CTO Blog

Wave! You are live and online!

There only seems to be one point of consensus regarding Google Wave at the moment, which is: it’s different! The reason is that it’s supposed to be, but while I understand the logic for its development, it’s hard to rate it when your mind is struggling to relate it to what you already know. One blogger wrote: ‘I changed my definition of Google Wave three times in thirty minutes’ and he was at a Googleplex being given a personal demonstration! Google’s positioning is: ‘what would email look like if we set out to invent it today?’ Incidentally, the name ‘Wave’ is supposed to refer to people communicating with each other and creating a wave travelling around a community.

In other places I’ve seen the headline ‘Google threatens Microsoft SharePoint with cloud collaboration’ which suggests Wave is ‘just another’ ‘online’ collaboration package. I’ve also seen statements suggesting it is ‘Twitter on steroids’. All of these comments relate to an old way of product comparison, based around features and functions. Pushing aside my preconceptions, my starting point is somewhat different. From my perspective, Wave relates to changing working practices and the need for tools to support new ways of working which in turn are being driven by new trading conditions. Of course there is also a personal lifestyle scenario to it; hence the link to Twitter, but this is a business blog so I will stay with the business use scenario.

New Game Changers for the Internet; Opinions differ on value!

A few weeks back, my normal channels of information were full of news about a revolutionary new web software that was, and I quote; ‘An invention that could change the Internet for ever’. If you haven’t heard, Wolfram|Alpha (and yes the troublesome vertical bar is in the name, but fortunately not in the url – www.wolframalpha.com), is the revolution. The description from the site of its ‘goals’ or capabilities is pretty formidable:

Wolfram|Alpha's long-term goal is to make all systematic knowledge immediately computable and accessible to everyone. We aim to collect and curate all objective data; implement every known model, method, and algorithm; and make it possible to compute whatever can be computed about anything. Our goal is to build on the achievements of science and other systematizations of knowledge to provide a single source that can be relied on by everyone for definitive answers to factual queries. Wolfram|Alpha aims to bring expert-level knowledge and capabilities to the broadest possible range of people—spanning all professions and education levels. Our goal is to accept completely free-form input, and to serve as a knowledge engine that generates powerful results and presents them with maximum clarity.

Do Turkeys vote for Slow IT?

Metaphors are dangerous. A talented thinker once even stated that “using a metaphor is like carrying water in a bucket with a hole in it; there is a limit to where it will take you”. But anyway, the link between my earlier pleas for a more careful approach to technology (‘Slow IT’) and Slow Food is stronger than just a metaphor.

After all, the Slow Food movement started in Italy as a reaction to a quickly degrading food culture in which more and more of the taste and experience was sacrificed on the holy altar of Agitated Speed. When a McDonalds restaurant was even opened at the Piazza Di Spagna in Rome, it was the last drop that made the cup run over (good metaphor, yes). Carlo Petrini founded the Slow Food movement and even made it to one of the Time Magazine 2004 heroes, just because he promotes the love for original food that is prepared and tasted with the time and attention it deserves.

Seems that the current approach to IT is ready for some tender loving care as well. Especially in this period of downturn, the anxiety for short-term patches may drive us in the arms of hasty solutions that only partially satisfy. Then they will leave the organisation hungrier and unhealthier than it ever was. Proper timing and focus can help us to rediscover what value we actually want to deliver through technology and what foundation we need to achieve that.

David Sprott, the well-respected founder of CBDI forum (“a think tank specializing in practices for SOA and architecture led software delivery and management”), recognises this too. He makes a good analysis of why doing things right – in Slow IT style – is necessary in an industry in which offshoring, agile development and Web 2.0 are promising, but all too often hysterically abused tools. He doubts however that organisations will be ready for Slow IT, as he sees many of them already ‘slowing down’ in terms of cutting budgets, reducing headcount and – in general – doing more with less. The emphasis is now on quick, effective results and advocating more ‘slow,’ he says, nowadays seems a bit like turkeys voting for Christmas.

The Internet of Things just got a little closer

I was recently asked by a journalist: ‘what exactly does the often-used phrase “the internet of things” mean to you?’ It was a good and sensible question, as we use a number of such terms as useful concepts to avoid being overly specific. My reply did not do me much credit. I said I saw the term as a convenient way to avoid having to specify the many different things rapidly becoming connected to the internet. It set me thinking.

The next trigger was the announcement in the Japanese press about NEC planning to reduce the price of its RFID tags to around 10% of the current cost. Seemingly, major advancements ‘in the field of semiconductor research’ will mean NEC can accept orders for 10,000 tags at $100 from July. The tags are supposedly compatible to all six global standards. This price breakthrough makes the use of RFID in areas such as retail supply chains much more viable.

The Washington Template

I just might be repeating myself a little bit. But clearly, the Obama administration is setting a worldwide example of how to change a business through technology 2009 style. It went through my mind again when preparing for a panel on Tech Transformation, next week at the Forbes CEO Forum in Scotland. You see, it is one thing to get inspired by new technologies and understand how they can radically change business models – which is more than ever relevant in this period of downturn. But actually execute on these ideas and bring the promise to life: that may be the tougher challenge of the two.

I think they are doing both in Washington and we should all watch and learn from the patterns that are unfolding.

Barack Obama himself, to start with, is an excellent role model for any CEO that wants to grasp the potential of technology to transform business. He is obviously technology-savvy (without being a geek) and shows how to apply information technology in a pragmatic way. Many would argue that he got elected because of his smart use of Web 2.0 to reach out to his potential voters and mobilise a community. And after becoming elected he is still actively using all Internet channels to stay in touch with that community. Already in his campaign, he referred to technology as one of the most important tools to address the phenomenal challenges that America – indeed a complex business - is facing. Healthcare, education, energy, R&D: in the plans of Obama, technology would provide the breakthroughs to make his country leading again.

And now he is executing on the vision. Together with an impressive team.

Secure ID – gets a work around with support from key vendors

A secure ID is one of the key underlying systems for most in-house IT systems, but as we move into a Web 2.0 world, does this go far enough? We really need a federated ID that is still secure for in-house systems, but also enables the IT department to contemplate Web 2.0-style interactions which are increasingly driving a lot of the new business value. Of course there is nothing new about this, but it’s a lot easier to describe the requirement than to deliver the solution. Everyone has some level of an ID solution already, and federation means getting lots of different people and enterprises to agree on a common interest being as important, if not more important than their own interests.

The wish list has been in place for some time now, as well as some of the basic ingredients to build on, so we are now in the boring but critical phase of real ‘nuts and bolts’ work. I assume it’s for this reason that the announcements of real success didn’t hit the headlines too far after the ‘sexy’ announcement that the problem was being address. So what and where have we got to now?

The Ideality of the Cloud

Genrich Altshuller, the father of systematic innovation, already concluded it more than 50 years ago: the best possible solution to a problem has all the benefits and none of the harm and costs of the original problem. This is what he calls the Ideal Final Result or Ideality. Altshuller should know. Or at least, he had plenty of time to think about it. Way back in the 50’s, he was a lieutenant at the patent department of the Caspian Sea Military Navy. This is where he developed the initial ideas for a revolutionary approach to innovation and problem solving. He was so enthusiastic about his findings that he wrote quite an open, blunt letter to Stalin, who was not particularly renowned for his flexibility or sense of humour. It took Stalin some time to think about it, but eventually Altshuller was banned to the Gulag Archipelago in Siberia.

A minor drawback indeed.

On the positive side of things Altshuller had all the time in the world to contemplate his approach. The rest is history and nowadays TRIZ (Теория решения изобретательских задач, well ok, Russian for ‘Systematic Innovation’) is one of the best known tools for anybody involved in innovation management. One of its key principles is that of Ideality. Applying it helps to overcome psychological inertia and find breakthrough solutions. This is done by focusing on the needed service, rather than on intervening problems or required resources.

Quite a useful approach when discussing the pros and cons of the cloud, so I found out this week when I was presenting a keynote at the very first Swedish cloud conference.

Situational Software - The ‘Killer Application’ for Enterprise 2.0?

Ever since the spreadsheet was identified as the ‘killer application’ that justified the purchase of PCs for business use, the search has been on for the next killer application. Nowhere has this been more true than in the case of the Internet and the Web. Personally I reckon if there ever was a killer app for business it was the browser, which justified having an Internet connection. For me, the term Killer Application implies that the new capability is so uniquely valuable that you’ll invest in other by-products you don’t really want, just to get the Killer Application. What follows are personal choices to make the most out of the platform you now own.

This explains why a constant series of new but individual web capabilities don’t justify the term. However, Apple lays claim to the term for its iPod and iPhone purchases which were needed to get access to the iTunes Store and its App Store. Email is also a good example. Was it the Killer Application that changed working practices, or was it the other way round? You can hardly have matrix working without the support email provides, yet you can argue that cheaper matrix working justifies the business case for email, as it’s a necessity, enabling capability across an enterprise to support its working practices.

Guest post on Sustainability by Colette Lewiner, Global Leader of Energy, Utilities & Chemicals, Capgemini

I think most people recognise the need for and are interested to know more about the topic of sustainability, and that interest goes beyond just a discussion or activities in the data centre. When i discovered that a colleague Colette Lewiner was right at the heart of this topic and had even written a document for government officials who will be meeting this week i felt that a guest blog by Colette would interest many people:

"This week the hotly debated topic of climate change will be discussed as key European policy makers come together in Copenhagen for the World Business Summit on Climate Change. The summit, attended by world leaders and energy experts including Ban Ki-moon, from the United Nations; Al Gore, former US Vice President; and Connie Hedegaard, Minister of Climate and Energy for Denmark, will aim to develop policy and innovative business models to drive a sustainable transformation of the economy and stimulate job creation alongside low-carbon solutions.

A recent Capgemini study (“Long-term sustainability orientations for businesses”) looks into this topic and measures how during the current economic downturn, many companies are focusing on short-term decisions in order to overcome day-to-day difficulties, particularly in regard to sustainable development. However, it is important for businesses not to lose sight of the long-term impact of their decisions, especially because the present short term economic signals are not indicative of future challenges They should continue to invest in energy savings and in decreasing their CO2 footprint as well as in lower consuming products (as the Light Emitting Diodes to replace the incandescent bubbles). However,because of the presently low energy prices and of the lack of available project financing, the Return On Investment on these needed improvement projects is too long. This is why Government’s support to boost these investments in industry and tertiary businesses should be decided.

Where the work should be put? Time for Phase 2 in the Off Shore debate

Once again I read several things at once on the same topic, which caused me to think again and maybe to question circumstances. It could be the case that after reading the first piece, I started looking for more on the same topic, or is it that in this ‘online’ world, a first question creates a series of responses? Maybe I am just adding to it, but let’s see if I can add something new to an argument that started on cost, has become political, and even now gets used occasionally as a sales differentiator – as in ‘our call centres are all in your country and not someplace else in the world’.

The starting point was John Jordan in his excellent blog called ‘early indications’, which re-examined the case for offshoring work from the USA. He argued that the original case had been purely financial, but with time and scale it seemed that the original calculations were incomplete. John started with the base financial calculation, which assumes a savings of $400,000 per job, per year, and points out that for 3,000 workers, that means over $1 billion a year in cost savings – a point at which the case would seem to be irresistible to any hard pressed enterprise with active shareholders.

CIO Blogs
IT Blog Awards

About the authors

Wave! You are live and online!

New Game Changers for the Internet; Opinions differ on value!

Do Turkeys vote for Slow IT?

The Internet of Things just got a little closer

The Washington Template

Secure ID – gets a work around with support from key vendors

The Ideality of the Cloud

Situational Software - The ‘Killer Application’ for Enterprise 2.0?

Guest post on Sustainability by Colette Lewiner, Global Leader of Energy, Utilities & Chemicals, Capgemini

Where the work should be put? Time for Phase 2 in the Off Shore debate

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Navigate

Search the blog