The Kindness of Strangers

Posted on January 16, 2012 by Scott Smith

Unlike Blanche Dubois, I haven’t always depended on the kindness of strangers, though I am not opposed to the kindness of strangers, if their kindness makes sense in which the kindness is offered.

Like the times that the person in the checkout line spies my gallon of milk and pack of spinach and says “Oh, why don’t you go ahead of me?” Thus, I don’t have to linger behind them as they scan a month supply of dried goods. Such incidents seem to be fewer and farther between as the years go by.

Or last year when the person parked next to us at the Christmas tree farm offered to give me a bungee cord so that I could better secure the sawed-off Douglas fir in the trunk of my Honda. That level of generosity was of such a high magnitude when the metal hook became unfastened and ripped a generous chunk of tissue from from head, I whispered the reflexive cuss-words, instead of shouting them out, audible across all of Kent county.

Moments such as these are  usually uplifting, though seldom life-changing.

Though one day later, I’m still measuring the gravity of a comment  that a gentleman, also a vet of the Chicago advertising market, wrote in response to a post I’d made in on Linkedin discussion group several months ago. Here is an excerpt of the what he told me:

I, too, resided in the ad universe and was intrigued by your Google+ post. I just wanted to weigh in that it was a wonderfully written proposal and very substantive in your arguments.

It was one of the most uplifting experiences I’ve had in a while. Enough so that after a long hiatus,  I began discussing the concept with friends and acquaintances (both new and ‘auld’) in grocery stores, at the gym, on Facebook. Heck, I event sat down to blog about it.

The post he is referring to is a post that I’d made on Google+ well over six months ago for my “accessible reality” concept. In recognition, that the whole world is NOT on G+, I wrote a post on my blog, which include my G+ proposal, some months ago.

I have been contracting out SharePoint skills for the past year at a client, and I have admittedly been spending a lot less time on my idea. Though, after reading that gentleman’s comment, I have concluded some  things:

  1.  In the past year, Baby Boomers and senior citizens have not gotten any younger and product labels are still damn-hard to read. There is still an enormous opportunity for Accessible Reality.
  2. I really need to get busy refreshing the conversations with friends and acquaintances  who have transitions to new jobs, with new client lists.
  3. I need to gain feedback from strangers; whether it is kind or not.
  4.  I will  to remind myself of all the positive input that I have had on this area from friends, acquaintances  and strangers.  Most importantly I need to remember the phone conversation in which a  former colleague concluded that “….this is a shit-hot idea!”
  5. And as much as I feel awkward with the elevator pitch. I recognize the need to tighten mine up and be prepared to constantly refine it. I will also have an alternative pitch when taking the stairs, probably with fewer words to allow for the occasional huff and puff.

I am looking  forward to future conversations on this front and wishing all of my friends, acquaintances, and strangers a shit-hot 2012.

 

 

Posted in Accessible Reality | Tagged | 14 Comments

What Do You Do?

Posted on July 29, 2011 by Scott Smith

I try to take the stairs when I can.

I think the negative side-effect of taking the stairs is that I suffer from deficiencies in my elevator pitch. Perhaps, I am not as practiced at that art as I would be if I took the elevator more often. If you don’t take the stairs at all, you are probably much better at elevator pitches than I am.

Usually when I am in an elevator,the extent of the conversation  is “Can you push ‘7’ for me?”.  Though there is something about a coat, and/or a tie, that prompts people to think that they have the right to ask, “What  do you?”

I am not sure why people assume that if you’re wearing a coat and/or tie that you probably do SOMETHING, or that if you’re attired in a Red Sox hat and  shorts you probably don’t do anything.

I struggle with the question  “Scott, what do you do?” I wish that “It’s complicated,” were an acceptable answer to that question, as it is when people describe their relationship status on Facebook.

Though I think my biggest barrier to  my response is that I was humbled to be in the presence of  the greatest elevator pitch in networking history.

Decades ago,  I returned to Gainesville a few months after having graduated from the University of Florida. Eventually I took a position with a local radio station. The title on my card said “Account Executive” which seemed to generate more confusion than clarity.

During that time, I attended a March of Dimes fundraiser and  I intentionally didn’t hand out cards, because I didn’t want anybody to see my title. Thus, I was able to succinctly and irrefutably satisfy the inquiries with “I sell ads for KISS 105 FM.”

Though one gentleman was persistent and soon everybody wanted a card, and  I found myself repeatedly dipping into my pocket. That was all she wrote.

I fell into a trap of continually explaining that  “No, Account Executives don’t do accounting….”

Weary of trying to explain what I did, I turned to a gentleman who was in the current chat-circle. I didn’t know him, but his facial features were somewhat-familiar and the surname on his name tag was even more so. I asked him, “So, what do you Neil?”

He seemed surprised, but quickly answered:

“Oh, I’m George Bush’s son.”

Succinct. Irrefutable.

True, the response might have been better suited to a questions like “What’s your name?” or even “Who’s your Daddy…is he rich like me?”

But his response obliterated any aspirations that the  crowd  had of asking further questions. Nobody dared to inquire how much that job paid, or whether they were hiring.

It was over in less than three seconds, though  it was so beautiful in its parsimony and clarity that the mere  memory of the moment turns my knees gelatinous. Truly the gold standard of elevator pitches. I knew then that I could never love another. Nor would  my own elevator pitch ever feel adequate.

By the way, what do you do?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Invisible Fist | Tagged , | 22 Comments

Accessibility Concept “Executive Summary”

Posted on October 18, 2010 by Scott Smith

(For the past several months, I have been working on the development of a solution to provide accessibility in print vehicles and to promote consumer engagement. This blog post –a draft of an Executive Summary–is part of my efforts to “open source” some of my findings.)

Executive Summary

The buying power of consumers with disabilities is in the trillions of dollars, yet this continues to be a highly underserved market. Impediments to marketing and instructional content are compounded by continued reliance on print vehicles. Print is inflexible, and thus offers limited accessibility to users faced with visual impairments and language barriers.

Furthermore, print is a ”low-engagement ” medium compared to the burgeoning array of digital content options. Print cannot easily be adapted to individualized learning styles, or preferred content-consumption habits.

While devices such as the iPad are truly innovative, the accompanying chants of ”print is dead” are ludicrous. Yes, publishing and distribution models are changing, but print-based communications (think packaging) are not going anywhere soon.

The solution that is outlined in the following pages (future blogs in this case) is intended to describe a ”digital bridge” to allow better levels of access and engagement of content to all consumers. The solution outlined strives to address the needs of all consumers, not just those having disabilities. This is in accordance with the ”universal design” framework, rooted in the field of architecture.

Universal Design holds that products, information and environments should be designed according to the following principles:

  • Equitable Use: The design does not disadvantage or stigmatize any group of users.
  • Flexibility in Use: The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities.
  • Simple, Intuitive Use: Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user’s experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level.
  • Perceptible Information: The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user’s sensory abilities.
  • Tolerance for Error: The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintended actions.
  • Low Physical Effort: The design can be used efficiently and comfortably, and with a minimum of fatigue.
  • Size and Space for Approach & Use: Appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use, regardless of the user’s body size, posture, or mobility.

If you look at these principles with print communication in mind, it is evident how inaccessible a medium that print really is.

Modern print vehicles begin their lives in digital formats (Word, Quark, InDesign, Photoshop…); however, they become static and ”outdated” the moment that ink hits paper. While the physical attributes and limitations of print cannot be changed, current technology offers a unique opportunity to provide users the means to better see (or hear) printed content.

The following pages (er blogs) outline the potential opportunities to leverage existing (and affordable) technology in order to provide consumers with convenient access to digital editions of print content. This digital content might be delivered in and array of accessible formations such as the following:

  • Enlarged text
  • Language translations
  • Audio
  • Video with subtitles

In addition to greater levels of accessibility, customers will have the opportunity to vault from a printed vehicle (such as a product label) to online content where there are unlimited opportunities:

  • To be educated, entertained and engaged by online content
  • To make express purchases via e-commerce capabilities

The goal of the envisioned solution is not to preserve print media; however, it is prudent for manufacturers, retailers and service providers to recognize that print content will be part of the marketing mix for some time to come. Furthermore, these organizations can take advantage of numerous emerging technologies that will allow them to more-effectively reach hundreds of millions of consumers.

Posted in Accessible Reality, Accessiblity, Publishing | Tagged , , | 24 Comments

If Print Is Dead, Somebody Better Tell My Aspirin Bottle

Posted on October 13, 2010 by Scott Smith

As many of you already know, I have been working for several months on service offerings in the area of content accessibility and consumer engagement. The following paragraphs provide a high-level walkthrough of my journey. In the next few days, I will be publishing  more about this endeavor in subsequent blogs.

Getting There

Some time ago, I began mulling over consumer-accessibility issues related to packaged goods. My background is in print publishing and I have worked in the creation and delivery of digital content since the mid 1990’s. I have long had a hard time accepting that so much of the content I get my hands on is so damn hard to read. (We can put a man on the moon, and watch the moon-landing on a phone 40 years later, but we can’t….)

The original problem that I set out to solve was related to my own (and millions of others’) inability to read small type on packaging. It’s increasingly difficult for me to read dosage levels, ingredients, allergens, etc on over-the-counter and prescription drug packaging. It’s impossible for others. As I started to ponder the problem, I realized how large an issue this was for millions of consumers.

So, I set out to find a solution (using pre-existing technology) that would promote accessibility among visually-challenged and also for consumers facing language barriers.

Some of my goals for the solution were that it would not place a heavy financial burden on consumers (I termed this the “Best Buy Test”), nor would the solution disrupt the content-creation, or QA processes of a packaged goods manufacturer, or retailers of such goods.

In short, I did it. At least from the conceptual level. I also realized that I could do more than address accessibility issues, but that there was potential for unprecedented opportunities for  consumer engagement and measurement of print readership. Gravy AND a bag of chips!

An Exceedingly  Large Market

In pursuit of reality checking, I tapped out a few thoughts in a blog and a few months later, I shared them with some former colleagues of mine, in Grand Rapids and Chicago. Frankly, I was stunned by the enthusiasm for some of my ideas. Also, I was astounded when I eventually realized how large the potential market of under-served consumers was.

Consider this example:

 

Image of Product Label of Store-Brand Pain Reliever

Product Label of Pain Reliever

While you may be able to read the dosage levels, ingredients, etc., think for a moment about those who may not be able to do so:

  • 78 million baby boomers (ages 46 to 64 in 2010, that is a lot of progressive lenses)
  • 40 million citizens who are over the age of 65
  • 60 million residents whose native language is something other than English
  • 12 million users are classified as having blindness or low vision

This “super-demographic” has buying power in Trillions of dollars. It doesn’t make business sense for manufactures, retailers, publishers, etc. to take these consumers for granted.

More Reality Checks

I sought further input and received additional validation from subject-matter experts in these areas:

  • Blindness and low-vision researchers
  • Content strategists and localization experts
  • Management consultants
  • Numerous key  figures from marketing and promotions sector
  • Retail strategists
  • Experts in the area of “extended packaging” (which I learned is what I was trying to  accomplish
  • Just about everybody else that I knew, or met

At the suggestion of some of the folks mentioned above, I looked into different ways to move forward with this endeavor, suggestions included venture capital and government grants. Along the journey, I made a decision that focus would be on  providing services rather than to set out to build  (and distribute, maintain) products. Services orientation allows for more flexibility in serving individual customer needs; the solution won’t be bound to specific devices, or server-side platforms.

Focus on services also affords me the flexibility to take a more open, and collaborative approach to such an endeavor. As I mentioned above, I have discussed these ideas with many, many people, and intend to keep doing so. My prime motivation for mapping out this solution was this (and only this): to provide users with the means to better  comprehend contents of package labels (or other print vehicles). This “open sourcing” of my ideas allows me to carry them with me to other contexts (for example, a full-time employer) this wouldn’t be possible with a product-development approach.

Posted in Accessibilibly/Universal Design for Learning, CM, DAM. ECM..., Publishing | Tagged , , | 19 Comments