Ok..
To further clarify let's reiterate. What I think we are suggesting, is that we start by further defining and drafting the scope of the solution(s) that are contributed to this thread.
The solution suggested in this thread so far.
Opening up Loyalty, creating a customer controlled channel for groupons, a solution founded on shared control of transaction data in which personal information is provided to Vendor's on the customers terms. (a task already championed by data portability effort and the ISWG) Customers can then begin to aggregate product interest, knowledge, and reputations of the company so that those customers with a similar demand for product features or variants can gather together to further benefit the business.
We are clearly talking about a much more powerful business proposition than just coupons or groupons alone. We are talking about designing a channel in which interest can be aggregated in products, where suggestions for the improvement of products can be made in bulk.
But it seems that this is the end result?
First, for any effort of this nature to be successful it needs to be a community exercise, discussing and defining the scope of the specific problem that we are solving and the methods at the communities disposal in which it will be solved :
The Scope of the solution which started this thread was:
an alternative to groupon's
discounting model, what if there were a means for people who are
existing customers of a category and know a lot about it leveraged
the group effect to improve products and grow a market.
Producing a list of the categories/market of interest for the solution. In order to create a small experiment based upon such a large idea of a VRM platform. At which point we produce a features and benefits list of the solution in a VRM document and open it to the community to dissect, edit and contribute to.
Seems like the beginning of a legendary plan. Even if it is just the first such exercise in this direction. :-)
Best Regards / Mark Lizar
On 9 May 2011, at 20:27, Katherine Warman Kern wrote: So why don’t we do an experiment among interested participants in this group regarding a category of common interest to prove when a group shares info with each other, everyone wastes less time and money on purchase “failures” and spends more enjoying the category. If we succeed, we will be able to tell a story that projects the scale of the platform’s value, based on this example. As Mark suggests we nominate categories and vote to pick the one most people are interested in. We keep the initial information sharing very specific so no one has to spend a lot of time. So the categories should probably be even more specific than gardening – like low-impact gardening or home gardening. As Mark suggests, we list the features and benefits we care about. I’d add two more questions to make sure we create value for participants. For perspective, we each reveal our history with the category – e.g., this is my first garden ever, I grow herbs on a windowsill in my apartment and wonder why not tomatoes, I have had an organic vegetable garden for 20 years and there’s not a weed in it. And to be assured we deliver valued info to each other, we ask for at least one problem we are trying solve. We organize the participants on these three dimensions to make it easy to find others who can help or others one can help. We ask everyone to share what they learned, how they acted on it, and how helpful it was. Then we have a story to share with others to learn how valuable this would be in other categories to individuals and/or businesses. K-- This is sounds interesting and potentially very powerful. Perhaps if we collected drafted a document of what a platform and business would be we could post it online for some community funding and launch a community effort where all of these amazing ideas can be championed from a collective. We have so much expertise, talent, and good ideas here. We should practice what we are preaching and reap the benefits of our passion. Choosing a path that truly engages with the spirit of VRM. Clearly, VRM is in need of eating its own dog food. Perhaps collectively we can create a runway large enough to really make a platform happen? Personally, I am deeply engaged in the Identity Trust side of Personal data Control, Trust and Privacy. I would love the opportunity to connect the international policy and privacy communities with standards communities into a VRM group effort. Building something with the full weicht of the international policy and regulatory communities behind it. For me this is what a VRM Utopia would start to look like. For those who are interested I have started an I dentity & Trust think tank Charter at Identity Commons that explains the identity and trust requirements and topics that are needed. This think tanks is based around the hope that I can aggregate and contribute identity and trust components that I have research for so long to efforts very much like VRM. In this regard, I am open to all thoughts and any suggested avenues to progress further. On 9 May 2011, at 16:33, Satya Krishnaswamy wrote:
Katherine's vision is very similar to an idea I started working on last year - I had briefly discussed it with Doc and Iain when they were in Mountain View. After a while, I realized that it needed more runway than I, as a first time entrepreneur, could afford. Interestingly, this idea pivoted into a "personal RFP" like service for consumers to interact with local businesses such as restaurants, salons etc (some folks who have seen it have called it 'Priceline for local businesses' or 'reverse Groupon'). The solution (called Glasscart) has been fully developed (including an iPhone app) and is ready for consumers and businesses to be brought on board but for various personal reasons, I am not moving ahead with it. If anyone is interested in taking it forward, pls contact me and I would be happy to discuss more in detail. Satya On 5/9/11 7:30 AM, "Mark Lizar" <
" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">
> wrote: Katherine,
I think you are spot on and your comment below is something I have
been thinking about for a very long time.
On 9 May 2011, at 13:58, Katherine Warman Kern wrote:
To clarify, I'm thinking about an alternative to groupon's
discounting model, what if there were a means for people who are
existing customers of a category and know a lot about it leveraged
the group effect to improve products and grow a market.
Lately, I have been imagining what a VRM community platform might look
like and in this regard I have a great idea.
What if the VRM community banded together and put together a platform
that combined loyalty card program and paperless receipts upon an
infrastructure of personal data control as to create a user driven
channel for coupons and groupons. A reverse or Open Loyalty system
if you will.
Enabling people to independently control, benefit, gain access too and
make valuable our own personal information in the context of all the
vendor relationships we have.
Perhaps this is a bit of a utopian VRM vision, but I do think there is
great potential in the combination of these traditional vendor tools
to build the business book that contrasts with the Facebook.
A concept beyond me to execute but a powerful VRM vision just the
same. Perhaps it is time that the VRM community started to think
about a call to action and collaborative structure to really make
things happen? Such a structure would surely have my support
Best Regards / Mark
|