white paper the internet of people - amazon web services · 2015-03-03 · white paper: the...

THE INTERNET OF PEOPLESupporting the Internet and the

Internet of Things with Real People

© 2015 Engage Co, LLC. Internet of People™ is a trademark of Engage Co, LLC.

WHITE PAPER

TM

White Paper: The Internet of People

The basis for this paper is that within the ever-expanding Internet-connected world there exists a large and compounding problem thatbuyers (both consumers and business buyers) need and want to connectquickly, directly and personally with businesses, and businesses want toreact more swiftly and personably with consumers. However, the socialweb that was intended to create more connectivity has more oftenproved an impediment to prompt and authentic relationships. Solving thisproblem for consumers and businesses requires both a “Social” and an“aSocial” approach, as well as technological solutions that fosterimmediate human connections without jumping through hoops.

We call this concept the Internet of People™.

Too Much of a Good Thing?The ubiquity and value of the Internet is undeniable. But has technologymade us more connected and aware of each other, or has it made us intoa more isolated society where communication is handled with fingertipsrather than with voices and faces? It’s an interesting contradiction, onethat has come to define an era where people are both more and less intouch than ever before. People want to protect their privacy on the Webby maintaining anonymity, yet they also know that to have richer digitalinteractions with businesses they also have to self-identify.

In her TED talk, “Connected but Alone,” digital expert Sherry Turklesuggested that we are “alone together” with many connections, but fewconversations. According to Turkle, a conversation occurs in real-time andis uncontrolled. It requires full attention. By contrast, she suggests that aconnection allows people to control how much attention is awarded towhom, and when. Strikingly, Turkle asserts that the feeling that no one islistening drives many people to technology.

© 2015 Engage Co, LLC. Page 1

Abstract

And technology is everywhere. While there were 1 billion connectedplaces in 1997, it is estimated that there will be 50 billion connecteddevices in 2020.1 Futurists describe the future as the “Internet of Things,”where everything that can be connected is connected. This whitepaperproposes a future Social Web that supports not only automatedprocesses, but also both human connectedness and conversation. TheWeb will be a companion and facilitator to real interactions.

For example, a web-connected dishwasher can alert the manufacturerwhen it’s broken, but still requires a human being to do a service call andfix it. There will be a human interaction when the service technician visitsthe home, possibly asks questions and explains how he or she will fix theappliance, then completes the repair. In the future, the Internet of Thingsmay help improve digital access to the world around us, but it will notdiminish the essential capabilities of qualified humans to supportproducts and services. It merely means that people will play anincreasingly larger role in live interactions with Web-based customers anddigitally connected assets.

Social Networking versus aSocial NetworkingBy definition, an aSocial relationship does not require a social bond and isabsent of any ongoing connection requirement (i.e., a person is free toconnect without a previous or ongoing social tie). aSocial networking isthe commercial manifestation of an anonymous connection—theconnection is initiated by a customer who has not yet self-identified. Thecustomer expects to avoid the requirement of the preformation of asocial bond (like those facilitated by LinkedIn® or Facebook®) and seeksinstant human connection based on the context of his or her immediateneed.



Social Context to Connect via Application

Mutual Agreement to Form a Social Bond based on Value of

Identity

Social Application Validates Proposed

Bond

Perpetual Social Bond Formed via Application

Application Leveraged to

Maintain Social Bond

Commercial Context to Connect via

Application

Mutual Agreement to Form an aSocial Tie based on Value of

Specific Context or a Named Asset

Temporary aSocial Tie Formed via Application

Buyer Can Choose to Expose Identity,

Remain Anonymous, or Form Social Bond

Application Leveraged On-

Demand to Reconnect aSocially

or Socially at the Discretion of the

Buyer

Figure 1: Social Networking vs. aSocial Networking


Social Networking vs. aSocial Networking


!



Social Networking models generally operate in direct opposition to open and aSocialnetworking. To social network operators, openness is viewed as a liability, not anopportunity.

For example, in a November 2014 interview2 LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman stated,“There were a bunch of ideas that were lacking, that have later turned into the modernsocial web as we understand it, which is real identity versus pseudonyms, realrelationships being the platform for how you build applications.”

This and other extant definitions of the social web are driven in large part by allegianceto the business model: to own and sell complete functional control over how peopleinitiate social web connections (relationships) via their platforms. To put it another way,the threat is that if social network operators lose control over how people connect viatheir platform, it poses a threat of disruption to their business model.

In all fairness, an executive of a large company understandably may not want to bepublicly exposed to instant communications by anonymous people (even if they areprospective customers). But, for millions upon millions of sales and support people, theircareers are entirely reliant on being open to instant communications from known andunknown (anonymous or pseudonym) customers and prospects. This in turn makesconventional social networking limited because customers and prospects must otherwisepass through the social media identity validation walled garden in order to connect andcommunicate with an individual at a company they merely want to buy from.

Throttling Connections for Profit

aSocial networking examples:• A prospective customer visits the website of an insurance company. She

has questions not fully answered by the website. She doesn’t want toshare her contact information until after her questions have beenanswered. She doesn’t want to expose her anonymity nor form a socialbond prior to engagement.

• A customer is at the check-out of an online shopping cart. He temporarilyshares a small amount of information (name, address and credit cardnumber) in exchange for the good or service he is purchasing. He may ormay not return to the website. The transient tie that binds the seller tobuyer only lasts as long as the transaction and fulfillment. The buyerdoesn’t have a formal relationship with the business, and doesn’t desireto create a social connection, but would like to reach out and have ahuman helper to support the pre- and post-buying process.

aSocial networking features:• Commercial context to connect via application, such as a buying scenario

or supporting a real-world thing (asset), absent of the need to form alasting relationship

• Mutual agreement to form an aSocial tie.• Temporary aSocial tie formed via application.• Buyer’s choice to remain anonymous, expose identity, or form social

bond.

By contrast, social networking is the commercial manifestation of theforced connection. It requires formality around the connection; bothparties (seller and buyer) need to self-identify and confirm their socialbond via the social media operator in order to become connected. Inmany cases the buyer simply wants to have a connection to the seller inorder to receive decision-making support, and the social bond is the onlyavailable way to instigate a relationship. This has been referred to as thesocial “walled garden” because the connection needs to be validatedprior to commencement of conversation, and it does not allow room forany concept of anonymity.



Social networking features:• Social context to connect via application.• Mutual agreement to form a social bond (relationship)• Social applications validate the proposed bond.• Perpetual social bond formed via application.• Application leveraged to maintain social bond.

Social networking example:• Looking up a individual identity of a person within a company on

LinkedIn® that you are considering doing business with. Note that you areunable to interact with that person without first creating a formal tie orgoing through a paywall. Ironically, you have to validate the relationshipin advance of being able to engage and enter into relationship-buildingconversations (even if it’s the buying context or asset you want, notnecessarily the relationship).

Therein Lies the RubThe social web and commercial world is center stage for bold dichotomiesbetween stated desires and actual behaviors. Despite their demand forautomation, consumers still crave human engagement. But now thedemand for communication lives online in places like social media andlive chat, with high expectations about responsiveness. An EdisonResearch study revealed that 42 percent of study participants expect asocial media response within 60 minutes.3

In an attempt to satisfy competing social and aSocial wants and needsonline, businesses use CRM (Customer Relationship Management),marketing automation and automated personalization tools.Organizations invest in “robust” websites that feature all the sales andmarketing collateral (brochures, PDFs, whitepapers, videos, etc.) at thefingertips of prospects and customers. But, no technology has yet been……



invented that meets the human need to be heard. In other words,customer-facing sales and support professionals within organizationshave ears and an ability to listen to customers that is unparalleled by anyavailable technology.

And, with so-called do-not-track tools and increasing distrust by webusers over how their personally identifiable information will be used, thecommercial world needs to solve the challenge of being immediatelyavailable to the anonymous buyer. The social web has not solved thisproblem. The social web needs to adapt to accommodate a customerunwilling to self-identify until they have developed trust with theorganization or the named personnel representing that company. EvenFacebook, the largest social network in the world, is still developing newcapabilities in initial attempts to support anonymous connections.4

The Competitive Edge in the Age of ContradictionsThe most successful businesses in this age of contradictions will capitalizeon the opportunity to address the social versus aSocial networkingdichotomy, answering the blended customer demand for bothanonymous connection and conversation, but sometimes occurringwithout the permanency of traditional social ties. Realizing that notechnology can match the ability of a qualified human to listen to thecustomer’s questions, assess their needs, interact, and help move thecustomer closer to purchase, organizations will need to deploy customer-facing people to their website (and other channels) in order to provideincremental—and quite likely comprehensive—value to prospects andcustomers.

They will:• Deploy the technology in a method that first establishes

customer trust above all else.• Take a highly personable approach, blending the best elements

of technology solutions, cont.



• Offer multiscreen capabilities—supporting customers on PCs,smartphones and tablets, and all other available digital devices.

• Harness technology to develop a ‘human layer’ around theirproduct SKUs and service offerings.

• Offer an optimized website, most importantly one that isoptimized for instant relationship building.

They will serve the Web-based buyer using technologies that are:• Convenient.• Immediate available.• Intuitive and easy to use.• An extension of accepted forms of person-to-person contact• Respectful of privacy preferences—the consumer may remain

anonymous, if desired.• Universally accessible independent of device type (PC, tablet,

smartphone).• Noninvasive–does not require the customer to download/install

software, plug-ins or applications. i.e., It just works.

Empower Customers by Blending Social and aSocial ElementsWe believe it is possible for technology to both help connect sellers andbuyers as well as enable authentic conversations leveraging the digitalchannel. This technology is a blend of both the Social and aSocialapproach to networking.

Blended networking example:• Chat 2.0— legacy live chat was really about a one-time

communication in a text box. It was devoid of an ongoing relationshipand finding the same chat agent at a later date was next to impossible.In Chat 2.0 the live chat leverages a blended model of Social andaSocial networking.



The consumer engages with a named company representativein real-time and has the opportunity to form a lastingrelationship with the person (chat agent). However, therelationship can have permanency (Social) or can be a one-time transient event (aSocial). The relationship can bepredicated by a prior relationship (Social) or can be initializedwithout any prior connection (aSocial and completelyanonymous).

Progressive-minded organizations and sellers will create an Internet ofPeople around their online business, products and services characterizedby:

• An easily-discoverable and transparent directory of all customer-facing people in their organization, ranging from salespeople tosupport professionals, and beyond.

• Robust representative profiles which display full name, job title,contact information, and relevant “About Me” information in atransparent fashion to help inform the buyer’s choice about whothey want to interact with. The buyer, whether self-identified oranonymous, will be enabled with the tools to drive the tempo ofthe conversation.

• Status indicators to reflect when a customer-facing person fromthe company is online and available.

• Customer engagement opportunities that are universallydeployed through all available channels (“Chat Now” is an optionavailable at the website, social media, digital documents, emailsignatures, search engines and all other available digitalchannels). This omnichannel approach will provide a broaderfootprint across the web, extending beyond the companywebsite or any one social media operator website.



The Internet of PeopleThe Internet of Things promises a future of asset connectedness withmany benefits such as accessibility, efficiency, productivity and costsavings. However, the Web was also created to help connect humans inmeaningful ways. In this duality resides the need for a healthy balancebetween transactions, objects and relationships. An opportunity existswithin the context of the Internet of Things for the parallel developmentof an “Internet of People” where products and services on the Web alsohave human support counterparts. In other words, for every “thing”there is also a “person.”

If the feeling that no one is listening drives many people to turn totechnology, what if buyers could find the ability to be heard online? Whatif they could find the right sales and marketing information at the rightpoint in the buying process and meet the personality and personal sellingskills of qualified people in a concierge-like experience? That capability tolisten and be heard online is the feature that distinguishes the Internet ofPeople from the Internet of Things.

Figure 2: The Customer’s

Digital Experience in

the Buying Lifecycle.

Note: special thanks to RightNow Technologies (now owned by Oracle)

for inspiring this graphic.


Need/Find

Buy/Get

Use/SupportEngage

Buy MoreWeb

Experience

Social Experience

aSocial, Chat, and Contact Center Experience


The Argument for Live Customer Engagement on the WebInstantly available Chat 2.0 technology is the single most effective onlinetool that can help bridge the gap between competing consumer desire togather information independently and to get questions answered by areal person, right now. It is also quickly moving from a novel technology –a big “chat live” button on your homepage – to a communication channelas vital as the telephone or email. Studies show that consumers are onboard with this growing communication trend. Sixty-five percent of onlineshoppers have engaged in a live chat5, and 44 percent of onlineconsumers say that having questions answered by a live person while inthe middle of an online purchase is one of the most important features awebsite can offer.6

And so it’s no surprise that legacy chat usage by businesses andconsumers has increased in recent years—it’s the worthwhile blend oftechnology and human interaction.

But, legacy chat is not without its limitations. Some are technical andsome are the result of poor strategy and implementation. Pitfalls can be:

• Inauthenticity—buyers have an authenticity radar that is stronger thanever. They have all experienced the bait-and-switch of legacy chat wherethey see a stock photo image of a “qualified representative” (i.e.professional model) only to be routed to a random, unqualified call centerrep. To build trust and credibility, visitors must digitally get to know a chatagent prior to engagement.

• Poor placement—if access points like the “Chat Now” button are buriedin the footer on a Web page, tucked away on a “Contact Us” page ordisguised by a creative treatment that lacks impact, the visitor is obliviousto the chat option. The opportunity to engage, connect and bond slipsaway. Low engagement numbers result.



• Availability—if the button is live, but no one is staffing the feature, theinstallation will not yield positive results. Failure to staff consistently andadequately during peak hours will not produce the steady results a chatinstallation can deliver. Agents must consistently be available to engagewith customers.

• Outsourcing—also known as “availability done badly.” Some businessesthat see the value in live chat, but don’t want to put the resources intostaffing the system outsource chat engagements. This leads to frustration(not sales) as potential customers are stuck chatting with people whohave only limited knowledge of the company’s products and services.

• Lack of multimedia options—most legacy chat systems only provide theability to chat. To share supporting documents or media, customers areforced to use email.

• Device compatibility—legacy chat software, like a lot of other software,often requires plug-ins or other programs to run the software. This meansthat chatting is typically not an option for someone using a smartphoneor tablet device. Given that mobile devices have recently overtakendesktop devices for Web usage, that’s a serious problem.

But the introduction of Chat 2.0 could change all that.

In just a few short years, HTML5 has revolutionized Web and mobiledevelopment. It is the first HTML incarnation specially designed to deliverrich content without the need for additional plug-ins. It can deliver anytype of media immediately, without the need to launch programs.



Acme CompanyASelect a Mortgage Banker

Perhaps HTML5’s biggest benefit is a truly seamless, cross-platformcompatibility across devices—PCs, tablets and smartphones—andbrowsers. This is important, since the Pew Research Internet Projectshows that 34 percent of Internet users go online primarily using theirphones.7 Yet given HTML5’s relative newness to the developmentindustry, only the savviest companies have jumped on board to createapps and programs that use it.

Engage is one of those companies. As a provider of on-demand,enterprise-level omnichannel engagement technology, Engage enablessales people and other representatives to connect directly withcustomers in a highly personal manner. Simple text chat, audio, video andeven document sharing capabilities are available to cater to everypossible customer preference.

Recently Engage launched its HTML5-based Chat 2.0 offering which allowscustomers to engage with companies using virtually any Internet-connected device. By using HTML5, Engage was able to bring a whole newlevel of human connection to live chat. This anytime/anywhereavailability means consumers can connect with companies right at themoment they need help, without needing a PC or downloading clunkysoftware, applications or browser plug-ins.

The possibilities for customer engagement are endless. More customerscan reach out to ask questions, find resources or go deep into the salesprocess, leading to higher visitor-to-lead conversions and more qualifiedleads and prospects overall. This can also help cut expenses, especially if abusiness has a call center. Since chat takes less time than a call,employees can often multitask during chat sessions. And because thevolume of phone calls is reduced, employees can work more productivelythroughout the day.



It All Comes Back to the CustomerThe Internet of People is essentially about creating a great experience forthe customer. This isn’t a hollow claim but a valid and urgent need in abusiness landscape marked by impersonal experiences. Customers rightnow are negotiating the separation conflict inherent in an aSocial digitalsociety: they are linked by technology, yet personally isolated from thesame type of friendly experiences you could get at your local hardwarestore in the offline world.

The consumer dichotomy of wanting autonomy and anonymity, yetneeding meaningful human interaction, is here to stay. With Web-basedcustomer-facing professionals available for Chat 2.0, solutions like Engagecan help businesses bridge that gap for consumers and be the lifeline theyneed at a critical juncture in the customer lifecycle, communicating withthem in their own language and demonstrating that technology can stillwear a human face. That is the Internet of People.

To learn more about Engage please visit www.engage.co.

Footnotes:1 “More Than 50 Billion Connected Devices,” Ericsson White Paper, February 2011, http://www6.ericsson.com/ki/news/110214_more_than_50_billion_244188811_c.

2 “Episode: 490: Legendary entrepreneur Reid Hoffman on his best strategies, valuable lessons, the PayPal mafia, and creating one of the first social networks,” TWIST, November 2014, 11:03, . http://thisweekinstartups.com/reid-hoffman/.

3 “Most Who Use Social Media for Customer Service Expect a Very Quick Response,” Edison Research, 2012, published in “Are Consumer Expectations for Social Customer Service Realistic?” Jay Baer, The Social Habit, 2012, http://socialhabit.com/uncategorized/customer-service-expectations.

4 “Facebook Developing App That Allows Anonymity,” New York Times, 2014, published in Bits Blog by Mike Isaac, http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/07/facebook-readies-app-allowing-anonymity.

5 “Stats: Do Customers Appreciate Live Chat on Websites?” Luke Richards, Econsultancy, September 5, 2012, https://econsultancy.com/blog/10644-stats-do-consumers-appreciate-live-chat-on-websites#i.1rd0nfm1c4xdyq.

6 “Making Proactive Chat Work,” Diane Clarkson with Carrie Johnson, Elizabeth Stark, Brendan McGowan, Forrester, June 4, 2010, http://www.forrester.com/Making+Proactive+Chat+Work/fulltext/-/E-RES57054?objectid=RES57054.

7 “The Web at 25 in the U.S.,” Susannah Fox and Lee Rainie, Pew Research Internet Project, February 27, 2014, www.pewinternet.org/2014/02/27/the-web-at-25-in-the-u-s.



http://www.engage.co/

http://www6.ericsson.com/ki/news/110214_more_than_50_billion_244188811_c

http://thisweekinstartups.com/reid-hoffman/

http://socialhabit.com/uncategorized/customer-service-expectations

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/07/facebook-readies-app-allowing-anonymity

https://econsultancy.com/blog/10644-stats-do-consumers-appreciate-live-chat-on-websites#i.1rd0nfm1c4xdyq

http://www.forrester.com/Making+Proactive+Chat+Work/fulltext/-/E-RES57054?objectid=RES57054

http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/02/27/the-web-at-25-in-the-u-s

white paper the internet of people - amazon web services · 2015-03-03 · white paper: the...

Documents