As the Israeli's didn't allow any press into the Gaza strip, we didn't have our formal “eyes and ears”. Instead both the Israelis and Hamas blasted the Internet with blogs, videos and Twitter to shape public opinion. The war was being fought on two fronts: on the ground and in cyber space. The Israel Defense Force maintains a YouTube channel and the Israel consulate in New York held a press conference exclusively on Twitter. For a while this 140-character-at-a-time medium seemed more important than the message: the chatter on Twitter got quite a bit of coverage. But now the dust has settled it seems that Israel was outsmarted on the Internet, not by Hamas, but by ordinary folks uploading real time reports. Despite its understanding of the Internet channel, superb technology and clever PR machine, the Israelis couldn't weigh in on the avalanche of blogs, videos and messages.
It used to be that we got our news neatly packaged from a limited number of sources such as CNN, Reuters and AP, now it comes from thousands of people, reporting on the ground as events unfold. These reports may be raw, grainy and emotional, but they can hit their target because they are more passionate and immediate.
Here are some examples of how Internet is being used to shape opinion. We Will Not Go Down (Song for Gaza) has been viewed on YouTube by over half a million people and has become the rallying cry at pro-Palestinian demonstrations. QassamCount, tracks the number of Qassam rockets fired into Israel by Hamas. It has both a Facebook and Twitter account that provides real-time updates. Yesterday, this was posted on Twitter: “5:22pm: 2 rockets hit Israel on Sunday after Hamas announced an immediate ceasefire #gaza”. (Note the #gaza, which is a so called “hashtag”, a tag or label that allows broadcasting of the message to the group “Gaza” so that everyone with an interest in the conflict can get this message.) Pictures of destruction by the Israeli army can be found on Flickr. On http://www.israel-vs-palestine.com/ anyone can vote on their position. While this reduces the conflict to it simplest black-and-white form and strips out any nuance, it prompted around 1M people to cast their vote. It is questionable what, if any, impact a site like this may have, but it is clear that we're seeing the first steps toward engagement with conflicts by using the Internet. Conflict 2.0 in its infancy.
I am currently working with European Center of Conflict Prevention and their partner NGO's, such as Oxfam/ Novib, Warchild and Cordaid, on a technology platform that aims to bring together information from the stakeholders: the different party's spokespersons, aid organizations, the press and observers on the ground. The objective is to give the fullest possible picture, provide analysis and prompt action, which may either help preempt conflicts or resolve existing ones. The platform should make it easy for people around the world to connect, exchange notes and to collaborate. We will leverage the same tools that play such important role in today's conflicts.
Last month, Machiel Salomons, an officer with UNHCR, wrote on my blog: “video footage is beamed nowadays through mobile phones to UN Agency heads in New York and Geneva. It helps decision makers, is instrumental in raising funds, mobilizes opinions and contributes towards an early resolution of major problems and challenges. Evidence is found in the fact that the world really has become a saver place.” While information technology is neutral, it can play a major role in resolving armed conflicts.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Obama-style Leadership
I can not help getting emotional watching Obama walk onto the platform to the cheers of more than a million people, who brave the icy Washington weather to participate in the inauguration of the 44th president of the United States of America. The world is celebrating both the first black president to take office and the end of eight years of incompetent leadership. Bush hands over an entangled Middle East conflict and the biggest economic mess since the Great Depression. Old style politics, leadership and business are incapable of solving the profound issues facing us.
The Bush Administration typifies last century's business culture: command and control, centralized decision making by an exclusive group of loyal insiders, driven by ideology and arrogance. Just watch Rick Wagoner operate and you see the Bush of business. It is obvious where GM is going (oblivion).
Obama is the best example of the new generation of leadership, the antidote to Bush-style government and business. For starters he has globality in his genes. His style is open, collaborative and inclusive. During the elections he effectively mobilized and engaged millions (by leveraging Web 2.0 technology). He believes that the economy can be brought back on track through innovation. Over the last weeks he worked closely with the House to create a $825 billion economic recovery plan, that includes money for education, infrastructure, energy investments and basic research, besides emergency spending for unemployment benefits, health care and food aid. His inauguration speech was sober and grounded in realism and pragmatism. Instead of talking in terms of “for us or against us”, he sees that there are no clear cut enemies, rather a “far-reaching network of violence and hatred”. He mentioned the need of close collaboration with other countries to solve the evil trinity of recession, terror an global warming.
While many business people worry about impending protectionism, his “Blue Print for Change” can not be clearer: “There are some who believe that we must try to turn back the clock on this new world; that the only chance to maintain our living standards is to build a fortress around America; to stop trading with other countries, shut down immigration, and rely on old industries. I disagree. Not only is it impossible to turn back the tide of globalization, but efforts to do so can make us worse off. Rather than fear the future, we must embrace it. I have no doubt that America can compete — and succeed — in the 21st century. And I know as well that more than anything else, success will depend not on our government, but on the dynamism, determination, and innovation of the American people.”
Obama is reactivating the American Dream. Let the USA again be an open place where talent from the whole world can come together, study, innovate and build companies. One of the reasons for the USA’s connection with the rest of the globe is its world class universities. Foreign students and immigrants account for almost 50 percent of all science researchers in the country. In 2006 they received 40 percent of all PhDs. By 2010, 75 percent of all science PhDs in this country will be awarded to foreign students. Those who earned their degrees in the US either stay in the US and tend to disproportionally contribute to the economic activity or they return to their home countries to establish and run companies that keep links with the US. Moreover, an open, well funded and competitive research environment has been the engine for much of the US growth, as major technology companies have sprung up around the major schools. Moreover, an open, well funded and competitive research environment has been the engine for much of the US growth, as leading technology companies have sprung up around the major schools, such as Stanford in Silicon Valley, the hot bed of technology with Google, Oracle, HP and Cisco, or MIT in the Boston Area, which has technology leaders like EMC. Dell is close to the University of Austin.
Obama's leadership style fits well with the post-recession business world. Successful companies in the next decade will have leadership that has more in common with Steve Jobs and Eric Schmidt (who was on Obama's Transition Advisory Board), than the leaders of the three of Detroit. Here's a summary of the style differences (thanks to Henk Bos who contributed to this list):
The Bush Administration typifies last century's business culture: command and control, centralized decision making by an exclusive group of loyal insiders, driven by ideology and arrogance. Just watch Rick Wagoner operate and you see the Bush of business. It is obvious where GM is going (oblivion).
Obama is the best example of the new generation of leadership, the antidote to Bush-style government and business. For starters he has globality in his genes. His style is open, collaborative and inclusive. During the elections he effectively mobilized and engaged millions (by leveraging Web 2.0 technology). He believes that the economy can be brought back on track through innovation. Over the last weeks he worked closely with the House to create a $825 billion economic recovery plan, that includes money for education, infrastructure, energy investments and basic research, besides emergency spending for unemployment benefits, health care and food aid. His inauguration speech was sober and grounded in realism and pragmatism. Instead of talking in terms of “for us or against us”, he sees that there are no clear cut enemies, rather a “far-reaching network of violence and hatred”. He mentioned the need of close collaboration with other countries to solve the evil trinity of recession, terror an global warming.
While many business people worry about impending protectionism, his “Blue Print for Change” can not be clearer: “There are some who believe that we must try to turn back the clock on this new world; that the only chance to maintain our living standards is to build a fortress around America; to stop trading with other countries, shut down immigration, and rely on old industries. I disagree. Not only is it impossible to turn back the tide of globalization, but efforts to do so can make us worse off. Rather than fear the future, we must embrace it. I have no doubt that America can compete — and succeed — in the 21st century. And I know as well that more than anything else, success will depend not on our government, but on the dynamism, determination, and innovation of the American people.”
Obama is reactivating the American Dream. Let the USA again be an open place where talent from the whole world can come together, study, innovate and build companies. One of the reasons for the USA’s connection with the rest of the globe is its world class universities. Foreign students and immigrants account for almost 50 percent of all science researchers in the country. In 2006 they received 40 percent of all PhDs. By 2010, 75 percent of all science PhDs in this country will be awarded to foreign students. Those who earned their degrees in the US either stay in the US and tend to disproportionally contribute to the economic activity or they return to their home countries to establish and run companies that keep links with the US. Moreover, an open, well funded and competitive research environment has been the engine for much of the US growth, as major technology companies have sprung up around the major schools. Moreover, an open, well funded and competitive research environment has been the engine for much of the US growth, as leading technology companies have sprung up around the major schools, such as Stanford in Silicon Valley, the hot bed of technology with Google, Oracle, HP and Cisco, or MIT in the Boston Area, which has technology leaders like EMC. Dell is close to the University of Austin.
Obama's leadership style fits well with the post-recession business world. Successful companies in the next decade will have leadership that has more in common with Steve Jobs and Eric Schmidt (who was on Obama's Transition Advisory Board), than the leaders of the three of Detroit. Here's a summary of the style differences (thanks to Henk Bos who contributed to this list):
Monday, January 12, 2009
Leveraging the Brain Grid
When Alan Lafley took over the helm at P&G he initiated a complete transformation of the company. P&G opened up and tore down the walls between their marketing, customer service, R&D and product development departments. According to The Economist P&G has radically altered the way it comes up with new ideas and products. Harvard Business Review wrote about their “connect and develop” method: P&G connects with external sources of new ideas, university and government labs, Web-based talent markets, suppliers, even competitors. Then it develops those ideas into profitable new or refined products—swiftly and cheaply— using the firm’s R&D, manufacturing, and marketing prowess. P&G used to source around 15% of its new products and innovations outside the company. This is now approaching 50%. Their profitability and company value have appreciated accordingly.
Most organizations are set up to operate in a stable environment. Once their product is out there, they have Marketing run campaigns, Sales signing up customers, Customer Service supporting them, Purchasing getting the best supplier deals and Manufacturing delivering the goods. Each department follows its internal play book and time-tested business processes. Unfortunately earlier success is no guarantee for the future. Not only financial services, retail and commodity markets are subject to gyrations, most markets are getting more dynamic and unpredictable. Rapid adjustment and constant innovation are critical for survival, let alone market leadership. If organizations are ossified along their functional units they will not be able to preempt or react to a dynamic marketplace.
A look at the average company shows us that Customer Service, with probably the best insight into customer requirements, is not talking to Product Management. Marketing still lives in the world of packaging and pushing the product, rather than engaging with customers. The Purchasing Department is specialized in getting the best transactional deals by issuing 1,000+ page requests for proposals. They are not an integral part of the company's value chain. Many contracts assume that the business will continue for the next years very much the same way at the day of signing. These contracts don't take into account that there will most likely be dramatic changes in the market place, regulation and that mergers and acquisitions may happen. Nor do they allow for strategic alignment, co-design and innovation. The IT department usually is a drag on progress, rather than an enabler. Introducing a new product-line for the company typically means that a multitude of systems need to be overhauled; from the rigid SAP or Oracle ERP system, to a cobweb of proprietary applications and CRM systems. As no project ever gets delivered within 12 months, the time to take a product to market will be measured in years rather than months, let alone weeks.
P&G broke with the traditional model and tied the various functions together into a cohesive set of connected business processes. They turned their organization inside out. It used to take P&G around two years to develop and launch a new product. Now it is down to less than a year. The apparel company Zara can modify their products within two weeks and get a completely new line in their stores in six weeks. They launch around 10,000 designs each year. These highly successful companies have done away with their silos and organized their company around rapid response to the market.
Even large companies can transcend not only the boundaries of their departments but also those of their company. P&G opened up to the outside world and created networks to co-design, collaborate and “crowdsource” for innovation. When P&G embarked on their Connect and Develop approach they decided to issue technology briefs that define the problem instead of publishing a detailed specification the size of War and Peace. Such brief is circulated not just within the company but throughout their global networks of individuals and institutions. Somewhere someone will probably have a ready-made solution available that will substantially cut down development time. If this is not the case then the “brain grid” can be utilized. In grid computing several networked computers, sometimes thousands of servers, are used to a single problem at the same time. Similarly the brain grid connects the best teams and brains across the globe to collectively solve problems or create opportunities. P&G uses both proprietary networks of trusted partners as well as open networks, such as NineSigma. This company “enables clients to source innovative ideas, technologies, products and services from outside their organizations quickly and inexpensively by connecting them to the best innovators and solution providers from around the world.” TopCoder nurtures a community of around 180,000 competitive software developers. A majority of the top performers come from China and Eastern Europe.
We will see the growth of large scale networks that support collaboration and development. Engaging a global community of supporters, being able to frame problems, managing on outcomes (rather than inputs) and understanding packaging are the managerial skills required to leverage the global brain power. Open, networked companies will innovate faster, get closer to customers and get to market quicker. They will emerge as the winners in the post-recession world.
Most organizations are set up to operate in a stable environment. Once their product is out there, they have Marketing run campaigns, Sales signing up customers, Customer Service supporting them, Purchasing getting the best supplier deals and Manufacturing delivering the goods. Each department follows its internal play book and time-tested business processes. Unfortunately earlier success is no guarantee for the future. Not only financial services, retail and commodity markets are subject to gyrations, most markets are getting more dynamic and unpredictable. Rapid adjustment and constant innovation are critical for survival, let alone market leadership. If organizations are ossified along their functional units they will not be able to preempt or react to a dynamic marketplace.
A look at the average company shows us that Customer Service, with probably the best insight into customer requirements, is not talking to Product Management. Marketing still lives in the world of packaging and pushing the product, rather than engaging with customers. The Purchasing Department is specialized in getting the best transactional deals by issuing 1,000+ page requests for proposals. They are not an integral part of the company's value chain. Many contracts assume that the business will continue for the next years very much the same way at the day of signing. These contracts don't take into account that there will most likely be dramatic changes in the market place, regulation and that mergers and acquisitions may happen. Nor do they allow for strategic alignment, co-design and innovation. The IT department usually is a drag on progress, rather than an enabler. Introducing a new product-line for the company typically means that a multitude of systems need to be overhauled; from the rigid SAP or Oracle ERP system, to a cobweb of proprietary applications and CRM systems. As no project ever gets delivered within 12 months, the time to take a product to market will be measured in years rather than months, let alone weeks.
P&G broke with the traditional model and tied the various functions together into a cohesive set of connected business processes. They turned their organization inside out. It used to take P&G around two years to develop and launch a new product. Now it is down to less than a year. The apparel company Zara can modify their products within two weeks and get a completely new line in their stores in six weeks. They launch around 10,000 designs each year. These highly successful companies have done away with their silos and organized their company around rapid response to the market.
Even large companies can transcend not only the boundaries of their departments but also those of their company. P&G opened up to the outside world and created networks to co-design, collaborate and “crowdsource” for innovation. When P&G embarked on their Connect and Develop approach they decided to issue technology briefs that define the problem instead of publishing a detailed specification the size of War and Peace. Such brief is circulated not just within the company but throughout their global networks of individuals and institutions. Somewhere someone will probably have a ready-made solution available that will substantially cut down development time. If this is not the case then the “brain grid” can be utilized. In grid computing several networked computers, sometimes thousands of servers, are used to a single problem at the same time. Similarly the brain grid connects the best teams and brains across the globe to collectively solve problems or create opportunities. P&G uses both proprietary networks of trusted partners as well as open networks, such as NineSigma. This company “enables clients to source innovative ideas, technologies, products and services from outside their organizations quickly and inexpensively by connecting them to the best innovators and solution providers from around the world.” TopCoder nurtures a community of around 180,000 competitive software developers. A majority of the top performers come from China and Eastern Europe.
We will see the growth of large scale networks that support collaboration and development. Engaging a global community of supporters, being able to frame problems, managing on outcomes (rather than inputs) and understanding packaging are the managerial skills required to leverage the global brain power. Open, networked companies will innovate faster, get closer to customers and get to market quicker. They will emerge as the winners in the post-recession world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
