Even though I’m hosting “Writing Right for the Web” webinars this week, I’m working behind the scenes on the research for an upcoming University Business column about the mobile Web and other cell phone based initiatives.
Thanks to a Twitter tip from @gilzow, I stumbled yesterday on the announcement of the MU iPhone Student Competition Winners, a contest organized by the Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri.
Launched in September 2008, this contest prompted journalism and engineering majors to create iPhone applications with a real-life purpose.
There were 2 winners for this competition: one picked by judges including ATT and Apple representatives and one picked by the people.
Both winning applications have a geolocation-based component, taping into one of the neat features of the iPhone: its GPS.
- Near Buy – the pick of the judges – is targeted to the real estate market (I’m not sure though what’s the journalism connection here). It allows iPhone owners to find home/apartment listings close to their current location – using Google’s big database. Real Estate agents can enhance their listings by including photos and get an idea of the performance of these listings by using the professional edition of the iPhone app.
- News Flash – the People’s choice – offers a local newspaper experience that can be entirely customized to the interest, needs and current location of the iPhone owner. It includes news from local sources, but also national and international news outlets.
What I found interesting in these applications is the fact they are trying to solve real problems and fill customer needs – which is always better ;-)
Apple recently celebrated its first billion of downloaded apps (a lot of apps are free, the others usually cost a buck or two), which shows there’s definitely something behind these little applications.
While many college students have developed very successful applications (including iStanford and the Duke iPhone Suite for example – both developed by the same team), most higher ed institutions seem to ignore these type of projects despite the marketing possibilities offered by these applications and other initiatives using the ubiquitous cell phones.
Is it too early?
Is it too complex?
Are the higher ed web and marketing professionals too busy getting social on Facebook, Twitter and the likes?
Why don’t we talk more about the mobile Web and its possibilities for our field? Please tell us what you think (or prove me wrong by sharing great initiatives) by posting a comment.
[…] […]
I don’t think this is limited to mobile web… it applies to any emerging technology. It’s the sad state of higher ed that we’re slow to take advantage of new ideas, but there are some real gems out there – MIT, Stanford, and Duke always seem to be players. Those schools invest in the resources and have a culture that values innovation for its own sake.
Your post helped me crystallize some of my thoughts and finish a blog post I’ve had in my drafts for a month – thanks! http://grundyhome.com/2009/05/06/why-higher-ed-is-always-a-step-behind/
We don’t talk about the mobile web in higher ed because the adaptation of mobile devices in North America is painfully behind the times when compared to Asia and parts of Europe. While we’ve all been very excited about the iPhone (myself included), it doesn’t begin to compare with the handsets currently available in Asia. We are a good 3-4 years behind which is many generations giving the exponential changes in technology. As a result, we don’t see all the new possibilities.
IMHO, the mobile web will rewrite the rules. True 24/7 access to the web, combined with GPS and many other unique benefits of mobile will require use to rethink what’s possible. As Tomi Ahonen writes – “Mobil as the 7th mass media channel is as different from the Internet as TV is from radio”
Our company, Usablenet, has worked with dozens of Universities to extend their websites to mobile, including the University System of Georgia, Dartmouth, City University of New York, Northeastern, USF, University of Kentucky and others. They have found great success in supporting students and staff on mobile devices.
You are right to ask “why aren’t universities focusing on mobile web?” The student demographic is increasingly mobile every day and expect to be able to access the internet on any device they use regularly. Every university should be doing this!
This is an easy question. You know, I’d love to do more mobile stuff, but there’s a couple issues:
1. Demand – it’s simply not there. At least not here. We have a VERY SMALL (<1%) user base on mobile devices, and no one is stepping up asking why we’re not doing more with it.
2. Resources – there’s no way to branch into yet another medium without more people, time, and money. I know I’m not alone when I say that my office is spread beyond the thin point as it is, and we’re cutting back more still. We’re so busy trying to keep the ship afloat, that we can’t spend a lot of time paddling towards the shore, so-to-speak.
I think most people would agree that if we could, we’d all love to do more cool, cutting edge stuff. But the fact is, we aren’t cutting edge, and in the current environment, there’s really no way to be. Even in the case of Duke and Stanford, that wasn’t the school doing it (outside of giving a little help connecting to their data). The projects were driven by students in their spare time.
If we have any chance at success in such areas, that’s where I think it will come from: dynamic, smart students. That still leaves schools like us in the cold, since we don’t produce students capable of that kind of work. We don’t work in a way that says “how can we create opportunities with new technology,” instead, it’s much more like “what can we do to keep our head above water.”
My company (Anycollege.com) looked into helping schools provide text messaging and/or mobile options for recruitment earlier this year, but when we asked the colleges we work with very few were interested in it. Many responded that they simply did not have the capability either with the technology or the staff to handle the responses in a timely manner. It seemed to be very much like Michael Fienen said; just trying to stay afloat was the primary concern at the moment.
I’ll mirror most of what @Fienen has said. The number of mobile web browsers showing up in our stats is very small (less than 1%). Now, one could say that mobile users arent coming to our site because we haven’t built anything specific for them and THAT is why the numbers are so low. But then again, no one is complaining about the lack of mobile sites either. Of course, the bulk of the sites we create are all standards based, so while not specifically designed for mobile devices, the majority of them look just fine on a mobile device. And for the ones that dont perfect, the content is still accessible.
Our biggest hurdle in creating mobile-specific sites is time. While we have a much bigger shop than Fienen, due to budget constraints and directives handed down from our President, we find ourselves barely able to stay ahead of the requests coming into our office. Creating mobile-specific sites has been on my professional to-do list for the last year, but it always gets bumped for more pressing items.
As for phone text-based marketing, we looked into text subscription services and it was cost prohibitive. We do have it for our alert system, but that was purchased with separate funds.
First, let me apologize for not replying earlier, but I had to host the second and last “Writing Right for the Web” webinar today.
@Chas – You’re probably right. However, I’m still puzzled by the fact that almost nobody (at the exception of the early adopters) were talking about Twitter just 6 months ago and now everybody in higher ed – not just the techies – seems to be on it and even using it as an institutional communication channel – even if it might not be a communication channel of choice for their target audiences.
@Mark – That’s true that there was some lagging technology-wise, but that gap is filling up very quickly.
While doing my research for my column, I found some great insights about text messaging usage. In Q3 of 2008, 203 million of the 263 million of mobile subscribers paid for a text messaging package (most of the time for unlimited usage) or on a transaction basis according to the Nielsen Company.
Moreover, it seems that the penetration rate of mobile use of the Internet in the US is higher than it is in the UK according to Mobisix.
@Nikki and Paul – thanks for the info.
@Michael Actually, I’m not sure mobile initiatives are just cool/cutting edge stuff.
Is there a strong demand for Twitter from your target audiences? Probably not.
While doing my research about mobile web and text messaging, I was actually very surprised to see that the research always highlights the fact that the younger users are not the only one using text or mobile web. So, our student audiences are definitely there.
I can understand that there’s definitely a lack of resources, but it’s really a question of priorities – and probably something related to the ease of implementation.
Setting a twitter account is easy. Starting a mobile initiative is more costly and time consuming.
But, does it mean that we should always go for easy even if we risk missing our target audiences?
@Gilzow I listened to a talk given by your president (Gary Forsee) yesterday. It was a discussion panel at the RJI event. At least in this talk, he seemed to be really into mobile initiative (isn’t he coming from the telecommunication industry, BTW?).
I understand that there’s always a difference between what higher ed executives say and what they do, but I can’t stop wondering why meeting our target audiences where they are (on their cell phones – not just with mobile version of websites, but also by using text messages) shouldn’t be a priority – but, then I’m a dreamer ;-)
Well, let’s narrow it down a hair more then. I’m not sure what you mean about doing what’s easy as opposed to doing what’s targeted. I would say everything we do is targeted, and little of that is particularly easy.
But here’s probably the finer point, and I’m mostly wondering out loud here: Where’s the ROI? When it comes to prospective students, I would argue that there is little to nothing to be gained coming at kids from a mobile angle. Money spent targeting prospectives in the mobile arena would almost assuredly be better spent and more effective targeting them in more traditional mediums. There’s little likelihood that a student will decide to go to your school based on a text message, or based on the neat mobile stuff you have. And if they did? I’d say you need to work on making your programs a lot better then. Parents and kids aren’t going to cluster around the iPhone on the couch to decide whether or not to come to your school.
And when it comes to current students, that becomes even starker. A student isn’t going to stay at your school because of the mobile tools you provide, they’ll stay because of the quality and cost of the education (or maybe that’s just wishful thinking on my part). At least in-so-far as traditional institutions go. And maybe that changes as we become more non-traditional, but that means talking about an entire paradigm shift far bigger than mobile computing alone. That’s another part of the puzzle. Mobile tools are not an end unto themselves, they are and for the foreseeable future will be components of bigger strategies.
I guess as I see it, mobile stuff is a toy. A shiny, pretty thing that sure is cool, and we want it when we see others playing with it. Rich kids have it because rich kids always have the best cool toys, but middle class kids, well, we make forts out of cardboard boxes. Until mobile tools can become an actual asset, one that can return on the expense put in, there’s no way for it to climb the priority ladder.
I totally agree with your points re: mobile web apps, Michael.
What I was referring to is the Twitter fever that caught higher ed institutions – it’s easy but really looks like it’s off target, for now – at least far more than trying to engage students via targeted text messages (I definitely place that in a different category than rich mobile web applications).
Coca Cola, American Idol among many other companies/brands reach out to “kids” via this medium – and not just the rich kids. Even if they have huge budgets, companies are not known to throw money just to look cool – especially when there’s a great way to measure the ROI of their texting initiatives.
I think mobile web sites are long overdue.
But beyond that? I think marketing is already invasive enough and investing resources to encroach on people in ways that give us the illusion that we’re “reaching them” in a positive way, is troublesome.
I feel that many of us need to focus on our biggest offering first – our web site. If thats not up to par with everything else we do (social media, mobile sites, apps, etc.) then there’s no point.
@Ron – Sorry, Ron. I’m also a marketer (hasn’t always been though) – which might explain my different point of view ;-) Marketing can be evil, but it can also bring the right (as in what makes sense to the target audience) information/services/products to the right audience using the right channels.
And, actually with shortcodes (when you request somebody to text a word to a number to get more info, register for a contest, etc.), text messaging marketing is really on the cell phone users’ terms – if they don’t want to receive messages from you, they won’t get them.
@Jess – I totally agree: no need to explore other channels if your website isn’t up to standard.
@karine yes, Foresee is the former CEO of Sprint. And while I’m positive he is for a mobile initiative of some sorts, he has also stated that we are not to print anythiung that isn’t directly related to recruitment/admissions and fundraising, and that everything should be moved to the web. In addition the University has over 1,000,000 pages (http://is.gd/xxxA) in the missouri.edu domain (this isn’t counting our 3 other campuses or UM System). We’re more focused right now on making sure all of those pages are secure and ADA compliant.
I’ve sat in a few roundtables with students and faculty and the students actually DID request that faculty use twitter more often. A couple mentioned text messaging but the majority were asking for twitter.
I think Universities have jumped on twitter because there is no cost to using it. And you dont need to learn anything to use it either: login to the website, type your message, click Update. Done. So while there might not be a huge demand, there’s also nothing really lost if it fails.
When we researched setting up a shortcode number, it was ridiculously expensive (more than $20,000/year). In times of budget crisis, that $20K could go towards someone’s salary. As I mentioned previously, people have the option to subscribe their phones to our campus alert system, but so far, the number of subscribers has been pretty disappointing.
As for mobile web development, a colleague and I researched the topic for about 6 months before it was formally added to our task list. What we discovered was there are about 120 different mobile OS + browser combinations, and none of them display exactly the same. Even the same OS will display a page differently between minor versions. Given that, your choices are kind of limited: you can develop a mobile-specific site and try to browser sniff and adjust the code for the device that is viewing your site, develop a mobile-specific site and just test the phones you have access to, or you code your site to standards, use progressive enhancement and know that 90% of mobile users will be able to at least be able to access your content.
(I actually give a Presentation on this exact topic titled: Accessibility beyond ADA: Who can Access you Content Online).
Now, if you are talking about web applications (like the ones mentioned in this post) it gets even more tricky. Which platform do you develop for? iPhone? Blackberry? Windows Mobile? Nokia? RJI picked iPhone for the competition, but as an institution can we really pick just one (if it were that easy then we would only have to support one desktop browser)? And no matter which one you pick, you have to have a programmer (or at least someone willing to learn) to download and learn the SDK. Then you have the issue of continued support for the application. This requires that someone dedicate at least part of their time to field support issues.
You (@Karine) mention that you found it interesting that the RJI applications are trying to solve real problems. Looking at it from that angle, a problem has not presented itself (yet) that demands a mobile application (at least in terms of student recruitment). We currently have record enrollments. While there are certainly applications I would *LIKE* to develop (a mobile campus map comes to mind), there just isnt a /demand/ for one yet.
Sent from my BlackBerry
@Gilzow – thanks for providing such great insights.
I really appreciate your taking the time to share your experience and research in such a detailed comment – especially from your BlackBerry (which, BTW, probably speaks a lot about the power of mobile web access devices even though you’re not representative of our traditional target audience – OK, I’m teasing you here ;-)
Now your point about accessibility/standards is right on target – that is definitely a way to serve our audiences no matter which devices (computer or mobile phone) they use.
I’m really not trying to point fingers to anybody – just to stir the pot and get some conversations going around this topic.
re: Twitter. Did you actually get a chance to ask students requesting more Twitter updates how they were going to check these — using a computer or another device?
I would like to add that there are more APIs than you can shake a stick at currently. Karine posted the article about the iPhone application (which has to be developed according to Apple’s standards), but what about the BlackBerry app, the Verizon API, ATT’s, T-Mobile has some proprietary standards for applications. This would mean, theoretically, that I have to develop 5 or 6 GPS apps in order to cover my bases.
Currently iPhone has lost mobile leadership to the Blackberry Curve and Palm is releasing their new phone shortly.
In short, I understand and appreciate the desire to push ahead in this new arena, but until there is some standardization, we can do no more than baby-step our way around.
Just my two cents.
Lots of good thoughts here but I think that you are all ignoring one important fact. New smart phones render websites pretty well and will only get better at this. I addressed this issue months ago so instead of getting into a long response I’ll just link to that post.
Smartphone Applications: Just Build for the Web
@Bill – yep, the lack of standardization is definitely an issue. Actually, it reminds me of the *good* old days of browser compatibility nightmares – Netscape, IE, AOL and the rest. Things have improved on the *traditional* web and they will probably become better soon on the mobile web.
@Kyle – Interesting post. While smart phones do render websites pretty well, I think there are still usability issues. I’ve been playing a bit with some iPhone applications (from newspapers, facebook, linkedin, twitterific) and they are definitely more easy to use than using these websites on my iTouch. It’s doable, it’s true, but the application will get me where I want to go faster.
@Karine – I guess the point I’m pushing is that I wouldn’t waste time developing mobile apps because I just don’t see the long term sustainable value.
Imagine how far smartphones have come in the last year… now think another year or two. The long term value just isn’t in mobile apps because they will be able to handle full renderings of websites with flash, javascript, etc soon enough. Heck my Blackberry Storm on my desk right now is a more powerful machine then my first Gateway computer from 1996!
If anyone else’s IT is anything like ours, the answer is always “No you can’t do anything mobile – security issues, student information blah blah cross-site scripting blah blah” – whether it’s valid or not. I’m a designer not a coder but I’m pretty sure there’s a way to do it without leaving the student body’s information at risk.
Lots of good thoughts here. Just want to add my 2 cents. I think a big part of the issue is folks are trying to view mobile as a stand alone marketing medium, when it really needs to be part of an integrated strategy. Also, I think sometimes folks are not seeing all the potential for alumni applications. This is not about sending a newsletter to a mobile device, it is about providing event information real time to attendees, another channel to offer distressed inventory, provide news real time, and even create a new channel for giving.
To expand on the giving, there are specific short codes where an opt in user can make a gift that gets added to their mobile bill. It isn’t about $100 gifts but rather using events/media to increase reach and collect a lot of $1 gifts (see Barack Obama campaign). The technology issue is real but choosing to develop apps for IPhone/Blackberry and use WAP sites for the rest creates pretty good coverage. We have found that penetration for smart devices is much higher for college grads than national averages.
Our company is launching mobile platforms for alumni offices at no cost and supporting with advertising. We are also making the revenue available via local advertising for businesses the campuses already have relationships with. Opt in campaigns are performing well, retention will depend on how fresh the content can be maintained. The problem we can’t solve is the resource issue on campus to support.
Very interesting discussion. Just wanted to add a data point here from a recent Brown survey of alumni who graduated in the past six years. We asked which electronic technologies they would like to see Brown use more frequently to foster communication with and among alumni. We didn’t ask about mobile applications (just wasn’t on our radar) but we did ask about text messaging. It ranked dead last. One telltale comment was “As much as I have pride in being a Brown alum, I do not want the alumni association invading my life with text messages.”
This could change over time, of course, and we will ask the question again. But for now, we don’t see a need to pursue it.
@Karine re: twitter – i did not have the opportunity to ask how they were going to view the twitter posts.
We just had our monthly campus Web Developers meeting today and I asked if any department on campus was pursuing either a mobile web initiative or anything with SMS text messaging. The answer was a unanimous “no”. Main reason: budgets. However everyone has started using twitter and most were also using facebook to reach alumni, current students and/or future students. Specifically, one person said [paraphrasing] “I dont have to get permission to do something with Facebook or Twitter. I’m already in charge of sending out this information by email; twitter/facebook is just another avenue to get the information to our customers. Developing a mobile application would require that I get permission first before pursuing it.”
Wow. I love the discussion!
I have researched high school students. Guess what is the most common thing they do on their phone…
answer: texting. (even more than talking – wow)
You can see the research here if you wish:
http://blog.mongooseresearch.com/2009/04/texting-is-the-most-common-use-of-mobile-phones.html
For marketing, we have 3 options:
1) a mobile web site (which can now be very nice if done well)
2) a native phone specific application (iphone, bberry)
3) Texting.. SMS. MMS is an option but low quality kills the deal.
The third optional is already the most popular (see above). The key is to leverage this existing behavior. The Mongoose Mobile Platform is SMS based.. simple texting. It is what people what – to communicate – stay in touch – on their terms. On an admissions site.. it is implemented as a value-add service to prospective students to manage their mobile updates… be reminded of important admissions dates. Be notified when there is an event in their area. Helpful things like that.
Mongoose is partnering with St. Mary’s University (TX) on the initial implementation of the technology. We are excited to examine how adding more touch points to the admissions cycle (Mobile Updates) will have an effect on conversion and yield. …that’s all that really matters… right?