《信息技术和信息社会》案例分析
(共两个案例，请尽可能在案例背景下，进行批判性思维critical thinking，给你的你想法。你的逻辑、创意、所运用的课程中的知识点是我所看重的)

案例1. Zynga Wins with Business Intelligence

这是一家高速发展的游戏公司，但它并不是以逼真的图像，令人心悸的动作，或者史诗般的故事著称，也不为Playstation, Xbox, 或者Wii开发游戏。这家公司就是Zynga。如果你有Facebook的账户，很大可能你会很熟悉它所开发的游戏。Zynga爆炸式发展表明社会游戏的潜力以及社会化网络在提供关键数据理解公司客户的能力。

Mark Pincus和一群创业者在2007年创建了Zynga，如今这家公司已经成为社交网络游戏的领行者，它的游戏包括CityVille、Texas HoldEm Poker、FarmVille、Empires & Allies等。这四款游戏是Facebook上最为流行的应用。Zynga的游戏有将近3亿月活跃用户以及6千多万日活跃用户，他们每天就会产生3TB的数据。自创建以来，Zynga便将数据分析放在优先级位置上，以方便对其游戏的管理以及公司的商业决策。

这家公司极度依赖数据来提高用户保有，增加游戏玩家的相互协作。用Zynga的首席数据官的话来说，有用的数据必须是“可行动的” – 它必须使能够帮助Zynga对其游戏做出显著改进的信息。游戏数据的产生和储存只是这个战争的一般。Zynga还必须有俩个分析团队（数据分析、可视化）来处理数据，在数据的基础上给出商务改进建议。

促进社会化游戏的经济性有三个关键指标：流失率、口碑传播系数、每个用户所带来的收入。流失率是指游戏玩家的的流失率。社会化游戏的流失率很高，平均而言，每月可以高达50%。这意味着今天注册的用户在一个月后只有一半人会继续。传播系数是衡量现有游戏玩家能够吸引新客户的有效性，这是社会化网络平台的一个重要能力。具体来讲，如果在一个月内，有100个FarmVille的玩家能够带来5个新的玩家，那么传播系数为1.05。用户收益是一个游戏玩家在整个生命周期所能够产生的预期收益，它是在每个用户的月收益和流失率的基础上计算。例如，如果每个用户的月均收益为5美元，流失率为50%，那么他的预期收益为5元第一个月 + 2.5元第二个月 + 1.25元第二个月等等依次类推，总共为10美元。

第一波Facebook上的社会化游戏关注提高传播系数，他们通过游戏玩家在游戏时的墙张贴广告来提高传播系数。但这样的做法产生了太多的“墙垃圾链接”或者游戏相关的帖子，使得用户很难看到他朋友推荐推荐过来的墙贴。为此，Facebook以及其他社会化网络平台严令要求游戏公司减少他们的墙贴。

为此，Zynga转向了社交图谱分析（social graph analysis）。对于社会化游戏，社交图谱，或者说朋友之间的关系，和社交网络平台有一些不同。例如，Zynga的Mafia Wars游戏，玩家可能有两类朋友：一类是对这个游戏很积极，另一类是对该游戏相对消极，只是为了朋友而加入到这个游戏，很少玩这个游戏或者很快就离开了这个游戏。玩家和这两类朋友的互动方式也不一定一样，例如积极分子朋友圈中礼物和提供帮助更多些。指导玩家对不同朋友采用不同的沟通方式，提高了收益降低了流失率。类似Zynga的社会化游戏公司必须从各个方面提升玩家体验才能提高游戏的利润。

来自于Vertica Systems（一家数据库管理公司）的技术能够解决这个问题。Vertica的大规模并行处理（massively parallel processing）架构允许用户用标准硬件或者云解决方案（即“节点”）来使用它的分析平台。用户可以建立群，包括1，10，100或者更多的节点，将上千个的处理器，TB的电脑内存，以及PB的硬盘空间整合到一个群里。一个小公司可以只用一个节点，根据需要可以增加节点。

Vertica的数据仓库是列，即以每一列而非每一行来存储数据，这样有利于更好地将数据压缩（压缩比为10：1）。传统的数据库无法处理压缩数据，但是Vertica的数据仓库能够对压缩了的数据进行管理，从而提高了绩效，降低了对处理能力、内存的要求。采用这个数据仓库，Zynga在数据处理上要比其他公司要快50-100%。Vertica的数据还能够为社交图像对数据进行预处理，将各个用户和其它用户的互动信息很快就转置成一列。这是传统的关系型数据库所做不到的。

Zynga的社交图像数据传到Vertica的一个特定群里，在这个群中，每天都会产生一个社交图像。每晚，这些社交图像生成的模型被反馈到第二天游戏当中。每天Zynga都会做多达130个实验一遍调整它的游戏，并分析玩家的反应。在推出新功能的几分钟之内，Zynga能够从百万多个玩家中发现谁喜欢这个功能谁不喜欢。在这个知识的基础上，Zynga每天能够对它的产品进行多达100次的升级。

有着这个商务智能解决方案，Zynga能够提高精准营销（targeting）的效率，例如礼物，从而提高活跃用户的互动，减少对非活跃用户的打扰。Zynga已经做到识别具有相同行为或途径的活动用户们，对他们进行游戏相关的促销等精准营销活动。

Zynga的收入从2009年的1亿美元增加到2011年的10亿美元。显然它的做法是有效的。传统的游戏开发商例如Activision Blizzard和Electronic Arts注意到了这家公司的成长，并开始采用相同的方法。

Zynga的商业模式是向大量小游戏的用户提供免费游戏，通过向玩家销售虚拟产品来赚钱。虚拟产品的概念出现很多年了，例如Second Life及其他虚拟世界，在其中用户为他们的阿凡达购买衣服和配件。但是Zynga对细节的关注以及从大数据中获取关键信息的能力是它与众不同。

例如，Zynga的FishVille游戏的产品经理们发现他们的用户在游戏中会经常购买某一特定类型的鱼，一种半透明有光泽的安康鱼(angler fish)。为此，Zynga开始提供和安康鱼相似的鱼，每条3个美金，相应的，玩家比平时买进更多的鱼。另外，分析发现，Zynga的玩家倾向于购买限量版的产品。Zynga也有广告收入，但是大头仍然是虚拟产品的销售收入。

Zynga选择Facebook作为社交平台也给予它很大的助力。当用户安装Zynga的应用程序时，他们允许Zynga获取他们的个人说明，包括他们的姓名、性别和朋友列表。Zynga用这些信息来判断他们是哪一种类型的用户，会最有可能按哪种方式活动。Zynga最希望的是知道这个用户是否会成为明星用户，每个月花费100元以上购买虚拟产品。尽管只有5%的活跃用户为Zynga贡献收益，他们非常的忠诚，基本上公司所有收入都来源于他们。

Zynga的游戏大量运用Facebook的社会化功能。例如，在CityVille，用户必须去邀请朋友来担任“市政大厅”的虚拟的职位，才能成功搭建这个建筑。所有Zynga的游戏都有类似的功能。但是Facebook并不是总是支持Zynga的做法。Zynga在Facebook上的App以往是可以直接向Facebook用户发短信，但是由于投诉，现在不在允许这样做。仍然，如果你有朋友在Facebook上玩Zynga的游戏，那么你很有可能收到来自Zynga的广告鼓励你来玩。

Zynga的成功在一定程度上颠覆了视频游戏行业。传统的视频游戏开发往往从一个希望能够吸引玩家的想法/故事出发，然后才开发游戏。而Zynga从游戏开始，然后分析数据来决定用户如何来玩，什么用户最活跃，以及用户会购买什么虚拟产品。Zynga用数据来使得玩家能够玩的时间更长，能够推荐更多的朋友，以及购买更多的产品。

并不是所有的人都同意Zynga的数据驱动开发游戏的做法。很多游戏行业的老手认为Zynga的游戏太简单了而且有着太多相同的游戏元素。这家公司面临着多起山寨其他开发商游戏的起诉。甚至有些公司内部开发人员对于公司把数据分析放在游戏设计的创造性之上感到愤怒。还有人质疑Zynga的可持续性，认为这家公司很难开发出全新的游戏来替代日益丧失独特性的旧游戏。在2011至2012年期间，Zynga的核心用户减少了10%，尽管他的用户总数在增加。Zynga的商业模式假设Facebook还会和现在一样运营，而且用户对游戏质量的期望不会变化等等。这些不一定总会如此。

可以说，Zynga的游戏缺乏艺术。但是Zynga也承认它的目标客户是那些偏好casual的游戏，它的目的就在于让几乎所有的人都能够玩它开发的游戏。希望要求高潮游戏技能的玩家可以从其他地方购买。Zynga用数据来管理它的游戏，从而为用户提供定制的体验，这在以前是从没有在游戏当中实现的。

为了降低对Facebook的依赖，Zynga在2012年3月推出自己的游戏平台Project Z。这个游戏平台允许用户在它的网站上玩游戏，而不需要登录Facebook。一个叫“Zynga With Friends”的服务可以将相互不认识的玩家匹配起来，哪怕他们没有Facebook的账号，或者只是在手机应用上玩这个游戏。同一个月，Zynga购买了OMGPop公司，这家公司的手机游戏Draw Something非常流行。这个游戏让用户通过画图来表达他们的意思，然后让其他人来猜他们画的是什么。Zynga管理团队希望这个游戏能够成为它们构建跨社交网络平台的基于移动、casual、社会化的手机游戏的战略规划的一个部分。

这些努力是否能维持Zynga的竞争优势？Zynga的商业模式是否能够在移动互联时代继续？现在讲还太早，但我们可以相信Zynga会用他们的数据来探索。

* Give examples of three kinds of decisions supported by BI at Zynga 给出几个例子来看Zynga如何用商务智能来做决策支持 * What problems can BI solve for Zynga? What problems can’t it solve? 商务智能能够解决什么问题，不能解决什么问题？ * Zynga的商业模式是否能够在移动互联时代继续？为什么？

II) OpenTable is the leading supplier of reservation, table management, and guest management software for restaurants. In addition, the company operates OpenTable.com, a popular Web site for making restaurant reservations online. In 14 years, OpenTable has gone from a start-up to a successful and growing public company that counts around two-thirds of the nation’s reservation-taking restaurants as clients.

Today, more than 28,000 restaurants in the United States, Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan use the OpenTable hardware and software system. This system automates the reservation-taking and table management process, while allowing restaurants to build diner databases for improved guest recognition and targeted e-mail marketing. The OpenTable Web site, OpenTable for Mobile Web (its mobile Web site), and OpenTable Mobile (its mobile app), provide a fast, efficient way for diners to find available tables in real time. The Web sites and app connect directly to the thousands of computerized reservation systems at OpenTable restaurants, and reservations are immediately recorded in a restaurant’s electronic reservation book.

Restaurants subscribe to the OpenTable Electronic Reservation Book (ERB), the company’s proprietary software, which is installed on a touch-screen computer system and supported by asset-protection and security tools. The ERB software provides a real-time map of the restaurant floor and enables the restaurant to retain meal patterns of all parties, serving as a customer relationship management (CRM) system for restaurants. The software is upgraded periodically, and the version in April 2012, was designed to provide increased ease of use and a more thorough view of table availability to help turn more tables, enhance guest service, personalize responses to diners, coordinate the seating process, and maximize guest seating. The ERBs at OpenTable’s customer restaurants connect via the Internet to form an online network of restaurant reservation books. For restaurants that rely less heavily on reservations, OpenTable offers Connect, a web-based service that lets restaurants accept online reservations.

OpenTable’s revenue comes from two sources. Restaurants pay a one-time fee starting at $1,295 for on-site installation and training, a monthly subscription fee of $199 for software and hardware, and a $1 transaction fee for each restaurant guest seated through online reservations. The online reservation service is free to diners. The business model encourages diners to assist in viral marketing. When an individual makes a reservation, the site “suggests” that they send e-vites to their dinner companions directly from OpenTable.com. The e-vites include a link back to the OpenTable site.

OpenTable is a service-based (software as service, or SaaS) e-commerce company. In other words, customers don’t buy software and install it on their computers, but instead go online and get the software functionality through subscriptions. OpenTable is also an online service that does not sell goods, but instead enables diners to make reservations, like social networking sites provide services. The restaurant industry was slow to leverage the power of the Internet. This was in part because the industry was, and continues to be, highly fragmented and local—made up of more than 30,000 small, independent businesses or local restaurant-owning groups.

The founders of OpenTable knew that dealing with these restaurants as a single market would be difficult. They also realized that the Internet was changing things for diners by providing them with instant access to reviews, menus, and other information about dining options. And there was no method for making reservations online—we all know reserving by phone is time-consuming, inefficient, and prone to errors. In order to make the system work, reach and scale were very important. For diners to use an online reservation system, they would need real-time access to a number of local restaurants, and the ability to instantly book confirmed reservations around the clock.

If customers were planning a trip to another city, OpenTable would need participating restaurants in those cities. The company was originally incorporated in San Francisco in 1998 as Easyeats.com, morphing into OpenTable.com, Inc. a year later. When the company was founded, most restaurants did not have computers, let alone systems that would allow online reservations made through a central Web site. OpenTable’s initial strategy was to pay online restaurant reviewers for links to its Web site and target national chains in order to quickly expand its reach. This got the company into 50 cities, but it was spending $1 million a month and bringing in only $100,000 in revenue. Not exactly a formula for success. The company retooled its hardware and software to create the user-friendly ERB system and deployed a door-to-door sales force to solicit subscriptions from high-end restaurants. The combination of e-commerce, user-friendly technology, and the personal touch worked. The four markets OpenTable targeted initially developed into active, local networks of restaurants and diners that continue to grow. OpenTable has implemented the same strategy across the country.

Despite the challenging economy, OpenTable’s numbers at the time of the IPO (in 2009) were strong, and since then, it has continued to grow. The company has benefited from having e-commerce revenue streams from subscription fees and per-transaction charges, rather than depending on advertising. Further, more than 50% of OpenTable’s revenue comes from B2B subscriptions, which are typically part of long-term contracts. Restaurants that have invested in OpenTable’s software package are less likely to want to incur the switching costs associated with changing to a different reservation management package. Another reason for its success is that OpenTable has a large number of satisfied customers. Restaurant owners report that they and their staff members find the software easy to use, and it helps them manage their business better. Specifically, it streamlines operations, helps fill additional seats, and improves quality of service, providing a concrete return on investment. This has led to both high customer satisfaction and high retention rates. OpenTable has also taken advantage of the interconnected needs of restaurants and diners. Restaurants want cost-effective ways to attract guests and manage their reservations, while diners want convenient ways to find available restaurants, choose among them, and make reservations. By creating an online network of restaurants and diners that transact with each other through real-time reservations, OpenTable has figured out how to successfully address the needs of both.

OpenTable’s market is susceptible to network effects: the more people use it, the more utility the system delivers. OpenTable’s growth continually provides diners with expanded choices. More diners discover the benefits of using the online reservation system, which in turn delivers value to restaurant customers, and helps attract more restaurants to the network. Diners serve as a source of viral marketing, as the OpenTable Web site encourages them to e-vite their dinner companions to the meal. When they do so, the e-mail provides links back to the OpenTable Web site. And the OpenTable link appears on the restaurant’s Web site, linking directly to the reservation page. OpenTable has been able to improve its efficiency even as diners are staying home more often.
Questions
1. Why will OpenTable competitors have a difficult time competing against OpenTable? 2. What characteristics of the restaurant market make it difficult for a reservation system to work? 3. How did OpenTable change its marketing strategy to succeed? 4. Why would restaurants find the SaaS model very attractive?