Difference between revisions of "Telco-Web-Data User Model Scenarios"

From IIW
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 6: Line 6:
'''Notes-taker(s):''' Christie Grabyan
'''Notes-taker(s):''' Christie Grabyan
'''Conference:''' [http://iiw.idcommons.net/Iiw10 IIW-10] (2010A) May 17-19 in Mountain View. [Complete Notes for IIW 10 http://iiw.idcommons.net/Notes_IIW10]
''' technology discussed/ideas considered:'''  
''' technology discussed/ideas considered:'''  

Revision as of 04:02, 16 November 2010

Session: Wed Session 5 Space F

Conference: IIW 10 May 17-19, 2009 this is the complete Complete Set of Notes

Convener: Nancy Frishberg

Notes-taker(s): Christie Grabyan

technology discussed/ideas considered:

We shared ideas about what the scope of the discussion should be:

  • User scenarios/use cases specific to the Web/Telco interaction discussed previously
  • What scenarios does a personal data store concept enable?
  • What use cases are there to drive adoption by users of a personal data store?
  • What is the narrative/story between a user and scenario (how many players are there? Is there a specific case to delve into?) An overview where parts can be storyboarded

We chose to focus on the perspective of types of users and their interactions with the web and/or Telco infrastructure. We want to discuss both the macro and micro (global vs. local) interactions.


Terminology check: User profile = user persona Use case = user scenario

Example user scenario: Woman who has a single cell phone in a South American village and she makes a living renting out her cell phone to others in the community to make calls. (We have assumed a one-to-one relationship of person-to-phone). This is not a technical challenge; it is that there is not perceived value by the users to uniquely identify themselves.

Example user scenario: A colleague goes to China and tries to figure out how her product’s companies will fit into the Chinese culture and lifestyle. Not everyone (the China user base) had a computer, but pretty much everyone had at least one phone. Many users had many phones. It is perceived at useful for one person to have multiple devices. Often these phones are pay-as-you-go structure. Different phones are used in different contexts.

Example user scenario: We suspect that usage behavior will vary by age group. For example, younger users may not pay for their service (paid for by parents), and they may text much more than they call. Conversely, different phones and plans are marketed towards different groups/peoples.

One application for the personal data concept is that it limits that monopolization of data (by Facebook, etc). But, for people who are not on any social networks, what is their “personal data store”?

Family historians today share family information, but often “offline”. But if this were digitized, there could be more of a need for personal data store for this population. Marketers and advertisers are interested in data like recent browser searches, not always information considered personal, like the family historian artifacts.

Adoption is usually driven by either ease-of-use. People often don’t trust claims of privacy and security.

Not only “what is the killer app to get people on board with personal data store”? But also what is the killer app to get more people to be “social”? The discussion is that everyone is social, but perhaps not digitally social.

A user might not understand the use of a personal data store until they understand what they will gain from it. They need to understand what scenarios will be the reasons they would want to protect and/or share their personal information.

It’s not just about what data to share, but how easy is it for data that already exists about you to be shared back with you. (i.e. the digitization of medical records in the U.S.). There is also the international scenario of people who move countries, and information (residential, health, etc) is essentially lost or no longer usable.

In Singapore, there are national ID cards that are assigned when born and then that number is used on ID cards when you are an adult. There is efficiency in the system, but obviously a lack of user control over your own information or the aggregation of information.

The aggregation of data is the scary part to users, even if it’s the aggregation of data that already exists. It’s the same political issue as the resistance against the government having a national ID card scheme. There will definitely be an education effort for the average consumer to understand what the personal data store means, and why it is necessary, useful, beneficial, etc. The negative incidents that occur are what will give consumers the awareness required to care about these kinds of issues. It’s not that a bank account has to be compromised, but it’s that someone can take and exploit your aggregation of digital data. The emotional impact on the public/consumer base will drive the adoption of change of behavior.

Scenario: what is your last/recent web searches? How does this interact with or integrate with your personal data store.

If you don’t know what is IN the personal data store, you won’t be in a position to decide what and how to share.