A Contact Centre Manager with over 20 years’ experience, Carol has a proven record of success in building, managing and delivering outstanding call centre services.

Carol originally worked as a Scientific Officer in South Wales before commencing her contact centre career with a direct insurance company in Bristol. From there she moved to a life insurance company to set up the outbound function, gaining a certificate in financial planning along the way. Carol has spent the last 11 years as Contact Centre Manager for a leading Bristol-based outsource company, growing the call centre from ten to 100 seats and expanding her experience working within highly regulated industries such as financial, government and utilities.

Carol brings to Expolink Europe a wealth of knowledge of managing a range of inbound, outbound and back office functions. Along with a an interest in how technology can aid and enhance the customer offering, she is passionate about developing the call centre team and strives to achieve and maintain a learning and empowering work place.

Outside of work Carol’s has recently completed a round-the-world trip, taking in USA and Australia before returning via Hong Kong. She has also grown to like a range of sports including cricket, succumbing to the consensus of a very male household! To relax she likes nothing better than settling down with a good chick lit novel.

Email: carol.workman@expolink.co.uk

LinkedIn: Carol’s Profile

The new cookie compliance legislation is due in May this year and the ICO has expressed concern that businesses are not as prepared as they should be – what do these new laws mean for the average UK business and how can they ensure they are prepared?

The cookie compliance law – more accurately known as the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 – is designed to ensure that visitors to websites can decide whether or not a website collects information about them. Most websites use cookies: this is a small file that is downloaded onto a PC or laptop when a user accesses a website which then sends information back to that site on subsequent visits. Probably the most commonly used cookie for the average UK business is Google Analytics, which simply counts visitors to websites and provides the website owner with stats about its use. Cookies are all over the web – from an ecommerce site that stores address and delivery details to speed up the checkout process to far less scrupulous uses. Google makes great use of cookies to personalise its search results and adverts based on, amongst other things, what you have searched for in the past and your location.

Under the new cookie compliance legislation businesses must tell users about the cookies on their website, what the cookie is doing, and – this is the new bit – gain consent to use that cookie. There are some exemptions, but the general rule is that businesses must actively seek consent. This has significant implications for both website owners and users of those sites which is why implementation has been controversial. Businesses (and indeed government) websites have been slow in facing up to changes as they have been hoping for a less clumsy solution to the very real privacy issue.

In short, we should all be making changes to our website before May to ensure compliance with the regulation. The ICO guidance is very helpful on what preparations are required.

The DMA has expressed concern about the EU’s new Data Protection Regulations in terms of the negative impact to the direct marketing industry. Do you have any similar concerns for digital marketing and communications?

If fully implemented, the change in legislation will make a significant difference. Few of us realise the extent to which our experience of the web is shaped by our search history, particularly adverts and search results. The traditional marketing industry uses market intelligence to sell us more stuff; the digital marketing industry uses online data and cookies in the same way. Without this data, then the user experience is bound to be affected.

Google is the single largest online supplier of search results and adverts – in 2011 Google made $37.9 billion in revenue of which 96% came from advertising. They have a vested interest in ensuring European legislation does not harm their revenue stream and have recently asked everyone with a Gmail or Google+ account to consent to revised terms of use. If Google has its way – and it has the influence to do so – then the impact may well be less than expected.

What are the main points to consider for effective website management?

Website management is important if you want your website to rank highly in search engines like Google. The way search engines work is to ‘crawl’ your website on a regular basis to see if the site is suitable to be shown in its search results. Part of the management task is to ensure the site is error free, loads quickly and efficiently and has suitable links between it and other websites – there are a number of tools you can use to check this.

Decent web hosting makes a significant difference to a site’s performance. It’s surprising how many businesses scrimp on hosting when their website is business critical, this is a false economy. We would recommend ‘optimising’ the site for search engines, so that search engines have sufficient information to understand your website and when it should show in search results. More generally Google wants users to find websites that are useful and provide a good user experience, which means a key management task is to ensure the site is accessible, easy to use and contains fresh relevant information.

What are your social media recommendations for 2012; B2B and B2C?

The single biggest recommendation for social media – for both B2B and B2C – is to be authentic. Partly this means being clear about your brand values and how they translate as a ‘tone of voice’ to an online audience. Being authentic as a business can be very different to being authentic as an individual so make sure that everyone using social media in your business is on-message, and then relax and let them get creative! Social media is designed to be an interactive medium (that’s the ‘social’ bit), but too many companies use it as just another channel to broadcast sales information. The point of it is to create a community that is receptive to you and you do that through conversation and interaction. This takes time and commitment – it’s not for every business.

Facebook and Twitter are probably the most popular social media used by businesses, but depending on your sector and type of work there are other options which may have a greater business benefit. For example we have started using Pinterest (pinterest.com) to create visual snapshots of our clients and their business sector as a way to inspire creative approaches to their digital marketing.

PPC, SEO? What’s the craic?

So many acronyms, so little time! Every industry has its jargon and digital marketing is no exception. There is so much of it that it’s easy to get blinded or indeed hoodwinked into parting with cash you don’t need to.

There are some great reference materials out there. We would always recommend SEOMoz for their beginners guide to SEO. Matt Cutts, the Head of Google’s Web Spam Team, does brilliant video questions and answers that are available on YouTube or Google Webmaster Help for more techie issues. For PPC (pay per click for those not in the know) you can’t beat Google’s own help materials. If you want the jargon decoded in a more human way, we’d love to help!

What digital trends would you identify for the coming year?

The digital trend of the moment is Google Search plus Your World. If you have yet to join Google+ you will notice there is a +You option at the top of the menu in Google search results which invites you to register. Google+ works on the idea of Circles – a more sophisticated version of Facebook friends – and the delivers search result based on what your circle of friends and acquaintances are searching for. It’s the next level of personalisation of search.

If you combine personalised search with the increased use of smart phones then you can see we will all be carrying around a ‘community’ of people, brands and interests that we can interact with from almost anywhere at any time. Eventually when you walk into your favourite store, you will receive notification of their deals of the day and what your friends bought. When you search for a restaurant or café you’ll see recommendations from people you know. Arguably we will be ever more connected. However, to go back to the changes to the cookie laws, it’s reassuring to know that Government is considering the long term privacy implications of this.

How far do you reckon the ‘Olympic effect’ will extend across the UK in terms of business?

Hopefully the wave of national joy brought about by an unprecedented number of gold medals won by Team GB will boost our national morale so the Olympics will affect all businesses in a very positive way!

Corporate conferences – cliquey, shameless excuses for days of work or important part of PR/sales/marketing strategy?

It depends on the corporate conference and the corporate culture of course. A day away from the routine, focusing on the future, setting out company and brand values, injecting some creativity and zest into the mundane and reflecting on the customer experience has to be important to any company that is serious about continuous improvement, customer service and their bottom line.

A cliquey, day off work? What kind of corporate conferences have you been to?!  - Note from Editor; only the latter option of the question!  

Tell us a joke…..

Why was six against seven? Because seven eight nine.

Noisy Little Monkey is a digital marketing collective specialising in the full gamut of online solutions for any kind of business. Contact them here. 

While by no means an exhaustible list we have gone some way to honouring (and dishonouring) some of the folks who make the world of whistleblowing a more interesting place.

Best (adaptable for) Screenplay Award – Enron

At 15, Enron was just a teenager when, as US’s seventh largest company, it employed 21,000 staff in 40 countries. This success, it transpired, was based on a premise of false accounting and fraud. Sherron Watkins, VP of Corporate Development at Enron was the first on the scene, alerting CEO Kenneth Lay to other whistleblowers and the seismic holes in the company reports. Critics say that Watkins’ actions don’t necessarily constitute whistleblowing as she simply gave her boss a nifty escape route from the impending meltdown – either way, she went on to become one of Times People of the Year, 2002, alongside two other whistleblowers Cynthia Cooper of WorldCom and Coleen Rowley of the FBI.
Among Enron’s dubious accolades of largest audit failure and bankruptcy re-organisation in US history at that time, the play by Lucy Prebble, based on the scandal won a plethora of international awards – so, worked out well for some.

Best Ensemble cast – Bradley Manning, Wikileaks and Adrian Lano

Manning was arrested in May 2010 and charged two months later for supplying an estimated 250,000 diplomatic cables to Wikileaks which were duly republished by several left-leaning papers and on the Wikileaks website. An acquaintance, Adrian Lano, subsequently blew the whistle on Manning, proving that one good turn deserves another. It is unclear whether Manning had any kind of personal relationship with Wikileaks high priest Julian Assange, but his organisation has been vocal in support of Manning’s actions saying he has “single-handedly changed hundreds of thousands of people’s lives for the better.” Conversely, the White House branded his actions as “terrorism”. Assange for his part is embroiled in a legal battle of his own for alleged sexual assault -

Manning’s trial continues…

Best Sound Editing – Hugh Grant

It seems a little unfair to award one of these prized trinkets to an established actor, but back in July 2011 we were thrilled to discover that Grant had enjoyed a chance encounter with News of the World reporter Paul McMullan and secretly taped admissions of wide-spread phone hacking at the paper. Grant went on to charm all at the Levenson Enquiry and despite being branded as a “screechy, sanctimonious little (bleep)” by the not-at-all screechy Piers Morgan, seems to be enjoying some nice, credible PR and perhaps a little more peace from the press.

Best Whistleblower in a Leading Role – Jeffrey Wigand

Jeffrey Wigand’s whistleblowing endeavours were immortalised in the Russell Crowe vehicle, The Insider. Whilst working at a large tobacco manufacturer Wigand discovered his bosses were manipulating their product blend to increase its addictive capacity. Wigand told all on the US TV show, 60 Minutes, and his employers responded with a law suit to prevent him testifying in open court. The company and others of its ilk were left fuming (ahem) when various states began their own litigations to recoup losses to public health initiatives caused by tobacco-related illness.

See also: Linda Tripp of Clinton/Lewinsky fame. More of a sticky beak than a whistleblower, but makes this list for inciting a hugely divisive argument regarding her motivations for revealing details about the affair. The movie deal it is claimed she was anticipating for her part in the scandal is yet to materialise…

Best Whistleblower in a Supporting Role – Mark Felt

Mark Felt, the whistleblower and former FBI agent was the infamous informant of Washington Post journalists Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, whom together brought down the Nixon administration. Bernstein and Woodward published a series of articles on the Watergate scandal revealing corrupt activity in the Nixon stable, later a book and inevitably a film, All The President’s Men. Felt’s disclosures lead to Nixon’s resignation and jail sentences for a number of senior White House employees. Felt went by the codename ‘Deep Throat’ and enjoyed anonymity until 2005 when he confessed all in an interview with Vanity Fair, 31 years after Nixon’s resignation.

Lifetime Achievement Award – Leslie Chapman

It is not always the high profile cases that have, or should have, the most enduring legacy. ‘Though Leslie Chapman was well known throughout Britain in the ‘70s, regrettably he is little remembered to this day. As a government employee he took the exceptional step of breaking Civil Service convention, if not the Official Secrets Act, and speaking out through a series of books about waste and extravagance in the British Civil Service. He then broadened his area of concern to local government and nationalised industry and, despite undoubtedly, putting a few noses out of joint along the way, he was deliberately placed on the board of London Transport as a result of his first book of revelation, tasked with rooting out abuses there. The recent raft of MP expenses scandals shows that such activities are still rife, making it all the more unfortunate that Chapman’s legacy is not secured in our national and political psyche and that decent governance systems have not always prevailed.

How has the culture of ethical business changed in the last 25 years?

I am not sure it has actually changed. Companies have simply recognised the need to be more explicit about doing business ethically.

Major developments have been that companies now, in the main, provide guidance to staff about expected behaviours, ways of handling certain situations and so forth, usually in the form of a code of ethics/business practice. This has happened because the ‘job for life’ syndrome where one would learn alongside another employee about how the company worked no longer is the case. People switch careers or companies more frequently and have more diverse backgrounds than 25 years ago, so they need to understand more quickly how the company operates.

What has been the toughest challenge of your career?

The toughest challenge has been to do the right thing even if it meant I went out on a limb! It is rewarding though when doing so is recognised subsequently as having been the right thing to do.

What do you consider your career high points and/or your greatest achievements?

Finding myself at the Institute of Business Ethics which combines my interest in business, seeing it run successfully with education and encouraging people to share best practice – all within a charitable not-for-profit organisation.

If you could set one piece of global legislation to make businesses work more ethically what would it be?

I think if companies had to state in their memorandum and articles of association when they set themselves up how they are going to conduct their business (not just what the company is going to do), a benchmark would be set to measure that company’s performance.

What are the main factors that attract people to working with the IBE?

We are a small, friendly team who work closely with our subscriber base and others who share an interest and passion for the subject. Every day is different so there is no time to get stale!

In terms of ethics, what are  your greatest fears for the UK business community?

I fear that cynics will never acknowledge the good that business does and the way, in the majority of cases, that businesses behave. Businesses and companies are human societies in themselves, with well and poorer behaved individuals making up the whole. Sadly, there are some rotten apples but to judge all by the few is unfair.

And your greatest hopes?

My hope is to prove the cynics wrong through businesses providing goods and services and conducting themselves in an open and fair manner that earns the respect and trust of the wider community.

How has the IBE utilised new technologies to progress its work and message?

We have Twitter and Facebook pages and regularly update and review our website; always looking for new ways to improve communication with our subscribers and others interested in the subject. During 2012 we will be introducing webinar events to reach out to those unable to attend our events in person.

The response to the Bribery Act from the business world has been well documented; but from your own point of view, what have been the most significant contentions and concerns with adhering to the legislation?

The legislation, for the most part, is common sense if you wish to stamp out bribery and corruption, which the business world needs to do as it is so corrosive. The most difficult element is how to say ‘no’ to a facilitation payment when you are at the front line and a lot hinges on whether you pay or not. This can be made worse if the payment made actually equates to the official’s salary as the local government knows they can get away with such practice.

Do you think the communications regarding the Bribery Act from the MoJ et al have been adequate?

In general, yes, though clearer practical guidance regarding facilitation payments would have been helpful. The SFO has now issued further guidance on this.

What do you see as the IBE’s main responsibilities when it comes to the Bribery Act?

Ensuring that experiences and practical solutions that companies have, relating to the Act, are shared for the benefit of all.

IBE has always fostered strong academic partnerships – how do you hope this will evolve in the future?

We will continue our annual student essay award, which for the last three years has had an Olympics theme of Ethics, Business and Sport, co-sponsored by the Pierre de Coubertin Committee.

We are also doing research into the Teaching of Business Ethics, an initiative co-led with the Institute of Global Ethics, to encourage the standard setters to include a larger element of teaching business ethics in their criteria for evaluation.

Thirdly, we are encouraging higher education institutions to establish codes of ethics, following up from a publication we did with the Council for Industry and Higher Education a while back. This was picked up on again by Lord Woolf in his recent report on the LSE where he concluded that such institutions should have a code of ethics.

For further info about the IBE visit www.ibe.org.uk

The ‘Broken Windows’ theory championed by former Mayor of New York, Rudolph Giuliani, promotes an ideology where communities will report or fix a broken window, rectifying even the smallest incidents of wrongdoing, thereby instilling similar responsibilities in others and creating a better environment for all. Advocating whistleblowing within organisations follows a similar premise. By fostering a culture of self-regulation and accountability, management can help ensure their staff and business operations are protected.

Whistleblowing is a valuable tool in any organisation’s corporate governance strategy as it empowers employees to act on incidences of misconduct and help maintain a safe workplace, while protecting profits and reputation.

But is whistleblowing ethical? Such conversations provide great scope for dizzying philosophies – but let’s keep it simple for the moment – surely at base level, altruistically reporting wrongdoing must be ethical? The act of whistleblowing can cause a conflict of interest between the personal, organisational and societal spheres. Much of this conflict stems from the context that one views a whistleblower – as someone sharing knowledge of misconduct for the benefit of others or someone who is a ‘grass’ and acting ‘disloyal’ to their organisation.

Public perception of ethics and whistleblowing

Whistleblowing can be a divisive topic and, while most would agree with the value of reporting wrongdoing and condone good organisational governance, external contexts can colour acceptance and perception. There are elements of chicken and egg as attitudes that are encouraged in the work place extend to the street – if businesses promote good corporate governance for all, whistleblowing  needn’t be viewed negatively or as solely the preserve of business or community leaders.

In 2007, a survey commissioned by the US Democracy Corps of 1014 “likely voters” revealed that 70% supported whistleblower protections and 40% stated that they would be much more likely to vote for a congress that enacts such legislation. When we vote, use services or entrust our money with banks we want to know that they are secure and working in our best interests (although the latter example might stick in your throat somewhat!). If an engineer at a water sanitation plant in your area uncovered safety issues we would hope they had ample opportunity to report this without fear of reprisal; avoiding danger and incident and allowing for the company in question to assess and improve their practices.

Personal perception of ethics and whistleblowing

The whistleblower is ultimately torn between loyalty to their employer (or the subject of their revelation) and their moral commitment to the law and society at large. Many feel they have the most to lose, at least in the first instance. It could be argued that it is incongruous with human nature to display loyalty to a bureaucratic organisation because it is composed of so many different people. This dehumanising environment could distort the whistleblower’s perception of their relevance within a company or their ability to influence change, thus degrading their sense of responsibility and motivation to report.

As long as the whistleblower is sure that their motivations are sound and that they are confident in the system they should not hesitate to relay such information and be pleased that they are helping to create a safer working environment for their colleagues.

Whistleblowers and the media have enjoyed a somewhat symbiotic relationship. ‘Though agendas and motivations may vary, they share the ambition of exposing wrongdoing and encouraging changes in systems that aren’t working in the interests of those they are supposed to protect. Recent high profile cases, such as the care homes scandal, are excellent examples of individuals reporting for altruistic reasons – but if a whistleblower appears to be seeking a soapbox for public attention or engineering an act of retaliation, it is of paramount importance that the investigative body in question ensures that the case is conducted in the correct way and that a message of intolerance is clear. If an individual feels disenfranchised by their position in the process, to transfer it to the public sphere might seem their best or only option. It’s up to business and community leaders to ensure this does not happen.

Business perception of ethics and whistleblowing

Even if an organisation has a whistleblowing hotline in place they should not be complacent when it comes to its usage and communication. If a company doesn’t receive many whistleblowing reports they shouldn’t assume that no news is good news. Read more about communicating your whistleblowing hotline service.In addition, if companies don’t use the data collected from their reports in a progressive manner (analysing trends, investigation and resolution etc) it negates the benefits of the service considerably. Businesses have a responsibility to the public to act on whistleblowing intelligence or risk adverse consequences. They are additionally accountable to the governing bodies of their sector such as the FSA, HSE and of course the Ministry of Justice. Where there are environmental concerns arising from a whistleblowing report, these too must be addressed with the correct authorities.

There are isolated instances where whistleblowing could be considered the wrong course of action in an ethical context; the Republicans branded Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks informant, a terrorist and whipped the media and public into a frenzy regarding breaches of national security. This of course is an extreme case and it is unlikely that whistleblowing cases made in a corporate context will ever mirror this level of drama. But, no matter what size or sector, businesses cannot afford to allow a culture of misconduct and corruption to infiltrate operations.

It might seem obvious as an employee of a market-leading hotline provider to believe in the ethics of whistleblowing – but personal politics aside, it is true to say that individual ethics are born of a culture of ethics and no matter what your personal take on whistleblowing in this realm, that assertion, at least, is undeniable.

To find out how Expolink’s marketing-leading, confidential whistleblowing hotline can help your business click here.

Paper vs E-card
Though it is generally considered better greeting card etiquette to send a traditional paper greeting card, there are other options for those on a tighter budget or with concerns about the considerable environmental impact a little Christmas cheer can have. Electronic greeting cards are available in a wide array of colours and themes. Some are simple, others animated or even musical. E-Cards are indeed a viable alternative to paper greeting cards, BUT careful consideration should be given to the pros and cons of each before making a decision on HOW to send out your seasonal communique.

A question of taste
Paper greeting cards are tangible. They show that you took the time to choose a card, personalize it, address it and send it to a person you value for a reason – it tells the recipient they’re important to you. E-Cards tend to be more casual and their place in the professional world is questionable. Furthermore a tasteful, good quality card says, “We provide quality goods and services”. Ill-chosen cards on the other hand, and unfortunately sometimes e-Cards, can send the opposite message. Subliminally, “We can’t afford the postage so we’re sending you an e-Card” isn’t really going to have the desired effect, whereas “You’re really important to us so we spent the time, money and effort in choosing this lovely card for you” certainly will.

The conscious vs the unconscious message
That said if your company is one that prides itself on its environmental credentials, there’s a very strong argument for sending an e-Card. Apart from the conscious “Thank-you for your custom” message included in the text of your e-Card, there would also be a subconscious “we care very much about the environment and our impact upon it” message.

Subliminal this and that aside, there is absolutely no denying the fact that e-Cards are way more cost effective than their printed counterparts. So maybe the answer is to make sure that your clients receive something worthwhile in their e-Card – something they REALLY want for Christmas.

Which charity?
There’s no question that charity is a big thing at Christmas and it’s something that more and more people are increasingly passionate about. No charity should be considered unworthy but, if the purpose of your Christmas communique is to connect with your clients (in addition to spreading seasonal good cheer and making a selfless donation to charity), you should really consider which charity your clients are most likely to want to donate to. Some companies even go as far as asking their clients who they’d like the Christmas donation to go to every year – very easy to do with a little bit of forward planning.

World events and news coverage sway people’s opinions on which cause is most deserving of their charitable donations – for example in recent years, Help for Heroes has taken more in charitable donations than any other UK charity – largely because they have been at the forefront of the public’s collective mind thanks to news coverage of various conflicts the armed forces are involved with.

And on that note
In line with our environmental undertakings to minimise the impact we make on the environment, Expolink will be shortly be distributing its annual seasonal message of mirth and merriment. The money saved by sending an e-Card rather than a printed one will go towards an elected charity.

Watch this space!

Services such as Facebook and Google offer their services for free – but the costs of their resources and expertise are immense. They make their money by aligning advertising with your recent searches and personal information; which depending on your inclination can be ignored or otherwise. We are increasingly unused to paying for online services – after being enthusiastically encouraged to sign up for free when the whole social media boom took off – the question is would we rather pay for these services or received targeted advertising? Facebook admits to mapping its 800m users’ website activity for the previous 90 days before a visit; a practice that advertising agencies and online businesses defend, saying it affords them invaluable information about users’ interests and behaviours – which of course it does. But who decides what information is fair game? And if the goal posts move at any stage, will we be consulted? CEO Mark Zuckerberg insists the data is used solely to enhance the users’ experience of Facebook functionalities – but, tellingly, is yet to respond to recent claims that he applied for a patent for technology that correlates tracking data with advertisements.

We know that insurance and recruitment companies refer to online profiles to support or dismiss applications; Add to that personal information gleaned from Smartphones, apps, e-commerce and search activity, and you are looking at a pretty comprehensive portrait of a citizen. Though it is not yet believed to be the case, at least not on a significant level, privacy advocates worry that corporations, government agencies and political parties could routinely purchase tracking data from data aggregators. Certainly, it would do no harm for there to be ground rules in place if or rather when this does happen.

The UK Government is thought to be the largest data publisher in the world, with data.gov.uk several times greater than the US equivalent. They are currently at loggerheads over usage of data collated for the necessary running of the country. On one side there are the altruists who would like to see the data shared freely, on the other those who would like to profit. The data, comprised of post codes, procurement, land ownership information and much more, is derived from the Electoral Register. Access to the Electoral Register is free at local council offices and libraries but, due to its sheer volume and format, only really useful for simple reference. While the Full Electoral Register is subject to strict usage permissions, the Edited Register (which we can opt out of) can be bought for considerable cost and utilised for any purpose by any agency.

But public data, captured at source, at its most granular level and made freely available could benefit all businesses not just those with the reddies. Imagine the value of having such data as a fledgling business or service provider in the UK? Without considerable funds to invest, this precious data is out of reach. And it’s not just private companies that are losing out through this debilitating system. Trading Funds, introduced by the Conservative Government, force organisations such as the Post Office, OS, HM Land Registry and the Patent Office to sell data to other public and private agencies in order to meet Treasury targets. For example, in 2008 Swindon had to pay OS £38,000 to use its addresses and geographical data.
As a notoriously private nation what do we think of such proliferation of our personal details? In 2009, a Politics Home survey found that 63% of Britons feel the government already collects too much information about them, and only one in four favours data collection and retention by the authorities. Considering the loss of 25m personal records by HM Revenue and Customs in 2007 it is hardly surprising!

In 2010 Google was accused of illegally harvesting data including millions of emails, passwords, website addresses and even some health records for creation of its UK Street View maps from encrypted wireless networks. Only an individual with a black belt in naivety would claim that Google’s relentless quest for data was anything less than share-focussed megalomania but never-the-less, if such activities go unchallenged and unregulated, how are we ever to know such data harvests even take place? Google claimed the collection was made in error and that they had not used the information to benefit any of its products and services. Deletion of the data was subsequently ordered and Google’s staff re-educated on data protection standards. The lack of action taken by the Information Commissioner’s Office was a source of great bewilderment and outrage from civil liberties groups who expressed doubts about the ability of the Office to successfully audit such activity.

The popularity of social media has spawned its own raft of debates on data ownership and harvest. In November 2011, researchers at the University of British Columbia revealed that their team of 120 ‘Socialbots’ had infiltrated the Facebook network and mined 250GB of personal information in just eight weeks. The Socialbots (specially developed software that mimics human behaviour) had their own full profile including the ability to make friends and update those friends on their activities. Ensuring they remained within Facebook’s limit of 25 friend requests a day the ‘bots sent out 5053 requests to random users eliciting a 19% positive response rate. A further 3,517 requests were then sent to the friends of people who had accepted first time ‘round. As these were more trusted recommendations this garnered an impressive 59% acceptance rate. Only 20% of these were blocked by Facebook’s ‘Immune System’ which is used to identify and remove fake profiles – most of those were a result of spam alerts from users. So far so anodyne – but consider the treasure trove of information contained within a targeted social network and the malevolent way this could be used for on-line profiling and phishing activities. Facebook’s advice for users to only accept requests from known parties is unrealistic – it is the issue of user data security at source which must be addressed.

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the main standards setting body for web technologies, is currently creating guidelines for software called “Do Not Track” (DNT), a browser-based mechanism that allows users to communicate data preferences to their chosen browser. This affords users protection from tracking by advertising networks across their digital journey. Unsurprisingly there are myriad considerations the W3C must make before its guidance is complete; significantly the way that browsers will communicate the opt-in functionality and demonstrate that the request is being honoured. While this is not a panacea to contentions of data ownership and distribution, it is certainly a step in the right direction and will help webmasters ensure they remain compliant with the new cookie laws that come into play in May 2012.

Governmental and other data will continue to be collated regardless of where it ends up. Providing we exercise control over our preferences and make it accessible in a coherent and intuitive manner this has the potential to open doors to the society that it is composed from in the first place. Sharing and combining large databases can provide hitherto unimaginable resources – facts are born of figures, innovation comes to the fore. If we can find a way to map and coordinate information in a meaningful and progressive way, while maintaining strict security controls to protect personal privacy, we could help develop more efficient use of services, foster sharing of knowledge and increase transparency and trust in Government. But who should be responsible for this daunting task? Is the civil service, with its somewhat inflexible attitudes to change, really the best agency to be in control of such large databases? Wouldn’t those with an aptitude for progression and more commercial nous be preferable? And can they be trusted?

Our lives are increasingly spent online, creating discrepancies about the nature of ownership. Digital commodities can be owned by multiple agencies as we exchange and share assets daily without concern. With so many ‘masters’ involved, the psychological value of these assets is diminished. Yet we cannot put boundaries on the transactional space the web offers us, it’s our regressive attitudes and lack of ability to systemise governance that is causing the problems and consequently stifling the possibilities for innovation and progression.

Kate’s expertise will ensure our valued clients receive comprehensive project development from beginning to end. She will help define scope, goals and deliverables that mirror stakeholder objectives, and a solution that is on time and within budget.

Kate’s excellent time management and project development skills are also tested outside her work remit for Expolink with the planning of her wedding next year –  after her outstanding interpersonal communication skills won her the contract with her fiancé in the first place!

Email: kate.shoesmith@expolink.co.uk
LinkedIn: Kate’s Profile

Corruption and whistleblowing in Cuba