“I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me” –
Memoirs of the life writings, and discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton
Author: Paul Wallbank
-
Playing with shining things
-
Don’t mess with Elon Musk
Criticise Tesla’s launch parties and your car order may be cancelled, reports The Guardian.
Stewart Alsop, an Californian venture capitalist, wrote an open letter to Tesla’s founder Elon Musk claiming the launch of the Tesla X was ‘a disgrace’.
Musk responded by cancelling Alsop’s Tesla order.
There’s a range of arguments about the customer always being correct, the customer’s right to criticise a product or the risks of making online comments but what it definitively shows is the power of being the seller of something people want.
I suspect Stewart Alsop will get his Tesla eventually, but the boss will make him squirm.
Similar posts:
-
Thinking beyond the group
It’s nice and comfortable living in an echo chamber and we’re all guilty of it one way or another. An example of how insular echo chambers can be are two surveys done by UK company Apollo Research on who UK and US tech writers follow on social media.
The answer was each other, with most tech writers following a common core of twenty in the UK and thirty in the US. Basically the groups are talking to each other which explains how technology stories tend to gain momentum as variations on the same stories feed through the network.
While technology journalists are bad for this, it could be argued their political colleagues are far more guilty of this group think as their working in close quarters makes them even more insular and inward looking. That explains much of the political reporting we see today which often seems divorced from the real world concerns of voters or challenges facing governments.
For all of us, not just journalists, it’s easy to become trapped in our own little echo chambers and find it harder to think outside the pack as the web and platforms like Facebook deliver us the information we and our friends find confirms our own biases.
Clearly, thinking with the pack creates a lot of risks and for businesses also raises opportunities. At a time of fast moving technology and falling barriers to entry, thinking outside the prevailing group could even be a good survival strategy.
A good example of industry group think is the US motor industry of the 1970s where they dismissed Japanese competitors as being cheap and substandard – similar to how many think about China today – yet by the end of the decade Japan’s automakers had captured most of the world’s market.
On a national level, Australia is a good example of dangerous groupthink as up until three years ago the consensus among governments, public servants, economists and business leaders was the China resources boom would last indefinitely.
Today that consensus looks foolish, not that those within the echo chamber are admitting they made the wrong call, and now governments are struggling to find new revenue streams as the expected rivers of iron ore and coal royalties fail to arrive.
For Australian businesses, governments looking to raise revenues are another factor to plan for and getting one’s tax return and company paperwork in on time might be a good idea to avoid fines from overzealous public servants.
The bigger lesson for us all however is not to think like the group. While it may feel safe in the herd, we could well be galloping over a cliff.
One simple way to avoid groupthink, and that cliff, is not to copy the tech writers or the Australian economic experts who mis-called the China Boom. With the web and social media we can listen to what other voices are saying, most importantly those of our markets and customers.
A varied information diet is something we all need t0 understand what our markets, economies and communities are doing. It might be comfortable huddling down with the herd, but you’ll never stand out from the pack.
Similar posts:
-
The opaque Alphabet
Late last year Google announced it was restructuring and creating a new holding company called Alphabet, at the time I hoped it would bring more accountability into a business that’s becoming notable for easily distracted management and sprawling bureaucracy.
Yesterday the company released its latest quarterly reports and it appears far from improving transparency, the restructure has resulted in the operation of ‘moonshots’ – termed ‘Other Bets’ in the reports – becoming even more shrouded in mystery.
Other Bets, which includes Google Fiber, Ventures and Google X, made a stonking $3.1 billion loss while 90% of revenues still comes from the advertising business.
Even within the advertising arm there’s little transparency as the division includes Apps, Android and YouTube along with the lucrative Search and Ads business. There’s little information of how these divisions are travelling on their own.
As Dennis Howlett at Diginomica points out, there will come a time when shareholders demand some accountability as the losses in the Other Bets are not trivial but it seems that time is some way off.
For Google, the biggest risk is being disrupted themselves. Their ‘river of gold’ is not dissimilar to that the newspaper industry floated along prior to the web – and Google – arriving.
Another aspect is that of culture where most parts of the business are free of accountability as the lucrative Ad division’s revenues allow disinterested management and needless bureaucracy to thrive.
While Alphabet’s revenues are impressive, this is a company dangerously reliant on one line of business. History has not treated such ventures well.
Similar posts:
-
Securing the drones
While we assume military equipment has far higher levels of IT security, it isn’t always the case reports Ars Technica.
Allegedly the US National Security Agency and Britain’s GCHQ were able to intercept the video feeds of Israeli and Syrian drone aircraft using off the shelf software. While it appears security has become more sophisticated on this equipment, it is a concern that data feeds can be monitored from military equipment.
This is even more concerning given the reliance of software and telemetry systems in modern weapons. The troubled F-35 project shows just how complex computer code has now become in military equipment and it is safe to say some of those bugs will create weaknesses in the systems.
For those of us with more modest security needs, all is not lost though as Rob Joyce, the NSA’s hacker-in-chief, has given some useful tips on how to protect your systems. These are worth following although Joyce is quite clear that you’ll have to work hard to stay ahead of a sophisticated and persistent cyber-enemy.
Similar posts: