Speed: It can make you look like a rock star or a rock star’s discarded gig wear.

Mobile UX: It can make you a helpful, innovative leading-edge company or it can make you look like someone’s old Windows 3.1 application.

From a banking application to a quick Twitter session with your friends, I believe that speed and ease of use are the ultimate drivers for mobile applications. Web and application developers have been going through a growth path that includes the typical questions:

• What’s a mobile application?
• Who would ever trust such a thing as a mobile application?
• How fast can I get one for my business?

Years ago, the question surrounding the viability of mobile, image-less browsing was relegated to R&D and people with a great deal of time on their hands. These days, it’s becoming more and more a requirement in our proposals and presentations. Have you seen an increase? Do the requests make sense?

Trust Me

Trust is a key factor in many of the decisions our customers make as to whether or not they belong in the mobile community. My personal advice to any company who has a service or application that can be used in quick sessions (less than a three-minute transaction) is to go for it. Build the application using the latest and greatest security you can employ and create your mobile application as soon as possible.

Trust comes with time. Established in x year. Since xxxx. Time is a great way to generate trust to your audience. It isn’t going to carry you very far, but it’s a start and it’s something you won’t have if you don’t move now.

Again, Again!

Once you’ve gone through a comprehensive design for the mobile version of your offering, it’s critical to keep the ball bouncing. By standing still and keeping your early iterations in production, you’ll lose the edge.

Paying attention to new browser versions, the ability to incorporate time-saving development environments and keeping your application or service fresh is going to keep the customer alert and keep you on the right path.

Remember the Past

It’s a significant effort to produce the right UX for a mobile environment. It takes a deep understanding of your product, your staff and the design process for human factors and behavior.

Additionally, it takes time. Most often, we notice that failing mobile ux is a product of not taking enough time to sort out the business requirements. It’s not effective to take what you have and “re purpose” it. The mobile version should have the same care and feeding that was established with the big sister or big brother product.

In most situations, you’ll run into some nasty speed bumps such as

• language versions / regional codes
• brand elements
• functional buttons / iconography
• vanity

That last bullet is pretty important. Vanity can kill a mobile application. If the logo is too big, the first impression might be that the provider cares much more about themselves than they do about me. If it’s too small, or ignored altogether, the customer may feel that the provider isn’t being transparent.

Corporate vanity has a strong place in the mobile world: marketing materials, about pages and tasteful watermarks.

Conceive and Create

Use your product knowledge and your creative staff to work together. It’s an effort that can not be successfully carried out by one or the other. Both departments (or vendors) need to work in harmony to effectively produce your mobile application or service.

The global reach for companies these days is expanding at a rate far greater than ever. And, with this expansion of products and services, especially through online channels, comes the ability to work with freelance or agency talent all over the world.

Collective talent pools like Airbag Industries, HappyCog and, of course, Visual Activity have succeeded due to a deep bench of talent and the ability to work in remote areas while using the most up to date tools.

We currently have a staff that includes an engineer in London, a senior ui developer in Utah and two physical addresses in the Northeast where the other three staff members work each day.

Our reach, like that of our clients, becomes paramount to our success in such a competitive landscape. While some of our clients such as Harvard University and Interactive Data Corporation are local, our international clients like Novartis and Capcom require a blend of weekly phone calls and online project management tools to help everyone stay on track.

The extent to which we are able to work with clients across the globe is unlimited. We’ve had a long history of success working with client teams from Ireland to India and we expect the trend to not only continue, but to grow.

A fantastic example of how international talent is being used for global marketing is the recent hire of Sydney, Australia-based Publicis Mojo to handle the worldwide effort for Diet Coke. This, based on information from a report in AdAge marks this as “the largest global account ever awarded to an Australian agency”.

As the trends grow and the internationalization becomes more standard, one thing that will remain an issue is the localized audience. I still think that companies have a difficult time understanding the needs of the local audience as it pertains to a global strategy.

Time will tell if localization becomes less of an issue (spelling, language options as a standard option, sites with zoned pricing, etc…). I hope that as companies more frequently use international talent they pay close attention to the local impact.

Maybe it’s the time of year. Maybe it’s the kooky font choice. Maybe it’s the way we all feel after indulging twenty spoonfuls of high-octane sugar and brain freeze. Regardless of the reason, the new baskinrobins.com site seems to me to resemble a Rankin/Bass production.

I half expect to see Rudolph appear and tell me “she thinks I’m cuuuuute!”

The brand needed a face lift and I’m glad that the new ownership group has taken charge of getting things going in the land of Dunkin’ Brands. If you haven’t noticed any changes, you will. More menu items (regardless of how you feel about them) and the addition (FINALLY) of a fresh-brewed, year-round iced tea, which is delicious for a chain.

The Baskin Robbins I visited in London (Richmond Upon Thames) could have been mistaken for just about any hole in the wall ice cream shoppe, but when the new branding hits, it’ll certainly stand out (for better or worse).

Enjoy a pint (not that kind) and have a safe, warm holiday.

I find it very difficult to explain more than any other discipline how incredibly unappreciated illustrators are in the world of 2.Now.

The reasoning behind my lack of articulation surrounding these folk is predicated on the sheer fact that you have to see it to believe it. In other words, I just need to make sure that when someone says, “I’m not really into that” or “I think it’s great, but I don’t pay attention to it” or even “It’s nice but that can get expensive” that I have a list of links to point them to.

I had an illustration created for my article on A List Apart in September. The genius that is Kevin Cornell brought to life the idea behind my piece that left me feeling like I hadn’t done HIM justice.

In trolling other people’s talented creative, I came across Steven Lefcourt. Steven is an artist who works wonders with animals and humor. One of his many designs was featured on shirt.woot.com (a fantastic place to fill your bureau with the strangest and brightest collection of t-shirts you’ll ever see… one at a time).

There are so, so many talented illustrators out there and their work needs to be seen more often in new design. Even a corporate entity can use a little love, so give the idea merit as you hire your next creative team.

We pronounce today: Illustrator Day.

It’s Friday (not that Saturday workloads care about Fridays, but that’s another post for another day). We’re tired from a long week of contract negotiations, client interviews and many, many rounds of client creative reviews. However, that won’t stop us from discussing the merits of user-centered design with a non-believer or two.

I’m continuously discussing with peers, family, the dog and the lamppost that I speak to so frequently about the idea that if a “user” (or, to be nice, customer) doesn’t need/want something then you’d be hard-pressed to convince me it belongs in the aesthetic or functional specifications of your Web entity.

How, then, do we find ourselves so often tinkering and playing and working through pieces of functionality or designing widgets and cogs which were not listed in the initial requirements? How do we end up in a place where we, as the vendor, are answering for the client, rather than the client answering why they’ve chosen a specific direction?

It’s befuddling to look at the listed goals of a project only to warp drive three or four months into the future and realize that along the way you picked up some odd passengers.

I think we need to be better at saying “no”.

“The client pays the bills”, you say.

Yep. They also asked you for your expertise in designing and building their online entity. Think of the user. Ask your client to think of their clients. Ask yourself if you’re part of the solution… or part of the problem. It’s okay if you are, but make sure you’re comfortable where you ended up.

And, if you’re strong enough and have had waaaay too much coffee, shout from the top of the rolling cubicle chair without arms, “Back, non-believers!”

Enjoy the weekend.