We’ve seen huge changes in consumer buying habits with rise of internet, social and mobile tech. With biased hype over wearable tech it’s easy to underestimate or overestimate its impact on consumers’ day-to-day activities.

Among a stack of recent posts on Apple Watch, I’ve noticed few very contrasting opinions:

1. The “flop” hype is based on single channel estimation. Cumulative estimation gives more optimistic results.
2. The farther away people are from tech industry, the more they like Apple Watch
3. Messaging app is showcasing the motives of killer app, and smartwatch value overall

The first two thoughts let us at least assume that the watch conversation is not over, not to mention that it’s developing quickly. But it’s the third one which I’d like to focus on.

Killer app

As highlighted in above mentioned article, the watch is highly effective for messaging. The reason is - we usually spend only seconds reading and texting, while we spend minutes waiting for reply on other end. We typically spend this “gap” time either for random surfing, or getting phone back and forth from the pocket. And it wouldn’t be an issue, if it’d happen once a day. But we do this a lot. On average 100 times per day.

Smartwatches simply eliminate this scenario, and cut usage time by half. We only get disturbed for those few seconds of interaction, while we can devote the rest of “gap” time for ourselves. So while majority of watch reviewers agree that most convenient use case is glancing at notifications, there is a use case much richer than read-only glance. It’s about same seamless interactions and replies, while leaving phone down there in a pocket.

Smartwatches minimize the time we spend with technology, and encourage us to squeeze our activity with technology to only things we really need. So if desktop is about hours, and mobile is about minutes, than watch is about seconds. And the most interesting use cases arise when these seconds actually change consumer decision.

Being there when consumers need us

Imagine this scenario: Alice is making a family dinner, and she’s right in the middle of cooking a Caesar salad. When getting the tomatoes out of the fridge she notices that it’s the last portion. She realises she’ll need more tomatoes for tomorrow dinner and she’d want to order them right away. But her hands are dirty with salad and her phone is in her pocket. She either need to stop cooking, wash her hands and get into the app, or order them later.

Chances are, she’ll buy them later. And you can’t yet say where exactly - maybe she’ll ask the kids to run by closest grocery store, or she’ll get it on her way from the bus station. In contrast, she could buy it from retailer who was there exactly when she needed him.

Let’s take a look at similar scenario: Bob is driving home, stops at traffic light and notices a nice ad of new furniture. He likes it and considers purchasing it, but he can’t reach his mobile phone to get more details. The traffic light turns green and he rushes home to his family. The furniture is forgotten.

In contrast, he might add it to wish list with simple voice command on his watch, and check out more details when he’s home. He buys the furniture from retailer who was there when he had the need.

New touchpoints in Consumer Decision Journey

I’m not saying that typical CDJ model stopped working - consumers still familiarize with, consider & evaluate products. I’m saying that there are now touchpoints sellers can tap into to satisfy consumers’ instant needs or wants. Smartwatches are there with consumers in moments when mobile phones are not. And we can be there, right when they need us.