The reality of privacy

Recently I had the exciting opportunity to meet Retired General Hayden, the former head of the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). He was discussing some of the trends he is seeing, as well as, the global developments that are taking place with regards to security. There were a lot of questions from the audience regarding privacy and espionage; whether state/governments or corporations were responsible; in addition to a discussion around understanding the evolution towards cyber security. Ultimately, an interesting discussion, however I left the event asking myself one simple question – “Who is now responsible for our privacy?”

 In the good ole’ days, before the time of the Internet and social media and “cloud services”, we were confident that our governments could and were protecting our privacy, whether that was our home address, phone number, or banking details. All of this information was under strict government policies to ensure a countries citizens were protected.  Of course, in many of these instances, we had to opt in, i.e. to remove our phone number from the directory or to ensure our address didn’t appear in the phone book.  But, it was definitely a simpler time and one in which we felt secure in the geographic boundaries that our country protected.

 Fast forward back to today and oh how the world has changed. Our home phone and home address have become the least of our concerns as our online identities are increasingly coming under threat. The knowledge that is available on each of us today is like nothing we have ever seen - your credit card details, your email address, your social media contacts and even what you store in the cloud.  All of this information is now worth much more than our home phone number ever was.

 It is interesting then that the responsibility of our Privacy is moving away from our respective governments and into the hands of local and global corporations.  When we contemplate what that means for each of us we may feel a shiver of fear or doubt, I know I did. Consider for a moment your purchases online or simple sharing of your hobby’s or interests with your friends in social media gatherings… Where does that data go?  Who sees it? Do you use a tablet or smart phone - guess where you’re phone numbers and any personal data is backed up? Certainly your local government has no involvement in the storage and safe keeping of this data.   So, at what point did we start relying on corporations – or in many cases “Over The Top” providers – to ensure our privacy and protect our identities? What do you think happens to that data?  Where does it go?  Who can see it?  What can they do with it?  What will they do with it?  I could go on, but I think you get the point.

 I am not sure about you, but I don’t recall being provided a location as to where all of this information was going, or being assured it was even remaining in my country of origin…  We need to remind ourselves that these are businesses, not governments.  There has been no signing of a memorandum between our governments and these businesses to officially hand over responsibility and accountability for the maintaining of our privacy.  Therefore, there is no assurance that any of our data is not being used to create profiles or not being shared with others – ever heard of people’s photo’s being hijacked for other uses? 

 I recently shared with a group of people the fact that it is easy to find out a whole raft of information about someone’s profile.  They were a little surprised at the ease with which I could get the data and one of them said that is why he doesn’t have an online presence – well at least one that he wasn’t aware of! These online businesses we are now relying on to protect our privacy, are in fact providing some privacy services (some of these we even pay for) however, you will actually find that many of them, in their fine print, inform you they are not responsible for your data and if this information is stolen or “lost” they will attempt to retrieve it but cannot promise anything.

 There have been some interesting cases recently where regulatory bodies have attempted to reign in these businesses, either in terms of how they are using our information, or how they were trying to access more.  But ultimately, what do you do when that business operates on a global scale? Given today’s environment, I am not surprised that we are hearing more and more about governments trying to tap into the Internet to listen and read what is going on. As I am sure you all know, we are really no longer sending letters via post office or making fixed line phone calls, in fact almost everything we use in terms of communications is somehow connected to the Internet.

 Interestingly, one business has recently been talking about the “connectedness of everything”, where we expect there to be some 50 billion devices connected to the “internet” in the next 5-7 years. Consider for a moment, 50 billion devices, which would include your car, refrigerator, TV, home security, washing machine, even our children (this actually happens today where a Sim card, combined with GPS, is used to track a child’s movements).  Do we really think all of this data will simply go onto a storage device in our homes? Of course not! Many of these devices being connected to the Internet will be incredibly useful to us.  Just think about it… knowing what to buy at the supermarket when you have forgotten your list or knowing when your car needs service –without worrying that something might break before you service or repair it. So, with the convenience and help that all of these devices can bring us, the concern still remains - what else would this data be used for?  Where will it go?  Who will see it?  What will they do with it?

 This is where I come back to the original question, who is responsible for our privacy? Well ultimately we are.  We need to ensure we are always checking the policy of the online providers we are using and understand what the fine print means. We need to ensure we are lobbying regulatory bodies and governments to ensure they only issue business licenses for online services to those providing clarity on what our data is used for and more importantly, for those who are intending to share our data that they MUST have an “opt-in” clause so we know what we are getting ourselves into. I don’t know exactly when governments became no longer responsible for our privacy, but ultimately we need to be aware of what we are signing up to and using the Internet for.

 Now some of you will be thinking – ok Nathan, so what are you saying turn off the Internet and resort back to mailing letters and using the landline phone for communication? Not at all! We are already far down the path to an Internet enabled world, and there is not much we can do about that. What I am saying though, is that we need to be aware of the risks, understand what we are signing up for, read the fine print and always think about what we are posting online or sharing with our online communities.  At the end of the day, we are now responsible for how we interact with our online world more so than ever before, and we need to ensure we do not assume that someone will protect our privacy or our governments will come riding in on white horses to save the day.

Our information has moved online and we must define our own individual policies.  We choose how to interact with “the net”.  We protect ourselves.  This is the new reality of privacy.

The Power of one ... It's all about me!

There is an amazing transition of who is defining the internet user experience. The significant influence that content owners, use to have, is now moving towards the average person/user. Everyone is beginning to recognize that they can now choose their own content and services, and with this development, there are implications for an industry you might not have thought of at first– Advertising.
In the past, advertisers love(d) content owners. When there were only a few of them (relatively), they had the unique opportunity to define what content would be viewed by an end user.  Think of the influence they could wield, their ability to track patterns of interest and through the grouping of similar customers be able to create user profiles.  Like any enterprising group of businesses, the content owners would then, in turn, share this incredible insight with advertisers to help the advertisers create relevant ads for specific groups.
Okay, now move to today, where we have an incredible 3- 4 billion web pages of content for people to access either through websites or other platforms … that is roughly 1 unique content source for every two people on earth (this is compared with some 3.5 million web pages that were active just 15 years ago!). Based upon this development, it is increasingly difficult for the content owner to create profiles which are accurate.  Think about it… How in the world could you create a unique profile, of every person, based on the unique combination of content they may each choose to access, let alone adapt that profile based on their mood, time of day and location in the world for each individual website?
In walks the Over the Top (OTT) player who is able to provide us with a new approach.  This new model monitors all webpage’s, applications and media, through cookies and operating system tools. The content providers and advertisers have had to adapt to the OTT’s and ensure they had the right arrangements in place to promote their online content or their relevant ads. Naturally this is a situation which neither the content owners, nor the advertisers, should be or are very satisfied with.
For this reason, it is no longer the content owners or the associated advertising providers who have the best visibility and analysis of the dynamic nature and changing profiles of each individual users given the enormous diversity of content to choose from. This ultimately means they have now become dependent on the OTT for data on customer profiles. Meanwhile, it is the OTT’s that have been increasingly dominating the ad space purely through volume of end users they have visibility of.  There haven’t been any alternatives or any noticeable limitations on what OTT’s could or couldn’t view. Until recently, OTT’s could capture all data, from all users, without any concerns on the public’s perception on where or how this data was being collected.  In essence OTT’s were the “All seeing eye”.
Despite the far reaching capabilities of OTT’s, there are now more regulations and increased savviness from internet users to block out cookies and ultimately decide what information they want to share about themselves.  This in turn, is making it harder for OTT’s to provide accurate profiling of end users, which leads to advertisers again looking for alternative means to present relevant ads to internet users. It is these changes which I refer to as the Power of One.  Me, you, all of us, now have the ability to decide how much data about ourselves we want to share (whether that is our location, our interests or even our friends).
Enter stage left, the one remaining group who should be building relationships with advertisers, and until now, have not been fully leveraged– Internet providers. What if you could sign up for ads that were relevant to you based on your interests, location and time of day, without worrying about someone gathering all of your personal data? Ok … I hear you saying I don't like ads, I understand and agree with that but, they are a fact of life, so let’s use the “Power of One” to see ads we want to see rather than ads they get the best deals for.  Signing up through your internet provider, whether at home, or in a café, or a shopping mall, to define your areas of interest can be mutually beneficial. We trust internet providers not to store all of our data through the internet, and know that they have a customer service model that if we see any ads that we don’t think is appropriate we can ask they can act on it, something which OTT’s tend to propose they only facilitate and therefore can’t be held accountable for.
There are some interesting companies out there like Adztream, Jiwire and Urban Airship who are seeking to help advertise firms - and businesses seeking to advertise directly. They understand how to help advertisers adapt their approach to reaching out to individuals, through various solutions which are targeted at the changing profile at any time on any day. It is important for advertisers to maximize the changing landscape and rebalance their focus of engagement.  Move from the content owners to those providing access to the internet, whether in the form of operators (fixed and mobile) or private wifi owners such as malls, campuses, hotels and sporting events.
These companies are the early adopters in introducing alternative models which drive more of a symbiotic relationship between the advertisers, internet providers and most importantly the end users. It is now up to the internet providers to look at how they can best leverage these platforms and start shifting the traditional source of advertising from those pushing ads based on the “all seeing eye”, to pulling relevant ads for the end users which they have chosen to see or are relevant based on where they are at that point of time. So now what? Well, to advertisers, I would say start looking at alternative avenues and platforms to introduce relevant ads that avoid the discussion around privacy. To Internet Providers – it doesn’t matter whether you are a ISP, Mobile Operator, coffee shop or university, your private network gives you an opportunity to look at engaging partners to create a positive user experience subsidized by end user relevant advertising. For all of us, as end users, the internet experience is no longer about what we are told it is, but more about what we want it to be and most importantly about how much data on ourselves we are willing to share.
We, as the Power of One, need to remind ourselves that we define our own experience and the market will continue to evolve to the point where we will see ads more customized to our specific situations at any given time or location versus what OTT’s think we should see. The Power of One is not only alive and well, it is now clearly having an influence on the internet industry and the advertising revolution.

Nothing to Fear but Fear itself

On my way back from a Telecom conference – in Hawaii of all places! – I read an interesting article stating that CEO’s are nervous about how they will succeed in 2013. I hope they are not feeling inhibited by the technology that their businesses use, because if they are, then clearly I am not getting my blog out to enough people!
It was very interesting to read the concerns regarding “too many unknowns” that need to be managed during this year: market stability; changes in governments; regulatory changes; the risk of economies slowing down further; and managing supply chains. Now, I know I am often regarded as being “ultra positive” when looking at business challenges and I am probably too often looking for the silver lining in any challenge, but seriously…we have been managing thus far, are we really saying we haven’t yet learned to adapt?
Businesses now have access to the tools to help them adapt their businesses to the ongoing market dynamics, whether they are localized or global. Most successful companies have the necessary tools right at their finger tips. If you don’t, I am not suggesting a complete rip and replace of your existing systems and communications platforms … those assets, are, or are in the process of being depreciated. What I am suggesting is to look around and ask yourself this question – Can I make business decisions first and foremost knowing my IT & Comm’s will adapt to those needs? Will my infrastructure be able to adapt to necessary business changes and challenges? I am hopeful (yes I know Mister Positive) that there are a few of you out there who are thinking that yes, we have started to progress towards a business which can adapt to change.
This past year has been exciting! Business processes are being virtualized, meaning we only need to pay software providers, for the number of active sessions, which is ultimately dependent on the success and customer demand. Communications services are now accessible through a network, rather than taking up expensive office space and, security is increasingly being embedded in internet gateways, which has resulted in reducing the need for higher capex. All of these items are helping businesses to manage more effectively, its assets, which are directly impacting people, processes and place.
With all of that said above why then is there still this drive to spend capex? How can it be, that in a market where we are concerned about whether a business will survive, that people still want to buy assets that will sit on their books for the next 5-7 years. I understand the emotional aspect, this is what people have done for years and they are given a budget and hence think it is better to spend it upfront in case they don’t get another one. Think about it though, what if you could have a meeting between your CEO, CFO and CIO and define a new way of working, one in which the costs of IT & Comm’s would be directly associated to the growth or decline of a business?
Of course this is not just relevant to local market businesses but also international ones, in fact this approach is possibly even more important to international businesses that have to deal with both growth and decline, in parallel, yet coming from different markets. Well again, what if you were able to redeploy IT & Comm’s resources to countries where there is growth or increased demand and then shift those again if the wave of growth should start to decline? I have seen businesses do this with people, but then get caught up with increased cost as they seek to buy incremental equipment and services to temporarily support this staff. This can be expensive if after those temporary resources have gone and you haven’t reallocated them and they simply gather dust.
In Asia. we have become increasingly aware of the regulatory limitations in terms of security, voice and in some markets the quality of the internet access. These are increasingly manageable as vendors seek to create new offerings to be regulatory compliant whilst driving new service creation. Take the example of being able to redirect local calls in Indonesia, yes these calls do need to remain in-country and as such need to be connected to a local operator, but separate the regulatory needs vs. the driver for efficiency. The Actual telephony server for the Indonesia office doesn’t need to be IN Indonesia, it can easily be in Singapore, but a small device located in the Indonesia office simply helps to separate local from international and office to office calls. It is small examples like this that can rapidly help to empower a business to decide what they want to do, provide them the ability to effectively manage and/or adapt to changes around them, and then help to minimize the immediate concern of how much is it going to cost.
I challenge the CEO’s out there to pull together their leadership team and ask the question, how elastic is your IT & Comm’s environment? Can IT & Comm’s be an enabler for business change or will it be an inhibitor? If the latter, then you have some work to do, as businesses who are already on this journey will start to move past you in their goals to maximize growth, mitigate risk and manage change, without the concern of significant ICT change management overheads.
Hence don’t fear change, embrace it, and use it to enable your business to become more robust, in a market which currently requires you to adapt, in order to remain relevant, and create the opportunity to drive sustainable growth.

I Believe I Can Fly!

Seriously, I really do believe I can fly and one day I am sure we will figure out how. Me losing some weight would probably be a good start, that and lots and lots of technology! I am often asked about my open mindset approach when going into meetings to work out challenges and how I achieve this. Well, like the title, if you believe you can fly and you have a desire to achieve the outcome, it will happen in one way or another!


I have been watching, with great interest, at how two very different types of businesses attempt to adopt innovative approaches to new technologies. The first is the “start-up mentality” and the second is what I would call the “large business mindset” group. The “start-up mentality” companies are the ones who give the appearance of not facing the challenges of large businesses –but I can tell you those challenges exist! The “large business mindset” group have a tendency to look at business change or confronting challenges as “baggage that must be addressed” whilst managing the day to day aspects of a business operation.

In today’s market, businesses face many challenges and it is interesting to watch how the “people factor” of problem solving always gets in the way of solving the actual problem – I know weird, right? For many people, problem solving is a clinical discussion. “We can do it” or “we can’t”, simple as that. Yet, when “we can’t do it” is the only solution or answer, who wants to inform the organization, who owns the problem, that they cannot be helped? Consider that for a moment. Recognize yourself there already, sighing as you go into your next workshop, anticipating a hard slog or another round table debate? It is, for this reason, why many large businesses tend to look at start-ups with a great degree of jealousy. They see start-ups appearing to act nimble and addressing solutions, while they claim that they cannot move as quickly due to their size, scale and complexity. Well, I am here to tell you that a large part of that claim is simply crap. I have seen and worked in my share of complex IT systems or business processes. If you really want to achieve something you can, it may not look or work the way you thought it would, but the goal is always achievable.

What makes these start ups more successful in addressing business issues? Their attitude! They are walking into a room, not to attend a meeting, but to solve a problem. That mindset is what is driving the first aspect of their success. The second has to do with people – ever had the feeling, during a meeting that people are simply brought in to make sure everyone is represented? It happens often. People are fearful of what decisions might get made, on their behalf, that could impact how they work or what they need to do. In a start-up environment, yes of course everyone wants to chip in and be involved, but there is too much going on to have everyone involved, hence, more often than not, you will hear of meetings with only 2 or3 people looking to solve a problem, informing others of the recommendation to validate if there are any “serious” impacts or risks in moving forward. Plain and simple. So, if you ever sat in one of those meetings asking yourself – “what am I doing here?” well, more often than not, with all of those people, more actions are created and more delays become the outcome and ultimately the problem is not solved. It is then merely a case of how we plan to progress forward. Again, within a start up environment, time is literally money, hence a meeting to agree to have another meeting is not an outcome, and it means delaying a decision which ultimately could mean failure of the business. (This too should and could be applied to large business, but you already know that.)

Here in resides the ultimate challenge of large businesses, “how do you drive a sense of urgency?” – not to have everyone work harder – but an understanding that we simply must walk out of this room with an agreed view on what will be done and by whom and by when to resolve the problem or challenge. Can you imagine having the confidence in your colleagues knowing that as a team you had not only solved the problem but that you and your colleagues are about to go out of that room and make that outcome happen? Imagine achieving that same result four, five or even six times? At what point does it become business practice when staff start walking into a meeting with: a. fewer people and b. the confidence knowing they have been chosen to solve a problem? This would surely start to drive a sense of ownership in solving a problem and ultimately contributing to the success of a business.

I surely hope those of you reading this are not thinking “Well of course Nathan, it is merely a case of throwing money at it!” because that is absolutely not my point at all. If it was, then in most businesses this would result in just one aspect of the decision… where some parts would require reallocating funds. What then happens when the actions require reengaging the customer or supplier, or managing a process differently, or finding work arounds? What then? Can you just throw money at it? I think not. Having worked in both start up businesses and more mature organizations, the challenges remain the same - it is the mindset and approach we take and the people we choose to engage with which ultimately drives the right types of outcomes.

For these reasons I always encourage an organization to have a mix of people who have worked in start up businesses and understand the risks of failure, combined with people who have worked within large corporate for some time and know where the proverbial “skeleton’s” are hidden. It is very rarely the case when business challenges or problems cannot be solved. We simply need the right people around the table, combined with the right mindset, and the focus on business outcome and success. I appreciate the “easier said than done” factor, however, look at who you have sitting around your table. Do they truly believe in what you are trying to achieve? Do you have the right balance of passion and insights? A balance of managing risk vs. ability to execute? And most importantly, can you see one common agenda and view on how your business / team / or idea will succeed – if not, you are in for one hell of a journey or a path to continuous frustration.

The most important attribute of all though, don’t give up! I have met some phenomenal problem solvers out there which I can break into two groups:
• Those that can solve the problem but feel they face a wave of nay sayers or blockers making the outcome all but inevitable;
• and, those that can solve the problem and in the face of setbacks, identify a different path to get to the outcome that is right for the business.

Now, obviously I am not saying those in the 2nd category always succeed, but if you can look inside yourself and honestly say you have tried different approaches and are still not getting anywhere, then you are trying to solve the problem in the wrong place and we are back to the initial challenge of having the right people involved to begin with. No business is perfect, they all have their ups and downs but it is the businesses that have the ability to rally to a cause, empower their teams to lead where their expertise lies and drive business outcomes that ultimately succeed.

One day I am sure I will find the right group of people to solve my challenge, “I believe I can fly!” I just need some bright people to help me figure out how and then I will need to decide whether the benefits outweigh the risks? Believe in yourself and believe in the fact that there is always an answer. Your answer simply depends on your understanding of the outcomes and ensuring you have the right mindset and ownership around the table – now, if you will excuse me whilst I prepare for my first flight!

Importance of Cloud to Asia

Asia is still recognized as the growth region of the world. Look at any research firm and they will be talking about Asia and if not they will have read someone else’s report and realize that this is where the growth engine of the global economy now resides. But like any new engine Asia is not yet purring smoothly - especially for new businesses looking to expand rapidly into the region. The challenge for these businesses is how to grow faster than the competition but at the same time reduce the risk of burning out the engine before they have had a real chance to maximize its potential.


Asia is an incredibly dynamic region and unlike Europe or the US, it is complex. It is a dynamic patchwork of markets, each with their own challenges, opportunities and relationships. To be successful businesses need to be able to rapidly test new products, new services and new approaches – but with minimal risk and maximum flexibility. This is where Cloud technology comes into play.

In a market like Asia, Cloud provides an avenue to address the challenges of low risk, scalability and rapid response that business leaders have been trying to articulate to their CFOs and Management teams for years. Yes Asia is a growth engine, yes it comes with risks that mean we have to be able to change direction or approach quickly BUT now for the first time we have a Cloud technology toolkit which supports, not prevents, this agility.

Contact centres in Asia are a classic example of the need for increased flexibility, sounds like a leap right, but stay with me and I will explain. Customer engagement has become a critical differentiator in Asia. Why? Simply because it is increasingly difficult to gain any sustainable advantage through price or functionality alone. Therefore businesses need to differentiate through the manner in which they engage with their customers – which for most businesses means the contact centre.

With a population of over 2 billion, Asia has a large number of customers looking for personal attention! To retain those customers and to differentiate through service businesses need to be able adapt to their changing needs, views and preferences of engagement. That’s right, we are truly a complex people and technology hasn’t helped matters. Mobile phones, social media and applications have empowered the end user to define their individual anywhere, anytime and anyhow needs. In addition consider the diverse segments a regional business in Asia must engage with – language, culture, age, religion, nationality and above all personal preference – a significant opportunity but to adapt to all of this successfully in a static technology environment is near impossible. Hence flexible, scalable, low cost cloud services simply MUST be an integral part of any future customer experience provided by businesses in Asia.

Cloud-based contact centres provide us with the confidence that we can scale with the ever changing demand ensuring that our costs are always in line with business needs. More importantly, a cloud-based contact centre means businesses can take back control and respond to market changes in real time.

Imagine for a moment a certain country in Asia is announced as being the no. 1 tourist destination - and, as a tourist airline, that could mean big business for you. But how do you inform your regular customers and the tourist agencies that your airline is a key provider of flights to that country and that now you are going to increase flights to that country as well? Traditionally getting these new campaigns live might take weeks or even months, but with a public cloud-based contact centre you can make these changes in minutes and across all media channels. As a result you have been able to rapidly take advantage of a market shift faster than your competitors and secure new business ahead of the rest of the market. Equally as important is the confidence that your cloud technology platform will be there to support rapid business growth as and when you need it.

Cloud services in the Asia market represent a key opportunity for businesses to minimize the key risk factors often associated with high growth markets. Use these services to embrace Asia for what it is – the growth engine of our global economy. If you don’t have public cloud in the contact centre you’re not agile. And in Asia if you’re not agile you’re not competitive.

Half-Life of Technology

I can remember when my parents last bought a new TV, they had the old one for more than 10 years! With the new TV installed and in use they actually only then realized that everything looked better in HD! I share this with you as I have been thinking about the speed, at which these days, we are refreshing our technology devices. Think about it, what is the “half life” of your technology devices these days and by that I mean, at what point, are you already starting to think about upgrading your devices from the moment you purchased the last one? Half-life is the moment when you could continue to use your device but it is either so far behind the functionality of other devices or because of performance issues, it is increasingly unusable – both points, which would normally take 3-5 years, are now more likely to be only 1-2 years.


Historically, we would see significant forward leaps in technology or that our current devices, of “x” years, had simply given up to validate the half life point when we were considering a new device. However, today these changes are brought about, not by leaps forward in device functionality, but merely by the controls put on us by vendors seeking to sell as much hardware as possible, as frequently as possible. We have all seen the leap forward in functionality and speed for mobile phones, laptops and tablets over the past 20 years, however, we are seeing this definitely slowing. Don’t get me wrong, there have been some great developments in recent years, but many of these are software related. We have to ask ourselves how many of these updates, whether they be related to mobile, media or network, could actually have been made on the existing hardware or upgrading what they already have. Do you really have to buy a new device and/or network to gain the functionality through a potential software upgrade?

I am increasingly amazed to see so many new software releases on home and mobile devices being limited to a particular selection of devices – if you don’t have the latest phone, TV, media hub or home router, then the update might not work on your device … oh and by the way even if you do, it may only be applicable for the coming three releases (usually within a year). At this point, you will most likely start to reach the Half-life of your device, without even realizing it, and as you consider a new device, in order to realize the benefits of new upgrades and performance. We have all experienced hitting the well known wall of functionality or been in the position of receiving the last available upgrade designed to stretch your devices performance. This is the time they want to “educate” us in looking at new devices to realize performance gains once again. This is definitely not a circle of life (okay technology) that I was not looking to be a part of.

So, why is there a drive against reusing Hardware and the rapidly decreasing half-life of our devices? I thought everything was supposed to be in the cloud – i.e. accessible to all through your devices so that we didn’t need all of these upgrades? What happened to the services we wanted using the devices we wanted and simply accessing these in the cloud as and when we choose?

There is an exciting opportunity here to the emerging device and software manufacturers to partner and develop solutions which simplify the end device to being only a terminal and all of the smarts and computing in the cloud resulting in an upgradable system without having to change your handset – oh hang on that was called Virtual Desktop, something which can work on everything from Computers to Mobiles to Media devices. BUT, why would manufacturers want to do this when it would result in potentially selling less Hardware and more software … woah isn’t that a potential environmental benefit as well? The improvements in networks to businesses and the home mean we are ready for this change, however hardware vendors would need to change their business model, something which obviously will be difficult, as hardware results in quick revenues and software can mean lower revenues to start with but more sustainable and adjustable to the market needs

In all seriousness, something is going to need to change. The half-life of technology devices has dropped rapidly and in order to realize sustainable benefits, once again, we as the end user community and technology evangelists need to be driving a change in approach. Lets realize this push into cloud services! This will enable all of us to extend the life of our existing devices whilst leveraging new capabilities, pushed to us from the extensive number of data centres and internet platforms, that are already out there. I enjoy testing new devices but I would much rather be testing how different software solutions could maximize my device as opposed to restricting its functionality and more importantly limiting its life span to less than four seasons.

I look forward to a generation of platforms which shift the focus back to the needs of the end user experience, separate from device and platform, yet central to defining multiple scenario experiences for the end user, i.e. we decide how we want to view content, applications and services depending on the device or platform we choose to use, rather than being limited by them. Maybe this is wishful thinking but it’s my Birthday so today I should be allowed to ... right?

Bridging the Generation Gap

I had a deja-vu experience the other day, nothing like seeing a cat cross my path twice or similar, but suddenly realizing I am now in my parents shoes from some 15 years ago. Put simply, the education I gave to my parents on how to use their mobile phone was being given to me by my kids on the use of my Tablet. My daughter comes to me and says “Dad, I can’t access YouTube on your tablet.” I reply that well sometimes it doesn’t work over the Internet. Her response: “That’s ok Dad, if you download the YouTube application onto your tablet over the Wi-Fi you will find it works better and then I can always access my favourites!” To this, I respond: “Yes I know, when I have time I will set it up for you”. She then highlighted to me, “It’s ok Dad, just give me your password. I know how to set it up for you and then I can even save your favourites for you too!” Well that clearly wasn’t going to happen; she is only four by the way. Then you also have my son who somehow knows how to access the Nintendo Wii that we have and reset all of the high-scores except his to ensure his character is shown at the beginning of each game that he plays in front of his family and friends.
Now I remember as a kid the most high tech device I had was a computer console that let you play tennis, hockey and squash in black and white. I was amazed by how cool it was with all the sophistication of a single button and a dial to move your bat up and down the screen. In contrast, I now get asked by my eldest daughter to help her load music from a CD onto her iPod because it’s a bit old and she wants to listen to some of her parents music which she can’t get as mp3 tracks from her friends. When did the digital era end? The technology market has clearly changed!
The key dynamic in all of these technology changes is the user experience and what I find interesting is the growing gap in terms of the market demands by end users. For Generation Alpha it is clearly all about immediacy and own preferred technology, whereas for the Baby Boomers it is all about ease of use. These are two very contrasting views and the challenges for technology companies and integrators alike is to find a way to manage this balance, enable personalization but retain core components which are intuitive and don’t require the ability to reconfigure a device or platform to interface with their own technology. At this point I expect there are two groups pausing here and contemplating one of two things:
1) Well of course you integrate a new technology with what you have - that is how you maximize the new widget whilst at the same time retaining your own preference in platforms.
2) Why am I integrating something, it just works right?
Or perhaps there is a third group – you want to connect what to what?

You should be able to identify with one of these scenarios and interestingly, the third group is actually the oldest technology engaging generation and at the same time, the youngest. We may understand the reasons for the former, but it is the next generation that simply expect it to work, it’s all about immediacy and me, the simple expectation being I connect a new technology to my existing devices or technology and it just works because the interfaces are already designed to speak to each other. For this generation the Android vs. Apple debate isn’t even a topic - they are focused on the application and service layer.
At the point it might sound like I am referring to the obvious and also provide businesses with peace of mind that they don’t need to worry as this is why their technology is targeted at a specific market segment and if it does not reach all users, this isn’t a concern due to the size of each of these addressable markets. However this is where the slap in the face comes in. If you are trying to introduce technology into a business environment where there is a mix of users, it must be viewed as usable by all. I had one experience where what one person thought was a great conferencing platform that could integrate with all of their devices, another person felt that this required a science degree to have it work on more than one configuration.

Technology is definitely an enabler for businesses but any technology firm seeking to introduce new offerings into a business environment needs to adhere to three clear guidelines:
1. User Experience: The technology must be able to shape to individual preferences.
2. Adoption: It is not enough that one group in a business adopts the technology, it must be used by all otherwise it will ultimately fail to see sustained use.
3. Relevance: Every user must be able to translate how a new technology will improve their working environment.

Now these might sound straight forward but look at your own development teams. Can you see a mix of generations being engaged in developing and introducing a new technology to market? If yes, then your teams should be able to answer the above questions for the different generations with ease. If they look at you quizzically then be afraid, as without bridging the diversifying generation gap, your great technology or business idea will ultimately fail and you will be recognized as having developed a great technology or platform but a technology/platform that could not be used within a business environment. Businesses are often challenged with adapting to the markets they seek to operate in - it is time technology providers started to consider the same for the growing diversity of technology users within a business as well. There is a simple analogy here for technology firms, as far as survival in an Enterprise environment for technology. It is a case of adapt or die.