No matter how you look at it (or who you ask) mobile search, the model that has effectively retrofitted Internet search for mobile devices, is riddled with shortcomings This was the message that came across in the interviews I conducted for Mobile Advertising Research UK, the presentations I and other search authorities made during the recent Mobile Search Masterclass in London, and, more recently, in the mobile search assessment white paper (Pump Up The Volume: An Assessment of Voice-Enabled Web Search on the iPhone) I co-authored with Peggy Albright. (DOWNLOAD)

Is mobile search broken? More importantly, how can we fix it? These are the questions I put to a variety of executives representing companies from across the mobile search and advertising business ecosystem. Read between the lines, and their answers – along with my own conclusions – point to areas of improvement and opportunity in mobile search.

MOBILE ADVERTISING RESEARCH UK

Primary research and C-Level interviews with agencies, brands, operators and third parties reveal mobile search is missing the mark. Their gripe: the poor quality of mobile search (specifically universal search powered by keyword queries and PageRank algorithms) is to blame for a lack of interest and investment in paid search advertising.

As a leading executive at a global brand put it: “Just between the two of us, our spend for search is by far not in the [single] digits yet – and it won’t be….We do a lot in mobile, but the basics of search are not yet at the level of sophistication consumers would expect from us.”

At the other end of the spectrum, agencies are far from upbeat about the short-term outlook for mobile search. As one managing director at a mobile marketing agency put it: “Just the way the content is indexed prevents advertisers from creating a cohesive plan to integrate search in their [mobile] advertising strategies. There is just not the volume to get in and really do some targeted search [advertising], and that’s what brands want: to make advertising personal and relevant to every search the consumer makes.”

Against this backdrop, many sources questioned whether the U.K. adspend figures for 2008 released by the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) – the trade body for digital marketing – and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) didn’t overplay the importance of paid search advertising.

The study – a U.K. first – shows that mobile adspend bucked all market trends, increasing by 99.2 percent year on year to reach GBP28.6 million. Mobile display advertising – which includes banners, text links, tenancies pre/post roll and in-game – accounted for GBP14.2 million in 2008, 49.8 percent of all mobile advertising spend, while paid-for search advertising was estimated to account for GBP14.4 million, 50.2 percent of all mobile advertising spend.

As Harry Dewhirst, Co-Founder & Operations Director of RingRing Media Ltd., an independent media agency in the U.K., pointed out during the conference Mobile Advertising Research UK and again in a private briefing with MSG: the amount spent on paid search (from his vantage point) is considerably less than display. The reason: mobile search is “not up to scratch” and fails to deliver people “information in a digestible format as quickly and as conveniently as they need it.” (During the conference Harry raised eyebrows when he identified mobile search as a chief obstacle to mobile advertising – period.)

Harry further tells me the poor mobile search experience means fewer people use search, and that has resulted in a “lack of depth” in search terms. While the terms “plumber” and “London” might draw crowds of online searchers, they can’t pack them in on mobile – yet. “And until they do, search queries will continue to be focused on branded terms like ‘Facebook’ and ‘MySpace,’ and used as navigation.” Despite these issues, Harry reports conversion rates for search are higher than display. “This indicates a positive future for mobile search advertising, but the repeat usage and quality of results isn’t good enough yet.” (Ironically, this sentiment is echoed and documented in the summary analysis of the Masterclass below.)

But there are some bright spots. Harry, who knows mobile search inside out from his previous experience at Medio Systems, a mobile search provider, gives high marks to Taptu, a socially-assisted service that tackles issues such as poor quality results and even worse rendering by summarizing the content/search results in a page that allows people to pre-screen the results before clicking. He is also upbeat about other vertical solutions such as directory assistance search services that are designed from the ground up to give searchers what they need on the move.

MOBILE SEARCH MASTERCLASS

A summer highlight for me has been participating for the second successive year in the mobile search masterclass, a course delivered as part of The City University London’s Masterclass series. Once again I joined an impressive roster of industry authorities from companies, and once again Colin Bates, CTO of Mobile Commerce Ltd., presented some amazing insights into mobile search usage, trends and behavior.

It’s worth sitting up to take notice because Mobile Commerce, like an honest broker sitting between all the major U.K. mobile operators and all the mobile search engines, effectively powers customers’ search boxes. In a nutshell, Mobile Commerce takes the search terms people type into operator portal search boxes and federates them out to a variety of information retrieval sources to deliver a results set made up of  regular Internet search results (Google, Yahoo Microsoft), specialist mobile search results (local search and a variety of verticals), and paid search advertising linked to keywords. Mobile Commerce also offers an increasing number of content owners/publishers a similar service through its Monetised Mobile Search solution, a plug-in service that allows client companies to put a search box on their mobile site and generate revenues from paid search advertising.

As a result, Mobile Commerce has an invaluable insider’s view into what people search for and the results they receive. The bottom line: Nearly 12 months on from Colin’s last presentation and mobile search is still (!) broken.

VOLUME

The surprise: mobile search volume has doubled and in some cases tripled. However, part of the reason for this meteoric rise could be Mobile Commerce’s own success in signing up customers (such as major U.K. newspapers and Virgin Media). Colin put it down to growth in mobile publishing and the number of publishers that placed a search box on their pages. [Hmm - will more publishers take charge of content (and advertising) by controlling the search box?] And let’s not forget the impact of the iPhone and other cool handsets that make the Internet fun to surf on our phones.

What are people searching for? The stellar growth Colin sees – partly because Mobile Commerce powers mobile search for The Sun – is in a category he calls “Glamor,” a term that comprises all the hot half-nude models (Page 3 girls) featured on the newspaper’s third page.

More people are using mobile search. Are they getting what the want?

In a word, no.

Colin’s road test of mobile search services offered by Google and Yahoo (similar to last year) makes it clear mobile search has a way to go. While the search engines excel in Internet search on a mobile phone, their mobile-specific results are – well – “rubbish.” A search for directory assistance delivers a link to the media relations department for World Aids Day, and a simple search for nearby post offices delivers a list of locations no longer in operation. As Colin put it: “The tools (such as Google Maps) are great, the data is out of date.”

Why are mobile search results served up by Internet search engines so poor?

1)    Mobile robots can’t spider the “mobile Web.” There is no sure-fire way to identify a site by URL (for a while .mobi or m.sitename. was a help). The advance of the iPhone and multi-mode sites that adapt content and change markup to match the incoming device type also muddy the waters.

2)    Indexing mobile pages – where information is dynamic, spread across multiple pages and impacted by user input and user-generated content – is a nightmare to index.

3)    The existence of data silos (such as downloadable content) and the lack of cross-linking data make it difficult to rank results and power PageRank algorithms.

4)    People have little say in their search results. On the Internet what we click on (or don’t) is important feedback (an indication of what we find relevant) that fine-tunes rankings and results. We do this on mobile too, but relevant results are often too many clicks away to be seen, used or appreciated.

PERSPECTIVES

Despite the many shortcoming of mobile search, people are using it more than ever before.

What are the drivers?

For one, supply. More players offer mobile search this year than last.

All the U.K. operators offer mobile search on their portals and an increasing number of publishers have also implemented Mobile Commerce solutions.

(In fact, this flurry of activity prompted Mobile Commerce to launch its Monetised Search service in the U.S., where U.K.-based search engine Taptu has signed up as the first client. Bob Last, SVP of Business Development at Taptu, said in a statement: “Working closely with Mobile Commerce since last year, Mobile Commerce significantly improves the availability of relevant ads for our users. The U.S. is our busiest market for mobile searches at Taptu and we are very pleased to be extending our involvement with Mobile Commerce to monetise more of this U.S. search traffic.”)

Demand is also a factor.

People are using mobile search – but it’s not the way they use it on the PC. It’s more about snacking, snippets and quick answers than research and information retrieval. This is what Mobile Commerce concludes (and proves) after a thorough analysis of search terms, search results and what people clicked. Because it powers the complete process it can make the connection between what people query and what they consider a valuable (accurate) result.

The company has developed a system of some 20 categories, ranging from Single User Search (which comprises all the Long Tail terms that literally only came up once in 12 months) to Social Networking (which accounted for a 16 percent of searches over the last year).

Connect the dots, as Colin did, and specific categories (such as Social Networking) are about navigation. In other words, people are typing them in order to find the mobile site. This is further supported by the dramatic dip in searches for Facebook plummet right around the time the social network launched a proper mobile property.

REVENUE

Mobile search may broken but paid search advertising – at least for a few categories – is paying dividends. Specifically, the categories Adult, Games and Personalization (downloadable mobile content) received the largest ratio of clicks against paid search adverts in the results set.

Read between the lines, and we have a confirmation of the pivotal role of paid search advertising in content discovery (a trend I have tracked and documented in articles such as this one for New Media Age – subscription  required).

Why should mobile content companies harness paid search ads to promote their content? Because it works. As Colin put it: “The mobile search model is broken, and publishers have very little control over how their sites appear in the results set – if at all.” In practice, using advertising – specifically text and banner ads – enables content discovery and drives results. It’s also cheap discovery since (at least in the U.K.) CTRs for display ads have tumbled from GBP 15 per CPM to “around GBP 5.”

The avalanche of mobile content – and now mobile apps – turns up the pressure on publishers and developers to rise above the noise and make their stuff findable and buyable. Until companies fix the bugs in mobile search, display and banner ads remain the only sure-fire way to get the message out.

BETTER MOBILE SEARCH

But publishers and brands don’t have to limit their focus to the usual suspects (Google, Yahoo, Microsoft). The real excitement is in search tools and technologies that make the most of mobile and even harness other people to improve the overall experience.

An example Colin offered is Shazam, which he described as “mobile content search without the box.” The phenomenally popular mobile music discovery provider grew from 20 million users (in September 2008) to 35 million worldwide (in February 2009), with over a million tracks now being tagged every day across the world. (Release) It has deployed by 75 carriers across 60 countries, and is a popular application in the Apple App Store, the Android Market and the BlackBerry App World.

In Colin’s view, “mobile-specific search tools” that enable made-for-mobile search (as opposed to universal Internet search) are bound to improve mobile search and make money for the companies that develop them.

In my own Masterclass presentation (and ongoing mobile search research) I have taken it a step further, identifying 10+ categories of mobile search and assembling a list of super-cool companies harnessing context, location and the wisdom of crowds to improve the precision of search results and the quality of our mobile search experiences.

A welcome addition to the list is Alabot, a mobile search provider based out of Pune, India, with offices in Kuala Lumpur and London. I first met Akshat Shrivastava, Alabot founder, at a mobile search conference, where I had the pleasure of presenting him with the Bronze in the category Best Technology Innovation – Software. Earlier this week Akshat sent me a DM via Twitter (@peggyanne) with the great news: Alabot has secured funding from a global innovation fund and sealed a deal with a Malaysian mobile operator to develop a multi-lingual (English, Bahasa, Chinese, Tamil) mobile content vertical search service.

The text search service will start off serving up ringtones and wallpapers from the operator’s online content stock, or “low hanging fruit” Akshat tells me is just the beginning. As he put it: “Content services that require a syntax or Internet access aren’t getting traction [in that region] because they are not intuitive or interactive.” Moving forward, Akshat tells me plans are to extend the service to other content verticals and expand reach via deals with several OEMs. Rock On!

SEARCH AS CONVERSATION

Strong demand for more interactive (translated: natural language search services) isn’t limited to emerging markets.

In North America, ChaCha, a people-powered search service that uses specially trained individuals ChaCha calls “guides,” has answered more than 150 million questions via mobile phones and the Internet, making it one of the leaders in SMS search.

Intrigued by the power and potential of voice search on the iconic iPhone, Peggy Albright and I recently completed Pump Up The Volume: An Assessment of Voice-Enabled Web Search on the iPhone, a performance analysis of voice-enabled mobile search services offered by Google, ChaCha and Vlingo (a spoken interface to the Yahoo search engine). Download the free white paper here.

A chief finding: ChaCha “proved superior” to the two other voice-enabled search options for the iPhone. Specifically, ChaCha proved to offer exceptional results, with its human guides interpreting the search query accurately in the majority of cases.

To be clear, the study was not a road test of speech recognition technologies. To evaluate the overall performance of voice-enabled mobile services offered by ChaCha, Google and Vlingo for iPhone with Yahoo!, the researchers asked a series of 18 queries representative of six typical mobile search categories (Navigational, Directions, Information Local, Information General, Social, and Long-Tail). For each query the researchers evaluated nine performance characteristics including response time, results accuracy, voice recognition accuracy, number of results received, keytaps required, relevancy of the result, location awareness, use of advertising, and presence of other value-added features.

According to the study, ChaCha interpreted natural language search queries, that is, queries asked as questions, accurately in 94.4 percent of the tests and delivered an accurate search result in 88.9 percent of cases. The Google voice recognition technology interpreted queries accurately in 16.7 percent of tests and delivered accurate search results in 22.2 percent of tests. The Vlingo for iPhone voice recognition technology correctly interpreted queries in 72.2 percent of cases and delivered accurate results (via Yahoo!) in 27.8 percent of tests.

A clear finding that emerged is the importance of people-power. As Peggy Albright pointed out: “The use of human agents [by ChaCha] to help interpret spoken queries and conduct searches makes a positive difference in the quality of results delivered when compared to traditional search engines that use algorithmic software to find requested documents or information on the basis of keyword matches.”

In the report I also identified a key advantage ChaCha has over its competitors: Its keen focus on social search, an approach that effectively infuses human preferences and human judgments into computer algorithms to pinpoint truly relevant information and potentially better answers.

Beyond tipping the scales back in favor of results that are relevant rather than search- engine optimized, social search also lays the groundwork for a conversation with people on their terms, paving the way for the delivery of mobile advertising that is relevant and more likely to be appreciated.

MY TAKE:

Universal mobile search has significant shortcomings, weaknesses that brands and agencies tell me has convinced them to put paid search on the back burner. (There are exceptions: Colin from Mobile Commerce reminds us that for some segments – specifically mobile content – paid search is a potent means to encourage content discovery.) We have a choice: we can wait for providers to improve universal mobile search, or we can harness tools and technologies to deliver a better experience NOW. An obvious and excellent alternative is social search, often called “people-powered search” because it harnesses people to deliver results tailored to searchers on the basis of who they are and what they like. The interviews and insights collected in this analysis outline where mobile search misses the mark and reveal a huge opportunity for companies (such as ChaCha) that give a personal touch to search results (a perfect fit with the mobile phone, which we’ve already established is an intensely personal device).

It’s still in the early days, but the place and the power of people in mobile search is clear. As the worlds of mobile search and mobile social networking collide, they produce opportunities for companies to tap the community – both implicitly and explicitly – for much better quality results and the delivery of much more relevant advertising.

Disclaimer: The complete report is available for free download from MSearchGroove. This white paper is published by MSearchGroove. It contains the findings of independent research and analysis carried out by Peggy Albright, Albright Communications, and Peggy Anne Salz, MSearchGroove in January 2009. The research methodology was developed by Peggy Albright. The research was sponsored by ChaCha. The opinions expressed in this white paper are those of Peggy Albright and Peggy Anne Salz, and do not reflect the opinions of the organizations referenced in this paper.

Related reading:

Context, Social Media, And Cool Interfaces Rock Mobile Search; MSG Teams Up With mTrends To Map Out The Brave New Landscape

Mobile Search Masterclass: How Google & Yahoo Really Measure Up; Is Paid Search The Path To Discovery?

Mobile Social Search Makes Its Mark; Will Group Searching, Sharing & Collaboration Take Social Networking To The Next Level?

EXCLUSIVE & EXPLOSIVE: New People-Powered Mobile Search & Advertising Solution Puts Mobile Operators Back In The Driver’s Seat; Will Search Giants Have To Watch Their Backs?

Will Tapping The Wisdom Of Crowds Outsmart Mobile Search Giants?

But the real news is Pump Up The Volume: An Assessment of Voice-Enabled Web Search on the iPhone, MSearchGroove’s new-release white paper assessing the performance of voice search on an iPhone offered by ChaCha, Google and Vlingo (using Yahoo!), which you can download here. The report is especially timely, coming on the heels of today’s announcement by Google that it has fine-tuned the mobile app versions of its Google Voice service for Blackberry and Android. (More on the user experience via this detailed post at GigaOm.)

The top-level findings: ChaCha, a fast-growing SMS mobile search service available in the U.S. in the industry, “proved superior” to two other voice-enabled search options for the iPhone: the Google Mobile App with Voice and Vlingo for iPhone, a voice enabled application that allows users to direct their spoken queries to Google or Yahoo! (For the purposes of this study Vlingo provided a spoken interface to the Yahoo! search engine.)

ChaCha proved to offer exceptional results, with its human guides interpreting the search query accurately in the majority of cases. According to the study, ChaCha interpreted natural language search queries, that is, queries asked as questions, accurately in 94.4 percent of the tests and delivered an accurate search result in 88.9 percent of cases. The Google voice recognition technology interpreted queries accurately in 16.7 percent of tests and delivered accurate search results in 22.2 percent of tests. The Vlingo for iPhone voice recognition technology correctly interpreted queries in 72.2 percent of cases and delivered accurate results (via Yahoo!) in 27.8 percent of tests.

My personal thanks to esteemed colleague and associate Peggy Albright, the study’s lead analyst and principal author, and Bill Meisel, editor of Speech Strategy News and a leading authority on market and product opportunities created by the maturing of speech technology. Bill is also the president of president of TMA Associates and I look forward to showcasing his work and ideas on MSG soon.

Tomorrow: More report findings and surprising observations on the dismal state of mobile search.

Disclaimer: The complete report is available for free download here. This white paper is published by MSearchGroove. It contains the findings of independent research and analysis carried out by Peggy Albright, Albright Communications, and Peggy Anne Salz, MSearchGroove in January 2009. The research methodology was developed by Peggy Albright. The research was sponsored by ChaCha. The opinions expressed in this white paper are those of Peggy Albright and Peggy Anne Salz, and do not reflect the opinions of the organizations referenced in this paper.

While Yahoo comes to the party more or less six months later than rivals such as Google, there is some indication that the wait was worth it if we consider that this service extends beyond allowing people to conduct keyword searches (for flight numbers, locations, Web site names, local restaurants – the works). People using the app can also use voice to customize the ‘My Interests’ tab. The procedure (according to the press release): “Simply click on ‘add anything’, speak the topic you’re interested in, then select the relevant content and add it to your page.” The Yahoo! oneSearch with voice application is currently available on more than 80 different devices and across platforms including Blackberry, Nokia, Windows Mobile, and now the iPhone – with support in eight languages.

Various bloggers have tried out the voice app, which harnesses speech recognition technology from Vlingo, and reported mixed results. But it’s difficult to judge the user experience based on random road tests. (This is why MSG has pooled its resources to produce mobile search research that, like my own mobile advertising white papers, offers readers a balanced assessment based on first-hand experience and solid methodology.)

The Yahoo app, however, comes in too late to be included in Pump Up The Volume, MSG’s own assessment of Web search on the iPhone. But that won’t keep us from conducting our own road test of the Yahoo app soon. Regular readers and Twitter followers (@peggyanne) may recall I announced the project a while back (a teaser before we had further refined our methodology to account for fundamental differences between natural language and keyword search, an important improvement that makes the results all the more compelling).

The white paper, researched and written in collaboration with Peggy Albright, MSG Associate and founder of Albright Communications, will be released next week. By way of background, our work assesses the overall performance of the voice-enabled search services offered by ChaCha, Google, and Vlingo in a typical range of use cases and scenarios. (Vlingo for iPhone converts queries into text and submits them to one of two search engines, Google and Yahoo. We chose Yahoo.)

A special highlight: A foreword by Bill Meisel, Editor of the specialist publication and voice technology knowledge destination Speech Strategy News. I’m honored to have him on board for the voice search white paper, and look forward to showcasing his analysis/columns on MSG soon.

I won’t divulge all the white paper results and stats here. However, I can say that ChaCha’s  results proved superior to both the Google Mobile App’s voice feature and Vlingo for iPhone.

ChaCha uses human agents to transcribe and interpret/answer search queries (spoken as questions). However, we found the performance of voice recognition alone does not determine nor predict the accuracy of a search result. Indeed, one search provider exhibited high voice recognition accuracy but still had difficulty delivering the intended search results regardless of query format.

Some background on the methodology of this defining work, which will be available for free download.  We created 18 queries representative of mobile search usage and trends. The queries covered search categories considered common in the mobile environment, such as navigation (to a specific Web site), directions, local information, general information on timely topics, and specialized or unusual long-tail topics (sometimes referred to as “dinner table” questions). We also included specific queries that represent the most popular mobile search terms in 2008, based on mobile search data publicly reported by AOL and Yahoo. Recognizing that the search engines used in the Google Mobile App and Vlingo for iPhone services are built from the ground up to handle keyword search – matching documents/information on the basis that they contain one or more terms (keywords) – we conducted a second set of tests using keyword queries.

Peggy and I are proud of the research and look forward to collaborating together on future mobile search assessment reports and work contracted by our various clients. I will keep you posted of our progress on MSG.

A key takeaway I want to leave you with: This white paper provides evidence that mobile social search – which harnesses human judgment, thus restoring balance in a model that tends to promote search engine optimized websites over destinations the user may find genuinely relevant and useful – has significant advantages over algorithmic computer-centric search approaches. As I have pointed out in this earlier analysis, in the case of the mobile phone, an intensely personal device we have with us at all times, a more people-centered approach represents a perfect fit with our search behavior and our expectations for a more personalized service. Indeed, the rise of mobile social networks further underlines our increasing requirement for search services that effectively inject human preferences into the equation. This, itsmy.com CEO Vince Staybl, recently told me was the primary motivation for the tie-up between his mobile social networking service with socially-assisted search engine Taptu, and I fully expect many more such partnerships to follow.

Disclaimer: ChaCha is an MSG supporter and white paper sponsor. The opinions expressed in the white paper are those of Peggy Albright and Peggy Anne Salz, and do not reflect the opinions of organizations referenced in the paper.

Since teaming up with Rudy De Waele, blogger at mTrends and  dotopen founder, to develop mobile search case studies in preparation for a workshop on Mobile Search Future Prospects organized by JRC IPTS (Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European Commission), and seeing the positive response to our work to date, I’m convinced mobile search is back again at the top of the industry agenda. And with good reason: Search is the de facto interface to all things digital in the online space, and there is every indication that it will be the same in mobile.

From mobile advertising, where our queries trigger the delivery of related advertising (in the best case scenario, we’re not there yet), to social media, where the content we appreciate and discuss across destinations ranging from MySpace to Twitter allows us to restore balance in an otherwise purely algorithmic approach that tends to promote search engine optimized websites over what we find genuinely relevant and useful, mobile search is where the action is.

But as Rudy and I have both pointed out in our recent presentations, mobile search is not about the usual suspects (Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft). Rudy spoke at Next09, and you can find his slides  further on in this post; I spoke at the European Mobile Media Conference, and my deck can likewise be found after the jump.

Indeed, context and personalization change all the rules (!)

A highlight of our recent presentations: A comprehensive overview of the market and (thanks to Rudy) a SWOT analysis of the players that stand out in their category such as Google (universal search with a poor mobile offer and an even weaker grasp of social search), and Twitter (a case of mobile search + social media = real-time results that really reflect what we discuss/share).

In my own mobile search research – an on-going project that began back in 2004/2005 when I wrote the first report on mobile search and content discovery, a 220+ page report published by Informa Telecoms & Media – I have recently identified some 60+ companies and 10+ categories of mobile search I would like to share with you (below) for your feedback.

INTERACE

• Text: ChaCha, 4INFO,MINFO, textperts (acquired by 118118), Answers.com, AnyQuestionAnswered, Ask, AskMeNow
• Voice: Google, Yahoo, Vlingo, Microsoft, ChaCha (Watch this space for an expert assessment of the voice-enabled services offered by Google, Vlingo, and ChaCha. ( I am proud to have had the opportunity to collaborate with Peggy Albright, MSG Associate and founder of Albright Communications, and even prouder of the results.)
• Visual: IQ Engines, Kooaba, Mobile Acuity, Searchme, SnapNow, SnapTell, Tin Eye Mobile, Nokia
• Navigational: Boopsie, kannuu, Nuance (through Tegic acquisition)

ACTIONABLE

• Universal: Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL (based on Google), Medio Systems, JumpTap (although a much stronger focus on mobile advertising)
• Federated: MCN, Motricity (managed mobile search platform providers)
• Operator-centric search: Amdocs, Qualcomm, IBM and this company coming out of stealth mode
• Alternative search: Defined as every service except for Google, and includes a long tail of 1500+ search engines (tracked by AltSearchEngines) with ambitions to go mobile – some sooner than later
• Vertical/content-specific search: abphone, vtap, Truveo
• Local search: Hundreds of players that offer local search via SMS services, on their own WAP sites, and/or as part of a nearby shopping scheme. (Fortunately, the local mobile search landscape is the topic of an upcoming column on MSG from Martin Wilson, founder of Indigo 102, an independent consultancy with a focus on mobile local search and services, so watch this space!)

SOCIAL

• abphone, ChaCha, Hiogi, Taptu
• Twitter in a class by itself!

It’s work in progress, but it’s all the more exciting if we remember that – in mobile search – the players that matter and the business models that deliver are wide open to discussion.

Indeed, the central role of mobile search in a wide variety of mobile services around sharing, advertising, location, and context-aware activities turns up the pressure on an even broader range of businesses (operators, brands, agencies, enablers – everyone!) to understand what mobile search delivers (and doesn’t) and the companies/models that do it best.

To help mobile professionals and practitioners navigate this tough terrain, Rudy and I have joined together on a project to produce the definitive mobile search market overview, a work that will draw from primary research, case studies, and exclusive forecasts to document this exciting space and present our recommendations for strategies to harness growth opportunities on the horizon.

I still have the opportunity to take your views and perspectives into account, and I would welcome your input. The project, widely distributed via our sites and via our network of sites, supporters, and influencers, will also offer a commercial opportunity to companies interested in conveying their value proposition to a growing community of senior executives and decision-makers in the mobile space.

If you are a mobile search company with an interest in being considered for an interview, please contact me directly or send an email to my assistant Andrea Henninge (andrea@msearchgroove.com).

Gearing up for a whirlwind week in Barcelona for Mobile World Congress. Coverage on MSG will be thin (not enough time for deep-dive posts) but I assure you my follow-up analysis and in-depth video interviews will be worth the wait. Andrea Henninge – bless her! – has managed to squeeze in dozens of top-level interviews/briefings over the next five days at an average rate of one per hour – and even left me some time in the evenings for a few parties and get-togethers.

Top of the list is the launch party (Tuesday) for the Netsize Guide 2009, the 360-page mobile industry almanac I wrote on behalf of Netsize. Stan Chesnais, Netsize CEO, tells me it is the best one ever, and has already commissioned me to write next year’s (although we both struggle to think how we can top this one!).

If you are at Mobile World Congress (MWC), then don’t forget to pick up a paper copy. After the show, you can also download it for free on MSG. I look forward to your comments and feedback. I will continue to pursue this exciting theme (the morphing of the physical and virtual worlds with the mobile device at the center of this new convergence) on MSG, so watch for podcasts and video interviews that take this discussion to the next level.

And speaking of path-breaking, this week mobile search providers Taptu and Abphone debut their white papers on MSG.

(You can download the Taptu white paper by clicking the banner further down on the right-hand side, and you can find abphone’s white paper here.)

I am honored that both companies asked me for input. In the case of Taptu, it’s a comment. Abphone, on the other hand, asked me for a complete foreword.

In fact, Pierre Scokaert, Abphone CEO, sent me a personal email to thank me for my work:

I did read your foreword, and found it very good. It adds a lot of weight to our paper, and having someone as highly regarded as you speak of Abphone is always an honor.

However, I am equally grateful for the opportunity to lend my voice to his – and would like to take the opportunity here to thank Pierre and Yann Mondon, who heads up Abphone’s public relations.

Abphone

I don’t want to give away too much - and before my podcast with Pierre on precisely this topic – so here’s a short, high-level summary of the white paper, titled Snacking the Web.

In a nutshell, a shift in mobile search behavior (search has become a leisure activity, pursued in idle time and short sessions, and made popular by cutting-edge devices such as the iPhone) impacts how services can/should rank search results and determine relevancy. Abphone’s approach emphasizes click stream analysis, effectively drawing from the wisdom of crowds to determine which results users find relevant to the search queries, and ultimately improve rankings for future users.

In my view, this path-breaking approach borrows heavily from the insights outlined in Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software by Steven Johnson. Ants, Johnson writes, are not intelligent as single insects. But they develop a kind of collective intelligence – which he calls “emergent intelligence” – when they are interconnected in complex colonies.

In the case of mobile search, a single searcher, like an ant, can happen upon an excellent result. But there is no way for the searcher to leave a trail to benefit searchers who follow. As a result, each searcher must endure the same process (click distance) to find content they want. Abphone learns from its users, creating a feedback loop that potentially improves rankings for future users to deliver an overall positive user experience and help people find content they want in fewer clicks.

Allow me to close with my favorite quote from the abphone white paper: Pierre’s rant on Web transcoding

Take a gourmet meal, prepared by capable chefs, using only the finest ingredients. Then put everything in a blender and mix it into a pulp, as long as you need to, until you can drink it through a straw… This is what website transcoding is like.

I like it so much I have just added it to my slide deck for my presentation for the Qualcomm Plaza Internet Forum. The event now counts some 70 top-level attendees, and I am honored that Qualcomm feels the jump in attendance is due to my participation in it. Everywhere there are signs that MSG has indeed reached the tipping point…

Taptu

I am also proud that Taptu has decided to debut its white paper, titled Touch Search: A New Vision For Mobile Search, on MSG. True to the name, the white paper examines the shift in mobile search since the advent of the iPhone.

However, Taptu does more than acknowledge this trend; it has responded with a roadmap to encourage the innovation that content providers and brands agencies will require to deliver an optimized search and advertising experience for touch devices. I’ll have more on this next week, after I have had the pleasure of meeting today (Monday) with Andreas Bernstrom, Taptu COO, and had a closer look at the Taptu’s prototype search services for the Touch Web.

A highlight of the white paper is this trio of industry predictions. (Methodology is explained in the white paper.)

1)      Total global mobile search volume will grow rapidly from 63 million searches per day at the end of 2008 to 620 million in 2012 – almost 10 fold growth in just four years.

2)      The volume of searches from touch phones will grow even faster, to overtake the volume of searches from normal phones by the end of this year.

3)      By 2012, over 75 percent of all mobile searches will come from touch phones alone, representing less than 10 percent of the installed base of phones and just 20 percent of annual shipments.

A root question to consider: Will we have one Web (the Internet)? Or two (the Internet, and made-for-mobile sites)? Or three! (the Internet, the mobile websites, and the Touch Web)…

No one has the answers, but Taptu is preparing now for the challenges ahead.

My thanks again to Steve Ives, Taptu CEO, and Bob Last, Taptu Head of Business Development, for providing me the opportunity to contribute to the white paper.

Voice search

Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to give you a sneak peak of the next white paper in the pipeline: a joint project with Peggy Albright,  founder of Albright : Research : Media, assessing the performance of voice search services on the iPhone.

The white paper – which roadtests ChaCha, Google, and Vlingo — will launch in the week following MWC and be available for download on MSG. I have already twittered about some of the findings (they were too amazing to keep under wraps)…

Let’s just say that Google underwhelmed us – on all counts.

Disclaimer: ChaCha sponsored the white paper. The opinions in the white paper reflect those of Peggy Albright and Peggy Anne Salz, and do not reflect the opinions of the organizations referenced in the research.

Against this backdrop, I have decided to explore the advance of solutions from companies such as Wapple – designed from the ground up to make publishing a no-brainer – and the impact on the mobile Web. (Scott Beaumont, Co-Founder of Mippin, will also make his debut with a guest column next week that walks us through the procedure to mobilize MSG and the bigger reasons why publishers should get involved.)

My take: A lot of content to explore at our finger tips and an increased need for mobile search services that find – and monetize – it. Taptu tops the list – but I see other companies on the horizon that likewise understand the pivotal importance of putting people back in the equation.

I detail this argument in my column for EContent magazine here. One company I’m watching in ChaCha, a mobile search and answers service that launched a year ago this month. (By way of background, ChaCha has developed a “search-with-a-guide” process that lets stumped searchers connect with a live person – in real-time and via an instant message chat for answers in the form of relevant links and results.)

In fact, my associate Peggy Albright and I have spent the last weeks testing ChaCha voice search against the likes of Google and Vlingo and will have the results for you later this month. Keep posted for analysis that may surprise you and a post from Peggy chock-full of our observations and frustrations.

Disclaimer: Taptu has collaborated with MSG on a white paper.