{"id":140,"date":"2011-08-22T11:10:49","date_gmt":"2011-08-22T11:10:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/obc.ninety10group.com\/?p=140"},"modified":"2022-07-11T04:31:26","modified_gmt":"2022-07-11T04:31:26","slug":"be-prepared-for-the-coming-war-for-co-creators","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.footballthink.com\/be-prepared-for-the-coming-war-for-co-creators\/","title":{"rendered":"Be prepared for the coming \u201dWar for Co-Creators\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

The strategic relevance of ethics, commitment and rewards in Co-Creation <\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Ethics in Social Media <\/strong>Research \u2013 the privacy debate<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the market research community the discussion about data privacy and guidelines for social media research (mainly focused on listening) is peaking right now as ESOMAR, CASRO, MRS and other Market research associations have published their guidelines recently. This debate is crucial as behaviors like that of Nielsen Buzzmetrics scrapping data from patienslikeme.com<\/a>, a closed Online Community on health issues, can create distrust against a whole industry. I think a discussion of ethics in Social Media Research is crucial. But that doesn\u2019t mean I agree with everything written in the recent guidelines. And I am not the only one. A rising number of market research authorities reject and question these guidelines. For example Ray Pointer states in a recent blog post<\/a> that \u201c<\/em>in several areas, \u2018new\u2019 market research is at odds with the traditional guidelines. Examples of where NewMR is at odds with the traditional ethics includes: the brand-related incentives for members of communities, the brand advocacy of community members, the changes wrought by deliberative research, and most of social media monitoring research. <\/em><\/p>\n

Other areas where research is drifting away from the classic model of anonymity include a growing amount of customer satisfaction and most of enterprise feedback systems.\u201d<\/em> So Ray is making the point that \u201cIf market research companies abide by the old ethics, in particular anonymity and informed consent, they will not be able to compete for business in most areas where market research is growing. This is because there will be no commercial benefits that will accrue to sticking to rules and ideas that nobody else does<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

While I am really curious to see where the debate is going, I don\u2019t want to concentrate on the privacy debate in this post. For everyone interest in the discussion I recommend to follow the public forum debate on Monday, August 22 at 12:00 EST, hosted on the MRGA 365 Virtual Event Platform http:\/\/www.marketplace365.com\/registration\/mrga365\/<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Ethics in Co-Creation \u2013 the exploitation debate<\/strong><\/p>\n

I want to share my thoughts and start a discussion about another important area of ethics in Social Media, which I think is the way we integrate and reward people in co-creation and crowdsourcing projects. There is hardly a debate on this yet from an ethical point of view, as \u201cCo-Creators\u201d seem to be willing to share their ideas for free or relatively low money without real commitment from the company running the initiative. But in the long-term this might change! Here is why.<\/p>\n

#1 Co-Creators will become more selective and demanding<\/strong><\/p>\n

Happily consumers seem to love the new way of participation with companies. Last year Forrester Research asked US online adults if they want to co-create with companies. Here are some results:<\/p>\n