Month: June 2019

Are we selling discomfort?

What’s your product? “It’s a real-time data stream of who/what is where/how in any physical space” anyone at reelyActive might answer today. Okay. But what are you really selling?

Curiously, what we’re really selling today may very well be discomfort.

Really.

Take for instance our client who is measuring attendance and zone occupancy at a festival right now. Will the data comfort the festival and its sponsors by telling the story they want to hear about record numbers?   No.   The data will tell the story of what really happened, inevitably raising uncomfortable questions.

Take for instance our client who uses our data to help brick-and-mortar retailers compete on in-store client experience. Will the customer journey data comfort the retailer about how well they’re doing?   No.   The data will reveal their failures to meet their clients where they are, again, raising uncomfortable questions.

Take for instance our client who uses our data to observe occupancy and space utilisation in their offices. Will the data comfort them by showing that every space is just right and delivering outstanding employee experience?   No.   The data will tell the story of what spaces are under and over-utilised. They can expect an uncomfortable discussion about why they spent X on a space that nobody is using while there’s a shortage of some other type of space.

Why are our clients buying discomfort?

Our clients are buying discomfort because it motivates them to improve. Their competitors may be buying comfort: products and services that make the stakeholders and the status quo look good. And while that may still be an effective short-term strategy, our clients are embracing continuous improvement, and the associated discomfort, as they recognise this as the winning long-term strategy.

A festival that addresses what isn’t driving attendance, delivers a better sponsor and attendee experience the following year. A retailer that meets its customers at the right time and place earns and retains their loyalty. A business that regularly adapts its offices to the needs of its employees enjoys the highest productivity.

So, are we selling discomfort?   Yes, in effect.   But our clients are more than comfortable with that.

Data is Human

“It’s up to smart humans to stop being stupid about AI.” That was the title of what we’d argue was the most impactful talk at Collision 2019 in Toronto. A single slide of three words eloquently summarises the challenge and opportunity of our era: Data is Human.

The presenter, Christian Beedgen, went on to connect this concept with a quote from Immanuel Kant:

“Treat people as an end, and never as a means to an end.”

Combined, the implication is as follows:

When we consider that data is simply data, it is easy, even generally accepted, to treat data as a means to an end.

When we consider that data is human, we are confronted with the ethical dilemma of treating humans as a means to an end.

The challenge of our era is to consider that data is human despite the opportunity of, for instance, the lucrative advertising-revenue models of immensely successful Web 2.0-generation businesses which rely on data as a means to an end.

Imagine if industry did indeed consider data to be human and treated it as such. Would we have had the occasion to write the following blog posts over the course of the past six years?

— We need to move Beyond people-as-a-product [2018].   Why?   Because data is human, and we should treat people as an end and not a means.

— We should take care to treat The IoT as your Brand Ambassador [2016].   Why?   Because data is human, and we should treat people as an end and not a means.

— Society can HOPE for a better Link [2016].   Why?   Because data is human, and we should treat people as an end and not a means.

— There’s a strong case for The Bank of Personal Data [2015].   Why?   Because data is human, and we should treat people as an end and not a means.

— There’s a legitimate fear of Big Brother and the Identity of Things [2013].   Why?   Because data is human, and we should treat people as an end and not a means.

Of course, all too often, industry continues to treat data in the manner that is most convenient, not necessarily that which is most appropriate. This is even more concerning in light of the Internet of Things, where humans generate orders of magnitude more data, often unknowingly.

In fact, our cheeky April Fool’s post introduced the concept of the “Digital Conjoined Twin”, arguably the ultimate manifestation of data being human. Will industry practices drive people to a point where they will go so far as to host their own data on their person? Almost certainly not, assuming that companies embrace, in earnest, the concept that data is human.

However, if companies continue to treat user data as a means to an end, the consequence may well be their users finding a means, however extreme, to end the relationship. It’s up to smart humans to avoid that outcome.