Wearable tech: talking about technology isn’t enough. Let’s talk about social acceptance

The formerly awesome project of Google, Google Glass, is turning in an tough knot. In several ways…

In the public sphere, many medias / peoples / authorities wonder if the privacy issue will be permissible.
In the tech sphere the project has become a “segway gate“.
And within Google’s employees we could see a sort of discomfort while they discreetly tried to keep the project quiet during the I/O Keynote.

Then, we have to go toward Apple’s CEO Tim Cook to talk about wearable technology.
Onstage at the D11 conference in California, Tim Cook got an interesting point. Beyond the Google Glass issue, the question is about the wearable technology in general (wich excites Apple).

“To convince people that they have to wear something, it has to be incredible.” Tim Cook

Tim Cook is right. But, in my mind, the value of technology isn’t enough. The gap between digital world and real world is thinner than ever. One of Cook’s examples is interesting: “If we asked a room of 20-year olds to stand up if they’re wearing a watch, I don’t think anyone would stand up.” Instead, people don’t have any problem to get their smart phones on the table during a lunch, a meeting, a formal presentation etc… Many digital tools has replaced traditional objects. Showing up our digital devices doesn’t appear like a problem.

But are we ready to wear something which gets consequences on our body/face?

The anchoring effect

It’s not really the way we look (even though we may seem stupid or ridiculous). It’s more about the signs we give.
The anchoring effect is a psychological concept. It teachs us that the first piece of information about someone (or something) can have on how we think about someone (or something). Perception and environment matter.
Brands such as Albercrombie and Fitch, Victoria Secret or L’Occitane are known to use this concept in store (Light, music, scent, employees…).
It’s quite the same for wearable technology in our social life. It gives noticeable signs and message about us.

Shifting from a phone to a smart phone, ok. Shifting from a watch to a smart watch, ok. Shifting from shoes to smart shoes, ok. They don’t really replace the way you look and so, the message you give..

But how about this kind of object: A connected bracelet? Connected glasses? Connected gloves? A connected hat? A connected underwear?
It’s kind of weird for some of them, isn’t? Even if the technology is amazing… I think, it’s not about how looks the object or how is its technology. It’s about purpose and context of the object (i.e perception and environment on people side).

Why would I not want to wear connected Glass but I don’t see any inconvenience to wear a Nike FuelBand?

Nike FuelBand shows us the right blend between purpose and context.
Purpose: a clear, unique and simple goal. Quantify yourself and overcome your performance.Be connected is not the aim, it’s the way to go further. Actually, wearing this bracelet is a way to add Nike’s values about performance to your personality (people perception).
Context: I do wear this bracelet when I do exercise! The purpose is consitent with the context, also in this environment (I do exercise) it’s logical to get a wearable tech to improve my stats.

How about Google Glass?

In the case of Google Glass, the context doesn’t seem really clear when we look at the presentation. It’s up to us.
How about the purpose? What kind of message do you pass on? I think Google is about all kind of digital outputs which make your life easier and adjustable. Then, the purpose is to be easily connected whenever I want. But in a social sphere,people tend to see you as someone who is physically connected all day long, so… you get back in the perception & environment issues.
It doesn’t seem natural or relevant to wear those glasses in a public moment such as restaurant, party, library...

“Here [at I/O], I do wear Glass. I don’t wear it elsewhere in my life…I wore it into a restaurant in a non-San-Francisco-type town and it was, like, everybody stares at you.” Laurie White Google Developer Group organizer

I think the lack of context is quite confusing in the message that the Google Glass give us.

I’m deeply convinced we want to be able to be connected anytime but we don’t want to feel or look connected anytime.

I’m sure Google is working on that. They’ll find a way to shape the context. And from a clearer context, the purpose will be more relevant. Then, Google Glass will suit social acceptance.And so on.
The success (or not) of Google Glass will teach us many things about people’s behaviors regarding the future of wearable technology.