Text archives Help


Re: [projectvrm] Trunomi and doing more with VRM than monetizing data


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Doc Searls < >
  • To: Kevin Cox < >
  • Cc: "Phillip J. Windley Ph.D." < >, Iain Henderson < >, ProjectVRM list < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Trunomi and doing more with VRM than monetizing data
  • Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 10:50:23 -0400
Is it possible for customers of Welcomer-equipped businesses to relate to each of those businesses the same way? Rephrased, can a customer scale across multiple Welcomer-equipped businesses?

Doc


Doc,

Welcomer does not sell to individuals. - but sells to businesses.   Businesses in turn sell privacy, access, more convenience, less time for customers.  The reality is that giving people access helps both business and customers.  

Kevin

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Phillip J. Windley Ph.D. < " target="_blank" class=""> > wrote:

We discussed Utopia of Rules at IIW. 

I see VRM being my defender against encroaching bureaucracy (both government and corporate). 

In that sense, I see tools like 1Password as porto-vrm tools because they make dealing with the increasing bureaucratization of my life easier. I’m happy to pay for them. 

The more these tools will do for me, the more I’m willing to pay. 




Hi Doc, I think part of the problem that we have in this respect is that we have no VRM/ individual-side equivalent to the term 'monetise'.

As I see it, the metric most relevant to VRM propositions is 'save me time'. Make my data more accessible when I need it, stop me having to hunt around irrelevant products/ vendors to find what I want, fill in forms for me all have 'save me time' as their core. Yes there are other benefit types, but I think 'save me time' is both the biggest benefit area and the easiest to measure. Convenience is a good proxy, but less tangible and more difficult to measure.

So what might be the buzzword equivalent of 'save me time' that we could build measures around? Might be one for the glossary fest piece of work. Get that right and we have a very relevant term and metric to pitch into the customer experience discussion.

And let's not go down the route of then converting time into money. Minutes/ seconds saved' is likely a more tangible measure for individuals when it comes to how individuals value what might often be a 'free' service.

Cheers 

Iain


Re:

Alexander Ainslie
@AAinslie
@jobsworth @dsearls Are you ready for the "epic battle around the sovereignty of data & consent to share"? medium.com/the-fintech-bo… #VRM #SDH

The link there goes to Why business-led data monetisation is a mere stepping-stone to the consent to share end game. It’s by Stuart Lacey: <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/stuart-lacey/29/b46/585>, founder of Trunomi: <http://www.trunomi.com/>. Anybody familiar with it? (Could be Stuart’s here. Not sure.)

Description at @Trunomi on Twitter: "We transform the use of Personally identifiable info (Pii) and KYC; empowering customers to create, share and manage it at a fraction of the time, cost & risk.” (KYC is Know Your Customer. Perhaps the VRM counterpart would be Know Your Vendor.)

Some pull-quotage from the top link above, with comments:

Financial organisations the world over are clamoring to find ways to mine and use customer data; which, in turn is giving rise to consumers becoming more aware of how their data is tracked and used. Consumers are comfortable trading spending history for a free service,

No, that’s a marketing fantasy. As an Uber customer, I am comfortable with Uber knowing where I need to be picked up and my history of using their service, but nothing more than that. So, while I think it sucks that Uber has a shitty history around abuse of personal data…


… I value their service enough to put up with it. But acquiescence ≠ comfort, and it is wrong to assume so.

but are beginning to question why a taxi company such as Uber should have access to family holiday photos.

Yep.

This raised level of awareness will require a whole new business model to emerge to address the use of personal data. The consumer will be at the core of that business model. Yes, consumers will be monetising their own data.

That’s the kind of thing that comes to mind when you stand on the side of the market where personal data is busy being monetized all the time. 

But from the personal side, data is secondary to agency: the power to act with full effect in the world. If we have full agency, we control how we interact with others on the Net. Valving the data we share is part of that, but far from all. Being able to control how we relate to other entities in the marketplace is far more important. Monetizing data only comes up because it’s already being done.

So, the logic goes, “Consumers’ data is being monetized without their involvement, so let’s find ways for them to monetize their data as well.” This is like saying, “There’s a big market in stolen goods, so let’s find ways for those whose goods are being stolen to get in on the action."

(This, fwiw, is where I was going with the vault vs. honeypot post we visited in an earlier thread: <http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2015/04/29/of-vaults-and-honey-pots/>)

Regulation, public policy and consumer demand will soon collide in an epic battle around the sovereignty of data and consent to share. The next trillion dollar industry is one in which new solutions come to market that enable consumers to digitally manage and share their identifying information across a number of industries and verticals.

Yep, that’s cool. And that’s where VRM comes in as well. Maybe some of that ends up monetizing data. But if that’s all we get out of VRM, I fear we will have lost more than we have gained.

Doc





--
Contact 0413961090


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

§