We'll take the line for frantic panicked travelers, please

Maybe it's time to let your customers personalize their own experience.

Fallon Planning wrote recently about the new traveler check-in process at Orlando Airport, in which travelers choose from one of three lines -- expert, casual, or family travelers -- for different experiences. As you'd expect, expert travelers are people with small carry-on bags who whisk themselves through the metal detectors with no change in their pockets. On the other end, families struggle with many bags and crying kids. Yet, bizarrely, this process -- which was suggested to the Transportation Security Administration by focus groups -- has streamlined check-in as travelers perceive more control over the experience.

Which is all brilliant, because the TSA has pushed personalization into the control of the consumer, not computers. Back in the 1990s, the idea of personalization and 1to1 marketing was almost arrogant, in that companies assumed they could analyze your data and then use fancy "business rules" to give you the perfect, next-best offer. The idea had its roots in airline seating (high-value business up front, schmucks in the back) and financial services (if you're investing a cool mil, your broker returns your calls).

Different customers would be treated differently, but only based on predictive modeling.

The Holy Grail of personalization broke down because (a) it's really hard to understand the actual future financial value and potential needs of all your customers, (b) mass-customizing a response is almost always cost prohibitive, and (c) the theory never really translated into a competitive advantage. Personalization is only one of the value factors that consumers perceive. Brands, design, financial cost, opportunity cost, competitor entries, what your spouse will think ... all of these make personalization just one push toward the purchase.

But personalization is still important. Google has succeeded wildly by creating the most personal response of all, by simply allowing customers to ask for what they want. And now airlines are allowing customers to pick their own line, for a more positive check-in experience even if it means admitting they aren't "expert travelers."

So, Netflix, Amazon, and all you other collaborative filtering tell-us-what-we-want recommendation systems: We love the kindness. But sometimes, maybe you can just ask us what we'd like instead.

(Photo: United terminal at O'Hare by Ken Douglas)

Apple TV and the end of 1to1 marketing

The most interesting thing missing from Apple's presentation yesterday wasn't a new iPhone. It was 1to1 marketing.

Steve Jobs spent much of his keynote at the Macworld conference trying to turn Apple TV from a toy into a serious attempt to control America's living rooms. U.S. consumers spend billions each year on home movie rentals, video and music, and yet no one has figured out how to own the entertainment market. Apple TV now makes it easy to get video-via-internet, but there are still too many pipes leading to the den. Netflix sends envelopes via mail and is toying with wireless internet delivery. Blue-ray and HD DVDs are still fighting over the next disc format. Cable sends movies with a click. Consumers are still confused and we all still have three or four remotes.

Back in the 1990s, 1to1 marketing was supposed to break through such competition. The idea was to identify the customers with the most financial value, figure out their unique desires, and then to personalize content or service delivery in a way that competitors could not match. If anything calls for personalization, it would be the entertainment content consumers receive -- since we all have such varied interests. You'd think if 1to1 personalization works, technology leaders such as Apple would be all over it -- giving us iPhones that remember our contacts in ways competitors couldn't, and personalized video or music recommendations so good we'd never switch from iTunes to Amazon. Netflix has offered a $1 million prize to anyone who can improve its collaborative filtering by more than 10%.

But the public and media seem to yawn. We don't want personalization as much as we want the next, hot gadget. A lot of Apple's new video interface makes it easy for users to pick from menus, not get pre-customized recommendations. There are only two ways this can play: Either 1to1 personalization is a true competitive advantage and the world's communications leaders are ignoring the opportunity, or maybe customers need far more than personalization to drive entertainment impulse purchases.

We think 1to1 works, but that its control panel now lies directly with consumers, not business intermediaries. Why should anyone wait for Netflix or Amazon to tell us the next thing we'd like, when we can now find it ourselves with a click? Navigating choices has now become simple with search engines that can pinpoint any whim anywhere from the internet; video will follow this path. Don Peppers and Martha Rogers saw the future back in 1991. They just didn't see that true personalization would eventually be controlled by each individual themselves.