The psychosis of consumption - The Consumer Self and the Civic Self.

When it comes to consumption we have 2 conflicting personalities that work against one another - our consuming self, and our civil self. Their experiences are supported by separate systems and different organisations. The battleground is the customer experience, the prize - improving the negative impact of consumption.

One of these personalities is an active member of society, doing things on behalf of the community. Concerned about the general well being of others. Through this lens we worry about the environment, feel slighted by big corporations who seem to poison the planet, help our neighbours, save for the next generation, and thoughtfully separate our re-cycling.

In contrast, the consuming self indulges their dreams with purchasing new products and services. Blinkered to their personal impact on the environment. They love the thrill of getting the right product that fulfils the dream. And when that product is exhausted, broken, or comes to an end, they don’t dwell on it, they look for a new one. 

Systematic blinkering
These two selves avoid one another, which is easy as the systems that they live in everyday rarely references one other. 

The consuming self lives in the commercial system of the customer life cycle, which encourages self satisfaction, and consumption. It uses tools of adverting, marketing, and design to flatter the user in to making the next selfish purchase.

The civil self, lives in the altruistic system of the community, which encourages responsible thinking, neighbourliness, and concerns itself with the environment and globalisation. They use tools of democracy and citizenship to lobby governments, create community programs and raise awareness of their cause of being better citizens.

Protecting bad behaviour
The consuming self is protected from civil self when consuming. The commercial system avoids talking about issues that will alert the civil self to its consuming actions in fear it will put the consuming self off their consumption. To do this the customer lifecycle is punctuated by messages that reinforce the selfish good feeling of consuming. Reassured that the product is right for them, how to use the product correctly, what makes it high quality and the best deal. Every aspect of the customer life-cycle reinforces the consuming self apart from what happens when usage ends. 

Once broken, outdated, or un-fashionable the product is no longer the problem of the consuming self. The handover takes place and it becomes the problem of the civil self. Who need to deal with things like broken electronics, redundant cleaning products and the exhausted batteries of broken toys, amongst the other weekly rituals of recycling.

The Cliff of Consumption
Currently the consuming self pushes the problem off a cliff of consumption down on to our helpless civil self to deal with. The consuming self, and the mechanism that supports that personality have little interest in joining these two experiences.

Conversely the civil self finds it hard to talk the same language that the consumer self uses. The translation often ends up sounding like guilt. The user experience of being a consumer and being civil are not easily translatable. But they could be.

Resolving your personal differences
The potent moment at the end of the customer lifecycle is overlooked as a solution for improving the negative impacts of consumption. We can call this part of the customer life cycle the off-boarding phase. It should be filled with closure experiences that help bridge the conversation between the consuming self and the civil self. 

Acknowledging closure experiences in our consumer lifecycle can help alleviate the cognitive dissonance between our conflicting personalities. Alerting the consuming self that there is an onward journey to the product they have disposed of. And aiding the voice of the civil self to be heard in the deafening noise of consumption.

We cant end consumption, and feeling guilty about it isn’t really actionable. Consumption should be one user experience, not two. We need to create a customer lifecycle that acknowledges the end of the product or service relationship and aids dealing with its consequences. This means resolving this split personality in all of us. We need to create common user experiences that have encouraging language around endings, that stop our civil self being flattened by our dominate personality. We need to create more closure experiences.

Ctrl+Alt+Pulp/Print

Although an office based pulping and paper-making machine might bring an end to annoying footers about printing emails, it will achieve lots around closure experiences in the office environment.

Epson have recently released the worlds first office paper making machine, that turns waste paper in to new sheets. Although this is an enormous achievement for Epson, and will be greatly appreciated by many large companies and organisations, its real achievement is dealing with 2 closure experience issues common in offices. Firstly, it reveals the end of the paper life-cycle to the people that use paper. Secondly it securely destroys unwanted documents while the authors of those documents witness it. 

The usual customer life-cycle for office paper, or any recycling program for that mater, is the effort that goes into it is hidden from the consumer. Paper recycling is a long drawn-out affair with lorries picking up waste paper, taking it to a collection points, that assembles the paper in bulk and transports it again to recycling centres, which then pulp it into new paper, and re-distribute to shops, who reveal it to the consumer, who then buys it. 

Epson. Reduced and revealed recycle flow

Reducing this to a shorter, quicker, more transparent process is good. Not only taking trucks off the road, but it brings acknowledgement of a closure experience to the people who can make a real behaviour change about their paper usage - the customer.

All too often the customer is hidden from the consequences of their consumption - the machine of industry deals with that. The customer places the paper in the right bin, and gets another ream of paper to put in the printer. They don’t see the end of the product life-cycle, and therefore have little acknowledgement of it. Just an interest in it. This might go as far as being happy about the recycle logo on the paper pack.

Now, they will need to attend to the recycling process themselves. Witnessing it in their own office, at the same time appreciating their role in that process. They have moved from the passive role of interest, too one of control. 

This will be welcomed by authors of sensitive material that have a profound anxiety about the security of document destruction. They can now rest-assured, knowing that a sensitive piece of material is gone forever as they witness it themselves being destroyed.

Future innovations, such as the Epson PaperLab, are welcomed. They create a meaningful acknowledgement at the end of a products life - a closure experience. Creating witnesses of consumption, not just passive actors in it is a good step forward in dealing with the cost of consumption. My only request is they call it the Epson End Maker Paper Maker.

Sky fallen for cliche business approach to Closure.

Sky has displayed the usual paranoid business approach to customers leaving. In the process damaging the brand and providing some terrible memories for its customers. 

People who have wanted to leave the Sky service have been trapped in sales conversation for over an hour, while the customer service team tries to sell them more products and stop them leaving. This is hard for many people to stand, and some give in and sign up for more services. Its a little like holding on to someones leg when you get dumped - it doesn’t build respect.

An example of this was relaid by Gavin Hackwood from Newport, South Wales in the UK. He attempted to leave Sky through the online chat forum. Apparently after after 90 minuets and even moving to a phone call, his request was denied. Many others have reported similar experiences. 

In response Sky have said that they need to confirm with customers over the phone that they want to end the service. Which is not an uncommon practice, but having to experience this for an hour seems excessive. 

Concerned people are suggesting ‘Hacks’ to get around this paranoid customer service system. Some recommend saying that customers should say they are leaving the country, others suggest sending a letter and following up with cancelling your direct debit. Some financial services advisors have suggested doing all possible communication mediums, following up with a phone call and keeping every paper trail that is made, oh and also asking Sky for the recorded phone call you had with them (which is possible with Data Protection rights in the UK).

What I find amazing out of this approach is Sky’s misunderstanding of how Closure Experiences work. Firstly, Sky are in denial that people leave services (a common mistake companies make). You and I know everything ends, so why do companies fail to make it a good experience at that point? Secondly they are making sure that the experience of leaving is so awful that the customers remember it over any good experiences they might have had. According to psychologist and author Daniel Kaheman “people judge experiences based on their Peak (an intense moment of the experience) and at their End. Rather than a total flat average of the experience.” - the Peak End Rule.

 If you only have 2 potential opportunities - the peak and the end, to provide the customer with a good memory of your service you should make the best of both of them. Sky has ensured its customers have a terrible ending experience. So they can almost guarantee they have a bad memory of it. You don’t need to be a graduate in Branding to know that won’t help build a customer base in the long run. Sadly, so much of business is about the short term numbers and metaphorically holding on to a customers leg while they attempt to leave, might just make them think twice, but they won’t respect you for it. 

Hospice care; an inspiration to industries that deny closure.

Its fantastic to hear that the UK was recently considered the best in the world for end-of-life care. The study by the Economist Intelligence Unit looked at 80 countries capabilities across hospitals and hospices, including areas of staffing, environments, skills, quality and affordability of care. 

It hasn’t been just the rich nations who have been developing this, also many of the poorer ones too - Panama, Chile, Mongolia and Uganda were all praised in the report. A reflection of the increasing concern globally as all nations start to experience an ageing population and the likelihood of a ‘drawn-out’ death for many of their people.

Its reassuring to see the issue being taken more seriously. A wonderful comment was made by Dr Stephen Connor, of the Worldwide Hospice Palliative Care Alliance, said:

"The biggest problem that persists is that our healthcare systems are designed to provide acute care when what we need is chronic care. That's still the case almost everywhere in the world."

This echo’s some of the denial that we experience in other industries at end of life for Products, Services, and Digital Products. A mindset that sees overwhelming focus on sales and little regard to how that experience ends for the user. Many industries approach the end of the customer engagement with denial, instead of design.

There is a lot to learn from Hospice care when approaching the issues we have in consumption. Accepting and designing for the end would be a good start.

Virgin improves Closure through new transaction model

Virgin trains has announced an automatic payback scheme for delayed passengers. This is unique for a number of reasons, but the most interesting one is as a closure experience for users. In one initiative they have created a healthy Closure experience, changed the transaction model, and disrupted an industry. 

As I have pointed out in previous posts, the Closure experience of any service is closely tied to the transaction model - how you pay for it will influence how you end it.

There are 5 basic transaction models in the service industry:

1. Payment after delivery
2. Payment before delivery
3. Scheduled payment
4. Synchronous payment
5. Continuous observation

The transport industry, apart from taxis, operates a Payment before delivery model. The nature of this model means the customer is in a subservient position. They gave up their money before the service began. If the service doesn’t go as planned, the only option up till now has been to fill in forms and apply for compensation in vouchers from the transport company; which seems like entrapment on a few levels. 

The model also means that there is little open dialogue between the customer and provider at the close of the service which is unlike the discussions at the end of meal, at the end of a haircut, or a taxi ride (Payment after delivery) where there is an opportunity for feedback and potential of tips. This model results in these industries often excelling in service - making the customer feel good, because they have listening and learning built into the transaction. If the service provider excels at their service then they might get extra.

The transport industry doesn’t listen to its customers in the same way. It has little incentive to because the transaction has already taken place. The Automatic Payback scheme has changed this. People now will get their money back automatically if things don’t go as planned. No more filling in forms to get some vouchers. Its all done for the customer in the background. It builds trust.

The next step should be to extend this to all digital tickets and for any customer that pays with a card. However, this will require significant investment in digital ticketing systems. Oyster has such a system, and is capable of issuing automatic refunds for disrupted services, but hasn’t introduced it. 

Well done Virgin Trains. A long way to go, but at least you have left the station.

The rightful place for the Right to Die sits with individuals, not religion and medicine

Religion has owned the right to die for centuries. The common religious package of ‘a good life’ as an access to heaven is scattered across all structured belief systems in one form or another and is the power base by which religion controls, or “inspires” its followers. So it comes as no surprise that Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury and church leaders from other faiths recently announced their objection to the Assisted Dying Bill being pursued in the UK’s House of Commons.

The bill allows patients who have an estimated 6 months to live, and who have a “clear and settled intention” to end their lives, to do so with a lethal dose of drugs. Previously, an assessment would need to be completed by two doctors and a family court judge to agree that a patient’s decision was free from coercion and that the medical diagnosis was satisfactory. A healthcare professional would then have to be present while the patient administered the lethal injection themselves.

Society has a long history of groups controlling the passage through life with the promise of heaven. In the past this had more meaning. A terribly hard life of toil, disease and famine laid a fertile ground for the belief in something better to come in heaven. But as life has become more abundant and comfortable in the West, the concept of heaven has become less potent. In parallel to this medicine has become more capable, permitting a longer, more comfortable life. 

Religion and medicine enjoy the influence they have over people. Religious guidance around a ‘good life’ and the subsequent reward for that in heaven, has given it enormous influence over our daily lives with endless, dos and don’ts. This has also given it explicit authority over the end of life and the transition to the afterlife in heaven. In religion it is not the right of the individual to say how they die.

Alternatively, medicine has promised us a longer life - keeping us alive in comfort to a ripe old age and even, on some occasions, beyond what is potentially sensible. The diagnosis of death is often theirs to give, through the endless mechanisms and the strict definition of medical death. Generally in hospitals it is not the right of the individual to say when or how they die.

Both groups have benefitted from controlling the ending of life - the most important closure experience we have. With the Assisted Dying Bill individuals might now take control of their own death by selecting the timing and the meaning of the end of their life. The ones who are losing out are the traditions of religion and medicine, not those individuals whom are choosing to die.

This damaging gap is a silent environment killer

The negative impact of our consumer culture can be vastly improved by strengthening the connections between phases of the customer life-cycle. That life-cycle can be split into 3 phases - On-Boarding a customer, Usage of the product or service, and the Off-Boarding at the end of the engagement. 

If the message between buying a product, using a product and disposing of a product is not coherent we lose the opportunity to deal with issues associated with consumption. 

Many companies overly focus on the On-Boarding experience because selling to more customers means more money -the status quo of business. Canon is no different this regard. The way they sell printer ink is a good example of a company's bias to getting more customers, over the Usage of the product or the Off-Boarding when the product comes to the end of its life.

Printer ink is a very hazardous material. It is highly poisonous to the environment, so it is essential that it is disposed of properly. Canon, the printing industry, and governments all agree on this. So it is very important that we capture and reprocess this poisonous material. 

Lets look at the life-cycle of a Canon Printer Cartridge in more detail to example this issue.

User flow of Canon printer ink cartridge 

As it shows, the user will transition through well crafted experiences delivered by advertising, marketing, and packaging companies on behalf of the producer - in this case, Canon. This On-Boarding process is made up of 'starting experiences' (Adverts, Point of Sale material, etc) choreographed by these experienced and powerful companies, urging the user to purchase the product. 

Once the user makes a transaction the mode of the experience changes to one of ‘Usage’. The user navigates the inner packaging, cartridge, and the printer to replace the old with the new, and hopefully continues many days of happy printing. 

Canon instructions. Talk of chemicals, but not what to do about them.

But, once the new cartridge goes in, what happens to the old cartridge? At this point Canon seem to have lost interest in the lifecycle. The instructions contain some dos and don’ts, and a reference to the chemicals contained in the ink - users of course, don’t understand what ‘benzisothiazol’ means and therefore can’t action anything about it. 

Canon packaging. Baffling symbols, and links to an 'up-sell'.

The only guidance about next steps for the user is another ‘upsell’ on the packaging for CreativePark, “a premium content service available exclusively to users of genuine Canon inks”. In effect, they are pushing another On-Boarding experience instead of guiding the user along the life-cycle to a safe and responsible conclusion - a Closure Experience.

What is surprising in this case is that Canon is a very responsible company, and a printer pioneer, having operated a cartridge recycling program since 1990. But sadly they have not coherently attached this proud ancestry this to their On-Boarding and Usage phases of the printer cartridge life-cycle.

To join these phases together it is left to the guilt driven user to find out what to do with poisonous printer cartridges. After a quick Google search, the user might find the appropriate page on the Canon website (its nowhere on the packaging). After reading quite a lot of material the user is asked to sign the Canon terms and conditions - 2300 words - an excessive barrier to entry, when we need to encourage all the enthusiasm for recycling we can from users. 

After agreeing to these T&Cs, the user needs to fill in a form with their address and is finally rewarded with a commitment that Canon will send them a pre-paid envelope within 5 days. Canon recommends the user waits until they have at least 5 cartridges to send the pack back, citing that “it will help us minimise the carbon footprint of this service if at least five cartridges are returned per envelope”.

Nearly 500ml of redundant space in Canon packaging.

This again highlights the problems with breaking the phases of the life-cycle. Canon have already got the packaging of the cartridge into your home. This pack is excessive in size. Having nearly 500ml of additional space inside. A shocking piece of hypocrisy! 

Like many big corporate companies Canon want to do the right thing, but are crippled with internal fractured thinking. The failure to stitch the On-Boarding, Usage, and Off-Boarding phases of the life cycle is inherent in the sales culture we breed.

Amongst the many simple solutions to remedy the Canon printer cartridge problem would be placing return packs in the capacious packaging they send their product in. This would keep the life-cycle coherent between the phases, encourage the user to recycle, inform the user that Canon is serious about the environment, and show that Canon can create Closure experiences, as well as starting ones.

How Closure fits into the customer lifecycle

---

The customer life cycle can be broken into 3 phases - On-Boarding, Usage, and Off-Boarding.

On-Boarding is made up of Starting Experiences

It is the effort it takes to get the customer to commit to the product or service relationship. It is the the start of the relationship.

Starting Experience examples
Advertising that attracts you to a product or service relationship
Marketing that orientates you towards the right decision
Packaging that reveals the beautiful product you have bought

Usage completes tasks, empowers people and orders chaos.

It is the stable committed relationship between the user and the service they use, or the product they own.

Usage Experience examples
Paying in to a pension scheme
Daily usage of a car
Regular usage of an app

Off-Boarding is made up of Closure Experiences

It is the effort it takes to neutralise the effects of the engagement. To complete the agreed engagement. Its the conclusion of the relationship.

Closure Experience examples
It is the completion of a mortgage
It is the disposal of a product in the right place
It is saying goodbye
It is closing the un-used accounts
Its tidying up the impacts of consumption

Death: Pets versus robot dogs. Who wins?

Sony’s robot dog, Aibo, is dying. But it’s achieved a surprising comparison with its canine doppleganger. 

Although Aibo has been hugely successful, selling 150,000 models between 1999 and 2006, Sony has stopped repairing them. Heart broken owners of the robot dog now rely on hackers, and home technicians to achieve the life saving operations the robot dogs require. 

The love for Aibo from their owners is remarkable. A similar behaviour to established pet - person relationships. Some even resorting to methods of farewell reserved for humans and family pets. These robot funerals are captured in this great video by the New York Times (The Family Dog http://nyti.ms/1MLY3hf via @nytvideo). 

This strong pet type bond being the successful result of the variable characteristics programmed into the robot dogs. Making them all somewhat unique. Or at least appearing that way for the convinced owners. Certainly the owners talk about the development stages of Aibo similarly to the stages of a real family pet. And now they talk sadly about the end of Aibo’s life as the potential death from a lack of parts starts to materialise. 

Up till last year Sony were supplying parts, but now the repairs have to be done with parts from redundant un-loved robot dogs. Like some grotesque sci-fi story of body part sales in a post apocalyptic future. From a lab full of these parts and half built Aibos, the repair guy in the video reflects on the ultimate situation of all the parts running out. “So one day they will all be gone”.

Aibo has significantly outlasted many other products and services created around 1999. For example, Phones often last far less, at an average of 2 years. Apps weren't even around at the time of Aibo release. Its life span being more in line with TVs at 15 years. It hasn’t quite achieved the length of a Satellite though at 25 years. 

A novel, and appropriate comparison would compare its lifespan with pets. Mice and Hamsters at 3 years, Gerbils last about as long as a laptop at 4 years, rabbits and cats between 9-13, but as a beautiful coincidence, Aibo has lived for the average lifespan of a Dog at 15 years. Although targeted as a quirky alternative to a real pet, I bet many of the Sony production team wouldn’t have imagined it lasting quite as long as a real dog. What a wonderful coincidence.

Re-spawn time in Credit Cards

Its unlikely you’ll ever hear your bank talk about the pros and cons of ending a relationship, but thankfully Money Saving Expert has put this interesting and informative piece together about what you should consider when leaving you Credit Card company.

Amongst the insights in the article, MSE talk about the period of time after you close your account that the Credit Card company will consider you “new” again - a classic re-spawn. 

"Goodbye kettle! You boiled well"

Our life as a consumer is dominated by the noise driving us to purchase more, buy again, do more quicker, faster, easier. This drive has left our houses cluttered, our computers and our lives full of products we rarely use, and maybe don’t even need or like. We are trapped with these products because we can’t say goodbye. We don’t know how to because we have lost the capability to end relationships correctly - to have a good closure experience. 

Where our ability to start a new consumer relationship (on-boarding) has been sharpened and crafted over generations by many industries focused on getting us to buy. In contrast, our ability at ending these relationships has few champions.

One person countering this is Marie Kondo, a self proclaimed declutterer from Japan, who has been helping hundreds clients declutter their homes. Although, according to Marie, there are many approaches to decluttering your home, and she has tried most, she believes that her's is the only approach that really works.

She believes, an area where many people fail is the approach to decluttering their home. Insisting that it cannot be done piecemeal. It has to be done with all items in each category at the same time. For example all clothes in the house, all books, etc. Any other approach fails as it becomes slow and looses its purpose. 

The technique then requires people to reflect emotionally on each product. She asks the person to hold and feel each item. Handling them is vital, as it evokes important feelings and emotions about the item. Feeling for the item to ‘spark a feeling of joy’ If so, it should be kept and valued. If not the item should be ‘thanked and wished well for its future’ and disposed of appropriately.

What to throw away and what to keep is easier said then done. Many people find it difficult to say goodbye to products they have had for years. The product might mean something significant, but maybe not ‘joy’. This is a common blocker that Marie experiences daily and believes these emotions break down to 3 categories.

• an attachment to the past
• desire for stability in the future
• or a combination of both

People hold on to items out of fear of the future or attachment to the past. They are anxious to not lose that attachment to the past or that link with the future. With numerous clients that have gone through this she is confident that life with fewer objects is better and reassures many clients to be ruthless about what ‘brings them joy’ as a product.

The emotion that Marie brings to her technique is the most interesting. Instead of a cold hearted departure where the product ends it life in the waste bin, she insists that people say goodbye to the product they own, and wish it well. 

Like wise she promotes a far more emotional relationship with all the products an individual keeps. Believing this increases a products life and gives greater value to ownership. This is nicely exampled in a passage from her book ‘The Life Changing Magic of Tidying’.

This is the routine I follow every day when I return from work first I lock the door and announce to my house “I’m home” picking up a pair of shoes I wore yesterday and left out in the hall I say “Thank you very much for your hard work” and put them away in the cupboard. I put my jacket and dress on a hanger and say “Good job!” I return to my bench and put my empty handbag in a bag and put it on the top shelf of the wardrobe saying “You did well have a good rest”.

Many of us would feel strange saying a clear “Thank you!”, “Well done” or a meaningful “Goodbye!” to products. Yet in Advertising and Branding we often tug on these emotional strings at the on-boarding stage of the relationship. Brand agencies often talk about giving the brand a “personality” or “brand promise” Advertisers talk about “having a conversation between the customer and the provider”. Are these not equally emotional triggers created to tempt us to commit to a product purchase? Isn’t it equally strange to have a conversation at the beginning of a customer relationship, as it would be to have a conversation at the end?

The difference is in the mode of thinking at the beginning and the end of the relationship. The beginning - on-boarding stage of the relationship triggers our aspirations. Telling us we will be better with this purchase. What should be in place at the end of a customer relationship is self-reflection. But this is sadly overlooked because it stops our focus for purchasing new items. 

But this is where Marie Kondo, brings us something important for Closure Experiences and products. It is the opportunity for self-reflection on a products usage and its end.

The most many of us do when we dispose of a product is put it in the right recycling bin. This at most provides an emotionless thought about product materials, but it does nothing to provide emotional meaning to the end of a product relationship. And certainly doesn’t induce self-reflection.

To deal with something like climate change for consumers we are going to need better emotional persuasion than the dry and worthy arguments of Reduce, Recycle, Renew. We need to get emotional about endings and seize the opportunity for self-reflection. This would help us ask deeper questions about our personal consumption. And this would surely be the start of individual behaviour change. 

So maybe saying goodbye to products is a good start. Try it next time you end a product relationship.

Empathy Cards

A new set of cards designed by Emily McDowell brings home the difficulties people have in navigating emotions when someone has a fatal disease or is dying. 

So many end of life experiences are lonely experiences for the dying person. As a recent cancer patient, Emily McDowell experienced these up close. Her frustrations were not with the progression of a disease like cancer or the resulting treatment and its side effects. Her frustrations lied with the behaviour of her close friends and family. Not that they done anything different to any other friends and family of this generation. They just didn’t know what to do or say. So sadly they said very little.

Courtesy of Emily McDowell

Generations ago, life was far more delicate. Death was common place. So our relationship with it was more familiar. People were comfortable to talk about it, and knew its path. 

Today, we are distanced from it by many walls. The dying are often removed from their home, looked after by service personal, high on disease-fighting drugs. Those final moments  lack the personal meaning they had in the past. And we subsequently lose the ability to deal with death when a loved one faces it. Sadly that often means that dying person faces death alone. 

Courtesy of Emily McDowell

Courtesy of Emily McDowell

Emily’s Empathy Cards, bring a rare confidence and warmth to this situation. They are not the whimsical, or even meaningless ‘get well soon’ cards. But portray real feelings and some frustrations that are felt by the patient when dealing with close ones at this stage. They bridge the gap of not knowing what to say, when words are so hard to find. They are a great example of dealing with fatality of life and dealing with closure in sensitive way.

Courtesy of Emily McDowell

Courtesy of Emily McDowell