| Home > Portal > Events > SLA Conference 2003 > Interview with Clare Hart, Factiva
Interview with Clare Hart, President and CEO of Factiva.
Questioning by Annabel Colley, FreePint, at the Special Libraries Association (SLA) conference, New York, June 2003.
>>> Press release (PDF format)
>>> Return to SLA Conference coverage
NB: When you have finished, click here to see photos and read other FreePint dispatches and interviews from the SLA conference.
First, can you tell me a little about your career background. I understand you have both a computer science degree and MBA and began life as a programmer on the applications development side
I am not sure what possessed me when I was only 17 years old to decide to major in computer science but I am very glad I did because - even at that time - I knew that technology would always be behind the scenes. Right now, because of my experience with technology, I am not intimidated asking questions about technology, and communicating with our own technology folks as well as our customers' technology folks. That is an important aspect of this business. You can't have content or information without technology.
|
|
| Annabel Colley, Bill Fisher (out-going SLA President) and Clare Hart |
As an IT professional in those early days did you know that there were "information professionals" and what was your view of them.
I didn't even know they existed back then.
I would like to ask you your view of the value of virtual communities in general. As part of your InfoPro Alliance portal, you support and link to FreePint.com. How much value is FreePint to you in terms of customer or market intelligence?
When we built the InfoPro Alliance portal, we knew we wanted to have a forum or community for professional researchers. Partnering with FreePint enabled us to do this quickly and easily. It is very valuable. Factiva monitors virtual communities for intelligence, but we do need to do even more monitoring than we do now.
How would you explain to our diverse FreePint readership how keeping abreast of news and information using an enhanced subscription database like Factiva rather than the free web is strategically beneficial to business?
The challenge for both information professionals and the wider FreePint readership is the quality of content that users are going to get if they rely on the Web. The free Web is great for some things. However, the time that information professionals will waste if they rely on the Web for content is huge. Most importantly, as the role of information professionals change and they start taking responsibility for internal content as well as external content, they have to work with their internal clients to show that the value of information isn't going to multiple places for information. The value is to bring information together in a cohesive way within the workflow of the organization's employees. It is only then that people will more quickly get access to the information they need so they can move on to the next stage, which is making decisions and then moving on to executing their business plan, sales proposal or whatever their information gathering process requires.
Factiva was created from Dow Jones Interactive (DJI) and Reuters Business Briefing (RBB). It must have been quite a challenge for you personally to bring together these two companies. What techniques did you use to manage the integration and to drive forward two such competitive globally diverse businesses?
Communication, in fact over-communication. Otherwise, people are not aware of what's happening within the larger organization. Don't keep secrets. There is no reason to hide anything. Make information available to people. In Factiva's case, we built our corporate intranet very quickly and it became our auditorium. Everybody knew they could go there to find out what was happening in the company - what was happening with people, products, marketing, sales wins or losses. It didn't matter if you were sitting in London, Australia, or Princeton USA, everyone had access to the same internal information. The second thing is respecting the cultures and trying not to dictate how things are done from single perspective. Business today is completely dependent on teams and collaborative working relationships. Dictatorship does not work.
In a joint venture - when you are bringing people together - you must respect the cultures that are coming together. In our case it was British and American, RBB and DJI, and each of them have rich histories, so it was critical to acknowledge that great heritage and build on it. The other important thing is to bring in outsiders for a fresh perspective and an objective point of view to create the Factiva culture.
Factiva's big announcement in March of this year was that Factiva would be integrated into Microsoft Office 2003. You said at the time that it was "a long term collaboration to solve some basic business issues in a modern way". Could you expand on this.
The first reason Microsoft wanted to work with Factiva is because we have a longstanding customer relationship. Microsoft employees use Factiva services. They are very comfortable getting access to relevant news and business information, because it has been on their intranet through their library network for many many years. The second reason is the quality of global information we have. Factiva has content in 22 different languages that is from 118 countries. We support a global audience and so does Microsoft. We both need to support our customers in local markets in the local language. The third reason is that we built and launched our brand new XML platform in July of 2001. The platform is XML end-to-end and Web services enabled. Microsoft insisted on XML capability. So really it is machine-to-machine talking to each other. The user doesn't even realise that from Word or PowerPoint, they are actually going out to Factiva and bringing information back to be used for research.
In the future, if users don't realise where information has come from why do you need separate vendors? Isn't this the end for separate information vendors? After integration with Microsoft, won't all content companies have to increasingly adapt their technologies to Microsoft's ways of doing things?
I don't think so; I think Microsoft is one means of using technology. We have relationships with Microsoft, IBM, Alacra, Plumtree, and Epicentric. We do that because our customers require options and to support their different environments. The means by which people build out custom workflow applications for their end users is going to drive what technology they use. It could be Microsoft but it could be Oracle or PeopleSoft. It is always going to vary based on the company's mission and objectives and how they intend to make the information easily accessible to all those who need to use it.
So how would you respond to those in the content industry who say that this has a big implication for customer choice as Microsoft try to lock people into their environment?
Well, that is a great role for information professionals - and I have had this conversation with information professionals. It's their job to make sure that people know that there are choices out there. Even if Microsoft makes available Factiva content, if one company needs chemical abstracts, or another company needs access to high-level technical or pharmaceutical information, Factiva is not the best place to go. Therefore the Microsoft 2003 system will need to be enabled with that niche content and the information professional needs to guide their organization to other services.
Positive industry reactions to the Factiva - Microsoft deal have said that it constitutes market validation for the content industry. What is your response to that?
Yes, I think it also validates the point that quality information is not available for free on the Web. Microsoft is offering services to enterprise customers and individual information workers, that enable them to get quick and easy access to a collection of high-quality sources that are not available free on the web. Microsoft is saying essentially, "We recognise quality and we are incorporating a quality service into our content set."
Recently in the USA, the anti-monopoly laws regarding the ownership of public broadcasting and media companies were relaxed. What repercussions do you think this will have for the dissemination of news and information?
I think information professionals' roles will expand as a result of the change in the regulatory environment around the ownership of media companies. It now becomes increasingly important for information professionals to educate their organization about the array of sources available so information workers have a 360-degree view on a subject, not a one-dimensional perspective.
So, what do you think can be done to encourage Internet users to access a wide and varied scope of news and information, in view of the growing dominance of powerful cross-media companies?
You need a balanced view. Information professionals have a reputation for knowing sources so that people get the complete view on a particular industry, political, or economic issue.
Recently you have been changing the Factiva business model, from being a straight content delivery company into selling more Knowledge Management (KM) tools and technology, and offering consultancy. Do you think this is a sustainable model? There seems to be a demand now for integrated KM products for Intranets but for how long?
I think the world of simply selling and delivering articles thorough a destination product like Factiva.com is definitely a secure business. It's going to grow. There is no question about it. But it is going to grow at a slower pace than expansion businesses like knowledge management solutions - where you are bringing together internal and external content and utilising great new technologies.
We're acknowledging the cultural changes that are going on in organisations so that people can keep up with the fast-paced, real-time business environment. All of that requires taking external content and co-mingling it with internal content then integrating it into meaningful workflow applications and environments that help people get access to the right information. I believe if we limit ourselves to just selling content, we will not serve our customers and will therefore be marginalised.
We also have a rich history of taxonomy services both from DJI and from RBB. Customers are willing to pay for taxonomy services. They're buying our taxonomies. We also have a lot of experience organising and normalising content. Customers want to take advantage of that too. So, a lot of what we have done isn't because we sit in our offices in Princeton and London and say "wouldn't it be great" but rather it is because our customers say "can you help us with this?". We then realize, "yes there is a business here." We talk to other customers and, yes, people are struggling with taxonomy building, maintenance, and content integration. Factiva has been doing this for 20 years so of course we have the expertise to build a business around helping customers solve their content management problems.
In a recent survey of business information professionals and librarians in Europe by IRN Research, the single most important criterion in the choice of online service was the range and relevance of its content. Even ahead of pricing. As you move more into KM consulting, how can you reassure your traditional content customers that you will continue to strive to be the market leader in the breadth of global sources?
That's a great question. I have said it repeatedly, there is no question, content is at the core of what we do. But I firmly believe that content at the centre must be surrounded by technology and services in order to make it meaningful. The volume of content is growing at such a pace, that the real challenge is to figure out how to make it meaningful for the given knowledge worker.
Factiva has nearly 20 people globally who are responsible for relationships with our publishers. They make sure we have the most timely delivery and complete collection of news sources from around the world. We prefer not to deliver abstracts, or selected articles, but instead complete sources, cover to cover. That isn't going to change; it remains an investment area for Factiva. We will also continue to invest in vertical taxonomies so that we can organise key vertical content even better than we do today. We have made key investments in source processing. Everyone can see Factiva.com and we talk a lot about the Factiva platform, which is great, but behind the scenes over the last 18 months we have also been building something that might not appear as glamorous - a new source processing system. This is a replacement product for the RBB and DJI source processing systems. It's a rich application, again built on industry standards.
You said in a recent interview with the Competitive Intelligence Centre that customer intelligence is more important than competitor intelligence - can you expand on this?
My view is the intelligence group within an organisation centres around competitive intelligence, market intelligence, and business intelligence. You must have all three. Yes, you need to know what your competitors are doing and what is going on in your market and adjacent markets, but you must have that business intelligence that tells you if buying habits are changing it can potentially have a greater impact on an organization than a competitor announcing a new product or an emerging technology. Customers may be laying off people or all of a sudden decide that something isn't a priority - or that there is a disruptive technology that they learn about that we haven't learnt about. Changes in customer attitudes and perceptions have significant impact on business.
To pick up on customer service and communication. How much internal communication from Factiva customer services up reaches you? How is that done?
Well, it absolutely comes to the top - it absolutely comes to me. Factiva is committed to reviewing and acting quickly on feedback from customers. We encourage every customer to submit feedback directly to us from our product - there is a feedback button. This information is aggregated and presented to Factiva management where customer issues and suggestions are reviewed and very often result in changes to our products or services. The Factiva Membership Circle(SM) is a great example of change that was driven by customer desire for Web access to certain types of support - rather than phone.
So what about customer intelligence from Internet listservs? To take one example, there has been some discussion recently on the Solo Librarians list. They are saying that the Pay As You Go system is unworkable for smaller and one person libraries to administer. That is Pay As You Go service using credit cards rather than by monthly invoice. Where you aware of that?
There is a person within Factiva who watches the lists and sends me a report of what the general sentiment is. Of course I saw the recent difficulties with the solo librarians. When I was reviewing the feedback, two people in particular were unhappy with our Individual Subscription offering and credit card billing - one from a large insurance company and another from a research company. Both of who are in Factiva's target audience. So, I first asked our sales team - why is this such a small account? It doesn't make sense to me that they wouldn't be spending at least $500 a month on quality business information. That was the real issue, not credit card billing.
Your core business is large global multinationals with multi-site licences. How do you respond to those who say that Factiva is effectively sending out a message to smaller libraries that you do not want their business?
I think any business person understands the changes that we made to our business model last November. We talked to all of our customers about this at Factiva Forum so there were no surprises for those who were there. We put a press release out about the launch of Factiva's Membership Circle. We re-structured our business so that we can take better care of all of our customers. Individual self-service customers are important to us, as are our large corporate clients and enterprise business-to-business clients. We are taking care of them all through our direct sales organisation, our customer development centres and through Factiva's Membership Circle.
Some information professionals that I have talked to have said that there is sometimes a disconnect between the customer sales representatives and the users within the library community. Are there any plans to hire sales people with an MLS (library/information) qualification or who are more knowledgeable about corporate libraries and their needs?
Well, we have several MLS professionals on the sales team. We have a number of MLS professionals in customer service and in marketing as well. I do not believe we could effectively sell or market our products and services or support information professionals without them on our staff as well.
Regarding Library and Information Management courses. Do you think Universities are turning out people with the right information management skills, critical to the future?
I think the library schools have to do a couple of things. First, they have to make sure that information professionals are technology savvy, because the technology will inevitably play a role in their career. You're not in information, without technology - they are inextricably linked. They have to teach them management skills such as working in cross-functional teams. You are not a separate entity if you are going into a larger organisation. It's about working as a team and it's about leadership. Don't be afraid to manage and take on new roles.
The Outsell Inc. survey on the Changing Roles of Content Deployment Functions, launched at this conference, finds that one of the most important changes is the increasing impact of Globalisation and the impact on delivery of corporate information. What is your reaction to that?
You're ahead of me. It is on my pile of things to read! But I am very pleased that globalisation has come out as a key issue. It is crucial.
Do you think the area of information governance after scandals like Worldcom and ENRON will mean that there is a real KM opportunity for information professionals in terms of information governance?
What is so amazing to me is the number of Factiva customers who see their role expanding as a result of the Government's requirements for information. They are now in a place where they are truly linking their role in the organisation to the needs of the business. I think that is an incredible opportunity.
What is your vision of the online content industry and the information professional? What will the typical online customer look like in 5 or 10 years time?
I definitely see a very clear opportunity for information professionals. It is not only owning the responsibility for external content, but taking ownership of internal content as well. Helping your company really capitalise on the information access. It is a tremendous and exciting opportunity. That is what motivates me - those companies that really capitalise on making sure that people have the right information at the right time to make the right decisions. Organizations will remain ahead of the curve if they re-use information to drive efficiency, consistency and ultimately gain a solid competitive advantage.
…And which Companies do you think are doing this well now?
IBM is a great example, as is PriceWaterhouseCoopers. IBM talks about how they reduced the proposal preparation time of their consultants from 200 hours per year to 30, this results in considerable cost savings.
Do you use best practice and success stories a lot in marketing?
Yes we do because we still see a need to educate people about the value of information. In order to truly demonstrate value, you need to use real life experiences.
Can you name three technologies that you think will impact on the electronic delivery of news and information in the next 10 years?
I would say Directories, Web services and XML. To take just one of those, directories - in the future, a worker will walk into the office and based on what is in his or her calendar - and someday probably email as well - the rest of the given employee's view of information is going to be populated by the things that are critical to know. This will be based on whom the employee will meet with that day, and who is on his or her list of people to call. So the latest information about a key customer, executive changes in their organisation, news about their industry, how frequently has that customer called customer service, etc. And it will all be completely role-based. Today, we are just scratching the surface with customisation and personalisation. If we understand who each person in the organisation is, where they work, and what their job function is - or that they work in this industry or that sector - based on an employee directory that can be transferred to other applications - then we can personalize information for each individual.
So finally, in the midst of all this technology and in view of the huge range of sources delivered electronically, is the physical corporate library now an anachronism?
I don't think so. As a speaker at this conference said earlier today, there are more libraries in the world than McDonalds! I don't think that libraries are going away. They are just expanding and increasing their roles within the larger organization.
| 
