innovation | Paul Wallbank - Brilliant Communications

Towards the social media enabled jet engine

“What if my jet engine could talk to me and what would it say?” Asked Beth Comstock, General Electric’s Chief Marketing Officer, at the Dreamforce 2012 conference.

The idea of social media connected jet engine is strange, but the idea that a key piece of technology can talk to engineers, pilots, salespeople and management makes sense.

At the Dreamforce conference, Salesforce.com were showing how their Chatter social communications tool can be applied to more than just salesteams, in GE’s case by giving their new GEnx engine the opportunity to talk to its support teams.

In flight telemetry is nothing new to the aviation industry, ACARS – Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting Systems – have allowed airlines to monitor the performance of their aircraft over high frequency radio or satellite links during flight since 1978.

The difference today is the sheer amount of data that can be collected and who it can be shared with. If relevant data is being shared with the right people it makes managing these complex systems far easier.

More importantly, it helps teams collaborate. The GEnx engine is a new design that’s fitted to Boeing’s latest airlines including the troubled and late Dreamliner 787 so streamlining the design process of a new, high performance piece of technology pays dividends quickly.

Although things can still go wrong – one wonders what the final tweet from this engine would have been.

We’ve been talking for a long time about how social media and cloud computing services improve collaboration in a work place, the GEnx jet engine illustrates just how fundamental the changes these technologies are bringing to organisations.

If an industrial jet engine can be using social media it begs the question why service based companies and workforces aren’t. It’s where the customers and staff are.

These tools are radically changing the way we work right now – the question is are we, and the organisations we work for, prepared for these changes?

Paul travelled to Dreamforce 2012 courtesy of Salesforce.com

Legacy people

“The problem with legacy businesses is legacy people” said David Cush, the CEO of Virgin America at the Dreamforce conference.

For many organisations this is indeed the problem; that managements, workforces and shareholders are locked into a way of doing business that has worked for them in the past, so when change arrives they are ill-equipped to deal with it.

One of the key take aways from the Dreamforce conference is that the rate of business change is accelerating as technologies like cloud computing and the Internet mature.

For the legacy businesses locked into old ways this means they are going backwards faster than they could imagine.

A good example of this is when Virgin America showed their vision of how customer service works in a connected, social world.

The problem for companies like United and the other legacy carriers with their older aircraft and lumbering IT systems is they simply don’t have the infrastructure to provide these services if they wanted to.

One of the characteristics of 1980s management thinking is under-investing in equipment. ‘working your assets’ by flogging them way past their replacement dates is a handy way to increase profits and management bonuses, but it leaves a business exposed when newer technologies come along.

That’s the problem the legacy businesses, whether they are airlines, banks, telcos or in any other sector. Those who are nimble and those who have invested in new systems can take advantage of the change.

For some of these businesses even if they had the wits, and cash, to make those investments it’s dubious whether they could make the tools work properly.

‘Getting it’ is more than just understanding how to turn on an iPhone or send a tweet, it’s about how these tools can be used in a business.

If you don’t know how to use these tools, or understand the consequences of using them, then the investment is wasted.

For those organisations who are falling behind, they have to start moving quickly or their legacy is the only trace there will be of their existence.

When disruption meets regulation

Taxi booking applications have been one of the big areas for smartphone developers. Around the world apps for hailing cabs have popped up following the lead of San Francisco’s Uber.

One of the opportunities for copycat developers is that in most places taxis are regulated by the local city or state government, so an app for New York will struggle in Los Angeles, Paris or Tokyo and savvy entrepreneurs can create their own Uber knock off suited to their own location.

The problem is in most places taxis are regulated as a cartel, not a public service. Sometimes that cartel is to protect drivers, sometimes the companies that run the networks and often taxi license holders.

Sydney, Australia, is a good example of the latter two. The New South Wales state government’s rules are designed to protect the interests of the greedy ‘investors’ who’ve bought taxi license plates and the networks who run the booking systems and management of the cabs.

The result is Sydney cab drivers are treated like serf in what can only described as a feudal system while customers have to put up with lost bookings, poorly kept vehicles and high taxi fares.

It’s a lousy deal all round and is a great example of where disruption can change things for the better.

The problem is the incumbents will fight innovation that threatens their cosy and profitable arrangements and the regulators are part of that comfortable alliance.

In New York it looks like the Taxi and Limousine Commissioner does have some of the consumer interests at heart, pointing out that the metered fare is what passengers have to be charged by law. In most cities though, particularly Sydney, protecting the passenger is just another smokescreen for protecting vested interests.

Something that many innovators don’t realise is the power of those vested interests.

In the case of the taxi app developers many of them are about to get a nasty taste of just how vicious incumbent and their tame regulators can be when confronted with a threat to their cosy business arrangements.

Moving on from the gadget era

Yesterday at the launch of the next generation of Kindle e-readers Amazon’s CEO Jeff Bezos observed why the various Google Android based tablets have failed.

Why? Because they’re gadgets, and people don’t want gadgets anymore. They want services that improve over time. They want services that improve every day, every week, and every month.

Throughout the industrial revolution progress and innovation was about creating products that improved people’s lives – whether it was Josiah Wedgwood making affordable crockery, Thomas Edison commercialising the light bulb or Henry Ford making cheap motor cars available to the masses – these innovations changed the way we lived or did business.

In the late Twentieth Century business focused more on creating gadgets and our lives became a race to accumulate more useless tat to store in our big McMansions to store the junk in.

We wore out our credit cards and home equity in “buying stuff we don’t need to impress people we don’t like” throughout the 1990s and early 2000s.

Today that’s changed, consumers are now more cautious and, despite the efforts of governments to prop up the broken system, the great credit boom is over.

Jeff Bezos is onto this, instead of Amazon offering me-too products that don’t add value, “people don’t want gadgets anymore. They want services that improve over time.”

The word ‘service’ is notable — one of the things Amazon have achieved is changing how customers use books and DVDs from outright purchases that they can trade and sell to licensed products where Amazon and publishers control distribution.

Amazon are consolidating their position as one of the big four Internet empires. How Google, Apple and PayPal respond to Amazon’s suite of services will define much of the online economy.

Selling old rope

“Big Data is a fad” announced a speaker at a technology conference. “We’ve had Big Data for years. We used to call it business analytics.”

He’s right. The IT industry is very good at rebadging technology and the term ‘Big Data’ is just the latest of many examples — the best of which is how ‘cloud computing’ which is largely a rebadging of SaaS, Application Service Providers or client-server.

While it’s easy to be cynical about this IT industry habit, there is a valid underlying point to this repainting old rope — that the refurbished old string is cheaper and more useful than what came before it.

The problem for innovators creating accessible, cheaper and faster ways to do things is they risk that their product will be likened to the old, expensive and inaccessible methods. No cloud computing provider wants to be associated with IBM’s expensive client-server products or the flaky Application Service Provider of the dot com era.

Most innovations aren’t revolutionary, they have evolved out of an older way of doing things. So saying “it’s being done before” when seeing an innovative product may be missing the point.

In the case of Big Data the principles aren’t new but we’re collecting more data than ever before and the old tools — even if they could manage with the volume of information— are far more expensive than the new services.

So repainting old rope isn’t always done for purely marketing purposes, sometimes there’s a real benefit to the customers.

Tag: innovation

When disruption meets regulation

Similar posts:

Moving on from the gadget era

Similar posts: