Long Live the QR Code
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 at 8:17PM 
This is written is response to an article by Dan Neumann, Emerging Platforms Strategist at Organic, titled “RIP: Why We Don’t Need QR Code Campaigns.”
Some Background
QR Codes are a form of 2D barcoding technology widely used in Asia, especially Japan, as well as parts of Europe. These codes are placed on printed marketing materials, and when a user points the camera on their phone at the code and clicks, the phone reads the barcode and takes the user to a website (they are also widely used for things like phone numbers, digital coupons, and the like). Despite many years of use abroad, the technology has never seen mainstream adoption in the US.
The Case
In brevity, Dan argues that this failure of adoption in the US market is because there is no use for them here. He states (without siting a source) that phones with full keyboards have greater market share in the US than they do in Japan, and by extension that Americans are happy to type URLs into their phone and hence have no use for QR Codes (To be fair, he also states that carriers in Southeast Asia, “ensured that reader applications were installed on every device.”).
What I Have to Say About That
I completely disagree with Dan’s reasoning for QR Codes failure in the US, but I do agree with his advice to marketers (for now) to stick with URLs, at least until the related industries get their collective act together.
Speaking for myself, I’d much rather point my camera and click to get to a mobile website than type it in manually on a chicklet size keypad. And I’d speculate that, given the option, most other users would as well. The problem is a failure of adoption on the part of carriers and handset makers who have not chosen to include the software as a preinstall or even better, as part of the phone’s OS in the US market.
What Dan describes is not a preference on the part of Americans to manually type in URLs, but a high barrier to first-use. Once the app is installed, they never have to do all that work again. But it is a huge hurdle to expect of the user — a multi-step process — to download the software and install it on their phone, in order to use it for the first time. That is a failure of leadership and initiative on the part of both the mobile advertising industry, and of the carriers and the mobile manufactures.
As it is, individual campaigns have been burdened with the responsibility to introduce and educate about the technology: Each campaign that implements a QR Code has to promote not just their product/service, but also promote and educate the user about the technology. And then the onus to download and install the technology is on the users themselves.
So I disagree with Dan’s reasoning that the failure of adoption of QR Codes in the US is because users are just fine with typing URLs into their phone’s keyboard. But I do think, for individual campaigns right now/today, that URLs are the best stop-gap solution.
Another oversight of the argument is that it doesn’t even address the matter of US market penetration for mobile phones with qwerty keyboards vs mobile phones with cameras. For some sobering numbers: Mobile phones with full keyboards (including touch screen keyboards) make up 16% of the US mobile market vs ~80% for phones with cameras (Keyboard Source: Wireless Federation. Camera Source: I pulled it out of my, er, recollection).
There needs to be a coordinated adoption initiative among related industries so that campaigns can focus on their marketing goals instead of educating the public about the technology.
Furthermore, as marketers are aware, most short URLs are taken. Campaign specific URLs are generally longer, for the simple reason of availability. To make them easier to remember, smart marketers will opt to use a memorable phrase, tag line or slogan as the URL for a campaign. Given the choice between typing in an entire phrase on a phone size keyboard vs clicking one button, I’d say the QR Code wins hands down… if only the related industries could collectively get their act together.
Where I agree with Dan is that using URLs for a campaign today is the smart choice. The responsibility for educating the public should not fall on individual campaigns and the responsibility for installing the software should not fall on individual users, and until that problem is addressed, typing in a URL is the best option.
I do think Dan picked the right execution to criticize, but for different reasons — the choice of channel. This appears to be a magazine print ad. I would suggest that OOH is a more appropriate channel for such a mobile code implementation.
One More Thing
I have an intuition about this Ford campaign. The particular example given in this Ford ad is technically not a QR Code. The term QR Code specifically refers to an open standard bar-code created by Denso-Wave of Japan. What is shown in Dan’s example is actually one of Microsoft’s proprietary HCCB Codes. Microsoft is attempting to take on the QR Code open standard, and my intuition is that they may have subsidized this Ford campaign. While I personally prefer to see the adoption of an open standard, at least the campaign would make a lot more strategic (and tactical) sense for both parties involved if this turns out to be the case. But that’s speculation on my part.
Mobile, QR Codes in Marketing, Technology 
Reader Comments (6)
Wow, never thought about it, but I see a great opportunity for Apple to create iCodes. Microsoft codes are not really taking off, but if Apple was to incorporate a built-in code reader on the iPhone, the cult of mac will make it spread like wildfire.
Thanks for the great post Chris! I was very disappointed by Dan Neumann's article. It frustrated me that a poorly cited article, that did not look at both sides of the argument, could possibly set 2D codes back regardless of the recent progress the technology has been making. It is my hopeful opinion that Neumann's views on the 2d barcode technology is a minority in the mobile marketing industry.
I believe that QR codes areare absolutely on the rise, they are gaining a lot
of momentum in the US, Europe, and Australia.The recent example of
Starbucks putting QR codes on gift cards is one of many ways QR codes can be used creatively to raise brand awareness and brand loyalty. The possibilities are endless! These codes are great for advertisers, publishers and brands because they are an
effective way to add interactivity to any offline media. My company, Mobile Discovery, is currently offering a free trial to create, manage, and track QR codes for anybody interested.
www.mobilediscovery.com
Why use QR codes at all if you don't have to? Pongr wrote a brief analysis of why this will not work in the U.S. or Europe (but why it will work remarkably well in Japan, South Korean, and other regional, highly contained markets with only one or two carriers).
Marketers need to team up with some more technical people who can explain the nuances of the carrier, hardware, software issues. For a bit of info see: http://bit.ly/3jYNN5
Great article and very happy to see these discussions coming about!
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie,
It may have been a bit more objective of you if you had disclosed in your comment the fact that you are an employee of Pongr, and that Pongr is the developer of a competing technology to QR codes, so the article (and your post) have an agenda.
I support all marketers efforts that look to push mobile technology forward, but the primary drawback to Pongr's technology is the same as that with Nokia's -- to use your own website's language: "If our technology recognizes the image, we'll send you customized results."
The user doesn't know if there is anything there or not, unless they snap a picture, look to see... And if there's not? Well there's a much higher likelihood of failure and disappointment by the user with Pongr than there is with QR codes.
The advantage to QR codes is that it is not just its use as a link, but the QR Code itself is a signal to users that there is actually something there to link from. Whether with Nokia's Point & Find or Pongr's technology, the user has to check and see -- "Is this thing linkable?" then photograph it using Point & Find or using Pongr to see... and the overwhelming likelihood is that, of all the things/brands/products in the world, most things won't be.
Also, that article makes a big to-do over some phones not having cameras accurate enough to photograph the QR codes, but doesn't address how these same phones would then not be accurate enough to use Pongr's technology. Furthermore, the article points out that most phones in the US market are feature phones (not smartphones) and many of the feature phones won't have the software to read the QR codes, but doesn't mention that Pongr's own software is currently only available for the iPhone, Android and Blackberry -- in otherwords, Pongr's own technology is supported by exceptionally far fewer phones that QR Codes are and furthermore, their software is installed on many fewer than that.
best regards,
Chris
Chris, I've seen first hand the almost fanatical use of advanced cell phone tech in Japan and almost invariably it's movement offshore to Europe and the Americas. I'm amazed that things like QR codes and micro-payment haven't taken off here in the states yet, but I am fairly certain we'll be seeing more and more of it as we see more fully featured devices begin to be adopted here. I think that most folks here in the states don't realize that we are at least a generation and often two behind the cell phones commonly available in Japan.
Great article and you are now firmly ensconced in my reader.
Chris:
Interesting post, and the opposing views are interesting as well. Hard to think that NFC is a QR killer when neither has made significant progress in NA from a practical perspective, and both have barriers. The qwerty keyboard argument against QR doesn't hold water, but like so many other things, it feels like standards will be an issue. That will be an interesting process to watch. Keep up the great work!