Thinking Of Mobile As A Different Form Factor Is A Big Mistake

Written by Evan Schuman
February 17th, 2011

In the last few months, we’ve heard a lot of retail IT veterans casually reference mobile devices as just another form factor. Although technically—and from a dictionary perspective—that’s absolutely true, it’s actually a dangerous and ill-advised way to think. It’s like a retail CIO in the mid-1990s thinking that the Web was just the next-generation of GEnie, Prodigy and Compuserve.

The fact is, there isn’t a retail IT leader today who doesn’t understand—on multiple levels—the explosive potential of mobile. When looking at geolocation, payment, barcode-scanning, video-integrated everything, it’s clear that retail today hasn’t begun to experience truly mobile-only projects. The industry is still replicating offline functionality, with occasional glimpses of what is to come.

Even though IT execs understand the immense mobile potential, by even thinking of it as just another form factor, it limits creativity and feeds into the dangerous comfort-zone inclination. Retail execs—and note that I didn’t say “leaders” this time—always want to stay in the comfort zone of doing what they did before, with a few mild tweaks. That’s human nature.

Just like the Web—and the Internet before—mobile’s potential is light years beyond anything else. The proper approach is to set aside all prior experiences and look at mobile anew. This is the time for offsite meetings where mobile possibilities are explored, and the wackier the ideas, the better.

That’s what Microsoft did with the Web, and the company did it just before it was too late.

This column was prompted by a conversation this week with a very senior payments exec, who said that mobile is going to leapfrog other technologies. But he used the term form factor because he’s been in the payments business for years and has managed the transition from many form factors to newer ones.

Mobile is different. Almost everyone understands that. But even thinking of it as the latest form factor is a comfortable—but dangerous—way to strategize.


2 Comments | Read Thinking Of Mobile As A Different Form Factor Is A Big Mistake

  1. Chris Roon Says:

    Far better to consider the “mobile consumer” as an entirely new demographic segment. If marketers consider this segment as a rapidly evolving adolescent with spending power and create business intelligence sensing for mobile customer management, then Facebook like revenue multiples could be possible. Unlike any prior “form factor” the data exists and retailers can now own a customer if they own the cell phone number.

  2. Mike Julson Says:

    I feel this kind of argument can and should be applied to all customer interaction. By focusing on the variety of ways consumers talk to retailers, and tailoring components on the back end to be as reusable as possible, the industry can both delight customers in their experiences, and maintain both agility, and manageable costs.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.