Author: Mark Bonchek

You may not know this, but Big Data has a little brother. And together, Big and Little Data are far more powerful than Big Data alone.

Big Data is what organizations know about people — be they customers, citizens, employees, or voters. Data is aggregated from a large number of sources, assembled into a massive data store, and analyzed for patterns. The results are more accurate predictions, more targeted communications, and more personalized services. Big Data is what enables banks to predict credit card fraud by analyzing billions of transactions, marketers to understand customer sentiment by analyzing millions of interactions on social media, and retailers to target promotions and offers by analyzing millions of purchases.

In contrast, Little Data is what we know about ourselves. What we buy. Who we know. Where we go. How we spend our time. We’ve always had a sense for these things — after all, it’s our lives. But thanks to the combination of mobile, social, and cloud technologies, it’s easier than ever to gain insight into our own behavior.

As an example, consider the emerging field of mobile health. Portable devices like the FitBit or Nike FuelBand measure your activity level and sync with your smartphone. The associated mobile app gives feedback, encouragement, and rewards as you reach your goals. New research shows that people who use tracking technologies are more likely to be successful in losing weight and getting in shape.

A similar trend is underway in energy conservation. The company Opower partners with utilities to give customers visibility into how their electricity consumption compares with the average of their neighborhood.

Big and Little Data differ in three primary ways:

• Focus: The focus of Big Data is to advance organizational goals, while Little Data helps individuals achieve personal goals.
• Visibility: Individuals can’t see Big Data; Little Data helps them see better.
• Control: Big Data is controlled by organizations, while Little Data is controlled by individuals. Companies grant permission for individuals to access Big Data, while individuals grant permission to organizations to access Little Data.

Without Little Data, Big Data has a tendency to become Big Brother. We’ve all experienced that unsettling feeling when ads follow us on the web, a practice marketers call retargeting. And retailers have gotten into trouble when Big Data predicts things about people they don’t even know themselves.

On the other hand, Little Data without Big Data is incomplete. One complaint about portable fitness devices is that they aren’t sufficiently prescriptive. They don’t tell you what to do based on your behavior. How much activity should I be getting? If I’m not sleeping well, what can I do to sleep better? This requires a partnership with individuals and health care providers to combine tracking with advice and treatment.

Or consider the experience of grocery shopping. We are all familiar with the coupons we get when we checkout at the register. In the time it takes for you to sign your credit card slip, a massive database analyzes what you bought today, what you bought in the past, and what people like you tend to buy, then matches it to the available offers and prints out a personalized set of coupons. A classic case of Big Data.

But what does this scenario look like with Little Data? Start by applying the three steps:

• Shift Focus: How can we help individuals achieve their goals?
• Make it Visible: How can we give people visibility into their own data?
• Share Control: How can the relationship be more reciprocal?

Putting these together, we can imagine a different kind of shopping experience. The Little Data alone could be used to create a personal shopping assistant that lets you:

• Generate shopping lists automatically based on what you’ve purchased in the past. This feature could be used to send a reminder while you are right in the store, e.g. “Don’t forget the milk!”
• Bring promotions to you based on your interests. For example, instead of paging through the entire circular, you could find out if there are specials on any of your favorite brands.
• Provide useful information to guide purchasing decisions. For example, the assistant could alert you to foods with ingredients that might trigger food allergies.

Things get really interesting when we combine the power of Big Data with Little Data. For example, as a shopper, I’m interested to know which brands have the highest loyalty or what else people might have on their Thanksgiving shopping list. There might even be patterns that could predict which foods I am most likely to enjoy based on what others buy who share similar purchase histories. (Think of this as the Netflix of food.)

This connection between Big and Little Data applies in other areas as well. Consider the smart thermostat made by Nest, which automatically adjusts itself to your preferences and behavior. A utility company could connect the Little Data from Nest devices to the Big Data from its power grid. Nest customers could then benchmark their energy usage against others in the community. Furthermore, the sense of shared purpose and the greater transparency and control give individuals greater incentive to share information and participate in energy saving initiatives.

This partnership between Big and Little Data can apply to almost any industry, from travel and financial services to health care and government. While companies build up their business intelligence teams and hire (Big) Data scientists, companies should also look to create services based on Little Data that empower their customers. These services would enable customers to pull information towards them when they need it, instead of just trying to figure out what message to send and when to send it. They would enable customers to make better decisions themselves, instead of trying to figure it out for them. This is a new way of thinking, and a new way of engaging customers. Perhaps we need a new generation of (Little) Data scientists to figure it out.

There is no doubt that Big Data will transform business. But in an age of connected and empowered individuals, precision targeting must be balanced with personal value. If you want to build loyalty, spend less time using data to tell customers about you, and spend more time telling them something about themselves.

Companies are turning to “purpose” and “authenticity” as a way to engage consumers and employees. But it’s hard enough to find a purpose in life if you’re an individual, let alone an entire company. And being authentic is a bit like being cool — sometimes the harder you try, the less you are.

So what’s a leader to do?

The first step is to recognize that there are different kinds of purpose. Sometimes purpose is about values — who you are and what you stand for. Other times it is about value — what you do and how it benefits others.

The ultimate goal would seem to be having your values and value aligned: have what you do reflect who you are, have what you stand for guide what you make, and have your value to the community enhance your value to customers and shareholders.

This goal is of aligning values and value is espoused by many eminent leaders, from Jim Stengel to Bill George. It’s a core tenet in the field of corporate social responsibility.

But in a social age, this kind of purpose isn’t enough. The problem comes down to a simple preposition. Most leaders think of purpose as a purpose for. But what is needed is a purpose with.

Customers are no longer just consumers; they’re co-creators. They aren’t just passive members of an audience; they are active members of a community. They want to be a part of something; to belong; to influence; to engage. It’s not enough that they feel good about your purpose. They want it to be their purpose too. They don’t want to be at the other end of your for. They want to be right there with you. Purpose needs to be shared.

To understand the power of shared purpose, it’s useful to look at the mission statements of leading companies. To be clear, I’m not equating mission statements with company purpose. But they illustrate the point, and in fact are remarkably representative of the differences between the companies. So with that caveat, let’s look at our first mission statements from Adidas and Nike:

Adidas: The adidas Group strives to be the global leader in the sporting goods industry with brands built on a passion for sports and a sporting lifestyle.

Nike: To bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete* in the world.

*”If you have a body, you are an athlete.”

Notice how you respond to each statement. Which one do you feel more a part of, regardless of whether you are a customer or shareholder? Adidas puts the emphasis on value and values. But Nike goes further, addressing not only people’s interests but their sense of who they are. Adidas is for, while Nike is with.

Let’s look at another example, this time between Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts.

Dunkin Donuts:> Make and serve the freshest, most delicious coffee and donuts quickly and courteously in modern, well-merchandised stores.

Starbucks: Our mission: to inspire and nurture the human spirit — one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time.

Dunkin Donuts’ purpose is clearly for customers, and it delivers on this purpose exceedingly well. But there is something different about Starbucks’ purpose. It is a purpose that is achieved with its customers.

Again, mission statements don’t always reflect a company’s true purpose. But in these cases, I think you would agree that they are fairly accurate representations of the company’s approach to the market, its engagement with customers, and its perception as an “authentic” brand.

The relationship of shared purpose to corporate social responsibility is worth exploring a bit further, this time by comparing Pepsi and Coca-Cola. Under the label “Performance with Purpose,” Pepsi has declared both a mission and a vision.

Mission: Our mission is to be the world’s premier consumer products company focused on convenient foods and beverages.

Vision: PepsiCo’s responsibility is to continually improve all aspects of the world in which we operate — environment, social, economic — creating a better tomorrow than today.

This is a perfect example of a “Values and Value” approach to purpose. The vision covers values, and the mission covers value. But something is missing. There is no shared purpose here. Nothing for people to participate in, belong to, engage with, co-create, or share with others that aligns the commercial side of the business with social responsibility.

By contrast, Coca-Cola has declared as its mission:

To refresh the world…
To inspire moments of optimism and happiness…
To create value and make a difference.

While the third line is a bit generic, the first two lay a stronger foundation for a shared purpose. It is perhaps no coincidence that Nike, Starbucks, and Coca-Cola all feature the word inspiration in their mission statements. You can’t inspire someone without their participation and engagement.

How can you create your own shared purpose? It’s simple, but not easy. The essential question is:

What is the shared purpose that …

a) We and our customers can work on together?
b) Is a natural expression of who we are and what we stand for?
c) Connects how we make money with how we contribute to the world?

When you apply this lens to the brand we have covered here, you can see how Nike, Starbucks, and Coca-Cola pass the test. Nike to inspire the athlete in all of us. Starbucks to nurture the human spirit. And Coca-Cola to refresh the world with moments of optimism and happiness
.
As you formulate your shared purpose, don’t go for what you think it should be. Look for who you already are. How you already connect with your customers. What your fans already say about you.

Remember, this is not something you are going to do to them, or for them, but with them. It’s a journey you will be on together, hopefully for a very long time.