Category: Disruption

  • Working in the gig economy

    Working in the gig economy

    Just what do people think about the on-demand, or gig, economy? A survey by public relations company Burston-Marsteller looked at those who use and provide services for companies like Uber, AirBnB and Instagram.

    Unsurprisingly the majority of users are have positive experiences with on-demand services which allows them to access product they couldn’t afford otherwise.

    More important are the views of the contractors, and those who are doing these jobs for the flexibility are matched by those who’d rather have full time employment but can’t find a role.

    Strikingly, the longer a contractor has worked for one of these services the more likely they are to find the company’s practices exploitative and more than half believe the platforms are gaming the regulations.

    Overall, it shows participants in the ‘sharing economy’ have no illusions about the caring aspects of the services that employ them, unlike many of those touting the benefits from the sidelines.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • How the taxi industry lost its advantages

    How the taxi industry lost its advantages

    In San Francisco, the Yellow Cab Company is filing for bankruptcy in the face of mounting insurance costs and competition from services like Uber and Lyft.

    For most of the Twentieth Century, having a government controlled market was good for cab companies and those owning the rights to own taxis. In most places though it wasn’t good for drivers and passengers however as wages fell along with the quality the service.

    In most cities, the taxi operators didn’t care as their industry was protected and customers didn’t have much choice. The problem was compounded by supine regulators who saw protecting the interests of industry incumbents as taking precedence over making sure operators provided a safe, reliable service.

    With the arrival of Uber, this changed and passengers started voting with their wallets. Interestingly, despite Uber X and Uber Pool being illegal in most place, regulators and their political masters found public opinion was firmly against the taxi companies and owners who’d exploited them for so long.

    To the horror of the taxi operators, they found the community and the market had shifted against them leaving them exposed to changes they had never expected. Now operators like San Francisco’s Yellow Cabs are paying the price for not focusing on providing a decent service.

    For other industries, particularly those which have some sort of barrier to entry through government regulation, the taxi industry’s woes are an important lesson – focusing on service is the key to staying in business, not relying on keeping competitors out.

    Similar posts:

  • Thinking through the effects of autonomous vehicles

    Thinking through the effects of autonomous vehicles

    The defining technology of the Twentieth Century was the automobile. While there were many advancements – antibiotics, mains electricity and mass communications to name just three – nothing changed society to the same extent as the motor car.

    A hundred years ago it was impossible for a pundit to appreciate how the motor car was about to change communities, the population’s increased mobility saw the suburbanisation of cities, the creation of the consumerist society and the rise of industries such as supermarkets and drive in theatres, none of which were foreseeable fifty years earlier.

    Change didn’t happen in isolation, those new industries were the result of a number of changes in technology alongside the motor car, for instance the supermarket couldn’t have happened without refrigerators becoming household items along with radio and television developing new markets through the advertising industry.

    Economic drivers

    The biggest driving force was economic, once motor cars became affordable for the typical worker – just before World War II in the US and in the mid 1950s in most of rest of the Western world – the cost of travelling fell dramatically.

    With the cost of moving around falling, workers had the opportunity to move out of the dirty, grimy inner city to new and clean suburbs where they could commute to their jobs in offices and factories. At the same time it also meant families could travel further to buy their groceries, forcing the end of the cornershop and the milkman.

    Autonomous vehicles change those economics again, as Uber founder Travis Kalanick pointed out last year, the most expensive item in a taxi or Uber fare is the driver.

    During his interview at the Code Conference Kalanick went on to describe how eliminating the driver changes the economics.

    “When there’s no other dude in the car, the cost of taking an Uber anywhere becomes cheaper than owning a vehicle. So the magic there is, you basically bring the cost below the cost of ownership for everybody, and then car ownership goes away.”

    Changing ownership

    The assumption in today’s discussions about autonomous vehicles is that car ownership will become and thing of the past, something that fits into Travis Kalanick’s view.

    Should that be the case then a whole range of new industries open up. Who owns the cars, who dispatches the cars, who plans for peak and normal usage are just a few questions and opportunities that open for savvy entrepreneurs.

    A changing concept of ownership doesn’t come without problems, not least who owns the code controlling the vehicles and the data being generated which in turn raises privacy issues.

    Loss of jobs

    The obvious other question with driverless vehicles is what happens to all the taxi drivers, couriers and long haul truckers as automobiles no longer require operators.

    With truck driving being the dominant occupation in most US states, employing 1.8 million workers according to the Bureau of Labor Studies, this is a serious question. Interestingly the BLS forecasts employment to grow five percent per annum over the rest of the decade.

    That scale of  job losses hasn’t been unusual over the last century. The agricultural industry itself has seen a massive fall in employment in that time period with the proportion of Americans working in agriculture falling from half the population to a tenth of that.

    Creating new industries

    Obviously half the US working population didn’t end up being unemployed, with the many of those displaced by the motor vehicle – either in the agricultural sector or in those fields catering for the pre-motor car market – finding work in other fields.

    That the economy adapted to the loss of jobs in what were traditional fields in 1915 gives us a clue to where the jobs and industries of the future are going to come from as the changing nature of the economy means new businesses are created.

    As the economics of these industries change, we see the need for workers move further up the value chain. We also see those reduced costs open opportunities for new ideas, just as the supermarket concept took hold in the 1950s as the economics of household shopping changed.

    This is where the greatest opportunity lies for today’s entrepreneurs lies, in figuring out how those reduced costs will change the way consumers and society use transportation. In turn that will drive the next wave of employment growth.

    Similar posts:

  • The limits of today’s technologies – day two of Autodesk University

    The limits of today’s technologies – day two of Autodesk University

    The second day of Autodesk University 2015 in Las Vegas continued the focus on innovation and changing industries, the afternoon innovation session was particularly focused on some of the opportunities being realised in drones, pre-fabricated buildings and lampshades made out of fungus.

    Brooklyn based designer Danielle Trofe gave a great demonstration of how she’s using fungus to create a range of sustainable light shades. Interestingly in a conversation earlier in the day with Autodesk CTO Jeff Kowalski the topic of growing products out of Mycelium, the vegetative part of a fungus that Trofe uses, was discussed in terms of smart packaging and biodegradable products.

    Growing products out of organic material is one of the themes explored in Mercedes Benz’s Biome concept car which proposes to grow the chassis out of seeds. While realising that concept is some way off, Trofe’s Mush-Lume idea shows some products are already at that stage.

    Rethinking prefab buildings

    Following Trofe was Jos Mulkens, the CEO of Dutch building company Voorbij Prefab, who described how by using sophisticated design tools and 3D printing to make prefabricated building panels they had reduced to the time to fabricate elements from days to hours.

    Mulkens gave a good insight into how design and production workflows are being accelerated with modern technology, particularly in replacing manual form makers to make the moulds for the precast panels. Voobij Prefab are flagging a lot of disruption heading for the building industry.

    At one the media breakout sessions a group of senior Autodesk managers discussed the trends in design and materials engineering. This turned out to be an interesting session on the limits of current technologies.

    Composite technologies

    Max Moruzzi, Autodesk’s Principal Research Scientist, is a passionate believer in composite materials and the benefits they promise. However he conceded when challenged by his colleague Steve Hobbs, who joined Autodesk last year with the acquisition of  UK based Computer Aided Manufacturing company Delcam, about the structural properties of composites that we still have a lot to understand about how they behave and fail.

    Bringing a touch of English scepticism to the panel, Hobbs pointed out almost all metallic components made by 3D printing require some sort of mechanical, subtractive finishing such as milling or polishing.

    Hobbs went onto warn that we risk introducing a “hairball of complexity” into the design and manufacturing industries as people experiment with developing products with materials and techniques they don’t fully understand.

    All the panel, which also included Carl White – Autodesk’s senior director of marketing for advanced manufacturing – and Benjamin Schrauwen who leads the company’s Spark 3D printing division, agreed that applying current design and manufacturing methods need to be rethought in the light of new methods being developed.

    The limits of 3D printing

    It was notable in the panel Q&A around the revelation that 70% of 3D printing projects fail, the panel put this down to the relative immaturity of software and machinery along with the technologies currently being poorly understood. Hobbs observed that for GE to 3D print their jet engine parts they rebuild and reprogram the printers they buy to their own higher specifications.

    For the final session CEO Carl Bass and CTO Jeff Kowalski faced a Q&A from analysts and the media, that session was interesting in exploring some of the directions Autodesk sees industry and business heading and I’ll write more about that tomorrow.

    Overall, the Autodesk University has been an interesting insight into the future of design and manufacturing along with the effects this has on other industries. With these technologies at an early stage, it’s a field that is going to evolve rapidly.

    Paul Wallbank travelled to Autodesk University in Las Vegas as a guest of Autodesk.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Rewriting the IoT

    Rewriting the IoT

    Last week I posted a long interview with Kevin Ashton, the man who coined the ‘Internet of Things’ tag, on startups, innovation and how the media manages to misreport technology. It was a good, but lengthy, interview.

    The good folk at Smart Company have rewritten the piece into a much more readable story so if you thought the first post was tl;dr – too long; didn’t read – then you may find the edited version much more concise and useful.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts