Monthly Archives: February 2010

The State of Social Gaming and Its Impact on the Future of Day-to-Day Interactions

Written by jason. Filed under Games. Tagged , , . Comments Off.

If you have 28 minutes or so to spare, watch this entertaining and informative video by Carnegie Mellon professor, Jesse Schell. Schell covers the current state of social gaming, focusing on the factors that have driven its popularity as well as what it could mean for our future interactions.

Cause Marketing and Our Diminishing Attention Span

Written by jason. Filed under Marketing, Nonprofits. Tagged , . Comments Off.

The other day I was riding the subway when I spotted an ad for the anti-poverty non-profit, Windfall. Their tagline, “Wear white for Windfall”. The ad showcased a number of celebrities wearing white (white t-shirts, white belts, etc.). Flash forward to some research I was doing when I happened upon CARE Canada. CARE has a campaign, “Show Your String” in support of International Women’s Day. They utilize Flickr and ask supporters to upload images of themselves with a string around their finger. Hmmm.

Has it come to this? Has the public’s attention span become so short that we can only engage with issues as powerful as poverty, human rights abuse, and disease if they are distilled to simple colours and friendship bracelets? Organization such as Windfall and CARE deserve better. These causes deserve better. Cause marketing efforts should challenge the public. Yes, these are complex issues – and yes, it is difficult to be heard above the marketing fray – but we must respect that the public can handle it. Now, I understand that budgets don’t always afford grand campaigns but co-opting colours and pseudo-jewellery is just plain lazy. Admittedly, I don’t have the statistics to back this up, but I’m willing to bet that the effectiveness of this approach is questionable at best. There can only be one LiveStrong or Pink Ribbon, the rest become watered-down imitations.

I truly believe we need to rethink this cause marketing trend. We need to focus on the quality of engagement versus the quantity. Issues like poverty or breast cancer won’t be solved overnight; it’s going to take a long and concerted effort. Approaches like using colours or bracelets to represent causes might stick in consumers’ minds in the short-term, but they are hardly solutions for any long-term, meaningful conversations about an organization’s cause.

There are many talented (and not so talented) people in marketing and communications. Surely, we can create effective campaigns without breaking the bank. Non-profits and NGO’s must challenge us to do so. More importantly, we creatives must demand this of ourselves. The world’s disadvantaged and suffering are counting on us.

*In case you missed it, watch the video on Saul Bass for a little inspiration.

What will you do with your idea?

Written by jason. Filed under Competitions. Tagged , . Comments Off.

The MacArthur Digital Media and Learning Competition is now closed. I estimate over one thousand ideas were submitted. As far as I can tell, there are only six awards categories in the 21st Century Learning Lab Designers stream. Some of us will advance to the second round. Most of us won’t. That’s a lot of disappointed creative talent.

Gut check time: If you don’t receive DML funding, is your idea worth pursuing?

Saul Bass: The relationship between quality of work and perceived value

Written by jason. Filed under Design. Tagged , , . Comments Off.

Design legend, Saul Bass discusses his commitment to designing beautiful things regardless of whether or not the client cares or values beauty. Now I’ve been in the consulting business for over thirteen years and it is only within the last few that I’ve been able to truly wrap my head around this issue. I remember a passionate conversation with my father on the topic, and he reminded me that the average amount of time a visitor spends at the Grand Canyon is fifteen minutes. Only fifteen minutes! If you’ve ever visited the Grand Canyon, then you know that fifteen minutes hardly does it justice.

It’s been my experience that beauty does matter in the eyes of businesses however businesses do not value beauty as much as designers. This makes sense of course, however it does create a bit of an antagonistic dynamic between the designer and the client – especially around issues of compensation. Maybe Saul Bass is right, as designers maybe we should only be concerned about meeting our own standards versus that of our clients. On the other hand, maybe we should be working harder to educate our clients on the value of good design. Or maybe still, we should be working harder to identify potential clients who appreciate the value of good design. What do you think?

iLearn: A Content Analysis of the iTunes App Store’s Education Section

Written by jason. Filed under Apps, Children & Youth. Tagged , , , , . Comments Off.

Heads up educational technology developers and software developers. The folks over at The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop (yes, of Sesame Street fame) published a short but insightful paper on educational apps found in the Apple iTunes App Store.
If you haven’t witnessed it yourself, the “pass-back” effect where parents give their children previous generation iPhones/iTouch is real. You can read about what developers are focusing on here.

An interesting stat: 60% of the top 25 rated apps target toddler/preschool children, compared to 36% for adults. Hmmm…

(re)Design: Olympic organizers modify fence around Olympic cauldron

Written by jason. Filed under Design, Marketing, UX. Tagged , , , . Comments Off.

 

Photograph by: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images,

When I first heard that spectators were complaining about the fence around the Olympic cauldron, I immediate thought, “All that money and the organizers put a crappy fence around the iconic Olympic flame?” I mean really, couldn’t they have afforded a security guard or two instead? Fortunately, organizers corrected this design oversight and made the area around the cauldron more visitor friendly.

I am however quite surprised organizers didn’t think of the people who would actually visit the site in the first place. Clearly, the organizers’ concerns were with how the cauldron looked on tv, as well as avoiding potential lawsuits. Such a shame. Although I understand these concerns, organizers failed to think about the long-term opportunity: These folks travelled a long way – at great expense – to have an authentic Olympic experience. Instead of alienating them, organizers should have thought of these visitors as partners. After all, once these visitors return home, their stories and images will remain long after the corporate partners have rolled up their tents. These lasting images will remind them of their Olympic experience and remind friends of what they missed. I’m sure the value of this free advertising far outweighs the money saved by putting up a crappy fence.

Augmented Reality + distance learning = Amazing possibilities

Written by jason. Filed under Technology. Tagged , , , , . 1 Comment.

A fascinating look into the future. I spoke with Blake Callens of Zugara and he assures me the future is now. I can’t wait to help shape it. What will you do?

When Cheap Really Isn’t Cheap: Technology Projects and Not-for-profits

Written by jason. Filed under Nonprofits. Tagged , . Comments Off.

I just finished reading Michelle Murrian’s article, “Cheap, Fast and Good. Can Nonprofits have them All?” Briefly, Michelle discusses the challenges of managing technology projects for not-for-profits. She mentions four factors that impact the timelines and budgets for these types of projects: identity crisis, multi-project juggling, new emerging complexities, and holidays (I’ll let you read the article for the full details). Her article really got me thinking about my own experiences working with nonprofits and NGOs. Specifically the identity crisis factor and the “Good/Fast/Cheap/Pick Two” decision. 

The ‘Identity Crisis’

In her article, Michelle describes how technology projects – particularly web design projects – “leads to an examination of internal communication or business process, or thoughts about external perceptions, that become either paralyzing, or require a level of internal organizational process work that just takes time [and additional resources].” I totally agree with her statement. It’s been my experience that “identity crisis” is usually the rate limiting factor on technology projects such as web projects. I contend that once organizations file away their mission statements, they forget how to describe themselves publicly. In addition, web projects (which typically fall into two categories: communications or community building) expose the fact that many organizations haven’t thought deeply about the conversation they want to have with the public, their funders or the communities they serve. This isn’t an issue specific to not-for-profits, as many private sector organizations also grapple with this issue. 

I think one of the keys to managing a successful technology project is to understand that technology does not exist in a silo. Rather, technology should be thought of as an enabler – it extends the capabilities and capacity of organizations. In the case of my clients, I try to help them explicitly define/decide what they do and what they want their technology project to accomplish. Once we’ve established this, we can then plan (including budgeting, allocation of resources, setting timelines, etc.) how technology can enable their efforts. Much of this explicit defining can be done before a consultant even walks through a client’s door. The client need only understand the value of the process and put in the effort. Speaking of value and effort…

The ‘Good/Fast/Cheap/Pick Two’ Decision – When Cheap Really Isn’t Cheap

We all understand that not-for-profits are under tremendous financial constraints – particularly during these challenging financial times. Volunteers and staff overtime have long been the life-blood of many organizations. Choosing a technology solution that is cheap is often a necessity, not a choice. However, choosing a solution based solely on finances is short-sighted at best. Consider this: add up the amount of time a technology solution has failed to work properly because it was rushed to launch; add in the amount of time your resident technology expert needed to get up to speed on a less-than-user-friendly solution; include the amount of time the replacement for your technology expert needed to get trained on that less-than-user-friendly solution. Take the total time and give it a dollar value. While you’re at it, multiply that dollar value by a value representing staff morale resulting from your solution (1 = I love it, can’t live without it, 5 = I’d rather stick pins in my eyes than use this technology!). I’m certain you’ll find that the actual ‘cost’ of your inexpensive solution was not cheap at all. 

Now, I’m not advocating that you pay top dollar for all of your technology needs. In fact, many of the technology needs of not-for-profits can be handled with open-source and free solutions e.g. Google Docs, OpenOffice, etc. Sometimes an organization just needs a MacGyvr-type solution to get by. That said, if long-term success is in your organization’s plans, it’s time to drop the boot-strapping mentality and budget/plan accordingly for a successful technology project. My suggestion to all of my clients, “Never choose cheap. Cheap is a myth. You can make your project less expensive by doing a lot of the work yourself (see ‘The Identity Crisis’). But never choose cheap. You’ll always pay in the end.”

Kid-centric Search

Written by jason. Filed under Design, UX. Tagged , . Comments Off.

Here’s an interesting NYT article on the user interaction design efforts made by companies like Google and Microsoft to make search easier and more intuitive for children. A couple of interesting points:

    Children respond positively to query results situated at the bottom of the screen as it is closer to where they are typing and looking.
    43 percent of queries at Ask Kids use the question format to search (e.g. Who is the president?) instead of keywords.

You can read the article here.