Econsultancy: Are brands failing to properly promote their new chatbots?

My overall opinion was that it offers a fairly standard booking system via Facebook Messenger – nothing fancy, but practical enough.

One issue I failed to mention is that the brand doesn’t appear to be doing much to promote it. Which is odd, as how are people meant to use it if they don’t know it exists in the first place?

Here’s a bit more info on this issue and how brands can combat it.

Discovering chatbots

In order to access the Pizza Express chatbot, I typed @PizzaExpress in the recipient search bar in Facebook Messenger. Easy enough, as it immediately appeared in the drop-down menu.However, I was already aware that the bot existed, and it’s likely that most existing users don’t.

So, where else is it promoted?

Looking at the brand’s main Facebook page, I discovered that it can also be accessed via the ‘book now’ or ‘message’ buttons, which take you straight to Messenger.

Fair enough.

Although, it does seem like this would be very easy to miss, even for existing fans of the Facebook page. Most people find and access content directly from their news feed, so how likely is it that anyone will see this?

Upon further inspection, I spotted that the brand has actively promoted the feature in a recent post, highlighting it in conjunction with a current Valentine’s Day special offer and urging users to book it via the chatbot.

But, while fans might see it, what about people who occasionally (or even regularly) eat in a Pizza Express restaurant, but haven’t liked the brand’s Facebook page?

Personally, I’ve enjoyed the odd Padana Romana in my time. I’d even go as far as saying Pizza Express is my emergency high street restaurant chain of choice, but I’d honestly never think to hit that ‘like’ button. In that case, I’d miss the chatbot entirely.

And Pizza Express might miss out on my data and the subsequent opportunity for retargeting.

It’s also worth mentioning that anyone without Facebook Messenger installed on their smartphone will be left frustrated if they happen to click ‘book now’ on the Facebook page.

Read all: Are brands failing to properly promote their new chatbots? | Econsultancy


Rethinking Design Thinking |

Design Thinking has become one of the most visible and promising innovation movements in recent history, yet all design thinking is not the same, especially in practice.

The current proliferation of a one-size-fits-all approach is not only ineffective, it could ultimately doom its future.

We see this all the time: workshops filled with post-it notes and led by a “design” person who takes the audience through abstract activities that have little to do with the actual challenges facing the participants or their organization. While getting people outside of their comfort zone can create an environment that fosters creativity, design thinking must respond to the political, financial and cultural realities of the organizations it engages. Otherwise, it can become empty busywork that frustrates more than it empowers.

This lack of rigor around design thinking has led many organizations to 1) bring in design consultants on the back end of projects after problems and even solutions have been defined; and 2) seek short-term deliverables in the form of a “quick” technical fix that rarely drives the systemic transformation that makes design thinking so valuable.

Five Common Design-Thinking Mistakes

From our experience embedding design thinking within large organizations, we have repeatedly observed shortcomings in the practice of design thinking and have outlined five ways in which organizations err when engaging design thinkers or developing their own capacity for design thinking. We hope that this list not only helps organizations avoid these costly and time-consuming mistakes, but also preserves the long-term viability of design thinking practice.

Read all: Rethinking Design Thinking | The Huffington Post

Come play with us – the Tesco Service Design playbook | Roman Schöneboom | Pulse | LinkedIn

“bridging complexity fast I am very proud that the Tesco Service Design playbook was launched officially (internal for now).

The team and I created this resource over the last months to be a useful reference and guide for project teams while they work through a typical project.

The playbook is written from the perspective of teams doing service design projects.

The content is based on actual use of plays – this means: sharing what we learned from using and testing these tools in customer-facing research and design projects.

I hope the playbook can be used to support training and to make people comfortable in using service design techniques when they do their own projects. While the main target audience is teams in research and design, all the tools and plays are produced so they’re easily accessible to people who aren’t researchers or designers by trade.

The playbook is currently made up of 22 plays. There will be more added every fortnight.Teams may find that they are using similar tools in their own work already and that this is a natural extension of their current skills. They may also find new areas of personal growth—new skills and the excitement of being involved in service innovation”

Source: Come play with us – the Tesco Service Design playbook | Roman Schöneboom | Pulse | LinkedIn

Again and again and again: yes there is a Return on Design


Bottom Line: Companies that receive awards for product design see an immediate uptick in stock price.

Superior product design has been widely touted as a competitive advantage.

Apple is hailed for the sparse aesthetics and natural functionality of its products; Kimberly-Clark owes its boost in profitability to its more practical diaper design; and Lego’s financial turnaround was fueled by its rededication to making fun, easy-to-use toys.

But the discrete value of product design can be hard to quantify.

We don’t have much evidence of whether good design affects a firm’s market value, for instance — even though that would be a sure sign that shareholders reward outstanding design, as they do positive earnings reports or hot new products.To get around the subjective judgment of what defines excellent design, the authors of a new study decided to trust the experts.

A number of professional design organizations hand out prestigious awards for functionality, aesthetics, user interface, creativity, and environmental impact.

Read all: Return on Design

Smashing Magazine’s Mobile-First Is Just Not Good Enough: Meet Journey-Driven Design

In a recent sales meeting for a prospective healthcare client, our team at Mad*Pow found ourselves answering an all-too-familiar question.

We had covered the fundamental approach of user-centered design, agreed on leading with research and strategy, and everything was going smoothly.

Just as we were wrapping up, the head of their team suddenly asked, “Oh, you guys design mobile-first, right?”

Well, that’s a difficult question to answer.

While the concept of mobile-first began as a philosophy to help prioritize content and ensure positive, device-agnostic experiences, budgetary and scheduling constraints often result in mobile-first meaning mobile-only.

But according to the analytics data of our healthcare clients, the majority of their users are still on desktop.

We want to provide a positive experience for those users and for users on mobile and tablet apps and for those using mobile browsers — and even for users having an in-person experience! It is not accurate to assume that mobile is the primary experience

.We have so many devices today, it’s impossible to assume someone will use mobile.

We’ve come to the conclusion that mobile-first is not specific enough to user needs. Truly user-centered design needs to start with the journeys our users are taking and the flows they follow to complete their objectives. In other words, journey-driven design

Source: Mobile-First Is Just Not Good Enough: Meet Journey-Driven Design – Smashing Magazine