Customer Login  |  

by Shyamali Ghosh

Taking information at face value is a risky proposition, as Gary Hoover (formerly of Hoover’s and four other companies launched over the course of his career to date), pointed out last week in a Fundamentals of Business Research presentation, part of the University of Texas’s Information Institute‘s “Boiling The Ocean: 21st Century Business Research Tactics And Sources” workshop. Hoover used D&B as his example, explaining that in the past, the company’s researchers visited listees to gather information by interviewing business owners. The system was flawed, but had one advantage: interviewers could temper the information they were given by the company owner with what they observed during the interview. A million dollar company in a six-person back-alley office? Not likely. Today, without the check of an in-person interview, the owner-provided information goes unchallenged, inflated or deflated as it might be.

For individual researchers, the calculus of extracting a good answer from this kind data is never simple. As Hoover pointed out, “The reality is it’s a human endeavor.” Serious researchers develop estimates in multiple ways, discarding outliers and using the numbers that come close to each other. As an example, Hoover explained how he calculated average revenue for a set of restaurants by estimating median revenue per seat and per square foot, and then backed those numbers into average sales.

In 2013, no database publisher has the budget to send teams of human interviewers out to gather information firsthand, but it’s increasingly easy to incorporate double-checks into the information gathering process. In a managed crowdsourced data collection campaign, for example, multiple answers are collected for each question and outliers are discarded. For Internet researchers, electronic checks can ensure that all data in a given field is formatted the same way. Call center calls can be monitored to be sure that the identical data points are collected across the board.

One QC method we at IEI use for our customers is a “checksum” that compares the ratio of the number of a company’s full-time employees to its revenue. For instance, if the SIC code indicates that the company is a restaurant, then the annual revenue figure should be $85K x the number of FTE employees and if it isn’t, the underlying data (SIC code, headcount) needs to be directly reconfirmed. Each industry has a different ratio of heads to revs with Amazon at $750K/head and Wal-Mart at $125K/head, so it’s an easy-to-set up confirmation with human follow-up that helps ensure the quality of our clients’ data.

{ 0 comments }

posted by Shyamali Ghosh on January 15, 2013

The idea of harnessing work as a utility (i.e, like flicking a switch to turn on labor “power”) is gaining traction. Mary Meeker of Kleiner Perkins recently included it in her list of technology trends to watch (one of the few surprises in that presentation) and Gary Swart, CEO of oDesk, is now positioning his firm as one of the enablers of the trend.

Freelance marketplaces like oDesk, Elance, and Amazon’s Mechanical Turk are indeed maturing and the complex ecosystems of software firms around these marketplaces are also expanding exponentially so there is no doubt that this evolution of work is well under way already. Furthermore, long-term macroeconomic trends are accelerating the move towards a borderless labor marketplace with far lower overheads and much more flexibility than the traditional labor pool.

The evolution of labor is, of course, something that has been going on for a long time. The development of labor-saving tools based on emerging technologies (the cotton gin, the steam engine, the mechanical calculator) sped up productivity for a couple of hundred years and, as knowledge work eclipsed physical work and services overtook the manufacture of products, we saw the rise of different approaches to the “process” of work in the form of flex time and telecommuting. This latest stage, then, should not be unexpected, but most people are still hesitant to embrace it quite yet.

Like all true trends, though, workforce-as a-service (WaaS) is a genie that is not going back in the bottle. In fact, as soon as it is embraced and harnessed it will unleash a massive amount of productivity. There are several reasons for this:

  1. The immediacy of the labor. It can be literally “on tap” (for those employers who treat their virtual workers well), meaning that projects can be kicked off in minutes, not weeks.
  2. The speed of the work. By breaking projects into highly discrete tasks and distributing them across massive labor marketplaces, projects can be completed faster than ever before in human history. The principle is almost exactly the same as that of the packet protocols that make the Internet work.
  3. The cost. A true, global, open market for knowledge work is emerging and that means that, over the near term, the cost of low-end knowledge work labor will drop from something like $10/hour to $2/hr. (The cost of the technology required, however, makes the “fully loaded” cost more like $5/hour.) Traditional HR management overhead shrinks dramatically as well.

So what does the world look like when knowledge work is truly a utility? Process designers will standardize an increasing number of tasks into “tools” that are bundles of software and human activity. This will make it easier to swap out old processes for these “tools.” As a result, many types of knowledge work will become as measurable as the number of words per minute that a typist can type. Perhaps a new term for a unit of work (“erg-hour”?) will be adopted? Process flow charts will have little “work” icons showing where automated processes hand off to (heavily automated) human processes.

The only impediment to tapping into this potential is related to the design of work processes so that the promise of WaaS can be realized without slipping into the quicksand of super-fast microprocesses that go rogue and cause major headaches. That challenge, however, looks like it will be met with an avalanche of engineers, project managers, and massive investments that will give this trend legs.

{ 0 comments }

posted by Shyamali Ghosh on December 12, 2012