Buick has launched a new print campaign, which features a QR Code, to help promote its eAssist technology.
Before commenting on the campaign itself, it's interesting to note that Buick has used print to mobile technology before, specifically Google Goggles. So, the question can then be asked, why make the switch now? Were there not enough scans through Goggles? Did the technology falter in some way? Or, was there something else that caused the switch?
When the reader of the advertisement scans the QR Code, they are linked to a short video which describes the company's eAssist technology in detail, which is great, but then the interactive/brand/product experience stops dead in its tracks. Why? When the video finishes, there is no link to the company's corporate website or a product page, and there is certainly no motivation or incentive for the reader to continue the information gathering and/or shopping experience, because there are no links to a dealer locator, a purchase discount offer, a post-sale services offer, etc., etc. Why bother trying to warm up a sales lead and then let it go cold again...on purpose?
I see this time and time again with barcode-based advertisements and it makes very little sense. If used in any shape or form for lead generation purposes, the scan resolve content, as well as the desired consumer response, should be taken into consideration, just like any other lead generation campaign.
While the company's marketing team probably spent a good deal of time considering and researching alternative print to mobile technologies to replace Goggles, they really should have spent time developing a cohesive and measurable strategy, and how the use of a code was going to help accomplish the strategy and its desired objectives. (They did have objectives set didn't they?)
2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL