Consumer technology comes and goes—pretty damn fast. Over the past few years, we’ve all enjoyed (endured?) the hype surrounding 3D TVs, Ultra HD TVs, smart speakers from Amazon, Google, and Sonos, Google Glass, Meta Quests 1, 2, and 3, smart watches from Apple, Samsung, and Garmin, countless gaming devices, and a host of smart ovens, air fryers, pressure cookers, and refrigerators that tell you when you’re low on milk. But if you need a refrigerator to tell you when you need milk, you probably shouldn’t plug in electrical appliances yourself.

Not all of these products can succeed. And the truth is that more consumer electronics products fail to live up to expectations than deliver on their promises and truly change our lives in the long run. So how can marketers spot a shoddy piece of tech when the electronics brands and PR departments are touting it as the next big thing without having a crystal ball (with solar-powered 5G cellular)?

Finding the optimal technical point

Hamid Habib, CEO of Havas Entertainment, says: “Our 3D Samsung TV is completely pointless and our Google Home is pretty much a fancy kitchen timer these days. Oculus is an option, but Xbox on a big screen is much better. Still, I’m waiting for the Ray Ban Meta glasses to drop in price, even though I know they’ll be back in the closet after a month.

“There’s a sweet spot between utility (practical or fun), affordability (not a toy for rich techies), and the most important part of the triumvirate – the ability to give a damn. That third part is interesting because it’s wrapped up in PR, hype, and social tsunamis that make us, especially in our industry, temporarily believe new technology is bigger than the second coming of Christ. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a fan of that stuff. But the hype outweighs so many purchases.”

While many tech enthusiasts point to the Gartner Hype Cycle, which charts a technology’s rise to fame and its fall to failure, Phil Rowley, head of futures at OMG UK, prefers his Sisyphus Cycle. He explains: “Sisyphus was a character in Greek mythology who was destined to repeatedly push a boulder uphill, only for it to roll down as it neared the top. Some technologies struggle to gain traction, no matter how many times they are presented to us. We are often told that this time will be different, but until one condition is met, some technologies will remain at the bottom. That condition is the gap between user expectation and user experience.”

Loss of enthusiasm and shift in attention

When the exaggerated promises of truly immersive entertainment experiences, virtualized life and seamless AI support are under-delivered, people tend to lose their enthusiasm and turn their attention to the next big thing, says Rowley, citing three main reasons for this gap between UE and UX – value, friction and support.

New technologies are expensive at the beginning of their life cycle and if they do not offer good value for money to the public, they will fail, as Rowley explains: “3D cinema tickets were expensive, but after the first 15 minutes of the film, the audience’s brains stopped perceiving the 3D representation and so the extra cost became hard to justify.”

New technologies can be sophisticated but complicated to use or only usable in certain circumstances. Rowley says: “VR headsets are an incredible piece of technology, but most people have to make room in their schedules and on their living room floor before they can boot it up. Smartphones, on the other hand, are always on, always with you and can be accessed instantly wherever you are.”

Rowley concludes that consumers also need to know that there is an infrastructure behind every new technology and that there are creators and developers ready to provide raw material for new experiences. He says: “If you look at a technology that hasn’t lived up to its potential in the last decade, you’ll find that one or more of these factors are at play, which in turn creates a gap between user expectations and user experience.”

Code & Theory is a 50% creative and 50% engineer agency, so who better to know what makes good technology for marketers? Co-founder Dan Gardner can name many technical duds: “Technology has a natural evolution, and the hype cycle is a big part of that. When the wrong experts disappear and people stop paying attention to shiny objects, technology in general starts to become meaningful. For example, Flash websites were all the rage when we started Code and Theory; our company was built on them. Where is it now? Nowhere, but everywhere. Many of those marketing websites were pointless but fun, and then Flash technology died. Yet many of the innovations in digital design exist today because of the early experiments with Flash.”

Brands are always looking for the next “big thing” they can use to engage more with consumers and spread their brand messages at every opportunity. When Alexa was at the top of everyone’s Christmas wish list in 2019, agencies were no doubt advising their clients to develop a smart speaker strategy. Where are they now?

Aligning brands with technology

So how should brands evaluate and analyze the long-term viability of integrating new technology into their strategies? Steve Archer, Chief Creative Officer at SS+K, says: “Remember the JuicePro? The $500 juicer that squeezed out packets of liquid? What a ridiculous invention that was, but brands should ask themselves, is the juice worth squeezing? Does the technology fit with and enhance what your brand has to offer? And is your target audience likely to use it at a large enough scale that it makes sense to invest in developing the technology as part of a marketing plan? The metaverse, for example, has always been more closely associated with brands that were in gaming, music, and sports because it was already part of or enhanced those experiences.”

OMD’s Rowley encourages marketers to experiment with new technologies, but advises them to do so for the right reasons: “The wrong reason is brand glorification. Jumping on a bandwagon to satisfy the need to be seen as a pioneer. The right reason is to learn the art of innovation. To practice responding to new technical opportunities and planning the evolution of technology over time. To work on embedding systems that enable experimentation, reflection and reorientation – and that accompany the evolution of media technology. Not because you want to put all your chips on one number, but because you want to learn how the casino works. However you evaluate new technologies is fine. Just make sure you do it.”

While it’s not exactly consumer technology, Mark Zuckberg’s Metaverse is perhaps the biggest tech flop of recent times. The Metaverse promised a lot to brands looking to build interactions with consumers in virtual worlds far more wonderful than the real one. It’s fair to say it didn’t deliver on its promises, isn’t it?

Dan Gardner of Code & Theory warns against writing off the metaverse just yet: “If you talk to the average advertising executive, you might think the metaverse is dead. But if you look a little closer, it’s where the esteemed Gen Alpha lives. You would never call it ‘the metaverse,’ but just ask the average teenager about Roblox. Then there are new interesting companies like geniuses who are literally building the most engaging universes for brands to reach these audiences. This is an untapped marketing opportunity that no one is paying attention to because everyone has dismissed it as the ‘hype and bust’ word metaverse.”

Habib of Havas Entertainment agrees: “The metaverse is still here, it’s still popular – to a certain extent – but all of humanity hasn’t decided to get involved with Ready Player One yet – and most likely never will. The lesson is, whether you’re a brand or a person: take a deep breath before you get involved. Let the hype cycle die down and see what’s left afterward. Or don’t. Because even though we get bored quickly, there’s still fun to be had in the beginning.”

Archer believes that despite all the hype, VR is not quite where it needs to be to be a long-term success. He says, “On the spectrum of useful to easy to use, VR is not there yet. Even though it is getting better every day. Vision Pro users still have to wear headsets and have a battery mount. And the hardware is very expensive. Until display technology gets much simpler and cheaper, it will be difficult to get VR adopted by enough people for most brands to make it a major part of their investment strategy. And the ownership and usage statistics are still low. Where we are seeing the most growth is with younger audiences and in gaming.”