Cambridge Analytica and Facebook stretch the boundaries of digital privacy.. Further…Again

Cambridge Analytica and Facebook stretch the boundaries of digital privacy.. Further…Again

Mar 22, 2018 | Change, Governance, Strategy

The Channel 4 expose of Cambridge Analytica last week has started a firestorm of commentary.

Rightly so, but  is it not ironic that the tools CA used to swing the US presidential election are now being used against them after the tactics were revealed?

Facebook, and all the other digital platforms are just wholesalers of eyeballs, in business to collect then monetise their access to personal information, freely given. This how they make their money, exchanging access to the very detailed personal information they collect on their platform users, to advertisers for money.

I wonder if any of us should be surprised at the revelations? This is what they do with our cooperation. The problem in this case is that 50 million of the people whose data was skimmed did not know it was happening and had not given permission for it to happen.The tensions inside Facebook, and the other platforms, between those whose job it is to generate the revenue, and those charged with the responsibility for data security must make for some pretty lively conversations!

The access to the a wider set of eyeballs, via the downloading Apps, games, surveys, and the rest with ‘Friends permission‘ such as the popular game ‘Farmville’ enables access to the personal data of friends of those who are engaged. This Friends access allows ‘thousands of layers of personal information on millions of accounts‘ to be collected. That data was then analysed by Dr. Aleksandr Kogan using the principles developed by  the Psychometrics Centre at Cambridge University. Dr Kogan analysed the data collected for Cambridge Analytica, that had the objective of developing and delivering messages specifically targeted at an individual in order to move their voting behaviour.

Truly scary stuff, science fiction just a few years ago.

Facebook has since suspended Cambridge Analytica and associate SCL (Strategic Communication Laboratories) from facebook, while defending their own actions claiming ‘Protecting peoples information is at the heart of everything we do‘. Suspension is apparently, the ultimate sanction. I guess that we should all be grateful they are looking after our privacy so well, and not going out hawking it in the local bar.

Facebook is really under the regulatory gun in all this, coming as it does on top of the revelations about Russian troll farms and the possible influence they had on the US Presidential election results. However, they should not be the only ones under scrutiny for the use of personal data for profit. That is simply the business model that has evolved in front of us as we all use social platforms of all types and names. Facebook just happens to be the biggest, and best suited to electoral ‘management’ if not fraud.

While the personal information zealots cry about making potentially life saving medical records available on line, and politicians of all colours bleat about how important information privacy is, a hard argument to beat, we all continue to give it away happily for access to ‘cat porn’ and the menu of the local pizza shop.

The debate should be a wider one.

How much power do we want concentrated in the hands of so few providers of digital tools, and how will we  regulate them to ensure they play a constructive role in the development of our communities and society. The follow up question is I suppose, do we have the political machinery with the skills and balls to do anything about the obvious answer.

 

Header cartoon credit: Partial ‘First dog on the moon’  cartoon The Guardian 21/3/18.

Update: March 23

Mark Zuckerberg has released a statement that acknowledges the problem, gives a timeline of what Facebook has done to secure information, but goes nowhere near an apology. I suspect there will be some flurries meant to make Facebook look better, and as a salve to those calling for regulatory action, but little if anything of any consequence will change.

Second update March 24.

I just stumbled across this editorial by Mitch Joel, to my mind one of the interesting and informed thinkers in this space, that really gives some added context to the conversation. It supports the view that none of us should be surprised, we have willingly participated in the end of privacy, and besides, use of social data to manage (code for swing) electoral outcomes in this way is well known.

 

Third update April 16. 

I was sent this very useful explanatory video produced by the NY Times, describing the sequence of events. Thanks Geoff!

Fourth update May 24.

Aleksandr Kogan, the data scientist behind SCL has his say in an interview with Buzzfeed.

Why Wesfarmers is taking Coles through the checkout

Why Wesfarmers is taking Coles through the checkout

Mar 21, 2018 | Governance, Management, Strategy

It is no great surprise to me that Wesfarmers are spinning off the Coles supermarket business, and associated liquor and variety businesses. It also makes sense that they are keeping Officeworks and Bunnings, both stunningly successful businesses in Australia. Bunnings However, has failed miserably in the UK expansion, consuming capital and morale like a starving gypsy. It seems ironic that Coles thought they could beat the odds in the UK, just as Woolworths thought they could beat the odds with Masters here at home.

I do not think it is just being smart with hindsight to have foreseen the spin-off. Wesfarmers always seemed to me to be an owner that had adopted a culturally different and troubled although talented child, and was not too sure what to do with it. Despite pumping a lot of capital (around 8 billion) into the business and successfully turning it around beating the incumbent FMCG thug, Woolworths at their own game for a number of years, it still seemed to be an odd adoption.

A new Managing Director will always be keen to take the opportunity to ‘clear the decks’ of underperforming assets freeing up capital to deploy elsewhere in the hope of better returns.

New Wesfarmers MD Rob Scott is no different. Coles was a weight on the Wesfarmers balance sheet, accounting for 60% of capital employed, but returning only 30% of EBIT. Coles while a strongly cash positive business, is also the second player in a very mature market that faces a volatile future. However, it has played a role in the impressive increase in Wesfarmers value despite the nightmares that must have engulfed then MD Richard Goyder when the 2008 market crash occurred just after the $22 billion Coles acquisition in July 2007.

The FMCG market is entering a volatile period.

The channels to the consumer continue to fragment and enable the entry of innovative business models, and cashed up innovators. Aldi continues to make significant market share headway, Costco while a minnow is continuing to invest, Kaufland appears committed, and the shadow over everything is what Amazon may, or may not do.   Meanwhile, online shopping is increasing, while at the extreme other end of the spectrum, farmers markets, and even ‘pick your own‘ schemes are growing like mushrooms after rain.

Sounds like a good time for Wesfarmers to sell out of what may become a ‘legacy’ business over the next 10 years, and to put shareholders capital to work elsewhere.

 

 

Header credit: David Rowe Via Australian Financial Review.

 

 

A marketers explanation of Internal Rate of Return.

A marketers explanation of Internal Rate of Return.

Mar 19, 2018 | Governance, Management

 

This post should be read by marketers in conjunction with the earlier one that explains Net Present Value.

IRR partners with NPV as another tool in the investment choice toolbox. Both use as their basis, the forecasting of cashflow to make choices between investment options. While there are potentially a whole menu of influences over making decisions about investment options, cash as we know is the lifeblood of any business, and the measure least open to ‘management manipulation’, so should be in the mix.

The Internal Rate of Return, is the discount rate that would result in the net present value of a project to be zero.  In effect, you are  ‘solving’ for the discount rate that is used in the Net present Value calculation.

The discount rate best used in the Net Present Value calculations can be uncertain, we live in volatile times, and IRR is a means of calculating the rate given a set of investment parameters.

Businesses should set out to understand the rate at which the project breaks even,  so the IRR is the interest rate at which the NPV of all cash flows from an investment equals zero. Your investment break even.

IRR enables a ranking of projects by their rates of return to be done, rather than just relying on the NPV of the cash required. However, relying on IRR in isolation has a downside: it does not measure the absolute size of the investment.  A small investment might deliver a very attractive IRR, but be not as strategically attractive as a larger one that positions the business for growth. These are judgements  made outside the straight financial calculations, which are just tools to compare.

As with any mathematical modelling tool, an IRR calculation it also suffers from the ‘garbage in garbage out’ syndrome. Therefore the the most important part of the investigation is to understand and critically analyse the assumptions made, rather than just relying on the numbers Excel spits out to make the decision for you.

 

‘Burley’ is a great metaphor for marketing

‘Burley’ is a great metaphor for marketing

Mar 16, 2018 | Marketing, Small business

 

As a kid, I used to go fishing with my dad sometimes, usually off the rocks around Sydney’s northern beaches. He was a good fisherman, often came home with dinner when others around caught nothing.

His explanation of his relative success was hard for a kid to understand, a combination of the tides, moon, time of year, the spot he picked, and some mysterious concoction brewing under the house called ‘Burley’.

Burley he told me, was a brew he varied depending on the fish he thought would be around, making it easier for them to find him, and willingly receive bait that was irresistible, but hiding a hook.

Not  a bad metaphor for marketing.

Focus on the most likely target given the conditions

Go to where they might be found

Spread around something irresistible to them to attract lookers

Ensure you have the right bait when they turn up

Heat up the pan to receive the ‘incoming’.

 

Marketing ‘burley’ is a tricky thing to get right, so find someone with the experience and knowledge to  ensure your mix works.

Image credit: Hatalina via Flikr

8 habits to generate a return on your investment  attending network meetings

8 habits to generate a return on your investment  attending network meetings

Mar 14, 2018 | Customers, Marketing, Strategy

 

As small business owners, most of us go to network meetings of some sort. BNI, Rotary, your industry association, the local SME network, whatever it is, with the idea that we will make connections with people who may, at some point be useful to us, and to whom we may be useful.

Going to these meetings usually costs a bit of money, but more importantly to time poor entrepreneurs and grinders, it costs us our time.

So how do we make the most of the investment?

It really is pretty simple, all it needs is to be genuinely interested in others, genuinely prepared to help, without necessarily asking for anything in return. This builds trust, and trust is reciprocated.

However, there are some simple things you can do to communicate your value without having to blab it.

Eye contact.

Maintaining eye contact signals sincerity and warmth, weather you are speaking to an individual, or a group. Either way, maintain eye contact. When speaking to more than one, do not  just gaze off into the ether, maintain eye contact with individuals in the audience, move it around, to engage with numbers. Few things annoy me more than meeting someone who is then looking over my shoulder for someone more interesting

Use their name.

Using someones name generates some level of intimacy, especially when we have just met. We are all told that we should repeat back the name of someone to whom we have just been introduced, but many of us do not, so the name goes as we are introduced to the next person. Do whatever is necessary for you to remember peoples names and fall back on the old excuse of ‘I am hopeless with names‘ as sparingly as possible, as it communicates ‘you are not worth knowing‘

Listen actively.

This really just means you give your full attention to the other person when they are speaking. Listen to them, repeat back what they have said as confirmation and perhaps clarification, and ask relevant questions that demonstrates you have been listening thoughtfully, giving their ideas and words your full attention.

Know who you are talking to.

Often this may not be possible, but if you can, know a bit about the person you are talking to by doing a bit of research beforehand. This enables you to ask questions, and make observations to those you meet that will tweak the emotions and motivations of their favourite person, themselves. Often this is impossible, but these days using LinkedIn and the various notifications sent around of who is attending, enables some level of research to be done prior to the meeting. This research always pays off.

Mirroring.

Body language 101 teaches us that people who are interested tend to mirror in very automatic and  subtle ways, the mannerisms and body language of those we are communicating with. There is considerable research that demonstrates conclusively this is not just learned behaviour, but an evolutionary biological process that enables us to distinguish between friends and enemies. It is not creepy to  set out to reflect body language, it is simply empathising.

Be respectful and grateful.

When someone has given you their time and attention, be grateful, and respectful for both.  When you communicate that sense of gratitude, most recipients will return the favour in spades. Wandering through the chairman’s lounge in an airport nearly 20 years ago, I walked past Pat Rafter, at the height of his career, just sitting by himself. By chance, I  caught his eye, slowed down without any intention of stopping, and thanked him for  the pleasure he had given me watching him play over many years. He responded by inviting me to sit, and we had a terrific conversation for 20 minutes until the flight was called. He would not remember, but I do!

Follow up.

This is so obvious it is often missed. Following up a casual meeting at a network group is the first step to be taken in the building of a relationship that might deliver a transaction at some point.  It is also the case that those you meet are often a window into their networks, so even if they are not in your ‘ideal customer’ profile, it is fairly certain that they know someone who is.

Do  not expect an immediate return.

Business is still largely done between people, despite the B2B label much of it goes by. As people, we prefer to do business with those we know,  like and trust, and that implies a relationship into which some investment of time, energy and sometimes a lot of caffeine has been made.

 

Despite all the digital tools, there is nothing like looking into the whites of someones eyes to decide if you want to have more to do with them or not.

Photo credit: Andre Luis via Flikr