The first generation of connected objects was born in the early 2010s with the first connected bracelets.

The idea that the most everyday objects (resulting from previous industrial revolutions), such as household appliances, watches, glasses, toys, medical devices, sports accessories and clothes, would, with the addition of sensors and communication capabilities, be brought one by one into the digital age was obvious. Like the idea that the smartphone (and its avatar, the tablet) would become a kind of universal remote control, driving a myriad of devices and "dashboards".

Where are we now?

According to Médiamétrie and the Digital Economy Chair at Paris-Dauphine University, 20% of French people said in 2016 that they owned one or more connected objects, with the flagship product remaining the watch (9% of respondents).

The most contradictory figures circulate on the equipment of French people in connected objects: the scope of connected objects varies, indeed, from one institute to another. Beyond the equipment, it remains to understand the uses that are made of them, and beyond that, the way people appropriate them.

In quick succession, two reference studies have examined the development of connected objects in France.

• The first,Markets for Connected Objects for the General Public, is part of the interministerial Pipame foresight program and deals with the markets for connected objects for the general public. It was carried out by Idate at the request of the DGE, the Picom and the Ministry of Sports.
• The second, conducted by Wavestone on behalf of Caisse des Dépots, looks at the prospects of the Internet of Things from two perspectives: economic, but also societal and general interest: it sees the Internet of Things as " a response to rapidly changing social needs: travel and delivery, living and working, health care and better aging".

Connected objects are struggling to convince people of their usefulness

According to a survey of 2,000 people conducted as part of this study, connected objects are variously adopted by the French population.

• "Connected watches have the highest equipment rate (14% in 2016)."
• "The watch is the object that has seen the strongest increase in equipment over the past year, particularly due to significant media coverage."
• "If the level of knowledge is quite high (more than one French person out of two seems to know the majority of the objects of the panel), the level of equipment remains relatively limited whatever the object considered, all sectors taken together.
• "Proven plans for equipment remain low, between 1% and 9% depending on the object, particularly for the watch, thermostat and alarm."

The Iotics program analyzes the security and information level of connected objects

The technical analysis of connected objects is performed at two levels:

• the study of the material device in its immediate environment, with the opening of the objects in order to see, in the depth of their components, the security design.
• the analysis of its functionalities as a connected object: the observation of what it does and transmits. For this purpose, INRIA has developed a software placed directly inside the smartphones connected to the connected object, allowing the analysis of the application protocols and the study of the messages sent. Without opening the equipment, the data flows collected allow us to obtain a significant view of the personal data transmitted and thus understand what information is transmitted to which recipient, and under what security conditions.

Begun in 2017, the IoTics project will continue through 2020. The results will be published during 2019, once the legal and technical results have been cross-referenced.

• "The adoption of connected objects in the home remains confined to connected security services and energy management, for various reasons (lack of a real relevant service in particular)."  
• "The main obstacle to acquisition is the lack of attraction for connected objects, often interpreted by a lack of obvious services. Then comes the price, to a lesser extent.
• "Among the grievances retained by the general public are the price, the fears around the exploitation of personal data (and security) and the lack of immediate interest of these objects (which can be interpreted by a gadget aspect and by the absence of advanced services).
• "The interest generated by these objects seems to be conditioned by the development of advanced services likely to enrich their uses," conclude the authors of the study. "These elements, around the demand, suggest that the adoption of these objects will therefore be rather slow ...
• "Users' trust in the digital world and the provision of value-added services condition the growth of connected object markets according to several prospective scenarios."

• "Technophiles": this is the most advanced group in terms of equipment and purchase intention. They are more sensitive to technological innovation. They are more confident in the security of their data and are very positive about the widespread use of connected objects. Young people (under 24) and students are over-represented in this group.
• The "Followers": this is the group that follows the "Technophiles", with an above-average level of equipment and a rather positive image. They may be sensitive to the price of connected objects. They are rather young (but less than the previous group), rather in couple with children, CSP+.
• The "Reluctant" are not very well equipped, have few intentions to equip themselves, and have a rather negative image of connected objects, whose interest they do not understand. They are rather old (50 years and older).
• The "Opponents" have a negative image of connected objects, and very few intentions to equip them (no needs), with a particular sensitivity to data security. This is the oldest group (50 years and older), with more retired people and men.
• The "Unsure" are characterized by a lack of knowledge of connected objects, about which they often do not know how to express themselves. They tend to be older (50 years and over)".

An Internet of Things citizen?

After identifying the decisive factors for the development of new services (understanding user needs, mastering customer relations, ability to federate and orchestrate end-to-end services), the study suggests that the French Internet of Things sector should turn to an " Internet of Things citizen".

Connected object manufacturers are promising far too much...

It seems, observes Christine Balagué, " that manufacturers were a bit quick to believe that these revolutionary objects would make their fellow citizens dream. Result: some consumers have "adopted" them, but very few have "appropriated" them.

The author reminds us of the major difference between adoption and appropriation, " a difference that manufacturers are only beginning to discover ... A product or service is "adopted" by the consumer when he or she decides to try it, or to buy it. Appropriation, on the other hand, involves a longer process. It is effective when the individual has made the technology an object of his daily life.

Four steps before taking ownership of a connected health object

• "The first phase is symbolic appropriation. It happens either in the store shelf before the purchase, or the first time the individual sees the connected object - if it is a gift. Interactions are mainly sensory: they involve sight, touch and hearing. For some people, there is a "wow" effect: this reaction of the user expresses his astonishment or even his fascination towards an object perceived as "intelligent". In this phase, they project an imagined value onto the object and the related service.
• Then, the user can move on to the second stage, called "exploration". This is based on physical manipulation of the object to discover the device and its application; interactions that trigger a cognitive process in the user to understand how it works; and object-to-object interactions, where the object interacts with the cell phone to transfer the data collected and enable the application to provide the service. During this phase, usage allows the creation of real value in the eyes of the user.
• The third phase of appropriation will define the function of the object for its user. Each user uses the object for a specific function, among all those proposed, such as measuring his physical activity, his heart rate and his weight. This phase is accompanied by a co-production of value between the object and the user: it is the individual who defines and sets the function he or she wants to achieve. For example, a person who wants to build up his or her heart rate will decide to monitor his or her heart rate day by day.
• Finally, the last phase called "stabilization" is characterized by the fact that the user integrates the object in his daily practices. His interactions with the device become passive. For example, he wears a connected bracelet but forgets about it, while the object continuously collects data and automatically sends them to the mobile application on the user's smartphone. This phase also generates affective reactions that create a relational link between the individual and the object. During this phase, the perceived value of the object is "transformative", i.e. thanks to it, the individual has transformed his habits. For example, he now has the reflex to get off the subway two stations before his place of work in order to walk more, or he has stopped taking the elevator in order to prefer the stairs".