Archive for the ‘future’ Category

IIW14: VRM/Intention Economy – Where does it start?

May 3rd, 2012
Comments Off

There are many offshoots from this question:

  • with individuals (convenience, trust, ID protection) – Life context, poor people, people who work in office buildings, etc. Family CIOs.
  • by geography
  • by vertical sector (public and private, also membership) – Nordstrom, Trader Joe’s, customer service orgs, high-value items. Non-profit orgs, memberships, going “beyond donate” and engage, support.
  • legal/technical/facilitators
  • incentives (asprin or candy? Currencies – new things – personal RFPs, vs. savings – “data wombles”), Nudge (book) and regulations (blue button, green button related to energy industry)
  • Savings and “new things”

Question: major financial incentives (other than VC investments)? The term VRM represents new tools and procedures.  Needs to be a win for customers and vendors or it won’t work. New class of service providers, some call 4th party &/or personal cloud, that interacts with vendor  cloud (3rd parties) that can facilitate purchase, flow of information, customer service, etc.

Handful of advantages of personal channel:

  • trusted communications channel
  • bi-directional data sharing (controlled by user)
  • intent-casting
  • channel never breaks unless on purpose–continuous customer connection

Another example of parties, using car rental industry:

  1. customer
  2. Avis, Hertz, etc.
  3. Kayak, Expedia, Travelocity, Orbitz
  4. AutoSlash, RentalMagic (agents for customers)

It’s about the lifetime value of a customer — over years, they spend a great deal (both sides). Relationship vs transactional. – remarkable (24,000 albums, plus singles) record collection for fun, for culture. They’re treating visitors as personal data store-points, ethically responsible leadership. Pilot project, will evaluate in 6 months, business plan still to be created.

Still need trusted intermediaries, to create conditions in which users have trust that someone will act in your interest. It’s not about a person setting their permissions, it’s about new kinds of relationships.

Fair trade for personal data.

Relationships, not transactions.

Better results, lower costs.

Reducing the cost of being Nordstroms (et al.).

What’s Right | what’s pragmatic – different for orgs, different for individuals.

future, history, records, tools , , , , ,

IIW14: VRM update

May 1st, 2012
Comments Off

Doc Searls started out by listing many parts of this area on the whiteboard about VRM. As a principle, VRM makes us independent of organizations and better able to engage.

FOSS projects
Freedom Box
4th Parties
Personal Data stores/
Poroject VRM + research
Customer Commons
Trust frameworks
Intent-casting (pRFPs)
Music (industry)
Terms of Engagement
Personally-asserted prefs & policies
Information Sharing

We want to be able to work with CRM, not against.

Concerns: We’re losing more control, ability to manage our own data. We need better communications to be pro-active to be in control. Wondering how it will be commercially viable. VRM is a more efficient market to solve problems.

From solutions side, potentially inverting the info structure is very powerful–info from person to market (accuracy, intent, etc.). Actual known intent is a more powerful than guessing.

Everything that creeps us out is from bad guesswork. Enormous opportunity and a lot of money left on the table due to present market efficiencies. Newly trained quants being sucked up by miserable guesswork.

How does someone verify that another is who they are? Verified identity, trust and reputation, personal data stores to verify. There are many options.

It’s not just about business, not just about my wallet. It’s about relationships and conversations left on the table too. I want it easier to control my part of the world.

Example of a pharmaceutical company filled with doctors but company is run by marketing department. Or a large well-respected auto manufacturer that’s run by their IT department (who limits everything).

What are big catalyzing factors that will help this? We’re one invention away, the necessity that mothers invention. We’re all doing groundwork, necessary but not sufficient. Big orgs will cope, but it’s not their job.

Question: what will it take? Several things, but it gets down to the fact that it answers needs that we currently have in our data flow lives. Example: buying a car (a guy who just goes and gets one for a fee, buyer doesn’t have to deal with dealership. Kantara Info Sharing’s car buying user story illustrates what it might look like.)

It’s also about trust: giving a real phone number generated 50 calls re: health insurance. Same thing for moving. Intent is a big deal, and we’re being subbordinated by the needs of others. Most people have no knowledge or concern (yet) about creating personalized contracts and relationships. Also where do networks begin and end? Should be possible to use affiliated parties to fulfill interactions without ever revealing our identity. We want to do the whole spectrum of relationships, not just transactions.

If there’s a way to leverage personal identity, other aspects of this conversation forward, that would benefit everyone. Structural tools: opening up a channel (with user control) and intent-casting, other party’s reputation is affected, brings a bi-directional equality to the market. Where is control, ownership and leverage, and when does it start (young student playing sports)?

friends/family, future, records, tools , , , , , , , ,

On Identity and Justice

March 7th, 2012
Comments Off

Bryan Stevenson offers a wonderfully rich perspective on attitudes in the United States. He points to some very real consequences that are the result of a general lack of social conversation, understanding and appropriate action by our society. These consequences were fueled by intolerance and fear.

Coaching moment: What does this video have to do with digital identities? Everything. Bryan talks eloquently about the humanity in our lives. In the digital world, humanity is largely stripped away and reduced to points on a line, or organized according to a specific (not necessarily appropriate) framework, or a gathering of bits that someone can make assumptions about.

We all know that we’re more than the sum of our parts: we may have purchased a thing, or been involved in an event, or may know a particular person, but that thing, event or person does not define our whole life. We need tools to help us explore and express our individual needs, wishes, and priorities online as well as off. When we are only subject to the rules of others, we can not be ourselves.

future, history, records , , , , , ,

I Shared What (the blog)

February 25th, 2012
Comments Off

The blog at I Shared What?!? has ceased updating (for now) but the posts are still around. Since I authored many of the posts there, I’ve copied those posts to this blog for reference. Other posts were written or co-written by Joe Andrieu (the man behind I Shared What?!? and Show Me First–an app for displaying the information you’d share if you used Facebook’s tools to log into a third-party site), and can be found on Joe’s blog. A list of posts with local links follows. Read more…

future, history, records , , , , , , , , ,

The Facebook Empire

February 25th, 2012
Comments Off

This article was originally posted at the I Shared What?!? blog on 9 March 2011.

Noting Facebook’s continued and expanded efforts to “drive external content in, own that content per its user guidelines, and continue exploiting users’ data,” Geoff Livingston has taken a stand: The Facebook Empire Ends Here. In a move that could be characterized as being “user driven,” Livingston says to his readers and commenters: Read more…

future, history, records , , , ,