Results

The election season is reaching a fever pitch, and this election year the candidates are reaching out to voters in unique ways. All of the top contenders have some type of online presence, though some have been more successful in their social networking efforts than others. They have created Facebook pages and groups, MySpace profiles, YouTube videos, and encouraged their supporters to organize through Meetup.com. So far, Republican Ron Paul has focused on Web 2.0 tools more than any other candidate, and he tops the list of candidate Google searches for 2007. He has certainly started a trend, but the question remains: will hits and Facebook friends translate into votes?

The candidates have used different means of reaching voters who hang out online, and with varying degrees of success. Democrat Barack Obama’s Facebook group, “One Million Strong for Barack” was created by a supporter, and infamously joined by Rudy Giuliani’s daughter. Other candidates have copied the verbiage, including TV personality Stephen Colbert, though to date the group is home to just over 400,000 Facebook members. The group is a grassroots effort run by supporters, and is not affiliated with Obama’s campaign. This is in contrast to the other candidates Facebook groups, which are calculated PR moves. Perhaps this puts Obama ahead of the curve when election time arrives.

Another frequently used site is YouTube, where the candidates have jointly posted over 2500 videos since last January (452 of those belong to Republican Mitt Romney, never one to be camera-shy). Perhaps the most entertaining of these comes from Mike Huckabee, who is clearly trying to capitalize on the recent endorsement from Chuck Norris, a.k.a. Walker, Texas Ranger. Huckabee asserts (with straight face) that “there’s no chin under Chuck Norris’ beard, only another fist.” It’s clear this ad is meant to appeal to the YouTube demographic, as I’m sure my grandmother wouldn’t laugh at this joke.

Perhaps the most influential of the Web 2.0 sites used by presidential candidates is Meetup.com, a networking site which allows users to connect with others in their communities with similar interests. Their website states: “We want to see the world’s people self-organize. We believe that people can change their world, or the world by organizing themselves into groups - Meetups - powerful enough to make a difference.” Ron Paul has had tremendous success with Meetup, and his approximately 82,000 supporters have organized 21,000 offline events to fund raise and generate support for him. Whether he wins or loses the nomination, his success using Meetup and other social networking sites will likely be emulated in future election campaigns.

Web analytics company Compete has created a tool to track the candidates and their successes and failures using online networking. Candidate Facetime breaks up the candidates by party and shows what percentage of their “hits” are on their official websites, how their hits stack up against their competitors, and how many total hours people have spent learning about them through their Web 2.0 efforts. November’s data shows Ron Paul as a clear Republican frontrunner when it comes to generating online buzz, while Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards are neck-and-neck for the Democrats.

As Mike Huckabee points out on his Facebook group, “I believe that the internet will play a huge role in the 2008 campaign and sites such as this are wonderful tools for people to come together and show their support for the candidate of their choice.” Right he is, especially when it comes to gathering support among younger, more wired voters. Or are they “voters” when all they’ve done to express their political beliefs is to post a candidate’s name to an online profile? Are these groups just a way for lazy voters to establish a political identity, or will they transform into actual support for these candidates? We’re about to find out.

The day is soon approaching when the major electronic devices in our lives will become integrated. Our phones are already MP3 players, our digital cameras are already phones, and our phones are becoming more and more like laptops. The TV set seems to be the last man out in this trend, like the wimpy kid who gets picked last for the dodge ball team (no offense meant, I was that wimpy kid). In our heart of hearts, we all expected to be surfing the internet on our TVs by now, and it’s disappointing that it hasn’t come to fruition. However, some folks are working on providing internet video through our TVs, and the challenges they face are immense. With the high cost of service and hardware, the lack of quality content, the slow download speeds, and the complications of setup, there are definitely hurdles that these companies are going to have to jump.

Apple TV is a serious contender in this market, and some industry experts expect their business to grow significantly in 2008. Their relatively small box would be fairly easy to find room for in your entertainment center, but the 40GB version retails for $299.00, which is a bit much for the pleasure of watching YouTube on a widescreen. In addition to other internet video sites, Apple TV can access your iTunes library and display your downloads on your TV. The device works with a wireless connection, so it wouldn’t be practical if your home connection isn’t wireless.

Sony also released a device called “BRAVIA Internet Video Link”, which will be integrated into most of its new television sets to allow them access to free internet video content from providers such as AOL, Yahoo!, Grouper, and of course, Sony BMG and Sony Pictures. The BRAVIA link will access your broadband Ethernet connection, so it won’t be a problem for non-wireless subscribers. There’s also no extra fee for the service, though how long that will be true is another question. One is immediately suspicious that ISPs or cable companies (which are mostly the same these days) will find a way to charge you extra for downloading and watching videos on your TV. After all, as a Canadian man found out recently, providers always seem to find exceptions to the term “unlimited”.

There is another concern for companies looking to bring web video to the living room. Those Marshall McLuhan scholars may recall the mantra, “The medium is the message,” and while television is the medium of passivity, the internet is the medium of creativity, at least when it comes to user-generated video content. People do not contribute to their favorite TV shows, but they do increasingly contribute to the content we view on the web. People watch TV when they want to absorb, not create, and it’s unclear as to whether these two desires can be balanced.

So the question is: does anyone really want to watch YouTube on their TV? Do they want to flip on their TV and actively search for shows or do they want to consume whatever FOX, NBC, ABC, and CBS has planned for the evening? Forrester Research indicates that 80% of responders would not pay for an internet video TV device at any price (Wall Street Journal article). The makers of these adaptive devices may find that there simply isn’t a market for their product.

Another challenge they face is the rise of web-enabled cell phones. It seems that we’re watching internet video on increasingly smaller screens rather than on our increasingly humongous television sets. Web-enabled phones have seen huge growth this year, and their ability to entertain us seems endless. Who wouldn’t want to check out last night’s episode of The Office during the morning commuter rail ride?

Internet video TV devices may be barking up the wrong tree, but it’s not entirely a lost cause. The industry needs to do some serious thinking about their target market, and they need to make the devices less obtrusive and more affordable. Whether or not web video is brought to our TV screens, the idea of consolidating electronic devices will live on, and eventually our TVs will be able to join the rest of the proverbial dodge ball team.

It’s a struggle for any company to reach the right market for their products and services. How do you know what type of person will want to use what you’re selling? How do you find the right tools to market your service specifically to those people? And how do you know if your efforts were fruitful in the end? One process that can be applied to answer these questions is called persona building. A persona, simply put, is an easy-to-navigate dossier that describes a typical user or group of users. It is a detailed biography of existing or imagined customers. Building these personas can help you identify, cater to, and gather feedback from the customers who will find your product or service the most useful.

Many companies approach user profiling with little more than unfounded assumptions about user’s needs and actions. They believe that they “know” how users think, or can predict their behavior. Avoid this kind of conjecture. A truly effective persona will be based on concrete data and actual user profiles; it should be much more than baseless suppositions about their needs. Do the research, compile the data, and use that information as the skeleton for a user profile. You can organize this information in much the same way you would format a resume or CV. The skeleton profile can include sections on your user’s objectives, educational and occupational backgrounds, favorite activities, skills and abilities, and even shortcomings. Adding personal details, photos, even sound and video files (a theoretical subject’s favorite song, for example), will flesh out the picture, making your persona as human as you and me.

One mistake that businesses often make it to create just one user profile for each product or service. This can control your marketing efforts and restrict freedom and success. There are many different “standard” users for every product. For a high-volume website, for example, it would be advisable to create many personas, each of which are representative of a portion of your user-base. This is especially true if your product or service will reach a diverse or even international audience.

Another common mistake that is made is “over-doing” the persona. The profile you create should match your the type of customers that you actually have - nothing more and nothing less. Incorrectly identifying them will lead to decisions that will impact your business and the type of applications your trying to build. Missing a group of people could mean that certain features are not available or may not be easy to use. Identifying someone who does not fit with your audience could result in the addition of features that no one will use, and it will scuttle the user experience.

Below are two brief examples of personas for two different users of Talkibie:

User A - Karen Fielding

Background info: Karen is a graphic designer with a local firm in the Phoenix, AZ area. She is good at her job, but she has not had any professional development classes in a while. She is largely self-taught, and she tries to keep up with trends and technology by reading blogs and online training documentation. She finds her coworkers are younger and younger, and she’s trying to stay ahead of the new talent in her field.

About Karen: She is in her mid-30s, and she’s very socially active with friends and coworkers. She likes to visit museums and galleries, and she considers her work to be an art-form. She uses the internet mainly for work to keep up with email, but she’s computer savvy and quick to pick up new skills.

What she values: Intelligence, efficiency, and a sense of humor.

Quote: “I like a website that’s informative and entertaining.”

User B - Dan DiMaggio

Background info: Dan is the CEO of a staffing firm which serves 3 states in the Northeast. His job entails managing a staff of 150, and they’re always suggesting ways to improve the company’s reputation through web-based technology. He’s great at the business-side of his job, but he’s lost when it comes to technology solutions.

About Dan: He’s in his 50s, and he’s been with the same company for 25 years. He loves managing his staff, and they like and respect him. However, he’s so clueless about computers that he has his assistant print out his emails each morning so that he can draft replies by hand. He wants to learn how to do these things, but it seems like no one has the patience to teach him.

What he values: Loyalty, hard work, customer satisfaction

Quote: “How can I approve new website functions when I can’t even figure out how to sign on to the internet?”

These two very different Talkibie readers have very different levels of experience and backgrounds, but after creating profiles of this type it’s easy to anticipate their needs. Dan would need a very simple interface which features instructive articles written so that anyone could understand the topic being presented. Karen, on the other hand, would want a slick-looking site where she can read about the latest trends and how to implement them in her regular workflow . Karen would be the type of user to give back to the online community by posting comments and questions on blogs, where as Dan would be more absorbent, looking for information rather than creating dialogue, and he’d probably want it in a printable format. A solid persona includes not just age, gender, and buying habits, but also less-tangible characteristics like experience-level, values, and attitudes.

The key to serving a diverse audience with any product is to actually get to know them and attempt to address their needs. Predicting this information can prove invaluable when it comes to designing an application or product tailored to your personas. If, for example, you know that a significant portion of your target audience is blind or disabled, you can maximize the accessibility of your application or service with careful design that allows your users to function at their peak. This would include strategies such as keeping content simple and organized so screen reading software can be effectual, including captioning options with multimedia portions of your site, allowing keyboard commands as an alternative to mouse-driven content, and enabling your user to control style sheets for maximum readability. If your target audience tends to be under 25, you can consider integrating social networking widgets for a customizable interface, or allowing each user to create a personalized profile for your site. A good user experience is the most obvious benefit of carefully crafting personas before beginning design. At the end of the day, the aim is to create a design for your customers that makes it feel as though it was built specifically for them, regardless of their various backgrounds. Having solid personas up front is key in reaching that goal.

But forget what the textbooks say about consumer profiles. When you create a persona, you should be creating an imaginary friend. Unlike when you were four, this imaginary friend should not be named Bongo or want to tip your milk cup over the kitty cat just to see what she’ll do. No, this imaginary friend should resemble your clients, your ideal clients. You should know this persona well enough to predict how he/she will use your services or products, and they should be an “easy sell” for your idea. Your persona’s motivations and abilities should become second nature to you. You’ll know before it happens that the milk cup is about to be overturned. And if you like, you still can name your persona Bongo.

Many companies struggle with their product development process. Some are constantly pressed for time and behind schedule, trying to balance quality content with tight budgets, and some have trouble keeping up with the desires of their users. One thing almost all companies have in common is the drive to innovate, but the inability to do so consistently. Not every product can be a breakthrough, and often new releases tend to be upgrades to old products instead of radical new products. One way to combat this stagnation is to implement the “lead user” process, where companies employ expert customers to search for breakthrough ideas.

Lead users are more than just early adopters, like those poor folks who bought the iPhone for $600. They are consumers who take existing products and adapt them to suit their own needs. A lead user is someone who cannot be satisfied by existing technology because it does not meet their unique high-level needs. For example, a NASCAR driver like Jeff Gordon might make tweaks and adjustments to his family car, while an expert jeweler may add a special clamp or built-in tool to a standard workbench. Incorporating lead users into your product planning and development cycles allows you to create a product that directly meets the needs and fulfills the desires of your most demanding users.

Several organizations have adopted the lead user process to give their products the best chance at innovation. Evolv, a company that makes rock climbing shoes, brought one of the best-known athletes into their lab to design a shoe from start to finish is one example. Evolv sponsors Chris Sharma, arguably the world’s best rock climber, and they invited him to participate in the creative product development process. Everyone benefits in this situation: Evolv gets an innovative product, customers gain access to a shoe designed by Chris Sharma, and Sharma gets a shoe he designed for his specific needs.

Another example of the lead user process is the growing world of open source software. Open source software packages make the source code available to the public so that creative programmers and developers can write ad-on programs and accessories for the product line. Mozilla is a company that has taken full advantage of this trend, and lead users have taken the source material to new heights with widgets and plug-ins that increase the functionality of their products. Facebook is another innovator in the field of open source software, and their site hosts thousands of applications written by third-party lead users for the benefit of average users.

Using outside experts is a great way to keep the product development process on the cutting edge. Organizations often doubt the willingness of lead users to contribute to product cycles, but most are enthusiastic about sharing their expertise and ideas. It benefits them just as much as it does the average consumer. Talent is talent, no matter what the source. It’s never too early to incorporate the lead user process into your product development group, and this technique, in conjunction with your existing usability techniques, can help you determine whether a new idea is viable, how you should approach your research, and what new users your ideas might be able to reach.

Google has long been a proponent of green technology and reducing carbon emissions for some time. In 2007 they announced a plan to become “carbon neutral”, reducing their carbon emissions from data centers and offices to zero. Part of the solution was building a massive solar panel at their Mountain View, California campus. They also supported (with VC money) the RechargeIT initiative, which promotes the use of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. However, a November 27th announcement shows that Google’s commitment to renewable energy goes beyond reducing their office’s carbon footprint and giving money to other organizations. They are launching an initiative known as RE>C, which aims to develop cheaper and cleaner energy sources than coal. RE>C will “focus initially on advanced solar thermal power, wind power technologies, enhanced geothermal systems and other potential breakthrough technologies.” ( Google Press Center ). This move is not only responsible, but it also makes good business sense.

Google has millions to spend on side projects beyond the search engine and advertising core of their business, and renewable energy is increasingly an enticing investment as the world slowly wakes up to the reality of global warming. The burning of coal is currently the primary energy source for most people around the world, making up 40% of the world’s electricity production. It is also one of the leading producer of greenhouse gases, which contributes to the climate crisis. Coal is so popular because it is the cheapest energy source, but Google’s initiative aims to change this.

RE<C has already begun supporting two companies that are working towards cheaper electricity from solar and wind power. eSolar Inc. specializes in solar thermal power. They are driven by the simple concept that renewable energy should be priced competitively with fossil fuels. They produce relatively-small panels, which they call “heliostats”, and they are installed in configurations that maximize the energy absorbed. These installations are efficient, fast, and scalable to different sizes of power plants. Makani Power, which draws its name from the Hawaiian word “mah kah’ nee” meaning wind, focuses on high altitude wind energy. Founded by an MIT PhD and a wind surfing champion, Makani is developing high altitude wind capture technologies that have the energy potential to supply the entire globe.

Google has a real need for these types of technologies, as its data centers are some of the largest in the world. It’s not at all surprising that the biggest fish in the Silicon Valley pond is taking a stab at supporting renewable energy initiatives. What is surprising is that the move is not entirely a venture capital project. In addition to supporting companies like eSolar and Makani, Google will be hiring an in-house team of engineers and energy experts to work on the problem of cheaper-than-coal electricity. They will be tasked with the specific goal of “building 1 gigawatt of renewable energy capacity that is cheaper than coal. (That’s enough electricity to power a city the size of San Francisco.)” according to a Google press release. Though there are no specific numbers in terms of money allotted for this team, they are expected to complete their task “in years, not decades”.

While countless bloggers and industry experts are bemoaning Google’s apparent inability to stay within their realm of expertise, one cannot help but admire their hands-on approach. As an organization, they attract limitless talent, pull in countless billions, and have a reputation for success. They’re oozing money, and it’s hard to criticize a company that chooses to use their assets to support an important cause. Besides, this is essentially a business initiative. Renewable energy is beginning to catch on, and Google is getting in on the ground floor of an industry that is bound to grow. It’s a smart move, no matter how you look at it. Good PR + good ROI + doing good = a winning combination.

For more information about RE>C, please visit http://www.google.com/corporate/green/energy/index.html. To contact Google about investment, R&D, or project opportunities, send proposals and contact information to renewables@google.com.

A few weeks ago, Facebook begun a revolutionary advertising system called Beacon, which would collect data about user’s purchases on outside websites and add them to their Facebook profiles, through the news feed/mini feed functions. The original goal for Beacon was, “to build a simple product to let people share information across sites with their friends”
(Facebook blog). The service would tell your friends what movie tickets you purchased on Fandango.com, for example, or which games you added to your queue on Gamefly. The idea struck some users, though, as a distinct invasion of privacy, and for others Beacon was literally the Grinch who stole Christmas. Reportedly, one man’s wife learned of the diamond ring he’d bought her for the holiday from his Facebook mini-feed.

Beacon was meant to be a key part of Facebook’s social advertising strategy, where social networking is a springboard for word-of-mouth advertising. Unfortunately, Beacon did not receive the accolades they expected. Instead, MoveOn.org, a civic action advocacy organization, became involved and accused Facebook of violating user privacy. Users formed a group on Facebook itself called “Petition: Facebook, stop invading my privacy!”, which now has more than 75,000 members. It wouldn’t be surprising if litigators get involved at some point (emotional distress over spoiled gift surprises is a far more valid claim than many of the lawsuits our courts are forced to hear).

All this hoopla and backlash has forced Facebook to apologize and make amends by giving users the option of turning off Beacon. Here’s how to opt-out:

• Click the “Privacy” tab in the upper right hand corner on your Facebook page.
• Select “Edit Setting” under External Websites
• Check the box that says “Don’t allow any websites to send stories to my profile”.

While allowing users to turn off Beacon is a step in the right direction, some users are still critical of Facebook, with one blogger noting that the text “is a very light gray…on a white background. Specifically designed to blend in with the background, once again making it all that more difficult to get out of the damn thing.” For those who choose to opt-in, Facebook added pop-up windows to the system that force users to click “OK” before any action at a third-party website is posted to their profiles/mini-feeds. This allows users to cherry pick which actions they want friends to see and which actions they want to keep private.

Other industry watchdogs claim that turning off Beacon does not mean that Facebook is not still collecting data about your activities from outside websites; it just means that your friends don’t see that data in their news feeds. Those claims are expressly denied by Facebook: “If you select that you don’t want to share some Beacon actions or if you turn off Beacon, then Facebook won’t store those actions even when partners send them to Facebook” (Facebook blog). Those partners, by the way, are mostly keeping mum about the backlash. It’s also surprisingly difficult to find a complete list of which websites are participating, though this blog published a partial list.

It seems that social advertising is not what the public wants, even though it would be enormously beneficial to the advertisers who get a ready-made captive audience. This hiccough is not likely to be the death of systems like Beacon, though. The idea is too juicy to let it die, though I guarantee that similar initiatives will be far less transparent in the future. While “they” (in the Big Brother sense of the word) may have lost this round, our actions on the web will continue to be tracked, shared, and stored. The only question is, will other companies have the guts to admit privacy violations like Facebook did, or will they simply make their efforts invisible to users?

Once upon a time, little more than a decade ago, if you wanted to rent a movie you had to physically visit a video store. You had to drive your gas-guzzling vehicle through rain and snow, busy streets, and crowded parking lots. When you actually arrived at the store, you encountered less-than-enthusiastic employees, little selection, and draconian late fees. You would pay a steep price per movie, and you would have to bring it back again the next day to avoid more fees. If you wanted a specific film, you probably should have called ahead to see if it was available at your local store, because otherwise you’ll end up watching whichever new release is still on the shelf.

Nowadays, the movie fan has many more options that do not involve the negative experiences described above. More and more people are signing up for online rental services like Netflix, which revolutionized the way we watch movies when they begun service in 1999. They are drawn to the convenience, selection, and service that a traditional brick-and-mortar store cannot offer. Netflix spokesperson Steve Swasey points out, “You can rent from wherever you want, whether you’re at home, at work, or at Starbucks.” Best of all, compared with the average video store’s selection of 3,000 to 5,000 titles, Netflix now offers over 90,000 films of every possible genre.

The subscription service works on a very simple model. Members sign up for one of nine different plans, each offering a different number of movies at a time/per month, and each at a different price point. They can then search Netflix’s catalog of films and add them to a personal “queue”. Films will be shipped based on their order in your queue, and you can reorganize the order at any time. Your DVDs arrive in those tell-tale red envelopes which are designed to be your return envelope as well. The business model is smart, efficient, and it filled a real need in the marketplace. In fact, Netflix finds themselves with with 70% of the online movie rental market, with approximately 7 million subscribers. They are still growing rapidly, and they are poised to be very competitive in the $8 billion movie rental industry.

Obviously, as the largest of the traditional video chains, Blockbuster had to step up to the plate. They announced a service to rival Netflix called Total Access, which allowed customers to receive DVDs in the mail and exchange them in the store, all for lower prices. The Total Access service was successful in the short term, and it caused Netflix to drop their prices and add more DVDs to their catalog, but it wasn’t as competitive as they had hoped. It seems that people don’t want to go to the video store, even if it means getting more movies at once, and Netflix’s members seem to be abnormally loyal. This is bad news for Blockbuster, who’s third-quarter results are looking dismal. They have been forced to close hundreds of stores in the past year and cut many jobs to keep their heads above water.

As CNET’s News blog points out, “Blockbuster has been a victim on an online company finding new and inventive ways of bringing a product to a customer.” Why has Netflix been so successful? Why are their customers so loyal? Swasey attributes it to Netflix’s commitment to improving the customer experience: “We continued to invest in content by adding Blu-ray and HD DVD options and improving our user-friendly website. We added price plans so there would be something for everybody.” Indeed, the focus on website customer experience has paid off, as Netflix has been named the #1 rated website for customer satisfaction for five consecutive periods as a result of independent surveys conducted by ForeSee Results.

Netflix cares enough about user experience to offer a $1 million prize to any programmer who can improve their movie recommendation application by 10%. The system allows members to rate movies they’ve seen, then recommends other movies of similar genres, themes, and styles. So far, one team has been awarded a progress prize of $50,000 for their efforts, but the big money is still on the table. Other website improvements are also a priority, with the newly added “drag and drop” queue and the “watch instantly” function which allows users to see films directly in their browsers. In addition to improving the online experience, Netflix recently moved all their customer service to a call center in Oregon, so users can actually talk to a real person if they have a problem with service.

More and more traditional businesses are seeing market share slip away to e-businesses, and their efforts to hold onto customers are not terribly successful. Like Blockbuster, many of these brick-and-mortars compete only with prices without regard to the level of service that consumers want. They undercut not only their online rivals, but also themselves, and their services are not financially sustainable. The best way to compete would be to take an honest look at the user experience, which is something most brick-and-mortars never do. E-businesses and traditional businesses alike could look to market leaders like Netflix for solutions to their customer service shortcomings. In the meantime, I think I’ll take a look at what films await me in my Netflix queue.

A recent survey appearing in Health Affairs: The Policy Journal of the Health Sphere, shows that Americans find little satisfaction in the current health care system. The study focused on seven developed countries: Australia, Canada, Britain, Germany, The Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United States. In almost all categories, U.S. patients ranked themselves dead last. Americans have the lowest life expectancy, the highest percent of GDP spent on health care, and the highest infant mortality rate of the nations polled.

A whopping 32% of patients have experienced medical mistakes, where as only 16% of Dutch patients said the same. This could be a result of doctors’ complaints about not having access to medical records at the time of service. Only 49% of Americans are able to get an appointment with their physician when they’re ill, whereas 75% of New Zealanders are able to see their doctors when it counts most. Even more revealing, 34% of U.S. patients surveyed say that the health care system needs to be entirely rebuilt.

What can health care providers, including physicians, hospitals, government programs, and insurance companies do to combat this high level of dissatisfaction? Is there something short of a complete overhaul that will improve the health care experience of the average American? Perhaps providers can take a page out of the book of private business, where the ultimate goal is always improving the customer experience. In the few months, Talkibie has reported on some of the high tech solutions that many providers are using to give their patients the best possible care. These new services and technologies could solve some of the user frustrations with our current health care system.

As reported earlier this fall, a Canadian company called Myca has been giving patients access to their doctors through cell phone video conferencing. Canada ranked the lowest of all seven countries when it came to same or next-day appointments with doctors, with the U.S. a close second. The service allows subscribers and doctors to communicate visually through their phones, and conversations can be logged and incorporated into existing medical records. Prescriptions can even be assigned by email. This could be a major help to physicians who suffer from a constant backlog of appointments, and for patients with minor ailments who need medication but do not necessarily need to be seen face-to-face. Providers and patients currently using the service have seized a golden opportunity to streamline the antiquated protocol of our current health care system.

Patients may also turn to alternative online options to increase their satisfaction with the health care system. Microsoft is courting the disgruntled patient with its new HealthVault service, which debuted in October. The idea is that medical records can be stored online and shared with any health care providers who use the service, regardless of whether or not they’re your primary doctor, a specialist, or a surgeon. It’s easy to see how a service of this kind would reduce the rate of medical mistakes due to a lack of access to medical records. And Microsoft is not the only high tech company to offer this service. Google unveiled vague plans to host online medical records, which it says was inspired by the destruction of thousands of patient records during Hurricane Katrina.

The U.S. health care system most definitely needs some changes, and borrowing a few tricks from the internet technology world could potentially solve common problems that affect the patient experience. Innovators in both fields could work together to identify and address the concerns of patients, and by using a problem-solving process that focuses on the needs of the end-user, we just might avoid a total overhaul.

As the Wall Street Journal reported last week, Google is finally close to a launch of the long rumored “GDrive” (not yet the official product name), a service which would offer online storage for data of all sorts. Pricing and storage capacity has not been announced, but it is likely to come in free and paid versions, depending on the level of service/size of storage. Rather than a completely new product, the GDrive will probably combine the existing storage capacities of your Gmail, Picassa web photo albums, Google Apps documents, etc. The GDrive is aimed at replacing your computer’s hard drive with an online, searchable option that would support your email messages, photos, documents, music, and videos.

Google is not the only company to attempt an online file storage service. Omnidrive offers several levels of service for yearly subscription fees. One gigabyte is free (it will grow with your files for a fee), and features include drag-and-drop for file transfer, collaboration on documents, and file sharing by web address. Microsoft also has an online file storage service, called SkyDrive. One gigabyte is also free, and each folder can be password protected for sharing with different individuals and groups. Unlike Google Apps, however, files cannot be edited online with SkyDrive.

The pros of this storage method are obvious. With online editing capabilities a service of this kind would do away with multiple versions of the same document, and it makes collaboration easy and convenient. Online data storage also allows you to share your documents through a simple web address, which is great for family photo albums, HR policy documents, etc. These files are accessible from any computer with internet access, so your hard drive essentially travels with you regardless of who’s computer you’re using. The GDrive is also remarkable for its disaster recovery possibilities; no more losing all your documents if your hard drive crashes, your office burns down, or your laptop is stolen.

Unfortunately, the cons of the GDrive and similar services are just as clear. First, the ever-present privacy question: will Google use the content of your GDrive to target advertising at users? This is already in place for GMail, and it’s frankly a huge turn-off. Google does have a strong track record of protecting user data from third parties, but they’re a bit lax about using said data to push ads in our faces. The fact that all files are stored online is also a detriment, since business users in particular may need to access documents when they cannot access the internet (i.e. when flying). Google has said they want the service to mimic a traditional hard drive, but the jury is still out on how they can accomplish this without offline functionality. There are also copyright issues to address, particularly when it comes to music and video clips that will be stored and shared through the GDrive service. Google is reportedly working with key copyright holders to create solutions, but they have faced complaints in the past with regard to content on YouTube. Tech bloggers are sure to carefully comb the Terms of Service of the GDrive to prevent any abuse of copyright claims.

Whether the pros outweigh the cons in this case is a personal opinion. Obviously it will take time to build up the level of trust that businesses will need to store sensitive files online, though I’m certain the GDrive will be popular with younger Web 2.0 users, who already publicize much of their lives online through social networking sites. The GDrive reflects a trend of mobile computing that is likely to see huge growth in the coming years. Users are beginning to demand access to all their data from any device, be it a phone, a micro laptop, or a traditional computer. Google, while not the only company to respond to these desires, is potentially the most likely to pull it off due to their general propriety and trustworthiness. After all, the much-quoted Ten Things which serve as a moral compass for the search giant does suggest, “You can make money without doing evil.” What more can we ask of our technology innovators?

Web 2.0 technologies are often finding a place in the business world, and wiki is the latest tool that’s causing a sensation and pleasing companies to no end. Wikis can adapt to the requirements of many organizations and give teams the ability to share knowledge in a collaborative manner. However, as any IT department knows, you just might have a riot on your hands if a new technology is not implemented in the right manner. Organizations, no matter how innovative and creative, are slow to adapt to changes in process and reluctant to learn new skills. Luckily, there are plenty of ways to combat this attitude and make an enterprise wiki successful.

A wiki, as defined by the most successful of them all (Wikipedia), is “a type of computer software that allows users to easily create, edit and link web pages.” It is essentially an online database in the form of web pages that can be explored, edited, and shared by a number of people. Wikipedia, for better or worse, is increasingly the first source we turn to for knowledge of any sort, be it the birth date of a celebrity or an explanation of a Walt Whitman poem. Users of the site can write content and add details to pages within the database to increase the usefulness of the articles. The same principle is beginning to be adopted by companies looking to simplify their means of information-sharing within their intranet. Users could turn to an internal wiki to learn how to upgrade their software, access information about past projects, find human resources policies and forms, or suggest changes to procedures that will benefit multiple units within the enterprise.

Many well-known organizations have turned to wiki for information sharing. Discovery Communications, which is the parent company for Discovery Channel and its affiliates, created a wiki where viewers could provide feedback on programs, discuss shows with other viewers, upload videos, and even recommend new content to producers and executives. Boston College’s Gerald School of Information Management has also created a wiki for classes where students post ideas, essays, and suggest exam questions. Students have the opportunity to collaborate and learn from their peers in a manner which does not increase the workload for professors.

There are two major types of wikis that can be applied in a business setting, depending on an organization’s needs: suites generally include enterprise bookmarking, blogging, and tagging programs, while stand-alone wikis are stripped down to provide basic service. The need for suites depend on the type, size, and resources of the organization. The end-user or audience for the wiki must be the determining factor when you make a decision. Is this a group that is familiar with Web 2.0 technologies, or will the wiki be their first experience of this type? What are likely to be their goals in creating a wiki? If your audience is active, eager, and motivated, you’ll have an easier time implementing a wiki, and potentially an entire suite Web 2.0 tools. Regardless of what type of software is chosen, it’s very important that organizations keep the implementation simple, organic, and rewarding to contributors.

While it’s easy for a college professor to provide incentives to participate in a wiki (class credit could depend on the number and quality of posts), there are still ways to encourage participation within an enterprise. First, think about a tiered release, with high-level users such as IT professionals and managers acting as the “front line”. These users can get the ball rolling and supply the wiki with a solid foundation of information, forms, and documentation that other users will come to appreciate. Once a foundation is in place, other users can be incorporated into the wiki and they should be encouraged to modify and add to existing pages. Next, participation in the wiki could be added as a regular task to employee schedules or as a part of a performance evaluation. Negative consequences are always less effective than positive reinforcement.

Some popular wiki packages include BEA Systems’ AquaLogic, and Microsoft’s SharePoint, both of which fall into the “suite” category, and include other Enterprise 2.0 services. Stand-alone programs include Mediawiki (the software behind Wikipedia), Tikiwiki (which is open source for customization), and Dokuwiki. All have different features, strengths, and capabilities and your best choice depends on the needs of your organization. The benefits of using this type of collaborative technology are many, and more and more creative companies are turning to wikis as an easy and effective way to keep teams up-to-date on in-house knowledge. This is especially useful in high turnover jobs like customer service and support personnel. A wiki can capture the accumulated knowledge of workers and make it easily accessible to new employees. Reps might use the wiki to log particularly successful or challenging support calls, and the company can use this data to train new employees and improve their services. While projects (and even team members) come and go, wikis help prevent knowledge and experience from going with them. A good wiki can act as a giant brain for your organization, helping you learn from the mistakes of the past and allowing every team member to contribute to the successes of the future.

Science fiction films and TV shows have long touted the virtues of voice recognition technology, perhaps the most popular example being Star Trek: The Next Generation. Unlike Captain Kirk, who had to rely on subordinates to do his bidding, Captain Picard would simply call out, “Computer?” and the ship’s invisible intelligence would activate, jumping to obey his every command. It’s clear why this type of technology appeals to science fiction writers and fans; who wouldn’t want to interact with artificial intelligence as easily as we interact with other human beings? No more memorizing keyboard commands, no more texting on minuscule cell phone number pads, no more waiting for a computer to boot up/connect to a wireless network/open a large file. All we have to do is ask.

This voice-based interface is becoming less of a fantasy and more of a reality. Voice recognition software is improving greatly, and while we won’t likely be jumping to warp speed anytime soon, we may experience a hands-free voice activated interface within a year. One of the companies working in this vein is Nuance, who recently released Dragon NaturallySpeaking 9, a software application that allows you to speak at a normal speed while it “types” your words. Their ingenious website allows you to challenge the software to a typing race (which you will lose, trust me), showing off how accurate and fast their product is at recognizing speech, including unusual words like “aardvark”. In addition to typing applications, Nuance has a a voice control product which allows you to operate a mobile device with spoken commands. You can send short emails, set appointments in a calendar, place calls, and access the web with phrases like, “Go to website: www.cnn.com”.

Voice recognition technology could be a huge advantage for a couple of reasons. Wouldn’t it be great to access and answer emails during your morning commute, hands free? Or be able to dial a phone number by speaking the name of your friend or client? Not only would it cut down on the time we spend actually touching a computer, but it would allow more open access to technology for many people around the globe. Populations with low computer-literacy rates, like Grandma and Grandpa, would be able to stay in touch with family, access health information, and play internet bingo. All jokes aside, though, those with visual or physical impairments or in developing countries (where previous experience with computers is limited) will have an easier time operating computers and mobile phones with the further development of this technology.

Perhaps some of the more alert readers will have spotted a disconnect between the current capabilities of speech recognition and the Star Trek version. In the movies this technology seemed to easily recognize conversational language, intuitively carrying out orders given in any configuration. But what about slang? What about foreign languages, or even regional accents? Will a voice-activated dashboard device be able to “pahk the cah at Hahvahd Yahd?” What about timber and tone of voice? Obviously, these are problems that haven’t yet been fully addressed. We’ve all been frustrated by a telephone menu where we’re forced to speak commands, say our PIN number, etc., and as a result we’re unable to talk to a real person. Imagine if there was no “real” person to eventually reach by shouting, “CUSTOMER SERVICE!” into the handset. Such a possibility could become a reality, and it could cause major headaches as it did for one man. His bank’s voice recognition software froze his account because it “thought” he was a female. Not to mention security concerns about using your voice as a type of fingerprint to establish your identity. Clearly, our “intelligent” technology isn’t as fallible as we would like it to be.

Leading companies in the field of web applications are already being encouraged to make their products as accessible as possible to people who, for one reason or another, do not have physical access to a computer. Not only will it be a major step for those with physical impairments or handicaps, it will also benefit users who want to access a computer hands free (when driving, for medical procedures, for military operations, etc). However, a balance is required for voice recognition software to be effective without being overbearing. As with any new trend, it should be implemented slowly with great concern for security, and it should never be the only barrier between us and our email, internet access, or bank accounts. However, if ever there was a case for the good outweighing the bad, this might be it. Voice commands could allow a whole new set of users to experience the connectivity and benefits of a digital lifestyle.

Much buzz has surrounded the recent release of Halo 3, and much of it has focused on Bungie’s and Microsoft’s usability efforts. Wired.com ran an article earlier this fall describing the usability process that Halo 3 went through prior to release. The game was tested by hundreds of participants, and their reactions to every aspect of game play were monitored through one-way mirrors by psychologists and usability experts. These in-depth studies were conducted to ensure that the game was not too difficult to be fun, intuitive, and would provide fans with a consistent experience across the brand.

This marriage between applied psychology and usability is becoming more common in the corporate world, and it is the very essence of providing a user-centered product. Heuristics and error prevention are wonderful tools to use in web development, but they do not ask or answer the essential questions of human behavior. Is your application fun to use, is it easy to figure out, does it frustrate the user, or does it aid him/her in accomplishing something desirable? How does a user feel when using this site? At ease or infuriated? Indifferent or engaged?

Because Halo 3 is a wildly popular game and expectations were high for the end of the trilogy, the developers had to be sure they had the tools to answer these questions. With psychologists monitoring every move, participants tested all levels of the game, providing data both verbal and visual to the psychologists. For example, if the main character “Master Chief” was getting killed by evil aliens too quickly or at the same point in the game, the experience would not be much fun for players. The data collected by psychologists suggested that players were dying at certain points because they couldn’t find ammunition stockpiles or didn’t see an approaching cliff. They solved these problems with simple graphics tweaks to keep the game fun for players.

One of the other overall strategies of the Halo developers was to limit bloody, intense battle scenes to 30 seconds. This is another example of applying psychological principles to create highly usable applications. Experts are divided about the actual average length of an adult’s attention span, but they generally agree that it is shrinking. Though interested in the game, Bungie assumes that users cannot concentrate on the intensity of a battle for much longer than 30 seconds and still enjoy themselves.

By employing psychological testing on their newest product, Bungie and Microsoft have another critical success with Halo 3. Using the methods and tools of psychology can explain not only when users are succeeding or failing, but also why. It takes into account what they feel when they visit your site: frustration, peace, anger, fun, or satisfaction. We could all take a page from the gaming world’s book in creating applications that seek to entertain and ensure the satisfaction of the user.