Types of value adding apps

Mashable reviewed 13 branded apps which they deemed successful. In this review, three categories were defined: useful, entertaining and product enhancing. Mashable’s categorization was, for this article, analyzed, discussed and improved to create a more fitting definition. These definitions are far from perfect and more categories could be added. However, this is a suitable way to define the different types of branded apps currently available.

Ok it’s time to begin waking up from my slumber. Its been amazing to see time fly with nothing on your back, but since I will be starting my new job in less than 2 weeks now I need to start focusing again. The total job description is until now undefined, but it will be at the IT-firm Capgemini as Consult and will have to do with new technological developments, ‘international’ business and  Marketing/advertising.

In these upcoming weeks I will spent some time on my blog going more into detail about some topics I found interesting or in the need for detailed analysis, explain the function of apps better, do some future platform forecasting and explain a bit better in a nutshell what my qualities are.

Even though I have not really written anything lately I have been busy doing:

• Some looking into the potentials of Salesforce.com
• Which now includes Radian6; a tool I needed ~8 months ago
• Looked into how IT-outsourcing should  look in the future
• Have fallen in love with Tumblr as a photo blog: altasia.tumblr.com/
• Seen a discussion evolve that apps might not be the holy grail of 2011 that some people thought, but please keep believing it will be. Apps are here to stay.
• How the topic seem to shift to Social enterprises and the importance of them. A topic which first got my attention with P2 for WordPress as a sulution in the further development of the intranet and later blow me away with social monitering in getsatisfaction, but now Chatter/Salesforce might get the claim trying to make the whole organisation social. Anyhow a topic in the need for further explanation and researched.
• Android has started overrunning the smartphone market and has started to show up in more and more places which is starting to show the strength in this approach by Google. It’s always nice to see that this is happening, since I made already some analysis about this some time ago (link). This however could need an update.
• The Q4 price drops in the tablet market(I’m starting to see 90 Euro tablets and Amazon just launched their first true tablet as well) has finally started to make it into an interesting market  after being in slumber for such a long time.
• Realized that the field of in home centralized devices will become hot and happening within the next 2 years and probably the next big battlefield of the big tech companies Apple, Google, MS, Samsung, Sony etc.
• Windows 8 could potentially be the change which MS needed to make to survive, does anyone have a clear road map of this development?
• Could Instagram become the advertisers dream?

So that the lists up for now, please hit the jump to see some facts on my site performance over the past year.

Random analyses and strange facts on site Visiting rates:

• Visitors have gone down allot since I stoped posting
• However Peter van Straaten post seem to stay popular
• Also the site has been a constant hit over the last month in Moldavia
• Making it the 4th country in visits behind the normal top 3 in 2011 of NL, BE and US
• In this year Chinese visitors has plummeted from 2nd in total amount visits to a mediocre 10th place.
• Yet my Chinese readers spent most time on the site.
• The nr. 11 Russia on the list spends about 10 times as much time as the Chinese Visitors, So привет России!!
• In the last year of the amount of visits on a cities were almost all Dutch besides one from the south of Brazil
• The top 3 cities is Amsterdam, Nieuwegein and Utrecht

Passing away at just 24 years old is unfair, especially with such a bright future still a head of him.  My condolence go out to his family and the ones close to him.

In the following theoretical article I have tried to explain what is meant by the experience economy and how this can be related to apps. These theories are taken from the thesis I made on Branded apps. All further related articles and the actual thesis can be found at this part of my site.

The Experience economy

There are several major factors affecting premium-product businesses today. Cheaper brands, from China and elsewhere, together with the increasing popularity of private brands, are affecting the market share of their premium counterparts. Commoditization and rapid imitation is leading to shorter product life cycles for premium brands. Furthermore the increasing power of giant retailers demanding lower prices from manufacturers is resulting in shrinking margins (Avans lecturer Lavearts, 2010). Companies need to offer experiences rather than just high-quality goods and services (Pine & Gilmore, the experience economy 1999). For example, Nike, The Body Shop and Hard Rock Café all create experiences around their traditional products in order to sell these products more effectively. At the moment, most of these experiences are offered for free. Ultimately, it would be preferable to offer these for a fee.

In the experience economy, Walt Disney is the true pioneer, offering guests a personal experience in their amusement parks. By nature, experiences are personal. They only exist in the mind of the consumer, who is engaged with the brand on a emotional, physical, intellectual or, even, spiritual level.

Experience involves either passive or active participation. In passive participation, the consumer is an observer or listener; he does not affect the outcome, e.g. watching branded content or going to a concert. In active participation, the consumer plays a prominent role in the creation of the experience (Pine & Gilmore, 1999). Apps have the ability to be such a value-adding brand experience. A brand should offer consumers tools, which can be used alongside the product to create a brand experience. Back in 1998, Pine and Gilmore were already convinced by the possibilities of engagement using new technologies and stated that this would lead to the creation of a whole new genre of experience.

Today most of a consumer’s material needs have already been fulfilled and their future needs are yet unknown to them. Therefore traditional marketing research is leading less and less to the creation of distinctive experiences (Nijs & Peters, Imagineering, 2006). Concept development should therefore turn to more symbolic and ethical values to find out what consumers expect.

Nijs and Peters (2006) go into greater depth in their approach to experiences, adding an extra dimension described as “Imagineering”. They see the theme approach of Pine and Gilmore as not authentic enough to be suitable for all markets outside the United States. People are looking for more authentic experiences, which brands should try to offer and inspire consumers to transform their ways for the better. The Body Shop is a good example of this sort of authenticity. The retail chain is built on the vision of founder Anita Roddick, providing refillable containers of ethically produced, quality skincare products free from animal testing. The Body Shop provides an experience, not just a product (Roddick, 1991).

In an interview with Professor Nijs (2011) of NHTV University the relationship between apps and creating brand experiences was discussed. Professor Nijs stated that rather than trying to sell you a product, companies should be more concerned with helping consumers solve problems they might encounter. Apps are a new tool that should be concerned while looking to solve problems for consumers. Please do note that apps on itself are just a technology and success will depend on implementation of this technology.

The Experience economy related to apps

Apps can offer consumers experiences related to a brand. They can make a brand present in consumers’ lives, offering them wholly new experiences and/or beneficial tools during their experiences. In the experience economy, it is understood that there will be a fee charged for these experiences. At present, apps are generally being created on a model that offers the basic app for free and charges a fee for additional content. There are multiple methods for payment for apps like, in app transaction or by creating a “premium” and “lite/free” version of the app. These approaches can be experimented with, but the main focus for the brand should be gaining market share and becoming a dominant player now that this market is still exponentially growing.

All in all it could be assumed that in this experience driven economy brands should focus more on their total experience that just only on the product. Apps can be a great addition in creating this experience that is enhanching the product or  complimenting what the brand stand for.

Brand value

Brand value creation is a concept that has remained vaguely defined for more than 25 years. Nonetheless it is seen as an interesting indicator to measure the success of brands. In this theoretical background a closer look is taken at theories of how brand value is created within the human brain and how marketers can best approach the process of establishing brand preferences. Most of this research was conducted in the early 1990s, but is still seems as relevant today as it was 20 years ago. In conclusion, it will be explained how branded apps can influence brand value perceived by the consumer.

For the purposes of this paper, brand value, also referred to as brand equity, is conceptualized from the perspective of the individual consumer. Consumer-based brand value is created when consumers are familiar with the brand and holds favorable, strong, and unique brand associations in their memory (Keller, 1993). As Keller stated in his research marketers should understand how marketing programs affect consumer learning and how they recall brand-related information.

Also for the purposes of this article, apps are considered as a form of marketing. Therefore key brand-value principals need to be examined to understand how apps can establish brand value. In the depth-of-processing approach by Craik and Lockhart (1972), it was assumed that when consumers are more actively thinking about and involved with a brand or service, stronger associations in their memory will be created.

Furthermore Keller (1993) states that quality (e.g. the manner in which a person thinks about information) and quantity (e.g. how much the person thinks about information) result in better memorization of information. In other words, if information received by consumers is of high value to them and it is repeated frequently, it will be more easily remembered.

Additional research has concluded that attitudes formed by direct experience, like using an app, are more accessible from memory than indirect forms of behavior, such as watching TV commercials (Fazio & Zenna, Direct Experiences and attitude-behavior consistency, 1981). In the consumer’s mind, these brand attitudes are more accessible, more likely to be activated while choosing a product and more likely to guide future brand preference (Berger & Mitchell, 1989; Fazio, Powell, & Williams, (1989)). Once these types of links are created in memory between brand and perceived message, they are believed to be extremely durable (Loftus & Loftus, 1980).

From the above mentioned literature, it can be concluded that the power of branded apps lies in the fact that they are experience driven and add value to consumers’ lives by offering valuable, relevant features and information for that consumer. This establishes more prominent links in the brain between brand, product and benefits. An app is quick to access and should be designed to promote frequent usage, which will create stronger connections in consumers’ minds. In other words, an app is more likely to create high brand value in the consumer’s mind if it creates a qualitative experience and encourages regular use.