There are several studies that show that even highly popular, highly "democratic" sites like Digg are pretty much ruled by an oligarchy of moderators.

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/entry-4-are-the-digg-100-the-new-rupert-murdoch

There isn't really that much difference between the gatekeeper who hoards information... and the gatekeeper that "tags" information as relevant. In the end, you mostly just get the information they choose to let you have.

Information hoarding is not a good long-term strategy, because data wants to be free. Also, brokers have higher influence than hoarders, so the hoarders will eventually become less numerous. That's just the rules of evolution ;-)

However, those hoarders have a lot of useful organizational knowledge... if they could be "won over" instead of bypassed, then we'd have the optimal solution.

I believe you're confusing "broker" with "bottleneck" or "hoarder," similar to the first poster.

I'm perfectly capable of shopping around for my own insurance, but I prefer checking with a broker as well. Why? They are better connected, and have better tools to stay up-to-date. They know things I do not, even if all the information is freely available. It also frees up my time so I can do more important things.

I'm perfectly capable of shopping around for my own mortgage, but I prefer checking with a broker as well. Why? They are better connected, and have better tools to stay up-to-date. They know things I do not, even if all the information is freely available. It also frees up my time so I can do more important things.

I'm perfectly capable of... well, you get the picture.

Companies are already using brokers, whether they chose it or not. The broker is the well-connected person who navigates multiple information systems, talks to many people about what they are working on, and is the "go-to" guy for lots of random questions. They might not know the answer, but they probably know who knows the answer. Some do this out of natural curiosity, others do it to expand their influence, still others do it simply because they need broad access to recent data to do their jobs.

Like it or not, Billy... you -- like most folks in product management -- are an information broker. You blog, you wiki, you're all over social networks, you check-in reports and presentations, and you answer questions on email lists... and yet people still email you directly because they can't find stuff on their own. People are either lazy, or its just an extension of Calvin Mooers law:

An information retrieval system will tend not to be used whenever it is more painful and troublesome for a customer to have information than for him not to have it.

'tis your fate... I'm sure you'd love to be replaced by a computer so you can retire, but that's not in the cards ;-)

I disagree... the travel agent "broker" has not disappeared... simply changed.

The most mundane of travel agent tasks has been taken over by Expedia, Travelocity, and Orbitz... who do a good job getting you from point A to point B, and getting a hotel. But now the bar is raised. What hotels are any good? What shows should you see? What tours should you take? Can you rely on top listings in Expedia? Can you trust comments? Should you use TripAdvisor for reviews, and somebody else for purchasing tickets?

Nearly every hotel I've been to in the last 5 years had an on-site travel agent and/or concierge... so the industry is far from dead... its just more niche. Many companies still use them for business travelers, and many tourists still use them to find the "out of the way" adventures that aren't yet on the web. If Orbitz goes the way of Amazon -- allowing small partners to sell niche services through their interface -- I can see them coming back strong in that there "long tail" people keep talking about.

This is no different than innovation in any industry. Initially new technology is disruptive, and replaces people... such as how the sewing machine replaced tailors, and the printing press replaced scribes. However, the next leap in innovation occurs when humans learn to work with technology, to go after newer markets, and be more productive than technology alone. Tailors initially got fired... but the drop in the price of garments created a huge demand for clothes. Tailors who knew how to use sewing machines had more business than they could shake a stick at. Printing presses initially made scribes less useful... but cheap books created a huge demand for the printed word, and the printing industry exploded.

Probably the best recent example of this is the industrial base in China. Instead of single-purpose machines to spit out one piece of cheap plastic crap... they have a combination of multi-purpose machines and human labor. That way, they can spit out a great variety of cheap plastic crap, to keep up with demand. Its a lot cheaper to re-train a human, than re-program a computer. Ironically, in some well-managed and fast-changing industries, its not cost effective to train computers to keep up with humans...

When it comes to innovations in information technology, this rule still holds. I highly doubt the answer is better technology alone... nor will it be the "wisdom of crowds" alone. The truly influential will be those who use new technology, monitor crowd behavior for extra data, then add their own judgment.

Kurt R. Karst of Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C. (and co-chief blogger of FDALawBlog.net) will be speaking at two upcoming conferences on various Hatch-Waxman Act product lifecycle management issues.  The first conference is the Center for Business Intelligence's Premier Bio/Pharmaceutical Summit on Legal & Regulatory Product Lifecycle Strategies, January 20-21, 2009, at the Hilton Baltimore in Baltimore, Maryland.  Information on the conference is available here.  Conference sessions include:  For more information or to register for the conference, please contact the Center for Business Intelligence toll-free by phone at 1-800-817-8601 or via e-mail at cbireg@cbinet.com. The second conference is a Thompson Publishing Group audio conference, titled "New Drug Exclusivity Provisions: How They'll Impact Your Product Lifecycle Management," and will take place on January 13, 2009 from 1:00 PM – 2:30 PM.  Information on the audio conference is available here.  This conference will explore the "old" antibiotic and enantiomer exclusivity provisions recently added to the FDC Act, as well as recent issues concerning 180-day generic drug exclusivity and patent term extensions.