This is part 2 of "Is "Access" Really the Right Word for Collaborative Consumption?"
Part 1 can be found here http://www.builtinchicago.org/blog/access-really-right-word-collaborative-consumption-pt-1
The Access Spectrum
There exists a natural “access spectrum” and different points on this spectrum carry different rights and corresponding obligations. On the one end of the spectrum is traditional ownership. In the middle is access. And on the other end of the spectrum is what I’m going to call “leverage.”
Ownership
We own some things outright and therefore enjoy unlimited, unencumbered access to these things and we have a right to do whatever we want with them, whenever we want. Our corresponding obligation is to pay for the thing, store it, care for and maintain it, keep track of it, and move it when necessary. The examples here are the punch bowl that we own, the movies that we store and pay for in whole, or our documents taking up hard drive space.
Access
This is the popular place on the spectrum that’s been getting so much attention in recent times. With access, we don’t own the thing, but have access to it. However, our right to access the thing is determined by the owner and may be well less than the unlimited access we enjoy when we own something. But our corresponding obligation is much much less. Basically, the only thing we have to do is not break the thing while we’re using it. Few or none of the burdens of ownership befall the person who only accesses the thing. Here, we are referring to streaming via a mechanism like Netflix, borrowing an item temporarily, or viewing a document on DropBox (but not editing that document).
Leverage
This is a concept that has not really been explored or defined with the same thorough analysis as access. In fact, whether or not it belongs in a discussion about collaborative consumption is debatable. But I think it does. So there. When I say leverage, I mean the aforementioned ability to derive utility from yet one more degree of separation further than access. Leverage is being able to derive utility from something without even being able to access it. Leverage is a bit more abstract and a bit more conceptual; therefore slightly harder to apply to tangible things. It’s somewhat more straightforward to consider in a financial setting. Let’s say, theoretically, that you’re a startup founder and you’ve had some success in recent years. Being a founder of a successful company that’s presumably received some outside funding, you very likely hold a large, illiquid stake in your company worth, let’s say, a few million dollars. This is a perfect instance of something you CANNOT easily access. There are, say, $3M in assets you own, in your name, but it’s not like you can pull $3M cash out of the bank tomorrow. You have no access. However, you can still derive utility by borrowing cash secured against the value of your holdings. You can leverage that dormant holding and use it to get cash in hand. Thus, without having any access, and only through the existence of those shares in the world, you can affect change to your current state to include $2M in cash, in addition to the $3M in illiquid stock, and in doing so, utilize something to which you have no access.
[ibimage==24277==Original==none==self==null]
Ultimately, “access” is an important term and is completely appropriate in the world of collaborative consumption. I am not suggesting that we all go around saying “derive utility” in the place of “access.” Instead, I am explaining that it might be a good idea to acknowledge that when we say “access” we really mean “derive utility.” As the world progresses, words evolve and take on the appropriate meaning for the current generation. Right now, access still literally involves tangibility. One day, though, access might actually be defined as an intangible experience.
______________________________________________________________________________
Gint Rudis is an entrepreneur and co-founder of Chicago-based Spare to Share www.sparetoshare.com a collaborative consumption platform that provides for sharing, renting, and selling of items and other goods with closed, known networks. Prior to entrepreneuring, Gint worked in finance and management consulting. Gint holds a BS in engineering from Vanderbilt University and regularly regrets having graduated in 4 years.
