Lola's Problem With Place

In the Puddin' - Lola's Turn

One of the biggest misconceptions in Experience Design is that the experience is the physical place and what it looks like. Although absolutely true that good experience design incorporates the physical space, exceptional experience design incorporates much more.

Today I’m letting my alter ego come out to play - we’ll call her Lola – and I’ll let her rant a bit:

Lola: "If you build it they will come." That may be true. For experience design to drive a successful business, the larger question is:

"Will they keep coming?"

A lot of experience design starts perfectly well (grossly over-simplified):

1. A great, distinctive idea creates the inspiration for a new place of business.
2. The next big question is, "What does it look like?" and the physical design / architecture takes shape.
3. Technology will often come into play as leveraging experiential elements considered to be "cutting-edge", "biggest", "fastest", "clearest picture", clearest sound system", "state-of'-the-art" then become part of the 'place'.
4. Interior design is used to set the mood: colors, textures, shapes, furnishings, lighting, etc. all to create an appropriately appealing, distinctive place.
5. Ideally, the 5 senses are incorporated to assist in immersing consumers into a distinctively different place
6. Great experience design will then incorporate the actions of the team members and their operational workflows and special points of contact with the consumer.

Without #6, the experience is likely to resemble the most gorgeous person on Earth with an IQ of 2 - Undeniably very attractive at first, but boring, frustrating and annoying over time - Unlikely to earn your loyalty and devotion.

• Regardless of how beautiful a stadium is built, loyalty to the franchise is ultimately coming from the team's ability to carry out the plays in the coaches handbook with precision and consistency - team members working together for victory.
• Broadway puts an enormous amount of creativity and resources toward building incredible stage sets with state-of-the-art lighting and effects. Still - It's not much of a show if one girl in the chorus line decided her job was stupid. Or, frighteningly just as likely in business, that the director decided that it didn't really matter what any of the actors were doing on stage, as long as the projected ticket sales were met for that month and no one complained. And, if ticket sales are down, it must be the economy.

It is impossible for me to emphasize enough the danger of relying so heavily on the physical experience design. Yes - It is essential to create a great space for experience design to work. But why are companies so tempted to stop there? Without question - it is what is happening, what people are doing and the responses of the team members in that space that creates an experience worthy of repeat customers, loyalty and fanatical market share.

The most painful example is an organization who took the time to orchestrate great experiential tactics, enjoyed the success it brought to the brand and then let go of the tactics because they thought they no longer needed them to be successful. While these organizations may be correct in the short-term, they may be the leaders for a period of time, I am concerned for the welfare of their brand when their competitors challenge them. What will happen to them when consumers have greater choices?

Such a company who meets this concern is Harkins Theatres, the largest privately owned movie theatre chain in North America and their Cine Capri product:

Making its debut April 1, 1966, the original Cine Capri theatre was an instant hit with moviegoers in Phoenix, Arizona. It had 800 seats and a 58-foot (18 m) wide screen - the largest in Arizona. From the signature white columns to the majestic gold waterfall curtains surrounding the screen, the Cine Capri was the place to see all of Hollywood’s blockbusters.  In 1997, the decision to demolish the Cine Capri in favor of a high-rise office building. Despite over 260,000 petition signatures and efforts of the Save the Cine Capri Committee, the preservation effort failed.

In 2003, Cine Capri was rebuilt in Scottsdale with the largest regular movie theater screen in Arizona (except IMAX) at over 70 feet wide by 30 feet high with a 568 seat auditorium and a 40,000 watt / 150 speaker Digital sound system.

Growing up in Arizona, I looked forward to the reincarnation of Cine Capri and anticipated the experience. My first experience was wonderful: The manager of the theatre stood at the stage front and welcomed all to the Cine Capri Experience, hyped the movie and what we were about to experience as well as introducing (by name) our Experience Concierge who would be at attention throughout the movie for any of our needs. After the manager exited with crowd applause, the immense, ornate, gold satin curtain peeled back to signal the grandeur of the main event. Upon leaving the theatre, our Concierge thanked each one of us for coming and asked if he would see us next weekend.

A year later: the theatre was still beautiful; the gold curtain still parted, but no welcome, no pre-event warm-up from the manager and no Concierge waiting in the wings. The human tactics had been completely set aside and (perhaps coincidentally or not) we bought a home theatre system that Christmas. Now we create most of our movie experiences at home.

A few months ago, we went back to Cine Capri, no longer expecting magic, but feeling it was the best place to see Indiana Jones' latest movie (a big deal in my family). The experience had deteriorated further. Arriving early to be at the front of the line for "Dan's seats" (where Dan Harkins likes to sit at Cine Capri - so we've been told) was a priority for my kids. Upon arrival, we asked 4 different employees where the line was to be formed for Cine Capri - no one knew for sure - one blamed it on the management, stating that it was impossible to tell because they kept moving it all the time. We awkwardly hovered outside of the entrance of the movie, waiting for the prior showing to finish, unfortunately, observing as unsupervised employees mocked some of the patrons exiting the movie. I asked to see a manager and explained what I observed. His concern did not appear genuine. When I explained that I was not sure he was taking my concerns to heart and that perhaps I should write a letter, he simply nodded and took no further action. Perhaps I caught them on a very bad day - but as a consumer, my last encounter is my impression of their current brand.

With all of that said, it is important to know that I still believe Harkins to be the best movie theatre brand in Arizona - as a physical space, their theatres are superior to local competitors - down to the comfort of their seats and concession offerings. I have been a fan of their product for my whole life and have deep respect for their reviving a piece of Phoenix history. I want Harkins to have future success and remain a leader in their market. But I am deeply concerned that if the human tactics are not repaired back to their original greatness, Harkins will not be able to compete when new luxury movie theatre brands like Monaco Pictures and their kind enter the local market.

A brand cannot survive on heritage alone. A brand cannot survive on past reputation alone. A brand must consistently perform in a manner that lives up to its reputation and heritage to stay competitive.

As was necessary in 1997, Lola is now campaigning to Harkins to bring back those great tactics and commitment to service that had always been a part of the Cine Capri experience. Save the Cine Capri - don't let it become just another movie theatre. --Dolores McKay

Comments

[CJ]

I understand that movie theaters have been struggling in recent years - facing mounting competition from Netflix and cable's on-demand service. They need to find ways to make up the revenue gap.

Unfortunately they have decided to sacrifice part of the customer experience by selling television advertising in front of the movie. The last three movies I've seen have been 20 minutes late starting, presumably so the theater can show the maximum amount of ads in front of the most eyeballs.

Rather than differentiating their product further, they have made it more like a home-viewing experience! If I go to the theater to see a movie, I should get a better experience than watching at home - and not just a bigger screen or deafening audio.

My recent experience is limited to AMC theaters - so perhaps my observations are only applicable to that brand. I doubt it.