As mentioned in the programme, many organisations are turning to automated call-handling systems, on-line self service systems and other forms of technology to interact with their customers. Customers can find these approaches off-putting at best – and absolutely maddening at worst, particularly when things go wrong. I am sure most of us have had occasions when we are trying to tell our bank, mobile phone operator, utility company or other service provider about a difficulty we are facing – and getting stuck in what seems like an endless loop of recorded messages, menus of options and requests to key in 16 digit customer passcodes!

However, in addition to providing a source of frustration, these systems also have other side-effects that may be even more detrimental for all of us. The increased use of technology, particularly information technology, to automate the customer interface means that increasing amounts of data about our use of services, our movements and our tastes and preferences are stored on databases of both private and public sector organisations.

For example, my local railway station has recently "retired" the gentleman that worked in the car park pay-station for many years. Rather than handing over coins and notes to pay for parking, while receiving a ticket and a cheery greeting from another human being, users of the car park now have the option of going online or sending a message via their mobile phone.

Rather than displaying a printed ticket on the windscreen, the online or phone booking and payment is recorded in the database of the car parking provider, and all cars in the car park are checked against this database. So, what was a previously private matter, where and when I parked my car, has now become an ongoing record in a corporate database. Replicate this over all the customer interactions that are now based on the use of IT and it is easy to see why many people are concerned about the amount of personal data that is held about all of us and hence the increased potential for misuse of that data. UK citizens are already viewed as the most surveyed in the world; data capture as a by-product of de-personalising the customer interface will simply add to this.

The subject of the collection and use of personal data both from consumers and from people in the workplace has formed a basis of ongoing research at the Open University Business School, see for instance Ball, Daniel, Dibb and Meadows (2009). This team of researchers, which have backgrounds in surveillance, information management and marketing, has recently won funding from the Leverhulme Trust to explore what they have termed “new uses of customer data”; that is, uses of data that customers may not be aware of or that firms are being required to undertake, for example, by regulators and law enforcement agencies.

"So, what was a previously private matter, where and when I parked my car, has now become an ongoing record in a corporate database."

 The focus of the work will be firms in the financial services and travel sectors, which is particularly relevant when two of the three guests on the programme are from the travel sector. Both the financial services and travel sectors espouse the benefits of customer relationship management and the related activities of customer profiling and segmentation. For these activities they collect and store considerable amounts of information on their customers, including personal details and a record of all their transactions and purchases. However, as the focus of the research suggests, this data may be used for purposes that are not obvious to those that are providing it and may have unforeseen side-effects or consequences, both for the individual customers involved and for society at large.

As more and more organisations make use of technology to automate their interfaces with their customers, this collection of data will increase. Indeed, as in the case of the use of my station car park, customers may not even be aware of the information about them that is being stored, let alone how it might one day be used.

Find out more

Open University Business School research project Taking Liberties: New Uses of Consumer Data in the UK

Who's watching you work? Surveillance in business

A Report on the Surveillance Society
by KS Ball, D Lyon, D. Murakami Wood, C Norris and C Raab, Surveillance Studies Network.

Democracy, surveillance and 'knowing what's good for you': the private sector origins of profiling and the birth of 'citizen relationship management
by KS Ball, E M Daniel, S Dibb and M Meadows
from Surveillance and Democracy
edited by M Samatas and K Haggerty

Coercion versus Care: Using Irony to Make Sense of Organisational Surveillance
by G Sewell and J Barker
from the Academy of Management Review, Volume 31, Number 4, pages 934-961

About the author

Elizabeth Daniel is Professor of Information Management at the Open University Business School where she undertakes research and teaching in the fields of e-business and information systems. Elizabeth also undertakes consultancy work for a number of blue chip and leading public sector organisations.

Subscribe to Elizabeth Daniel's posts

 

Blogging about

Money Programme

Get the facts behind the big business and finance stories from around the world – and down your street, in The Money Programme.

I suspect there is now a new way to characterise the population Before now, you were either left-handed or right-handed, you could either roll your tongue or you couldn’t or you loved marmite or you hated it….now it would seem you either love MMOGs and spend half your life playing them, or you can’t see the point in them. And if you need to ask what an MMOG is, then you are most definitely with me in the latter group.

Massive multiplayer online games or MMOGs (also sometimes called massively multiplayer online role playing games, MMORPGs) are a range of games played with many others – often thousands and even millions of others -  via the internet. They seem to come in two flavours – either based upon gnomes, trolls and slaying dragons and other beasties or a virtual form of real life, that seems to be nothing like real life as you get to decide for yourself just how beautiful and sociable you are.

As I say, they don’t work for me. In fact the only comment that seems to come to mind when I think about these games is…why? But this lack of understanding may not be my fault. The traditional users of MMOGs are between 18 and 35, and although they are allegedly popular with women, with approximately 30% of players being female, as an older woman (just slightly older), I am not the target demographic. When it comes to online games, older women, or so I have read, ‘enjoy playing short puzzles and logic games’.

'Calvin Klein has announced plans to launch a virtual fragrance'

Whilst these games may not appeal to my natural tastes, as a business and management academic, there may be more professional reasons to give them further thought. These games appear to be offering organisations a new channel to promote, and perhaps eventually distribute, their products and services. Adidas, Toyota and Dell have all created content in the MMOG Second Life. The clothing store, American Apparel, have opened a store in this virtual world, where players can buy items for their virtual alter ego, and Calvin Klein has announced plans to launch a virtual fragrance. 

These virtual worlds have also been identified as a potential laboratory for social scientists such as economists. Economics is an area where it is notoriously difficult to test theories and compare outcomes of different actions. Whilst simple experiments can be set up in classrooms and labs, unless you have a small country at your disposal, it is very hard to set up situations with stakes that the participants really care about or which involve large numbers of individuals over long periods of time. The virtual worlds created in MMOGs meet these criteria perfectly and could provide powerful test beds for new ideas on fiscal or monetary policy or areas of social policy. Indeed, the academic credibility of these games is already established, with one professor in the US securing funding to construct a virtual game world to try out such experiments and Brunel University appointing the UK’s first professor of digital games, whose area of study include MMOGs.

So, perhaps there is something in these games for all of us after all……or perhaps I should just stick to the short puzzles and logic games!

Further reading

•  
• Virtual world, real millions - the Money Programme investiagtes the millions of people opting out of real life and signing up to "live" in computer worlds
• What makes an entrepreneur? - take a test to discover if you’ve got what it takes
• Join the discussion - What do you think of Second Life and World of Warcraft?
• Synthetic Worlds: The Business and Culture of Online Games by Edward Castronova, published by University of Chicago Press
• Tomb Raiders and Space Invaders by Geoff King and Tanya Krzywinska, published by IB Tauris
• Understanding Digital Games by Jason Rutter and Jo Bryce, published by Sage Publications

About the author

Elizabeth Daniel is Professor of Information Management at the Open University Business School where she undertakes research and teaching in the fields of e-business and information systems. Elizabeth also undertakes consultancy work for a number of blue chip and leading public sector organisations.

Subscribe to Elizabeth Daniel's posts

 

Blogging about

Money Programme

Get the facts behind the big business and finance stories from around the world – and down your street, in The Money Programme.

It would appear from Geoff’s piece last week, detailing his experiences with Microsoft’s Vista, the Open University blogs accompanying this series of the Money Programme, are going to be more personal in nature. This personal theme promises to continue with one of my colleagues sharing his views of living in Spain, whilst working for the OU – and who knows what personal insights we may uncover from another colleague who is set to share his thoughts on the world of male diets and slimming!

Ever keen to follow a trend, I shall share my own experiences of Web 2.0 life. Unfortunately, not being quite on the crest of this wave – I haven’t recorded or posted my own video on-line yet, but like any self-respecting ten year old, my son has. Whilst not in the league of some of the most watched video clips, such as the motivational speaker, Judson Laipply, dancing Barrymore-like to various songs (approx 40 million views) or a personal favourite, the band OK go singing whilst carrying out a complicated dance routine on gym running machines (approx 9 million views). My respect for the latter made greater by the fact I know what damage can be done by falling off such a machine – the belt acts like a sander which is very painful when wearing shorts!

But more interesting to me, than the number of views my son has got (OK – so it’s just a total 45 across two clips), was why he had posted his videos in the first place. After all, he had had no encouragement from me or his school. However, my question to him about why he had posted them was met with a blank look and some words that seemed to be along the lines - you do it because it’s the thing to do. I checked to see if he thought the clips were so good that they would be viewed around the world and he would be famous. No, he hadn’t thought that – it’s just if you have something, you share it. Not a case of everyone might want to see them – more a case of, someone might want to see them.

Still, there may soon be a more obvious reason to share content on the most successful video sharing site, YouTube. At the World Economic Forum in Davos late last month, the CEO Chad Hurley announced their intention to share advertising revenues with those uploading videos. Commentators have speculated that there may be a number of reasons for this move. It may be that they are reacting to competitors that already offer payment to those sharing videos. Alternatively, it may be that Google is looking to earn a speedy return on the $1.65bn it paid for YouTube last November and will drastically increase the amount of advertising on the site. Sharing revenues with content providers may make this increased advertising more acceptable. However, Nicholas Carr, the former editor of Harvard Business Review thinks there may be more significant reasons. He speculates in his own blog, that a relatively small number of videos will account for a disproportionate amount of the earnings. ‘Locking up’ the content of these videos will become important for ensuring significant user numbers and hence revenues. In return for payment, YouTube may seek those uploading videos to grant them an exclusive licence - currently they ask for a non-exclusive, royalty free licence. This would give them complete control over the video hits of the future, just like more traditional media businesses. So, perhaps we should enjoy sharing for the sake of sharing while we still can.

Futher reading

• What makes an entrepreneur? – take a test to discover if you’ve got what it takes
• DIY TV – the Money Programme meets the everday people who are watched by millions
• Join the discussion – what do video sharing sites mean for TV companies?
• Rough Type – Nicholas Carr’s Blog

About the author

Elizabeth Daniel is Professor of Information Management at the Open University Business School where she undertakes research and teaching in the fields of e-business and information systems. Elizabeth also undertakes consultancy work for a number of blue chip and leading public sector organisations.

Subscribe to Elizabeth Daniel's posts