While writing my last article an old adage came to mind, "build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door". That adage seems to be back in vogue when I look at the innovation coming through for business technology and the daily needs to stay connected. The other thought that came to mind was an old quote supposedly attributed to Charles Duell, commissioner of the US patent office in 1899, who said, "everything that can be invented has been invented".
So would he have been right if he had said that today? Maybe, for when was the last time you found something completely new to use? I wanted to use the iPad as an example but it was just a better mouse trap when compared to previous tablet PCs. Sure there is plenty of amazing stuff about and every day it gets more amazing but is any of it a brand new invention?
From consumer electronic extravaganzas like the Las Vegas conference to the latest motor show, through to home ware and building exhibitions we find advancements on products or reinventions to keep them top of mind for consumers. Everything we need today seems to exist and it's hard to remember the last time I was amazed at a new product that took the world by storm.
TV was around, along with the car, vacuum cleaners, HiFi equipment and a sundry of other every day products when I came into this world. I admit the last 50 years have been the most progressively productive for advancements of ideas but milestones today have more to do with innovation of a previous idea than a new product. Science fiction movies of today struggle to amaze us with a look into the future because it seems like it's all been invented already?
The Sony Walkman, the mobile phone, the MP3 player, the world wide web and of course the computer to take it all in, were all startling inventions but it's been a while between drinks. Is that because pencil thin 3D TV is just an extension of what we already have ( wow isn't that taking off, not ) or that going faster and broader through the Internet really ends up with access to more stuff we already have? They are just two examples of what people are passing off as new inventions today, when the reality skews more to innovation than invention.
The issue with all of the above is, I don't really know what I want invented. I haven't got a clue as to what I am missing in my life until someone with a brilliant new invention shows me what I'm missing. Like the MP3 player / iPod, which showed me I always wanted to carry around my entire music collection and then allowed me to do it in style. Like the computer which opened up the world via the WWW, true inventions become the milestones from which all others are measured.
So no matter what Mr Dyson does with the vacuum cleaner or what Mr Jobs does with the phone, they will only be building on the blocks of inventions that came before and building the better mouse trap.
Maybe I just need to be satisfied with progress via innovation because it sure is nice to have the latest models, so iPhone 4 move along, I see the next one over the horizon. That'll keep em happy for a while.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
UCD.
I wish I was a brilliant innovator, capable of coming up with the next "greatest thing". Not for any other reason than to feel the rush of walking down the street and looking in the window of a store that can't keep up with the orders for my next "greatest thing". Truth is that doesn't happen very often and the image of the lone innovator, charismatic as that image may be, turns out to be companies that use an old 80's phrase of UCD ( user centered design ) to come up with the next "greatest thing". Companies that have individual innovators come up with ideas and initiatives without customer insight don't tend to last the test of time.
It doesn't have to be the banal customer forums in a green room with one way mirrors but companies do need to build user empathy with their customers over the products they use. Either that or companies become very good at being end users of their own products. Consider ski and surf manufacturers who find their staff missing on big surf days or powder snow fall days, out using equipement they build for their customers. Even Mr Jobs is an end user of his products along with all his Apple acolytes who are then able to continually push the innovation envelope. Such companies end up as their own target market and are then able to use that to foster innovation from within.
Either way, the lone wolf innovator slash guru, intuitively coming up with the great "aha" moment has long made way for succinct user research, internal and external. The lone wolf example, too often resulted in products labeled with the "works as designed" label ending up in the discount bin because no one ever bought the product because it lacked relevance and usability for the end user without that all important research. The empathy gained from UCD, that companies build with their customers, becomes a powerful tool for innovation as they gain insight into what really drives emotional buying and engagement thinking in their customers. It's certainly not the two page questionaire asking for feedback. Tools that come from building that empathetic bridge with company customers gives real understanding of their needs which then gives rise to relevant products that stand the test of time.
This research will have companies walking the proverbial mile in their customer's shoes and really finding out if the shoes are as comfortable as they thought. Researchers for the truly innovative companies become different people through this process and find, without that change, any innovation is likely to be more guess than success. The companies that internalise the research and become end users of their products also end up the most successful. True user-centered innovators are available to any company that makes empathy a top priority.
If your company makes something or is looking for the next "greatest thing", consider the last time you set out to truly find what your customer wanted?
It doesn't have to be the banal customer forums in a green room with one way mirrors but companies do need to build user empathy with their customers over the products they use. Either that or companies become very good at being end users of their own products. Consider ski and surf manufacturers who find their staff missing on big surf days or powder snow fall days, out using equipement they build for their customers. Even Mr Jobs is an end user of his products along with all his Apple acolytes who are then able to continually push the innovation envelope. Such companies end up as their own target market and are then able to use that to foster innovation from within.
Either way, the lone wolf innovator slash guru, intuitively coming up with the great "aha" moment has long made way for succinct user research, internal and external. The lone wolf example, too often resulted in products labeled with the "works as designed" label ending up in the discount bin because no one ever bought the product because it lacked relevance and usability for the end user without that all important research. The empathy gained from UCD, that companies build with their customers, becomes a powerful tool for innovation as they gain insight into what really drives emotional buying and engagement thinking in their customers. It's certainly not the two page questionaire asking for feedback. Tools that come from building that empathetic bridge with company customers gives real understanding of their needs which then gives rise to relevant products that stand the test of time.
This research will have companies walking the proverbial mile in their customer's shoes and really finding out if the shoes are as comfortable as they thought. Researchers for the truly innovative companies become different people through this process and find, without that change, any innovation is likely to be more guess than success. The companies that internalise the research and become end users of their products also end up the most successful. True user-centered innovators are available to any company that makes empathy a top priority.
If your company makes something or is looking for the next "greatest thing", consider the last time you set out to truly find what your customer wanted?
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Cultural Fit.
When was the last time an employer offered you $2000.00 to quit after the initial training period? Sometimes you quickly figure out, if a company culture is not for you but you took the job and now you stick around hoping that things may get better. A $2000.00 incentive to not hang around and mess up the chemistry may make your decision to leave easier and help the company out at the same time. If a company culture does not fit how you do things and you can't see any change in your direction of thought, then the choice should be obvious.
Of course that doesn't happen very often and the choice for joining a new employer seldom has to do with the culture. It's about friends who may work there, it's closer to home, there is a pay increase, your'e desperate to leave your current job or a dozen other reasons that make sense in the short term. Long term tenure requires more thought than just the annual pay increase and cultural fit within the work place is becoming a major factor for people looking to achieve for one employer and not use a series of them as stepping stones.
The $2000.00 get out of jail, phew I nearly messed up, this is not my bag idea, comes from Tony Hsieh of Zappos shoes. Zappos sells shoes online, nothing extraodinary about that, except they do it better than any company on earth as witnessed when Amazon bought them for a billion a few years ago. From $70 million to $1 billion turnover in under a decade and more than 4 million pairs of shoes to choose from, sold by a sales team working in a call centre environment is the work place for employees who as a group would take the proverbial bullet for Hsieh. For most this environment would not engender thoughts of staff having the audacity to come to work and enjoy it. Yet that is exactly what Tony is offering thousands of people living the Zappos brand.
Culture as a competitive advantage is a by line for Zappos, along with company values of inspire, connect, educate and experience, showing they value their employees above profit and share value. Amazon does not interfere with the workings of Zappos because they bought a culture of success that not even they could emulate. Culture can be easily explained as the way things are done in the work environment but Tony Hsieh pushes that envelope further and believes the work place should also fulfill employee's aspirations and personal values.
What a great reason to come to work. In fact the "work" becomes secondary to your experience and no one yet has come up with a counter argument that happy workers don't equal profit. Zappos is the post child for employees looking for that opportunity to marry work and life and come away satisfied with both. It is achievable as Hsieh describes in his book " Delivering Happiness" so why are companies like Zappos so rare? It is only people, after all, working to create a place they love, just like home.
Do you have the audacity to change your culture at work?
Of course that doesn't happen very often and the choice for joining a new employer seldom has to do with the culture. It's about friends who may work there, it's closer to home, there is a pay increase, your'e desperate to leave your current job or a dozen other reasons that make sense in the short term. Long term tenure requires more thought than just the annual pay increase and cultural fit within the work place is becoming a major factor for people looking to achieve for one employer and not use a series of them as stepping stones.
The $2000.00 get out of jail, phew I nearly messed up, this is not my bag idea, comes from Tony Hsieh of Zappos shoes. Zappos sells shoes online, nothing extraodinary about that, except they do it better than any company on earth as witnessed when Amazon bought them for a billion a few years ago. From $70 million to $1 billion turnover in under a decade and more than 4 million pairs of shoes to choose from, sold by a sales team working in a call centre environment is the work place for employees who as a group would take the proverbial bullet for Hsieh. For most this environment would not engender thoughts of staff having the audacity to come to work and enjoy it. Yet that is exactly what Tony is offering thousands of people living the Zappos brand.
Culture as a competitive advantage is a by line for Zappos, along with company values of inspire, connect, educate and experience, showing they value their employees above profit and share value. Amazon does not interfere with the workings of Zappos because they bought a culture of success that not even they could emulate. Culture can be easily explained as the way things are done in the work environment but Tony Hsieh pushes that envelope further and believes the work place should also fulfill employee's aspirations and personal values.
What a great reason to come to work. In fact the "work" becomes secondary to your experience and no one yet has come up with a counter argument that happy workers don't equal profit. Zappos is the post child for employees looking for that opportunity to marry work and life and come away satisfied with both. It is achievable as Hsieh describes in his book " Delivering Happiness" so why are companies like Zappos so rare? It is only people, after all, working to create a place they love, just like home.
Do you have the audacity to change your culture at work?
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
PC, History?
The Monkees were a successfully compiled musical group that played on our TV for a couple of years and sold millions of records ( vinyl ) and for about 2 seconds were supposed to be the second coming of the Beatles. Mike Nesmith the quiet one of the group ala George Harrison, was talented but didn't need the money because his mother had invented Tippex ( whiteout ) for typewriter corrections. It was a gooey white material secretaries used to cover up spelling mistakes made on their typewriters which were closer to stone tablets when compared to today's technology.
I give you these fascinating facts as a segue leading to comments made by Mark Dean from IBM indicating the PC will soon be obsolete. Mark Dean is a long term IBM employee who holds three of the nine patents on the original PC, so he has the history and the credibility to hold forth on such comments.
Just as Steve Jobs made comments about being in a post PC world and how much tablets will take from the PCs, Dean's thoughts push that thinking even further. Most analysts would consider the market close to saturation and PC makers are having a hard time convincing consumers to buy other than on price. So where are we heading?
According to Dean it's mobile all the way and the smart phone will be the choice for everything we do on the PC now and more. The speed of acceptance, growth and usability of the smart phone has been higher than the PC and people will live their lives through these hand held devices. Everything from credit cards, drives licences, pictures, music, medical records and more will be held on these phones and all transactions you do on a daily basis will flow through them. Sure there will still be some PCs just as there are still typewriters in museums and curio shops.
One of the big advantages phones have over the PC is the ubiquitous nature of the device in that anyone can now afford one, even in developing countries like India and China, where even the new tablet war hasn't made a dent. The iPad and it's many competitors are seen as go betweens or transitions of the PC to the phone but you can't carry them around as easy as a technological wallet housing all your documents, transacting as you go with whatever the electronic currency of the future will be. Dean is convinced we won't be carrying around wallets in 5 to 7 years time. The phone is already the focal point of social media with everyone under 30, barely looking at a PC, unless it is in the workplace, so Dean's predictions don't need much more of a push to see the end of the PC.
If you take this to the Nth degree it will affect men's fashions as back pockets for wallets will no longer be required as the smart phone will house everything you now carry around in that wallet including the few dollars for drinks with your mates. May have to look at some more glute exercises now that I can't hide behind that wallet in my back pocket.
I give you these fascinating facts as a segue leading to comments made by Mark Dean from IBM indicating the PC will soon be obsolete. Mark Dean is a long term IBM employee who holds three of the nine patents on the original PC, so he has the history and the credibility to hold forth on such comments.
Just as Steve Jobs made comments about being in a post PC world and how much tablets will take from the PCs, Dean's thoughts push that thinking even further. Most analysts would consider the market close to saturation and PC makers are having a hard time convincing consumers to buy other than on price. So where are we heading?
According to Dean it's mobile all the way and the smart phone will be the choice for everything we do on the PC now and more. The speed of acceptance, growth and usability of the smart phone has been higher than the PC and people will live their lives through these hand held devices. Everything from credit cards, drives licences, pictures, music, medical records and more will be held on these phones and all transactions you do on a daily basis will flow through them. Sure there will still be some PCs just as there are still typewriters in museums and curio shops.
One of the big advantages phones have over the PC is the ubiquitous nature of the device in that anyone can now afford one, even in developing countries like India and China, where even the new tablet war hasn't made a dent. The iPad and it's many competitors are seen as go betweens or transitions of the PC to the phone but you can't carry them around as easy as a technological wallet housing all your documents, transacting as you go with whatever the electronic currency of the future will be. Dean is convinced we won't be carrying around wallets in 5 to 7 years time. The phone is already the focal point of social media with everyone under 30, barely looking at a PC, unless it is in the workplace, so Dean's predictions don't need much more of a push to see the end of the PC.
If you take this to the Nth degree it will affect men's fashions as back pockets for wallets will no longer be required as the smart phone will house everything you now carry around in that wallet including the few dollars for drinks with your mates. May have to look at some more glute exercises now that I can't hide behind that wallet in my back pocket.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Air Bags.
Everyone jumps into cabs with no real thoughts of safety especially as the journey is often quite short. Yet it is something we should consider with any vehicle we travel in, especially cabs and rental cars. We have that egalitarian attitude in Australia to jump into the front seat of a cab, chat with the driver, casually watch where we are driving and pay at the other end. Statistics tell us that accident survival rates in a cab are 94% in the back seat, 87% for the driver but only 25% for the front passenger seat, time to get in the back. If we looked even closer at a lot of the cabs we get into and ask ourselves a couple of questions, we might bring up some more doubts on the safety of the vehicles. I wouldn't buy a lot of the taxis I've been in for the family car because they certainly look like they have done the hard miles and I don't really know what it's like under the bonnet and if the brakes have been looked at recently.
The skills of the taxi driver are another issue altogether and I think we put way too much trust in people we have never met to deliver us safely to our destinations. I don't think anyone would argue that service, knowledge and the general upkeep levels of cabs has dropped in the past decade, so add that to an aging fleet and there are enough question marks to why you would get into the crummy ones in the first place?
While we don't think much about getting into cabs we do invest some more time when we decide to rent a car for business or leisure. As a general rule we start at the bottom rung regarding prices and get what we pay for. If you asked most people would they buy the car they are renting, they would tell you no and that the family car requires much more thought in regards to safety and performance.
To pick a rental on size, convenience and price makes no sense compared to what you drive around in normally. In the US where there have been recalls of cars from large brands like Toyota to GM, rental car companies have had to satisfy consumer and advocate group concerns by fulfilling federal safety obligations and making sure drivers are aware of a car's safety features. Like everything in the US some of the new rental car safety obligations came about after disastrous accidents and subsequent legal verdicts.
One such legal outcome was from a $15 million verdict against Enterprise Rent A Car, following the deaths of sisters in a PT Cruiser which had been recalled but not repaired properly, causing it to catch on fire, creating a loss in steering and a fatal head on with a semi trailer.
So while you agonise over the next car purchase and read all about the airbags and impact safety features, think also about the next cab or rental car you may be travelling in and decide what's more important, a $5 dollar a day saving on the rental car or taking the first cab that comes along. I'll be thinking about that from the back seat of a Silver Service cab or on my next driving holiday in my steel plated Hummer.
The skills of the taxi driver are another issue altogether and I think we put way too much trust in people we have never met to deliver us safely to our destinations. I don't think anyone would argue that service, knowledge and the general upkeep levels of cabs has dropped in the past decade, so add that to an aging fleet and there are enough question marks to why you would get into the crummy ones in the first place?
While we don't think much about getting into cabs we do invest some more time when we decide to rent a car for business or leisure. As a general rule we start at the bottom rung regarding prices and get what we pay for. If you asked most people would they buy the car they are renting, they would tell you no and that the family car requires much more thought in regards to safety and performance.
To pick a rental on size, convenience and price makes no sense compared to what you drive around in normally. In the US where there have been recalls of cars from large brands like Toyota to GM, rental car companies have had to satisfy consumer and advocate group concerns by fulfilling federal safety obligations and making sure drivers are aware of a car's safety features. Like everything in the US some of the new rental car safety obligations came about after disastrous accidents and subsequent legal verdicts.
One such legal outcome was from a $15 million verdict against Enterprise Rent A Car, following the deaths of sisters in a PT Cruiser which had been recalled but not repaired properly, causing it to catch on fire, creating a loss in steering and a fatal head on with a semi trailer.
So while you agonise over the next car purchase and read all about the airbags and impact safety features, think also about the next cab or rental car you may be travelling in and decide what's more important, a $5 dollar a day saving on the rental car or taking the first cab that comes along. I'll be thinking about that from the back seat of a Silver Service cab or on my next driving holiday in my steel plated Hummer.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Life's Playlist.
A recent download of a new app ( Zite ) got me thinking about personalising my life. Zite is a magazine style app from Canada that personalises my reading material. Like the secretly guarded Amazon, Netflix, Google and my favourite Apple genius algorithms on intuitive additions and recommendations to your online experience, Zite figures out what I want to read from what I am now reading, what I suggest, what have read and what I might like to read in the future. On the other hand you have great reading aggregators like Flipboard, of which I am a fan, which compiles my news sources, putting them all together on the kitchen table so to speak, for me to browse whenever I have the time. Personalisation differs from aggregation in that it is more than just piling your favourite newspapers together, it is giving you one newspaper where you want to read every article because each has been written on an interest you have and topics that engage you.
So I'm thinking that I need an app I can put all of life's decisions into and it will decide and recommend life's directions, finance, entertainment and people options. Stay with me on this one.
So I have very dear and close friends and I'm thinking I could probably use some more, after all who doesn't need more friends. So feed them into the software and it suggests people to me that fit within those friend parametres that have taken many years to develop. If you like John or Mary then you will like Michael and Sue, so similar to the way Amazon has picked out some great books based on my past buying history, so I could find more friends via the personalisation algorithm. Takes the work out of all that first meeting, catching up at the next BBQ, then coffees, meeting their friends and on and on till you get to know them and like them and finally become friends, sometimes taking years.
Sounds a bit like RSVP but you could use the algorithm for anything in your life that you enjoy, have had success with and care about. When looking for that next house to buy, another coffee shop that will treat you like family, your favourite TV shows onto the best holiday you ever had, all continually personalised. Imagine watching just one TV channel that houses all of your favourite shows, watchable when you want, watch out Foxtel. You could get granular and take it down to your favourite cheese, your favourite pair of shoes or your favourite ice cream which could all be part of the "genius" algorithm to find those items and others like them to take the concern out of finishing that last cheese slice and wondering if you can get anything like that again. All of life's decisions big and small could be personalised and replicated so that you no long have to worry about whether you have to worry at all, about decisions on anything.
With this abounding satisfaction in always finding something to match your last favourite item, will we become slightly vanilla in our attitudes, emotions and decisions? Will we have no highs because there are no lows to benchmark against? Will our lives become a giant Facebook with thumbs up everywhere? Will we always be smiling? Starting to sound a little like a science fiction movie now.
On second thoughts I might just leave the genius to choose songs and let my personalisation device work on the rest of my life. We've all got one, it's the best around, it's called a mind and from all my research I can't find anywhere that Apple has duplicated it and put it into a nice aluminium design case.
So I'm thinking that I need an app I can put all of life's decisions into and it will decide and recommend life's directions, finance, entertainment and people options. Stay with me on this one.
So I have very dear and close friends and I'm thinking I could probably use some more, after all who doesn't need more friends. So feed them into the software and it suggests people to me that fit within those friend parametres that have taken many years to develop. If you like John or Mary then you will like Michael and Sue, so similar to the way Amazon has picked out some great books based on my past buying history, so I could find more friends via the personalisation algorithm. Takes the work out of all that first meeting, catching up at the next BBQ, then coffees, meeting their friends and on and on till you get to know them and like them and finally become friends, sometimes taking years.
Sounds a bit like RSVP but you could use the algorithm for anything in your life that you enjoy, have had success with and care about. When looking for that next house to buy, another coffee shop that will treat you like family, your favourite TV shows onto the best holiday you ever had, all continually personalised. Imagine watching just one TV channel that houses all of your favourite shows, watchable when you want, watch out Foxtel. You could get granular and take it down to your favourite cheese, your favourite pair of shoes or your favourite ice cream which could all be part of the "genius" algorithm to find those items and others like them to take the concern out of finishing that last cheese slice and wondering if you can get anything like that again. All of life's decisions big and small could be personalised and replicated so that you no long have to worry about whether you have to worry at all, about decisions on anything.
With this abounding satisfaction in always finding something to match your last favourite item, will we become slightly vanilla in our attitudes, emotions and decisions? Will we have no highs because there are no lows to benchmark against? Will our lives become a giant Facebook with thumbs up everywhere? Will we always be smiling? Starting to sound a little like a science fiction movie now.
On second thoughts I might just leave the genius to choose songs and let my personalisation device work on the rest of my life. We've all got one, it's the best around, it's called a mind and from all my research I can't find anywhere that Apple has duplicated it and put it into a nice aluminium design case.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Freedom.
Business freedom comes in many forms but the most sought after nowadays, seems to be the Silicon Valley, campus style, chino wearing, one day off a week to yourself kind of freedom. Google became popular with the tech and innovation crowd when they decided to give their employees back 20% of their time to work on projects they were deeply passionate about, that may have not been in their normal work brief. It's lore now how Google Earth, Gmail, Google Maps and a myriad of groovy and funky ideas became reality from this percentage vision. All kinds of companies have tried to copy the process and integrate it into their work flow but for many it turned into the table tennis championship of the lunch room with no innovation or creative ideas bought forth for the company future.
It was thought that this free thinking platform was really only suited to the free wheeling, bean bag loving, frisbee throwing, no ties ever environment of the online and tech style companies.
Yet the 20% idea goes back 60 years before Google, 1948 in fact, and it's interesting that Google don't confirm or deny whether they were the first company to look at what many companies call "daydreaming time" or as HP call it, personal creative time . It was actually 15% and 3M were the first company to look at giving their employees time off to dream, innovate and create new products on company time.
Just like Google, 3M ( Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company ) had their epiphanous moments which continue to this day. We've all heard the Post it Notes story of Art Fry and his attempts to keep the page in his hymn book without dog earring the pages. Every year 3M employees get together over events based on ideas thought up in that 15% downtime from "real work" and present and look for feedback to see if they may not have the next Post it Notes. Examples to come from this event, such as clear bandages, light reflecting film, non bleeding painters tape and non blunting abrasives are all big sellers for 3M who have over 50,000 products and nearly 23,000 patents, many coming from the 15% time, giving them over $20 billion in revenue.
It all seems such a great idea with hindsight goggles on, but 60 years ago it was a brave move to take people out of production lines and give them room to think and most importantly the confidence to fail as they forged their "innovate or die" strategy. For employees past, present and future, freedom is a powerful motivator to stay with a company and also to join a company. What for many companies still feels like a "soft" benefit has become a business strategy for companies like 3M, HP and Google.
Masking and cellophane tape may have been the catalyst to turn the sandpaper company around but the company's focus on it's people and their creativity was to be the reason it has survived and prospered till now. Accepting levels of failure, hard to do for many companies, was the way 3M showed faith in its people and they have certainly recouped that trust.
With 60 years of success shown by 3M and employee choice Google enjoying the same fruits of success from staff freedom, how does your place stack up?
It was thought that this free thinking platform was really only suited to the free wheeling, bean bag loving, frisbee throwing, no ties ever environment of the online and tech style companies.
Yet the 20% idea goes back 60 years before Google, 1948 in fact, and it's interesting that Google don't confirm or deny whether they were the first company to look at what many companies call "daydreaming time" or as HP call it, personal creative time . It was actually 15% and 3M were the first company to look at giving their employees time off to dream, innovate and create new products on company time.
Just like Google, 3M ( Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company ) had their epiphanous moments which continue to this day. We've all heard the Post it Notes story of Art Fry and his attempts to keep the page in his hymn book without dog earring the pages. Every year 3M employees get together over events based on ideas thought up in that 15% downtime from "real work" and present and look for feedback to see if they may not have the next Post it Notes. Examples to come from this event, such as clear bandages, light reflecting film, non bleeding painters tape and non blunting abrasives are all big sellers for 3M who have over 50,000 products and nearly 23,000 patents, many coming from the 15% time, giving them over $20 billion in revenue.
It all seems such a great idea with hindsight goggles on, but 60 years ago it was a brave move to take people out of production lines and give them room to think and most importantly the confidence to fail as they forged their "innovate or die" strategy. For employees past, present and future, freedom is a powerful motivator to stay with a company and also to join a company. What for many companies still feels like a "soft" benefit has become a business strategy for companies like 3M, HP and Google.
Masking and cellophane tape may have been the catalyst to turn the sandpaper company around but the company's focus on it's people and their creativity was to be the reason it has survived and prospered till now. Accepting levels of failure, hard to do for many companies, was the way 3M showed faith in its people and they have certainly recouped that trust.
With 60 years of success shown by 3M and employee choice Google enjoying the same fruits of success from staff freedom, how does your place stack up?
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Why Do It?
I was recently asked how I find the time, ideas and motivation to write my blog every week and what was the hardest part? Without being blasé about the whole process my answer regarding the hardest part was certainly the first 100 blogs. I started out with a flurry of ideas and opinions that I wanted to write about and I burned through that list pretty quickly and then came to a screeching halt, thinking I was going to run out of ideas and it would all just be a "flash in the pan" idea.
With 100 in the rearview mirror I still have those thoughts but people, media and events continue to provide ideas and opinions. I do have to discipline myself to the decision of twice a week entries and to jot down ideas and thoughts for future blogs but it's a very personal discipline as I write for myself as much as for the couple of people ( thanks Mum ) who actually read my thoughts. I have never bothered to attach a Google analytics measurement to the blog, initially because it was too difficult to figure out how to put it into the system and in the end because I was writing for myself as much as anyone who wanted to listen, so the numbers don't really count.
I have no idea what my end objective for the blog is, other than to enjoy the writing experience, relate to the occasional comment on my thinking and that it makes me feel like I'm contributing to whatever this online community will eventually turn into. As with the analytics decision I don't plan to add any commercial context in the form of advertising or external commentary other than other bloggers I may admire ( consider Kurt Knackstedt, Seth Godin, Malcolm Gladwell, Tom Peters ). Any advertising I chose could lessen credibility about the things I write on, especially if it was inappropriate and people would see the blog as a revenue stream enabled by headline grabbing articles.
Many blog sites have specific niche targets, audiences and views to keep them highly opinionated, controversial and certainly attractive to advertisers but I would prefer to keep the mood lighter and upbeat while trying to engage in conversations rather than one way diatribes on what someone may consider the latest crisis. One of the big things I've learnt, while writing over the past year or so is to give people even more benefit of the doubt and not always believe what you read. Having been on the wrong side of incorrect tabloid news it's too easy to slant a message and as we all know, the net never forgets, so it is better to take the high road and take into account as many sides as required to stay on the straight.
I know a lot of blogging has been micro-ised and Facebooked with people preferring to say it with symbols or less than 140 characters but I believe there will always be people ready to read stories if they are written with honesty and feeling. I believe information and data in itself can be boring and hard to digest and remember, but when told in the context of a story it can become unforgettable.
So I'll continue to write as long as I enjoy it, have something to say without shouting and hopefully have some readers to take along with me. Thanks again Mum. See if you can't get Dad to have a read, could double my readership.
With 100 in the rearview mirror I still have those thoughts but people, media and events continue to provide ideas and opinions. I do have to discipline myself to the decision of twice a week entries and to jot down ideas and thoughts for future blogs but it's a very personal discipline as I write for myself as much as for the couple of people ( thanks Mum ) who actually read my thoughts. I have never bothered to attach a Google analytics measurement to the blog, initially because it was too difficult to figure out how to put it into the system and in the end because I was writing for myself as much as anyone who wanted to listen, so the numbers don't really count.
I have no idea what my end objective for the blog is, other than to enjoy the writing experience, relate to the occasional comment on my thinking and that it makes me feel like I'm contributing to whatever this online community will eventually turn into. As with the analytics decision I don't plan to add any commercial context in the form of advertising or external commentary other than other bloggers I may admire ( consider Kurt Knackstedt, Seth Godin, Malcolm Gladwell, Tom Peters ). Any advertising I chose could lessen credibility about the things I write on, especially if it was inappropriate and people would see the blog as a revenue stream enabled by headline grabbing articles.
Many blog sites have specific niche targets, audiences and views to keep them highly opinionated, controversial and certainly attractive to advertisers but I would prefer to keep the mood lighter and upbeat while trying to engage in conversations rather than one way diatribes on what someone may consider the latest crisis. One of the big things I've learnt, while writing over the past year or so is to give people even more benefit of the doubt and not always believe what you read. Having been on the wrong side of incorrect tabloid news it's too easy to slant a message and as we all know, the net never forgets, so it is better to take the high road and take into account as many sides as required to stay on the straight.
I know a lot of blogging has been micro-ised and Facebooked with people preferring to say it with symbols or less than 140 characters but I believe there will always be people ready to read stories if they are written with honesty and feeling. I believe information and data in itself can be boring and hard to digest and remember, but when told in the context of a story it can become unforgettable.
So I'll continue to write as long as I enjoy it, have something to say without shouting and hopefully have some readers to take along with me. Thanks again Mum. See if you can't get Dad to have a read, could double my readership.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
A Rose by Any .....
I'm glad my name is reasonably unique ( I know you can't be reasonably unique but you know what I mean ) and that I own an E mail with just my name and no numbers and symbols attached. I'm glad it can be used in whole for this blog and anything else I have encountered so far on the net. That isn't the case for many of my friends and colleagues who have had to use a combination of things and be creative in order to own their piece of the net. Sure Susie99@ and AdamG27@ at least have a semblance of who they are as they try to retain their true identity but many morph their names into unintelligible one liners their Mother would never recognise.
This shortage of name space on the net will not get any better as millions more decide to go online for emails, websites and blogs. For many areas it doesn't matter but if you are looking to advance your professional career, you need to consider perceptions of names when applying to your potential new employer. Being too creative will not get you past the gate if you are looking to get your CV any further than the spam can. Studies have found that unprofessional or offbeat names are rated lower by potential employers than real and professional names. With 90% of fortune 500 businesses having online application processes you need to reconsider that funky email address just like the tattoo you got from Mexico after 20 Coronas. No matter if everyone thinks of you as bigarsedaddy@ and you like the moniker, the perceptual ramifications will have you in the cyber trash bin without a reply.
All that said, there is the other side of the coin where people hide behind monikers so obtuse to enable them to comment and lay claim to opinions that they wouldn't proffer under their real name. Slambam@, slyfox@ and mnbv2355Z@ are all part of the ability to hide behind a screen of anonymity and then go forth and comment under a shroud of invisibility. So whether it's a creative moniker or a necessity because Joe Smith is taken and you weren't quick enough to grab that one early, people still need to consider where that name may take them and how it will be perceived. I know for sure that slutty69@big
Knockers is not going to engender credibility leaving comments on the CNN news blog or any such site looking for open and honest dialogue, along with a quick exit from the CV line.
People are looking for truth and the question often asked, what is your real name can lead to non replies or a mind your own business reply. For credibility, anonymity makes you a second class citizen if you have something worthwhile to say.
So to quote Mr Shakespeare be careful how you name that rose because you may not smell as sweet.
This shortage of name space on the net will not get any better as millions more decide to go online for emails, websites and blogs. For many areas it doesn't matter but if you are looking to advance your professional career, you need to consider perceptions of names when applying to your potential new employer. Being too creative will not get you past the gate if you are looking to get your CV any further than the spam can. Studies have found that unprofessional or offbeat names are rated lower by potential employers than real and professional names. With 90% of fortune 500 businesses having online application processes you need to reconsider that funky email address just like the tattoo you got from Mexico after 20 Coronas. No matter if everyone thinks of you as bigarsedaddy@ and you like the moniker, the perceptual ramifications will have you in the cyber trash bin without a reply.
All that said, there is the other side of the coin where people hide behind monikers so obtuse to enable them to comment and lay claim to opinions that they wouldn't proffer under their real name. Slambam@, slyfox@ and mnbv2355Z@ are all part of the ability to hide behind a screen of anonymity and then go forth and comment under a shroud of invisibility. So whether it's a creative moniker or a necessity because Joe Smith is taken and you weren't quick enough to grab that one early, people still need to consider where that name may take them and how it will be perceived. I know for sure that slutty69@big
Knockers is not going to engender credibility leaving comments on the CNN news blog or any such site looking for open and honest dialogue, along with a quick exit from the CV line.
People are looking for truth and the question often asked, what is your real name can lead to non replies or a mind your own business reply. For credibility, anonymity makes you a second class citizen if you have something worthwhile to say.
So to quote Mr Shakespeare be careful how you name that rose because you may not smell as sweet.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Is Anyone Listening?
Micro blogging sites such as Tumbir, Plurk, Twitter and PingGadget et al, are never out of the news as they have become self fulfilling prophesies or virtual circles of self promotion, the more messages, the more publicity. Sure the stars seem to have millions following their every utterance but then movie stars and celebrities have a fan base whether they tweet or not. What is more interesting is the need for everyday people looking for their own fans to listen to them who seem intent on collecting them as listeners or just statistics.
As Seth Godin so succinctly points out, it's not whether you have a 100,000 followers, it's whether anyone is listening to you? From a personal view it's surely more important to have a 1000 people listening to you than 100,000 not?
I get the instant news value and the sometimes successful marketing micro blogs by such companies as Zappos, Jetblue and Bestbuy and so does Facebook and Google who look at that avenue as a revenue stream in the making. Hence their current struggle to acquire Twitter.
What is more interesting to understand is the allure it has for Joe Citizen. Obviously the need to be heard is never going to wear off but who we hear from is another matter. So as mobile usage continues to grow, there seems a never ending supply of first time users looking for an audience. The soap boxes in Hyde Park come to mind and the perception of someone ranting on about their opinion is never far from the truth. Then of course there is the inanity found in the minutiae of daily life that so many seem to think important.
Just as there are only a few soap boxes, the statistics for Twitter show that only 21% of users are active on the site and that 22.5% of users are responsible for 90% of all tweets. Out of the top 20 global twitter sites, only two are inherently news worthy in Barack Obama at number 4 and CNN breaking news at number 20. All the rest pertain to the wardrobe allure of Lady Gaga at number 1 with over 8 million followers and the hairstyle aesthetics of Justin Bieber at number 2 with over 7.5 million followers, along with publicity highlights from celebrity luminaries Britney Spears number 3, Kim Kardashian number 5 and Ashton Kutcher at number 6. So from all of that, out of the 10 people following me on twitter only 2 are actually listening and one of those is my mother, so thank you to that one other person interested in my ramblings.
While celebrity chit chat can be noteworthy distractions from our daily lives is this showing the true value of micro blogging? Still it's hard to argue against the numbers and maybe we really do live our lives vicariously through 140 character celebrity news bytes. Yet sentiment seems to indicate the number of people listening drop off significantly after the first couple of tweets from their favourite celebrity, so where does that leave your Average Joe rabbitting on about the party he is attending tonight?
If no one is listening then why are Facebook and Google so intent on acquiring Twitter and its ilk? We come back to maths and the fact that there will always be a significant number on the phone and that not all information has to be relevant to all.
So if Facebook is successful in the acquisition of Twitter we can look forward to more Gaga'isms along with the tonsorial eloquence of the Bieber. Google may not be the best alternative for something like Twitter either, so my best case scenario would be for one of the global news conglomerates to acquire the appropriate micro blogging site and then we would really be up to date.
I look forward to that day, no matter how fascinating the Bieber's next hairstyle may be.
As Seth Godin so succinctly points out, it's not whether you have a 100,000 followers, it's whether anyone is listening to you? From a personal view it's surely more important to have a 1000 people listening to you than 100,000 not?
I get the instant news value and the sometimes successful marketing micro blogs by such companies as Zappos, Jetblue and Bestbuy and so does Facebook and Google who look at that avenue as a revenue stream in the making. Hence their current struggle to acquire Twitter.
What is more interesting to understand is the allure it has for Joe Citizen. Obviously the need to be heard is never going to wear off but who we hear from is another matter. So as mobile usage continues to grow, there seems a never ending supply of first time users looking for an audience. The soap boxes in Hyde Park come to mind and the perception of someone ranting on about their opinion is never far from the truth. Then of course there is the inanity found in the minutiae of daily life that so many seem to think important.
Just as there are only a few soap boxes, the statistics for Twitter show that only 21% of users are active on the site and that 22.5% of users are responsible for 90% of all tweets. Out of the top 20 global twitter sites, only two are inherently news worthy in Barack Obama at number 4 and CNN breaking news at number 20. All the rest pertain to the wardrobe allure of Lady Gaga at number 1 with over 8 million followers and the hairstyle aesthetics of Justin Bieber at number 2 with over 7.5 million followers, along with publicity highlights from celebrity luminaries Britney Spears number 3, Kim Kardashian number 5 and Ashton Kutcher at number 6. So from all of that, out of the 10 people following me on twitter only 2 are actually listening and one of those is my mother, so thank you to that one other person interested in my ramblings.
While celebrity chit chat can be noteworthy distractions from our daily lives is this showing the true value of micro blogging? Still it's hard to argue against the numbers and maybe we really do live our lives vicariously through 140 character celebrity news bytes. Yet sentiment seems to indicate the number of people listening drop off significantly after the first couple of tweets from their favourite celebrity, so where does that leave your Average Joe rabbitting on about the party he is attending tonight?
If no one is listening then why are Facebook and Google so intent on acquiring Twitter and its ilk? We come back to maths and the fact that there will always be a significant number on the phone and that not all information has to be relevant to all.
So if Facebook is successful in the acquisition of Twitter we can look forward to more Gaga'isms along with the tonsorial eloquence of the Bieber. Google may not be the best alternative for something like Twitter either, so my best case scenario would be for one of the global news conglomerates to acquire the appropriate micro blogging site and then we would really be up to date.
I look forward to that day, no matter how fascinating the Bieber's next hairstyle may be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
