vendredi 21 décembre 2012

Marketing: les 5 tendances à suivre en 2013


Collaborative, alternative, frugale, locale, raisonnée... L'Entreprise fait le point sur les nouvelles formes de consommation qui gagneront du terrain en 2013.

"En 2013, les consommateurs participeront de façon croissante et de plus en plus diverse au financement, lancement et développement de marques et produits", pronostique Trendwatching, cabinet d'études de veille de tendances basé aux Pays Bas. Le crowdsourcing continuera donc son développement.

"En 2013, les consommateurs participeront de façon croissante et de plus en plus diverse au financement, lancement et développement de marques et produits", pronostique Trendwatching, cabinet d'études de veille de tendances basé aux Pays Bas. Le crowdsourcing continuera donc son développement.
istock

1.Le boom de la consommation participative

"En 2013, les consommateurs participeront de façon croissante et de plus en plus diverse au financement, lancement et développement de marques et produits", pronostiqueTrendwatching, cabinet d'études de veille de tendances basé aux Pays Bas. Le crowdsourcing continuera donc son développement.
Nouveau, le consommateur fera de plus en plus appel à une foule d'experts pour s'y retrouver dans la jungle des offres sur internet.
Darjeelin se veut ainsi la première agence de voyages participative : "La recherche du meilleur billet d'avion peut prendre un temps considérable à un non-initié, avec un résultat souvent décevant, explique Thibault Lorcy cofondateur. "Notre plateforme mobilise pour les voyageurs une communauté d'experts qui les aideront à voyager " plus malin". Ils connaissent toutes les ficelles de la recherche de billets ("flight hacking") et sont capables d'être très créatifs pour proposer des tarifs jusqu'à 25% moins chers que les comparateurs ou agences de voyages en ligne classiques."
Concrètement pour 20 euros payés par l'utilisateur, Darjeelin met en concurrence quatre experts pendant trois jours pour chaque demande de voyage. Celui qui a fait l'offre la plus intéressante touche 15 euros, et l'intermédiaire cinq euros.
Autre exemple de nouveau venu de la consommation collaborative, wedigup. Cette plateforme propose elle aussi de rentabiliser le temps passé sur la toile en faisant appel aux experts. Le principe : "Nous mettons en relation des internautes compétents (en high tech pour l'instant) au service d'acheteurs novices et pressés pour dégoter le meilleur produit au meilleur prix en fonction de ses besoins et de son budget", explique sa créatrice Félicie Lavinaud.
A suivre: le gros carton aux Etats-Unis de Quirky. Cette start-up new-yorkaise dont le leitmotiv est "les meilleures idées sont dans la tête des clients", propose d'élire une invention née d'un consommateur pour améliorer le quotidien. Les 300.000 membres du réseau social de Quirky votent trois fois par semaine. L'invention la plus ingénieuse passe alors au bureau d'études avant de devenir un prototype puis un produit de masse distribué par de grandes enseignes (Auchan en France depuis fin 2012).

2. L'essor du "consommer moins mais mieux"

"Je voudrais consommer moins mais mieux". C'est l'affirmation dans laquelle se reconnaissent le plus 30% des Français, selon l'étude 2012 de l'Observatoire des consommations émergentes (ObSoCo). Par consommer "mieux", les consommateurs entendent "acheter des produits "qui durent plus longtemps" (44%), "bons pour la santé" (37%), des produits "de qualité et respectueux de l'environnement" (36%) et enfin "fabriqués localement" (33%).
Les Français achètent déjà "autrement" : 60% ont acheté au moins un produit d'occasion dans les 12 derniers mois, 50% empruntent du matériel de bricolage ou des produits culturels à leur entourage. 37% ont aussi déjà pratiqué l'achat groupé dans l'année écoulée. "La location d'un produit (hors voiture) est encore modeste (19% des consommateurs) mais peut-être d'abord à cause d'une faiblesse de l'offre", remarque l'ObSoCo, observatoire de la société et de la consommation. "Mais le développement de site comme Zilok (location entre particuliers) ou l'engagement récent de certaines enseignes (Leroy Merlin ou Monsieur Bricolage) est de nature à révéler tout le potentiel de cette forme de consommation".

3. L'appel aux "pairs"

"La crise favorise le succès des formules " de particulier à particulier ", note Rémy Oudghiri, directeur du département Tendances & Insightschez Ipsos Public Affairs. Avec l'essor des réseaux sociaux, les individus n'hésitent plus à se mettre en contact directement les uns avec les autres. "Conséquence : un Français sur deux a déjà acheté des produits à d'autres particuliers via des sites d'annonces en ligne et la même proportion a déjà vendu des produits à d'autres. 11% ont déjà échangé ou " troqué " des produits ou des services avec d'autres personnes et 11% ont déjà loué un bien ou un équipement dont ils avaient besoin à un particulier." Avec la crise, le consommateur n'hésite plus à se tourner vers ses pairs pour résoudre ses problèmes de la vie quotidienne.

4. Un marketing plus "frugal"

Contraintes budgétaires obligent, en 2013, les clients chercheront encore plus de solutions pour consommer "malin", retirer davantage de satisfactions et d'effets pour chaque euro dépensé. S'ils achètent d'occasion ou recourent au "faire soi-même" c'est par souci de faire des économies. "Les sombres perspectives en matière d'évolution du pouvoir d'achat pour les prochaines années constituent un facteur de diffusion et d'intensification des pratiques de consommation émergentes", relève l'ObSoCo. Conséquences: certaines marques et enseignes n'hésitent pas à s'inspirer du marketing en vigueur dans les pays émergents . Le marketing frugal l'arme fatale pour doper la consommation des "fauchés" ?! Renault, Procter&Gamble, Nokia...et bien d'autres s'en servent déjà.
"L'innovation frugale consiste à augmenter la valeur perçue par le consommateur tout en gardant le coût minime", explique Navi Radjou, consultant basé à Palo Alto en Californie et auteur de "Jugaad Innovation" ("jugaad" mot indien veut dire "ingéniosité maitrisée" en indou). En Inde, la Nano voiture du groupe Tata vendue 2000 a rendu la consommation automobilie accessible à la classe moyenne. Le marketing en 2013 devra redoubler d'ingéniosité pour rendre abordables les produits et les services qu'au fond le consommateur rêve toujours d'utiliser ou de posséder ! Vertu de la crise : elle obligera à être créatif !

5. Fabrication locale 2.0

"La fabrication locale est la nouvelle économie de services". Dans son briefing des dix tendances à suivre en 2013, Trendwatchning pronostique l'essor de "fabrication locale 2.0". Les consommateurs s'éprennent de plus en plus du "made in France" : leur engouement va aux marques qui, au-delà d'un produit, racontent une histoire, et aux marques qui peuvent répondre vite (donc n'ont pas délocalisé loin leur production). En Californie, le constructeur de voitures électriques Tesla a sorti un modèle tesla S fabriqué entièrement localement.
"Our Town is making jeans again". A Cardigan (Pays de Galles) on refabrique des jeans après en avoir délocalisé la production il y a dix ans. C'est Hiut Denime une start-up britannique qui s'est lancé sur le créneau en 2012.
Dans l'hexagone, le revival du "made in France" est balbutiant, mais les vents sont porteurs pour ceux qui n'ont pas cédé aux sirènes de la délocalisation. Les relocalisations d'activité ont timidement commencé avec souvent comme argument de se rapprocher de leur marché. Ainsi les vélos à assistance électriqueVeloscoot ont-ils rapatrié leur production de Chine à La Rochelle.
Google comptait jouer aussi sur la fibre du patriotisme économique quand il annonce le lancement de Nexus Q en juin 2012. Sur la coque de ce lecteur multimédia domestique était inscrit "Designed and Manufactured in the U.S.A." La base en métal devait être faite dans le Midwest, les composants en plastique moulés en Californie. Et l'ensemble du bijou hightech serait assemblé non loin du QG de Google à Moutain View, Californie ! Le lancement du Nexus Q a été retardé, mais la promesse marketing était très claire : designé, fabriqué et assemblé au pays !
Source : L'Entreprise

Data Analytics and Smart Grid: The Rising Tide for Power Utilities


While power utilities like to claim that they employ data analytics, they really 
Data Analytics and Smart Grid: The Rising Tide for Power Utilities
don’t.
While power utilities like to claim that they employ data analytics, they really don’t. Utilities tend to have last-gen business intelligence (BI) reporting solutions that they call “analytics,” but that typically amount to not much more than reporting tools or descriptive analytics (primarily based on older database architectures running SQL), as opposed to the real-time and predictive software using complex event processing, to which the term “analytics” is now commonly understood to refer.

Utilities are today seeking to become more proactive in decision-making, adjusting their strategies based on reasonable predictive views into the future, thus allowing them to side-step problems and capitalize on the smart grid technologies that are now being deployed at scale. Predictive analytics, capable of managing intermittent loads, renewables, rapidly changing weather patterns and other grid conditions, represent the ultimate goal for smart grid capabilities.

Based on GTM Research’s latest report, The Soft Grid 2013-2020: Big Data & Utility Analytics for Smart Grid, the leading areas of concern for utilities within data analytics are:
  • Achieving an enterprise-wide IT architecture where all relevant data can be shared with all other necessary departments, systems and applications. 
  • Ensuring that the enterprise is big-data-ready vis-a-vis the data storage and data management layers of its architecture.

Once utilities begin to overcome these foundational architecture issues, they can then begin to move into the deployment of analytics. The bulk of momentum behind utility analytics deployment is coming from:
  • Consumer-based analytics
  • Situational awareness gained through synchrophasor/phasor measurement unit (PMU) reporting the health of the transmission grid on an ongoing basis
  • Grid optimization analytics of the distribution networks (e.g., voltage management)

A recent GTM Research survey of more than 70 global utilities, which was conducted in partnership with the SAS Institute, displays how well different stakeholders understand the value that analytics provide. Not surprisingly, the survey confirms that utilities themselves report having the most momentum for analytics in the domains of customer management and grid operations.
FIGURE: In What Areas of the Business Do Analytics Seem to Have the Most Momentum?


Source: The Soft Grid 2013-2020: Big Data & Utility Analytics for Smart GridSAS Institute

Historically, very little, if any, analytics have been performed on the consumer side. This is due largely to the fact that this industry primarily operates in a monopolistic fashion, with only a smattering of states allowing retail competition. However, the era of smart grid has sparked a renewed interest in demand response and energy efficiency. It appears that utilities are beginning to improve both the data and the level of analysis they are willing to offer customers.

In considering utilities’ progress to date, it should be pointed out that most of the early success stories are rather narrow in scope and often are limited to a single domain. It is GTM Research’s conclusion that the true implementation of broader analytics (both customer-enabling and enterprise-wide) is not yet underway.

However, another trend that is occurring is that employees and customers are beginning to ask for access to particular datasets. At the current juncture, many utilities are not equipped to fulfill these requests, as they do not have enterprise-wide data architectures in place.

In many instances, this has resulted in a growing level of frustration, particularly as employees from other non-operational departments clamor for access to smart meter data. It is our belief that this situation will put some pressure on utility CIOs to properly design the right architectures to allow universal access.

FIGURE: How Would You Rate Your Utility’s Analytics Competencies? (5 Is the Highest, 1 Is the Lowest)

Source: The Soft Grid 2013-2020: Big Data & Utility Analytics for Smart GridSAS Institute
Some progressive utilities, such as OGE, SCE and SDG&E, realize that there has been a paradigm shift and are beginning to make strides. However, the results of the survey indicate that the majority of utilities give themselves low marks in areas such as the utilization of analytics for reliability, the utilization of analytics for customer satisfaction, availability of enterprise-wide analytics, data integration of smart meter and grid operations data, and the propensity for data-driven decision-making in general.
The majority of utilities will therefore be challenged over the next ten years to invest properly in big data infrastructure, software, and services in order to avoid the risk of moving too slowly and having their enterprises be overwhelmed by the rising tide of smart grid data.
Source : GreenTech Media

mercredi 19 décembre 2012

Google Ventures 2012: year in review

In 2012 Google Ventures grew across the board: our fund grew to $300 million per year, our team grew to 60 people, and the number of companies we’ve funded grew to over 150.
Thank you to our portfolio companies for the impact you made this year. Reflecting on 2012, we can’t wait for 2013!

jeudi 13 décembre 2012

Japon : Hitachi invente le stockage éternel de données


Japon : Hitachi invente le stockage éternel

Fin septembre, Hitachi présentait à son siège japonais un nouveau support de stockage révolutionnaire. Destinataires privilégiées de l’invention, les marques peuvent attendre la commercialisation avec impatience. Elle est prévue pour 2015.

Avec ses 2 centimètres carrés et son épaisseur de 2 millimètres, ce petit carré de quartz transparent ne donne pas l’impression de pouvoir changer profondément l'industrie multi-milliardaire du stockage de données numériques. Et pourtant, le prototype sur lequel travaille Hitachi depuis 2009 est un pionnier, le genre de tournant technologique qui pose les bases d’une nouvelle ère, comme l'on fait avant lui le CD ou le DVD.

En collaboration avec l’Université de Tokyo, Hitachi a sorti de son laboratoire de recherche un support de stockage de données conservant l’information de manière sécurisée « pour des centaines de millions d’années », se félicite le chercheur Kazuyoshi Torii. Capable de supporter 1000 degrés de chaleur pendant deux heures sans se dégrader, le verre de quartz est également imperméable à l’eau et ultra résistant au choc. « Les données ne seront perdues que si le verre se casse » assure le chercheur en chef Takao Watanabe.




Ce nouveau moyen de stockage, qui conserve les données sous forme binaire en gravant quatre couches différentes de points à l’intérieur d’une fine feuille de verre, évite donc les tracas que peuvent produire - malgré eux - les médias actuels de stockage. Le disque optique comme le disque dur sont condamnés à l’obsolescence après quelques décennies au mieux.

« Le volume gigantesques de données créées chaque jour a explosé, mais aucun progrès notoire n’avait été réalisé afin d'en assurer la conservation pour les générations futures », explique Kazuyoshi Torii. « Les risques de perte des informations ont même augmenté ». Et que dire de ce parcours du combattant qu'implique, par exemple, la numérisation des anciens 33 tours ou cassettes VHS ?




Envisagée pour 2015, la commercialisation de l'objet ne devrait au départ être réservée qu’aux entreprises stockant d’immenses volumes de données. Le grand public devra donc encore patienter. Pendant cette période, Hitachi envisage de proposer aux futurs clients d’envoyer leurs données afin qu’elles soient encodées.

Reste maintenant à savoir à qui profitera l’invention ? Le fabricant japonais - dont le slogan « Inspire the next » est plus que jamais d’actualité - envisage a priori d'équiper d’abord les agences gouvernementales, les organisations religieuses et les musées, sur qui le temps n’a pas d’impact. Mais l’obligation de legs n’est pas leur monopole. Un grand nombre de marques pourrait s’en servir à bon escient, notamment dans le stockage des données marketing et clientèle.

Source : Influencia

Big Data : c'est le chef de rayon qu'il faut former


Caractérisé avant tout par un accroissement du volume de données à analyser, le Big Data peut déboucher sur d'énormes gains de productivité, en donnant une capacité de décision aux opérationnels. Le Big Data n'influence pas la stratégie. C'est en soi une stratégie, celle de la micro-décision.

 
A l'évidence, la problématique du Big Data occupe largement les esprits. Depuis quelques mois, colloques, séminaires et autres conférences se multiplient. Les solutions techniques arrivent sur le marché (avec, en décembre 2011, la sortie de la version 1.0 de Hadoop, système de traitement de données adapté aux grosses volumétries). Mais ces solutions, développées pour gérer de vastes ensembles de données, ne répondent pas forcément aux problématiques marketing. Le volume est une chose, la capacité à l'exploiter en est une autre. Le goulet d'étranglement se situe certainement moins dans le Big Data que dans le "Big Analytics" : identifier des domaines de décision, des indicateurs clés, et proposer des modèles qui s'accordent au business. L'enjeu réside donc dans la capacité à formuler de bonnes théories (quantitatives) pour organiser le traitement (rapide) des données. 

Ce qu'apporte le Big Data ? Simplement de grands volumes des données générées par la multiplication des capteurs (smartphones, cartes de fidélité, etc.). Rien de révolutionnaire, mais un énorme gain de productivité. Ainsi, dans la distribution, l'analyse des zones de chalandise nécessite de comprendre les choix des consommateurs. Cette théorie s'incarne dans ce qu'on appelle les modèles gravitaires. Avec le Big Data, calibrer ces modèles pour construire des cartes plus précises et plus dynamiques devient envisageable.
A chaque point de vente, sa carte concurrentielle
Une conséquence très simple de l'accroissement du volume des données réside dans le concept de granularité. Le nombre ne change pas la connaissance  - la théorie des échantillons nous apprend qu'au-delà de 10 000 observations, on accroît peu la précision -, mais il permet de calculer un plus grand nombre de modèles, permettant de donner un caractère particulier ou local à la connaissance générale. A chaque point de vente sa carte concurrentielle, qui peut être consultée jour par jour et, mieux, refléter l'effet des actions marketing !

C'est cette granularité qui est essentielle. On comprend de suite où se trouve l'enjeu : des milliers de cartes produites doivent être analysées, interprétées et exploitées par des milliers de managers. Cela implique que chaque responsable de point de vente, et même de rayon, possède la "culture quantitative" qui lui permet de lire ces cartes et de comprendre les modèles. Il doit acquérir un sens des données, en comprendre les limites, en apprécier les variations. Il ne bâtira pas les modèles, mais sera amené à interpréter les résultats en fonction du contexte. Le Big Data nécessite donc le développement de nouvelles compétences, et sans doute plus encore un véritable "empowerment" des unités opérationnelles : plus de données, plus de contexte dans les modèles et les indicateurs, donc plus d'autonomie dans la décision.
La pépite du Big Data n'existe pas
La tentation est grande d'aller encore plus loin, de considérer un grain encore plus fin, en automatisant les micro-décisions. Pensons aux prix, et à cette faculté des étiquettes électroniques de les faire varier quand on le souhaite. On imagine aisément qu'à partir de modèles de prix raisonnables, on produise des milliers de tarifs tendant à l'optimal adaptés aux différents produits, points de ventes et circonstances, leur affichage étant piloté par des systèmes experts (sans doute supervisés humainement, espérons le). C'est déjà en partie le cas des grands commerces électroniques. Pour Amazon, ces modèles sont issus du filtrage collaboratifs.  

On ne doit donc pas attendre du Big Data qu'il influence les stratégies. Car il est une stratégie en soi, celle qui favorise les micro-décisions opérationnelles, sur le principe des petits ruisseaux qui font les grands fleuves. De ce point de vue, le mythe de l'orpailleur s'évanouit. Non l'avantage du Big Data n'est pas d'améliorer la qualité des études, ni de fouiller dans la masse des données jusqu'à trouver cette pépite, la corrélation qui permet de savoir mieux vendre et à moindre coût. Dans la perspective de la micro-décision, l'action l'emporte sur la connaissance. On continuera à forer les données, à les analyser, les malaxer. Mais le nouvel enjeu est de les distribuer sous forme synthétique. N'attendons pas du Big Data de grandes découverte, faisons en sorte qu'il aide les opérationnels à agir avec plus d'intelligence.

Data Centers : IT Efficiency Leads to Smart Grid Savings


Grid-side opportunities abound for data centers via virtualization, server optimization, and “load migration.”
Data centers make an interesting, if challenging, target market for integration into the smart grid. Sure, they’re a huge source of power, running about the smartest power loads in existence -- lots and lots of servers, routers, switches, and other IT equipment. That should make them a natural fit for the network of IT that’s connecting utilities to their customers to better manage power across the grid.
Data centers also tend to have a pretty hands-off attitude when it comes to hooking up to the local utility. Most data centers have installed expensive batteries and backup generators to take over during outages -- but they’re not very interested in turning over those resources during peak power times or other such grid emergencies, since that’s when they’re also most likely to be facing their own power crunch.
But rising power prices, combined with the IT world’s insatiable hunger for more server space, are bound to push data centers and utilities closer together. Beyond lowering power bills, data centers face key pinch-points in capacity that need to be handled right away -- some customers may need to increase computing capacity in the same crowded space, while others may need to increase capacity without exceeding the amount of power their local substation can provide.
Luckily for the data center world, it appears that their IT needs and their energy demands can align nicely for savings for themselves and the grid. According to an August report from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (PDF), data centers can shave power bills by up to a quarter, simply by managing their IT resources more intelligently -- and with the grid’s needs in mind.
The study included funding from the California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program and utilities Pacific Gas and Electric and San Diego Gas and Electric. It also saw participation by two data center efficiency startups, Santa Clara, Calif.-based PowerAssure and Sacramento, Calif.-based SynapSense, which are both working with data center partners in the state.
According to the study, “With minimal or no impact to data center operations, a demand savings of 25% at the data center level or 10% to 12% at the whole building level can be achieved with strategies for cooling and IT equipment, and load migration.”
The report came with a long list of caveats, however, including the fact that it only tested four data centers. It also noted that not all of the responses used for maximum energy savings would be appropriate for “mission-critical” data centers like, say, the ones that control Wall Street or the Pentagon.
It also stressed that “load migration,” or moving computing loads back and forth between data centers to maximize energy market savings and revenue opportunities, would require an underlying level of IT sophistication that not all data centers have.
“If the applications are data-center independent -- if they can switch from one to another seamlessly, which they have to do for reliability anyway -- then you have enough flexibility to play in the energy market,” Clemens Pfeiffer, CTO of PowerAssure, said in an interview last week. “On the other hand, “If the application doesn’t support it, you can’t do it.”
In other words, data centers are already making the IT infrastructure improvements they need to play into energy and grid markets today -- if only they have the tools to recognize it. Becoming aware, in turn, can lead to grid-facing opportunities, both to reduce cost and to generate revenue.
So how have data centers taken up the challenge? We’ve seen a number of projects building the links to allow data centers to interact with the smart grid at large, such as Cisco’s project with NetApp and Pacific Gas & Electric in 2008. That project paid itself off in utility rebates as well as power bill savings.
But the next level of data center energy optimization -- the kind that brings load migration and other more advanced concepts into play -- is far less common. After all, this technology is all brand new, and most data center operators are leery of turning over control to any system that could negatively affect uptime.
Even so, we’re seeing more and more integration of energy data into the way data centers are run today. IT giants like HP, IBM, Intel, Cisco, Microsoft and Oracle are improving server performance per watt, and integrating energy data more closely into their data center infrastructure management (DCIM) platforms. Big grid players like ABB, Siemens, GE and Schneider Electric are also making forays into the data center. Then we’ve got startups like PowerAssure, Vigilent (formerly Federspiel Controls), SentillaVigilent andJouleX, to name a few, each bringing their own combination of capabilities to market via partnerships in the industry.
PowerAssure, for its part, has been working on data center-smart grid integration with Virginia’s Dominion Power since late last year. Earlier this month, it announced a partnership with iTRACS, a maker of data center mapping and visualization software, to provide its suite of software as a cloud-hosted service, or as a turnkey platform for customers concerned about keeping data center data under strict security, Pfeiffer said.
Other startups are linking up with companies that are designing the next generation of high-efficiency gear for the data center. JouleX, the Atlanta-based startup that works with customers including Cisco, Intel and VMware, has also worked closely with Calxeda, maker of ARM-based high-efficiency servers, for example. It has also worked with Cisco on a powered-over-Ethernet (POE) LED lighting system, similar to that deployed by startup Redwood Systems in Facebook’s super-green data center in Oregon.
Underlying all these technical approaches is a common challenge, however, Pfeiffer said -- convincing the human beings in charge of making investment decisions that energy-smart data centers are worth the cost. “Our problem today is, we need to quantify the opportunity, then have the infrastructure to do it, and the tools to participate in it,” he said.
Source : GreenTech Media

mercredi 12 décembre 2012

Fortune Exclusive: Larry Page on Google

121211083220-larry-page-google-gallery-verticalThe press-shy Google CEO talks about mobile computing, his tussles with Apple -- and the future of search.

FORTUNE -- Last month, Larry Page sat down with Fortune Senior Writer Miguel Helft for a lengthy interview for a forthcoming Fortune magazine article. It was only Page's second wide-ranging conversation with a print publication since becoming CEO of Google in April 2011. The 70-minute discussion covered, among other things, Page's take on the future of search, his plans to integrate Motorola and how his management style has changed since taking the helm of the company. Edited excerpts follow.

Fortune: When you're thinking about the next bet you're going to make, how do you pick?
Larry Page: That's something we've been thinking about a lot. Unfortunately, there's not a perfect science to that. Partly I feel that Google is in uncharted territory in the sense that I don't think there's an example from history I can take and say: "Why don't we just do that?" We're at a pretty big scale. We're doing a lot of different things. We want to be a different kind of company. We'd like to have more of a social component in what we do. We like people to be happy with the products they're using. We like our employees to be happy about working here.
Sorry, back to your main question: Choosing what to do. We want to do things that will motivate the most amazing people in the world to want to work on them. You look at self-driving cars. You know a lot of people die, and there's a lot of wasted labor. The better transportation you have, the more choice in jobs. And that's social good. That's probably an economic good. I like it when we're picking problems like that: big things where technology can have a really big impact. And we're pretty sure we can do it. And whatever the technology investment we need to do that, it's not going to be that huge compared to the payoff.

What else would change [in a world with self-driving cars]? Would we not have streetlights? Would the cities be different? Do you have a vision for what could happen?
It's very hard to predict entirely. I think that, you know, one of the issues we face here is parking. I'm getting quotes [for] the cost for us to build a parking lot structure [of] $40,000 per space. It's all concrete and steel. Do you really want to use all your concrete and steel to build parking lots? It seems pretty stupid. If we have automated cars, or even if we have some fraction of automated cars, we'll save hundreds of millions of dollars on parking, just at Google. When you think about your experience, the car can drop you at the front door to the building you work at and then it goes and parks itself. Whenever you need it, your phone notices that you're walking out of the building, and your car's there immediately by the time you get downstairs.

Let me bring you back to management in the company. One of your big early changes was to organize the company around product groups. Are you satisfied with what it's accomplished. If part of it was about getting faster, have you gotten faster? How do you measure that?
It's my job and my personality never to be satisfied. But in general I've been very happy with the changes that we made. And I think that we have focused the company and that's been very helpful. I've generally been happy with that.

And do you measure the speed at which [you are executing]?
You kind of have a feel for it, but it's hard to measure really accurately. But I think a lot of things have improved. We had a measurement of our rate of how we check in code. We've seen some improvements in that, which I view as a good sign. But I probably put more weight on just an intuitive feel.

Web search is going through a pretty significant transformation with things like the Knowledge Graph, Google Now, mobile. What do you think search should be able to do? Are things that we see today that point us to where it's going to be five, ten years from now?
I've been saying the same thing about search in some sense for ten years or so. The perfect search engine would really understand whatever your need is. It would understand everything in the world deeply, give you back kind of exactly what you need.
I think some of the things we're going to do with shopping are also related to that. In shopping we switched to more of a bid model. Part of that's just to make sure we get the information to better structure it, and we have really accurate information that we could give to you. Because obviously if you're buying something, it is a commercial transaction.

MORE: Top 10 MBA programs in the U.S.

We've had tremendous focus on really making sure we have very accurate, very structured data about everything. We've been working on maps for seven years now or something, and a lot of that is to get exact data on like what is this street, and what is this business, what is the outline of this building. In order to meet our users' needs, the more accurate, the more detailed, the more structured the data we have, the better. That's why we bought ITA--to make sure we had better structured travel information.

A big part of this is happening as we shift from the desktop to mobile. There's a lot of concern about the prospects for advertising in mobile. How much do you think about monetization of new services?
Obviously we have a big company with a lot of revenue and a lot of people, and so we take our core business, search and advertising and all those things very, very seriously. And they do go through some disruption right now. And I think that's great. That's what's good about the technology industry is that we're building new stuff, new software that really meets people's needs better than the old things. And that's opportunity.
We made our bets really early on on Android. We thought that the mobile experiences really needed a rethink, right? That was correct. It's been very successful. And I think because of that experience and the knowledge that we put into developing Android and our understanding that, we understand that space really well. I think we're in the early stages of monetization. The fact that a phone has a location is really helpful for monetization.
I view a whole bunch of things as additive that you can do on mobile that you couldn't do before. And I think with those things, we're going to make more money than we do now.
I think there's no company you would choose that would be better positioned to transition and innovate in mobile advertising and monetization. We've got all the pieces we need to do that going forward.

In the old world of just desktop search, your main competitors at the time were Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT). Is the competition now something totally different? Is it Siri? Is it Amazon (AMZN) for commercial queries?
I mean, I don't really think about it that way.

Because you don't think about competition?
Obviously we think about competition to some extent. But I feel my job is mostly getting people not to think about our competition. In general I think there's a tendency for people to think about the things that exist. Our job is to think of the thing you haven't thought of yet that you really need. And by definition, if our competitors knew that thing, they wouldn't tell it to us or anybody else. I think just our strengths, our weaknesses, our opportunities are different than any other company.

I don't know if this is unique at this time in this industry, but there are companies that are clearly competing with each other [Google, Apple (AAPL) and Amazon], with completely different business models.
I actually view that as a shame when you think about it that way. All the big technology companies are big because they did something great. I'd like to see more cooperation on the user side. The Internet was made in universities and it was designed to interoperate. And as we've commercialized it, we've added more of an island-like approach to it, which I think is a somewhat a shame for users.

So in light of that, Apple's still a partner. It's a competitor. You and Steve Jobs were friendly.
At times.

At times. You said that whole thing about Android and them being angry about it, that it was for show.
I didn't say that entirely. I said partly.

[Apple did it] partly for show, to get the troops to rally.
By the way, that's something I try not to do. I don't like to rally my company in that way because I think that if you're looking at somebody else, you're looking at what they do now, and that's not how again you stay two or three steps ahead.

So Apple obviously is a huge distribution partner for some of your services. How is the relationship?
What I was trying to say was I think it would be nice if everybody would get along better and the users didn't suffer as a result of other people's activities. I try to model that. We try pretty hard to make our products be available as widely as we can. That's our philosophy. I think sometimes we're allowed to do that. Sometimes we're not.

MORE: Will Adobe's new cloud strategy pay off?

So do you have an ongoing conversation with Apple about these kinds of issues and trying to resolve them?
I mean, obviously we talk to Apple. We have a big search relationship with Apple, and so on, and we talk to them and so on.

For a long time, Google was organized on a 70-20-10 model, with 70 percent of effort going to search and ads, 20 to apps, [and 10 to completely new projects]. Does that still apply?
Yeah. We still think about that. I think we're in a bit of a unique point in the history of Google, where we have a number of things that are kind of in the 20 on the way to the 70. So where would you put Android? It's probably in the 70 in terms of impact -- the monetization is at an early stage.

What [else is] in the 20?
It's question of how you really measure it. I don't think about exactly what we put in the 20, so I can't come up with an example offhand.

Okay. But Google X [which includes self-driving cars and Project Glass, the augmented reality glasses] would definitely be on the 10?
Yeah. My experience is like it sounds kind of funny because I think investors always worry about this. You know, "Oh my God, they're going to spend all their money on self-driving cars." I feel like no matter how hard I try, I can never make the 10 bigger, because it's actually hard to get people to work on stuff that's really ambitious. It's easier to get people working on incremental things.

Because it's their comfort zone?
Yeah.

Google Plus was a big bet.
Is a big bet.

It is a big bet. What's most important to you? Is competitive with Facebook (FB)? Is it about weaving identity across all of Google's products? You've talked about adoption being higher than you expected. What's the measure of success going forward?
I think it's gone pretty well. I'm very happy if users of Plus are happy and the numbers are growing because that means that we're on to something. We've got a huge team actually in this building. If you walk around, you see everyone's excited and running around and working hard on it. I think that they're doing great stuff. They're making it better and better every day. That's how I'm measuring it.
There's [another] part of Google Plus. I think in order to make our products really work well, we need to have a good way of sharing. We had 18 different ways of sharing stuff before we did Plus. Now we have one way that works well, and we're improving.

MORE: The best of everything in tech this year

One of the first instances of Plus being woven into other Google services was in search. There was a fair amount of criticism. In some cases where somebody is not an active user of Google Plus, you put their [Google Plus profile in search results]. That is not necessarily the best use of that real estate. And some people went as far as saying you were betraying the promise of always giving the best, unbiased search results. What's your reaction to that?
What you should want us to do is to really build amazing products and to really do that with a long-term focus. Just like I mentioned we have to understand apps and we have to understand things you could buy, and we have to understand airline tickets. We have to understand anything you might search for. And people are a big thing you might search for.
And so we think about it somewhat differently. We're going to have people as a first class object in search. We need that to work, and we need to get started on it. If you look at a product, and you say the day it launched, "It's not doing what I think it should do." We say, "Well, yeah. It just launched today." Part of this is you have to interact with it and you have to claim your name and make it work for you. And so I think for me I didn't have any issues around that. I think that people weren't focused on the long-term. And I think again it's important if we're going to do a good job meeting your information needs, we actually need to understand things and we need to understand things pretty deeply. People are a component of that.

Many of your competitors have talked about how you showcase your services in search at their expense. Obviously it's gotten regulators' attention. Should Google have done things differently in any of those areas?
The way we think about it is that our customer is our end-user. People are really trying to get some information and get honest, accurate, well-ranked information from us. That's our job one. I think that there are companies that do various kinds of specialized things, that they're doing a part of what we do. We see the opportunity to build amazing products that are more than any of those parts. So one of my favorite examples I like to give is if you're vacation planning. It would be really nice to have a system that could basically vacation plan for you. It would know your preferences, it would know the weather, it would know the prices of airline tickets, the hotel prices, understand logistics, combine all those things into one experience. And that's kind of how we think about search.
You began by saying "your competitors." I don't think the companies that are complaining about various components of what we do are trying to do that. So again, I don't kind of think about it that way.
I think in general we've tried to be very inclusive of people's data. Obviously when you search in Google you get all kinds of different search engines and travel providers and everything else. We're doing our best to make sure those things are represented well. I think for us our strength comes from working with everybody, but we also need to make sure we're serving our end users with a really great experience and that we provide that detailed information to people. Sometimes those things will be complicated.

There's many areas [of Google] that are working very well. Payments seem to be an area where the uptake is a little slower. Are the challenges there technical or are they [the result of] this ecosystem of partners, banks, payment providers, et cetera?
I guess you're talking about Google Wallet?

Yeah, Wallet.
I think that's an area where we've made really rapid progress actually. If you talk to the users, they rave about it. We'd obviously like to get it to more people if we are allowed to. I'd like to see more cooperation in that area and in many parts of the industry.
Besides Wallet, we're very good at accepting worldwide payments. We have very many small advertisers. We're also getting very good with Play on Android at accepting payments from users in many, many different countries, wireless, carrier billing and all sorts of other forms of payment. We have probably a non-understood set of capabilities there.

MORE: 4 obstacles to mobile world domination

There are some great products out of Motorola, but none of them are your signature Nexus line. Will you partner with Motorola for these sort of signature devices? How will you decide when to partner with them? And despite all your assurances to the other [Android] partners that you're going to be neutral, aren't they going to freak out [when you build a Motorola Nexus]?
First of all, I don't think there's any physical way we could have released a Nexus Motorola device in that sense. I mean, we haven't owned the company long enough.

How will you decide when to do a Motorola Nexus device, and what do you tell Samsung and LG?
I think there's a lot of complexity in that question. Maybe I'll talk more generally about that area.
The right way to think about it is how do we get amazing products into users' hands in the most cost-effective, highest quality way possible and to the most people. That's what we do as a business, and that's what we've done with Android.
Part of the reason why we've done Nexus devices in the past is that we want to build an amazing device that kind of showcases what's possible on Android, gives a way for the programmers to get early builds, does a whole bunch of things that are important. Exactly what we do, which devices we do, what the timing is, how we release the software with them, all those things have been changing.
Every day we kind of evaluate how do we help our partners out the right way, how do we produce amazing innovative devices, and how do we get those out, and how do we get that innovation into the ecosystem and into the hands of as many people as possible, and how do we keep our partners happy. I think we've done a pretty good job of that so far.

How much time do you spend thinking about your own role as a manager? You were a founder, obviously you've managed teams before. But how do you develop those skills? How do you -- do you experience your sense of responsibility differently as a CEO than you had as a founder?
It's really a different level of responsibility. I do spend more day-to-day management time than I did previously. I think that's a good thing. I think I have great advisors. There's a lot of people in our ecosystem and board members and so on who I rely on, and Sergey, as well, and Eric. He's very helpful on a lot of different issues. I think that I've been doing a lot of this stuff for a long time, so it's been pretty smooth in that way. But I think again I'm a little bit in uncharted territory because I think what I'm trying to do is not -- I can't point to another company and say, "I want to do what they're doing." So I'm trying to cause something to happen, and it's not obvious how to make it happen.
As we start up new things, as we're working on new areas, as change needs to happen, I tend to get very deep. Then I make sure I have the right team and the right people are in place, and I'm confident they're doing the right thing. And then I'm gone for a long time. I might be gone for a quarter. Those things vary a lot. But that's the trick -- knowing which things are really going to be impactful.

So is there one thing that keeps you more occupied right now than any other thing?
The thing I'm most occupied with now actually is the overall structural questions. We want Google to be wildly successful. What does Google look like five years from now? What are we doing? Who's doing it? How are we organized? What people do we have? And I think we have some answers to those questions. But I think, like I said, what I'm trying to do is to get a technology company that continues to scale its impact and aspirations in its everyday. We're at a certain scale now, but I don't see any particular reason why we shouldn't be much bigger, more impactful than we are now. So that's what I'm trying to figure out. And I think I have a lot of ideas about how to do that, and gradually, every day we increase our scale a little bit. It's probably incremental in that way. And that's my job, right, is to create shareholder value and create value for the end users.

How long do you see yourself being CEO?
I don't know. It seems impossible to predict. But like I said I'm motivated to make Google into something even more amazing and have a really tremendous positive impact on the world ultimately.
We're still 1 percent to where we should be. I feel a deep sense of responsibility to try to move things along. Not enough people are focused on big change. Part of what I'm trying to do is take Google as a case study and really scale our ambition such that we are able to cause more positive change in the world and more technological change. I have a deep feeling that we are not even close to where we should be.

Source: Fortune

vendredi 7 décembre 2012

Le collaboratif débarque dans la grande distribution



L’économie collaborative et le crowdfunding viennent de passer un nouveau cap en France. Ces nouvelles tendances intéressent désormais le secteur de la grande distribution. Le groupe Auchan a, en effet, annoncé hier avoir noué un partenariat exclusif avec l’américain Quirky.

Fondée en 2009 par Ben Kaufman, 23 ans, la plateforme Quirky permet aux internautes de transformer leurs idées en véritables produits commercialisables pour 10 dollars.
Concrètement, Quirky applique le concept du crowdfunding au design industriel. Ainsi, une fois que l’idée a été choisie par la communauté, Quirky dépose le brevet du nouveau produit à son nom et reverse, en échange, des royalties à l’inventeur et aux internautes qui ont contribué à la naissance du produit. Quirky assure donc le développement du produit, la réalisation d’un prototype, la production et la distribution.
Fort de cette alliance, Auchan proposera donc dans tous ses magasins une gamme de 8 produits Quirky, dès le 14 décembre prochain. Cet éventail aura vocation à s’agrandir au cours des prochains mois.
Par ailleurs, dès le 1er trimestre 2013, les internautes français auront la possibilité de déposer leurs idées de création sur Auchan.fr, via l’un des 100 000 codes promotionnels mis à disposition et donnant droit à un dépôt d’idées gratuit.
Les projets sélectionnés seront développés, fabriqués et distribués par Auchan mais aussi à travers le réseau de distribution de Quirky aux Etats-Unis.
Pour rappel, le 7 septembre dernier, la start-up Quirky a bouclé une levée de 68M $. Aujourd’hui, la plateforme rassemble une communauté de 300 000 membres et revendique 250 produits créés depuis son lancement.

Source: Frenchweb

mercredi 5 décembre 2012

In Sweden, bus stops offer light therapy

Umeå Energi has replaced bus stop advertising boards with therapeutic illumination, hoping to tackle instances of winter depression.
alttext Hot on the heels of our coverage of Re-Timer, a light-emitting device that aims to help users readjust their bodyclocks, we’ve stumbled across another innovative use of light. Swedish firm Umeå Energi has replaced bus stop advertising boards with therapeutic illumination, hoping to tackle instances of winter depression.


Considering some reports suggest that the prevalence of seasonal affective disorders can reach as high as 9.5 percent of the population in regions such as Scandinavia, it seems that light is important for keeping a healthy balance of hormones in the brain. With this is in mind, the company has installed lamps that replicate daylight at 26 bus stops around the town. The bulbs are similar to those used in phototherapy and do not emit ultra-violet rays – they will be in place for three weeks.
Although part of a temporary campaign, could governments employ a similar idea to help boost the moods of citizens during the winter?

Website: www.umeaenergi.se
Contact: umea.energi@umeaenergi.se

Source : Springwise

mardi 4 décembre 2012

IBM : une enveloppe de 4 milliards de dollars pour les PME

Pour aider les petites entreprises à se doter de technologies – IBM –, la société a garni son programme « Global Financing » de 4 milliards de dollars de prêts à taux zéro. C'est quatre fois plus que l'an dernier.


IBM Global Financing Logo
Le géant de l'informatique américain a renouvelé, la semaine dernière, son programme de financement aux entreprises. Dans cette optique, la société a doté son enveloppe de 4 milliards de dollars de prêts à taux zéro, et sur douze mois. Ces prêts sont accordés, certes, mais à condition de se tourner vers des produits de la marque. « Grâce à cette initiative, ils peuvent désormais bénéficier d'un financement pour l'acquisition de technologies Cloud, analytiques et PureSystems », peut-on lire dans le communiqué de Big Blue.

« Ce soutien d'IBM de 4 milliards de dollars à l'écosystème mondial permet d'éliminer de nombreux obstacles de coûts auxquels sont actuellement confrontées les entreprises et notamment les PME », souligne l'entreprise. Par ailleurs, une nouveauté fait son apparition : une application mobile est lancée dans la foulée « pour accélérer les demandes ». Disponible d'abord aux États-Unis courant novembre, puis dans le monde entier en janvier 2013, l'application sera compatible iOS et Android.

Comparé à 2011, ce programme Global Financing a vu donc sa dotation quadrupler. Il avait alors permis d'aider 6 800 entreprises (PME et PMI) à s'équiper de technologies IBM. L'américain note en outre que les entreprises avaient plus profité qu'attendu de ces prêts et s'étaient avérées demandeuses en solutions cloud.

Nul doute que les petites sociétés technologiques françaises pourront sauter sur l'occasion. Rappelons qu'un rapport pointait du doigt l'Hexagone, mercredi, pour ses problèmes de financement aux start-up. Un chantier sur lequel le commissaire à l'Investissement, Louis Gallois, propose de progresser, dans son rapport sur la compétitivité remis en début de mois.

Source: Clubic.com

vendredi 30 novembre 2012

Obama opposes Silicon Valley firms on immigration reform

White House announcement before congressional vote on STEM Jobs Act puts president in opposition to many of the Silicon Valley firms and executives who bankrolled his re-election campaign.
An immigration reform plan backed by Silicon Valley firms is one bill President Obama doesn't want to sign.
An immigration reform plan backed by Silicon Valley firms is one bill President Obama doesn't want to sign.
(Credit: White House) 
 
President Obama opposes an immigration reform bill backed by companies including Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe that would let U.S.-educated computer programmers and engineers remain in the country, the White House said today.
The surprise announcement comes in advance of a House of Representatives vote scheduled for Friday on the Republican-backed STEM Jobs Act of 2012, which would make up to 55,000 visas available to foreigners who earned a master's or doctoral degree in certain science or technology area from a U.S. university. Those visas would only be available if immigration authorities certify that no American workers are available to fill the post.
The White House's statement this afternoon (PDF) says the "administration opposes House passage of H.R. 6429."
It's a move sure to disappoint the legions of companies and business groups -- the list also includes Cisco, IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle, Qualcomm, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, IEEE-USA -- that sent a joint letter to House members in September pleading with them to approve the bill.
While the Obama administration's warning didn't include an explicit veto threat, it also didn't take that possibility off the table, and it means the legislation will likely die in the Democrat-controlled Senate even if it clears the House.
Tech companies had hoped that the STEM Jobs Act could emerge as a rare bipartisan point of accord during an otherwise hotly contested election year. AOL co-founder Steve Case, now a venture capitalist, told CNET this month that:
My view is if there is a way to come together around broader immigration reform quickly, that would be great. But if that doesn't happen, then we shouldn't delay the issue because every year -- and again it will happen in May and June next year -- 40,000 to 50,000 people will be graduating with Ph.D.s and masters' degrees, and half or so will end up having to leave. Some of those people will go back to their countries and start companies that could end up being the next Googles or Facebooks.
The White House's announcement said the administration doesn't necessarily oppose the concepts behind the bill, but the STEM Jobs Act is a "narrowly tailored proposal" that does not "meet the president's long-term objectives with respect to comprehensive immigration reform." One reason it's controversial among Democrats is that the bill would eliminate the 55,000 diversity visas available to citizens of countries with low immigration rates to the United States.
This week's vote is all-but-certain to forward the STEM Act to the Senate. House Democrats defeated a prior vote on the bill in September, but that was under rules requiring a two-thirds supermajority. If the vote counts remain approximately the same, under this Friday's simple majority rule, the measure will clear the House.
Silicon Valley firms haven't had much luck persuading Washington officialdom to budge on immigration reform. As CNET reported this month, a related bill, Startup Act 2.0, that would authorize 75,000 "entrepreneur visas" has languished in House and Senate committees for half a year without a single hearing.
Legal immigrants founded or co-founded innumerable technology companies including Google, Yahoo, Intel, eBay, and Sun. A Kauffman Foundation study by Vivek Wadhwa found that 52 percent of Silicon Valley startups were "immigrant-founded."

Source: CNET; by

Les pôles d'innovation se multiplient en dehors de la Silicon Valley


digital world map and laptop

Si la Silicon Valley est depuis des années le poumon de l'innovation dans le monde, d'autres écosystèmes de startups, nouveaux ou déjà plus matures, la rattrapent. L'entreprenariat est en plein essor, et entraîne l'apparition et le développement d'écosystèmes locaux, dynamiques et compétitifs.
Si la Silicon Valley a longtemps été le principal lieu de création de startups, il semblerait que cette tendance touche à sa fin : ces dernières années ont vu une « explosion » d’entrepreneurs et avec, « l’émergence de nouveaux écosystèmes de startups dans le monde » explique le Startup Genome dans un rapport intitulé Startup Ecosystem Report 2012. L’étude, basée sur des données collectées auprès de plus de 50.000 startups, présente un classement des 20 écosystèmes les plus dynamiques du monde. 7 indicateurs sont utilisés pour les évaluer: l’indice de production (quantifie l'activité des startups), les opportunités de financement, la performance des startups, l'état d'esprit, la caractère disruptif des écosystèmes, l’aide aux startups (mentors, network) et le nombre de talents qualifiés.

Des écosystèmes prometteurs ou déjà matures
Parmi les 6 premiers écosystèmes de startups de l’index Global, 5 sont nord américains : la Silicon Valley arrive en tête, suivie de Tel Aviv, Los Angeles, Seattle, New York et Boston. Toronto et Vancouver arrivent en 8è et 9è position du classement. Pour l’Europe, c’est Londres qui est en tête (7è position au classement général) suivie par Paris (11è) Mouscou (14è) et Berlin (15è). Sao Paulo est le premier écosystème d’Amérique Latine (13 au classement général), avec Santiago (20è). Waterloo, Singapour, Melbourne et Bangalore arrivent en 16è, 17è, 18è et 19è positions. De grandes disparités distinguent ces écosystèmes les uns des autres, et en font des environnements variés. D’après le rapport, les villes qui se distinguent le plus de la Silicon Valley ont les meilleures chances de succès, puisqu’elles seront en mesure de faire de leurs spécificités un avantage compétitif.

De fortes disparités les distinguent
Boston, Tel Aviv et Vancouver ressemblent fortement à la Silicon Valley. Toutes présentent, globalement, des indices de production, de financement et de talents élevés. Par opposition, Moscou, Sao Paulo et Sydney sont les écosystèmes les plus éloignés de la Silicon Valley, et ont tendance à avoir des indices de performance, de production et de financement relativement faibles. Toronto, Chicago et Paris sont des environnements qui offrent un soutien de qualité aux startups, qui présentent un fort indice de performance, et des indices de production et de talents moyens. En revanche, ce sont des écosystèmes relativement peu innovants ou disruptifs. Syndney, Melbourne et Los Angeles forment le top 3 des écosystèmes les plus disruptifs, tandis que Vancouver, Londres, Santiago et Sao Paulo ont le meilleur état d’esprit.

Source : L'atelier

jeudi 29 novembre 2012

A Barcelone, PickBe lance le mur d'achat dans le métro


PickBeTélécharger


La startup a mis en place lundi des magasins dans le métro barcelonais, qui consistent en un mur connecté affichant des produits. Il suffit de scanner un code pour l'acheter via son mobile.
A Barcelone, depuis lundi 26 novembre il est possible d’effectuer des achats dans le métro. En effet, PickBe, éditeur d’une solution mobile de SmartShopping, a mis en place des boutiques virtuelles proposant d’acheter des produits parmi cinq enseignes partenaires. "Mis au point par Julio Garcia  et Carles Farrerons il y a six mois, Pickbe a pu voir le jour grâce au Groupe Inspirit, incubateur de technologie dirigé par Didac Lee", explique à L’Atelier Marta Cirera, Directrice de la communication et chargée d’affaire au sein de Pickbe. Le but : s'inspirer de solutions comme celle de Tesco pour populariser une nouvelle façon d’acheter. C’est pourquoi ils ont ensuite "créé ces magasins virtuels dans un format digital". Pour acheter, il suffit aux consommateurs de se munir de leur smartphone, télécharger l’application et scanner le QR Code associé aux articles qu’ils souhaitent acquérir. Pour le lancement du projet certaines enseignes proposent des réductions. En fonction des produits, ils peuvent être livrés chez le mobinaute, ou ce dernier peut aller les chercher en boutique.

Comment ça marche ?

Pour communiquer en amont sur le projet, les écrans ont été installés une semaine avant. Sur ces derniers des affiches représentant des vêtements et autres produits proposés ont été disposés. On pouvait y lire : Vous ne pensez pas pouvoir acheter cela ici. "Nous avons pensé au métro car c’est un lieu de passage, trop étroit pour installer des boutiques ordinaires. Et lorsque les passagers sont sur le quai, ils attendent leur métro ou rejoignent quelqu’un", poursuit Marta Cirera. Avant d'ajouter : "C’est le moment parfait puisqu’ils sont seuls avec leur smartphone". La startup a choisi d’implanter cinq magasins qui ont la forme de murs digitaux aux stations Diagonal car c’est une rue dans laquelle les grandes enseignes sont présentes et Sagrera, car c’est un lieu très visité. Ces stations sont dans la catégorie A dans laquelle il y a une affluence de plus 100 000 passagers par jour.

Et après ?

Les enseignes partenaires sont Groupalia, site d’e-commerce qui propose des activités de loisirs, Privalia des vêtements, Casa del Libro des livres ou encore Promociones farma pour les produits pharmaceutiques, et enfin Ulabox supermarché en ligne. Mais au sein de l’application, se trouve un catalogue proposant d’autres marques, comme Tradeinn qui vend diverses sortes de produits liés à l'équipement sportif. Il existe également un bouton "Hot Deals" dans lequel douze produits exclusifs sont proposés chaque heure. Marta Cirera souligne le fait que d’autres partenaires pourront les rejoindre par la suite afin d’avoir une offre plus large. "Aujourd’hui nous utilisons le QR Code, mais à l’avenir, nous espérons pouvoir utiliser de nouveaux types de technologies. Si le NFC et la reconnaissance faciale fonctionnent correctement, nous les déploierons également". Pickbe et le métro ont signé pour au moins un an. Reste à voir comment les dispositifs vont évoluer d’ici là.

Source: L'atelier