End user database
Description
A simple, searchable online database made up of structured records whose content is generated by the participants. The records normally contain personal information relating to a set of individuals. The database is self-perpetuating in that in order to access it, participants are usually made to submit their own information. Usually incorporates instant messaging capability for connecting participants based on a match.
Related Methods
Purpose
The purpose of this method is to ‘find’ others with matching needs or take control over your data. For example, matching interests in order to connect or trade. Participants benefit from being able to use a single touch point for identifying matches and are able to compare offers from a pool of potentially similar records. Improves the likelihood of success through pre-vetting.
Category
Do
Strengths
- Can offer anonymity while retaining high levels of personal detail and control over how these are shared (i.e. citizen held records).
- May include advanced testing to determine compatibility or matches between participants and records.
- Useful research tool, e.g. for determining average prices.
Weaknesses
- There is often a charge to access the database.
- Sometimes there can be a stigma associated with being on a private database (e.g. if participants are looking to date).
- Can soon become out of date and usefulness out of perspective if inactive records are not deleted.
Examples
| Name | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|
| Hot or Not | Dating website | http://hotornot.com/ |
| Match.com | Dating website | http://www.match.com |
| RightMove | Housing Database | http://www.rightmove.co.uk/ |
| eHarmony | Dating website | http://www.eharmony.co.uk |
Tools
| Name | Link |
|---|---|
| Google Health | http://www.google.com/intl/en-GB/health/about/ |
| People Match Me | http://www.peoplematch.me/ |
Profile
| Item | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| How important is it that you gain insight from your participants, such as statistical reports on participant demography etc? | Very important, ability to match records in the database is a key asset |
| How would you describe the resources you have available to this activity? | Free or minimal cost (it may cost money to access the database) |
| Should the activity have an emphasis on getting participants ideas and opinions to diverge, converge, or both? | Depends on the application |
| To what extent should participants take ownership of the activity? | Just between participants |
| How does the digital engagement activity need to integrate with other activity? | Web based methods |
| To what extent do you envisage your intervention in participation? | Irrelevant |
| How public should the engagement activity be? | A mix of private and open |
| At what stage of your overall project will this engagement activity relate? | Not applicable |
| How quickly are results required? | Time and empowerment irrelevant |
| How important is it to know the identity of the participants? | Good levels of trust needed to ensure that matching works well |
| On what lines are participants likely to be grouped? | Segmentation is by demographic or participant type |
| Are you hoping to engage a particular audience? | Can help seldom heard connect with likeminded people (e.g. if they have social problems). |
| How many people should the activity engage? | Requires mass participation to ensure that the database is comprehensive |