The first challenge is to define what is actually meant by mobile advertising. It is a broad term. We could be talking about using the mobile device as a channel to respond to advertisements in other media, such as texting a shortcode in response to a billboard promotion. But we could also be referring to messages delivered to a mobile device and used to redeem special offers at physical retail locations. Or, of course, advertisements displayed on the mobile screen and used to purchase mobile content, where the promotion, transaction and delivery all occur within the same media.

It strikes me in all these scenarios there is a fundamental difference inherent in the mobile delivery channel. It comes back to this concept of user ‘missions’ which I have mentioned in several previous MEX articles. Mobile users typically operate in missions defined by the amount of time they have available, the task they need to complete and their physical location.

This is very different to TV viewers, who by the very nature of TV consumption, have already defined themselves as being mission-exempt.

It also contrasts with the PC, which is a naturally multi-tasking environment, where several missions may be underway at any one time and the user has the visual space and attention span to switch between them.

It could be argued then that marketeers have an easy task with the mobile channel - if users are typically on specific missions, it should be a relatively simple task to understand those missions and deliver advertisements with direct relevance. However, as discussed in last week’s article ‘Portal power‘, understanding missions in the mobile environment is actually a very complex process and very different from established models such as contextual web advertising.

Assuming, however, you are able to understand the user’s mission, you face another challenge: how can you deliver advertising not just related that mission, but advertising which helps the user complete that mission. This is the fundamental difference with advertising in the mobile channel: it is about delivering tools and answers, not capturing attention.

This is an important lesson for marketeers to learn, because the consequences of misunderstanding it are potentially very serious. If the user perceives the advertisement to be hindering the completion of their mission, not only will the advertising spend be ineffectual, it may also generate negative sentiment towards that brand.

The completion of mobile missions is an inherently linear process, primarily because most mobile handsets are unsuited to multi-tasking. The user is engaged in a process chain which requires the completion of each stage to move to the next step. Advertising which hinders this process will be perceived negatively (i.e. encourages the user to explore outside the parameters of their current mission), whereas advertising which delivers tools enabling the user to shortcut the process will be valued.

The extent to which users will respond positively to advertising which attempts to capture their attention outside their current mission will be directly proportional to the level of perceived intrusion. It could be argued, for instance, that an application which downloaded special promotions from local retailers in the background and was accessed at a time of the user’s chosing would be more effective than SMS or MMS messages being ‘pushed’ at the handset.

The risk of interrupting a user’s mission flow can also be mitigated by the level of trust the user has in the person or company causing the interruption. I have already talked about the importance of community in previous articles and the power of personal recommendations. It may be appropriate for special offers or recommendations forwarded by contacts in my address book to flash-up on the screen as new messages in a way which I would find wholly inappropriate if the sender was a retailer or advertiser I was unfamiliar with.

This sensitivity to intrusion and the fundamental differences between mobile missions and immersive exploration processes demand new business models. Long-term, I can’t imagine big brands using the mobile channel for profile and awareness activities - these are much better suited to TV, radio and billboard. Recent suggestions in the industry that mobile TV could be supported by users opting in to video advertisements before accessing the TV stream fail to recognise these important differences.

Advertising revenues in the mobile channel will be directly linked to how effective an advertiser is in helping users to complete their missions. It’s about assistance rather than distraction.

Do you have a view on mobile advertising you’d like to share with the MEX community? Email me at marekpawlowski@pmn.co.uk with your ideas.