Tag archives: starbucks
the betacup – how are we doing so far?
Posted by Shaun Abrahamson on Saturday, 10 April 2010
How are we doing after 1 week?
+ 65 ideas
+ over 300 comments
+ almost 30,000 views of ideas
+ almost 1,000 registrations to submit ideas
In addition, the contest has good press and is the subject of steady twitter conversation all of which is helping to move the numbers above.
But how good are the ideas?
Here are some good examples:
+ new cups – some are created from existing waste materials, some while you wait and others are designed to disappear when not in use (while also checking into foursquare)
+ new recycling or reuse options – cups can be used to distribute seed or if we had more ways to collect used reusable mugs, perhaps more people could use them.
+ new behavior – these ideas explore ways to encourage behavior to reduce or eliminate the use of paper cups.
I personally believe this last category is where the best solutions will be found (I’m not a juror, but I will be voting with everyone else for the community prizes).
One of the big changes in recycling is the cost of tracking. For example barcode scanners are ubiquitous, so barcodes can be used to track and reward reuse. In fact the cup (or the lid) can become the more valuable kind of plastic (the kind you buy stuff with).
Going one step further, loyalty card programs result in interesting data for segmenting customers for selling more stuff, but they can also be used to cause better behavior.
Beyond the ideas, we’re excited to see how the process unfolds
Because submissions are public some interesting things are happening.
+ comments – feedback is already resulting in iterations, so we think some of the submitters are benefitting and enjoying the feedback
+ teaming up – it has happend once already and there seem to be some discussions already (this is how the netflix prize was won, so this is interesting, for sure).
+ juror expert feedback – we have already seen some of the jurors weigh in with their particular expertise, so we’re looking forward to seeing how this helps submitters to identify and address prospective issues with their submissions.
We’ve just started, so why not submit an idea or encourage other people to check out the betacup challenge.
Posted in: Mass Collaboration | Tagged: betacup, jovoto, starbucks | No Comments
Crowdsourcing 101
Posted by Shaun Abrahamson on Sunday, 1 March 2009
Guest Post. Geng Tan, joined Mutopo forJanuary 2009, as part of MIT’s externship program. Geng Tan is a junior at MIT majoring in Mechanical Engineering and Management Science. Although he is a mechanical engineer by training, he is also interested in marketing and business development, especially through web 2.0 tools. In the past, he has interned at Hakuhodo Inc. one of Japans leading marketing consultancies and is currently leading up a crowdsourcing project at MIT related to education and technology.
Crowdsourcing
From the start, people have used the Internet to collaborate – the first research communities would use tools like e-mail to share information more quickly. In recent years, as global online participation has surged and connectivity costs have dropped, new forms of group collaboration have emerged as organizations try to harness the power of many connected people.
Earlier forms of these include the Linux “free-software” movement, but in the recent years more and more value, in the forms of Wikipedia articles, Youtube videos, Yelp reviews, Istockphotos’ pictures, SETI’s massive calculation power, just to name a few, are generated over the web through contribution of the “crowd,” the increasingly active internet users.
In this post, I would like to propose a framework for “crowdsourcing,” a term describing, according to wikipedia, “the act of taking a task traditionally performed by an employee or contractor, and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people or community in the form of an open call.” According to Jeff Howe, the author of Crowdsourcing, the foundation of crowdsource is the concept of spare cycles, the spare time people naturally spend on hobbies and leisure, such as playing baseball with kids, taking pictures, web-surfing and blog posting. Crowdsourcing is achieved by harnessing people’s spare cycles to generate value.
Some Examples
Businesses are paying more attention to this phenomenon because it has been shown time and again that these projects can produce products of superior quality (such as Mathwork’s competitions, Wikipedia, myStarbucksidea, Muji.net) and generate contributions such as content , computing resources or donations of massive scale (such as Yelp’s review systems, Istockphotos, Dell ideastorm, Kiva, Skype’s model of data processing) even compared to the most successful corporations. It also provides a few other advantages, such as reducing expenses associated with marketing, distribution as well as customer support.
I’ll first introduce how crowd source is used to generate quality and/or quantity of work, build a framework for businesses that attempt to crowdsource, and then list a few examples of successful crowdsourcing projects. I’ll conclude by listing the dos and the don’ts in crowdsourcing.
In any crowd sourcing project, users gather around an issue/task/topic and each work on a small portion of the project. Even though each person is working on a very small portion, the web allows for a massive accumulation of work. The crowd often forms a self-perpetuating community as well, and they can generate a lot of ideas, build upon each other’s ideas, and self improve the inferior ideas to form a better one. This almost resembles web games, such as the World of Warcraft, where users competitively build superior characters. As a result, there exist a myriad of characters and competitiveness nature of the system forces the superior characters to surface.
One key point to be noted here is that if the purpose of the project depended on diversity of ideas, such as in the case of brainstorming or producing reviews, the project manager needs to limit the interactions among the users. Too much interaction tends to form a trend within the community and such crowd-mentality trend to weed out the less main-stream ideas (imagine a forum where people nominated presidential candidates. Everyone chat about candidates and people agree on obama as a good candidate. Nominations of other candidate from this group seems very unlikely). However, if the project really wanted to produce a single quality idea, the manager want to encourage as much interaction among the crowd to encourage the crowd to build upon each other’s ideas (encouraging everyone on a forum to debate about who’s a superior candidate in the election.).
A proposed framework for making crowdsourcing work for your organization
1.Identify a crowd, a goal, and a method of contribution
The crowd can be preexisting or created. Pre-existing community can be internally marketed, and the existing rules can be imported.
If a new community is to be created it needs to be organized and encouraged. The new rules need to be created, and culture need to be formed. Relationship management is the key
The goal or goals needs to be clear and practical
Method of contribution needs to be simple and easy to use. Good user interface is the key, because it makes it easy for people to contribute their free time and wont get in the way of the primary experience, such as contributing and communicating.
2. Motivate contribution, motivate peer review/revision, collaboration, and consolidate the community
Motivate contribution by giving people the recognition for their work. People want to be heard, be appreciated, be recognized. This can be done by creating special “power user” status, giving front page coverage, etc. linked to specific measures of success.
Motivate peer review by encouraging discussion among users. “everyone’s equal on the web.”
Show that contributions make a difference and are appreciated – by other participants and/or by the organization.
Consolidate community by encouraging personal interactions. Easier for localized websites, such as yelp and facebook. Sponsored/hosted events may be helpful. i.e. yelp (yelp’s night’s out) and istockphoto (istockalypses).
You can check community health by looking at metrics such as number of posts, repeat traffic versus new, what percentage of people are contributing versus browsing, etc.
Also remember that people participate in different ways. For example perhaps only 1% of users will actively generate content while the majority might simply observe.
3. Market to a larger crowd and repeat 2.
Market via word of mouth. i.e. other people’s blog posts, forum posts, reviews, etc.
Market via scandalous/controversial/disruptive content. Lots of coverage from existing media, lots of people talk about it, lots of buzz.
Rely on sudden burst of publicity – people discovering an active community are more likely to try it out. If there are no signs of life already, no amount of promotion will help to seed.
4. Measure how you are benefiting
Does the community feel exploited? Its important to constantly monitor whether or not the organization is doing its part for the community in return for their contributions. If value is not fairly exchanged, you are likely to fail.
Use generated ideas for commercial purposes.
Revenues from advertising associated with generated content.
Get donation like Wikipedia personal messages, appealing to people’s interest, who other people that you are getting donated.
Ask your community how you should benefit and how they would like to benefit, too!
Some examples of these ideas in action
Manga Helpers
1. Identify a crowd, a goal, and a method of contribution
i.e. manga lovers, translation of Japanese manga, a manga data base
2. motivate contribution, motivate peer review/revision, collaboration, and consolidate the community
i.e. personal messages, grant special status, public acknowledgement, individuals can contribute different translations, and formation of clan/ranking of clans, paid trips to anime convention, etc.
3. Market to more crowd and repeat 2.
i.e. blog reviews, word of mouth, media coverage
4. Financial return
Gain enough data for commercial use, sell the data
Gain enough traffic, earn revenue from advertisement
Be disruptive enough to the existing big companies to be bought out
Get donation like Wikipedia style
Mathworks Competition
http://www.mathworks.com/contest/furniture/about.html
1. Identify a crowd, a goal, and a method of contribution
i.e. Coders, Superior Algorithm, Competition Style,
2. motivate contribution, motivate peer review/revision, and loosely consolidate the community
i.e. publicity via niche distributors, such as university prof, professional publications, blogs, etc. Open up the winning code, and frequently comment/update the competition website, generate hype among competitors and their friends via granting them publicity
3. Market to more crowd and repeat 2.
i.e. blog reviews, word of mouth, media coverage
4. Financial return on the capital
Gain good enough data for commercial use, sell the data
Build brand with students
Identify potential talent
Wikipedia
1. Identify a crowd, a goal, and a method of contribution
i.e. Specialists, Encyclopedia, Write articles,
2. motivate contribution, motivate peer review/revision, and loosely consolidate the community
i.e. ask professionals to write few articles, give people tools for revision, encourage discussion between professionals
3. Market to more crowd and repeat 2.
i.e. blog reviews, word of mouth, media coverage
4. Financial return on the capital
Currently just accepting donations, although there is constant suggestions to monetize using advertising.
Failed Examples
CurrentTV – TV programs created from feedback by users for the users failed because it overestimated crowd’s capacity to generate large professional grade content. Hence few contributions and little to talk about.
Assignment Zero – crowd source journalism and publish the content created by the crowd. Failed to build a seed community
So what can we learn from these?
Dos
Encourage community building among users
Think of ways to serve and help the users. In turn, they will help you
Separate the tasks into small distinct bits
Have a clear objective for the users to perform
Guide the crowd along the way
Listen to the crowd
Donts
Take the crowd for granted, they are your equal
Go against the will of the crowd, they have power
Leave the crowd alone, they need your guidance
Ask crowd to do too much at once, they don’t have time
Complicate the process, they don’t have patience
Exploit the crowd, they are not stupid.
In conclusion, crowdsourcing has promising potential for content creation (quality and quantity) and marketing. It has also been shown that ventures based on crowdsourcing, the whim of the crowd, can be self-sustaining and profitable. It also saves money and time for the existing companies. Effectively used, crowdsourcing can generate more ideas and form a strong brand loyalty for the company.
[UPDATE- we have expanded this idea to create www.colaboratorie.org]
Posted in: Crowdsourcing | Tagged: Crowdsourcing, dell, externship, manga helpers, mathworks, MIT, muji, starbucks, wikipedia | 8 Comments


