2D Bar Code Strategy

2D/QR Barcode Strategy & Creative is a LinkedIn group, which serves as a forum for people across the country, and around the world, to share news, case studies, creative ideas, opinions, insight, etc., about all things related to mobile barcodes. If you are active on LinkedIn and have an interest in mobile barcodes, or just marketing in general, I invite you to join the group and add to the discussion.

Eataly, the Italian food and drink emporium in the heart of New York, makes use of QR Code shelf talkers throughout the store to help shoppers learn more about the various products, and there are many, on display.


This particular shelf talker is in the beer section, and what I like so much about it is that, when scanned, the QR Code brings a shopper to a third-party website, beeradvocate.com, to read and learn more about the beer on display. Sure, Eataly could have linked the scan to their own website and offered more information and possibly some reviews, but they are not true beer experts, not like beeradvocate.com. Whether this was done intentionally or not (i.e., linking to a third-party expert site for reviews and commentary versus not having to produce one more page or additional content for their own site), the tactic works well because, in my mind, it helps to raise the level of the "conversation" and moves a shopper that much further along the purchase decision path.


Having seen shelf talkers before and in a variety of settings, I believe it serves both the company and the customer well, when and where appropriate, to be able to tap into and make use of the thoughts, comments, opinions, reviews, etc. of an objective third-party.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: PASS

This Verizon out-of-home billboard, which features a QR Code (see lower left-hand corner), was spotted at a near-by shopping mall. In viewing the placement of the billboard and the way the code was generated, my question to the company's marketing/creative brain trust is, what were you guys thinking?


For starters, the billboard is located on the third floor of the shopping mall facing outward into an open-air space (unfortunately, we have seen placements like this before). So, unless a shopper is able to levitate in mid-air, or decides to inconvenience themselves by having to stand next to the left-hand side of the billboard and reach over the railing with their phone, hoping they can position their phone correctly and not drop their phone, can the code be scanned. Not a very practical way of thinking about, planning for or initiating the user/brand experience.  


Of course, one could ask, can't the code be scanned from where I took the picture? No it can't, and for one simple reason, the code is way too dense (see image above) and cannot be scanned from such a distance and/or angle. Instead of using a URL shortener, Verizon decided to use the long URL for the scan resolve landing page, which consists of over 200, yes 200, characters. Why the company chose to do this without realizing the outcome (i.e., a code that is too dense and difficult to scan at distance/angle) is anyone's guess. Granted, this particular billboard is probably one of many that may have been placed into the market but, why choose this media location knowing that an objective of the campaign is to have consumers scan the QR Code. Or, am I presuming too much and code scans were not an objective? Couldn't the company have created two different billboards, one with and one without a code? Or better yet, create one billboard, but make sure the code is large enough and simple enough (i.e., not overly dense) to be scanned at a distance and at an angle. It's not rocket science.

Enough about this campaign, we need not get into the scan resolve content.    
   
2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL

Now, back to our regularly scheduled program...the analysis of mobile barcodes in the wild. It's been a while since my last campaign critique, and this one from Liebherr, the German kitchen appliance manufacturer, looks promising.


This print advertisement was found in the April issue of Architectural Digest and, when the QR Code is scanned, it leads the reader of the ad to a mobile website. Once on the mobile site, the reader can access a product catalog, the pages of which are completely mobile optimized, a dealer locator and a handy tool to help determine the best refrigerator for a kitchen space.  


Simple? Yes, but the site delivers plenty of information for those who are interested in learning more about this not-so-well-known appliance manufacturer.   

In seeing that the mobile site is in beta, the company may wish to consider adding widgets (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, email, etc.) to each product page or the site in general, so as to enable social sharing. Also, why not display customer reviews or even professional chef endorsements for the products, as these go a long way in the consumer decision-making process.

With respect to the print ad, it would not hurt to have an intriguing call-to-action next to the code, in addition to code scanning instructions. And, if the company wants to generate a little media/social buzz from the print ad, what about developing some sort of contest, the prize of which is a new Liebherr kitchen or professional cooking lessons or a trip to Germany or something else of interest and value.
 
2D Barcode Litmus Test: PASS

From one market research study to another, from one industry trend report to another, the results are in and they are all very consistent: the ownership and use of mobile phones, specifically smart phones, is on the rise globally and there are no signs which indicate that this will stop or reverse itself any time soon. No surprise, I know, but what's a marketer to do, as it relates to the mobile channel? Does he/she all of a sudden decide to integrate mobile-based technologies and/or products (e.g., banner ads, coupons, SMS, mobile barcodes, visual search recognition, near field communications, digital watermarks, augmented reality, etc.) into his/her marketing mix, or does he/she simply do nothing and wait for the various components within the mobile channel to develop and mature that much more?

For many marketers, making this decision is a real dilemma, and rightfully so, because there is, or can be, a lot at stake. Should investments be made today knowing the pace of change? What is the competition doing or not doing? What are consumers demanding or wanting? Is there in-house expertise and capacity to effectively manage this new channel? The list goes on, and not only is it a question of deciding whether or not to integrate mobile into the mix but, what happens once a decision to move ahead is made? It's really a two-fold dilemma.

On the one hand, if a marketer decides not to integrate mobile into their mix then they stand a very real chance of alienating the ever increasing number of consumers who choose to make mobile their first screen, in addition to possibly loosing ground to the competition. On the other hand, if a marketer decides to integrate mobile into their mix then they stand a very real chance of expanding their reach and holding their ground versus the competition. But, what about the dilemma's second fold? Great that a marketer decides to embrace mobile, but how do they go about choosing which type of mobile-based technology(ies) and/or product(s) to use and have integrated with the rest of their marketing mix? In my mind, this is the real question that a marketer needs to ask and be concerned about, meaning it's less about "if" and "when," but more about "how."

How a marketer may choose to integrate mobile can be a daunting and complex exercise, all for the simple reason that there are so many options available to them. For example, with mobile barcodes, a marketer can choose between open-source codes (e.g., QR Codes or Data Matrix Codes) or proprietary codes (e.g., Microsoft Tags or SnapTags). If the open-source route is chosen then a marketer needs to decide in-house or out-of-house with respect to code generation, management and tracking. If in-house, are the resources available to do an effective job? If out-of-house, which vendor or platform to use? And, the same can be considered or asked if choosing SMS, augmented reality, visual search recognition, near field communications, etc., because for each technology or product there is more than one provider/platform.

So then, back to the original question, what's a marketer to do with respect to the mobile channel? In my mind, the answer is to take action, some action, because the pace is too fast and the opportunity costs are to great to merely sit on the sidelines. By taking "some" action, I am referring to action that is calculated and cautious, as opposed to random and with no fore thought.

The steps below, which are in no particular order and are by means all inclusive, may help a marketer make the decision as to whether or not mobile is for them and, if so, how to prepare for including the channel into the mix.  

1. Determine goals and objectives for the strategy or campaign and understand how mobile may help to achieve those goals and objectives
2. Understand internal resources, capabilities and limitations (e.g., personnel talent, budgets, equipment, etc.) and be prepared to align them accordingly
3. Understand what's necessary to obtain buy-in from senior management on down
4. Understand the target market and other key demographics and how they may or may not react to mobile
5. Learn about different mobile-based technologies and products (advantages/disadvantages, strengths/weaknesses, costs, requirements, best practices, etc.)
6. Learn about individual vendors/platforms and what they have to offer with respect to product, service and, perhaps, training and support
7. Examine real-life case/user studies and/or third-party research reports
8. Determine if mobile can be supported like other channels for the long-term 

With these steps serving as a guide, once a decision to include mobile has been made, a marketer can then start to pick and choose which mobile-based technology and/or product makes the most sense. And, from here, it's important that marketers keep in mind the need for experimentation and analysis. Chances are the first implementation of mobile will not be exact, so it may be necessary to make adjustments along the way, and this should be expected, not feared. Just think of the learning curve when it came to the Internet, email, direct mail and most any other marketing medium or channel. It may take time to master the mobile channel, but the more research and thought that goes into making the mobile decision up front the greater the chance for success in the long term.

To expand on the comment made above, while the first attempt at mobile (i.e., the integration of a particular technology and/or product) may go south and not live up to expectations, this should not deter a marketer from either realigning the expectations and trying again, or from trying another mobile-based technology and/or product all together. For example, if mobile barcodes don't fit the bill then, perhaps, mobile coupons might. If augmented reality doesn't work as planned maybe mobile barcodes do. As with everything else marketing related, mobile is a matter of trial and error. Learn from past experiences, campaigns, strategies, etc., and try to make the next one that much better, stronger, more relevant, more meaningful, more valuable, more consumer focused.

In summary, the mobile channel might not be for every marketer and every business, but serious thought and consideration needs to be given before it can be simply written off as a way to engage and interact with potential and/or existing customers. As mentioned above, more and more consumers are using their mobile device as their first screen, not only for web browsing, but for activities as important as search, payments, social sharing, email, coupon redemption, calendar and address books, photo storage, directions and location, tickets and, least we forget, making a phone call.

The other day, an article ran on MarketingVox titled, "The Final Word (Maybe) On Whether QR and NFC Really Work for Consumers."

The article opens with this paragraph: "There has been plenty of doubt cast on whether consumers are as enamored with QR Codes and Near Field Communication technologies as marketers are. Now, an experiment underway in Reading, England may deliver the final word."

Question to our players at home, in the world of marketing, since when is one research study enough to be or set the "final" word?

The article continues:

"Outdoor media owner JCDecaux and planning and buying firm Kinetic have partnered to install 325 poster sites in the area, which is near Heathrow Airport to the west of London, according to Screen Media magazine.

The point of the four-week test is not to see if the technologies work—by now we know they do—but if they really engage consumers.

During the trial, 12 brands–Test the Near Future, are EA Games, H&M, ITV2, Lucozade Sport, Lynx, Magnum, Mercedes, Morrisons, Toni&Guy, Universal DVD, Universal Special Projects, and Vaseline–will take turns to providing content for consumers to download  using NFC contactless technology, or via a QR app if their handset does not support NFC.

Clearly, the participating brands are hopeful the test will yield positive results. Richard Brooke, Unilever UK’s communications and buying manager, told New Media Age that 'This trial is a test-bed to understand the way in which we can use smartphones to open up new ways of enabling brand interaction. If the trial proves that consumers enjoy this interaction, it could shape the future of marketing.'"

It's great that firms wish to better understand consumer perception and reaction to mobile barcode and NFC technology, but I wonder how much attention will be given to the scan resolve content, calls-to-action, incentives, offers, promotions, etc. to be found in these test campaigns. Will the scan resolve be relevant, meaningful, of value and benefit to the consumer? How will this be judged and factored into the study? Will the researchers conduct qualitative-based interviews with the consumers in the area to learn why they did or did not choose to scan, or just work off of scan rates? Also, will demographics and phone ownership information be tracked and studied, as well as previous scanning experience?

While the study will be conducted over a number of weeks and across dozens of poster sites, is this study somewhat flawed/one-sided in that maybe consumers would rather scan a code in the comfort of their home or office when reading a magazine or a product package, etc., and not out in public?

Lastly, it will be interesting to see if this research supports the scan trend reports we have seen from the various code providers and research firms, all of which show a continued increase in scanning.

If you are a media buyer tasked with researching and purchasing space for an interactive advertisement which makes use of mobile barcodes, digital watermarks, visual search, augmented reality, etc., here's a clue...find a location that has Internet connectivity 24/7. Failure to provide consumers with the ability to interact with the advertisement, when they want to, will only lead to unfulfilled expectations and possibly a negative impression of the brand, product or service. Additionally, if there is difficulty scanning a code and linking to the intended content the likelihood of a consumer socially sharing the advertisement and/or experience will decrease.

Just a thought (read: best practice) to keep in the back of your mind. 

Over the past couple of weeks, wtfqrcodes, a website that posts images of some of the dumbest and most ridiculous commercial uses of QR Codes yet to be seen (even more so than what's found on this blog) has been gaining a lot of attention, and rightfully so.


While a website like wtfqrcodes may poke fun at what could be/is a very useful technological application for enabling consumers to engage and interact with a brand or product, my question is, where is the accountability? Who's ultimately responsible for allowing these campaigns to come to the fore? (And, my thoughts don't stop here, because I continually ask this question for just about every automotive and beer commercial on television, but I digress.) Is it the CMO, creative director, digital director, interactive director, mobile director, media buyer, etc.? Is it the brand, the agency or both? Or, is it a matter of there being no clear delineation of responsibilities when a 2D-based campaign is decided upon and tasks (e.g., code generation, code testing, campaign design, user experience, etc.) simply fall through the cracks?


Another aspect to all of this, and this is something that I have written about before (read article), is the apparent lack of campaign goals and objectives. For me, it is very easy to see that, for a great number of 2D-based campaigns, there couldn't possibly be any goals and objectives or concern about ROI, as it relates to the use of the technology and/or the advertisement as a whole. Without goals and objectives, a 2D-based campaign, or even a traditional campaign, is doomed from the start and, I believe, most would agree that goals and objectives are Marketing 101.

Getting back to wtfqrcodes...I wonder if a site such as this will scare brands and/or agencies straight on how to correctly and effectively make use of 2D technology. Time will tell. Stay tuned.

As companies start to add the Pinterest icon to their other social site icons (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Tumblr, Flickr, Google+, etc.), whether it be for marketing collateral, advertisements, packaging, in-store signage, event signage, etc., might it also make sense to add the Pinterest icon to their mobile barcode-based campaigns (read: enable Pinterest interaction via the code scan resolve)?

Just a thought. You're welcome.

Hawaiian Airlines has launched a new out-of-home campaign using a designer QR Code. This billboard was found on the side of a New York City telephone kiosk.


While it may make sense to customize a QR Code with a corporate logo and/or colors from a brand management perspective, I am not in love with the application here. The airline's logo is the same exact color as the remainder of the QR Code, which does little to help the logo stand out and be noticed. Also, it does not help to use a color for the QR Code which closely matches the background color of the billboard itself.

With respect to scanning the code, why should the reader of the billboard scan the code? There is no call-to-action, no offer, no incentive, no description informing the reader about where the scan will take them. We know calls-to-action, offers, incentives, etc. work and serve a purpose in other marketing mediums, so why not here with a 2D-based OOH advertisement?


One aspect of the campaign that I do like, is that the scan resolve points to a landing page that speaks directly to a New York audience. The scan resolve page has a headline which reads, "Aloha, New York!" and the body copy on the page talks about a new route between New York and Honolulu and how a Hawaiian vacation starts at JFK Airport.

As great as it is to see a landing page that is highly relevant to the targeted audience, this campaign suffers in that the landing page is not optimized for mobile, there was no offer or incentive being made, there is no compelling reason to share the campaign socially, the landing page content, as relevant as it may be, could have been a bit more interesting/sophisticated/descriptive, need I go on? In summary, a lost opportunity to deliver more and get more in return.

2D Barcode Litmus Test: FAIL