Archive for the 'Consumer Behavior' Category

Stepping Back from the Mac

Published by Jarred on June 30, 2008 in Apple, Consumer Behavior and Reading. Comments

Last Tuesday, my otherwise trusty MacBook sputtered out for the second time in six months.  In February, I returned home to find my white plastic-encased sidekick unable to boot up.  One new hard drive later, I was back in action (Apple’s awesome Time Machine utility saved me from any data loss).  Unfortunately, I had to relive this scenario last week when my MacBook wouldn’t revive after a routine reboot.  And so it was, after a painless call to AppleCare tech support, that I shipped my MacBook off to let the wizards work their magic on my poor, sick machine.

(Don’t worry, Mac lovers, this isn’t a hate-on-Apple post.  I’d much rather have my backed-up MacBook die every six to twelve months, and be bug-free in the interim, than have a constantly bogged down PC frustrate me on a daily basis.  What’s more, AppleCare was impeccable with their service.  I called them on Wednesday, and they had a box to me for my MacBook on Thursday morning.  They received, repaired, and reshipped it on Friday, and it’s been in D.C. since Saturday.)

In the period between shipping my computer to Apple’s repair depot and this moment, I’ve enjoyed a nice weekend away from the computer.  It’s true that I cheated a little and used my roommate’s iMac to do some quick e-mail checking and such.  And although I don’t exactly count the Kindle as a computer, I did spend some significant time with it as well.  My computer vacation, though,  has made me realize just how much of my free time revolves around my laptop.

Continue reading ‘Stepping Back from the Mac’

Questioning Things: Vol. VI

Published by Taylor on May 9, 2008 in Consumer Behavior, Politics and Questioning Things. Comments

I live in North Carolina. You might have heard about a little primary election we had on Tuesday. I actually voted weeks ago, taking advantage of my state’s one-stop early voting process: voters can show up at any early voting location in their county, register, and vote on the same day. The early voting locations open about three weeks ahead of election day, and offer weekend hours for voters who are unable to vote during the work week. I walked into my polling place, voted, and was back at100 laptop work within 20 minutes. As I walked back to work, I couldn’t help thinking: I can’t believe an idea this indisputably good for our state actually came to fruition. Now don’t get me wrong: I love NC, and we have a number of incredibly dedicated civil servants working in all levels of state and local government, not to mention brilliant and talented policy advocates in the nonprofit realm.  And yet, for some reason I’m still shocked that early voting is real.

On the other end of the spectrum is the $100 laptop.  This strikes me as such a powerful idea, such a POSSIBLE dream–there is, in fact, an excellent design–and yet…the project is stalled and faces innumerable obstacles.

So here’s the question: what are other policies, products or inventions (maybe online tools?) that seem almost too good to be true?  What’s something amazing you’ve seen/heard about, only to be shocked when it became reality?  Alternatively, what’s the best idea that you don’t think will ever come to fruition?

My second story (and question) is inspired by an article in Fast Company magazine (thanks for the plane reading material, Dan!) on “The Brand Called Obama:”  obama sign

Politics, after all, is about marketing — about projecting and selling an image, stoking aspirations, moving people to identify, evangelize, and consume. The promotion of the brand called Obama is a case study of where the American marketplace — and, potentially, the global one — is moving. His openness to the way consumers today communicate with one another, his recognition of their desire for authentic “products,” and his understanding of the need for a new global image — all are valuable signals for marketers everywhere

As Jarred and I have disclosed before, we’re fans of Obama’s politics.  But more and more, I find myself attracted to the Obama “brand” with the same fierce loyalty I feel for a company like Apple.  Let’s just say, if Apple released an electric toothbrush, I would probably buy it.  These brand loyalties are interesting to me.  Jarred and a number of our friends are irrationally loyal to one particular “barbecue” (in quotes because it’s not legitimate ‘cue) joint in their neighborhood, despite all convincing evidence of its over-rated nature.  What forms and perpetuates these loyalties?

Again, here’s the question: what brand(s) are you loyal to–to a fault?  What brands will you absolutely pay a premium to support, even if logical alternatives exist?  When you examine your brand loyalties from a detached perspective–I can, for instance, recognize that an Apple toothbrush would probably be awful…and that I would buy it–what loyalties seem ridiculous?  Which can you justify, and which are completely irrational?

Image of $100 laptop used under a Creative Commons license courtesy of Flickr user Kofoed.

Obama sign image used under a Creative Commons license courtesy of Flickr user sweetashvegas.

Amazon CEO Says Kindle Will Salvage Long-Form Reading

Published by Jarred on May 3, 2008 in Books, Business, Consumer Behavior, Gadgets and Reading. Comments

Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon.com, recently sent out his annual letter to shareholders [warning: PDF file]. I’m not a shareholder [yet], but the letter is currently linked on the Amazon homepage.

Bezos writes almost exclusively about the Kindle, the e-reader created and sold by Amazon that seems to be constantly going out-of-stock. While the whole letter is interesting and informative, I found that one paragraph in particular clarified something about the Kindle that I hadn’t though about before: the Kindle not as the harbinger of informational ADD, but as the savior of long-form reading as we know it. I especially like the term “information snacking,” and you’ll probably see me use it more and more here on the blog.

Here’s the paragraph in its entirety*, and I’ll leave it at that for you to ponder and comment on:

We humans co-evolve with our tools. We change our tools, and then our tools change us. Writing, invented thousands of years ago, is a grand whopper of a tool, and I have no doubt that it changed us dramatically. Five hundred years ago, Gutenberg’s invention led to a significant step-change in the cost of books. Physical books ushered in a new way of collaborating and learning.

Lately, networked tools such as desktop computers, laptops, cell phones and PDAs have changed us too. They’ve shifted us more toward information snacking, and I would argue toward shorter attention spans. I value my BlackBerry—I’m convinced it makes me more productive—but I don’t want to read a three-hundred-page document on it. Nor do I want to read something hundreds of pages long on my desktop computer or my laptop.

As I’ve already mentioned in this letter, people do more of what’s convenient and friction-free. If our tools make information snacking easier, we’ll shift more toward information snacking and away from long-form reading. Kindle is purpose-built for long-form reading. We hope Kindle and its successors may gradually and incrementally move us over years into a world with longer spans of attention, providing a counterbalance to the recent proliferation of info-snacking tools.

I realize my tone here tends toward the missionary, and I can assure you it’s heartfelt. It’s also not unique to me but is shared by a large group of folks here. I’m glad about that because missionaries build better products. I’ll also point out that, while I’m convinced books are on the verge of being improved upon, Amazon has no sinecure as that agent. It will happen, but if we don’t execute well, it will be done by others.

* I broke the paragraph up into four pieces to make it easier on the eyes (and brain).

Image used under a Creative Commons license courtesy of Flickr user etech.

Pay As You Drive

Published by Taylor on May 2, 2008 in Consumer Behavior, Environment and Sustainability. Comments

[Note: sorry for my recent posting hiatus (thanks to Jarred for keeping things humming).  Welcome to new readers! -T]commute

I’m pretty happy with my auto insurance rates through [insert large insurance provider with articulate reptilian spokesman here]. But with my driving patterns (less than a 3 mile commute to work; occasional road trips and errands around town), I’m definitely paying more than necessary and subsidizing the insurance of riskier drivers.  From the authors of Freakonomics, writing in the NY Times Magazine:

Imagine that Arthur and Zelda live in the same city and occupy the same insurance risk pool but that Arthur drives 30,000 miles a year while Zelda drives just 3,000. Under the current system, Zelda probably pays the same amount for insurance as Arthur.

While some insurance companies do offer a small discount for driving less — usually based on self-reporting, which has an obvious shortcoming — U.S. auto insurance is generally an all-you-can-eat affair. Which means that the 27,000 more miles than Zelda that Arthur drives don’t cost him a penny, even as each mile produces externalities for everyone. It also means that low-mileage drivers like Zelda subsidize high-mileage drivers like Arthur.

First of all, you’re correct in assuming that I’ve quoted this example because the person representing my predicament is named Zelda.  But far more importantly, the idea of “Pay As You Drive” (PAYD) insurance is gaining traction.  The article references Progressive Insurance’s willingness to test a PAYD system in a few states.  PAYD involves GPS locators that track a car’s movement; privacy advocates will no doubt bristle at the thought of an insurance company maintaining those types of records.  Yet the cautious momentum behind PAYD is a far more sensible response to high gas prices and the environmental consequences of our national car obsession than an utterly moronic “gas tax holiday” (Tom Friedman takes down that idea nicely here).

Congestion pricing–another attempt, albeit imperfect, to incentive good behavior like carpooling and public transit–is stalled politically in New York City.  Nevertheless, I’m heartened by the buzz surrounding ideas (like PAYD and Congestion Pricing) driven by a simple, effective equation: place a true cost on behavior that stresses infrastructure and the environment alike while rewarding individuals with incentives to improve their impact.  Think there’s any chance that this trend will gain real traction?

Image used under a Creative Commons license courtesy of Flickr user Peter Kaminski.

The Birth Of BLUE (Long Live Green)

Published by Taylor on April 13, 2008 in Consumer Behavior, Environment, Sociology and Sustainability. Comments

Adam Werbach is a very controversial figure in certain (mainly older and/or purist) environmental circles. His company, Act Now Productions, works with a variety of companies (including Wal Mart) on improving sustainability. He’s criticized the traditional “environmentalist” movement, even declaring it dead. He gave a speech last week that’s worth highlighting. Apologies for the gratuitous excerpts, but I found it impossible to leave much more out. Courtesy of Grist (emphasis mine):

Tonight I invite you to join me in Wonderland. I ask you to consider joining me in building a movement that goes beyond the political to the personal, that views the existential threat of global warming as a chance to change the way we treat ourselves and the planet, that aspires to have one billion active participants across the earth. Tonight I’ll contend that we need to invest more time in making a difference through our routine activities and the things we buy every day. To achieve this we need a broader platform than green. [...]

[All over the world], I’ve seen people seeking something broader than a green or environmentalist solution to the myriad problems they face in their lives. Yes, they believe climate change is happening, but they also want to feel good about the way they look in the mirror and the way their kids look at them at the dinner table. They want to be part of something larger than themselves without having to sacrifice their identity. They want joy, not guilt, and a little money in their pocket so that they don’t have to trade down on yet one more thing in their life.

Building this new movement will require a commitment to the mainstream that we are unaccustomed to in San Francisco. It’s not enough to have a revolution that consists only of Mac users. It’s not enough to have a revolution that exists only in coastal states and college towns. It’s not enough to attack China as the home of lead-painted toys and neglect the aspirations of the hundreds of millions of people who have been brought out of abject poverty because we’ve bought those toys.

Something is happening now; progress seems at hand. We don’t know what to call it. For now let us call it the sustainability revolution — we are beginning to understand how human culture will harmonize its relationship with the living world. [...]

Continue reading ‘The Birth Of BLUE (Long Live Green)’