It throws the spotlight on the growing economic importance
of apps, predicting that there will be 2.8m developers’ jobs and 4.8m people in
support and marketing roles by 2018, and has some interesting observations and
hard stats on the business. But it doesn’t touch on the influence of personal
data, and how it’s managed by organisations that develop apps and the
application programme interfaces (APIs) on which they run.
A growing number of consumers are sensitive about personal
data, and their choices are going to be influenced by whether they feel it is
held in a neutral and safe place. This places it among the factors that API and
app developers will have to take into account in building their markets.
It’s a fractured picture. The app economy has been built on
developers finding different ways to make money, including charging for the
download of apps, offering them as a
medium for advertising or charging when they are used for transactions. The API
economy is harder to define – there’s no strong consensus – but it revolves
around the provider making the API available to developers as a base for their
apps. You can see this in Apple’s App Store and Google’s Play Store, on
platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, and among providers of personal data
services such as Mydex that provide APIs.
These economies are growing on their appeal to people’s
desire for convenience; apps give them an easy route into online services
without having to provide their details each time around. But users often have
no idea how this is creating revenue for the developer or API provider, even
though it often involves the use of their personal data.
Different models are used. Some companies use the data to
target their own advertising; others make it available to third party
advertisers; it can be used to identify consumer habits and assess risks; to
feed into business intelligence; and in developing new services. The potential
is growing as more devices are able to provide information on people’s location
and movements, and this is going to increase as the data on those apps is
hooked up with the internet of things.
There are also some that are not trying to monetise the data
but use it to make their own processes more efficient. But the key point for
all cases is that there is a degree of intrusion, and it’s all done without the
knowledge of most users.
By law API providers and app developers have to tell people
how their data could conceivably be used, but in practice it is usually buried
in those lengthy terms and conditions that few people are going to read before
they click their approval. They only begin to understand further down the
track, when in most cases it’s too late to withdraw approval and the only
remedy is to stop using the app.
Put this alongside the sporadic horror stories in the press
about breaches of personal data held by large organisations, and a growing
number of people are going to think twice about signing up to use apps, and
will often decide that they can live without them.
If businesses want to keep those people on board they need
to find a consent model that gives users more control and feeds a sense of
trust; which comes back to the need for a neutral and safe place for personal
data that is detached from any commercial process.
There are possibilities around the provision of stores for
personal data, supported by a credible process to verify an identity and verify
the data, which individuals would populate or
have populated by those they connect with and make available as they see
fit. They would be most effective if they provide some flexibility; the
individual might be able to give blanket permission for access to relevant data
for every app they download; or have some a
simple short form of consent for different scenarios under their own terms
or ask for requests for specified data each time they sign up; or even make
data available for one time use on apps for a single transaction.
They would surrender some of the convenience they currently
enjoy, and they wouldn’t be the most attractive customers for the most
commercially aggressive app developers, but it would give them the control that
they want.
This could be done by an API provider or by a third party
with access to the API. The latter might prove more attractive to the privacy
savvy consumer wanting a service provider that isn’t looking for new ways to
make money from the data. He or she would give up some privacy, but with a
stronger sense of trust, especially if they were already using it for
website-based services.
There is also a case for it assisting API and app providers
by reducing the risk from false data. If they are given a false identity or
inaccurate details it undermines the quality of what they can offer, and can
lead to unhappy customers, reputational damage and, in the worst cases, legal
problems from providing the wrong data about individuals. Taking the data, and
proof of identity, from a third party with a more stringent verification
process could provide a degree of security that they won’t obtain from someone
quickly jabbing details into a smartphone or tablet.
It’s likely that some companies would be reluctant to give
up free access to the data on which they’re building a commercial model, but it
offers a degree of compensation that could be more highly valued as customers
become more guarded.
Concerns over personal data are beginning influence the
market for apps. This is one possible solution and there could be others out
there. Overall, the companies that are willing to take it seriously could find
a competitive edge in appealing to those customers who are not going to be more
demanding in providing their trust.
No comments:
Post a Comment