Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Being put to death by Google should be a good thing

I don’t tend to punch guests as they leave the party, but some companies do the metaphorical equivalent. Not saying goodbye graciously can create a terrible reputation with your customers, and party goers. Now, I could drag up the usual suspects of big old corporations that fail to create amicable endings with their customers but I want to talk about start-ups, and the tech industry, who are sadly drifting down the path of short-termism that we usually associate with the financial services industry. 

I don’t tend to punch guests as they leave the party, but some companies do the metaphorical equivalent. Not saying goodbye graciously can create a terrible reputation with your customers, and party goers. Now, I could drag up the usual suspects of big old corporations that fail to create amicable endings with their customers but I want to talk about start-ups, and the tech industry, who are sadly drifting down the path of short-termism that we usually associate with the financial services industry. 

Due to its Papal like infallibility, we rarely question the way start-ups and tech industries approach things - especially when it comes to endings. But with the recent news about Revolv and its customers I feel I want to share some thoughts about Closure Experiences and how customer endings should be handled, even in tech.

A few short years ago, in the early hype of the ‘connected home’, some bold pioneering customers committed themselves to a company called Revolv. Tempted by the prospect of handling some of their homes’ more tedious functions - heating, garage doors, lighting - through an app, these people became Revlov’s first customers. That was only 2012 and - with a couple of talent acquisitions later - first Revolv by Nest, then Nest by Google/Alphabet, those customers now find themselves in a very different situation. Nest has decided to stop supporting Revolv as of the 15th of May. 

You might think that experiencing the end of a product isn’t unusual, many tech companies stop supporting outdated products and services. You might have experienced this with your old computers not being able to deal with the latest updates to software, but in the Revolv case it is a little different. It’s not a ramp down, they are actively stopping the service - turning the server off and killing the app. So the products in Revolv’s customers’ home’s will be dead immediately. This is not an unusual situation in the high-risk world of start-ups; where there is a casual attitude towards death and rebirth, uncaring of the consequence to the users, or the environmental impact when you brick functioning hardware at 4 years old. 

From the work I have been doing with endings in products, services and digital, I know that good Closure Experiences require 4 broad elements to be present. 

They should be…
Connected to the rest of the experience through Emotional Triggers that are Actionable by the user in a Timely manner. 

Revolv surprisingly fails on all. 
Doing things in a timely manner means showing a realistic timeline agreed upon by the user and the provider. For example, Kia cars offers a 7 year warranty. This allows the customer to imagine a time frame that is realistic to the expected life of the product and the provider an opportunity to access the customer around the time they are thinking of purchasing a new car when that warranty runs out. Its timely for both parties.
In contrast some companies imagine their products to be immortal. Revolv seemed to follow this cliche. Offering a “Lifetime Subscription” as part of the product purchase. This has an obvious semantic problem of defining “Lifetime” in this context? So this fails in being ‘timely’.

The Revolv customers were not consulted before the public announcement. This undermines the commitment those customers showed when investing in the start-up all those years ago. The link between the start of that relationship and the end of it, is therefore very different. Where as Revolv appreciated the commitment to the company from that customer in 2012. Now, at the end of that relationship its failed to show similar respect. So its not really ‘connected’, to the beginning of the relationship.

The emotionally barren language used by the Revolv founders in their letter shows a cold hearted indifference to the customers. Those users were, at one time, pioneers of the ‘home automation’ scene. Investing their personal money in to new ventures by start-ups like Revolv. They are owed a thanks. Not indifference. So if there are any ‘emotional triggers’ going off, they are ones of anger.

The FAQ (below) has been clearly limited by Revlov. Consciously closed language that leaves no actionable options to the user. 

What happens to my Revolv service?
As of May 15, 2016, Revolv service will no longer be available. The Revolv app won’t open and the hub won’t work.
Is my product still under warranty?
No. Our one-year warranty against defects in materials or workmanship has expired for all Revolv products.
What will happen to Revolv data?
Revolv data will be deleted.
How can I get customer support?
Please contact Revolv customer support.

Nest could have provided a way to move over to their platform for little effort. Instead they have currently made it as legally cold and absolute as possible. 

What should be… Connected to the rest of the experience, isn’t. Where positive emotional triggers should exist theres only options for resentment. Where there should be actionable options, there is cold denial. And where events should be timely, they come as a surprise.

The end of one relationship signals the re-birth of another. Of all people, the celebrated entrepreneur of the start-up industry, the type of person that started Nest, Revolv, and even Google should know that. Those who enjoy the benefits of re-birth, should respect the functions of a good death.

We can do a lot by designing closure experiences for users and in turn prepare the user for a healthy re-birth. Users that experience a good closure will be prepared for a new trusting relationship with another start-up, but the more we give them terrible endings, the less they will tolerate risky starts. 

If you're in a start-up, you should think a little more about closure experiences. If around 90% of start-ups fail, thats a lot of death to overlook.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Bowie. Closure.

We all have to bridge that gap between the ‘Now’ and the ‘Then’. The being alive, and not being alive. Bowie has inspired in life. In death. And has uniquely stepped inspiringly between.

Some people died before their time, some people died long after they should have done, few get it right. Elvis, popped an artery on the toilet, Diana got wrapped around a tunnel support, Lennon got shot, Jackson, should have died before losing credibility, lots of other artists have overdosed - which arguably you could say they had control over, but we have to hand it to David Bowie, never has an artist planned and executed a death so well.

The emotional out pouring has been quite a spectacle. The artist stories that example his talent and skill, the broad audiences that he appealed to, whether mass market or the fringe, all had some personal connection for what the artist meant to them. However, amongst his greatest achievements might not be his work when he was alive, but the work he done on his death. 

About half a million of us die in the UK each year. Many put up a fight for a while, then become reflective about the end, wanting to spend it meaningfully with family and loved ones. I guess for a while Bowie fought the cancer as so many of us do each year. Rounds of chemo, ever decreasing strength to keep fighting. In contrast though, Bowie, decided to own the issue and create for it. That must have taken some effort.

Many of us passively drift into the abyss without purpose or plan. We fear the end, try to dodge it. Forgetting the simple preparations like a will or funeral plan - according to the BBC, only 30% of us have prepared a will. Which isn’t a big effort. So imagine the effort Bowie went through to do what he did, to think about an album, set up photo shoots, videos, (I really hope he didn’t waste his time doing a social media plan) to create what was a perfect final curtain.

Conducting a performance around your end is pretty impressive. Death inspires many artists. Potentially its the most potent of muses. Victorian Gothic was rarely without a reference to it. Others have died while doing their art - Tommy Cooper the comedian and magician for example died on stage doing ‘Live From Her Majesty’s’ - which has a certain irony and comic value that I am sure Cooper would enjoy. But he didn’t plan it that way. Other stills have created artwork around their own death. Johnny Cash, ‘Aint no Grave’ and ‘Man Comes Around’ are good examples. Although about his death, and near his death, they didn’t involve his death as part of the act, as arguably Bowie's did. 

Its the link between the two states that make Bowie's ending so remarkable. Barely any have achieved such a thing. And the ones that have mostly lived in the theme of religion or myth. The philosopher Epicurus said that “Death is nothing to us, because when we are here, death is not, and when death is here, we are gone." Bowie managed to create something for both of those states, and bridge the worlds of being and not being. 

We all have to bridge that gap between the ‘Now’ and the ‘Then’. The being alive, and not being alive. Bowie has inspired in life. In death. And has uniquely stepped inspiringly between.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

The psychosis of consumption - The Consumer Self and the Civic Self.

When it comes to consumption we have 2 conflicting personalities that work against one another - our consuming self, and our civil self. Their experiences are supported by separate systems and different organisations. The battleground is the customer experience, the prize - improving the negative impact of consumption.

When it comes to consumption we have 2 conflicting personalities that work against one another - our consuming self, and our civil self. Their experiences are supported by separate systems and different organisations. The battleground is the customer experience, the prize - improving the negative impact of consumption.

One of these personalities is an active member of society, doing things on behalf of the community. Concerned about the general well being of others. Through this lens we worry about the environment, feel slighted by big corporations who seem to poison the planet, help our neighbours, save for the next generation, and thoughtfully separate our re-cycling.

In contrast, the consuming self indulges their dreams with purchasing new products and services. Blinkered to their personal impact on the environment. They love the thrill of getting the right product that fulfils the dream. And when that product is exhausted, broken, or comes to an end, they don’t dwell on it, they look for a new one. 

Systematic blinkering
These two selves avoid one another, which is easy as the systems that they live in everyday rarely references one other. 

The consuming self lives in the commercial system of the customer life cycle, which encourages self satisfaction, and consumption. It uses tools of adverting, marketing, and design to flatter the user in to making the next selfish purchase.

The civil self, lives in the altruistic system of the community, which encourages responsible thinking, neighbourliness, and concerns itself with the environment and globalisation. They use tools of democracy and citizenship to lobby governments, create community programs and raise awareness of their cause of being better citizens.

Protecting bad behaviour
The consuming self is protected from civil self when consuming. The commercial system avoids talking about issues that will alert the civil self to its consuming actions in fear it will put the consuming self off their consumption. To do this the customer lifecycle is punctuated by messages that reinforce the selfish good feeling of consuming. Reassured that the product is right for them, how to use the product correctly, what makes it high quality and the best deal. Every aspect of the customer life-cycle reinforces the consuming self apart from what happens when usage ends. 

Once broken, outdated, or un-fashionable the product is no longer the problem of the consuming self. The handover takes place and it becomes the problem of the civil self. Who need to deal with things like broken electronics, redundant cleaning products and the exhausted batteries of broken toys, amongst the other weekly rituals of recycling.

The Cliff of Consumption
Currently the consuming self pushes the problem off a cliff of consumption down on to our helpless civil self to deal with. The consuming self, and the mechanism that supports that personality have little interest in joining these two experiences.

Conversely the civil self finds it hard to talk the same language that the consumer self uses. The translation often ends up sounding like guilt. The user experience of being a consumer and being civil are not easily translatable. But they could be.

Resolving your personal differences
The potent moment at the end of the customer lifecycle is overlooked as a solution for improving the negative impacts of consumption. We can call this part of the customer life cycle the off-boarding phase. It should be filled with closure experiences that help bridge the conversation between the consuming self and the civil self. 

Acknowledging closure experiences in our consumer lifecycle can help alleviate the cognitive dissonance between our conflicting personalities. Alerting the consuming self that there is an onward journey to the product they have disposed of. And aiding the voice of the civil self to be heard in the deafening noise of consumption.

We cant end consumption, and feeling guilty about it isn’t really actionable. Consumption should be one user experience, not two. We need to create a customer lifecycle that acknowledges the end of the product or service relationship and aids dealing with its consequences. This means resolving this split personality in all of us. We need to create common user experiences that have encouraging language around endings, that stop our civil self being flattened by our dominate personality. We need to create more closure experiences.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Ctrl+Alt+Pulp/Print

Although an office based pulping and paper-making machine might bring an end to annoying footers about printing emails, it will achieve lots around closure experiences in the office environment.

Epson have recently released the worlds first office paper making machine, that turns waste paper in to new sheets. Although this is an enormous achievement for Epson, and will be greatly appreciated by many large companies and organisations, its real achievement is dealing with 2 closure experience issues common in offices. Firstly, it reveals the end of the paper life-cycle to the people that use paper. Secondly it securely destroys unwanted documents while the authors of those documents witness it. 

Although an office based pulping and paper-making machine might bring an end to annoying footers about printing emails, it will achieve lots around closure experiences in the office environment.

Epson have recently released the worlds first office paper making machine, that turns waste paper in to new sheets. Although this is an enormous achievement for Epson, and will be greatly appreciated by many large companies and organisations, its real achievement is dealing with 2 closure experience issues common in offices. Firstly, it reveals the end of the paper life-cycle to the people that use paper. Secondly it securely destroys unwanted documents while the authors of those documents witness it. 

The usual customer life-cycle for office paper, or any recycling program for that mater, is the effort that goes into it is hidden from the consumer. Paper recycling is a long drawn-out affair with lorries picking up waste paper, taking it to a collection points, that assembles the paper in bulk and transports it again to recycling centres, which then pulp it into new paper, and re-distribute to shops, who reveal it to the consumer, who then buys it. 

 

Epson. Reduced and revealed recycle flow

Epson. Reduced and revealed recycle flow

Reducing this to a shorter, quicker, more transparent process is good. Not only taking trucks off the road, but it brings acknowledgement of a closure experience to the people who can make a real behaviour change about their paper usage - the customer.

All too often the customer is hidden from the consequences of their consumption - the machine of industry deals with that. The customer places the paper in the right bin, and gets another ream of paper to put in the printer. They don’t see the end of the product life-cycle, and therefore have little acknowledgement of it. Just an interest in it. This might go as far as being happy about the recycle logo on the paper pack.

Now, they will need to attend to the recycling process themselves. Witnessing it in their own office, at the same time appreciating their role in that process. They have moved from the passive role of interest, too one of control. 

This will be welcomed by authors of sensitive material that have a profound anxiety about the security of document destruction. They can now rest-assured, knowing that a sensitive piece of material is gone forever as they witness it themselves being destroyed.

Future innovations, such as the Epson PaperLab, are welcomed. They create a meaningful acknowledgement at the end of a products life - a closure experience. Creating witnesses of consumption, not just passive actors in it is a good step forward in dealing with the cost of consumption. My only request is they call it the Epson End Maker Paper Maker.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Sky fallen for cliche business approach to Closure.

Sky has displayed the usual paranoid business approach to customers leaving. In the process damaging the brand and providing some terrible memories for its customers. 

People who have wanted to leave the Sky service have been trapped in sales conversation for over an hour, while the customer service team tries to sell them more products and stop them leaving. This is hard for many people to stand, and some give in and sign up for more services. Its a little like holding on to someones leg when you get dumped - it doesn’t build respect.

Sky has displayed the usual paranoid business approach to customers leaving. In the process damaging the brand and providing some terrible memories for its customers. 

People who have wanted to leave the Sky service have been trapped in sales conversation for over an hour, while the customer service team tries to sell them more products and stop them leaving. This is hard for many people to stand, and some give in and sign up for more services. Its a little like holding on to someones leg when you get dumped - it doesn’t build respect.

An example of this was relaid by Gavin Hackwood from Newport, South Wales in the UK. He attempted to leave Sky through the online chat forum. Apparently after after 90 minuets and even moving to a phone call, his request was denied. Many others have reported similar experiences. 

In response Sky have said that they need to confirm with customers over the phone that they want to end the service. Which is not an uncommon practice, but having to experience this for an hour seems excessive. 

Concerned people are suggesting ‘Hacks’ to get around this paranoid customer service system. Some recommend saying that customers should say they are leaving the country, others suggest sending a letter and following up with cancelling your direct debit. Some financial services advisors have suggested doing all possible communication mediums, following up with a phone call and keeping every paper trail that is made, oh and also asking Sky for the recorded phone call you had with them (which is possible with Data Protection rights in the UK).

What I find amazing out of this approach is Sky’s misunderstanding of how Closure Experiences work. Firstly, Sky are in denial that people leave services (a common mistake companies make). You and I know everything ends, so why do companies fail to make it a good experience at that point? Secondly they are making sure that the experience of leaving is so awful that the customers remember it over any good experiences they might have had. According to psychologist and author Daniel Kaheman “people judge experiences based on their Peak (an intense moment of the experience) and at their End. Rather than a total flat average of the experience.” - the Peak End Rule.

 If you only have 2 potential opportunities - the peak and the end, to provide the customer with a good memory of your service you should make the best of both of them. Sky has ensured its customers have a terrible ending experience. So they can almost guarantee they have a bad memory of it. You don’t need to be a graduate in Branding to know that won’t help build a customer base in the long run. Sadly, so much of business is about the short term numbers and metaphorically holding on to a customers leg while they attempt to leave, might just make them think twice, but they won’t respect you for it. 

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Hospice care; an inspiration to industries that deny closure.

There is a lot to learn from Hospice care when approaching the issues we have with consumption. Accepting and designing for the end would be a good start.

Its fantastic to hear that the UK was recently considered the best in the world for end-of-life care. The study by the Economist Intelligence Unit looked at 80 countries capabilities across hospitals and hospices, including areas of staffing, environments, skills, quality and affordability of care. 

It hasn’t been just the rich nations who have been developing this, also many of the poorer ones too - Panama, Chile, Mongolia and Uganda were all praised in the report. A reflection of the increasing concern globally as all nations start to experience an ageing population and the likelihood of a ‘drawn-out’ death for many of their people.

Its reassuring to see the issue being taken more seriously. A wonderful comment was made by Dr Stephen Connor, of the Worldwide Hospice Palliative Care Alliance, said:

"The biggest problem that persists is that our healthcare systems are designed to provide acute care when what we need is chronic care. That's still the case almost everywhere in the world."

This echo’s some of the denial that we experience in other industries at end of life for Products, Services, and Digital Products. A mindset that sees overwhelming focus on sales and little regard to how that experience ends for the user. Many industries approach the end of the customer engagement with denial, instead of design.

There is a lot to learn from Hospice care when approaching the issues we have in consumption. Accepting and designing for the end would be a good start.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Virgin improves Closure through new transaction model

Virgin trains has announced an automatic payback scheme for delayed passengers. This is unique for a number of reasons, but the most interesting one is as a closure experience for users. In one initiative they have created a healthy Closure experience, changed the transaction model, and disrupted an industry. 

Virgin trains has announced an automatic payback scheme for delayed passengers. This is unique for a number of reasons, but the most interesting one is as a closure experience for users. In one initiative they have created a healthy Closure experience, changed the transaction model, and disrupted an industry. 

As I have pointed out in previous posts, the Closure experience of any service is closely tied to the transaction model - how you pay for it will influence how you end it.

There are 5 basic transaction models in the service industry:

1. Payment after delivery
2. Payment before delivery
3. Scheduled payment
4. Synchronous payment
5. Continuous observation

The transport industry, apart from taxis, operates a Payment before delivery model. The nature of this model means the customer is in a subservient position. They gave up their money before the service began. If the service doesn’t go as planned, the only option up till now has been to fill in forms and apply for compensation in vouchers from the transport company; which seems like entrapment on a few levels. 

The model also means that there is little open dialogue between the customer and provider at the close of the service which is unlike the discussions at the end of meal, at the end of a haircut, or a taxi ride (Payment after delivery) where there is an opportunity for feedback and potential of tips. This model results in these industries often excelling in service - making the customer feel good, because they have listening and learning built into the transaction. If the service provider excels at their service then they might get extra.

The transport industry doesn’t listen to its customers in the same way. It has little incentive to because the transaction has already taken place. The Automatic Payback scheme has changed this. People now will get their money back automatically if things don’t go as planned. No more filling in forms to get some vouchers. Its all done for the customer in the background. It builds trust.

The next step should be to extend this to all digital tickets and for any customer that pays with a card. However, this will require significant investment in digital ticketing systems. Oyster has such a system, and is capable of issuing automatic refunds for disrupted services, but hasn’t introduced it. 

Well done Virgin Trains. A long way to go, but at least you have left the station.

 

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

The rightful place for the Right to Die sits with individuals, not religion and medicine

Religion has owned the right to die for centuries. The common religious package of ‘a good life’ as an access to heaven is scattered across all structured belief systems in one form or another and is the power base by which religion controls, or “inspires” its followers. So it comes as no surprise that church leaders from all faiths recently announced their objection to the Assisted Dying Bill being pursued in the UK’s House of Commons.

Religion has owned the right to die for centuries. The common religious package of ‘a good life’ as an access to heaven is scattered across all structured belief systems in one form or another and is the power base by which religion controls, or “inspires” its followers. So it comes as no surprise that Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury and church leaders from other faiths recently announced their objection to the Assisted Dying Bill being pursued in the UK’s House of Commons.

The bill allows patients who have an estimated 6 months to live, and who have a “clear and settled intention” to end their lives, to do so with a lethal dose of drugs. Previously, an assessment would need to be completed by two doctors and a family court judge to agree that a patient’s decision was free from coercion and that the medical diagnosis was satisfactory. A healthcare professional would then have to be present while the patient administered the lethal injection themselves.

Society has a long history of groups controlling the passage through life with the promise of heaven. In the past this had more meaning. A terribly hard life of toil, disease and famine laid a fertile ground for the belief in something better to come in heaven. But as life has become more abundant and comfortable in the West, the concept of heaven has become less potent. In parallel to this medicine has become more capable, permitting a longer, more comfortable life. 

Religion and medicine enjoy the influence they have over people. Religious guidance around a ‘good life’ and the subsequent reward for that in heaven, has given it enormous influence over our daily lives with endless, dos and don’ts. This has also given it explicit authority over the end of life and the transition to the afterlife in heaven. In religion it is not the right of the individual to say how they die.

Alternatively, medicine has promised us a longer life - keeping us alive in comfort to a ripe old age and even, on some occasions, beyond what is potentially sensible. The diagnosis of death is often theirs to give, through the endless mechanisms and the strict definition of medical death. Generally in hospitals it is not the right of the individual to say when or how they die.

Both groups have benefitted from controlling the ending of life - the most important closure experience we have. With the Assisted Dying Bill individuals might now take control of their own death by selecting the timing and the meaning of the end of their life. The ones who are losing out are the traditions of religion and medicine, not those individuals whom are choosing to die.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

This damaging gap is a silent environment killer

Many companies overly focus on the On-Boarding experience because selling to more customers means more money -the status quo of business. Canon is no different this regard. The way they sell printer ink is a good example of a companies bias to getting more customers, over the Usage of the product or the Off-Boarding when the product comes to the end of its life.

The negative impact of our consumer culture can be vastly improved by strengthening the connections between phases of the customer life-cycle. That life-cycle can be split into 3 phases - On-Boarding a customer, Usage of the product or service, and the Off-Boarding at the end of the engagement. 

If the message between buying a product, using a product and disposing of a product is not coherent we lose the opportunity to deal with issues associated with consumption. 

Many companies overly focus on the On-Boarding experience because selling to more customers means more money -the status quo of business. Canon is no different this regard. The way they sell printer ink is a good example of a company's bias to getting more customers, over the Usage of the product or the Off-Boarding when the product comes to the end of its life.

Printer ink is a very hazardous material. It is highly poisonous to the environment, so it is essential that it is disposed of properly. Canon, the printing industry, and governments all agree on this. So it is very important that we capture and reprocess this poisonous material. 

Lets look at the life-cycle of a Canon Printer Cartridge in more detail to example this issue.

User flow of Canon printer ink cartridge 

User flow of Canon printer ink cartridge 

As it shows, the user will transition through well crafted experiences delivered by advertising, marketing, and packaging companies on behalf of the producer - in this case, Canon. This On-Boarding process is made up of 'starting experiences' (Adverts, Point of Sale material, etc) choreographed by these experienced and powerful companies, urging the user to purchase the product. 

Once the user makes a transaction the mode of the experience changes to one of ‘Usage’. The user navigates the inner packaging, cartridge, and the printer to replace the old with the new, and hopefully continues many days of happy printing. 

Canon instructions. Talk of chemicals, but not what to do about them.

Canon instructions. Talk of chemicals, but not what to do about them.

But, once the new cartridge goes in, what happens to the old cartridge? At this point Canon seem to have lost interest in the lifecycle. The instructions contain some dos and don’ts, and a reference to the chemicals contained in the ink - users of course, don’t understand what ‘benzisothiazol’ means and therefore can’t action anything about it. 

Canon packaging. Baffling symbols, and links to an 'up-sell'.

Canon packaging. Baffling symbols, and links to an 'up-sell'.

The only guidance about next steps for the user is another ‘upsell’ on the packaging for CreativePark, “a premium content service available exclusively to users of genuine Canon inks”. In effect, they are pushing another On-Boarding experience instead of guiding the user along the life-cycle to a safe and responsible conclusion - a Closure Experience.

What is surprising in this case is that Canon is a very responsible company, and a printer pioneer, having operated a cartridge recycling program since 1990. But sadly they have not coherently attached this proud ancestry this to their On-Boarding and Usage phases of the printer cartridge life-cycle.

To join these phases together it is left to the guilt driven user to find out what to do with poisonous printer cartridges. After a quick Google search, the user might find the appropriate page on the Canon website (its nowhere on the packaging). After reading quite a lot of material the user is asked to sign the Canon terms and conditions - 2300 words - an excessive barrier to entry, when we need to encourage all the enthusiasm for recycling we can from users. 

After agreeing to these T&Cs, the user needs to fill in a form with their address and is finally rewarded with a commitment that Canon will send them a pre-paid envelope within 5 days. Canon recommends the user waits until they have at least 5 cartridges to send the pack back, citing that “it will help us minimise the carbon footprint of this service if at least five cartridges are returned per envelope”.

Nearly 500ml of redundant space in Canon packaging.

Nearly 500ml of redundant space in Canon packaging.

This again highlights the problems with breaking the phases of the life-cycle. Canon have already got the packaging of the cartridge into your home. This pack is excessive in size. Having nearly 500ml of additional space inside. A shocking piece of hypocrisy! 

Like many big corporate companies Canon want to do the right thing, but are crippled with internal fractured thinking. The failure to stitch the On-Boarding, Usage, and Off-Boarding phases of the life cycle is inherent in the sales culture we breed.

Amongst the many simple solutions to remedy the Canon printer cartridge problem would be placing return packs in the capacious packaging they send their product in. This would keep the life-cycle coherent between the phases, encourage the user to recycle, inform the user that Canon is serious about the environment, and show that Canon can create Closure experiences, as well as starting ones.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

How Closure fits into the customer lifecycle

The customer life cycle can be broken into 3 sections - On-Boarding, Usage, and Off-Boarding.


The customer life cycle can be broken into 3 phases - On-Boarding, Usage, and Off-Boarding.

On-Boarding is made up of Starting Experiences

It is the effort it takes to get the customer to commit to the product or service relationship. It is the the start of the relationship.

Starting Experience examples
Advertising that attracts you to a product or service relationship
Marketing that orientates you towards the right decision
Packaging that reveals the beautiful product you have bought

Usage completes tasks, empowers people and orders chaos.

It is the stable committed relationship between the user and the service they use, or the product they own.

Usage Experience examples
Paying in to a pension scheme
Daily usage of a car
Regular usage of an app

Off-Boarding is made up of Closure Experiences

It is the effort it takes to neutralise the effects of the engagement. To complete the agreed engagement. Its the conclusion of the relationship.

Closure Experience examples
It is the completion of a mortgage
It is the disposal of a product in the right place
It is saying goodbye
It is closing the un-used accounts
Its tidying up the impacts of consumption

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Death: Pets versus robot dogs. Who wins?

Sony’s robot dog, Aibo, is dying. But it’s achieved a surprising comparison with its canine doppleganger. 

Although Aibo has been hugely successful, selling 150,000 models between 1999 and 2006, Sony has stopped repairing them. Heart broken owners of the robot dog now rely on hackers, and home technicians to achieve the life saving operations the robot dogs require. 

Sony’s robot dog, Aibo, is dying. But it’s achieved a surprising comparison with its canine doppleganger. 

Although Aibo has been hugely successful, selling 150,000 models between 1999 and 2006, Sony has stopped repairing them. Heart broken owners of the robot dog now rely on hackers, and home technicians to achieve the life saving operations the robot dogs require. 

The love for Aibo from their owners is remarkable. A similar behaviour to established pet - person relationships. Some even resorting to methods of farewell reserved for humans and family pets. These robot funerals are captured in this great video by the New York Times (The Family Dog http://nyti.ms/1MLY3hf via @nytvideo). 

This strong pet type bond being the successful result of the variable characteristics programmed into the robot dogs. Making them all somewhat unique. Or at least appearing that way for the convinced owners. Certainly the owners talk about the development stages of Aibo similarly to the stages of a real family pet. And now they talk sadly about the end of Aibo’s life as the potential death from a lack of parts starts to materialise. 

Up till last year Sony were supplying parts, but now the repairs have to be done with parts from redundant un-loved robot dogs. Like some grotesque sci-fi story of body part sales in a post apocalyptic future. From a lab full of these parts and half built Aibos, the repair guy in the video reflects on the ultimate situation of all the parts running out. “So one day they will all be gone”.

Aibo has significantly outlasted many other products and services created around 1999. For example, Phones often last far less, at an average of 2 years. Apps weren't even around at the time of Aibo release. Its life span being more in line with TVs at 15 years. It hasn’t quite achieved the length of a Satellite though at 25 years. 

A novel, and appropriate comparison would compare its lifespan with pets. Mice and Hamsters at 3 years, Gerbils last about as long as a laptop at 4 years, rabbits and cats between 9-13, but as a beautiful coincidence, Aibo has lived for the average lifespan of a Dog at 15 years. Although targeted as a quirky alternative to a real pet, I bet many of the Sony production team wouldn’t have imagined it lasting quite as long as a real dog. What a wonderful coincidence.

Read More
Joe Macleod Joe Macleod

Re-spawn time in Credit Cards

Its unlikely you’ll ever hear your bank talk about the pros and cons of ending a relationship, but thankfully Money Saving Expert has put this interesting and informative piece together about what you should consider when leaving you Credit Card company.

Its unlikely you’ll ever hear your bank talk about the pros and cons of ending a relationship, but thankfully Money Saving Expert has put this interesting and informative piece together about what you should consider when leaving you Credit Card company.

Amongst the insights in the article, MSE talk about the period of time after you close your account that the Credit Card company will consider you “new” again - a classic re-spawn. 

Read More