Google Play Influencer Marketing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Influencer Marketing Project Insights & Recommendations Agenda 1) Overview & Methodology 2) Key Insights 3) Recommendations 4) Discussion Project Overview Key objective: to gain insight into the considerations and decision-making processes of influential app developers and development team managers working with the Android platform. Our interviews focused on several areas of Android development: ● Coding for the Android platform ● Testing ● Developer community support ● Google Play store ● Relationship management with influential developers and dev managers. Methodology Through a series of 23 in-person interviews with app developers and development team managers in San Francisco, Seattle and NYC, we sought to understand: ● The overall Android development process vs other mobile platforms ● The types of real-world decisions they’re responsible for making ● Processes for resource allocation of developer talent, budget and time ● Feature prioritization within organizations and agencies ● Perceptions of the Google Play store submission process ● Efforts to promote Android apps with Google Who did we interview? A wide range of developers from venture-backed startups to publicly-traded companies to small and large agencies. Examples include: Uber, Deloitte, Fitbit, Best Buy, Safeway, Foursquare, Substantial, Hydric Media and Touchlab. Virtually all had hands-on experience developing for Android, however most held management positions and no longer actively worked on code. Ty Smith Mobile tech lead for partner applications at Uber and founder of the Android Study Group “As an Android engineer, you’re almost an antagonist within your company. You’re not just an advocate for the code, but for the customers, customer experience and product direction.” Robert Neer Head of Best Buy Technology Development Center “Nobody at our company notices when you launch a new version on Android, but we get a flood of feedback when we launch on iOS.” “Our account manager for iOS was responsive when we launched on Apple Pay and got us visibility. I’m not even sure how I’d go about having that conversation at Google.” Adam Pearson CTO at Substantial “I feel like there’s a grey area around editorial at Google. With Apple, they treat us like people. With Android, the process is very complex and impersonal.” Key Insights 1. Developers perceive Android to be a significantly riskier platform for app development than iOS, for a number of reasons. 2. Development managers lack a direct contact at Google for guidance and advocacy on achieving key app business objectives lending uncertainty to business outcomes. Many of them believe this is consistent with the Google brand and therefore make little effort to seek help. 3. Being an Android developer often means being the primary advocate for Android (platform + users) inside their organization, which can lead to confrontations with managers and executives over resources. Developers perceive Android development to be riskier than iOS ● There is a widely-held belief that Android users spend significantly less money than iOS users, making them a less attractive market to go after for developers. ● There is a perceived “Android tax” which is that development problems become magnified on Android due to the range of devices and OS flavors requiring allocation of more developer time, focus and money to address issues than on iOS. One developer estimated this as a 10x bigger problem for Android than iOS. ● Most tech executives are perceived to be iOS users, creating a sense of risk in not developing around what the boss/client uses themselves. ● Most VCs and investors are perceived to be iOS users who tend to fund apps/startups on the platform they are most familiar with. ● The process of getting an app featured on the Google Play store is perceived to be difficult and mysterious to most of the people I interviewed. The decision process for resource allocation 1. 2. 3. Weigh out the Weigh out the Choose to invest business risks of uncertainty of resources into Android vs iOS achieving key iOS development development business more often than objectives on Android Android Hypothesis: At many organizations, this decision-making process leads to a systemic bias against Android for allocation of resources towards new development projects. Development managers lack direct support for Android business objectives. This often leads to uncertainty in whether they are achievable. ● Most of the development managers I interviewed had no idea who their contact was at Google for guidance and advocacy on achieving key business objectives, nor whether such a contact existed. ● This was in opposition to developing for iOS, where managers almost all believed they had a good contact at Apple who was looking out for their business interests. ● When asked how they’d go about seeking information from Google on prioritizing new features that could earn their app increased visibility and downloads on Google Play, most had no idea. ● When asked the same question about iOS, most felt their contact regularly updated them on new features to consider implementing. ● Overall, the sense among development managers is that Apple is more hands-on in their approach to providing guidance and support for business objectives, while Google is “machine-like” by design. Perceptual map of Android developer support Open source forums Perceive high Meetups level of support Google I/O from Google Online resources (ie. Github) Hands-on developers Low influence High influence Development team managers Perceive low Startup/Agency CEOs level of support from Google Why this matters. There’s a prevailing sense among the development managers I interviewed that Google is relatively hands-off when it comes to helping them accomplish business objectives. Hypothesis: This results in a classic FUD problem: fear, uncertainty and doubt act as deterrents to Android development. This perceived lack of internal advocacy at Google is compounded by the fact that most managers felt this was something Apple does relatively well. It’s not that the process at Apple is well understood by these managers, it’s that they had a high level of trust in their internal contact to advocate on their behalf and help them navigate the system at Apple to achieve key business objectives. The areas where this was most impactful: ● Gaining insight on which features to prioritize into the next version of their app ● Helping secure high profile visibility within the App Store that leads to significant downloads ● Editorial consideration resulting in PR/Media hits, placement on devices in the Apple Store and spotlights at developer events like WWDC. Being an Android developer means being an advocate for the Android platform and the needs of its users. ● Android developers are often the only Android users at their organization. ● Android developers are usually outnumbered by iOS developers at their organization. ● Advocating for Android users (and user experiences) extends beyond code - into issues like budget allocation, feature prioritization and product direction. ● This process can lead developers to direct confrontations with their managers as well as business-savvy VPs in product, marketing and operations. Why this matters. Android developers are often forced to defend the Android platform to executives with business backgrounds. Having to serve as an advocate for Android and its users can put developers into confrontational situations where they’re forced to combat ‘iOS bias’ among managers, designers and senior leaders. This extends beyond the job of writing code and developing apps, to being an advocate for the Android platform, Android users and the customer experience itself. Hypothesis: As a minority inside their organization, Android developers can feel marginalized from their peers and intimidated by executives. As one developer put it “you’re generally the only one or the only group advocating for Android at your company.” Agencies also face similar challenges with clients who have a bias towards iOS. One agency head commented “I feel like I have to sell clients on Android” whereas the case for iOS is clear. Key Recommendations 1. Reduce perceived risk Empower Android developers, agencies and advocates with usable information and of Android development data about Android and its users. Implement a program for Android developers to receive products so they can familiarize and demonstrate Android to key executives who are only familiar with iOS. 2. Close the uncertainty Reach out to development managers and make sure they know who their primary gap for development contact is at Google for guiding business objectives. managers Reframe perception of the Google brand to be more human-like and less machine-like for developers. 3. Reward Android Develop a series of smaller events and dinners that bring influential developers and advocates and show managers together with Google executives. them Google cares. Create a high-level advisory board of developers, dev managers and influential members of the development community. For Discussion 1. What insights resonate or are in conflict with our current understand of our developers? Compared to DSAT? 2. Is Google really perceived as cold and machine-like by developers and mgrs? 3. Do development managers lack high level contacts at Google? How can we better serve them? How are responsibilities split between dev rel & play BD? 4. Are the risk factors around Android development possible for us to reduce/counteract through marketing comms and content creation?