User-Generated Emotions

I am one of the biggest fans of rating systems anywhere. I believe they add useful and easily digestible value to otherwise pedestrian data content, and help effectively deal with the "option overload," so well described in the book The Paradox of Choice.

However, I have recently run across two sites that depend heavily on ratings and user commentary, and walked away from both wondering if ratings systems automatically add value in every environment.

The first site was irresistible: called TheFunded.com , it lets entrepreneurs rate venture capitalists. Let's just say the process of asking people for millions of dollars to fund your dream and in most cases being rejected is a process that creates strong emotions. Various blogs written by and for venture capitalists quickly took strong exception to the site, claiming it was a pointless service: those who got funding tended to love those who funded them; those who were turned down were invariably filled with vitriol. There is truth to this, but there is also truth in the old saying, "where there's smoke, there's fire." What really gave me pause was that the commentary on the venture capitalists, both positive and negative, wasn't very actionable. There was little that entrepreneurs seeking funding could use to advance their cause.

I had a similar feeling when I visited the hot new legal directory site Avvo. It's an ambitious attempt to rate lawyers through a computerized assessment of "various factors" that the company does not reveal, coupled with the ability of consumers to post comments. Users posting comments are obviously going to be heavily influenced by whether the lawyer won or lost their cases. Expect no plaudits for a lawyer who worked tirelessly and well on a marginal case. And in legal specialties like trademark law, is there much to say at all? Don't get me wrong: Avvo is fresh, creative and could revolutionize how consumers find and select lawyers. But at the same time, computer-driven ratings, coupled with consumers who are more likely to rant and rave rather than express useful insights may drag the whole product down. We'll just have to wait and see how Avvo develops. The bottom line on ratings and user commentary is that to be valuable they need to be rational, and we need to tread cautiously in areas where emotions run high.

Labels: avvo, paradox of choice, rating systems, thefunded, user generated content

Hoover's and First Research Begin Integration

Hoover's and First Research announced this week that they have completed the first phase of the integration between the two information providers owned by D&B. First Research was acquired by D&B in March and was folded into Hoover's. The completion of the first phase means that First Research customers can access Hoover's company data through a Hoover's search box that appears on First Research's web site. Hoover's subscribers now have free access to a subset of First Research's industry profiles.

Customers who purchase a bundled subscription can access First Research and Hoover's content from the Hoover's site. Some of that content includes: Directory of First Research Industry profiles that cover more than 600 industry segments and a subset of industry profiles, including industry overviews (which provide a summary of key players and outline the competitive landscape of an industry) and call prep questions (that can guide users when they engage prospects and clients in discussions about business issues).

Alone, Hoover's and First Research provide users the tools they need to be successful in their business endeavors. Together, they will provide an even more robust service. It makes perfect sense for D&B to bring the two entities together and it was likely the plan before D&B officially closed on the First Research deal. And D&B didn't take long--only a couple of months--to bring customers the first benefits of the integration. Customers expect the most complete database of information from their content providers and Hoover's consistently bolsters its offerings to comply. This is just another example of the company's commitment to providing that content and functionality users need to compete in today's marketplace.

The Value of Historical Data

Last week, Standard & Poor's and The Wharton School announced that Standard & Poor's credit ratings will now be a part of WRDS (Wharton Research Data Services). WRDS users will now have access to RatingsXpress coverage of ratings on more than 43,000 active issues that dates back to 1922. They will also be able to take advantage of greater researching capabilities made possible by the combination of the RatingsXpress data with Standard & Poor's Compustat fundamental and market data.

The RatingsXpress ratings coverage includes issues for global issuers, public finance and structure finance entities. Historical Credit Ratings through the RatingsXpress digital feed include data at issuer/entity and issue/instrument levels. Compustat includes fundamental and market data on 65,000 global securities and it provides company, index and industry information that can support financial models and proprietary company and industry analysis.

This announcement emphasizes the ever-increasing value of historical data. In order to satisfy the needs of today's researchers, publishers must offer access to this historical data as well as the most recent, up-to-date information available. Researchers recognize the importance of historical data and publishers must do the same. Historical data really does help increase the value of current data--making analysis of all of the data more meaningful. And offering a complete collection of historical and current data to researcher customers can only help deepen their relationship with you. It's the backbone of WRDS, a service used by a subscriber base of more than 190 business schools, universities and research institutions. It could be the backbone of your collection too.

Martindale-Hubbell Is On TV

Well almost. LexisNexis unit Martindale-Hubbell this week formed an alliance with Spot Runner, an Internet-based ad agency, to provide Martindale-Hubbell law firm customers the ability to buy cost-effective local television advertising campaigns to promote their offerings in their specific regions.

Spot Runner touts the ability to offer advertising on major networks, such as CBS, CNN, ESPN and Fox News, as a lower cost than traditional ad agencies. Law firms will be able to select their ads from a collection of pre-produced ones that cover a wide range of practice areas. Spot Runner will personalize the ads with a firm's information, logos and images. With budget and market information from the firm, Martindale-Hubbell will work with Spot Runner's media planning platform to create an effective media plan for the firm--one that will enable it to target clients by demographics, networks and neighborhoods.

Martindale-Hubbell's overarching goal has been to provide a way in which to help customers promote their services to potential clients. Perhaps sensing customer demand for a multi-media approach, Martindale-Hubbell formed this alliance with Spot Runner. Overall, this is another good example of an information provider becoming a complete service provider for its customers. In a sense, Martindale-Hubbell has added "ad agency" to its list of credentials. It's a great way for the publisher to further engage its customers and it will be interesting to see how many of those customers actually participate.

InfoCommerce 2007 Confirmed Speakers

Join us at InfoCommerce 2007 for "Turning Data Inside Out." Confirmed speakers to date:

Jeremy Anwyl President, Edmunds Inc.
Tom Aley President & CEO, Generate
Judy Luther President, Informed Strategies
Mike Orren, President and Co-founder Pegasus News
Hugh Owen, President, Owen Media Partners
Robert Hawthorne President, Hawthorne Executive Search
Bryan Burdick Chief Operating Officer, ZoomInfo
Jim Fowler CEO and Co-Founder , Jigsaw Data
Jeffrey Killeen Chairman and CEO, GlobalSpec
Shannon Holman Director, Content Strategy and Development, ALM

Labels: infocommerce 2007