Forget about keywords—focus on the individual for relevance
In an article aptly titled The Mind Blowing Evolution of the Social Web, Solomon Rothman of WebProNews had this to say about personalization:
Web 3.0 will see all the social, user generated, and independent content conglomerated, analyzed and spit out in ways that can be quickly and efficiently customized to what’s important to you. Relevancy will no longer be determined at the keyword level, but on the individual level. Smart services will actually understand what you like and will evolve as do your likings and importance. It won’t be artificial intelligence yet, but it will have enough data from enough places to be able to quickly learn about your habits through smart “agents.”
I say that the article is aptly titled because I agree that the power of the web is nothing short of mind-blowing. And Solomon’s take on what constitutes personalization fits hand-in-glove with the VortexDNA view of the world, particularly that one sentence, which I think bears repeating:
Relevancy will no longer be determined at the keyword level, but on the individual level.
Later in the paragraph, he says that the web will have data to learn about your habits. MyWebDNA, of course, is taking a different approach, operating on the premise that we can get as good or better results from focusing on who you are, rather than on your habits. But we’re all going in the same direction here, following our hypotheses towards greater relevance.
This is the natural direction of the web. It can’t be more content—we’ve already got content coming out of our ears. It can’t be more participation—YouTube, Flickr and Wikipedia have effectively ensured that the web is now thoroughly powered by its community.
No, the direction of the web has to be towards understanding. Google’s mission is ‘to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful’. But we all know that ‘the world’s information’ isn’t necessarily useful to me. If I devote the rest of my life to absorbing information, I’m still only ever going to access a tiny subset of all the information that’s out there. So in order for Google to fulfil its mission of making information universally accessible, they have to make it individually relevant.
This, I suspect, is the driver behind Google’s personalization push. I’d love to know what you think.
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:10 am
Hi Kalia,
I’m very interested in the VortexDNA-type model and I may cover it in a follow up article. How are you currently collecting information about an individual’s core values? What happens when users actions contradict what they think they’re values are or how they would - for example fill out profile information.
For example when asked about what type of coffee you prefer, most people respond with “dark roast”, even though statistically most people like milky weak coffee. I see personalization and demographics as a way to get to a users’ real desires and needs that go deeper than what they may be aware of outwardly.
What do you think?
June 4th, 2007 at 6:44 am
Hello Solomon!
Thank you for your kind comment. To respond to your first question, users generate their VortexDNA genome through a series of questionnaires. While MyWebDNA will work after only one initial questionnaire, the more surveys you take, the richer your value profile will become.
Your second question is an excellent one: what happens when people behave contrarily to their stated values? As you rightly point out, this happens all the time; in the VortexDNA model, we describe it as ‘coherence’: Does your chosen purpose reflect in all areas of your life? Does it contradict itself? Is it consistent?
Someone’s values may show up as incoherent simply because they truly have not defined their core purpose and values. The VortexDNA questionnaires can actually serve as a feedback tool, helping the user to articulate what they truly believe.
VortexDNA users have access to a tag cloud that works as a visual representation of how they prioritize their purpose, values and life focus. As users take more surveys, the tag cloud adapts to the richer information available.
Yes, demographics absolutely have their role, as does history. One of the major stumbling blocks for those two methods, though, is privacy. VortexDNA doesn’t track user history at all — in fact, it is entirely anonymous. Your VortexDNA genome is the aggregation of all the information you’ve supplied about your purpose and values. A web site’s VortexDNA rating is the aggregation of all the VortexDNA users that have visited it — not a record of the individuals who have been there.
For users who opt-in to the use of history and demographics, I see the combination of the three as having a powerful impact on our ability to deliver relevant content. For those who wish to maintain privacy, though, we believe that VortexDNA can deliver an enhanced experience on its own.
What are your thoughts on the privacy issue?