Gmail Points To Possibilities Of The Data Decade

Photo credit: Cinefil on Flickr

The following is also my column in this week's Advertising Age.

If you threw me on a desert island (one with internet connectivity) and said that I could use only one website, it would be Gmail.

For the last five years Gmail has become the most indispensable tool in my communications and productivity system. I've even found a full-fledged Twitter client, Twitgether, that integrates into Gmail.

My use of Gmail is unorthodox in that I also use it as a massive database -- a backup brain and more. For years now I have been e-mailing myself articles that I think I might need later. Along the way, Gmail gives me a preview of what the algorithmic, personalized future of advertising and media will undoubtedly resemble.

The 2010s (or "the Tens" as it might be called) will be the Data Decade. Companies that understand how to harness it will win. Those that don't will perish. The same goes for marketers.

The Harvard Business Review highlighted this issue in its recent list of breakthrough ideas for next year: "When a 12-year-old can gather information faster, process it more efficiently, reference more diverse professionals, and get volunteer guidance from better sources than you can at work, how can you pre

tend to be competitive?" wrote Bill Jensen and Josh Klein in the January 2010 issue. The article outlined a bank that was having trouble parsing its massive amounts of data into reports that senior executives could actually use. The breakthrough idea? "Work hacking," or working creatively to get your best data and information.

And that's what Gmail has done. Google has built an ingenious search-advertising business -- it's all about intent. You need to enter a query before you are served with relevant ads. However, over the next decade, trusted sites such as Gmail will have learned enough about us that they will start to surface media, social and advertising content before we even ask. This is why I believe Facebook will succeed wildly. Like Google, they are data-driven, using what they call "the lens of friends" to connect us in real-time with products and services. This was one of Facebook's takeaways from the recent Le Web conference: We increasingly discover online content not just by algorithms but via this lens.

Google understands it's all about data. And Gmail is where you really can see a glimmer of where they will continue to shine in "the Tens" and how all those free services around the search engine will add up to revenues fast. Here's a simple example.

Recently I became fascinated with the work habits of Thomas Jefferson (a hacker and data geek if there ever was one). I am particularly intrigued by his fondness for stand-up desks, which are exactly what they sound like. As someone who already sits for much of the day, the thought of standing at the computer instead of sitting when I get home is actually appealing. So I began e-mailing myself articles on the topic that I found on websites. A few days later the little news ticker in my Gmail inbox began to show me ads for stand-up desks, which I have clicked on and have used in my research for what I might end up buying for my apartment.

Think about that: Gmail surfaced high-value information in the form of ads even when I wasn't searching for it. That's an early view of what the Data Decade will look like.

Comments

[Zeid Nasser]

Very interesting Steve! I use gmail too, I won't look at it the same way anymore :)

[maurice flynn]

Great article thanks Steve - some lovely real life examples included! One small query thou if the future is about "the lens of friends" (which I agree :) doesnt this point to serious strategic disadvantages for a googles mainly algorithmic approach? I know they are trying to combine the two but it isnt working for me yet - and Im still a massive 24/7 Gmail / Google fan! :) Not disagreeing just want to develop the debate! :) Thanks again M

[Dave Ploch]

I had never considered email as the general repository until seeing an organization who never implemented mailbox limits. We now discourage and try to control against large mailboxes in a corporate environment due to records retention and other compliance issue. I have to admit, I have several people in the enterprise with MASSIVE mailboxes that were grandfathered in when limits were implemented. Your model is exactly what they use with literally a million saved objects in mail.

[Steve Rubel]

@Maurice, I agree. Social has been Google's Achilles Heel. This is where Facebook conceivably could become the next Google.

[Dan Thornton]

Nice article and I totally agree about the value of Gmail - the only thing I'd query is whether Google is really doing anything different in serving relevant ads in Gmail when you've emailed yourself articles rather than on a SERP page? Whether it's search, Adsense on a blog, or in Gmail, it's a matching system between content and advertiser.There's definitely a lot more to come with data, and Google is a company which follows data religiously - A/B testing springs to mind as the best example. But I don't think Google's advertising as it stands todat, has seen a huge leap in approach yet - it's still display based on content, albeit incredibly good.However, mobile looks like the catalyst for change...

[wayan_vota]

Standing desks rock! I abandoned the chair two years ago and could not be happier. Pains in my back and ass, gone. I can move about to think or do much faster, and I burn more calories (or so I hope) than before.Oh and no need to buy a specific desk for the purpose - I found that IKEA file cabinets and glass desktop are the perfect height for both of us (we're the same height).

[Barry Dennis]

Scary. What's next? Knowing when you run out of Large Condoms?An order form for Pepsi Home delivery? Giving you the GPS location of your girlfriend? (Actually, that's already a Mobile App). I just don't think that you can say that the Facebook "Universe" is all that. If there are 180,000,000 Facebook accounts in the U.S. and over 320,000,000 worldwide, when is the "tipping" point when you are everything to everybody? It's one thing to Downstream an advertiser message to an algorithmically selected subscriber, it's another to "wear out your welcome." And, what about the market of 126,000,000 (well, take out 60 million 1-12 year olds) who don't have Facebook, or 65,000,000 non-Internet users? My point is, thinking that Facebook could re-invent the appliance marketplace defies the logic. Yes, they could make headway. Yes, they could get a market share. But to what end? To own 60% of the Mobile marketplace? Never Happen..Never. Competition wouldn't allow it. In fact, I'd bet my last dime that if they try, a newer, better, "AKA Facebook" will appear. Oh, and is Google just going to give up trying to "own" a lot of the traffic? Is Convergence and AnyThing, AnyTime, AnyWhere (AAA) going to go away? Be the best at what you know, lead in a venue where you are the top brand; you can't be all things to all people, the Brand Dilution diminishes your Brand Value and Loyalty.