John Honovich had a post a while back on the topic of Crowdsourcing. In the post he asked the question of whether crowdsourcing can compete with traditional remote monitoring providers. It’s a good article and you should check it out. His conclusion is that crowdsourcing is unlikely to be a material threat to traditional proprietary remote monitoring services due to the difficulty in lots of people accessing video, privacy concerns, and the ability for proprietary providers to leverage video analytics to exceed human based efficiency.
I’ve got a slightly different take on the topic, although I do agree with John’s assessment of the challenges. While “crowdsourcing” in its pure definition may not take off right away, I think that one of its key principles is already having a huge impact on the video surveillance market. The principle at the heart of crowdsourcing is this: providing access to video to a larger number of people can enable more value to be created from that video.
This principle is incredibly simple and very hard to argue with, but many in the industry have not yet come to understand how broad of an impact it will have or what is required to deliver. Regardless of how much value is being generated from video today (whether in identifying risks, investigating issues, or learning about and improving operations) you could always generate more value by having more people review it. It could be a numbers game in that you don’t have time to review everything or it could be an expertise game in that there are specific subject matter experts that could identify more useful information from the video. The “more people” in this could be others inside the company (marketing, operations, finance) or outside the company (remote monitoring providers, guard replacement, operational auditors, LP consultants, cheap labor in India).
Most of the arguments against this trend don’t really attack the concept, they focus on the challenges that keep companies from giving access to more people.
it is hard technically
This is absolutely true, it is very hard to give access to video in a useable way to a large number of people, inside or outside of the company. Most video systems were designed for onsite use by a handful of expert users. While many video systems are now remotely accessable, many require significant effort including VPNs and lot of IT intensive setup to make this happen. Extending video access to 1000s of people across 1000s of locations has some very difficult challenges that many video providers have not historically addressed. MVaaS is in the forefront of addressing these challenges to eliminate technology as a barrier to wider spread video utilization.
it requires a much more sophisticated approach to access control
Privacy concerns are the most commonly stated issue, but the access control challenges start well before you think about giving access to your video to Joe the Plumber. When you had 20 people using video in your company your access control concerns were likely binary: someone had access to all the video or they had access to none of the video. When you have 1,000 people accessing a large number of locations you have to worry about which sites they get access to, what they can do with the video, etc. It is materially more complicated and more important to control who can see what. Extend that one step further to outside organizations that you trust (a consultant, a remote guard company, etc.) and you need another layer of complexity to manage access within their organization. Moving even closer to the crowdsourcing model and giving access to people you may not yet know you need mechanisms for ensuring reviewers are certified, flagging inappropriate or ineffective reviewers, etc. MVaaS goes a long way to addressing the first two, but the third is an area, while solveable, that has not been fully addressed by the market.
it is not always economical (value of information generated greater than the incremental cost to generate)
Once you solve the technical issues and ensure that only the people you want to review video are able to do so, the remaining question is whether the additional viewers can create value for you at a price you are willing to pay. This requires that video be efficiently useable by the extended group of people and that the output of their review be easily consumable by the organization. Neither of these are true with most video systems today. Telling a potential user to review hours of video on a clunky interface is not efficient. Using POS data or targeted video analytics to limit the video that must be reviewed is efficient. Creating a bunch of PDF audit documents or sending thousands of stand-alone email alerts is not easily consumable. Using an easily configurable web interface for reviewers to create audits or capture new data from the video and then allowing the company to massage and filter the results is easily consumable.
Companies and organizations will continue to expand the number of people that have access to their video as it will most certainly increase their return on that investment. While it may be a while before crowdsourcing becomes a material business model, companies like Envysion are working to address the challenges that this broader access creates.