Tag: technology

  • Reinventing the connected bank

    Reinventing the connected bank

    Yesterday the National Australia Bank had a media briefing to show how they, like their competitors, are revamping their entire business around new technologies.

    The investments are substantial and the re-organisation of the business is too as the old model of branch based banking only available from 9am to 4.30pm is superseded by the always on model of Internet banking delivered through tablets and smartphones.

    One of the notable points the NAB executives made was their move to authenticating customers through voice recognition. A trial had found the system reduced fraud and social engineering attempts dramatically.

    The use of voice recognition makes sense as it reduces the reliance on users remembering passwords or having to give over personal information that can often be gleaned off social media sites.

    Again we’re seeing data security evolving away from passwords.

    On the social media front, NAB are also offering their small business customers Facebook selling tools in collaboration with social media sales platform Tiger Pistol.

    While it’s questionable that businesses will get that much from a Facebook store, it’s a good attempt from the bank to add some value and encourage their commercial customers to move online.

    The move online is essential as the bank noted that online sales through their merchant platforms are up 23% as opposed to an anaemic 2.5% in general sales.

    Along with passwords dying, the NAB also found that the cash register is dying and being replaced with smartphone and tablet apps. The bank itself is moving its online platforms to being ‘device agnostic’ so as not to be locked into any one technology.

    What the NAB, and its competitor the Commonwealth Bank, are showing is the importance of having modern systems which are flexible enough to evolve with changes in the marketplace.

    Smaller businesses could learn from the banks on just how important this investment is. The organisations who aren’t making these changes are steadily being left behind.

    Similar posts:

  • Building new technological Jerusalems

    Building new technological Jerusalems

    A Telegraph profile of Joanna Shields, the incoming Chief Executive of London’s Tech City Investment Organisation, is an interesting view of how we see economic development and the route to building the industrial centres of the future. Much of that view is distorted by the ideologies of our times.

    London’s Tech City is a brave project and somewhat reminiscent of future British Prime Minister Harold Wilson’s 1963 proclamation about the UK’s future lying in harnessing the “white heat of technology.” From Dictionary.com;

    “We are redefining and we are restating our socialism in terms of the scientific revolution…. The Britain that is going to be forged in the white heat of this revolution will be no place for restrictive practices or outdated methods on either side of industry.”

    Fifty years later a notable part of Wilson’s speech is the use of the word “socialism” – the very thought of a mainstream politician using the “s-word” today and being elected shortly afterwards is unthinkable.

    Today the ideology is somewhat different – much of Tech City’s objectives are around aping the models of Ireland and Silicon Valley – which in itself is accepting the failed beliefs of our times.

    Based around London’s “Silicon Roundabout” – a term reminding those of us of a certain age of a childhood TV series – the heart of the Tech City strategy lies the tax incentives used by the Irish to build the “Celtic Tiger” of the 1990s and government investment funds to create an entrepreneurial hub similar to Silicon Valley, something also done in Dublin with the Digital Hub.

    It’s hard not to think that copying these models is a flawed strategy – Silicon Valley is the result of four generations of technology investment by the United States military which is beyond the resources of the British government, and probably beyond today’s cash strapped US government, while the Celtic Tiger today lies wounded in the rubble of Ireland’s over leveraged economy.

    At the core of both Silicon Valley’s startup culture and Ireland’s corporate incentives are the ideologies of the 1980s which celebrates a hairy-chested Ayn Rand type individualism while at the same time perversely relying upon government spending. Ultimately failure is not an option as governments will step in to guarantee investment returns and management bonuses.

    Just up the M1 and M6 from London’s Silicon Roundabout are the remains of what were the Silicon Valleys of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

    The manufacturing industries of the English Midlands or the woollen mills of Yorkshire revolutionised the global societies of their times. These were built by individuals and investors who knew they could be ruined by a poor investment and managers who retired to the parlour with a pistol if the enterprise they were trusted to run failed.

    Today’s investment attraction ideologies – tax discounts to big corporations and grants to entrepreneurs – are in a touching way not dissimilar to Harold Wilson’s 1960s belief in socialism.

    At the time of Wilson’s 1963 speech China and much of the communist world were showing that socialism, with its failed Five Year Plans and Great Leaps Forward of the 1950s, was not the answer for countries wanting to harness the “white heat of technology.”

    Similarly today’s Corporatist model of massive government support of ‘too big to fail’ corporations is just as much a failed ideology, like the socialists of the mid 1960s had their world views had been framed in the depression of the 193os, today’s leaders are blinded by their beliefs that were shaped by the freewheeling 1980s.

    Whether the next Silicon Valley will be in London, or somewhere like Nairobi or Tashkent, it probably won’t be born out of a centrally planned government initiative born out of the certainties of Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan anymore than the 1960s technological revolution was born out of Karl Marx or Josef Engels.

    Silicon Valley itself was the happy unintended consequence of the Cold War and the Space Race, which we reap the benefits of today.

    Every ideology creates its own set of unintended consequences, those created by today’s beliefs will be just as surprising to us as punk rockers were to the aging Harold Wilson.

    Maybe Tech City will help Britain will do better at this attempt to regain its position as global economic powerhouse, but you can’t help thinking that economic salvation might come from some West Indian or Sikh kid working out of a storage unit in Warrington than a bunch of white middle class guys celebrating a government grant over a glass of Bolly in Shoreditch.

    Similar posts:

  • Legacy people

    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.

    Similar posts:

  • The Death of the IT Guy

    The Death of the IT Guy

    Until recently the cottage industry of computer repairers was thriving, having been born with the massive take up of computers by homes and businesses in the 1990s.

    Over the years, things got better for the local IT guy as businesses and then homes became networked. Some of the smarter technicians started selling and supporting servers and things got better.

    The arrival of the Internet, the approach of Y2K bug and, in Australia, the introduction of the GST made even more business for the local computer tech and the Windows virus epidemic of the early 2000s guaranteed plenty of work for anybody who knew how to wield a screw driver and a boot disk.

    As the industry matured, maintaining office servers and looking after the regular glitches in desktop computers was a steady, reliable source of income for most support companies.

    Every few years businesses or homes would upgrade their computers and that would trigger a cascade of costs as data was migrated and older peripherals like printers, serial mice and ADB accessories had to be replaced.

    Then all came to a stop with the arrival of cloud computing services where many of older computers could access online applications just as well as newer computers.

    For IT organisations with a business plan based up customers upgrading systems every three to five years this was a disaster.

    These businesses were already feeling the pinch with the late arrival and market rejection of Microsoft Vista and now their customers could sit on older XP machines and happily use the latest online applications.

    Sensible IT folk have understood the change and the good support companies now have an armoury of cloud based services for their customers. These businesses know the IT hardware and support spend of most businesses is shrinking and taking the market with it.

    Unfortunately there are a few holdouts trying to keep the old business model alive who have a hundred reasons why cloud services are no good for their customers.

    To be far to those fixed on the old IT model, this attitude is probably even more prevalent in corporate IT departments and among CIOs with cloud services seen – probably rightly – as a threat to their power and income.

    One of the biggest risks to those support folk who aren’t at least evaluating cloud services for their clients is that shrinking IT spend and eventually there won’t be much money, or customers, left for the old model.

    A similar thing is happening to bookkeepers and accountants as newer businesses and those with younger owners or managers are moving to cloud based software while the older ones are wedded to their legacy systems.

    The older accountants who won’t move to the newer systems are finding their businesses growth stagnant while their younger colleagues are picking up the work from new businesses.

    Computer support was always a business based upon the transition to a digital workplaces, similar to the men employed to walk in front of early motor cars with red flags.

    Now workplace technology has matured, there’s less work for the IT guy. Hopefully most of them will make the change and not get run over like the guys clutching red flags.

    Similar posts:

  • On being a Luddite

    On being a Luddite

    “I’m a Luddite”, magazine editor James Tuckerman proclaimed as Master of Ceremonies for Microsoft’s Asia Pacific Bizspark Summit this week.

    James was referring to an article in Australian Anthill in the 1990s where he predicted businesses would never use the Internet for research.

    Being a Luddite isn’t a bad thing, James contends. In his view being skeptical about technology enables business owners to better evaluate technology as Luddites “think like a layman, don’t know the limits and think commercially”.

    None of this is true though – being a skeptic is not the same as being a Luddite.

    The original Luddites in the English Midlands weren’t anti-technology, they were opposed to the technology that would put them out of work.

    At the beginning of the 19th Century, mill workers were a highly skilled and extremely well paid trade but the new automated loom technology meant those skills were no longer needed.

    To protect their livelihoods, the loom workers started smashing the new machines and burning down factories. Eventually they were viciously suppressed by the British government with some being executed while others were transported to Australia.

    What drove the Luddites was the loss of their income and who is to say we would have behaved any differently if we were faced with being unemployed and destitute in the harsh conditions of 19th Century England.

    However we shouldn’t equate being skeptical about technology with being protecting one’s turf.

    Today’s Luddites are those businesses who don’t want to move with the times – those who have grown fat on easy credit or lazily clipping the tickets on state sanctioned monopolies.

    Some of those Luddites are going broke as consumers stop buying electrical goods or cars, while others lobby their friends in government to protect their privileged and profitable positions.

    In the early 1800s the Luddites eventually lost, we can only hope that when history repeats itself two hundred years later today’s Luddites haven’t damaged the economy too much.

    James Tuckerman isn’t a Luddite and that’s why he’s part of the future. I just wish he wouldn’t call himself one.

    Similar posts: