Consumer Behavior Changes due to Technology.

Are there some "behavioral ecosystems" (driven by technology, or otherwise) and "contexts" that are simply "better" for human behavior? Are there "contexts" that "stretch" human behavior?

Executive Summary: A quick three pronged approach- a question to start us thinking about the impact technology has on the world we live in, a thought experiment to help us think through this impact, and then some quick thoughts as a check, and as an inflamatory contrast, to throw our own thinking in sharp relief. From the desk of Three-Pointers-Aren't-Just-All-Basketball.

The Question

A conversation with some bright digital media folks bubbled up this question: how has technology changed consumer behavior?

To each of us, the answer may be obvious, however, it is well worth stepping back and taking a moment to think through this as an exercise. This helps us become more aware of technology's impact on consumer behavior.

A Thought Experiment

Here is a visualization thought experiment, with apologies to the GEICO Caveman- The Neanderthal cave paintings were a "Gossip Girl" of the age.

Some Quick Answers

A wise, experienced response:
Within the framework of behavior in a country, nothing much has really changed. The context? As far back as the 80's and across the pond, folks were leveraging consumer analytics to sell financial products (Hats off, Ritesh).

Another view: Technology impact consumer behavior by 

1. aggregating numerous individual decisions,
2. making consumers aware of these aggregations, and,
3. allowing game theory to have a field day via exchange of, or lack of exchange of, information.

The underlying theme across these points is the development of markets- either intra or inter country- and the development of context for human behavior.

I know, your first reaction here would be- do you really think Facebook, Twitter, and Groupon have not changed how we live? Sure, they have helped "cultures"/ "markets" evolve, by changing their context. However, have these forces of technology changed fundamental human behavior?

The Twist in The Tale

This leads a different line of thought:

1. How is technology changing the context we live in?
2. How does human behavior adapt to changed context?
3. Are there really new contexts that have not existed before?
4. Are there some contexts that are simply "better ecosystems" for human behavior than others?

What do you think?

Innovation and Tactics Series: Netflix Bids for Original Programming.

Executive Summary: Netflix has been lauded for its ability to manage innovation, especially for its ability to translate innovation into real impact on its business. This post helps us think through some of the market possibilities it can target. From the Desk of "Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Its a... Jedi mind trick!"

The News, The Question

Netflix seems to be making interesting moves in content production:
1. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/03/netflix-plays-the-long-game/72611/
2. http://blogs.forbes.com/chunkamui/2011/03/17/how-netflix-innovates-and-wins/

The news reminded me of a curveball I recently threw to some very bright folks:
Will Netflix get into running movie theaters (or atleast renting them out temporarily)?

What Does The Question Mean?

The folks found the question interesting enough to pause to think it through. This is not because they did not have a (what may seem like an obvious) ready answer, but because it should, and apparently did, make you think about Netflix's context and how it is disrupting the context around it.
To rephrase:
1. Can Neflix groupon its at-home viewers into a high quality, custom generated "in theater" experience?
2. Can Netflix be vertically integrated in a niche market, while still serving what is currently its core market?

All in all, how do these ideas impact its profitability and its margins? At worst, can a capability to pursue the option posed in the question be a useful negotiation tool?

To dig a little bit deeper:
- What about Netflix's current position and capabilities (e.g. continued investment in innovation) provides it a competitive advantage?
- As Netflix get to know more of its customers better, how can it leverage it's information better?

Structure Around the Question

Here are a couple of paths to making sense of this question on Netflix:
- Content Development and Production -> Content Channels and Distribution -> Content Consumption
Or the reverse:
- Content Consumers and Markets -> Content Channels and Distribution -> Content Development and Production

Deep Dive Into The Market and The Consumer

Lets walk through the first way of looking through this process:
A. Who is Neflix's core consumer? What market is Netflix targeting?

1. Viewers of TV and movie dvd like content "experience" at home with access to a mailbox and to an internet ready device?
2. Viewers of video content "experience" at home with access to an internet ready device?
3. Viewers of an entertainment "experience" anywhere with access to an internet ready device?
4. Viewers of an entertainment "experience" with access to an internet ready device or with access to a specific location?

Now, you can define a spectrum of "experience" as well, from a streaming video "experience" on a small device while on the move, to a fixed location video "experience" of the IMAX or the "IFC Theater"/ "Indie Movies" sort. As for margins, isn't the IMAX share price hear its LTM high?

Now that you have some lightbulbs flashing in your mind, need I say more?


What do you think?
 

Consumer insights and Social Media trends... Updated: Preview Note to Brand Marketers

From the "Lies, damn lies and... statistics?" Dept. of Quibble-Over-Who-Said-What, The Mark Twain vs. Benjamin Disraeli desk.

At a wonderfully hosted interactive media event last evening, I sprung 2 stats at a social media strategist, while emphasizing the need to critically look at trends and consumer behavior. The bright strategist I was chatting with was aware of each of them, however, when we put them together and... here, I will let you decide:
1> Average number of Twitter followers: 126.
2> Over 30% of Twitter users tweet once, never to return.

On that note, let me splash some more statistics around this page for further insightful conversation with you: http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/cs/2009/06/new_twitter_research_men_follo.html

What do you think?

Update: I usually restrict my unrestrained editorializing to face to face conversation. However, thanks to a twitter (Thanks D.B.) note, I will let loose a little. :-D

From the Dept. of Stick-Yer-Neck-Out-And-Live-To-Tell, the Die-Hard-With-A-Clue desk.

Why should you really care about the Social Media industry beyond what you are doing in it? Why should you care about how it is evolving?

The statistics below kicked off an interesting conversation with a social media strategist. The math jumps at you. The average number of twitter followers could be skewed by the 30% who never return, and the Twitter BigBirds TM (Sidebar: CNN and Ashton Kutcher are Twitter BigBirds; No disrespect to Tweet TM). Our conversation converged on the fact that business acumen remains key to success here.

The theme of this conversation dovetailed with the theme of another with Susan Lewis who is at work finding sponsors for her Twitter game. The fundamental question here is: How do we help a corporate entity justify its spend in social media, beyond harking to the old Internet boom eyeball metrics?

Finally, is it just about measurement? What are we looking to achieve with the measurements? Stepping back from the metrics, how should brand marketers be thinking about their social media presence?

More on this in part Duh:
http://randomjunkyramblings.blogspot.com/2009/07/to-strategize-or-not-to-strategize.html

Consumer Behavior and Robert Pittman on Investing in Media

Consumer Behavior
Robert Pittman had some interesting insights on consumer behavior. He provided an “action oriented” view of Maslow’s hierarchy by citing convenience and branding as key components of a consumer’s decisionmaking.

He defined convenience as physical, tangible productivity tools and branding as a means to prevent switching. Applying that to internet tools/ properties/ networks, the key trade off is effectively the relative “delta” of convenience vs. switching costs.

Advertising channels and consumer behavior
Robert pointed out that the internet is not killing TV, its really killing newspapers. Some thoughts put forth around this idea:
1> Pricing: He compared the cost per thousand impressions between TV/ radio and newspapers. He then questioned the rationale for the market difference.
2> Change in spend across channels: He presented data that highlighted the marketing spend across newspapers, yellow pages and the internet, with newspapers currently garnering more than twice the ad spend on either the internet or the yellow pages. Change in marketing tactics to adjust to the internet as a medium has not been drastic. Given the theme, this presents a tangible opportunity in the internet media segment.
3> Nature of advertising channels: The cable TV industry is larger than the broadcast TV industry; however, the cable TV industry is quite fragmented. This creates a difference in how advertisers approach these two channels.

Some takeaways
1> Critically analyze the value of internet properties
Is the internet properties’ lack of stick just a function of low switching costs?
Do internet properties really make us more productive or more effective as they interweave into our daily life?

2> Expect unrelenting, inexorable change
Citing the fact that TV show ratings lead their revenue impact, Robert sees a similar trend in the internet media. The internet is truly impacting consumers and consumer facing companies. Adapting to this change in consumer behavior will define which companies fail and which survive.

The talk led to questions, as usual:
1> The web and TV: How do we categorize the impact of online TV series viewers on series like The Sarah Connor Chronicles and Dollhouse? The former got the axe despite as many as 7 million viewers following the series online.
2> Channel relationships and Ad spend: Are the industry structures in place for the media planning industry to move quickly, seamlessly and effortlessly across the various advertising channels? Is it just a function of channel relationships, or it is also a function of the industry still being in the process of wrapping their arms around opportunities in the “new media” segment?

What do you think?


The Usual Disclaimer: This is purely a knowledge sharing resource and I have been careful to protect panelist/ speaker interests. Ethically, context is everything, and I will gladly retract anything that affects the parties mentioned. Call this my mini OpenCourseWare, if you will, where Open signifies life experiences.