"Companies are making the same mistakes they made before the emergence of the Internet"

The popular notion seems to be that Europe is always waiting to see what the Americans will do. I would say, however, that the situation in Europe is actually quite different. It is not just American retailers that are innovating; the same thing is happening around the world. In e-commerce, though, we are faced with the problem that many of the large retail groups who began their on-line operations in the United States have found it very difficult to create the same types of companies in Europe. North America is a larger market, capable of accommodating a major company that operates only in the United States... In Europe you have to start in a national market and then expand internationally. This is why European businesses often have larger international divisions than their American counterparts, because they internationalise at an earlier stage. Firms in the United States, however, are larger, have better economies of scale, can offer better prices... So we can see that there are structural differences between the North-American and European cases. And if we look at the development of e-commerce in Europe, considerable differences are also found between individual countries. The United Kingdom, for example, has emulated the North-American model. The thing is, language plays a very important role, because when North-American companies need to internationalise they start in the UK, in the same way that Spanish companies look to South America. They are the natural destinations. But to get back to the question, while it is clear that e-commerce is working well in the United States, in Europe we are also developing m-commerce, and some countries in northern Europe are actually more sophisticated than America. In fact, only a short time ago some parts of the United States still had fairly primitive mobile technology, as the sector is organised at the local and regional levels. By contrast, countries like Sweden and Finland are so advanced that speaking by phone has almost become the most natural way of communicating. So there are a series of aspects that can't simply be put down to copying the United States - they are clearly European. We aren't right at the back, although even if we were it would not necessarily be a disadvantage. You can always copy the market leaders, and even improve on what they are doing! Exactly. If you look at what is happening in China, their copy of e-Bay is better than the original, which has not been very successful in the Chinese market. By contrast, companies like Taobao and Alibaba, which have copied the e-Bay model, are extremely successful because they have a much better understanding of Chinese customers. Yes, and if we take a look at Spain it is very interesting to see how mobile devices have been so widely taken up among young people. A series of generational changes are taking place. An entire market is growing around the culture of Spain's own youth, and this is very different to the situation in countries like Ireland or Bulgaria. M-commerce has grown from nothing in Spain in just five years, and France has introduced it in only ten... These are markets that have grown very quickly, in response to specific political and economic circumstances. Each country is treading its own path, and Spain is advancing at a particularly fast pace. Without question! I have kept it up to date as far as possible, but it is also very tempting to say that everything changes so quickly, that we need to constantly refresh our knowledge, that things fall behind the times... Some would argue that everything prior to the emergence of the Internet is no longer valid, that it's useless. But, ultimately, as consumers we are still behaving in the same way, only more quickly, because we have more options. We are still dealing with questions such as whether the consumer is happy, how much things are worth... So the rules that applied in the pre-Internet age continue to apply now. The scenario is new, but the rules of the game are the same. Admittedly, things are changing at a dramatic rate, and the publishing model would seem particularly susceptible to changes brought by the Internet as it is such a dynamic sector, but I should also point out that the English version of the book contains a section listing up-to-date digital materials. However, leaving aside specific examples and case studies, we need to think carefully about whether some of the frameworks of knowledge we have worked with for so many years are still relevant. Some remain valid, despite the many changes brought about by the Internet phenomenon. The web has made everything faster and perhaps removed the barriers to certain markets, but companies are continuing to make the same mistakes them made before the emergence of the Internet. So the old rules still have their importance. I tell my students that if they read an article from 1992 they will find that it deals with the same things we are discussing now. Certain things are cyclical. There are ideas that change, but others will constantly come back around. My book deals with a lot of these ideas, which continue to hold true even in the complex world of e-commerce. All of this needs to be explained to a highly pragmatic, results-focused audience, because the challenge for academics is to transmit the results of their work in a straightforward manner without over-simplifying. You are absolutely right, which is why we have to be totally clear when conducting academic research. When we carry out studies for companies we remind them that we are under the obligation to ensure that our work is transparent and that we reserve the right to publish our conclusions, even if the findings are not to their liking. For their part, the companies must sign to the effect that they will not attempt to prevent us from doing so. This is why we have an intellectual property agreement for our work with companies. In my 25-30 years as a researcher I can only remember three cases of companies saying to me: "Do you really have to say that?" My reply has always been the same: "Yes". The thing is, they want to sign contracts with the University of Oxford precisely because we are independent. They may not always like the results, but that is the price of our independence. So it is important to be clear about the fact that companies cannot exert an influence on our work. The difference now is that people are more comfortable talking about new technologies. Most of their questions are about mobile phones and social networks. In the case of Facebook and Twitter they are concerned about issues related to the commercial use of these tools, as they would prefer them to be for private use only. People also speak a lot about the right to privacy. That's true, but to young people none of this matters, because they are used to Facebook and Twitter. This is the difference between 'digital natives' and 'digital immigrants'. I consider myself very much an 'immigrant' and often ask my sixteen-year-old son about the latest apps and websites. I also ask him about what his friends are using. Companies are interested in knowing what's coming, as change occurs at an ever-increasing rate and this has repercussions for them. Companies can quickly go out of fashion, as can the companies they want to work with: Facebook, Google, Apple... Innovation is continuing to gather pace. It's crazy. Absolutely! It's an area in which more and more research is needed.