If the data is not personalized and used for research to make your product or lives better in some way is this such a bad thing? Data privacy is an issue that needs to be managed, but to what end? In a world where we will post pictures online or tweet about personal details in our lives, why can’t our data also be used to do something instead good. That is assuming that fitbit is using it for good, and not just for marketing and promotions. Maybe more transparency and communication with customers is needed on what the data is used for. eg/ last year our data helped Dr. X do his ground breaking research on Y.
This is a really great post. I agree the biggest challenge here is data security, particularly when having to do with health. Not only that, but in the healthcare where data has been collected and used for decades, but for different purposes and for different institutions, the question is how do you leverage old data too? It will take a lot of time and money to sort through all this data to an integrated and working state. Or is it better just to start from scratch and collect it from the beginning, with individuals opting into the program? This will take time though, and could be serval years until there is enough volume for this to be of any use.
The health needs to better use its data. Yet with data security and infrastructure problems I am afraid the industry will probably not use data to its full potential for many years to come.
Netflix’s data approach is certainly one of its major benefits. Particularly as a way to sort through the large library of movies available, its true value add is limiting and tailoring customer choice. I am excited to see where Netflix will go next. Instead of modeling based on the movies/shows you watch and then recommending other similar ones based on their own knowledge and what others have watched, it seems there is a lot more potential. Other data variables could be added to improve sophistication such as time of day and day of week and if you are alone or with friends or on a date etc. This could increase the value add even more.
I also wonder if the Netflix approach to data could be used for other products, such as music?
Questioning the quality of wikipedia is vital to its survival in my option. Especially as content online continues to grow. A lot of facts on Wikipedia need to be cited or verified through other articles and publications etc. There was a study done a few years ago (that I cannot find now:() where there is a time lag where information can literally be made up and then verified falsely later. In the study an individual put some false information, a quotation, about an individual who recently died on wikipedia. In the time is was on the site without a reference and before it was taken down it was picked up by a journalist and published on a media website. The individual then retyped the false quote on wikipedia and used the journalists article as the reference – legitimizing the false quote. In the next 24 hours this quote was used by many major media companies.
This is a great post. The role of crowd sourcing in a company’s product development cycle is a great way to implement the technique, however its success hugely depends on the companies agility and ability to implement it. AB-InBev used existing recipes from small breweries to help streamline this process, but I wonder how this would work when a customer without training gives suggestions and feedback.
This is a really interesting point. I think you are spot on that getting a range of individuals on the site with different and varied conditions is key for the future of the site. However in the short term it might be best to be specialized, i.e./ be focused on patients suffering from a specific type pf condition. This will ensure the richness of the information is there, and overtime can expand to other conditions.
I think the type of content on this needs to be varied too, to be of use to the patients and encouraging constant use and updates. For example, beyond just symptoms, for example different recipes they tried to cook that was easy to eat if they were having problems swallowing etc. The site needs to be current and continue to be as useful to patients as it is to the people buying the data.
The problem with this type of platform that relies on a network effect is that it can be taken advantage of. Many people can use the network and not contribute, diminishing/stagnating the quality of the product. When individuals are compelled to give feedback and user review is when they had a terrible experience or an amazing experience. This may skew the results, and diminish the quality of the offering, a core component of success. Also, the platform is used to book a trip, and feedback is given after the trip is complete – there is not a natural and easy link to give feedback without taking active effort to go out of your way to benefit others. There must be ways to improve this model.
Multiplayer gaming seems to be vital for the survival of video games, and highly leverages network effects. It is interesting to see which elements/ barriers are the most powerful in the gaming industry. Is it paying for games? Or ensuring all games are compatible on different consoles? Or ensuring that there is always a stream of individuals willing and ready to play online against you whenever you login to play, making sure the game is always different? A sufficient volume to ensure that there are always players available seems vital, but it seems like after that it doesn’t matter as much and the effect of the network will have saturated.
This is an interesting model, as it leverages network effects online, to drive sales to a tangible game that can be enjoyed without ever going back online. However, having the tangible game and making it a go to game in a friendship group encourages more people within the network to buy it as if you don’t have it people might be less inclined to go to your house instead of someone else’s that does have the game.
I wonder, as this landscape continues to develop, how will those in power stay ahead. It seems to me that they are all trying to differentiate themselves, but the differentiation is becoming less about the digital functionality, and more about the PR buzz, or social network effect. For a dating app, the app is only as good as the people using it and their shared experiences. Word of mouth is vital in this industry. The swipe right functionality is innovative and a brand distinction, but if there is no one on tinder because it has fallen out of fashion, the left swipe will be getting all the action.
Highlighting retail is vital in this discussion, as I truly believe as an industry they still have the furthest to come in terms of digital transformation, and one of the biggest potentials from an innovations perspective – but they are just not there yet.
Burberry has done a fantastic job bringing digital to a high scale luxury brand. They have been moved away from a purely one way and remote relationship with customers, and instead increased customer engagement through encouraging a two way conversation. Using real people to showcase their trench coat, as an example, was a big transition from the usual model-only generated campaigns. However, I would argue if this was a true digital transformation, or just the clever use of a digital and social campaign, which is used less commonly in higher end luxury brands.
For me, the true innovation, and the thing to watch, is the inventory management process they are testing. The relationship between online and offline sales is one that is not yet understood by most retailers, and where I believe a digital and data centric transformation would be best deployed. If Burberry is already thinking about this and taking action to test this with their customer base – they are one to watch for the future!
An incredibly interesting and well-written post, capturing the readers attention.
I agree, in retail the dressing room as a concept is one that is currently flawed and has not evolved for many years – it is due some disruption! Rebecca Minkoff has created an engaging and new customer experience to streamline the current dressing room experience, but I wonder if this is enough. For me, the real innovation will be bridging the gap between online and offline. Using data to help customize orders and subsequent ‘testing’ of the products in a completely new and innovative way, beyond just enhanced lighting, touch screen mirrors and heightened shop assistants who use data to cross sell. For me, the real innovation will be in changing the whole idea of ‘testing’ clothes. From being able to test clothes without actually wearing them through virtual reality and the use of 3D scanners, or from testing the clothes through a much longer experience ie/ for a day, so you can see how easy it is to walk, and if there are any ‘bugs’ as you wear the clothes in the context of your normal day.