Lots of talk this week about customer experience and it’s impact on stock price. Bruce Temkin and Jon Picoult both tackled this topic by comparing stock price performance with Forrester’s Customer Experience Index. I’ve got religion on this one. I’m a believer.

Steve Reubel firmly believes that Facebook will be the next Google. He makes a good case for it: they provide a social experience that is more elegant and organized than any other social offering out there. On the other hand, Google Buzz leaves a lot to be desired. Jeremiah Owyang helps us cut through the buzz - errr… hype with his hand social network matrix. On a related note, Facebook wants to be your one true login.

Admap brought together a few respected planners and former-planners to discuss the future of planning. I like what Will Collin, founding partner of Naked Communications, had to say about it: “I think the planner’s job is to hold the strategic line and be true to what is at the heart.”

And well, well, well… what sort of interestingness is Google up to? Google is gearing up to offer ‘ultra high-speed’ broadband in several small test markets throughout the US. I’d love to be a fly-on-the-wall in the executive boardrooms of Verizon, Comcast and AT&T (my client) to listen in on their initial reactions to this move.

Sites of the Week

• Air Jordan CP3.III
• Peugeot - Emotion & Motion
• Alexander McQueen - RIP

Jeremiah Owyang, a former Forrester social computing analyst, shares a crystal clear perspective on social networks, how Google is shaking things up a bit and what to do about it all.

Coles notes:

• Google’s entrance causes media havoc but web strategists should stay focused
• Facebook continues to demonstrate a sophisticated marketplace for consumers and brands to mix about
• Don’t discount MySpace’s active consumer base – if your customers are there
• Continue to monitor Twitter and respond if customers are there
• The feature set of newly spawned Google Buzz isn’t important, what matters is their ability to aggregate social content which will impact search strategy for businesses trying to reach consumers

Google launched Google Buzz today. In my opinion, it’s basically a more powerful version of Twitter integrated directly into Gmail or, as a friend so eloquently put it, a less obtuse version of Google Wave. What’s interesting about this is that Facebook’s recent design evolution looks like they’re laying the foundation for Facebook email. The rumor on the street is that they’re re-building the messaging section of their site from the ground up and turning it into a Webmail app like Gmail or Hotmail.

It seems like Google and Facebook - whether it’s e-mail, status or sharing we’re talking about - are gearing up for a battle to own the messages in our lives. Both companies have advantages. Google’s got the hardware (i.e., Nexus) and software (i.e., Android, Chrome OS) that takes their messaging experience beyond the desktop and Facebook has the larger user base at 300MM plus!

At this point in the game, I give the edge to Facebook as hundreds of millions of people across the planet today already view it as THE primary way to keep in touch with the people in their lives.

So the question for AT&T is, what slice of the messaging pie do they need to own? I would argue that they need to focus on the most intimate connections in our lives; those with our family and closest friends. Gmail and Facebook, especially Facebook, are about messaging to our much larger, less formal networks characterized by connections with acquaintances, colleagues and classmates. Whatever it is, they don’t need to own the whole pie - just a space within it that aligns closely to their brand and vision.

What do you think?

Skittles re-designed its website when they realized that social media isn’t all rainbows. Adweek and Fast Company weigh in on Skittles’ experiment with social media.

Business Week published a special report on the Value of Design this past week. A couple of choice articles to check out include The Role of Design in Business and Why Design Matters.

Frontline recently aired a new documentary called Digital Nation that “explores what it means to be human in an entirely new world — a digital world”. They’ve created a companion web site containing tons of raw footage and rough cuts.

The lack of Flash support in the new iPad has spun up a bunch of conversation about HTML5 and how great it will be for mobile. While we’re on the topic, Vanessa Miemis has created an impressive round-up of various iPad perspectives.

Finally - in honor of Super Bowl XLIV - Fast Company dissects the new Super Bowl logo. They say that it’s “mean and bold, befitting of the nation’s manliest past time.

Sites of the Week

• Air Jordan 2010
• Lego Click
• I Am the Next Prius (Russia)

Josh Bernoff says “prepare for the Splinternet“. The ecosystem of internet-enabled devices with various input modes (e.g., touch, voice, mouse) on closed vs open platforms (e.g., iPhone OS vs Android) is absolutely exploding right now and the Splinternet is the perfect term to describe that trend and the growing need for companies to be more selective about which devices they build apps, sites and experiences for.

The good news is that companies can focus if they are disciplined and make device selection a strategic choice. There are methods for making decisions like these easier. Coincidently, Josh is behind one of these methods - called the POST Method - and wrote about it over two years ago in the context of making decisions about which social media technologies to employ. I believe companies can use the same method to make decisions about devices.

Call it the four-step approach for solving your Splinternet woes (heavily, heavily drawing from Josh’s language):

1. P is People. Don’t start a device strategy until you know the capabilities of your audience. If you’re targeting college students, use laptops and netbooks. If you’re reaching out business travelers, consider iPad and smartphones.
2. O is Objectives. Basically, what Josh said: Decide on your objective before you decide on a technology. Then figure out how you will measure it.
3. S is Strategy. Again, what Josh said: Strategy here means figuring out what will be different after you’re done. Imagine you succeed. How will things be different afterwards? Imagine the endpoint and you’ll know where to begin.
4. T is Technology. iPad. Kindle. Nexus One. Netbook. Standard laptop/computer. Touchscreen. Mouse. Open. Closed. Get a handle on your people, objectives, and strategy, then - decide with confidence which device/platform is right for you.

If you’re looking for more background info, Forrester originally released the report about the POST Method in October 2007 and Josh posted publicly about it December 2007. I’m just humbly remixing some of the original thinking here. Thanks, Josh.

Forrester recently published a report that rates customer service experiences across industries. Bruce Temkin has shared a few highlights from the report on his blog. What really jumped out at me was how dissatisfied Gen Yers are with customer service experiences (you’ll have to read/purchase the actual report to see the breakdown by generation).

I took a look at other Forrester research about which consumers care about customer service and for whatever reason, Gen Yers care less about customer service when compared to their older cohorts. Is it that Gen Y is more concerned with low price than customer service? Or maybe they just have higher expectations than everyone else?

Are Gen Yers bad customers? Is Gen Y really Gen D? Generation Dissatisfied?

Would love to hear some hypotheses on root causes.

Quick Links

• The Maturation of Social Media ROI
• The Age of Customer Capitalism
• Strategic Planning is Too Slow
• The Art & Science of Evidence-Based Design
• The Future of Online Customer Experience

Sites of the Week

• Nike True City
• Starbucks Love Project

At first glance, the new Apple iPad doesn’t appear to be a game changer. Honestly? What it is, is an upgraded, tricked-out iPod Touch and in typical Apple fashion, they’ve focused on basic functionality the first time out. There is no camera, no HDMI, no USB - not without an adapter, at least - and it lacks multi-tasking.

Apple has created a low-risk product based on their existing technology. So unlike the Apple iPhone, there’s no new real technological or user experience innovation here (i.e., touchscreen tech and an application delivery channel in the form of the Apple App store). I can only assume that Apple created this device at a fraction of what it cost to research, develop and market the technology behind iPhone and iPod Touch.

That being said - I, for one, will be getting in line two months from now to pick up a 16gb Wifi iPad.

Personally, I really enjoy the touchscreen experience. I’ve been an iPhone user for over two years and I’ve craved a larger touchscreen experience for watching films, reading books and playing games while on the go (as I travel for work frequently). I get that now with the iPad and I’ll buy it because of that. Yes - I could have that with a small laptop or netbook, but neither of those device types are built for delivering a portable, high-end media experience.

As a business user, I can even imagine leaving my laptop at home when I travel for business. The iPad has 80% of the functionality I primarily use on my laptop - messaging, full-web experience, and full-size document editing. The big drawback is the lack of multi-tasking; the same problem with iPhones and iPod Touch. But maybe that’s a good thing. It’ll force you (me) to focus for a change instead of tabbing trough apps when you’re (I’m) on a conference call or in a meeting.

Summing it up, this is a low-risk effort for Apple. It’s not changing the game like the iPhone and the iPod before it, but it’s a comfortable foray into a market that will generate okay returns. I think it’s safe to say that Apple has not created a new market either (out of the gates at least). And I’d bet that behind closed doors they’re probably saying the same thing. Then again, that was probably the plan all along: assuming that the R&D costs were relatively miniscule, Apple can afford a two-year iPad experiment to see if a market emerges.

While Apple waits to see if that new market emerges, it begs the question: whose market will the iPad be stealing share from? Steve Jobs might pause when he looks in the mirror tonight because the answer is probably… Apple.

Are companies that deliver great customer experience recession proof? The result of Teehan+Lax’s 3-year stock market experiment - dubbed the UX Fund - points to a resounding YES. Since November 1, 2006 - the inception date of the fund - and as of this afternoon, the UX Fund has grown 12.65% while the major indices have contracted. The NASDAQ is down 6.56%. The S&P 500 is -20.34%. The Dow is -15.35% and the NYSE is -19.3%. Only the NASDAQ100 is up at +4.23%

I don’t believe this is a coincidence and the latest thinking from Roger Martin, Dean of the Rotman School of Business, only seems to bolster this notion. Read his recent Harvard Business Review article about The Age of Customer Capitalism for additional insight.

More to come in an upcoming post about customer experience and shareholder value.

Photo c/o Teehan+Lax

Nearly two years ago, I wrote about Starbucks as a brand in decline. They were suffering because they had lost sight of what differentiated them from other companies competing for the “third place”: their product and the customer experience.

After years of focusing on cutting costs and driving efficiencies across their global footprint, the benefits of these activities plateaued in 2006 - as reflected in their all-time high stock price, just shy of $40.

They installed automatic espresso machines, introduced flavor lock packaging, ‘templatized’ store layouts and expanded their available selection of merchandise. While this all sounds good, it was implemented at the cost of the customer experience. The automatic espresso machines took all the romance and artistry out of pulling the perfect shot and the machines were so high that they blocked the line of sight between barista and customer. The flavor lock packages of coffee stripped the air of the rich scent of coffee beans. Stores became carbon copies of one another - sharing, for the most part, similar footprints and interior design. And their merchandise selection reflected a weakening focus on coffee.

By the time I wrote my post in 2007, Starbucks had lost 25% of its market capitalization. By the end of 2009, as bad as it was for just about every company, Starbucks shares had dropped to just under $10 - a whopping 75% loss of market cap.

Fast forward to today - something has changed. Starbucks is now a brand on the rise with a renewed focus and commitment to customer experience. Bruce Temkin put it well today when he said “Starbucks brews a comeback with purpose”. (Bruce wrote a post about Starbucks’ misfortunes in 2007 too.) Starbucks stock is now trading in the $22 range and is rising.

Starbucks has learned a few valuable lessons over the last four years and their change of fortune is a reflection of applying what they’ve learned.

So what did they learn? Bruce points us to a New York Times article that provides us with clues:

1. As Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz, explains it, they “went back to start-up mode, hand-to-hand combat”. In essence, they went back to their roots, looking for those jolts of energy that fuel inspiration and innovation - a vital head space to be in when trying to tackle challenges as large as the ones faced by Starbucks.
2. They’re speaking the language of customer experience again. In the New York Times article, Schultz is quoted as using phrases like “the authenticity of the coffee experience” and “the romance, the theater of bringing that to life” in reference to one of their new Seattle shops.
3. Local matters! Starbucks is no longer out of touch with what their customers want and how those needs differ across the country. They’re also rolling out store designs that are more reflective of their locale.
4. While this isn’t called out in the New York Times article, we can’t ignore the importance of top down executive vision. The best customer experience companies rest on the shoulders of their CEOs and that CEO’s ability to galvanize employee belief in customer experience. Schultz had retired as CEO and came back to lead the organization out of the mess that had been created. Schultz’ vision for customer experience at Starbucks is absolutely essential to their continued success.

Starbucks’ rise is great news for other large companies who have lost focus of their core values. The strategy is simple: it really does come down to customer experience and product (or service). What’s not easy is the execution. But, if you can get the focus right, get a vision in place and create a team that is committed - you can do it. If Starbucks can, any large organization can.

Photo attribution to Flickr user Seadevi.

Quick Links

• Unbundling Dell’s Business
• Why Understanding Business Models Is Important To Interaction Designers
• Slow Strategy
• Modern Brand Building
• The Contribution Revolution: Letting Volunteers Build Your Business
• Executive Presentation Tips
• Futures, Experiences & Design
• Communication Arts’ Interactive Annual 14

Sites of the Week

• Go PSP Go
• Wario Land: Shake It!
• Hyatt Siesta Key Beach
• Nike 6.0

Quick Hits

• What Is Community?
• What Goes Into A Well-Done Critique?
• 21 Cases of Social Commerce Impact (yes… real $$)
• How To Build A Next-Gen Business Now
• CRM Is Not Enought: A Case For Action
• Hack the Debate
• The Next Internet

Sites of the Week

• Philips - The Bodygroom Manalogues
• Saab - Turbo Gene
• Adidas Y-3
• Shanghai World Financial Center

Quick Hits

• Ten Aspects of Web 2.0 Strategy That Every CTO and CIO Should Know
• Ideas vs Ideology and the “Strategy Table”
• The Future of the Desktop
• My First 8 Steps As A New CMO
• How Great Design Makes People Love Your Company
• How to Captivate an Audience
• Eight Rules for Choosing Web Analytics Key Performance Indicators
• When Did We Start Trusting Strangers?
• From Making a List of Questions to Crafting the Interview Experience

Quick Hits

• Would Just Do It Get You To Nike+?
• Death By PowerPoint (and How To Fight It)
• The Future of Advertising Is Design
• The Next Creative Revolution
• It’s All About Experience
• Can the Cellphone Help End Global Poverty?
• Tips For Building Next Generation Web 2.0 Applications
• Relationships, Stories and Context

Sites of the Week

• Subway Crush
• Tivo
• Got Milk’s White Gold
• Cars.com Waiting Room
• The Spiderwick Chronicles