Tag: Shawndra Hill

Developing Social Networks in Uganda

“Social media measurement is difficult even in the U.S., where social media penetration is extremely high,” says Shawndra Hill, Wharton professor of operations and information management. “This is no different in contexts like Uganda.”

Hill recently gave a keynote speech at the “Social Media for Business Conference” in Kampala, Uganda, organized by Kampala-based The 360° Network. Approximately 200 people from the telecom, technology and media industries, among others, showed up to gain insights into how companies can measure social media response, engage with their customers and develop social media strategies to fit specific business needs.

Hill’s research looks at large scale social networks, “ones that you can actually observe,” she says. “Think Facebook and Twitter, where you can see the links between individuals who are your customers. At the conference, I talked about mining the data you can get on social networks, whether it is data that is proprietary to a telecom firm, or data you can get in public for free, on [sites like] Twitter.” Such information can be used by companies that want to predict which customers are going to buy their products, for example, versus which customers are engaging in fraudulent activity.

In the developing world, Hill says, there is not a lot of data, “or a culture of collecting it,” on existing and potential customers. Attendees at the Kampala conference questioned her not just about data collection, but about ways to do this in a country where Internet penetration is relatively low. In Uganda, Hill says, a 2010 report cites approximately 16 million mobile subscribers and five million Internet users.

The developing world has an additional challenge, Hill adds: low penetration of credit cards, which means that web purchases are harder to make. “So social media strategy to some extent takes on a different meaning in the developing world context,” she says. “Strategy is still about building brand awareness and engaging with potential customers, but less about immediate online purchases. Strategy in the developing world must also include mobile, which is the future. Mobile penetration is relatively high, and more and more people are using mobile banking apps to engage in commerce.”  

The good news, according to Hill, is that “things are changing quickly.”  When she taught in Ethiopia for the first time four years ago, she asked how many in the audience had signed up for Facebook. No hands went up. Now, she says, when she asked the same question in her Ethiopian classes last summer, almost everyone raised their hands.

It’s no different in Uganda, she adds. “The tech community seems very vibrant and ripe for some kind of killer app to come out of it. Innovation is actually encouraged. For that reason, it’s a great place to think about investing in ideas. It’s a good test bed. It doesn’t have the user base of Kenya or South Africa, but there are people in Uganda who, in their free time, are learning how to develop apps and are very excited about it.”

Uganda needs at least two things now, Hill states. In addition to those killer apps that will “demonstrate the power of social media, connectivity and business outcomes … the country also needs a way to collect data on Internet users to begin to better understand Internet, mobile and consumer behavior via business analytics.”

Google, Hill says, just opened an office in Uganda, “which sends a signal that Africa – Uganda, in particular — is important to them in trying to understand how to bring the masses online, consumers [as well as] firms. Google is there trying to build the infrastructure to make that happen.”

Featured Professors:
Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Also tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Internet Privacy Takes a Hit, Again

Google, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal last week, has not been playing fair when it comes to upholding its own privacy standards.

The company has been tracking “web-browsing habits of people using Safari browser software even if [users] intended for that kind of monitoring to be blocked,” the Journal article noted, adding that this behavior has led three U.S. congressmen to ask for a Federal Trade Commission investigation. The article also pointed out the company last year signed a privacy settlement with the FTC after the commission charged it with using “deceptive tactics and violating its own privacy promises to consumers” when it launched its Buzz social network.

As for the breach the Journal found last week, Google responded that it has deleted the tracking files in question and is addressing the congressmen’s concerns.

KnowledgeToday asked two Wharton faculty — Andrea Matwyshyn, professor of legal studies and business ethics, and Shawndra Hill, professor of operations and information management — to comment on this latest incident.

Given all the recent examples of Internet companies chipping away at people’s privacy, how serious is this latest breach?

Matwyshyn: According to press reports of commentary from a Google spokesperson, the company does not necessarily consider its actions to constitute impermissible conduct: Google is alleging that users authorized the company to interact with their data in certain ways and, by implication, that this consent authorized alteration of inconsistent settings on a device, which may have happened in an unanticipated manner. 

Hill: Firms like Google need to take [care] because legal cases regarding privacy breaches can and do go to court. With each breach, Google opens itself up to punishment and a degradation of consumer trust. In this [latest incident], millions of consumers might be affected, which could indeed prove problematic for Google because of the scale of the Safari problem.

What would have led Google to do this? An obvious answer is the increasing competition for ad dollars, but is there another explanation? 

Matwyshyn: This type of error is symptomatic of the broader privacy and security culture wars going on inside all companies, but technology companies in particular. Privacy and security champions and lawyers frequently butt heads internally with engineers over design and consumer protection. In engineering-focused cultures such as Google’s, shipping code usually wins, and privacy/security and consumer protection can be viewed by some internal decision makers as secondary things you “clean up” when they go awry, rather than things companies must design around.   

Hill: It’s possible that better advertising alone is driving the data collection when consumers use the Safari browser. However, it is also possible that Google was not aware of all the consequences of their actions. It is often the case with data collection that you have one intention but that there are other uses that are unforeseen when the data or process for data collection is established. Still, Google should do a better job identifying potential problems before launching new processes.

Is it conceivable that Google didn’t know this was happening?

Matwyshyn: Code is written by humans, for humans.  Yes, it’s entirely conceivable Google didn’t do their homework and anticipate this dynamic. It’s also conceivable that a company might anticipate a dynamic such as this, but would then decide that fixing it is a lower priority than shipping code out fast. A third scenario might be that a company decides this type of dynamic is a feature and not a bug, that their consumer EULA [end user license agreement] grants the right to tweak settings on user devices and that users are unlikely to notice the exact workings of the code.

Do you think Google’s reputation as a “do no evil” site has taken a substantial hit?

Matwyshyn: “Do no evil” was Google’s successful mantra from the 1990s and 2000s. Those days are gone from the standpoint of consumer perception. Although Google’s socially-beneficial pilot programs and philanthropic efforts are commendable, in the 2010s many consumers view Google as an aggressive data aggregator akin to Facebook. Microsoft is the new underdog.

Hill: Google is scheduled to change their privacy settings next month. In addition, they have come under scrutiny regarding other privacy breaches in the past year. While the firm may continue to claim to “do no evil,” their business strategy is certainly changing; no doubt consumer perceptions, and possibly trust, will change as a result. However, other large data driven companies are using behavioral, social network and demographic information to target ads. So, it’s not like there is an alternative (right now) where user data are not being used for advertising and business intelligence.

The main concern for consumers will come when/if Google tries to maximize their advertising dollars at the expense of giving users the most relevant information to answer their search queries.

Three congressmen have called on the FTC to investigate Google over this practice. Are we finally reaching a tipping point where the privacy issue has caused enough concern that the government will mete out serious sanctions/punishment?

Matwyshyn: One possible outcome may be another FTC consent decree expanding the existing mandatory periodic FTC audits…. The organizational impact of FTC audits may be underestimated internally: FTC audits are a disruptive and expensive experience, as Microsoft learned. If this underestimation is the case, and if the privacy lessons from Buzz have not been internalized by the corporate culture, it is unsurprising that another privacy problem has arisen.

Hill: It’s hard to say which case will end up [resulting in a] severe punishment. However, with each case, we get further along into the discussion about what is acceptable and what is not with respect to consumer privacy. The hope, at least from consumers, is that the conversation will evolve into a clear set of rules and regulations that govern how online firms and others can make use of personal data while offering useful, and free, services.

Featured Professors: ,
Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Also tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment