Rick Wagoner
General Motors
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, MI 48265
cc: Allan Mullally, CEO Ford; Robert Nardelli, CEO Chrysler
Dear Mr. Wagoner,
By now you are probably tired of hearing every so called “expert” who has studied, analyzed or written about the auto industry – or simply driven a car — give you advice on how to survive this recent crisis, but I just wanted to tell you one more thing. Like the advice given to Dustin Hoffman in The Graduate: “Plastics” my advice can be summed up in a word (okay, two words): “user experience.”
As you struggle to consolidate your brands, close factories and dealerships and figure out a way to continue operations before you run out of cash I urge you, no, I beg you - please do not forget to invest in satisfying your customers’ experiences.
Your recent decision, along with your esteemed colleagues at Ford and Chrysler, to fly your private jets to Washington to ask American taxpayers to fork over billions to help you continue operations not only set the wrong tone, it is indicative of your company’s inability to understand the emotional needs of your customers and those that left the fold years ago to buy from your European and Japanese competitiors.
Having worked on advertising campaigns for a couple of automakers (US and Japanese) over the years I have some sympathy for both you and your dealer network in these trying times; I know how difficult it is to research, manufacture, market and sell products that have a long product development cycle. However, the experience also provided me with keen insight into how customers are often left out of the process. Going forward, here are a few suggestions that I hope you will consider:
Hire a ‘Chief Experience Officer’ immediately: this would be the senior executive responsible for understanding customer experiences across all communication touchpoints among all of your audiences. Make sure this person reports directly to your CEO. And, give him/her veto power over dumb decisions (like flying private jets to important public meetings or killing popular programs while ignoring your fan base).
Keep us in the loop: stay in touch with customers over the next year or two about what your plans are, even if it means having to tell us bad news. If there’s going to be pain, own up to it. You won’t be fooling anyone by communicating via the typical corporate-speak - or worse - by giving us the silent treatment. Two-way communication has be part of the new GM paradigm. Which leads to …
Be a good listener: don’t rely solely on your research department for insights. Put someone in charge of reading blogs, emails and snail mail from customers that has the ear of your CEO. Keeping an ear to the ground while putting your nose to the grind stone is difficult, but an absolute job requirement in this new economy. And blaming the press for the public’s “misperceptions” about GM’s lineup of fuel efficient cars (as Bob Lutz has done) isn’t going to cut it.
Don’t be afraid to look overseas: Your brand Opel is a well respected name throughout Europe. Right now Saturn is the only division that has announced plans for using the Opel platform (the 2010 Saturn Aura is essentially the Opel Insignia) - but ask 100 people on the street and I’ll bet you’ll have trouble finding 1 person that might know about it. With Saturn going away, don’t lose sight of Opel for helping you create cars in the US with some European sensibility and style.
Do something fun that surprises people: when was the last time someone beyond the gear head set said “Wow, GM gets it. They know how to reach me by doing something fun?” Think Mini Cooper, and the VW Beetle. Fun is the intangible gift that keeps on giving and can create a positive halo acrosss all of your models. And don’t say “Chevy HHR.” The 60’s was Detroit’s heyday for fun design, not the 50s. Some ideas: how about a US version of the ‘66 Vauxhall XVR or an updated 60’s era Opel GT? Or how about making the Chevy Volt fuel efficient, fun to drive and affordable?
Walk the walk (don’t just talk the talk): When you introduced Saturn to the world back in 1990, you promised a “different kind of company, a different kind of car” and really tried to create a new way to approach the customer. Now it looks like you will be closing or “consolidating” the Saturn brand. What happened? You wrote the words but forget the music. You and your predecessors gave up on Saturn’s mission after only four years by making the division just another GM brand and failed to provide the kind of experiences — or cars — that could compete effectively with the Japanese.
If you start to rebuild your company and your product line from the bottom up (i.e., putting the customer first) I’m confident that you can become a leader again in cars, not just trucks. But, I’m already bracing myself for the slogan “A new GM” and the multi-million dollar ad budget that will go along with it. Don’t make the mistake that Microsoft is making with Vista. Why not demonstrate the change and trust the customer to create the label this time?
There are two new vendor systems being introduced in the U.S. that will significantly enhance the type of information that will be made available to advertisers regarding the Web navigation and search behavior of users.
(Nice place to visit but do you really want to answer questions there?)
NebuAd and Phorm, are promising the first “consumer-centric behavioral targeting network.” If their business model looks promising, expect to see similar systems put in place soon by old standbys like DoubleClick as well. Essentially, these firms will be working with ISPs to track sites visited and searches performed by their customers and provide this information to advertisers in order for them to customize their ad pitches accordingly.
While these firms are poised to deliver the kind of contextual advertising experience long promised by the interactive properties of the Web, they are entering into some very dangerous territory when it comes to compromising the privacy of its users. According to The New York Times, at least one of these firms, NebuAd, is being cagey about what and how it is going to alert the people it is monitoring, leaving it up to the individual ISPs to alert their users. NebuAd has also so far refused to share information about its ISP partnerships.
Whatever side you might be on re: the privacy issues and relative merits of the different technologies used by these companies, their failure to act in a responsible way should be cause for concern: if these firms drop the ball on effectively notifying users they may be shooting themselves — and their advertising clients — in the foot. And the wounds could be deep.
Already Phorm is under fire from advocacy groups in the UK for behaving like big brother. Here is an example of what a viral video campaign could do to set off alarms in the U.S.:
There have been too many instances in which the failure of an industry to police itself of potential abuses (see our current mortgage crisis) has resulted in serious blowback from consumer groups and the general public. These behavioral tracking firms, which are currently flying under the radar for the most part, may be in for some serious heat if they don’t take pains to police themselves. This means coming up with a workable system for notifying Web users and providing them with a simple way for them to opt out of having their online behavior tracked (what some ad executives are calling “unavoidable notice”).
Rather than each company coming up with its own rules for disclosure, they should be establishing a consistent system with the help of a reputable third party non-profit oversight firm, similar to what Icann does with the contentious issue of Internet addresses.
The NAI (Network Advertising Initiative), made up of several companies with interests in the online ad space, including Google, AOL and Yahoo, has committed itself to self-regulation of online data mining practices. However, so far their consumer protections don’t appear to go far enough, especially around the definition of “Robust Notice.” The problem may be that they have too much of an interest in making these types of systems work to provide truly enforceable oversight.
Without stricter oversight, these firms and their advertising clients may find one of their worst nightmares coming true: sitting in Congressional hearings and having to answer questions to House members that barely understand how to send email, let alone the difference between a “cookie” and Internet protocol addresses (two of the ways that these companies are tracking information).
This should be enough of a disincentive for these firms to act now. Advertisers, who will likely be an easy target if any potential abuses of this information become widely known, would do well to help pay for oversight if the tracking firms are unwilling to foot the bill.
I’ve been doing some research for an article I’m writing about the importance of breaking down the barriers that exist between user experience practitioners and marketing researchers, and I’ve come to an important realization.
As much as the experts rail on about the importance of making “customer experience” a core competency within organizations, things are not going to change until the stakeholders force a change in the “frame.”
“a frame is a conceptual structure usedin thinking.”
Rakoff goes on to say …
“reframing is telling the truth as we see it – telling it forcefully, straightforwardly, articulately, with moral conviction and without hesitation. “
Some examples that Republicans have used to reframe issues in their favor (with the help of the much maligned GOP researcher Frank Luntz) include:
OldNew Tax cut Tax relief
Estate tax Death tax
Global warming Climate change
Logging/Clear cutting Healthy forests initiative
Although Lakoff’s and his progressive institute’s main concerns are the framing of political language, particularly that used by Democrats to counter the Republican successes of the past eight years, framing can be used by anyone to score points for their side.
Like the Democrats, most of the folks on “usability” or development teams have been using the wrong language to make their case, ignoring the power of framing when they speak to management. When it comes time to ask for funds for ”usability testing,” managers from the various business units who otherwise claim dedication to “usability” often come up short when it’s time to commit dollars.
I have a suggestion: instead of asking to fund “usability,” practitioners should reframe the issue by asking managers to support and enhance the ongoing satisfaction of the customer experience. If a product developer asked a manager in one of big three car companies for money to improve the stabilization system in their best selling car in order to improve the driving experience wouldn’t she get the funds? When film directors ask producers for more money to blow stuff up in their movies to improve the viewing experience don’t they usually get it?
Those involved in creating online customer experiences have to start talking about the funding of their goals in broader terms. They have to emphasize the importance of creating satisfying customer experience across all touch points with their customer, with the online experience as an essential piece that helps drive a stronger relationship with the brand. And, as with successes seen in the political realm, this reframing has to be consistent and persistent. That means using this new language in every piece of written communication and every interaction with stakeholders.
Reframing the issue in this way may go a long way to increased understanding of the importance of creating usable and persuasive interfaces for customers.
Kudos to Continental airlines for being the first to test their mobile boarding pass (Houston departures only for now). But why are they keeping this on the down low?
According the New York Times, Continental is the first airline to test electronic boarding passes that replaces the usual paper boarding pass. Their system creates a unique two-dimensional bar code (versus the more easily hackable one dimensional bar code used for paper) that can be downloaded and then scanned by airport personnel from your mobile device/cellphone. Athough Forrester Research is claiming only “42% interest in using mobile phones as a boarding pass” (42% of whom? mobile users who travel? Business travelers?), I think this is going to be in wide use once the airlines work out the standards with the T.S.A. and FAA.
The easy part is just letting users know about it, right? Hmm. You’d think that Continental would be making a big deal about this since they are first to market (since December ‘07), so let’s go find out more about it. Here is their home page:
It’s nice to see the BlackBerry icon although there is no specific mention on the home page re: this amazing breakthrough (only mentions of getting “flight updates”). And, just a nit, the icon is located just below the fold on my browser. Well, at least it gives me a good visual to start off …
Now that I’m on the “Wireless Tools” landing page I have to do some real scanning to find the link (see above). And note: although this new technology is considered a “special offer” by the company, the featured ads here (on right of page) are generic pitches for “low fares” and frequent flier miles. A real missed opportunity. Let’s click on that link under “Mobile Boarding Pass” …
Made it! They provide a pretty good overview of how to get set up to start using your mobile device for check in. And the benefit is right in the title: “truly paperless check in.” But, look at the breadcrumbs at top: why are they burying this page within the “OnePass News and Offers?” This is real news for everybody - why isn’t Continental featuring this across the site — and especially within their own ”Wireless Tools” section? This new check-in solution represents a real opportunity to communicate to savvy fliers that Continental is a true leader in technology. When another airline starts their own mobile check in service and does a better job marketing it, they could take away a lot of the mojo from Continental.
Some suggestions for Continental and other airlines once they get this going:
-Prominently feature a BlackBerry-type icon/link on the home page
-When users land on the mobile-related page make sure to feature this new technology, perhaps with a visual showing someone using it at the airport
–Make ad space contextual — i.e., lose those generic ads when you are only talking to mobile users and cross sell something specific to mobile technology
-Don’t bury the link so deep within a proprietary “offers” sequence/area. Users are likley to pass it over within a section reserved for “specials” and “price off” promises.
We weary travelers just want to get on that plane and move on with our lives. Now the airlines can help us do it even faster.
Posted by David Kozatch
Without stricter oversight, these firms and their advertising clients may find one of their worst nightmares coming true: sitting in Congressional hearings and having to answer questions to House members that barely understand how to send email, let alone the difference between a “cookie” and Internet protocol addresses (two of the ways that these companies are tracking information).
Posted by David Kozatch
Posted by David Kozatch
