A colleague asked me recently about what I thought about crowdsourcing, was I for it or against it? Here are some thoughts on the question that developed from the dialog.
As I noted in my presentation at the recent DIHAD conference (see my last Blog entry), technology is a neutral tool; the intent and its use defines its ultimate good. Some points to consider about crowdsourcing:
Some Cons:
1) Paying for crowd-work is a modern form of piece-work, something unions mobilized against a century ago
2) In its global reach and nature, it can be a race to the bottom on wages
3) The crowd can be used for ill intent. See Jonathan Zittrain's work; he talks about a number of the risks of crowdsourcing (See for example, a recent International Herald Tribune article)
Some Pros:
1) As a volunteer program, putting questions to the crowd can be a rich, inclusive activity
2) Ideagoras can be a source of innovation by casting a wide net for solutions (see http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideagoras
3) A "discover and harvest" approach to Field IT is a positive form of crowdsourcing
4) Crowdsourcing can provide a means for "sunshine info," where everyone is a detector; and political, economic, and policing transparency is more likely.
I favor the volunteer, idea harvesting, sunshine side of crowdsourcing. I find the pay-for-micro-work side of crowdsourcing demeaning. And I worry about crowdsourcing in the hands of oppressive governments.
__________________________
Also see http://www.crowdsortium.org/2011/01/31/workforce-innovation-txteagle-microtasks/ for an interesting application of crowdsourcing.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."
As I noted in my presentation at the recent DIHAD conference (see my last Blog entry), technology is a neutral tool; the intent and its use defines its ultimate good. Some points to consider about crowdsourcing:
Some Cons:
1) Paying for crowd-work is a modern form of piece-work, something unions mobilized against a century ago
2) In its global reach and nature, it can be a race to the bottom on wages
3) The crowd can be used for ill intent. See Jonathan Zittrain's work; he talks about a number of the risks of crowdsourcing (See for example, a recent International Herald Tribune article)
Some Pros:
1) As a volunteer program, putting questions to the crowd can be a rich, inclusive activity
2) Ideagoras can be a source of innovation by casting a wide net for solutions (see http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideagoras
3) A "discover and harvest" approach to Field IT is a positive form of crowdsourcing
4) Crowdsourcing can provide a means for "sunshine info," where everyone is a detector; and political, economic, and policing transparency is more likely.
I favor the volunteer, idea harvesting, sunshine side of crowdsourcing. I find the pay-for-micro-work side of crowdsourcing demeaning. And I worry about crowdsourcing in the hands of oppressive governments.
__________________________
Also see http://www.crowdsortium.org/2011/01/31/workforce-innovation-txteagle-microtasks/ for an interesting application of crowdsourcing.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."
No comments:
Post a Comment