The crowd sourcing debate goes on...

I've heard further bleating from the design industry on crowd sourcing.

As I have mentioned before in one of the discussions the way the industry works needs to change and that the current widely accepted business model is flawed. Crowd sourcing maybe just be the catalyst that changes the status quo.

The question now becomes how do you get remunerated for the value created not the cost of the input here is were it gets challenging. The models of performance never seem to work based on their being to many variables. Perhaps a new quantitative indicator is needed. Would favorability work measured through a variety of means (blogosphere, tweets, mentions, lines of copy). It's been an old ad metric so why not - surely standout is what it is all about anyway? This would align well to the tribal theory of brand management, where control is handed to the faithful.

A more radical way of looking at it would be to say that IP has no true value in what is becoming a rapidly open source society where competitive advantage through design exists for months rather than years (please nobody quote me Apple on this - heard it all before and try a different reference - it's good for the soul). Maybe the value is not created through design at all, maybe value is only generated at the point of interaction / engagement and therefore, coming full circle, crowd sourcing is part of that value generation.

I wonder if T-mobile / Orange with their naturally networked and savvy audience will be brave enough to go down the crowd source route. If so this could be the tipping point.