Yesterday ASOS beta launched ASOS Life .

In a move that reminds me very much of the Zappos model for online retailing + social media, ASOS have created an online destination and platform to ‘visibly’ host blog, forum, comment, tag, photo and story baased content.

On the ‘invisible’ side of course they are building relationships, assessing customer behaviour and building their community.

In terms of their brand I can only think this will lead to positive brand interaction, consistency, credibility, authenticity, trust and loyalty.  A very nice move.

On this blog we have discussed online purchases and online transaction handling before – usually in the context of usability or path to purchase. More often than not, we’ve ended up drawing comparisons to, or extolling the virtues of a sophisticated offline business process and asking the question, “Physical stores don’t work in this manner, so why are you making your online store work this way?” Ever heard the phrase ‘technology for technologies sake?’ We have, and it’s not pretty.

And yet, every so often the opposite happens. The online paradigm shifts an offline business process profoundly and sharply.

One such occurrence is related to purchasing. To me it seems that as eCommerce has become more mainstream, ‘ease in purchasing’ has become a pre-requisite for shopping generally.

One approach to defuse poor ease in purchasing offline is off course to invest in customer service representatives to smooth away any ill feeling. But another way is to invest in technology and its integration.

And so it transpires that earlier this month more than 1,000 London retail outlets including those at ‘Threshers’ and food chains ‘Yo Sushi!’ and ‘Eat’ have all signed up for a “contactless” payment facility. If ‘ease’ and ‘trust’ could be encapsulated “contactless” payment is it.

The so-called “tap and pay” system (like Transport for London’s Oyster payment network), is being launched in the autumn and other retailers are already on board too – ‘Krispy Kreme’, ‘Coffee Republic’, ‘Books Etc’ and the ‘Science Museum’.

Adding to the momentum, payment providers Mastercard and Visa have announced plans to offer contactless cards, which allow transactions of up to £10 without the need to sign or enter a pin number via their member banks. (The system, which is already popular in the US through outlets including fast food chain McDonald’s, aims to speed up payments and reduce queues.)

It is certain is that we can expect a great amount of marketing noise (good and bad) to emerge through 2008 as cashless payments start to become a reality.  ‘Ease’ and ‘Trust’ are key – and these are tricky subjects. But what price contactless cards will become a de-facto standard payment method offline?  My bet this is not a trend. This is going to grow like wildfire. First stop £10, next stop £25.  Soon.

Suddenly strategic plays involving loyalty cards and their underlying information seem very interesting indeed. And how will the mobile operators respond? They have also long been touted as the payment mechanism de-rigour.

Who can tell which way payment will shift? The only certainty is that as retailers use technology to make even more money – they’ll end up handling less of the dirty cash itself.

If we imagine there are two types of retailer, those operating on a low cost / low price model, and others operating in whatever cost / unobtainable price land – their websites will be very different. The objective of the former is to sell volume at increasingly lower margin, using the web to lower staffing and per transaction costs by letting the customer do the work themselves (from the comfort of their home or office). It’s an additional channel to market, certainly augmenting, but also potentially replacing physical stores.

The latter is more concerned with generating an aura of exclusivity and desire. Whether the website actually sells stuff is less of a concern. It’s primarily a marketing exercise.

Web 2.0 can help both types of retailer by building communities, enabling social selling, adding rich still and moving imagery to highlight product features, etc. However, the low cost retailer needs to tread carefully. The desire to simply “go web 2.0″ can be a distraction.

Fundamentally, the purpose of the low-cost retailer’s website is to make money by transacting. Changes to the website should therefore be backed by a business case considering the expected uplifts in traffic, conversion, and turnover. Changes should be prioritised according to the financial benefit they bring and should be reviewed after a period of live operation to check the benefit expected was delivered.

We have seen some banks and bookstores open in house coffee shops in an attempt to attract customers and boost sales. But not retailers such as Argos, Comet, Currys, Halfords, .et al. If it doesn’t work for their physical stores, why should community areas work any better for their websites?

If I’m looking to buy a new TV online, then what I want from a website (as a minimum) is:

• Intuitive site navigation including the ability to compare products side by side
• High quality pictures of the front, side, top and connectors
• Accurate technical specification information
• Accurate pricing information (and no surprises at the checkout)
• A delivery promise I can rely on
• A sense that if things go wrong, I can call someone (not email them) and my problem will be taken care of

Product reviews, opinions and ratings from other customers who already own the product will certainly be of interest to me, but the point is unless the basic information and features mentioned are available, I’ll happily read the reviews then purchase elsewhere. (And frankly the ability to drag and drop the product into my basket instead of clicking a button isn’t going to change my mind…)

Jakob Nielsen recently pointed out that basic site design, ease of navigation and clarity/accuracy of information is still pretty poor in many cases. In the low-cost space eCommerce teams should strive to get the basics of navigation and quality of information right first, then cost justify and prioritise changes according to the return they will bring to the business. Web 2.0, if correctly applied, can do great things for conversion rates, incremental sales and strengthening brand affinity. But financially, getting usability and content right is job #1.

Research commissioned by Fujitsu Services, has revealed that retailers are not meeting high consumer expectations for automated services that offer increased convenience and improved customer experience – despite the technology being available.

Dr Mark Dorgan, European retail partner at Fujitsu Services, comments: “The key theme to emerge from talking to consumers across Europe is that they are clear about the service they expect from retailers and in many cases they do not feel these expectations are being met.”

He continues: “In an age where people are empowered to tailor products and services to their own needs, consumers expect retailers to make the shopping experience convenient, whilst also offering choice in terms of products available and service channels. If customers can’t get the service they expect from a retailer they are likely to look elsewhere. Multi-channel technologies, both inside and outside the store, are available and consumers are willing and eager to explore their benefits. Retailers know they need to catch up in this rapidly evolving area – the time to act is now, because consumers demand it.”

The focus group research revealed that whilst the availability of automated technologies is not in itself a crucial differentiator in determining brand loyalty, it can have a noticeable impact on the consumer’s attitude to a brand. In order to encourage a good customer experience, retailers need to understand why the customer is shopping with them and their expectations, so that they can focus on how the customer feels at each touchpoint.

Internet banks have fared particularly badly in a new study that suggests the industry has lost trust from the majority of UK consumers.The Unisys-commissioned survey found that 71% of customers do not trust their banks, while the two worst rated brands were web-based.

At a time when the industry is under fire over charges and profits, 82% of respondents attributed ‘respect for customers’ as an important issue in gaining their trust.

Disrespectful attitudes, poor privacy, weak IT and poor corporate governance were among the main problems they highlighted.

According to Unisys, the results also suggest face-to-face interaction is important to consumers, as the lowest six rated banks had no High Street presence.

Elton Birden, the company’s VP of UK Financial Services said:

“Banks must look beyond firewalls and data breaches and understand that consumers consider everything when deciding where to place their trust.

“The poor performance by the online banks also suggests that face-to-face contact and the ‘human touch’ count for a lot with the British public.”