Posts Tagged ‘applications’

Pulling In Some Perspective on Mobile Apps

Monday, July 18th, 2011

Wikitude AR Web Browser - Share on OviOne – and probably the most popular – method of utilizing mobile a a channel for ministry is that of the mobile app. I’m working on a future piece that talks some about the return on investment question in regards to mobile ministry. But until that posts, I’d like to point to an excellent perspective on mobile apps from the marketing side of the mobile conversation from the folks at MobiThinking. Here’s a snippet:

…“When I saw the mobile winners at Cannes Lions, I immediately tweeted how the majority of the advertising festivals tend to think of mobile marketing only in terms of iPhone apps,” comments Leo Xavier, CEO, Pontomobi, the Brazilian mobile agency that built the official Cannes Lions mobile apps. “Obviously, it is a disappointing to see that four Gold mobile winners are nothing but an iPhone app. I really like the Heineken Starplayer app, though, because it is based on the new concept of co-viewing. And, yes, the best option to deliver that experience is an app. The problem here is that it is only for iPhone.” (Apple devices were about 3.5 percent of handset sales in 2010, so focusing on iPhone-only will exclude the vast majority of the client’s customers)…

Read the rest of Why Ad Agencies Like Mobile Apps at MobiThinking.

We do have some understanding of what works for mobile apps, but not necessarily what always works with those apps when “ministry” is envoked as part of the platter. Effective mobile ministry apps are few and far in between – at least if we have some common measure for what makes an effective mobile ministry app. So that approach is quite important. Probably mores than the app itself.

And now for a question to consider, if you are thinking of a mobile application as the/one of the methods that you will use for mobile ministry, what aspects of investing in that approach are you most unprepared for?

 

Should I Have An App?

Friday, June 10th, 2011

The question of mobile applications is a popular one. Certainly, there are a number of people who cannot see mobile devices and services without them. And to some extent, this has always been the case. The question though that’s been been hard for some to ascertain for themselves though is whether they need an application or not.

Applications are event or task-driven software. Sometimes, this might require some input from the person who desires information. Other times, this input information may be derived from outside sources such as another website, sensors on a mobile device, or a combination of these plus input from the person. So then, with asking this question (should I have an app), we should probably start with the key piece of data – what will this application be providing?

In previous articles, we’ve talked about mobile having three components (devices, services, and experiences). In this piece, we’ll try to answer this question (should I have an app) through this lens.

Content and Services

There are two things you provide through any computing interface: content and services. Depending on your realm (media, education, etc.), what you are providing is key to discerning whether you need an application or not.

Taking from a recent inquiry where we were asked to help someone determine what kind of app they needed, we asked the question: what will your application be giving that your current endeavors on your website and Facebook do not already offer? The intention was to have a spade of content that was readily accessible to potential fans of their work, but that question (a content question given their realm) was already answered through their existing media engagements.

Platforms and Ecosystems

A consideration for any kind of application (whether native to a specific computer platform like Windows, iOS, etc., or more ubiquitous like the Internet) is where it will be living – if you will, what is the platform that you will choose to serve this application from. Again, depending on the realm that your content or services exist within, this can be a simple answer or a complicated one.

Graphic taken from VisionMobile’s article HTML5 and What It Means for the Mobile Industry. Also, Mobify has written recently on the topic of mobile apps versus mobile websites (disclaimer: we use Mobify for our mobilized website) with some items to consider that correlate with Vision Mobile’s findings.

Going back to the example above, the person was interested in an application for mobile devices, but was not aware that to address their current audiences, developing a mobile application for at least three mobile and at least one desktop platform (mobile: iOS, Android, and BlackBerry; desktop: Windows or Mac OS) was the course. Or, they could opt to take the route in developing a web application (using HTML5 most likely) that could fit across most of those platforms, but would (in that case) simply duplicate existing efforts on Facebook and their current website.

Closing the Experience

Regardless of your content/service and the platform, there’s a larger goal that you have in mind when you are asking the question “should I have an app.” Have you clearly defined the goal of this experience? What are the spiritual, theological, social, or personal takeaways that someone will (not should) have when they finish a session within your application.

Let’s go back to the example we’ve been using. Remember how we asked the question “what will your mobile application offer that your website and Facebook site don’t?” That question gets extended here. What is it that your content or service offers that changes the person? Does your current website or social networking engagement follow through on this experience goal? For what you think of building into your mobile application, is this a realistic goal for a mobile application? Mobile use is different than a regular PC, and even other forms of media (radio, TV). Given the attention span that a mobile device might have, and what you are thinking of as a mobile application, do goals line up with what can be had given this mobile context?

The “Checklist”

Clearly, this isn’t always an easy question. And for those whom are looking towards developing a mobile component to their offerings, there are other questions that come along as the prior two sections are nailed down. We have these three layers of mobile (devices, services, and experiences) that help guide towards answering some (or all) of these questions. This at least gets us to the point of having a checklist of sorts towards answering this question.

Should I have a mobile application?

  • Am I delivering content or performing/administering a service?
  • What does a mobile application enable my content/service to do that current channels (website, social networking, etc.) cannot do as effectively?
  • What platform should I choose for my initial mobile application?
  • Is my content/service complicated by logistical constraints (languages, delivery/receiving methods, etc.)?
  • What resources do I have to develop on the platform our audience is most likely to meet us on?
  • What experience should be gained after this mobile application is closed?
  • Does this follow along with our vision/values?
  • Are there aspects of the experience that we can’t control that we are ok with?

Granted, this is a simplified checklist, but it at least should help some in getting through the question of “should I have an app” towards the perspective of making sure that you don’t just have it to have it, but also profitably put your energies on reachable goals.

 

Weekly Web Watch #27 at Mobile Advance

Thursday, June 9th, 2011

Over at Mobile Advance, a weekly list of links to news and happenings in and around mobile is posted. Here’s a snippet of what’s in Weekly Web Watch #27:

Apps

  • Introduction to jQuery Mobile (by IBM/C. Enrique Ortiz)
  • Why Web vs. Native Isn’t a Black and White Battle
  • Standards for Web Applications on Mobile: May 2011 Current State and Roadmap

Read the rest of Weekly Web Watch #27 at Mobile Advance.

 

Analyzing Mobile After Its Applied

Wednesday, June 8th, 2011

In the previous post, we talked about how innovation needs to be relevant for it to have some kind of initial impact. How about we look at things later? For example, one of the questions that we pose to groups that want to work with MMM is: what else are you expecting to happen after the introduction of ‘X’ to your community?

If you will, is it possible to look far enough down the road towards the application of mobile or web technology to see some of the implications that you just won’t be able to control? For example, a group decides to add mobile technology to improve the ability for people groups to communicate with one another. But, doesn’t see that down the line, it was the use personal communication devices (and no longer sharing a single regional phone line) that caused group conflict, sometimes on a major scale (see the testimonies of the introduction and implications of mobile in the book Where Are You Africa).

Is it right to ask someone/organizations to be cognizant of the effects of mobile that can be so far down the line that its not (technically) controllable? I think so. And I think it comes in how we approach the technology as driver towards some kind of intended outcome.

What is the intended outcome of having a device that takes someone attention to their mobile device for one hour, instead of 5 minutes (the time spent on a game versus checking email)? With heads down that long, are we expecting that they will become less attached to the technology and more attached to reflection? Or, are we expecting that what we are doing is simply replacing an analogy behavior that’s done already? If we had them head down playing our ministry game/watching our movie, they now have a need to charge their device in more places. So there’s a purchase to extra batteries, car chargers, etc. They are using it more often so we now have to add sermons and teachings on fixing one’s attention spans. And the list goes on.

I’m not necessarily of the thought that gadgets are making us stupider or stealing aspects of our humanity, only that we haven’t totally thought through the implications of using this technology. While we can start for ministry (good, serving) needs, the impacts are always further. Being honest with some of the projects and applications we’ve come across, we’ve not done as good a job thinking ahead of use. That’s going to cause some unintended consequences. Some of these we’ll be ok with, but others might cause problems much too large for an application (or Facebook revolution) to solve.

 

Diversity of Gifts, Diversity of Opportunities

Friday, January 28th, 2011

There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work. Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good…

1 Corinthians 12:4-7 NIV

When we’ve dived into defining mobile ministry, we’ve been very intentional about looking at some specific applications of mobile in ministry contexts, while keeping a consistent definition in place. The reason for this is that if mobile ministry is going to define opportunities, then we have to make sure that the same lens for its definition is given to its application.

As the verses from Corinthians illustrate above though, there’s always going to be a diversity of approaches that will matter towards the same goal(s) – utilizing the best of people and mobile technologies to expand the effectiveness of the Gospel.

While we are intentional here about looking at mobile through a specific lens, let’s not forgo other potential intersections which also will be ripe with opportunity, and impact.

 

Painfully Hopeful Compares Olive Tree Reader 5 and Accordance

Wednesday, January 12th, 2011

screenshot of Accordance for iPhoneWes Allen, who penned the post Technological Contemplatives, has written up an excellent comparison of Olive Tree and Accordance’s mobile applications. Here’s a snippet:

I’ve been an Olive Tree user since 2001 when I picked up an iPaq as a seminary graduation present. By the time I’d moved from Palm and on to iOS I had collected quite a library for my personal study. In fact, after Seminary I rarely carried a print Bible with me! When Olive Tree moved to iOS I became a beta tester and was instantly impressed, they also allowed me access to some resources I would have not been able to acquire otherwise – for which I’m grateful. I was so glad to see the progress that Olive Tree has made in version 5 of their iOS reader, that I purchased their $.99 version, rather than wait for the free edition to be released. Yes it’s only a dollar, but I wanted to show my support.

I’ve been an Accordance users for just about 2 years, and I’ve loved every minute of it. Their library and resources are a joy to use, and I’ve had a lot of fun incorporating many of their tools into my preaching and teaching. I’ve invested heavily in Accordance, and it’s not disappointed me.

Read the rest of this comparison review at Painfully Hopeful. And then download Olive Tree, Accordance, or any other Bible application to extend your ability to read and study nearly anywhere.

 

5 Further Ways to Define Mobile Ministry

Monday, December 20th, 2010

Photo of a Dictionary showing the word 'dictionary' via Kingdom of StyleAfter a number of conversations, further readings, and a excellent mobile ministry forum (report coming as soon as I slow down), there’s still this lingering feeling that the definition port forth here towards what is mobile ministry while not bad, just might not have gone far enough.

So, in the spirit of how this initiative is run, I want to put out a refreshed subset of that definition that I’ve been sitting on. It is one part just trying to get into a place of better understanding how to best apply a definition, but also lead towards developing and finding the research/case studies that support mobile ministry as an effective tool.

For a refresher, here’s the definition:

Mobile ministry is the skillful use and application of computer technology classified as mobile for the context of fulfilling the Christian (religious?) designation of forwarding the proclamation of the key ideals and history of the faith, following form to and innovating on top of cultural and faith traditions within applied contexts.

And here’s what I’ve been sitting on:

  • Mobile in missions: contextualizing Gospel messages; business as mission opportunities; technology in politics/global conversations
  • Mobile in Media: specifications around video/audio/text engagements; mobile applications alongside broadcast channels; mobile service development/infrastructure concerns
  • Mobile in discipleship/education: curriculum development; special education; educational explorations (OLPC-like initiatives)
  • Mobile Marketing/Analytics: SEO; security and access; local media channel development; mobile applications alongside and independent of broadcast channels
  • Spiritual implications of connected spaces: theological constraints/precedents; directions for educators/parents/local communities; psychological/cultural effects of mobile vs other personal/connected technology media elements
  • Mobile in Moment: use of connected services and applications; SMS/MMS; effects of and effects towards social and linear networks; personal use; theological constraints/precedents

So, in looking at mobile ministry as a tool, practice, or context, its becoming clear that how mobile is being defined determines its best application.

With that said, do you see any areas here where the Body is already equipped to move quickly into mobile? Or, do you see gaps that need to be addressed, before mobile ministry is regarded as wholly beneficial?