Archive for February, 2011
Thanks to Tweetsheep: http://twittersheep.com/
Not so coming as come. Lecture from mid-2008, aka pre Too Big To Fail.
What restricts a family’s capacity to navigate economic volatility are the large increases in necessary budget or recurring spending for:
Even though I’m loaded with gadgets: iPhone, iPod, iPad, mini Samsung projector, Apple TV, MacBook Pro, 23″ HD monitor, Jambox – and these are the items on my desk presently – I read the NY Times and scan the local paper every morning. News on a tablet or my iPad conveys information to me faster and allows me to compare the coverage of a story as I can easily explore what NPR or BBC or Reuters may say of the same event. I prefer the Times in the morning because of the visual juxtaposition of stories. I’m a comparer and a connector (ugh! labels), but it’s true. It’s the positive benefit of what my affliction was labeled in the 60s as “often can’t sit still.” Challenging to me is to connect thoughtfully the headlines and nature of the often shocking evidence of these reports. This morning the connections come easy.
IBM’s Watson computer wins the Jeopardy Challenge versus two human champions. There may be some W-2 life left in us yet as the mighty machine could not identify the name of the major Chicago Airport, you know, the busiest one in the world. Take that, Terminator! Concurrently, spontaneous and orchestrated protests occur in Bahrain, Yemen, Libya and even Iran as their unemployed youth and disenfranchised poor seek access to fundamental social opportunities.
Our soldiers in Afghanistan have actual real-time access to family and friends via Skype, Facebook, Twitter et al – note to self that the country is at war – while the Texas and the Wisconsin legislatures propose “Big Budget Cuts.” Well, gunner, what are we fighting for? And what are we heading home to at the end of this tour? might be legitimate questions from the soldiers. Or maybe they’re using social media to figure-out when the coast is clear to come home?!
We live in an amazing, dynamic and potent time. If you believe in the constructive value of Chaotic Friction, then you’re feeling pretty good right now. Doesn’t it feel like a raft ride down the rapids and maybe headed over a fall of some height? What should we yearn for? Control? Return to a past? Getting off the bus at the next stop? My preference is a collective sense that we’re all in this together and everywhere.
Apple: 5% marketshare for phones; 50% of profits.
Nokia: 40% marketshare for phones; 10% of profits – and declining.
I’ll remember this the next time that someone asks ‘where’s the business for this new technology? or What’s the ROI or How do we make money on this?’ Of course, fundamental questions and let’s not lose sight of the herd. And sometimes it’s a herd of lemmings. Sometimes not.
Graphic thanks to The Economist 10 Feb 2011 issue.
A comment from the recent on-line discussion regarding the adoption of Social Media by the enterprise. The Peter Principle prevails in that we get promoted because we work hard to learn and to apply new things, but when we get to the top of the totem pole, we tend to act as barriers to others doing the same. Being human is a hilarious endeavor. If you care who said this, I’ll tell you (email@example.com). 16 Feb update: Martha Johnson, boss of the General Services Administration. Brilliantly honest.
” Many agree here that having leaders involved in social technologies is important — but spotty. I have watched leaders tiptoe towards social technologies and have formed some opinions on what/why they are slow adopters. First, they don’t type fast. I kid you not. Second, they aren’t used to spontaneous conversation. They are conditioned to the leadership effect — meaning, small comments can make a big difference. So, they are careful. Which is hard to manage in the scrum of social media conversation. Third, time. Frankly, I don’t have a life, I have a schedule. That’s what top line leadership has to cope with. It makes every half hour on a site or sending messages very very precious. Fourth, they don’t quite recognize the answer to the question “why bother?” Leaders became leaders because they did things and exhibited various behaviors. It’s hard to believe in your soul that you should leave those behaviors and adopt new ones, especially when the old behaviors were so obviously rewarded. Five, sheepishness. Learning new things requires a little goofiness, awkwardness, practice, tutoring. How does that fit the image of powerful, decisive, responsible….
So, we need strategies for getting leaders through the knot hole — since we can’t wait until we all cycle through to retirement.”
I participated in a three day on-line discussion of Social Media and its value and rate of adoption for the enterprise. Ironic amidst the furor of government change in Egypt. Can there be any doubt of the power of such unstructured collaboration?! After all, Egypt started with Tunisia which was started by WikiLeaks. I found the audience of this Jam or on-line discussion to be divided in two broad categories: those who eagerly want the corporation to let go of control and to use these tools -as rudimentary as they are i.e. Twitter and Facebook and blogging- to permit employees, clients and partners to share what they know; and those who want to manipulate the tools to continue to control the message not realizing that it is too late for this. And like Egypt with the downfall of Mubarak, social media and its principle of ‘everyone knows’ moving beyond ‘knowledge is power’ has to be deployed or evolve in an reliable, safe way without depriving the capabilities of the individual. Trust and accountability on both sides of the aisle, government and citizen, employer and employee are the boundaries of this constructive chaos.