Slashdot Mirror
Making It Personal
But do not be confused. Personalization is not just another way to push more product out the door. Kasanoff clearly explains why personalization is not just a marketing tool, but instead an effective approach for all business relationships. Partners, shareholders, employees, and customers can all benefit from increased personalization. The purpose of implementing one-to-one personalization strategies is to benefit these stakeholders, not just the company. This is a fundamental concept that too many businesses just don't understand.
When customers give out their personal information they are taking a risk. If customers consistently feel as though their privacy is being violated, then it won't be long before they stop using the services. Companies will not be able to regain their trust easily, and worse yet the information they do receive is more likely to be false. This is a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. Making It Personal shows businesses how to make personalization a win-win situation for everyone involved.
The reality is that not all personalization "is the result of a massive computer sifting through dozens of databases to automatically deliver a certain type of treatment to a person. Most initiatives start with employees who have a good idea." Personalization starts with remembering someone's address so they don't have to retype it 50 times. Personalization starts when you remember whether someone prefers a window or an aisle seat. Personalization starts when you remember whether someone prefers charts and graphs or cold hard numbers.
Kasanoff explains how just remembering basic information about stakeholders is just the beginning of personalization. The key is to then use that information to "deliver unique benefits" to those stakeholders. That's when personalization has the power to influence behaviors and retain loyalty. But just in case this isn't crystal clear then think of it this way: Using personal information for purposes other than delivering unique benefits is exactly what scares the hell out of both stakeholders and legislators. So knock it off.
Your customers are ready and willing to use personalization, but is your company? The good news is that you already have a lot of information about stakeholders that can be used for personalization. In additional, personalization features are now appearing in software applications from companies like Oracle and Microsoft. What is missing is the "need to make personalization a central part of [your] corporate strategy, as opposed to something that simply requires awareness and sensitivity." That's because personalization says "let us learn better what a customer needs and then do something about it."
Making It Personal explains how to implement meaningful personalization strategies, but the book also covers some potential unintended consequences. While you may be dealing with mountains of information don't forget that it's comprised of individuals. We have all seen the newspaper headlines that resulted from just a few individuals having their privacy violated by companies. Now is the time to put policies and practices in place to avoid tarnishing your reputation with stakeholders.
Bruce Kasanoff does a great job of breaking down personalization into easy to understand terminology and realistic approaches. He shows that it really is possible to balance privacy concerns with profit motives. Making It Personal is worth more than a casual glance because personalization isn't just about getting the local weather forecast when you visit your favorite web site. Personalization is about delivering unique benefits to stakeholders and a means to preserve their loyalty. Violate their privacy and you risk losing them to your competitors forever.
Making It Personal will help you to understand that "personalization is about people, and the things that matter to them most." Kasanoff knows what he's talking about, and so do the numerous business and technology leaders he cites throughout the book. They confront the real issues and the real challenges facing personalization even in its infancy. Making It Personal will prepare you and your company for a world where your customers demand that you get personal. Don't disappoint them.
You can purchase Making it Personal at Fatbrain. Want to see your own review here? Read the review guidelines first, then use Slashdot's webform.
I don't know whether that protocol died or not, maybe some one else who reads /. will know.
I think this boils down to the issue of whether a company is thinking long-term or short-term. If the former, the company will logically be led to the strategy from the book, because the idea will be to create a loyal customer relationship. A short-term get-rich-quick strategy will often lead to the misuse of personal information because it's a way to make a one-time buck. I think we already see this in much of the corporate world. Big serious companies who know we can take our business elsewhere (which doesn't include nice monopolists like Qwest) are far less fragrant violators of our privacy than fly-by-night immature 'net businesses, whose basic revenue model is often dependent upon that misuse.
Am I the only one who thinks it's creepy that salescritters would use this sort of personalization tactic (for lack of a better term) in order to increase sales? My personality type (INTP) does not allow me to form personal bonds easily, and this holds true in business and personal situations.
;-) )
If I have to deal with someone on the phone, whether it's to follow up on a sales call or to correct an error at the bank, I want it to be as impersonal and as efficient as possible. The more I feel like the salesdroid or CSR is trying to "get to know me", the more irritated and introverted I get, and the more likely I am not to continue using the services.
I have this weird feeling that a lot of sales/CSR tactics are designed with "older" people in mind; these are the types of people who most value and favour personal interaction with someone while performing some sort of transaction. I, on the other hand, being younger and more tech-savvy than many older folks, want things to be automated and efficient. (I go nuts when people in front of me at the store write checks, especially for smaller purchases. Have you heard of the ATM and debit cards yet, people?
Anyway, what I guess I'm trying to say is that I know quite a few people who would not find this technique effective on them at all, and I suppose I'm kinda shocked to see that it might be applied more universally if one were to follow the advice of this book.
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
I really do prefer working with buisness that treat me as something other than a number. Whre I used to work there was a mass of food chains in the food area it's all boring with the exception of this older Lebonese guy who knows exactly what I want to eat and how I like it prepared. Not bad for a place I only eat at twice a week.
OTH I *hate* buisnesses who demand all sorts of information they don't even need. How does knowing my birthday and income level let them give me better service?
More people need to take this guy's advice.
If one accepts the proposition that the best use of a computer is as a 'tool for the mind' or an extension of the brain, then it seems that optimal use of this technology is really just an updating of having the owner of the corner bookstore remember that you are, say, a Terry Pratchett fan and letting you know that a new book of his is out, or the local butcher letting you know they got a fresh slab of Mortadella ...
IMHO it does come down to trust. Once I trust your integrity, the rest is just details, if I don't trust your integrity then ANY information you have about me is too much.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
I very firmly beleive this.
I *want* sites to remember who I am and tailor their content to suit my needs and want, but for every company who goes under and sells a database to a data-mining company or a spamco, I grow a little more uncomfortable. I just don't feel comfortable giving information that personally identifies me and allows them to track me when I know that the only thing that stands between that information and the wolves is that given dot-com's bottom line.
Let's be honest here... Who expected any of the dot-coms to fail? Even VA-Linux is in chapter 11, aren't they? If they do go under, won't Slashdot's entire database full of opinions, email addresses, etc, be up for grab at the asset auction? I hope this never happens, but it's a possibility.
Until spamming is a thing of the past and data-mining is illegal or so uncommon that nobody does it any more, then personalization just won't work in a big way.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
If they do go under, won't Slashdot's entire database full of opinions, email addresses, etc, be up for grab at the asset auction?
But any company purchasing this information will be unable to use it to trade in most European countries.
eg. The UK data protection act says that personal data must be "lawfuly and fairly obtained"
To use personal details bought at an asset aution (therefore without the individuals consent) would be very illegal. They would not be allowed to use that information to trade in the UK /. previously about this
If memory serves, there have been articles on
Why don't US'ians get together and fight for a law like this?
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
The databases are immense, and go far beyond what music groups you like. Companies such as Experian trade information on your illnesses! They even have an incontinence database! This information is sold for as little as $65 per million names.
This information is available to government as well. In some cases, businesses just hand over the data. In others, businesses sell the information (Check out EPIC's web page on public records profilers: http://www.epic.org/privacy/publicrecords/). Government can also just subpoena the records.
Companies that care about privacy will not engage in personalization. They will provide services where possible without collecting information unnecessarily. They will also allow "Customization," the practice of letting the customer decide what features will be provided. Personalization does the opposite--it's the practice of saying "I know what the customer wants." Let the customer decide!
All this personalization is pretty cool, it's nifty how Amazon.com knows what kind of books I like to read ahead of time and display them on a page customized to have the greatest potential of selling me something.
Unfortunately, while being convenient and helpful, it also is limiting and boring because I no longer need to navigate through their site or just browse for something new. How will I ever stumble upon that book on gardening when my personalized page is chock full of software development books and video games.
In my opinion, targeted selling, personalization, whatever you want to call it, causes people to become less aware of other things that are out there.
My point is some things are useful to be personalized and targeted toward the individual's habits, but others are not.
I Heart Sorting Networks
You are taking a limited view of personalization, really just as it applies to websites, but it's much bigger than that. You already have trust relationships with many companies and organizations: your employer, your bank, your credit card company, your lawyer, cpa, realtor, insurance agent, the IRS, etc. The list is long.
All of these people/companies/whatever have some of your sensitive personal information. You trust them with it. It's in their best interest to use it to serve you better, in ways that do not annoy you, or betray your trust. This extends to websites, too, but in that case there is much less incentive for people to establish trust relationships. Of course there are many different levels of trust. I'm not too worried about secrets like "prefers /. with no icons" leaking out.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
I have no problem with sites offering personalization options, but they are not for me. I think that most sites would be best served in offering the registration and benefits to those who want it, but also remaining fully open to those who do not.
Slashdot is a perfect example of this. If you don't want to register you can work the site perfectly fine and even post as anonymous (though you post as a lower caste). This is great for me, since I always toss my cookies I would have to re-register every single time I visited the site if I couldn't browse anonymously. Now the only time I log-in is when I want to post, since the benefits of posting when logged-in are worth it in my mind.
Honestly, I only know of one good reason for requiring a registration in order to use a site and that is when a site contains sensitive data which is only for certain people's use. Of course you have to lock it down and verify users then. Other than that I think sites are just trying to collect mailing lists on people. Personally I always give them totally false information, maybe if their mailing lists turn out to be full of crap they will get the point and stop the unsociable behavior.
Sapere aude!
Ideally, one of the pieces of info the salesdrone would get is "This guy doesn't make friends easy; just the facts". If that pops up on the computer screen the second you call, the person on the other end of the line can be fast and efficient in a way that, perhaps, others would consider rude and cold. Then you get what you want, they get what they want (long, slow, talkative, etc), and everyone is happy (except you while you wait on hold for them to finish).
Visit me on #weirdness on the Galaxynet.
The better sites I have visited and do business with:
a) Use SSL the instant any personal information comes into play, such as my name, account number and address.
b) Ask me if I want to store sensitive financial information such as my credit card number, and honor my request.
Some personalization I like... Some I don't. I found it very creepy when I was visiting a page I had never been to before, and an Amazon advertisement banner had my name on it. That crossed my personal lines, because it felt as if Amazon had shared my info with others before I even got there. I investigated and found out that wasn't the case, but in business, impressions can be a lot more important than one realizes.
BA's computer system understands this and whenever I book with them they always try and get me a window seat. And when I book for two people then they get two next to each other with one being a window seat.
Yes its a small example. But its a good one. Personalisation and its bigger brother CRM (Customer Relationship Management) means that people feel that they have a personal relationship with a company and are not just some number in a database.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
U.S. Postal Service announces Recycle Direct.
The USPS today introduced their new Recycle Direct service, which allows mail recipients to redirect unwanted mail directly to a recycling center. While all first-class mail will still be delivered, customers can now choose whether to receive third-class bulk mail in each of the following categories:
The postal customer's preferences will be checked during automated mail sorting, and the rejected mail will be shipped in bulk to paper recycling plants for pulping. Revenue from the recycled paper will pay for the program.
All residential mail recipients will receive a postcard announcing the program, with checkboxes to indicate which categories of mail they wish to accept. Sending back this card will inform the USPS of the recipient's mail preferences. Mail recipients' preferences will be stored by the USPS in the National Change of Address database. Sorting equipment has been using this database for years to automatically redirect mail after changes of address. The new preference system thus fits into existing mail processing.
Bulk mailers will be able to cleanse their mailing lists using the existing USPS service for deleting undeliverable addresses from mailing lists. Use of this service by bulk mailers is optional, but failure to use it will result in bulk discards at the originating postal facility.
Representatives of the postal union lauded the program. "We're tired of delivering stuff people don't want. The FedEx and UPS people don't have to do that, and so they don't get the hostility we do.", one said.
No, VA is not in Chapter 11, in fact VA has hardly any debt and still has cash in the bank. As for Slashdot, it's best revenue stream has been advertising and large ad clients such as IBM will not buy ad space here unless we post a network privacy policy
I actually had a Radio Shack cashier tell me he couldn't sell me a cable because I refused to give him my phone numnber. I haven't darkened their doors since.
You should have given him a 976 pr0n number!
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
If they do go under, won't Slashdot's entire database full of opinions, email addresses, etc, be up for grab at the asset auction?
Weeeellll, go down and rea the bottom where it says: "Comments are owned by the Poster." If VA wants to sell this database, then they will have to negotiate royalty payments directly with me, and I charge a $4.3 million dollar royalty fee per comment per view.
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"