Will the Internet of Things (IoT) be good for Public Relations and bad for advertising? Good or bad for customers?
The IoT connects ‘things’ to each other and to people. It is predicted by Michael Porter (below) to be the third wave of the information revolution following the computer in the ‘60’s and the Internet in the ‘90’s.
It will impact on almost every aspect of our lives. For instance, it will potentially completely invert current business models in the manufacturing sector, so that cars, refrigerators, stoves, swimming pool pumps, even the electrical wiring in a building, may be better hired instead of bought, and then monitored and maintained by the company not the consumer, completely revolutionising the relationship between the two.
Michael Porter, the Harvard economics professor sets this out in his November 2014 think-piece, How Smart, Connected Products Are Transforming Competition.
The more immediate impact is probably best represented by this graphic, setting out where change is happening first.
Simona Jankowski from Goldman Sachs in The Sectors Where the Internet of Things Really Matters, predicts “As with any gold rush, the early winners from the IoT are likely to be the suppliers selling the “shovels” to make the connections possible and to process the vast amounts of data. But in the long run, the ultimate impact of this third wave of the Internet depends on the adopters in these proving grounds finding gold in connecting billions of devices into an intelligent network.”
How will it affect Public Relations and Marketing?
So what does this mean for marketing plans and communication skills? It further narrows the gap between the seller and the customer, as customers increasingly rely on companies to gather and analyse data, providing better offerings and greater value.
It means:
- less hype, more facts
- ‘factual buying’ further replacing ‘emotional buying’
- marketers guessing less and measuring more
- Public Relations dominating advertisers who spruik
- customers becoming less sticky responding to need rather than loyalty
- trustworthiness is more easily assessed.
