(Update: Some follow up thoughts here and some scenario thinking here.)
Over the past couple of months, a groundswell has begun around the concept of VRM*.
This needs to be on your radar.
Although the idea has been around in various incarnations for many, many years (e.g. I was aware of a project called “TEKRAM” — yes, that’s cutely “market” spelled backwards — back in 1999; some thoughts from that epoch are here and here), the infrastructure required and, more importantly, the cultural readiness may finally be here.
What is VRM?: At it’s simplest, it’s turning the idea of selling and marketing TO customers on its head. With VRM, the customer is in charge of the relationship. Not the vendor.
Who coined the phrase “VRM?”: Mike Vizard, during a podcast on the subject. It was then pounced on in the way a pitbull pounces on a ribeye by Doc Searls (see the comment section below).
What’s needed for VRM to work?: There are a number of technical things that are needed: a robust way for customers to manage their own online identities without getting trapped in any vendor’s silo, a way for customers to only share the aspects of identity that they want to share with a particular vendor (perhaps anonymously), and a robust way for vendors to interact with those customers. But more importantly than the technical aspects, the cultural shift of actually putting the customer in charge may end up being the largest challenge.
Hasn’t this been done with things like Priceline and LendingTree: Sort of. More on the differences in a future post.Who else is thinking about this?: Doc has called a number of people who will be involved, including (but not limited to) Mary Rundle, John Clippinger, Dave Winer, Jeremie Miller, Joe Andrieu, Steve Gillmor, Deborah Schultz and myself.
Where can I find out more about VRM?: At the ProjectVRM page
* – No, not CRM (Customer Relationship Management), but its converse, Vendor Relationship Management.
Chris, you’re right when you say that this idea has been around for years. Years and years. In fact, my first, omni patri mantra for CRM advice was “when you buy the application, you buy the vendor” and I, for one, have been an aggressive proponent of managing the relationship with the vendor since 2000 or so when I “burst on the CRM scene” in a pool of water. I think the readiness has always been there but the customers have never taken up the banner because they didn’t have the sense of empowerment they have now. However, that doesn’t mean much to the big enterprise to this day. One thing that we can’t ignore when it comes to VRM is the politics that are involved in the choices. And the way that references are handled – sucker references often but also remembering that the vendor is making a living too. The idea here is the same as user generated content, or social networking or communities or any of the contemporary concepts. The vendor and customer have to collaborate to optimize the relationship. It is no longer one sided. That means that the customer’s management of the relationship is the recognition of the partnership that successful implementation demands and there has to be skin in the game on both sides. I have a whole set of approaches that I’ve evolved over the years on this from the reference checks to the cultural alignments that have to be there to make this successful. I’m glad to see its gone from a series of solo siloes to the predecessors of a “movement” the likes of which Alice’s Restaurant and Arlo Guthrie could never have imagined!! 🙂
Great stuff, and thanks.
A small factual adjustment… The one to name VRM wasn’t me. It was Mike Vizard, in the midst of a Gillmor Gang back in September, I think. (It’s one of these: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projectvrm/VRM_discussion_in_podcasts . I was making the case for it, and Mike came up with the VRM initialism, as a reciprocal for VRM. It was so right that I instantly adopted it and forgot whatever I was calling it before that.
thanks, doc. credit to mike vizard fixed above.
paul. love this line from your comment:
>The vendor and customer have to collaborate to optimize the relationship. It is no longer one sided. That means that the customer’s management of the relationship is the recognition of the partnership that successful implementation demands and there has to be skin in the game on both sides.
b-i-n-g-o. it really needs to be a relationship, facets of which are handled by both parties. absolutely.
i also dig the arlo guthrie reference. but you knew that.