Is this ad target savvy?

Ed. note: though the ad is basically the same, this [...]

read
Why Orange?

Many people (ok, some people) (ok, some ART DIRECTOR people) [...]

read
The New Magazine?

In the four months since its release, the [...]

read
Things I have learned on this blog so far

Good news for the Grip blog and its readers: We [...]

read

Big Orange Slide

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

Grip interviews: Shane Skillen

November 30, 2009 by Dave Hamilton

skillen

Shane Skillen is the president and founder of Hotspex, a market research firm based in Toronto, Canada.


1) Hotspex is to consumer research as _____ is to _____?
Hotspex is to consumer research as Google is to finding answers.

2) How does Hotspex’s digital orientation make it different from other research companies?
There’s a lot more flexibility. We are able to immerse respondents in virtual worlds (e.g., grocery stores with resolutions comparable to your kid’s favourite Xbox game) to see how they interact with new products, packages and point-of-sale advertising. We’ve even created online social networks called “Playgrounds” for brands where we get 300 people to do various activities. We find enormous value with this type of research, especially when consumers communicate with each other about things we may not have thought to ask. Being digital also allows us to conduct research in over 19 countries, in many different languages with all data collected centrally on our servers in Toronto.

3) How do people respond differently to online questionnaires versus more traditional methods?
There is a whole new level of honesty, and as a result there is increased data accuracy in online questionnaires. One of the big reasons is that there is no need to socially impress a moderator in a focus group or the interviewer on the other end of the phone. For example, in a recent phone survey 67% of American’s claimed to work out – while a web survey done with a similar sample reported only 41% work out regularly. Phone survey: 15% drink alcohol regularly. Online survey: 48%.

When you remove the need to give a socially acceptable answer to a person you get data that more accurately represents true behaviour.

4) What’s the most surprising insight about consumers you’ve uncovered in your work over the years?
People don’t say why they do the things they do and thus survey research typically results in the wrong recommendations. It’s why 85% of new products fail each year even after billions are spent on market research.

For example, if you ask people “Why did you buy that brand of tires on your vehicle?” they will almost always give “safe” and “long lasting” as their top reasons. It’s a lie! It’s a rational alibi to emotionally driven behaviour. Subconsciously, how cool the tread pattern and logo look has much more of an impact on buying tires than the perception of safe and long lasting.

5) Do you ever feel that clients (or agencies for that matter) are asking the wrong questions?
Most focus purely on rational questions while, in fact, emotion has just as much impact on behaviour. Everything we do, buy, eat, touch, etc., starts with a subconscious emotional urge to do it and then the rational brain is recruited at the last millisecond to either allow that action or veto it.

We’ve proven through extensive research with 10,000+ consumers that about 50% of decision making is emotional. In some categories, such as alcohol, it’s as high as 85%. Yet when testing new alcohol concepts people ask rational questions to determine if the product will succeed. Instead of asking “would you buy this” we need to ask “how does it make you feel?”

Knowing how a concept or a brand makes consumers feel and knowing the impact of that on behaviour helps us substantially increase (+32%) our accuracy in predicting what they will really do when looking at the product on a store shelf.

Advertising is another area where the wrong questions are asked. Many times a winning ad that will significantly build brand equity and drive sales will fail a traditional/rational advertising test.

6) As an entrepreneur, how would you describe your leadership style?
True to my research background, I typically ask my staff “How can I help you?” five or more times a day. I also like to surround myself with great people who love what they do and have fun while doing it. Sometimes we even have streaking contests.

7) Do you still get your hands dirty, or is it all long lunches and cigars now that the company is growing?
We’re about 80 people now and I have an excellent leadership team who manages the day-to-day. I find most of my time is spent networking, selling, exploring new ideas and recruiting new senior people to our team. I will admit that in the summer I like to get out with clients golfing once a week.

8) What was a lesson about consumer insights you’ve learned the hard way?
I learned that consumer insight collection and interpretation is an advanced science. Once upon a time, in the basement of my parent’s house, I thought that we could simply collect 1,000 responses with basic questions about how people used home hair colouring and that would tell the whole story. The Director of Market Research of a global cosmetics company quickly educated me and declared that no part of our presentation was to ever be distributed to the organization. It was an embarrassing and important lesson.

There are specific ways to ask questions, design the sample of respondents, clean data sets for bad data, weight the data to accurately reflect the population and then statistically test and analyze results. I consider it a miracle that seven years later, and now thankfully with some of the best researchers in the world on my team, we managed to re-engage that client and account.

9) Tell me a little bit about “Take A Survery. Plant A Tree.
One of the most important aspects of our business is that people actually take surveys, and since we’re working digitally, we’re pretty green versus traditionally survey methods. To highlight that, we reward online survey respondents with points that they can spend on chances to win prizes or convert into charitable donations, such as feeding kids in third world countries or planting trees in the rainforest. With our “Take A Survey. Plant a Tree.” campaign, we plant a tree in the Peruvian Amazon rainforest for each survey completed on Hotspex.

We recently passed the 1,000,000 trees mark. That’s pretty much a new forest.

10) After rounding out a decade in market research, are you any closer to understanding why humans do the things they do?
Absolutely. But as with many things, the more you learn the more you realize you don’t know. I find myself studying neurochemistry, molecular biology, advanced psychology and other topics related. I am, however, very lucky to be working in a career that helps in many aspects of my life outside work: I understand why my two-year-old son behaves the way he does as his brain and personality are developing; I can even help my buddies effectively “meet” new “friends” at the bar.

Blog watching

November 27, 2009 by Ian Mackenzie

tele

Been a busy week on the marketing blogs. Some highlights:

Seth Godin tells us How to lose an argument online. Step one? Have an argument online. “Once you start an argument, not a discussion, you’ve already lost. Think about it, have you ever changed your mind because someone online started yelling at you?” Good point. He goes on to make another seven.

• The anonymous scribe at Copyranter declares that Chinese advertising “just isn’t quite there yet.” Maybe. But the examples he gives seem to prove the opposite. See for yourself.

• The good folks at the Canadian Marketing Blog ask Has green marketing gone mainstream? Yes, apparently it has. And the change is being led by mainstream brands greening up their core products, a more demanding consumer, and the increasing resonance of “eco-friendly brand messages.”

The Design Blog continues its search for weird and possibly wonderful objects. Among them is a three-wheeled electric vehicle, a zero-privacy tent, and the “most advanced concept vehicle we’ve seen it a while.” It’s a Kia Soul. And it’s got a front windshield with integrated LEDs that display road-relevant animations. Looks distracting to me.

• And finally, Jonanthan Salem Baskin at FutureLab drops the axe on America’s Black Friday shopping spree: “Black Friday is a contrived, customer-hostile, bait-and-switch, potentially deadly symptom of what’s wrong with bricks and mortar retailing.” Get the full vein-popping rant here.

Revisiting your ABCs

November 26, 2009 by David Faris

Illustration by David Faris

Gotten your hands dirty with design lately? Likely not.

With the shift of most professional creative endeavors to the digital realm, particularly in fields such as graphic design, photography, illustration, video, and music, it is easy to lose touch with the hands-on experience. As a designer and production artist working in advertising, I often feel bound to the computer as a creative tool. Sometimes, however, it’s a good idea to step out of your comfort zone and look elsewhere for inspiration.

Case in point: despite my love of digital design and its capabilities, one of the more rewarding type experiences I’ve had recently was with a child’s lettering kit. I was looking for an appropriate typeface for an invitation. The prospect of trolling through endless digital font samples to find the right type just seemed too much like work. Sure, there are some great digital typefaces out there, maybe too many.

This time, however, I found my type in a simple stamp set belonging to my daughter. This unassuming little kit includes individual stamps for each letter of the alphabet, as well as the numbers 0-9, some key punctuation, and an ink pad.

It was a revelation to work with. And a heck of a lot of fun, too! The whole process was immediate and rewarding. No two stamped letters were exactly alike, and the results well-suited the intent. Of course, I couldn’t resist the temptation to scan in the lettering and manipulate it further on the computer, imposing “order” on the random results. But the real fun was in the tactile, hands-on approach to creating the type.

I’m sure that many graphic designers began their careers, as I did, working with traditional media, and then adapted their skills to computer-based applications. Certainly, hand-drawn type, Letraset, paste-up, halftone screens, and such production methods can seem like quaint memories from decades gone by. Contemporary design and image software have rendered traditional approaches all but obsolete.

It can be difficult to break away from reliable production methods, certainly in advertising, where so much of what we do is deadline-driven and constrained by brand standards. And while this idea of returning to “the source” for inspiration is an old standby, it’s worth a second thought.

While we become more comfortable with our high-tech tools, we can lose touch with some of the simpler creative outlets that drew many of us into the world of design in the first place. But there is definitely room for outdated technology in the digital world. The union of the two can create interesting – and liberating – results.

As the saying goes, “everything old is new.”

Thoughts on a film about stuff

November 24, 2009 by Dave Hamilton

Illustration by Brian RossObjectified is a feature-length documentary about our relationship with manufactured objects. For the marketer, it is a look behind the curtain at the business of creating what we sell (objects, more often than not) much earlier in the process than we are often privy to.

Director Gary Hustwit’s (Helvetica) film offers us a look at the creativity and discipline, as well as the decisions and constraints, that must guide the form and function of everything from toothbrushes to tech gadgets. Hustwit’s bias is definitely toward uncovering designers’ personal philosophies, but the resulting film also reveals the demands that consumerism, social identities, and now sustainability, place on the shaping of all things manufactured – and ultimately bought.

More than anything, Objectified serves as a primer on the subject. Great for the student, the curious culture observer, or a communication nerd because it scratches at the topic of industrial design with just enough depth to be engaging and informative, without becoming too concerned with the plumbing.

The film’s perspective on how digital interaction and the microchip has the power to change the form of products – but how it doesn’t appear to be doing so yet (digital cameras still look like film cameras, for example, despite the absence a film chamber that dictated its predecessor’s form) – starts to uncover how arbitrary consumer expectations influence the design process.

Among the film’s highlights is hearing Chris Bangle (former Chief of Design at BMW) talk about the automobile as ‘personal avatar’, and IDEO founder Bill Moggridge recounting the moment when, upon designing the first laptop, he realized software would define our world more so than hardware.

On the topic of bad design, David Kelley, also of IDEO, says:

“Bad design is where the customer thinks it’s their fault that something doesn’t work. So if you can’t make your GPS device work in your car — I mean, there should be a riot because they’re so poorly designed! Instead, the user thinks, ‘Oh, I’m not very smart, I can’t make this GPS thing work.’ People should demand more from the things they own, they need to demand that things work.”

The film does get a bit thin in places where the designers are given reign to wax philosophical on their craft. I’d have gladly traded some of that for more time with legendary Braun designer Dieter Rams, who is given conspicuously short shrift when one considers the weight and span of his influence in contemporary design circles. A lesser peeve is that though iconoclast Karim Rashid’s suggestion of cardboard laptops and sugar cane mobile phones is well articulated, the man’s sartorial resemblance to Brüno undermines his argument.

I came away believing (more than ever) that that the average consumer is irrelevant. It’s the edges of an intended audience that truly set the parameters for effective design. I think there’s a lot to be learned from that belief in how we choose to communicate with our respective audiences as marketers and advertisers.

Grip interviews: Nancy Mauro

November 23, 2009 by Ian Mackenzie

nancy

Nancy Mauro is a former advertising Copywriter and Creative Director. She recently published her first novel, New World Monkeys.




1) Ad writing is to novel writing as _____ is to _____?
Ad writing is to novel writing as a one night stand is to marriage.

2) How well did your experiences as a copywriter prepare you for the challenges of writing a novel?
I can not imagine up a better job than copywriting to prepare one for novel writing. You spend your twenties dreaming up stuff, having it raked over the coals, getting free schwag bags at Christmas, dreaming up more stuff – some of which you will sell, some you will bury in a drawer – and by the time you’re in your thirties you’re ready to write a book. In fiction writing workshops the instructor will commend you for “taking criticism very well.” You will say, “Please, I’ve spent my entire youth having my words torn to shreds by McDonald’s/General Motors/Bell Canada/Proctor & Gamble/Ford/Rogers. This is nothing.”

You will, however, always miss the schwag bags

3) Why did you call the book “New World Monkeys”?
I found out that monkeys of the western hemisphere (the new world type) are mostly arboreal – they spend nearly their entire lives in the canopy of trees. The two main characters in my novel start off this way; slightly elevated and in a position of advantage. One is a copywriter and the other a PhD candidate. They are pretty much knocked off their perch on page one and then things get good.

nancy-mauro_book

4) Could you mercy kill a dying animal like your novel’s protagonists do?
No way. Last week I was staying at a cabin upstate. I opened the kitchen cupboard (where they keep the corkscrew) and found a mouse writhing in a trap. I slammed the cupboard shut and went the entire week without wine.

5) What’s the stupidest question you’ve been asked about the book?
“Is that me on Page 89?” Yes, of course it’s you.

6) How is marketing your own novel different from marketing a client’s product?
This is the hardest part of publishing to reconcile – the feeling of not being able to do enough for the book due to budget and reach. After years of selling other people’s stuff, here’s a shot to sell my stuff. Where’s the damn media buyer when you need her? Actually I have a great publicity team – they even got New World Monkeys in the New York Times Book Review. But I’m teaching myself how to market at a grassroots level. That means book clubs, readings and blogging, for starters. We even shot our own book trailers and posted them on YouTube.

7) Back in your agency days, what was one of the common mistakes you saw being made by less experienced writers?
Being overly-defensive about the work. Though I think it takes a while to get this ratio in balance; knowing when to stand up for your concepts and when to push for a better idea. Often, you have to push yourself for more. If you hit gold on the first try, believe me, your colleagues will let you know. You will see it in their green, envious pallor.

8) As a creative director, what was your leadership style?
Too nice.

9) How do you feel about the advertising industry now that you no longer work in it directly?
I like it still and get jealous when I see something spectacular. “I wish I had done that” is still very much part of my vocabulary.

10) Writer’s craft-wise, what are you better at today than you were two years ago?
Plot and speed. Meaning the speed at which the plot moves. And I’ve found this is different in America than it is in Canada. Here a book has to careen around the corner, sandblast the clothes off your body.

Why I drive

November 20, 2009 by Kyle Shay

Illustration by Brian Ross

So, I commute to work. Big deal, right?

Well, to me it is a big deal. To me, it is a minimum of three hours a day, 15 hours a week, 60-ish hours a month, and 720 hours a year . . . give or take.

To my car? That’s about 300 km per day, 1,500 km per week, 6,000 km per month – and about 75,000 km per year. If you look at the odometer of my 2006 Chevy HHR you’ll see 261,000 km plus. (Ignore the “Check Engine” light – it’s been on for the last 80,000 clicks.)

In other words, I am on the road driving to work or driving home from work for an entire month of the year.

Why would I do that?

That’s the question, isn’t it?

Let’s back up a bit. I’m from rural Southwestern Ontario. West of Hamilton. West of Brantford. Near the towns of Waterford, Simcoe and the hamlet Nixon. I can drive to the beaches of Lake Erie in about 20 minutes. I could drive to Detroit in about the same time as I drive to Toronto.

When it comes to Southwestern Ontario, I am smack dab in the middle of nowhere.

But, I was born there. I met my wife there. My 14-year-old son has played hockey there all his life. When I got my driver’s license the first thing I did was drive the 60 km east to Brantford.

Where I’m from, we drive.

If you didn’t have a car, you didn’t go anywhere. That’s just the way it was.

Since the age of 16, my driveway has seen:

• a little red Chevy S10
• a Ford Aerostar
• a Ford Windstar
• a Pontiac Trans Am
• a BMW 318i
• a Ford Explorer
• a Dodge 2000 GTX
• a Cadillac Eldorado (my personal favourite)
• an Oldsmobile Alero
• a Chevy Equinox
• and a Chevy HHR

So we’re back to “why” aren’t we? Why would someone drive 300 km a day for work?

The answer, in a word, is Advertising.

The industry. The brands. The shoots. The clients. The ups. The downs. The big wins. The terrible losses . . . the excitement of the whole package called “advertising.”

My compromise? I’m not moving to Toronto to get it.

Don’t get me wrong, I love Toronto. But I also love the rural life that I’ve grown up with and want my son to have.

But let’s get back to why, specifically.

Back at the beginnings of my career, I found myself at Sheridan College in Brampton going through the Illustration program. We learned how to sharpen our conté with emery boards and all about guache and the line rule.

We also learned about advertising.

I knew then that that is where I wanted to be – somehow, somewhere in advertising. And where do you go to work in advertising? Toronto. It’s the centre of the universe, non?

The path I took to get here was not always direct. I had to work at a local newspaper and as a junior art director at a small ad agency near Pearson Airport. The next few jobs were still in the design or advertising fields, but much closer to home – some flyer design here, a newspaper ad there. Nothing substantial. Nothing that made you proud.

Finally, after the long road the came before, I landed at Grip Limited a year after it was founded. Fourteen or 15 people strong and I was there.

There is no other place I want to be at this point in my life. The people are amazingly talented, the parties are incredible, and the work . . . well, I’m probably biased on that one.

So, let’s recap. Yes, I drive an ungodly amount both measured in kilometers and in hours. I do it each and every day.

Why?

Advertising.

Are you reaching the world’s largest consumer group?

November 18, 2009 by Samantha Holt

Image by Brian RossIt’s no secret that before any marketer puts their heart into developing a consumer ad campaign, they need to do their homework. Jumping into a creative execution – no matter how stellar it may be – prior to understanding the motivations, values and the lives of the target consumer is like deciding to eat a banana without peeling it first. A hasty move likely to produce unfortunate results.

Now, throw women into your target market, and the importance of understanding what makes them tick becomes exponentially higher. That’s because women are quickly emerging as the primary decision makers in the marketplace.

Some recent findings on the topic:

According to some studies, women account for as much as 85% (PDF) of all consumer brand purchases in the United States, including: 91% of new homes, 93% of food, 66% of PCs, 65% of new cars, and 89% of bank accounts.

By the end of this calendar year, U.S. women are expected to make up the majority of the country’s workforce. To that end, almost 40% of U.S. households report a woman as the primary breadwinner or a provider of essential income to the family’s bottom line.

According to Martha Barletta’s book Marketing to women, women are the world’s largest consumer group, with a collective buying power greater than Japan’s economy.

U.S. women are expected to control $1 trillion (or 60%) of the country’s wealth by the year 2010. That’s according to research conducted by BusinessWeek and Gallup.

And according to one survey, 91% of women say advertisers don’t understand them.

It seems female consumers are making quite a bit a noise in the marketplace. Today’s smart marketer knows it’s time to listen up.

Five great books for lugheads

November 17, 2009 by Dave Hamilton

Image by James Ayres

I’ve been spoiled. In my (arguably) short career I’ve had the pleasure of writing a lot of advertising that helped sell cars: Acura and Mercedes at the luxury end of the spectrum, as well as mass targeted brands such as Honda, Pontiac and GMC Trucks.

Along the way, I’ve been handed books that shed great insight on the category and fuelled my passion for it. Here are five that anyone interested in the business of selling cars, or building brands, should read:

The Honda Myth: The Genius And His Wake by Masaaki Sato
A reflection on the work ethic and influential flashes of creativity that have shaped a company that rose from the ashes for WWII to become the world’s eminent brand of not just cars but motorcycles, marine and power equipment.

Driven: Inside BMW, the Most Admired Car Company in the World by David Kiley
Driven captures BMW at a pivotal time in its corporate evolution and answers some interesting questions: Why have the designs been shaken up so much? Why did they acquire Rolls Royce and Mini? It’s a fascinating peek inside one of the world’s most enduring and successful bands, period.

Lexus: The Relentless Pursuit by Chester Dawson
A look at how Toyota conceived, developed and launched its own luxury brand: Lexus. This one chronicles how the Japanese giant went from zero to 25% share of the luxury segment in the space of just 10 years.

Where The Suckers Moon: The Life And Death Of An Advertising Campaign by Randall Rothenberg
This one’s a roller coaster ride. Reads like fiction, but it’s actually a fly-on-the-wall account of the brief, turbulent marriage between a recession-plagued Subaru of America and one the world’s most admired ad agencies.

Six Men Who Built The Modern Auto Industry by Richard A. Johnson
It’s the story of six men who reshaped the auto industry after World War II: Henry Ford II; Soichiro Honda; Eberhard von Kuenheim (founder of the modern BMW); Lee Iacocca; Ferdinand Piech (builder of Volkswagen Group), and GM executive Robert Lutz. It’s also the story of six personalities that influence the boardroom politics, as well as the products, of their respective companies.

That’s my top five. Did I miss any? Where do you look for inspiration when it’s time to pop the hood on your favourite brands?

What’s in a band name?

November 13, 2009 by Ben Weinberg

Image by Brian Ross

Shakespeare once wrote:

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”

What did he mean? It doesn’t matter. What’s important here is that I started my article with a famous literary reference, making it seem like I know what I’m talking about.

Now to the article.

Names are hard. Just ask people who have recently “made-baby.”

“What do we call him/her?” they exclaim. “Krull? Fantasia?” they shout to no one in particular.

Tougher still, I submit dear reader, is naming a band.

Look at the most famous bands of rock’s great ages.

“The Beatles.” Let’s face it – it’s a lousy band name. They made up for it with things like “astounding talent” and “greatness,” but the name was something people tolerated or got used to at best.

“The Rolling Stones.” Ok. Not bad. Especially when shortened to just “The Stones.” And emblazoned on a jean jacket above the famous John Pasche-designed tongue.

“Led Zeppelin” is not a good name. Yes, it famously came from a quip made by Keith Moon in reference to the possible formation of a super-group that would include John Entwistle, Jimmy Page, Jeff Beck and Keith himself (Keith said, “that would go over like a lead balloon”), but so what. And their logo? A penis-less Icharus? Yikes.

And Black Sabbath? Very Spinal Tap. Too Spinal Tap.

Bands of the 80s gave us names like Duran Duran, Men at Work, Sigue Sigue Sputnick and Martha and the Muffins.

The 90s offered Seven Mary Three, Firehouse, and Hootie and the Blowfish. Names that, if you’re like me, fill you with the overwhelming urge to stab.

Nowadays, we have Arctic Monkeys and The Black Eyed Peas. C’mon.

(And yes. There were good ones too, in every era, but they’re not much fun to write about. Plus they do nothing to support my thesis.)

By now then you must understand my anxiety when AdBands rolls around – I know it’s only November but it’s never too early to panic.

What do I call my band this time?

There are lists-a-plenty online of terrible band names, which can give one a sense of what to avoid. (My friend has a band named Dippin’ Sauz – not on any list I’ve seen, but it should be.) The Onion’s A.V. club compiles a list of terrible names annually – check out those that made the cut in ’08.

Just a note here – this above-mentioned list is not for the squeamish. There are a lot of bad words and swears.

There are a number of band name generators online as well.

A quick search on Bandnamemaker.com yielded “Obnoxious Day of the Fifteen Moron.” I suggest checking it out even if you don’t have a band to name. It’s usually worth one chuckle, if not several. I just got “Undiscovered Prostate.” Awesome.

So. Have I made my decision for AdBands 2010?

Not yet. There are a few I’m considering, including “Killicide,” “Scandalous” and “A Good Cleaning.” (Thanks Mr. Pat Andrews for that gem.)

And while I’m not asking for assistance, I am asking for your patience over the next few months. If I seem distracted during meetings, you now know why. I’m wrestling with this considerable challenge on a daily, if not hourly basis.

Web X.X

November 12, 2009 by Jacoub Bondre

Image by Brian Ross

Or, how the Web was won – and branded.
The other day someone asked me if I thought we had made it to Web 3.0 yet. Good question, but I’m not sure I agree with the terms of the discussion.

Let me explain:

Web “version” is a misnomer.
Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web, once described the term “Web 2.0” as a “piece of jargon”:

“Nobody really knows what it means . . . If Web 2.0 for you is blogs and wikis, then that is people-to-people. But that was what the Web was supposed to be all along.”
– “Web 2.0” on Wikipedia.

In other words, the web is a continuum. Much like time, space and the universe. It is constantly changing and evolving. New technologies emerge and disappear regularly, and there is no defined timeframe for these occurrences.

Proponents of web versioning explain that Web 2.0 represents a new usage of the web that facilitates interactive information sharing, interoperability, user-centred design and collaboration on the World Wide Web. This sentiment has been repeated time and again. I’m not so sure.

Social networking isn’t new . . .
Remember BBSes? Those modem-to-modem Bulletin Board Systems that were popular long before the web was? As the web progressed, BBSes turned into user and news groups, then into forums and blogs, and finally to their current iteration of micro-blogs (Twitter, Facebook).

. . . neither is the technology.
Some argue that the second version of the web is defined by its technologies. Ajax is the primary example. But what is Ajax? (Other than an acronymn for “Asynchronous JavaScript + XML”?) It is a technique in which you use JavaScript and XMLHttpRequest to update data on a page without a page refresh. The technologies used to achieve this have been around long before Web 2.0. Just ask Sun Microsystems. They introduced Java Applets way back in 1995.

The reality is the web is not a piece of software that can be defined by development cycles, but a medium. And as will all media, they change and they mature. This change is gradual and constant, much like the growth and development of a human being.

So if the web’s not new, why are people versioning it?

We wanted to be digital pioneers – again.
There are two reasons the web has been versioned. The first involves ownership.

When the web was first gaining popularity, it was a brave new world. Being a web designer or a developer was exciting and respected. The people involved in the early stages of the web were breaking new ground on a medium that would change society on a global scale. They were pioneers.

As things evolved, the mystique, and adventure began to wane. The divide between the good, and not so good web professionals grew. The digital revolution had similar effects on many related professions. Suddenly being a web designer or graphic designer could mean anything from creating a pamphlet and site for a local church, to working on rock posters, to creating compelling interactive pieces for major brands. The playing field got muddy and mixed up. And so, in the early to mid-2000s you had an industry of web professionals looking to re-capture their glory days.

And we needed something new to sell.
And that brings us to the primary reason the web was versioned. In the early 2000s the dot-com bubble burst. Faith in the miracles of Silicon Valley was at an all-time low, and the economy of start-ups and investments had dried up. Investor confidence was shaken to its foundations. People stopped buying.

Web professionals, and technology evangelists (yes that’s a real job title) could not sell the web. The web was unstable, a poor investment, or at least it was in the eyes of those who held the purse strings. Even if there was a company, service, or product that had legitimate value it was very difficult to get the money necessary to develop it.

One of the victims of the bubble burst were publisher of technology training books. Many of us can remember going into a Walmart, Zellers, or Chapters during this time and seeing bins full of discount computer training books. One of the more prominent companies had an idea. Enter Tim O’Reilly of O’Reilly Media.

In 2004 O’Reilly Media held the “Web 2.0” conference. In one swift, simple, industry-relevant turn of a phrase, O’Reilly filled the needs of both new web professionals looking for meaning in their carries, and gave the venture capitalists in Silicon Valley something new to sell.

Introducing the all-new, completely redesigned Internet!
Web 2.0 was new, yet familiar. Business people were already confortable the idea of software versions, and had seen how new versions of software often improved on the former. Software was a technology and so was the internet. The jump in logic was easy for those with little knowledge of the industry. Combine this new term with the success of newly labeled technologies such as Google Maps, and Youtube, and investors opened their pocket books again.

Along with this new buzz word came new demand. Web professionals with 2.0 skills were in demand again. Professionals with the skill level to leverage these existing technologies in new ways could finally separate themselves from the masses. A second Renaissance, and a new bubble, was created.

Just like the first dot-com bubble, there were legitimate businesses and technologies, and not-so-legitimate ones. For every Facebook there are dozen of also-rans that get money from investors but failed to connect. The difference now is that investors are more cautious, and the failure of one start-up does not generate enough fear and panic to take down all of them.

Was the versioning of the web a bad thing? Likely no. It helped restore a struggling industry and helped all of us in the world of interactive move forward in our careers. It also helped, and will continue to help, break down communication barriers globally. But I’d argue that those benefits are just a by-product of versioning the web. The real intention was to make money, and it worked.

As for Web 3.0 . . .
Are we there yet? No, and we will likely not be until the industry as a whole needs us to be. Many people have tried to use Web 3.0 as a tool to sell new technologies and ideas, but we need to reach industrial consensus before we’ll be ready to move forward with that label. And until there is an event, whether crisis or celebration, that will galvanize the industry again, Web 2.0 will likely stand.