Miles To Go.

Charlie Green, author of Trusted Advisor

(MS) Since there is so much buzz around Sharing, (I’ve written about it recently here, here and here) and it’s key component, Trust, I’ve asked some experts to lend their opinions on my blog to fill out the color commentary. Here’s Charlie Green;

Whether you call it “the sharing economy” or “collaborative consumption,” there’s a fascinating new economic and social phenomenon going on.  While not identical, both terms refer to markets for the sharing of products and services between individuals.

It may seem obvious that the role of trust is pretty critical. But just what that role is turns out to be not so obvious.    

Background

The chroniclers of the movement are Rachel Botsman (Botsman & Rogers, What’s Mine is Yours), and Lisa Gansky (The Mesh: Why the Future of Business is Sharing). Botsman characterizes three sub-markets: product-services systems (like ZipCar), redistribution markets (eBay), and collaborative lifestyles (CouchSurfing).

Some of those sub-markets hint at huge scale economies: how many zillions of available-seat-miles go unused on the nation’s streets and highways on driver-only trips? How many available car-hours per day are actually used for driving, as opposed to uselessly hogging valuable real estate? And for nearly every traveler vacationing, there’s an empty house back home going unutilized.

Other sub-markets are more akin to intriguing social experiments: imagine a global foreign exchange student program run for adults, only faster, bigger, and with do-it-yourself vetting, and you’ve got something like CouchSurfing.

In an odd way, “markets” is precisely the wrong way to describe the social experiment part of the phenomenon – it’s anti-market, in a sense, to focus on collaboration and reduced consumption, rather than on increased sales and  intermediating exchanges.

But in more traditional senses, these are very much markets, with loads of interest. Technologies are enabling peer-to-peer interactions; but unlike stock exchanges and book-buying, many of them exist to facilitate real flesh-and-blood interactions. Subletting your house or apartment to someone, or simply hosting an out-of-town visitor, is no trivial social exercise. And lending out your car or tools, while not necessarily social, also involves a social risk.

Which is where trust comes in.

Trust in the Sharing Economy

If you’re going to open up your house to someone you’ve never met before, you will make some form of trust calculus about the possible guest.

The reverse is true as well: if you’re going to go spend some time as the house-guest of a perfect stranger, you also will make some assessment along the lines of, “Do I, or do I not, trust these people?”

Might there be a secondary market here for trust. Indeed, there might.  (Disclosure: I have a small relationship with one such venture, TrustCloud). Suddenly, the decision to trust has economic, and possibly very personal, consequences.

Trusting and Being Trustworthy.  People often talk about “trust” as if it were a single thing.  It’s not.  “Trust” is the result of a trustor and a trustee arriving at an agreement. Trusting is not the same as being trusted. Trust is, if you’ll pardon the abstract language, an asymmetric relationship.

To be clear, the one doing the trusting (the trustor) is the one taking the risk. If I loan my tools or house to you, you might abuse them. The trustee, by contrast, takes little risk.

The trustor’s decision is based partly on the perception of the trustworthiness of the trustee. Wouldn’t it be great, the thinking goes, if we could come up with the equivalent of a FICO credit score for would-be trustees.

The search for trustworthiness metrics goes in two directions. One is reputation;  the other is behavior. Reputation is relatively easy to assess; unfortunately, it’s also easy to game, and can easily be confused with notoriety. Kim Kardashian may score high on reputation, and even influence – but does that mean you trust her?

Behavior is harder to game: to fake behavioral dependability, I would have to establish a track record of dependable behavior – which is, after all, the point. It can be faked, of course, but such an elaborate con requires a level of effort quite out of proportion to the benefit, not to mention out of character.

Trusting. It’s easy to focus just on measuring trustworthiness, particularly in the product-services and redistribution markets, where the trustor wants information about the trustee to mitigate downside risk.

But in the collaborative lifestyles segments of the movement, it’s not just the trustworthiness of the trustee that is important, but also the trustor’s propensity to trust. In the fascinating sub-movement that is Couchsurfing, the parties aren’t just looking to cut risk: they want upside potential in terms of fascinating people willing to take social risks in order to meet others. They want trustors.

The 60s Redux?

The parallel with the 60s is instructive. Some of the era’s social experimentation didn’t make it out of the 70s. But the Beatles, Steve Jobs, and the Grateful Dead were all once-radical types who created models that are mainstream business today.

Even the hard-core economic segments of the sharing economy aren’t as radical as we think. The timeshare industry “shared” underutilized vacation home capacity; so did distributed computing in the 70s-80s. McDonalds’ discovery of breakfast was another capacity utilization play that paid off big.

In any case, we’re all going to be talking more about trust. And that’s likely a good thing for us all.

Doug Krugman, Greg Matusky, Roo Rogers, (M) and Xin Chung @S2 Learning Even

the woods are lovely, dark and deep
but I have promises to keep
and miles to go before I sleep
miles to go before I sleep

Robert Frost, in a poem of simplicity itself, captures the essence of the foundations of trust: promises kept.

I was at Shared Squared NYC’s monthly learning event last night, where a whole lot of people made good on a whole lot of promises. And there was lots of chatter about trust, as the social networks have spawned so much peer to peer interaction (and the P2P has spawned its share of weird interactions).

In short, the problem that is emerging is that people, for better or worse, form  judgements based upon online information, make promises and commitments, and then are disappointed with the related offline episodes. Happens all the time, across a variety of peer to peer actions. There are a gazillion examples of the difficulties of this toggle, like

• Lady GaGa tickets bought through Craigslist for cash at the last-minute
• A Wimdu rental, where the pics were great, but the pillows just plain smell.
• A RelayRide renter who changes his plans last minute and screws up the rest of your calendar

But the upside of getting trust right in the sharing economy (and in P2P lending, and in dating, etc etc.) is that more trust leads to more and faster transactions and interactions within a community. I think Stephen MR Covey (son of 7 Habits Stephen) had it right quite awhile ago when he wrote The Speed of Trust. You can add his good work to these recent pieces on the subject:

• The Trust Projects recent manifesto…
• Letters and outreach to the community by Scaffold and Legit
• Neal Gorenflo doing everything possible to forward the sharing conversation via shareable (Nice work!)
• Shared Squared finally announcing an event calendar in NYC

But, at some point, in order to truly scale, I really passionately believe the sharing economy must deliver an indicator of trust between the two parties in a transaction increases if not ensures the assets at risk. The only product in the market that is out there, doing it today and in increasing numbers with both communities and users is TrustCloud. (You can claim your TrustCloud here). And yes, I am an investor and have blogged on the topic here, here and here.

Eventually, they will be compelled to ensure trust is sufficient. And just as airbnb has done, others will need to underwrite that risk. People- and perhaps their insurers! – will want better answers to questions like:

• Will my car be returned in good order?
• Will my apartment be sacked while a couchsurfer is there?
• Will my boat he left on the rocks by this drifter that borrowed it?
• Is my daughter safe with this tutor who comes to the house?
• Will I ever see my lawn mower again?
• Will this ride share going to get me to work, or roll me out of the car in Mexico?

And all that attention has forwarded the discussion, but trust is not an absolute from the get go. We as humans observe behavior and actions before trust is earned,  and we frequently reassess trust levels along the way. It can work between online and offline as long as it is observed, recorded and elegantly presented in context.

So, not unlike the man in Frost’s Poem…

The accumulation of recorded behavior, events and affinities that leads to the confidence to exchange something of value, tangible or intangible is IMHO the most accurate and applicable definition of Trust that any P2P marketplace can rely on.  

And this is why, simply, behavior trumps reputation every time.

PS: I’d love to hear what you think of the new TrustCloud. Enter your comments below, or on their site. Mine is above at the top of my blog.

I just flew over America again.

I went to LA and was pitched in the Palisades Room at the Santa Monica Fairmont for two straight days and all I ever saw were VC’s, bankers and their cars rolling up to the front entryway. We didn’t see any Occupy groups, but they would have had a blast I’m sure. I took a break and saw my Choate roommate Michael Scott for dinner in West Hollywood and it was plenty more of the same with a few stars and starlets thrown in (not typical VC fare, that).

All good and all nice people. But I have this palpable sense that, slightly below the surface of the Brave Face of America (any in many towns between LAX and JFK), there is a shitstorm brewing among people who are tired and distraught. It’s probably about jobs, and the fact that we really don’t have enough of them to go around. That and the facts that, despite the 1,000 attendees at the Monty Conference, we are throttling the engine to create them. The coming world war will be an all-out global war for good jobs, says Gallup’s chairman Jim Clifton. I couldn’t agree more, and they won’t come from shovel ready Government civil works, nor from meaningless tax credits and incentives.

More proof of the disconnect irony comes from the Daily Beast’s Zach Karabel: The last time the markets were at their current levels—the tech-heavy NASDAQ index is also at its highest since the Internet bubble burst in 2001—sentiment was radically different. In May of 2008, Bear Stearns had nearly collapsed, only to be bought on the cheap by J.P. Morgan, and the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers was a nightmare scenario that had barely been contemplated. The housing bubble in the U.S. was clearly deflating, but unemployment had not yet spiked. And while many believed a recession was looming, few forecast a financial crisis. Still, the outlook was cloudy at best, and a descent from 13,000 seemed likely. The strength in financial markets, and stocks especially, is not a proxy for real-world economies.

It’s been said before and needs to be said again: Wall Street isn’t Main Street. The Dow can be 13,000 or 14,000 and it won’t matter a whit to the millions of unemployed and underemployed. Few jobs are created by rising equity prices, and companies will not hire unless there is stronger demand, no matter how high their shares climb. They will sooner pay a dividend to shareholders, buy back stock, or acquire competitors than hire extra bodies that are not necessary for managing current business or creating new ventures.

And that’s the root issue: though America has a GDP of about 3x the nearest competitors (being japan, UK, France, Germany, Italy) its growth has been anemic compared to China, who still lags the top five. We spend too much, we don’t take in enough, and it’s becoming a bad running joke in world lending corridors (where are those)? As any creditcard will remind you, in 20-30 years, 10% growth compounded beats just about anything. But last time we heard footsteps, we hit the dot.com boom and pulled away with innovation and productivity gains never seen before.

That’s what is needed now. And I think Mobile, social and sharing will be three places where innovation will lead.

Ride share with this gang?

I’ve been spending some time learning more about the sharing economy and some of its players. As an angel investor accustomed to clearly defined problems, grand solutions and natural revenue models, it seems like the beginning of the story. Kinda like a lot of people showing up in munchkin land- somewhat disoriented, terribly excited, not sure of the path forward.

Dorothy was pioneer when it came to couchsurfing (wimdu perhaps?), but she woke up in a terribly different world. She had to make snap judgments about people, and she had very little context to help (The Good Witch of the North notwithstanding). She was taking very real risks with herself, her dog, and her ruby slippers. But she had to rely on her wits: no help from web 2.0 and social media to help her make big decisions on risk  (one of the great segues of all time folks).

Nowadays, there are more ways to make an assessment about people. People vouch for each other on sites like LinkedIn, Honestly, and Connect.me. People accumulate likes and helpfuls from sites like TripAdvisor, Facebook and Yelp. And some products go further, combining those elements plus offline verification to develop multi-layers scores, like TrustCloud (I’m an investor). Through all these inputs, we have begun to infer things about people based on their actual behavior over time. Here’s how a well-designed trust solution might have helped with her key judgments:

1. The Scarecrow- great domain expertise and happy to assist. Probably a contributor to Yelp or TripAdvisor and frequently tagged helpful.
2. The TinMan- experienced and analytical, probably has people vouching for him like the static inputs of Honestly and Connect me
3. The Lion- I have this guy tagged as a reputation guy. Very proud and looking to clean up what people think of him. Uses Reputation.com a lot.
4. The Wizard- He’s all about influence, which means he spends most of this time on klout.
5. Dorothy- a teambuilder and leader. Probably destined for LinkedIn. But having trouble verifying place of residence!

The point is (and I have taken a veritable yellow brick road to get there) that we no longer live in Oz. There is real, relevant data out there that when properly gathered, weighted, and presented can really help the sharing economy navigate their challenges. (Here’s a great blog from Charles Greene on Trust). But no single point of reference and no rigid formula will serve the Trust needs of every community, let alone every situation.

This is a challenge and a journey that requires multiple layers, great heuristics, and the power of the network effect. (which is one super reason for all these layers to work together). I look forward to watching how this evolves, and who gets to the Emerald City first.

Life in 140 character bursts

Here’s one way to wrap up 2011:

World 2011in<140: ArabSpring Tsunami Wedding(Royal,Kim) Osama DSK Jobs(Steve,austerity) Riots Floods OWS PepperSpray Mobile!

Me 2011in<140: Wedding (mine) New Jobs (Mojiva-106) Angel ($500k) Venture ($25M) Contractions (hers) Startup (WellAware) Move (Greenwich) Baby (First) Sleep (Last)

Twitter was one thing I learned in 2011. Like most things in my life, I had never done it before. I just observed for a bit and waded right in. I ended up tweeting or retweeting 1,300 times or 100+ a month which turned out to be not at all a waste of time. Looking back at my tweets over time I recognize some basic trends that may help others considering jumping on Twitter on 2012. A few rules I learned:

• Add something to the conversation: This was #1 for me. I always try for, and sometimes fail at, a witty or creative thought, a piece of news before it’s over-reported, or a new point of view. I never tweeted “wonder if that cloud will pass behind that building”, or “bacon egg and cheese sandwiches umm”. As in life, the less you say, the more likely people will think you have something interesting when you finally speak. At least that worked for me, so far.
•  Follow a few people you respect: Fellow EO member David Kerpen  does an excellent job of outlining social media and has been a good one to follow. Henry Blodget has it covered in digital media. Irshad Manji is great on Middle East issues, Nick Kristoff on global. Dave McClure is hilarious on angel investing. Bill Gross is great on start ups. Joe Navarro is great at just reading people. April Rudin is awesome on the HNW community.
• Follow a few topics of interest: The topics I followed were angel investing, venture capital (though they play it pretty close to the vest), Middle East conflict, cooking, a few football players, local news, and disaster recovery (twitter is a great way to track fast breaking news).
•  Keep it light, and consider the consequences: I also follow some hilarious parodies and humor, not all of which I have the guts to retweet. Miguel Bloombito  is a farcical twitter account of NYC’s Mayor trying to get by in Spanish. Ricky Gervais is just raw sewer level humor that keeps coming non-stop. FAKEGRIMLOCK is supposed to be a software coder on a mission, but it’s likely just Brad Feld’s alter ego. AdamU has perfected the 140 character definition of snark. I love Henry_Kissinger (paraody)

I should also add it is a good way to make notes to yourself, make a legit complaint to an airline (they monitor those things), keep track of people in a disaster, and wedge your way into an important discussion. I did all these things in 2011. So I’m glad I jumped on Twitter, finally. It hasn’t changed me much, just made me more of who I already am. Remains to be seen if that’s a good thing.

Mobile Global: Click 2 see cool pic

I work hard to get lucky.

1. The Carriers used to think they were content curators. Seriously, there was no other way to get distribution than to program in bizarre carrier languages (BREW, etc) and pay them through the nose to be “on deck”. Hey, they got the idea from the old AOL days. But these people did not realize the comic effect of managing content on a 2″x2″ screen. Plenty of money was wasted getting on those decks, and getting the content optimized. At one point, I counted an easy $500MM of venture money was poured down that rabbit hole.
2. Eyeballs began to shift. First it was getting email and text on phones. Then a few games and stock quotes. But the iPhone and its 250,000 apps out the gate brought all manner of information and entertainment to the mobile screen. The PC reached a plateau.
3. People were no more willing to pay for apps than they were to pay for the “old fashioned” internet. It should be free, man continued as the digital credo. And except for very few exceptions (iTunes being one), the entire mobile revolution has been driven to date with ads.
4. Tablets followed shortly, and guess what: they’re mobile too. Meaning all the ad serving technology, all the geo-location and device data was much more like a mobile phone than a PC.

With a little knowledge as an angel/board member with digital yield optimizer operative (now Operative One) and some domain expertise from Cellufun, I went on to start mobile ad network/ad server Mojiva with co-founders Krish and Dan.  And I have since been founding angel in mobile powered projects like MyBailiwick (crowdsourcing too early!), TrustCloud (trust in the sharing economy getting hotter now) and WellAware (mobile health and wellness platform). I think my bets in mobile media have been pretty lucky, and i will continue to make them for all the basic reasons above (and many more that are regularly laid out by tech guru Mary Meeker).

I just never knew where the tipping point was.

I do now. High five.

Now everyone knows...

It’s been a busy few weeks for Trust.

When Fast Company covered the concept recently, they called it “The Sharing Economy”. Now more light and more capital has begun to flow toward companies that are enabling the peer to peer trading that the web promised long ago. (Isn’t it funny how the web delivers, if you can afford to wait long enough)!

Rachel Botsman coined the term  Collaborative Consumption ( or “CollCons”) and has  written about it in “What’s Mine is Yours” . She’s become a bit of an evangelist for the power of sharing and consuming, peer to peer. Besides getting cred for the concept at TED , she’s been right on top of every move in the CollCons space. Like Getaround winning the battle of Tech Crunch. And Ashton Kutcher investing in AirBnB. Full disclosure: I have an investment in, and a deep belief for, the benefits of  TrustCloud, mentioned below.

So what, if anything, is holding this movement back from breakout growth? Why can a neighbor lean over the fence and ask for something, but the online equivalent results in apprehension?  When you hand the housekeys  to a couchsurfer, leave the kids with the new sitter, or hitch a ride with three total unknowns, it’s not a natural feeling. I’ve written about it in my MadMen post, as well as the downside in my Catfish story. CollCons could be sooooo good if we could only enjoy the benefits of peer to peer –without that dollop of angst in the pit of our stomachs.

The antidote?  Trust. It’s kind of the reverse of the behavior I blogged about in Race to the Bottom. And it’s closer to becoming a reality in the CollCons space.  I’ve determined  six qualities that can be measured and portable (to a variety of sites) and will help achieve the comfort levels needed to scale users and usage.

1. I’m Helpful: I contribute online; so I’ll be considerate and prepared as your host.
2. I’m Local: I grew up or lived here for a while, so I know the best places & activities around.
3. I’m a Connector: I’ve got many local friends, so I can introduce you to interesting folks.
4. I’m Worldly: I’ve travelled a lot, so I know what makes a good host in a variety of cultures.
5. I’m Authentic: I’m open about myself online, so the description about my product (self) is also genuine.
6. I’m Consistent: I’ve got an established history with school & work, so I’m a more responsible.

While some companies in the CollCons community are thinking of ways to develop this algorithm themselves, TrustCloud has begun to test its beta “Trust Indicator” integration in three CollCons leaders. The advantage to using the TrustCloud API is that CollCons brands will have a trust indicator with no development costs, the scores leverage the power of the entire CollCons network, and the scores are portable.  [Unlike eBay Power Scores, with TrustCloud, good behavior on a shared room makes for good ratings in a ride share, etc.]

I’m deeply committed to “trust” in the real world, and I’m excited about its prospects to enable more peer to peer sharing online. But I’m also aware of how online behavior can be gamed and trust abused or never created.   So I’m excited about the day when this artificial drag is finally removed from the CollCons market. Meanwhile, I’m jazzed to help all members work more effectively toward this goal.