My WARC conference presentation stressed that the best way to market to women is to be inclusive rather than to simply overtly exclude men. Nevertheless, most marketing activities aimed at women do so simply by shutting-out the other gender. It’s a mirror-image of the current marketing worst-practice. Della, the new netbook sales portal from dell is a pastel-pink feminized counterpart to the unapologetically ultra-masculine Dell.com. It’s a perfect example of the current trend of exclusion marketing.

I remember interviewing one Lady Geek who told me in no uncertain terms that the ‘Dixons Women’s Only night’ was her idea of hell.

“What are they going to do, give me cheese and pineapple on a stick and tell me how to turn the telly on?”

Not exactly the response that Dixons were looking for, and in my experience a strategy which never works quite as well as the men who invented it might expect.

Marketing to women should not feel like “an initiative” i.e that a group of 40 something balding marketing men have been sitting in the boardroom and some bright spark says ‘We need to appeal to women. I know, lets create a portal for women, pink up and dumb down our products…we could even call it Della…(guffaw guffaw)

I admire Dell’s intent. Its brave. It shows that they recognizes that in the current environment, its a smart strategy to improve your bottom line by targeting women. I’m skeptical that Dell will achieve their objectives for two reasons:

Firstly,  do they really have a long-term commitment to growing the female market? Dell has a history of superficial and short-term business strategies such last year’s half-hearted flirtation with Linux . Is there any commitment to go beyond the shell of rebranding and create something which will profoundly appeal to this new market? As Elisabeth Kelan states, when you open the Inspiron artistic shell, its just an ordinary dull Dell laptop underneath.  How much of the products and community parts of the site have been specifically developed with women in mind rather than been re-skinned to appeal to women?

Secondly, I do not think that Dell have achieved a depth of understanding of their new female audience. Evidence of this is the handy lifestyle tips which state the excessively obvious. We also find the usual marketing copy cliches such as ‘giving extension to your digital life’ (I don’t want a digital life, I want a life with technology in it) and ‘enhance your life with technology’ and the ‘giving’ section – it’s the kind of vacuous text that means absolutely nothing.

From a product perspective, the site makes a big deal of their pretty new Inspiron Netbooks, however there’s not a whole lot else on the site – yet another echo of Dell’s failed Linux strategy which also presented an absurdly limited subset of Dell’s quite massive portfolio of products.

My research conducted with Jupiter found that a third of British women are frustrated, alienated and bored by the way tech companies market to them. Despite this most tech marketers are in denial about what must be done: There is plenty which can be done- it just needs to be executed and approached in the right way.

Strategies tech brands need to apply;

1) Go for an implicit strategy appealing to women rather than creating an overt exclusive ‘silo’. Overt branding such as Della, Dixon’s Women’s Only nights and Comets Angels give out wrong signals. Nintendo spent hundreds of dollars understanding women and their fitness regimes but never overtly positioned Wii Fit as ‘gaming for girls.’

2) Make women the heart of your strategy not the icing on the cake. Nike Women has invested millions and is part of a strategy which demonstrates Nike’s long term commitment to women. It goes beyond flogging products and starts to offer real benefits.

3) Develop an authentic understanding of women and what they want before you embark on women only strategies. Employ experts such as the Lady Geeks (shameless plug) who will help you go beyond the superficial and can deliver your proposition in a way that is not going to get women irritated. Dell have lost touch with the reality of those women its trying to sell to.

4) Position technology as entertainment rather than a female or male pursuit. Jeremy Clarkson, has equal appeal and ratings amongst both sexes. Rather than talk about the technical aspects of a car in a dry way, he has used humour and entertainment as a way to make cars appealing.

Della is a somewhat superficial step in the right direction. Lets just hope Dell listen to their customers and radically overhaul Della the concept before it becomes yet another of Dell’s six-month flirtations.

This is the 21st century right?. I pick up the T3 2009 calendar and can’t believe what I am seeing. I check it is 2009 and I have not found a vintage copy of the 1979 edition. Each month has a gadget of the month with a erotic shot of a girl ‘wet’ with excitement holding a strategically placed gadget in her legs, arms, breasts. January we have a woman with a see through slip on in water holding an android phone. February we have a women kneeling in hot steam holding an ‘eco gadget’. March shows us a women with a touchscreen strategically placed in her bikini. Do I need to go on?

In my previous post, I demonstrated that women are a growth market while male markets are saturated. Marketers missing out on a £5billion pot of gold (a conservative figure according to Jupiter), I predict T3 will be out of business in a year. Their magazine relies on its core audience of “sexually repressed nerds” according to Wikipedia. All of whom have the skills to download real porn from bit torrent and don’t need this half-hearted house tech-porn.

Showing the calendar to some male colleagues, one told me the only place he could see the calendar was “on the wall of kwik fit”. Hardly an aspirational image for your average man with disposable cash. If you are trying to woo a girl, and she walks into your bedroom and see a copy of T3 or worse, the T3 2009 calendar, what sort of signal does that send? Even a sexually repressed nerd can think that one through. Some of the advertising in T3 is no better, this Asus ad being a good example.

Rather than default to a out of date, lazy way of selling technology to men at the expense of attracting women, technology brands need to be more innovative with their media strategies. Technology has become so accessible and embedded into our culture, that the hard sell of technology is no longer needed. There is no such thing as Early Adopters.

Tech brands need to think innovatively about to communicate to both men and women and buying a media strategy of tech porn like T3 just ain’t going to cut it. What brands need to do:

1. Leverage the blogging community as they are the key influencers. Panasonic are doing this at CES. Who are you more like to trust for a product review- a blogger or a paid for reviewer?

2. Connecting your audience to like minded people is a great way to earn their respect and ultimately their trust. Hewlett Packard used ‘brandalists’- legal grafitti artists to get their HYPE message across and generated so much positive WoM.

3. Be brave. Be rebellious. And dont waste money on advertising in magazines like T3. Goodbye T3 and Good Luck.

Jerry yang, Yahoo’s ex chief exec announced that the advertising industry was facing the toughest downturn in decades. The age of extravagance is gone. The age of the hangover is here. No more big marketing budgets with money to trial and test cool ideas. Its about ROI. Its about bold, strong brands having a clear positioning. Tough times need solid, focused leadership, a lesson that Woolworths learnt the hard way.

Napoleon declared the essence of strategy is sacrifice. Never has this been more true than in the current climate. And the sacrifice should be allocating marketing spend to men- a well saturated market. Lad’s mags are already pregnant with tech-brands competing for their attention. Women are the financial opportunity and Jupiter estimate marketers are missing out on £0.5billion by not marketing to women.

Out of every 10 gadgets, 4 are bought by women. And no before you ask we are not talking about fridges and washing machines. More women than men play games between the age of 24-35 than men now And we are not just talking the Sims. World of Warcraft now has 50% female players.

The research I conducted with Jupiter highlighted (now Forrester), ownership is on a par with men in most categories. Couple that with the fastest growing segment on social networks is married women with children. And according to an N-vision survey, December 2008, approx 40% of women are transacting on the Internet (ie spending money rather than just using the Internet for communication, information and entertainment) compared to 30% of men. Hence, Women are no longer a niche audience – they are the budget-holders and drivers of growth.

The editor of marie claire is right when she says:

“When it comes to tech brands and women, technology companies are in the same place the cars industry was 20 years ago.”

With the exception of Nintendo and it’s Wii, Apple, no other brand is talking the female language. I agree with Hilary Chilura when she says:

“Like nervous teenage boys at a junior high-school dance, tech marketers haven’t figured out how to talk to women”.

Ask any family who was in charge of buying the Christmas gifts, and you’ll find out its women not men. Women are not only buying technology for themselves, but as the Chief Household Officer, are buying for kids, husband, gran and friends. Women are in charge of the house, but more importantly are in charge of the living room (see Battle for the Living Room) where many of the technology lives: PVR, console, HD TV…. In my house, its my husband who lives in ‘his’ world but its me who lives in the ‘real’ world. I am deciding what we should cut back on, how much we can save and what we will buy when it comes to technology.

If tech brands want to be successful, they should focus on women at the expense of men. Women are no longer ‘the Second Sex. ‘ Rather the most profitable sex.

At first when I heard about the Microsoft “I am a PC” ads, my first instinct was that the world’s biggest computer company should not feel the need to respond to Apple’s “I’m a Mac and I’m a PC” ads which had aired more than six months ago. It signified that not only that they gave a damn but also they were likely to loose control of the debate.

After seeing the hundreth Apple ad mimicking and stereotyping the Microsoft user, I started to see Apple as the bully of the playground. Poking fun at the perceived ‘not so cool’ Microsoft user was like the ‘IT’ girl in the playground with the cooler nike trainers picking on others. Microsoft approached me to be in the I am a PC – you can see my VT here:

<div align="center">

I wanted to do it not only to get the Lady Geek brand out there but more importantly, I am tired of the unconditional and undeserving love people have for the Apple brand. The original reason for the Apple brand being so desired, was clearly a great product but also this idea of being the underdog and a brand for the non conformist.

With Apple’s growth rate surpassing Microsoft, has Apple become the brand for the lazy conformist? The person who can’t think past the mac tax and see the new sexier brands like asus and acer chomping at their heels? Is Apple’s behaviour precisely the behaviour of that which they criticized Microsoft? Have the tables turned? And ultimately, do the I am PC ads successfully connect women with Microsoft?

I showed some Lady Geeks the ads and they got an encouraging response. With comments from ‘I love the stories behind the technology’ to ‘it made me reappraise the role of technology in my life.’ If its objective is to build the brand ethos first and foremost, its clearly successful. It has managed to move away from the technology and product specs and talk about what technology means to women and what they care about. It achieves Malcolm Gladwell’s fundamental question of what can Microsoft mean to people over and above being a software developer.

But if its aim was to get people to reappraise Vista, then there is a fundamental problem to solve. I asked my female colleagues at work what they knew about Microsoft Vista. All are tech literate, bright and articulate 20 and 30 somethings. I got answers ranging from ‘is it a credit card?’ to ‘something on my computer but I am not sure what.’ The majority of women don’t know or care what an operating system is, and could not identify Microsoft’s flagship product as an example of an operating system.

Meanwhile Apple seem to have no difficulty communicating the value of OSX – it seems as if every insignificant widget is trumpeted as if it were the greatest development in computing since the invention of the mouse. Apple are fortunate to have fans who create a reality-distortion field through which apple’s products appear magical – and under the same lens Microsoft’s products are by definition the exact opposite.

Lovers generally tend to overlook the faults in the object of their affection and Apple have been very good at building that kind of affection amongst their audience. Microsoft have never invested in building any kind of emotional connection with their audience – which is what makes their new campaign such a significant departure from their normal product-focused, conservative advertising. With the imminent launch of Windows 7, Microsoft claim to have fixed the technical issues that disappointed so many Vista users – now the goal should be to fix the marketing so that women understand and care about this thing that Microsoft have made, and understand how how it enhances their life.

Ok, it wasn’t hell. But it certainly wasn’t heaven; it was something in between. I was shopping for a new digital ‘point and shoot‘ camera. Like many women, I didn’t have much time to research different options online (Lady Geek research found than men research technology purchases more than women) so, like most female shoppers I came to my “retail experience” with no preconceptions. Since it was the only shop likely to be open on a Sunday morning, I went for Curry’s.

I wanted a camera indulge in my fantasy of being an undercover researcher. I told Vinesh, the shop assistant, I needed something small within the £100-150 price range, light and easy to use. Vinesh was quite informed and didn’t make me feel dumb or ‘female’, explaining that the type of lens was more important than the pixels. He showed me the Panasonic Lumix and the Sony CyberShot – The obvious choices – the most reputable brands.

Vinesh failed to ask me a fundamental question: whether I wanted to use the camera mainly indoors or in sunlight which I think is pivotal to anyone’s choice when buying a camera. I told him I’d heard about Fujifilm’s cameras being particuarly suitable for the kind of indoor photography that interests me.

He agreed; I ended up buying the Fuji.

I received my camera in a drab box.

I rummaged inside the box for the soft-case so I could at least protect my exciting new purchase. I was dismayed to find out that having paid two hundred quid for a camera it did not come with the most essential of accessories. I felt let down. It was as if I had just had a trip to the dentist. I was relieved it was all over. It wasn’t exciting. It certainly was not fun.

Compare this to the buzz I got when I bought a new dress the week before. I could hardly contain my excitement in the shop. I felt like a small child in a candy store. I got a posh bag. My dress was wrapped in tissue paper and smelt expensive. I even got a free magazine for ‘valued’ customers. It felt luxurious.

I love my camera. I love what I can do with it. Its seems pretty intuitive to use. My excitement comes from using the product. But what could have been an ‘experience’ to be enjoyed and savoured post-purchase was one easily forgotten.

If tech brands are asking women to divert their spend to technology, they need to provide a sensual, tactile and intimate experience with marketing that appeals to their senses as well as their purses.

Part of this is the whole experience, which includes not only the retail environment but the unveiling and ritualistic opening of the product when you get it home and peripherals are a big part of “making something my own” for women (The Japanese are particularly good at recognising this market.) So whilst I won’t rush to go technology shopping for a while, I am keen to get taking some good pictures for this blog.

We’ve just completed some interesting work about people’s relationship with technology.

Classical research theory assumes that our decisions are based on conscious, rational thought or reflex ‘snap’ decisions. These days most psychotherapists have come to the conclusion that the truth is somewhat more complex: decisions are often post-rationalisations and snap decisions are backed up by a lifetime of knowledge.

Our client had previously spent thousands of pounds on ‘traditional’ research which failed to reveal anything substantially new. The planner, had been traveling around the country, night after night, suburb after suburb and was exhausted at the prospect of doing yet more research.

We decided to change our approach and run an ethnographic style study.  We assembled our ‘SWAT’ team of researchers, each was sent to ‘live’ with the subjects of our research: We spent time in their homes. We went shopping with couples buying technology and ‘hung out’ with families, observing their relationship with household technology.

The study revealed a great deal of new insights about how gender influences technology use, for example men often have their PC/Laptop in their ‘den’- its a retreat, its a hide out, a solace place where they can internalize ‘their’ time.  We saw how women use their PC/laptop in the heart of the home. Many women used their laptops to manage the household and ensure things run smoothly: Its used to make sure the shopping online is ordered, help the kids with their homework and keep them in touch with their friends via social networking sites.

We watched how couples shop for technology and the very different roles they take:  Women tend to be more concerned about how the device will ‘fit’ into their home.  Whether it will be a beautiful addition to the home, not just in terms of design but in functionality and ergonomics. This is a motive that so many tech-brands misinterpret as “women only care what the technology looks like“. Men tend to want to make sure that what they are buying is “right” piece of kit.  Not in terms of their home but more in terms of what it will purportedly do.

While the differences are obvious, what unifies men and women is that buying technology is an emotional decision: This does not mean that it is irrational. An emotional decision can be very rational as our feelings are informed by a lifetime of experience. As the neuroscientist, David Lewis states,

“Our conscious is a bit like a PR company.  It justifies our decisions on an intellectual level and seeks to explain behavior that feels right“

The ‘PR’ bit is what ‘respondents’ had been articulating in the focus group.  The planner told me,

“I realized that for 2 years people had been lying to us in focus groups.  Not because they deliberately set out to lie but because they either couldn’t articulate it or were too embarrassed to tell us what they really felt about buying technology”

There are 3 types of decision making.  The first type is the truly instant decision. The second type are those which appear instant but actually access our vast network of experiences, however we often refer to them as based on our ‘gut instinct.’ The last type is the mathematical way to approach them which is cost benefit analysis. Received wisdom has it that the vast majority of choices are of the first and third type, however the more I observe people in the act of making choices the more I realize that the way people shop is neither frivolous nor analytical but something in between.

As Sartre stated, we are our choices.  If only technology companies spent a little more time trying to understand why we do what we do on a deeper level, then maybe so many women wouldn’t feel so frustrated and bored when it comes to buying technology.

Although we are not just a tech review site, as this is a niche well-served by thousands of opinionated man geeks whose mission is to describe tech objects in the most excruciating detail possible, I want to briefly attempt to describe the newish Nokia BH-503 headset…

Since this is just a headset, it does essentially the exact same thing as every other bluetooth headset ever made, just a little bit better and in stereo. Sounds boring eh?

What’s remarkable is not the engineering that’s gone into this product but that it’s taken the world’s finest electronic companies over three years to come up with the something that “just works”. It’s an understatement to claim that the market is flooded with crappy and non-functional bluetooth products. The overwhelming majority of Bluetooth gadgets are barely-functional trash.

This year Nokia seem to have got it right for the first time – they’ve built a headset on which I can listen to music on without annoying cut-outs. They’ve figured out that when a connection fails, the smart thing to do is automatically re-connect. They’ve managed to make a product that can withstand a few months of knock-about use without breaking.

Best of all they’ve made it so you can actually have a phone conversation a feature which previous generations of headset seemed to fail, despite arguably being the raison d’etre for a bluetooth headset.  And the best thing about this is that it liberates me to do other stuff while on the phone.

Bottom Line: It’s the first Stereo bluetooth headset I’ve owned that sounds good, does not make me look like I’ve escaped from the local mental institution, does not instantly fall-apart and is approximately as reliable as the old sort (you know the ones with wires).

I’ve written about my Asus EEE. I love it. Its cute. Lilliputian. Compact. And most importantly it fits perfectly into my handbag.

The Asus EEE has taken the market by storm (PC Pro, Gizmodo). I’ve already put my order in for the next upgrade. Even Dell have recognized that the micro-laptop is the next big – their Dell E series looks like a flattering imitation of the original EEE. Dell seems to have gone all out for copying asus, even down to bundling a Linux operating system instead of Microsoft Windows which has been a compulsory feature of just about evrery Dell sold in the last ten years.

There’s even a new name for this kind of dinky laptop: “mobile internet device” or (MID):

But not everybody loves these new gadgets: One female friend of mine claimed that she loved it, but “at the end of the day, still not a mac.” I explained that it was a 10th of the price of a Mac and not ten times inferior from a performance and usability perspective. But what ever I said, I could not convince Sarah. To quote Carrie Bradshaw,

“this was not about logic, it was about LOVE.”

(cheesy quote I know but reflective of the whole film)

If ever a brand was about pure unadulterated love, its Apple. Its a the world’s 7th most valuable brand, worth a staggering $55billion. Its is a Lovemark for so many people. Sarah anthropomorphised her mac in no uncertain terms;

“My Baby is old now. Arthritis has worked her spine for a while, but she is still going strong. Her memory is remarkably good considering all the strange things I have introduced her to. I love my Baby.. I can’t be mad at her. When her metallic voice speaks out “It Is _Not_ My Fault…” all I can say is: “I know, Baby… I know. I gave you a bad command, and I’m sorry. Let’s try again.”

Whilst I agree with our CEO, people are 20% rational and 80% emotional, I am left feeling that the love for Apple seems misplaced when there are so many better or equitable products on the market.

But perhaps that’s part of the joy of owning the EEE – the technology you buy makes a statement. With the near ubiquity of Apple’s products in the creative industries, these high-end laptops are no longer about “Thinking Different” and are more a sign of conformity to cultural norms, wheras carrying around an unusual laptop, especially one which runs entirely different software marks you as an outsider. Those rival icons of computing, the Thinkpad and the Powerbook (or Mac Book) represent your tech-tribal affiliation.

I feel emotional about my Asus. I feel emotional about my Tangent Quattro Internet radio. I feel emotional about my Blackberry. But show me a better, cooler, smaller, cheaper, more useful product and I will be promiscuous. With technology changing so fast, can we afford to be loyal to one particular brand. And quite frankly is any brand (even Apple) brand deserving of such unconditional love?

As a  techno-utopian, I believe technology brings people together rather than disconnecting them.

Received wisdom would have us believe that technology breeds isolation:  I’ve lost count of the number of hysterical Daily Mail articles that warn us that computer-games are turning kids violent. As a child I was told that sitting too close to the TV would “make you go blind”. There’s a great deal of nonsense spoken about technology, and it’s often believed because many people consider technological progress to be the root evil of society.

When I think about how technology is used in my household, the HD TV is like a digital campfire which brings the whole family together to watch films, the Wii is a short burst of fun for my husband and I when the kids are in bed, Facebook connects me to a wider circle of friends that I wouldn’t have the time to see, and my mum and I listen to Woman’s Hour together on our new Wi Fi radio.

Not only is technology physically bringing people together through new shared experiences, its creating a new way of sharing an emotional experience albeit in some cases on different platforms and different devices.  The reactions and the emotions of the people with whom you are sharing the experience with is whats important.

This becomes ever more apparent with the shift towards mobile content sharing devices.   As Jan Chipchase shows with this photo of two Tokyoites – on the right of the photo engaged in the same task watching the same television program on their mobile phone each using their own device, with comments passed back and forth.   Whereas one screen can compromise the viewing experience, the same content can be shared and hence the same experience.

Yahoo has launched Yahoo Shine, a site for what Yahoo says is an “underrepresented demographic.” It will combine Yahoo’s food, astrology, and health, content with fashion, beauty, and parenting sections, stories from publishers like Conde Nast, Hearst, Rodale, and TIME, as well as original content. The site will feature blogs submitted by users, as well sections on work and money and tips for the home.

“We’re executing on Yahoo’s starting point strategy by ensuring that women who start their day with Yahoo! are offered a more relevant experience,” Scott Moore, senior VP and head of Yahoo Media.

All of this is music to my ears. I went on the site and was slightly disappointed with the reality. They do seem to have fallen into the usual traps of talking to women. The first advert that pops up is ‘Fancy Lingerie that you can afford.’ Everything on there was expected…from spring cleaning tips, to pregnancy, to fashion, to how to spend more time with your husband without the kids. I was hoping for something a bit different to the usual “women’s portal” rubbish.

I also searched hard and found no tech site or tech news which I think is a huge missed opportunity: As one lady commented, “really, yahoo? astrology, fashion, and beauty? this is sooo exciting for us gals. i’ll check it out tonight after i do the dishes. as long as my husband says it’s OK to use the computer.”

I wonder how sensible this strategy is: Portals were big news in the late 90′s when there was a clear need for the Internet companies to offer the average internet user a guide to the best of the ‘net – however a decade later the Internet has been transformed: Sites like Google Reader and Bloglines allow anybody to put together their own ‘portal’ with content increasingly selected from the diverse “bloggosphere” rather than major publishers like Conde Nast. Shine seems like an attempt to revive the popularity of big-brand content at a time when the trend is clearly against the publishers.

I think the Inquirer is a bit harsh when it states “Shine appears to be a shallow façade of a site, pretending to offer women something new, when it obviously doesn’t.” I wouldn’t go that far but my advice for Yahoo is to deliver on its vision of offering something new. Inspiring Chief Household Officers (I love this!) to enjoy technology is a good place to start.