Have you noticed how more and more technology is "hands-on?" Touch screens are everywhere- on phones, ATMS, airport terminals- all kinds of computers. When Apple brought out the iPad, I didn't think it met a felt need. But I was only thinking about what what it did, not how it did it. I believe the iPad has caught fire because, like its smaller predecessor (the iTouch), how it works is with pointing, touching, swiping - natural intuitive human movements.

The more that interfacing with products and services uses our natural human gestures, movements, and patterns, the better they will sell. Why: They just make sense to us as human beings.

Let's apply this thinking to more complex things- like medical devices and electronic medical records EMRs. The more complex the issue or problem is, the more intuitively simple the interface with the solution needs to be. In our customer research on a wide range of medical products and health issues, we hear it all the time. Keep it simple. And nothing keeps it simpler than products designed to have people to do what they naturally do anyway. 

I just bought a new phone at Verizon. It's always, umm, an "experience" shall we say. First I went to my local Verizon store to try some out. I found what I wanted (the new Samsung Fascinate in case you were wondering!) and told the very helpful salesperson I wanted it. Who told me they couldn't give me my special $100 discount until my 2 year renewal date hit in another week. By which time their SmartPhone "2 for 1 special" would be over. Hmm. I talked to the manager who said things like "nothing I can do. it's policy. can't change promotional dates or any rules, etc. why am i a manager anyway, etc. (I made up the last one)." Anyway, I knew that no matter how much I threatened to go to AT&T or played my 'good customer with lots of phone lines' card, it wouldn't matter. So much for the in-store retail sales channel!

Frustrated, I called Verizon and asked for a customer service manager. Who immediately agreed my request to start my new contract one week early and get the discount and the twofer was very reasonable. And she made it happen. When I remarked on how much better her service was, she said that it usually goes better by phone and that retail outlets often run into problems. And that phone sales reps can redeem "mail in" rebates without needing me to mail anything in. Made me realize that the two Verizon sales channels - in-store sales vs. phone sales - compete! With phone sales the clear winner. The question is should Verizon steer people toward the better sales channel? The answer...Why not?! 

Imagine this: Instead of your credit card, you pull your cell phone out of your pocket to pay for groceries or gas or clothes. The wireless industry has been talking about “mobile commerce” for years, but apparently there have been a lot of hardware problems to overcome. So companies are now looking to software instead. And it appears mobile gift cards are the low hanging fruit. Why? There is a felt need: People have trouble remembering what gift cards they have, keeping track of their gift cards, and having them on hand when they need them. (Of course, retailers who figure unredeemed gift cards into their profitability forecasting may see solving these problems as a downside).

Here's a Target example.

What's the marketing strategy? Some companies like Transaction Wireless are taking a "push" strategy with technology that lets retailers sell gift cards on their websites or Facebook pages, and then delivers the virtual card to the customer's cell phone or e-mail account. Firethorn is using a "pull" marketing approach with their app called SWAGG that lets people use their cell phone to buy and store gift cards from retailers they like. This requires building a consumer brand. Similarly, FastGift is all about consumers buying gift cards and e-sending them to cell phone of friends and family. They're branding it as a mobile gift-giving service.

I think we'll see mobile gift cards catch on in the U.S. rather quickly, simply because of the convenience factor. With mobile banking, mobile airline boarding passes, and high profile mobile retailers becoming mainstream, security and privacy concerns are dwindling. This is a nice example of how push and pull marketing both have their place in advancing disruptive innovation.

I just called a colleague - a seasoned business executive - who answered his cell phone, only to apologetically tell me he was in a meeting and could I call back later. See, it's not just teenagers! Emergency situations excepted, wouldn't it make more sense to not answer and let voice mail take over when one is busy? I often tell my kids that somehow I (and a few zillion other people) survived most of my life without a phone in my pocket. They look at me like I'm nuts.

Marketers know that "everything talks" - your ads, the quality of your work, your signage, and yes, even how you deal with phone calls. All these communications convey a message. When someone answers only to say they're too busy to talk, the message is either: 1) you're not important enough for me to stop what I'm doing, or 2) I'm addicted to my phone and can't stop myself from answering no matter where I am or what I'm doing.

A marketing by-product of our collective love affair with the cell phone is to use that relationship to gauge the importance of other relationships. Like "Which of these would be hardest to give up - your mother, your job, your sex life, or your cell phone? But seriously, the zealousness of cell phone use is a powerful marker by which a host of products and services can be profitably compared. Think about it.

The Chinese symbol for crisis is composed of two characters. One means danger. The other means opportunity (or some say "crucial point").

That's how I think about allowing cell phone use on airplanes. In a recent blog posting, the NY Times called it "The in-flight menace: Wireless chatter." Personally I agree.

However, from a marketing perspective, domestic airlines could seize the opportunity to differentiate by being the first to allow phones in flight, citing the success of several foreign airlines like Emirates that allow cell phones and other personal wireless devices for making phone calls. They would secure a loyal customer base, at least until it became an industry norm.

Or better, they could stand out - and avoid the danger of customer backlash - by proclaiming their opposition to using cel phones in the air, in line with numerous airline customer surveys. Then brand their action as a demonstration of customer intimacy. But the airlines should not just do nothing while waiting as their national union lobbies Congress for a ban on inflight calls.

I was on a Southwest airline flight earlier this year when they tested internet access, I thought it was great for e-mailing. But I found I could have a phone conversation too in the air via Skype. This I did not like.

Let airlines capitalize on the phone-free "escape" they provide. If not, then hey - offer cell phone and cell phone-free sections, like the old smoking/non-smoking sections. Let freedom ring (sort of)!