets a goal of 1,000 leads. While the same metric may be used to measure each campaign (e.g., the number of leads obtained via the code scan), success can only be measured by the goal that each campaign has set for itself (e.g., either 100 or 1,000).

Or, let's look at it another way. Company "X" wants to use 2D technology to create media buzz about a new product and will be pleased with 10 new press mentions. Company "Y" wants to use 2D technology to sell more products via its mobile commerce channel and will be happy with $50,000 in sales. Two very different uses of 2D, both using different metrics to identify and determine success.

Each 2D campaign will have its own set of criteria or indicators, as well as goals and objectives, by which success can and will be determined, and this can be said of most any advertisement in general. For some reason, however, when it comes to 2D barcode tracking and measuring, a lot of people pay attention solely on scan rate numbers and are not focusing on the more important downstream numbers (i.e., post scan numbers) such as individual page traffic, time on site, social sharing and even, shun the thought, actual product/service sales. Sure, code scans may provide some useful information and answer some basic questions about the target audience, but certainly not all. Advertisers need to dig deeper to find meaning within the results of a campaign and to determine whether or not it was a success.

In summary, with no specific or standard set of criteria or indicators to use to determine the success of a 2D campaign, let alone baseline industry numbers or percentages to act as a guide, advertisers should conduct their own market/campaign research just as they would when making use of direct mail, email, landing pages, banner ads, etc. 2D is no different. Create A/B split tests, measure over time, measure frequency, measure ad distribution or placement, etc., etc.. If conducting this research can be done in-house great but, if you choose to use an outside 2D provider, ask what their capabilities are when it comes to conducting the type of market/campaign research described above.

Recently, the Park Lane Hotel placed this QR Code-based advertisement in The New York Post, and I like it because it is simple yet effective.


When the code is scanned, the reader of the ad is linked to a very well designed mobile site. At the top of the site, there is special offer copy (25% off any room, any rate in the hotel) that links directly to the copy found in the ad. Beneath the special offer copy there are navigation tabs for: Specials, Reservations, Accommodations, Location, Photo Gallery and Home. In each section, there is plenty of additional information about the property, all laid out in an easy to view and navigate manner.

What I love about this application is that it is so basic, delivering the exact information that a traveler/tourist wants and needs, as well as a special discount. Win, win. The only other item I might have included on the mobile site is customer reviews. Travelers/tourists are always interested in what others have to say about a hotel, restaurant, city, landmark, etc. so, why not include it here? Also, as much as I advocate attaching a line or two of descriptive and/or instructional copy adjacent to a code, in this instance, I believe, it works without, because the idea behind the ad is that it's all about a secret.

For companies in the hospitality industry, this is a 2D barcode campaign to replicate.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: PASS

Every so often, an advertiser using 2D barcodes will use the word "exclusive" to describe the scan resolve content. The question I have for these advertisers is, how do you define exclusive?

Recently, Mobil, the oil company, ran this print advertisement in a national sports magazine and the company used the word exclusive ("Snap a pic, or scan with a QR code app for exclusive Mobil 1 content.") in the caption near the QR Code.


When the code is scanned, guess what the reader of the advertisement is linked to? Go ahead, guess what the "exclusive" content is. Want to try again? How about a 15-second video of the two drivers shown in the ad talking between themselves about the type of car racing they do. That's it. Sound "exclusive" to you? It certainly doesn't to me.


From a 2D/mobile experience perspective, the scan resolve in this ad is virtually worthless and offers nothing of use, value or benefit for the reader. Looking beyond the actual content itself, how "exclusive" is the scan resolve when the circulation of the magazine is over two million people? Granted, not all readers will find the code and want to scan it, but just let's say they did. All exclusivity then goes out the window.

Advertisers, 2D or not, need to pay attention to the copy they are using and realize the sophistication of their audience. Not only is this ad's scan resolve worthless, so too is the entire experience, because even after watching the video there are no links or messages to keep the reader of the ad engaged. No product information is provided. No incentive to purchase is offered. The entire experience simply amounts to a waste of time.

If this were to be exclusive content then, why not offer it to the first 50 or 100 readers of the ad that scan the code? At a minimum, provide content that is truly meaningful, relevant and beneficial to the consumer, which does not have to take the form of a video. All it takes is a little bit of thought. 

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

From time to time, I write about general marketing thoughts, questions, ideas, etc., and this is one of them.

The other night, I was watching television and happened to see a commercial by Dodge for its new Durango truck and, after the 30 seconds, I'm sitting there asking myself, are they serious? Does Dodge really think this creative presentation, message, experience is going to motivate and/or interest me, or anyone else for that matter, enough to want to learn and inquire more about the truck? But, as I was pondering that commercial, another one came on from BMW and, here too, I am left wondering, are they serious? Who in their right mind comes up with this creative and, to go one further, who signs off on this nonsense. Sorry if I am hurting someone's creative feelings but, can you honestly tell me that someone is going to buy or become interested in buying a BMW, because a fuel tanker plane hovers over a convertible BMW, lowers a refueling boom and then proceeds to release coffee into the driver's coffee cup, as if it were refueling another aircraft in mid-flight?

You talk about marketing ROI and where the dollars go. Who keeps tabs on these types of commercials, this type of creative and says, yes, we are getting our money's worth, so let's keep going in that strategic/creative direction? You ask me and I haven't a clue.

In writing this, two other car commercials come to mind, one for Mercedes-Benz and one for Cadillac. In the Mercedes commercial, we see a guy standing in the middle of the desert and driving by him at different angles and high speeds are a number of Mercedes cars. Yeah, so? All that's happening is that the guy is getting covered with dust from the passing cars. In the Cadillac commercial, a car is racing down the salt flats and, as it does, arrows are being shot at it, as if it were a remake of some Greek or Roman war classic. The idea is that the car's design was inspired by the shape of an arrowhead and so with all the arrows being flung at the car, this is suppose to mean or tell us something. Does it speak to you, because it certainly doesn't speak to me.

Do the automakers, or other advertisers in general, really believe that they have to dumb things down so much in order for consumers to become interested? What about elevating the conversation/message and talking about things that really matter, like safety, fuel economy, resale value, low maintenance cost, post-sale service offerings (e.g., roadside assistance, etc.) or just to know the unique colors or options that come with the car.

Maybe it's just me, but as the good Seth Godin says, these are all interruptions and consumers these days simply don't like them. When will the automakers and other advertisers take note of this and realize there are plenty of other ways to engage and interact with an audience and, perhaps, this is where the valuable and limited marketing dollars are spent. Has anyone heard of a new technology/marketing channel called mobile?

If I were in the market for a new bed mattress, chances are I would seriously consider making my purchase from a company called Saatva. Read the company's history, product information, product guarantee, pricing, and customer reviews on the company's website and it seems as though Saatva has a virtually bullet-proof business model, marketing strategy, unique selling proposition, product line-up and offer. But, once the QR Code, which is displayed in the company's newspaper print advertisement, is scanned, the image of perfection (i.e., bullet-proof) quickly fades away.


When the QR Code is scanned, the reader of the ad is linked to the desktop version of the company's website...nothing mobile going on here. Seeing how well the company markets itself via its website, it's a wonder as to why they have not created a mobile website to go along with the QR Code that's being used. Somewhere, somehow the ball was dropped regarding mobile, and maybe this is a perfect real life example, which illustrates the points made in my last article.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

When a company decides to use 2D technology in their advertising, on their packaging, etc., there are a number of technology and marketing related variables, components and best practices at play which, alone or in tandem, can cause a 2D-based campaign to sink or swim, or to be as effective or as efficient as it could or should be.

Beyond the factors mentioned above, I believe there is one overarching reason as to why mobile barcode campaigns often don't deliver and succeed, and this is based on a company's marketing organization and structure. Please allow me to explain.

When marketers talk about or define their role or function within an organization, they often use the term silo to do so. And, as much as marketers may see themselves within a silo, they also use the term to describe sales, technology, finance, operations and other departments or groups within the company. Because each functional area (i.e., silo) has its own set of goals, objectives, projects, priorities and challenges, etc., it should come as no surprise that the lines of communication and/or ability or willingness to collaborate between departments or groups is often weak or, worse still, totally nonexistent. And, as a result of this type of working condition or organizational structure the company suffers, as does its customers. Sound familiar?

Now, let's take this a step further and focus on a company's marketing department. Today, marketing departments are often made up of various groups, which can include on- or off-line direct response, web development, market research, digital advertising, print advertising, television advertising, mobile, out-of-home advertising, search, media buying, telemarketing, events, corporate communications, public relations, call center, customer service, etc., call them what you will. And, as mentioned above, in relation to functional silos, the same can be said for groups within the marketing department, where each group is viewed as a stand alone silo with its own set of goals, objectives, projects, priorities and challenges.

So, when it comes time to develop and implement integrated strategies or campaigns, the strategies and campaigns stand a good chance of not being able to live up to their fullest potential, especially from the very beginning, only because real or perceived marketing silos were present. Does any of this sound familiar?

With marketing silos acting as communication and creative barriers, I believe it's all to easy for marketers, creatives and/or developers to get in their own way when it comes time to conceive, craft and implement a 2D-based campaign, because, at any point in time, who's to say that all are on board with 2D technology, let alone mobile and, further still, best practices. If the people who need to be involved with a 2D-based campaign can't find it within themselves to figure out how to break down the silos, establish a game plan and adhere to it, then I believe it's relatively easy to see where the strategic, creative and technology breakdowns are occurring and what's causing so many ill conceived and poorly executed 2D-based campaigns from the get go. (I also believe there is a great deal of misinformation being doled out by agencies and 2D providers, but that's for another article.)

In thinking this through, and I know I have a leg to stand on based on a recent conversation with the CEO of an established mobile barcode platform, I believe a new best practice should be considered and added to the mix. What if we were to call it "Marketing Collaboration?" The main tenant of the best practice is that in order for 2D-based campaigns (i.e., the end-to-end 2D/mobile experience) to be as meaningful, valuable, beneficial and successful as possible for the company, as well as for the consumer, marketing in its entirety must realize the need for open lines of communication and the sharing of information and resources, and to make whatever accommodations that are necessary in order to facilitate such items or activities.

What's your take? Should this be considered as a new 2D barcode "industry" best practice?

(Thank you, M.G.)

Last week, Mobile Marketer hosted a Mobile Marketing Summit and one of the sessions, which was paneled by CEOs from various companies in the mobile space, discussed the topic "What Needs to Happen to Accelerate Mobile Advertising and Marketing Deployment During the Holidays." During the session, the topic of mobile barcodes came up and was heatedly debated by panelists Greg Schmitzer (CEO, Mad Mobile), Nicole Skogg (CEO, SpyderLynk), Oren Michels (CEO, Mashery), Mike Wehrs (CEO, Scanbuy), Amielle Lake (CEO, Tagga Media) and Ken Harlan (CEO, MobileFuse).

In reading the session's highlights, the one comment that I would like to focus on came from Nicole Skogg of SpyderLynk, the company behind the proprietary barcode format called SnapTag. Ms. Skogg said, "One of the issues around bar codes is that there are a lot of competing standards, which is adding to the confusion in the marketplace." And continues by saying, "I think we will end up with one kind of bar code that means take me to a Web site and others that have some other kind of functionality behind them.” To Ms. Skogg, and others that see the industry from her perspective, I disagree.

First, I do not believe the term "competing standards" accurately represents the mobile barcode industry. In my mind, there are a number of competing code formats or types, but there is no real standard or one standard. QR Codes differ from Data Matrix Codes, which differ from Microsoft Tags, which differ from SnapTags, which differ from JAGTAGs, etc. Yes, they all compete, but there is no real or one standard in the industry.

Second, I do not believe there is as much confusion in the marketplace (i.e., among consumers), as Ms. Skoggs and others believe is present and, even if there was, it is easy to correct the situation. From my perspective, and from what others write and report on as well, it appears as though QR Codes are the most widely used codes in the U.S. marketplace and by quite some distance. Also, if advertisers simply identified the code that was featured in their ad then the thought, or worry, of confusion would go right out the window (e.g., "Scan the QR Code to receive a $20 discount on your next purchase." "Scan this Microsoft Tag, etc.").  Also, if confusion was a worry, why or how does Ms. Skogg explain her standing behind a product like SnapTag, which is not as far along as QR Codes with respect to use and adoption by advertisers?

Third, Ms. Skoggs talks about multiple codes in the marketplace and how confusing they are but, how much more confusing would it get if there was one code for this type of function/action and another code for that type of function/action? If I understand Ms. Skoggs correctly, which I believe I do, that would be insane and stop the use and adoption of mobile barcodes dead in their tracks. From what I can tell, there is no need for specialized codes. Am I missing something?

I read these comments from a CEO in the industry and I just wonder. What is her company's game plan? What are their goals and objectives as a provider, a proprietary one at that? What does she see when a company like JAGTAG, which offers a very similar type of code, gets acquired? 

Although these are the only comments that I wanted to focus on, it's worth mentioning that the panel seemed to have touched on the key factors and best practices which need to be in place to ensure the successful use of barcodes, and mobile, during the holiday shopping season. Just hope the audience was listening.

Recently, Bertazzoni, the Italian kitchen equipment manufacturer, launched this ad which features a QR Code. As beautiful as the ad creative/design is (although the code lacks a call-to-action, description, instruction, etc.), in addition to the product itself, much less so can be said about the 2D/mobile experience. Why? Because there is none. 

When scanned, the code brings the reader of the ad to the desktop version of a deep page on the company's website, a page that doesn't not even appear correctly on a mobile phone, or at least not on mine. So kudos to the company for wanting to try 2D technology in a print ad, but shame on the company's marketing/creative team for not thinking through the 2D/mobile experience from end to end, strategically and tactically, and not offering consumers or kitchen designers something, anything, of value or benefit.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

As of this morning, there were 499 members in the LinkedIn group that I created and manage, 2D Barcode Strategy & Creative. Who will make it 500?

Several months ago, I started the group as an offshoot of this blog, so that others interested in all things 2D barcodes could more easily ask questions, start discussions, learn from others and help others by providing expert opinion and knowledge. Based on the feedback that I have gotten, it appears as though the group has made good on all of these accounts.

With members from all over the globe, representing a number of industries and professions, perhaps you would find membership in the group to be of use and benefit for the work you do. If anything, group membership provides a means to further your professional and/or LinkedIn network Hope to see you there.

If you are already a 2D Barcode Strategy & Creative member, thank you for your interest and support.

These two advertisements were spotted in the latest issue of Architectural Digest; one has a Microsoft Tag and the other a QR Code.







Although I am usually interested in analyzing and commenting on an entire advertisement, what I want to focus on with these two particular ads is the copy that's associated with each code. For the top ad, the copy reads, "Modern History by Wood-Mode. Download at the App Store or www.2dscan.com." For the bottom ad, the copy reads, "The custom furniture finish that is as individual as a fingerprint. Each piece is signed by and dated by designer Sally Sirkin Lewis. Get the free mobile app at http://gettag.mobi Watch the Ombre Video."

In regard to the top ad, what is the consumer suppose to download at the app store? What is the consumer suppose to download at www.2dscan.com? What type of website is www.2dscan.com? Nothing is defined or explained, whether it's the QR Code itself or what is to be downloaded.

In regard to the bottom ad, the consumer is told to get the free mobile app, but why? What does the app have to do with the Tag? Also, the consumer is instructed to watch the video, but how are they supposed to do that? Here too, nothing is fully explained or described.

Both of these companies may wish to believe that the vast majority of consumers are on board with and understand how to use mobile barcodes, but they aren't. Not yet. So, from a best practice perspective, it makes sense for advertisers to describe, explain and instruct consumers on what a code is, why they should scan it, where they will go upon scanning and how to locate and download a code reader app. All it takes are a couple of short sentences to detail the above information, which not only serves to inform the consumer, but it also works to motivate the consumer to engage and interact with the ad (i.e., brand, product, service, etc.) via the code.

Of course, I could not help myself, I went ahead and scanned the codes anyway. The top code resolves to the desktop version of the company's website, and the bottom code resolves to a 1:44 minute You Tube video. Not optimized for mobile on the first. Too self promotional and not optimized for mobile on the second. In relation to both ads, what's in it for the consumer? Answer, not much, and that's a shame.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL and FAIL

This mobile barcode campaign is a mess, so I will try my best to keep my analysis as succinct as possible. 
 
Recently, New Balance, the sneaker company, opened a new flagship store on Fifth Avenue in New York City. As you enter the store, you can't help but notice the large gold and black QR Code, which is displayed on a column facing the front door, and the headline which reads, "Go For Gold" (see below). As prominent as the code display may be to people walking in the front door, or even looking into the store from the front windows, the code and its headline, I believe, means very little to the average consumer and has probably netted very few responses (i.e., scans). Why? Let's take a closer look.

First, the average consumer will look at the code and the headline and walk right by it. Why? Because there is no descriptive, instructional and/or call-to-action copy next to or near the code for a consumer to read. What? There is descriptive and instructional copy next to the code. Where? Where? Oh, there it is, it's hiding behind the point-of-sale kiosk, which is located underneath the code and in front of the column (see below). Well if that's not the perfect place to put copy that important, then I just don't know where else is. 


Who came up with the bright idea of placing copy in this location? If I was not as in tune with 2D campaigns as I am, I would have had no reason to hunt down and locate the instructional and descriptive copy hiding behind the kiosk. For that reason alone, I do not believe many will scan the code, but let's keep going.  

Second, let's pretend I am a savvy consumer and know all about mobile barcodes. I enter the store, notice the QR Code and scan it. I am then brought to a page that has the following message displayed, "iPhone users, think you can outrun NYC? Then watch the video below to find out how you can get a shot at free exclusive New Balance shoes and a 14K gold baton valued at $20,000." Beneath the play button for the video there is another message, which reads, "Don't have an iPhone? Get $20 of EXCELLENT free from New Balance by clicking the link below." Plenty to discuss here...

It seems as though New Balance wants to think of consumers as haves and have-nots. Consumers either have an iPhone or they don't and we, as a company, are really only interested in the ones that have. The game the company created, as described in the 1:14 minute video, was only intended for iPhone users, all others are out of luck and can settle for a $20 gift card, no contest for you (said like the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld). What kind of corporate message does that send or image does that project? Is the company not smart enough to develop a contest to be all inclusive, where mobile phone type does not matter? I guess not but then, why was I able to view the video on my Android phone? Does New Balance really have a handle on this thing called mobile?

With respect to the second message that appears on the scan resolve web page, what's "EXCELLENT" supposed to mean or refer to? If I am a fan of New Balance I would know the company is referring to a new line of sneakers, but what if I'm not? Also, is correct grammar being used in the sentence? I don't believe so, but that's for another discussion altogether.

What I also don't understand about the whole promotion is, when does the contest end? No date is given in the video or anywhere next to the code on the column. So, do I really want to spend the time and do what the video tells me I have to do in order to play the game and possibly win, only to find out that the contest is already over?

Sorry, I have to stop here. My mind is numb after trying to make sense of this campaign. Okay, one last thought/comment/question...What's in it for New Balance? The company runs a contest, it offers gift cards, gold batons, free sneakers, etc. but, where and how are they collecting consumer data and information for future campaigns and promotions? Am I missing something? Yes, they will (might) have some scan data, but then what?

Lastly, it's worth noting that this QR Code (which is a JAGTAG QR Code) was the same code used in print ads that the company ran when the store first opened a couple of months ago. Why is the print ad code being used in-store? Yes, they both want to promote the company's new line of sneakers, but the consumer is already in the store shopping, not reading about the sneakers in the local newspaper. Shouldn't the scan resolve be something all together different if the audience itself is different (i.e., print ad reader vs. in-store shopper)?

Enough.  Hope you learned something.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

With just three months left in the year, which 2D barcode-based campaign will rise above all others and be selected as the Best Campaign for the Year?

To date, only a handful of campaigns have passed my 2D Barcode Litmus Test and, if past is preview,  I do not expect to find many more winning campaigns (i.e., those that pass the litmus test) over the next three months to add to the list and make a selection from. So, to all of you advertisers and agencies out there looking to incorporate 2D technology into your advertising or packaging, etc., prove me wrong and show me that your campaign is worthy of winning the title "Best Campaign of the Year" and the $250,000 check that goes along with it (you know that's a joke, right?).

If you are an advertiser or agency that would like to submit your campaign for review and consideration, please send an email with images of the advertisement or packaging, a brief overview of the campaign/strategy and the results of the campaign if they can be disclosed. Because I only see a tiny fraction of the total number of campaigns out in the marketplace, it would be great if I had that many more campaigns to review and consider.

In mid-December, I will start the review process and, by the end of the month, a winner will be announced. For the campaigns that have already passed the litmus test and those that make their way to the "pass" column over the next three months, good luck and may the best campaign win.

Thank you in advance for any additional submissions. Any questions, comments or suggestions, please let me know.