What exactly is the concept of white label social networking?
Most social networking brands offer their products directly to users. However, I was a part of this group of people who didn't like the idea that every time you have to start a social web you need to hire programmers, write the code and spend millions of dollars. This means that billions of dollars have gone into building social networks. We felt that there was a need for a platform that enabled companies to build their own social webs and tailor these networks to a range of purposes. This is the concept of white labeling. The idea is to provide the building blocks for a social network where the platform provider is as invisible as possible to the social network's users.
There are two models we follow: Source code (the business model of Red Hat), and the other, Open source companies or Software as a Service (SaaS). Our earliest clients were 1UP.Com and Tribe.Net.
How can this benefit a company?
There are various ways in which a social network can help a company. I will tell you how some of our customers benefited. Bell Canada had a movie download site from where users could download movies. We added social features to their plain page. Now users could grade the movies, write/read, reviews technologies. This gave the company a vibrant community as well as enhanced the user experience.
Our another customer Telecom Italia, which has some 72,000 employees, want all the employees to talk and interact with each other. They want all of them to have fun together. So it's an HR function here.
But how would it help a company gain in terms of revenue?
Historically, organizations see this as a marketing expense. At EMI, one of the biggest record companies in the US, we met the marketing team and created a social web for them, wherein all sister brands came under one umbrella. We made them aware of the potential of social networking and how important it was to free the user's data.
The moral of the story is there is money to be made in social networking. And also those who embrace the technology early will be the leaders while the rest will be the followers. And remember there is always a difference between leaders and followers. The fact that companies like Oracle and Saleforce have embraced social networking proves their potential.
Also, I believe that all software are social. As a vendor you need to be a parent. You need to know when to hold on and when to let go, as well as not only to talk but to listen also.
Why shouldn't a company go for existing social platform (say from Google when it launches such a platform) rather than building its own?
It shouldn't. Absolutely not! Today, social networking is a commodity. It is same everywhere. Most sites have standard features, personal page, login page, group page etc. However, to have a compelling online experience you need not only differ from competitors, but also offer something more compelling.
Social networking features need to be everywhere; whether as a productivity suite or as an e-commerce tool.
There is a lot of money to be made in social networking. I believe the company who embraces it in the beginning will be the leader.
How is Google's OpenSocial different from existing social networks?
Today, OpenSocial mimics Facebook. It should be called open widget. However, this is just the opening move of a chess game. This is not the end but the beginning. The beginning for Google was to identify a hole in Facebook's strategy.
Facebook was great when it opened its platform to developers in May. The site was immediately flooded with several interesting applications. However, in the end, Facebook is just another closed system. It locks in its customers. In the end, it only works when you go to them.
Unlike Facebook, OpenSocial does not have its own markup language. It allows developers to write in normal java script and html with only minor adjustments needed for the code to work on its platform. Facebook requires use of FBML (Facebook Markup Language) for security reasons, but it also makes code unusable outside Facebook. OpenSocial will especially attract small developers who can create 'learn once, write anywhere' applications.
Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) are today one way. But they should be two-way. OpenSocial will be first two-way API. Watch Google, it will get APIs into Maps, RSS Reader, spreadsheets and all probable places.
What about the social ramifications of social networking?
In India, you have IT Act for this. Otherwise, it's like nuclear technology, which has both upside and downside. So, it's the duty of the social networking vendor to educate people about the good and the bad of social networking. It should be part of their DNA.
1 comment:
What exactly is the concept of white label social networking?
Most social networking brands offer their products directly to users. However, I was a part of this group of people who didn't like the idea that every time you have to start a social web you need to hire programmers, write the code and spend millions of dollars. This means that billions of dollars have gone into building social networks. We felt that there was a need for a platform that enabled companies to build their own social webs and tailor these networks to a range of purposes. This is the concept of white labeling. The idea is to provide the building blocks for a social network where the platform provider is as invisible as possible to the social network's users.
There are two models we follow: Source code (the business model of Red Hat), and the other, Open source companies or Software as a Service (SaaS). Our earliest clients were 1UP.Com and Tribe.Net.
How can this benefit a company?
There are various ways in which a social network can help a company. I will tell you how some of our customers benefited. Bell Canada had a movie download site from where users could download movies. We added social features to their plain page. Now users could grade the movies, write/read, reviews technologies. This gave the company a vibrant community as well as enhanced the user experience.
Our another customer Telecom Italia, which has some 72,000 employees, want all the employees to talk and interact with each other. They want all of them to have fun together. So it's an HR function here.
But how would it help a company gain in terms of revenue?
Historically, organizations see this as a marketing expense. At EMI, one of the biggest record companies in the US, we met the marketing team and created a social web for them, wherein all sister brands came under one umbrella. We made them aware of the potential of social networking and how important it was to free the user's data.
The moral of the story is there is money to be made in social networking. And also those who embrace the technology early will be the leaders while the rest will be the followers. And remember there is always a difference between leaders and followers. The fact that companies like Oracle and Saleforce have embraced social networking proves their potential.
Also, I believe that all software are social. As a vendor you need to be a parent. You need to know when to hold on and when to let go, as well as not only to talk but to listen also.
Why shouldn't a company go for existing social platform (say from Google when it launches such a platform) rather than building its own?
It shouldn't. Absolutely not! Today, social networking is a commodity. It is same everywhere. Most sites have standard features, personal page, login page, group page etc. However, to have a compelling online experience you need not only differ from competitors, but also offer something more compelling.
Social networking features need to be everywhere; whether as a productivity suite or as an e-commerce tool.
There is a lot of money to be made in social networking. I believe the company who embraces it in the beginning will be the leader.
How is Google's OpenSocial different from existing social networks?
Today, OpenSocial mimics Facebook. It should be called open widget. However, this is just the opening move of a chess game. This is not the end but the beginning. The beginning for Google was to identify a hole in Facebook's strategy.
Facebook was great when it opened its platform to developers in May. The site was immediately flooded with several interesting applications. However, in the end, Facebook is just another closed system. It locks in its customers. In the end, it only works when you go to them.
Unlike Facebook, OpenSocial does not have its own markup language. It allows developers to write in normal java script and html with only minor adjustments needed for the code to work on its platform. Facebook requires use of FBML (Facebook Markup Language) for security reasons, but it also makes code unusable outside Facebook. OpenSocial will especially attract small developers who can create 'learn once, write anywhere' applications.
Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) are today one way. But they should be two-way. OpenSocial will be first two-way API. Watch Google, it will get APIs into Maps, RSS Reader, spreadsheets and all probable places.
What about the social ramifications of social networking?
In India, you have IT Act for this. Otherwise, it's like nuclear technology, which has both upside and downside. So, it's the duty of the social networking vendor to educate people about the good and the bad of social networking. It should be part of their DNA.
Post a Comment