We saw the future, and there wasn’t an e-wallet to be found
Do NFC payments – with their tap-and-go simplicity – herald a revolution of the shopping experience? Or is NFC just an attempt to force more of our daily transactions onto payments platforms where their owners can claim a usage tax? The sales pitch is a promise of simpler, faster and more secure payments, allowing us to grab our goods and quickly get on with what we were doing. The reality is that the payment is only responsible for a small portion of the time wasted during the buying journey. Other trends we're seeing have much more potential to revolutionise the shopping experience, and they do this by moving the purchase away from the till to allow consumers to transact where and whenever they need. The huge investment in NFC means we can expect to see NFC terminals at most of the shops we frequent. However, at the same time we can expect NFC to be quickly eclipsed by other solutions which do a much better job of streamlining the buying journey.
Vendors are trying to convince us that the future involves NFC, smart phones and e-wallets. You might have seen the adds on TV; a demographically appropriate actor buys something trivial such as a pack of gum or can of soft drink by simply tapping their NFC enabled credit card or phone against a pay point before scampering off to some enriching activity. NFC, we're told, will make the payment so quick, so easy, that we'll barely even notice it. No more waiting in queues while the person in front of us fumbles with their purchase. And if we add an e-wallet then we can easily manage all these wonderful transactions via an app of some sort. Life will be good.
The problem with this vision is that it doesn't align with reality. The next time you're waiting in a checkout queue somewhere – be it a café, big box retailer or clothing store – spend the time to count how long it takes the people in front of you in the queue to hand over the goods they want, wait for the clerk to tally up their purchases, and to make their payment before they can escape. Was the payment – swiping the card and punching in a PIN – a big part of the time spent? Or was the time dominated by the clerk scanning barcodes into the till to find the total? I'd be surprised if the payment was more than a small fraction of the time spent, as most of the time we waste shopping is sucked up the the need to find the goods we want and tally up their prices; the payment is just an annoyance at the end.
NFC technology might be bling, but all the effort is aimed at the smallest part of the buying problem, the payment. Shaving a second or so off the payment will make little difference to how much of our life is wasted while shopping. The pack-of-gum example is a corner case carefully selected to show tap-and-go in the best possible light. How often do you simply pick up one product next to the till, wave your card near the payment terminal, and then sally forth into the rest of your day? When your at a restaurant? How about when your at the supermarket? Clothes shopping? Or that trip to the big-box hardware store on the weekend? Most of our time is sucked up the the need to find the goods we want and take them to the register (place our order and wait for it to be made), wait while the merchant tallies what we owe them, and then we make the payment. Why worry about slicing another second of an already short payment when there are bigger problems to solve?
A number of non-payment tools and technologies are emerging which are moving the payment away from the till, allowing us to entirely avoid the need to sign a check, do the chip-and-pin thing, or even tap-and-go. The booming gift card market and and near ubiquitous Internet connected smart phones are allowing us to rethink the buying process.
Aisle buying, for example, builds on the consumer habit of checking prices on their smart phones while standing in the aisle. Why just give them the price when, with one more tap on the screen, the consumer could simply pick up the product and walk out of the store, showing a receipt on their smart phone on the way out. No need to visit the register. No NFC required. Amazon realises the potential for aisle buying and has released an app which allows customers to scan a bar code, view the price and place an order, converting every shopping aisle in every retailer into a shopfront for Amazon.
Purchases are moving away from the till, as the relationship between customer and merchant moves from exclusively face-to-face to include online interactions, and interactions mediated via social media and smart phone apps provided by the retailer. Pizza chains already allow you to order via an app – both from home and from within their restaurants – and we're seeing business-consumer relationships founded on Facebook move into the real world with Facebook Credits and Checkin allowing retailers to interact with their customers wherever they are. Allowing customers to pay via the same channels is only one step further.
Square, for example, provides a till-replacement based on an iPad app. The app allows retailers to do the usual things, effect payments and tally the day's sales. It also has a nice feature where a merchant can allow an established customer to put a purchase “on account” simply comparing an image of the customer displayed in the app with the person standing in front of them. No money or slivers of plastic pass back-and-forth, there's no tap-and-go, the transaction is simply noted with the tap on an on screen button. Tesco Korea has taken the idea of aisle buying a step further and created virtual stores in subway stations, taking the store to the people when the people don't have the time to visit the store. Find what you want, snap a photo of the QR code, and the product is already on its way to your house. It didn't take long for this idea to catch on, and we're already seeing virtual shops pop up in other countries, from simple stickers on a shopfront through to the creation of virtual stores in public places.
Sign up for our mailing list.
I’ve put a slide overview of the book up on slideshare. Or you can look at the embedded version below.
Cries of ‘analysis paralysis’ are more often fiction than fact. Every time I've heard someone call out the phrase in a meeting it's to end a argument over some particular solution preference rather than an attempt end to an overly long analysis process. The problem isn't too much analysis, it's too little. Surrounded by weak, [...]
David Glideh gave a talk at Unsexy Startups in London on the future of the enterprise, building on an using some of the key themes in the book. The video is embedded below. Cloud, globalisation and social tools are changing the way Enterprises operate. Enterprises are going to be revolutionised and look extremely different in the future. [...]
Unlearning is potentially more important than learning as it allows us to sweep away concepts and preferences that are now longer relevant, clearing the way for us to learn something new which doesn’t sit well with what we previously knew. But why is unlearning so hard? It’s because we’re trained from birth to favour ideas [...]
2012/12/12 in Enterprise 2.0
It doesn't really matter which which way up you put the organisational pyramid the statically defined, stable organisation is looking quaint and increasingly irrelevant. There are a lot of conversations rattling around the Internet at the moment on which is the best way to structure your organisation: with the leaders at the top, or at [...]
- @DynamicAdaptatn on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @maddiegrant on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @socialfish on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @andrewmic on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @cpswan on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @nigelwalsh on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @pevansgreenwood on The New Instability: A summary in slides
- @dgildeh on Unlearning is the most important thing
- @stephenhuppert on Unlearning is the most important thing
- @andrewmic on Unlearning is the most important thing