Big Data and Analytics already play a large role in successful
inventory management and is sure to play an even larger role in the future.
However, trouble is on the horizon. A growing number of proposed data
localization requirements in numerous countries threaten to limit companies’
access to customer data under the guise of protecting their citizens’ privacy.
Data localization requirements come in a variety of forms,
but, essentially, it’s mandating that private data belonging to citizens of a
certain country or group of countries stay within that country or group of
countries. These laws force companies to store private data on servers
physically located in the country and prohibit the transference of that data.[i]
This is one issue that I worked on over the summer while at the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, and it’s an issue that intensely worries many U.S. firms.
Analyzing big data, that is, large numbers of individual
customer transactions collected over long periods of time, has been key to the
success of numerous businesses. Tesco, a British supermarket and merchandise
store, for example, developed an analytics model that incorporates weather
patterns, the effectiveness of sales campaigns, and other factors to help save
the company $16 million a year through better inventory management.[ii]
Borders, my favorite bookstore, went out of business in 2011 simply because it
failed to make the transition into the information age like its rival, Barnes
& Noble.[iii]
Data localization requirements essentially prevent companies
from collecting data on its overseas customers; this makes analysis much more
difficult. In order to do any data analysis at all, they must build local data
centers, physically transfer analysts to a certain country and perform a rather
limited analysis that will not have as much value as a wider regional/global
analysis.[iv]
While agreements between countries may still permit cross-border exchange of
information, these agreements can come under attack for a variety of reasons.
One such framework already under attack is the U.S.-E.U.
Safe Harbor agreement. The E.U. has stringent privacy protection laws and does
not normally permit data of its citizens to be transferred outside of its
borders. Due to this agreement, U.S. companies that self-certify can bypass the
E.U. laws by adhering to a certain set of standards. Following the revelation
of NSA spying, however, numerous European lawmakers have called for the
suspension of Safe Harbor, which would hurt over 3,000 American companies
currently operating under the agreement.[v]
Given the importance of data to accurate forecasting and
better inventory management, it is crucial that U.S. policymakers keep in mind
this issue of data localization when conducting trade agreements with other
countries. While authoritarian countries like China and Russia seek greater
control over the internet, even Western countries like Canada, Australia and
the E.U. are passing more data localization laws which negatively impact global
commerce.[vi]
As more and more countries seek to protect privacy in the information age by
passing laws that stem the flow of information, will the promise of big data analytics
remain a pipe dream, or will more forward-looking legislators prevail and give
companies the tools they need to create a more efficient inventory management
system and with it a more profitable global economy?
[i]
Chander, A. & Ueyn, P. L. (2014). “Breaking the Web: Data Localization vs.
the Global Internet.” Emory Law Journal. UC Davis Legal
Studies Research Paper No. 378. April 2014. Retreived from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2407858.
[ii]
Master, N. “Tesco Improves Supply Chain with Big Data, Automated Data
Collection.” RFgen. April 17, 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.rfgen.com/blog/bid/285148/Tesco-Improves-Supply-Chain-with-Big-Data-Automated-Data-Collection.
[iii]
Sanders, N. “Big Data Driven Supply Chain Management: A Game Changer.” Financial Times. June 9, 2014. Retreived from: http://www.ftpress.com/articles/article.aspx?p=2218298.
[iv] Ibid. i.
[v]
Beerman, N. “A Broadened Crackdown on EU/U.S. Safe Harbor Violations.” The National Law Review. September 9, 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.natlawreview.com/article/broadened-crackdown-euus-safe-harbor-violations.
[vi] Ibid. i.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.