| Is this a new term? |
Yes, as of July 2011. |
|
| Why do we qualify “crowdsourcing” to get the new term? |
The new term denotes the new shade of “crowdsourcing” that will become prevalent in the near future. |
|
| Why isn’t there any “fair” in the definition of the new term? |
The new term is all about increased competiveness among crowdsourcers (the framework provider).
The definition refers to a business model that can help improve the competitiveness.
“Fair” is subjective and emotional. It has no place in business model definitions. |
|
| Why is “fair” in the term name then? |
Increased competition brings prices and profit margins to the market levels.
These levels are deemed to be “fair.” |
|
|
|
|
|
| But really, could it be that "fair" has somethig to do with profit being
more evenly distributed among the crowd (content creator) and
the outsourcer (framework provider)? |
It may be. It seems like the most straitforward way to get the profit margins down
on the outsoutcer side and get the crowd to be more engaged with the process.
The framework provider in the near future may have to distribute parts of profit from
crowdsourcing projects with the content creators. It is not the only way how fair crowdsourcing
can materialize, but it is certainly a more obvious one. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Is anybody using this model already? |
Possibly, but not likely. In a way, all the market places (Apple, Android, stock photos, etc) created over the
last few years do a part of the model - pass some profit to the crowd creating the applications or
some other type of contents. They are not quite there yet because the profit margins providers
enjoy are still very high and, more importantly, the model does not apply at all to projects with
low profit/people ratio, like Wikipedia, Facebook, yelp, etc. |
