by Alex Spurzem

I’m a big fan of well designed products and with design I mean the way they’re used, not necessarily whether they present well or not. Apple does a great job at both. I prefer Macs over PCs because I find them easier to use. I have an iPod although it has less features and a higher price tag than other players just because it’s easy to use (with iTunes). And most of all I love to think about what other products would look like if they were built by Apple.

However, it’s not only the design. Usability starts with the product name. Recently we had a discussion in my company, a small Australian Insurance business, on whether we should call our product “Motor Vehicle Insurance” or “Car Insurance”. We only insure cars but for some of us “Car Insurance” didn’t sound dignified enough.
I guess that’s also the reason why you find consumer electronic products with names like “HTS9800″. I’m not kidding. That’s the name of my stereo. Or is it a lack of creativity?
My view is that product names should be aligned with what the customer understands. Have you ever searched for “Motor Vehicle Insurance” or would you look for “Car Insurance”?

The same thinking applies to web sites. In my job I’m responsible for a number of web sites and I’m quite passionate about getting to a point where they are easy to use. My grandma who has seen the internet maybe a couple of times should be able to use them.

Personally, I don’t necessarily need this. I’m a bit of a geek. Especially with gadgets. I like to do my research before I buy something and contrary to many other people I often read the entire manual just to be sure that I know about all the features my new phone / bike / whatever has. On my Mac I still use the command line every once in a while and I don’t get too confused by the name of my stereo.

Still I like when things are easy and intuitive to use. I regard it as a degree of respect that the company, which produced a product or service has for me. Respect for the fact that I spend hard earned money on their product and don’t want to subsequently spend a lot of time on figuring out how to use it.

Does your company respect their customers?

Yes? What about the name of your product? Do you also respect your potential customers before they buy your product or do they need to figure out what ‘HTS9800′ stands for or that you mean ‘Car Insurance’ when you say ‘Motor Vehicle Insurance’?

With regards to websites I recently found a book that I highly recommend and that summarizes it with “Don’t make me think”. That’s also the title of the book. The author is Steve Krug.
He suggests that you test everything on your site as to whether it requires thought. My favourite example is how people name the jobs section on their website. Customer friendly is: “Jobs”. That’s obvious. Somebody looking for jobs will click this. Slightly worse are companies who call it “Employment Opportunities”. This already requires a millisecond of thinking by the visitor to translate it into jobs. You may be thinking that doesn’t take much effort and doesn’t make a difference but the point is that all the little question marks for the customer add up. The worst case is if a company is locked into some corporate policy to call this section “Job-o-Rama” or similar…

Now, what does that have to do with innovation? Well, obviously, with every product, service, or process innovation it’s essential that you consider your customers. Before and after purchasing. Clearly, if something is useful it has chances to succeed but how much better are your chances if it’s useful and easy to use and easy to buy?

Innovation is a complicated and hard to predict process and has nothing to do with the corporate suggestion box or guys in white lab coats. I find you should not only follow Steve Krug’s advise to not make your customers think but also you might want to ask yourself where you can do the opposite and make your customers think for you. Just because consumers like easy to use products doesn’t mean they are not a smart resource to use in developing such products. Consumers invented entire industries like mountain biking and everybody is an “expert” at something.

Recently, consumer innovation has gotten a lot coverage in the media. P&G is structuring large parts of their business around this. Many web sites try to innovate on a crowd-sourcing basis (e.g. www.theoscarproject.org). And it seems there are already good results: Kraft foods introduced the 100 kcal pack based on an idea in their user forums.

Find out what kind of products and services your customers could be interested in and make them think about how they would use this product or service so that it doesn’t make them think .

All this has gotten a lot easier with the internet. Can you use the internet to involve your customers to think for you so that they don’t have to think when buying and using your product?

by Krista Walter

I have just gone on a tour of the wineries outside of Adelaide. One of the discussions I always like to bring up with the various wineries is how they feel about the current seal debate, ie. natural cork vs. synthetic cork vs. screw cap vs. zork vs. vino-seal debate. In Australia, the industry is heading toward producing only in screw cap bottles unless it is for export. I had a discussion at the Rosemount winery about this topic, and they mentioned they had been using synthetic corks, but decided to switch to all screw caps. In fact, they were even so bold as to change the shape of the wine bottle. It seems, Australians are willing to accept the thinking that the wine keeps better with a cap than with a cork, as the screw cap seals in the proper amount of oxygen that the winery actually formulates. In addition, the feeling is that storage is easier as the wine can be stood on its base as the bottle is designed, rather than on its side, which is precarious.

Recently, I spent three months in Italy as part of my MBA. Touring the wineries there, I asked about the screw cap v. cork debate. I got very strict answers that cork was the only way to seal a wine bottle and that the only people who would use screw caps do so for mass distribution. Synthetic cork was being considered by a few, but this was taken as a very experimental position.

In the United States, there is the general attitude that screw caps indicate a cheaper wine and a cork is indicative of a better wine. I have also heard the argument that screw caps decrease the experience of the wine, as opening the bottle doesn’t have the same flair, and there is no cork to smell. In addition, if screw caps are used then there is no reason to first examine the wine before drinking as there is no chance of it being “corked”.

Clearly, experimentation is being done for a reason. Apparently, cork is getting more expensive as it becomes shorter in supply. The amount of marketing being done around the use of natural corks seems to be growing. I am told glass corks (Vino-seal) are even being developed in Europe by Alcoa. Is the drinker becoming more sensitive to the impurities that can be introduced by the use of the real cork? Or is it more about taking the power away from the cork industry? Or is this incremental innovation at work? One interesting trend to watch is the response of the natural cork industry to these innovations. It may very well mimic that of other technologies which have become obsolete or “out of taste” with consumers. Perhaps there is an alternative way to defend its market share?

I would be interested in hearing from wineries, wine drinkers, and manufacturers from various parts of the world what their feelings are on the different types of seals that are available for wine bottles. Is there an alternative that is now more feasible than any of the traditionally shaped seals being used now? Do these current innovations ease the cost of manufacture?

I am also curious about the shape of the wine bottle itself. If the seal changes, does that mean the bottle shape could evolve into something easier to ship and store? Is glass the best material for wine storage? Is a square bottle better than a rounded bottle?