Musings : Of a Bridge and Enterprise/Solution Architecture

Musings : Of a Bridge and Enterprise/Solution Architecture!

Few days ago during the daily commute caught an NPR radio program ("A Big Bridge in the Wrong Place") where the radio-journalist was trying to find out the reason why the Tappan Zee Bridge in NYC is located at the broadest point on the river (despite higher cost of construction , more difficult build, extra fuel consumed etc.) when more narrower spots are available downstream. 

The reason it turns out is that any point downstream from where it is currently located would have taken it into Port Authority jurisdiction rather than NY State jurisdiction. That would have resulted in all the tolls going to the Port Authority. Something which NY State did not want.

Well, that's not the first or last time a sub-optimal decision has been taken due to extraneous reasons. But now, since all the infrastructure surrounding the bridge has come up at this current "broad" location any future enhancements would need to be made at current site despite the long length. Drives up costs considerably!

What's all this got to do with Enterprise/Solution Architecture? For me it was a reminder that a sub-optimal platform decision/solution design/tool choice now esp. if driven by extraneous factors will not only be sub-optimal now but will continue to drive sub-optimality down the years too as the cost of correcting a poor decision will become prohibitive. That's not counting the extra maintenance costs ("fuel charges"). 

Moral of the story: Build your bridges where the river is narrow (aka make the correct architectural decisions or be prepared to spend extra down the road)

Satya Nadella, New Microsoft CEO's take on Innovation

Interesting insights into where Microsoft is headed with Innovation from the new Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella's first message to employees:

•  Our industry does not respect tradition - it only respects innovation.
•  We need to prioritize innovation that is centered on our core value of empowering users and organizations to "do more."
• ...with every service and device launch going forward we need to bring more innovation to bear around these scenarios.

Some of this may resonate in other organizations too in context of breeding a culture of innovation. 

Frugal Innovation/Jugaad #6: The World's Best Designed Pizza Box

The World's Best Designed Pizza Box
(Excerpted from Quartz. Follow link above)

most pizza boxes are ineffective because they have holes on the side to release steam—but the heat is actually released from the top and bottom of the pies. Mehta’s solution is simple.

Cardboard, he explained consists of three layers: two flat surfaces and one ridged corrugated sheet in between. VENTiT boxes have holes in the two flat surfaces, but not in the middle layer. This permits steam to travel through the grooves in the middle corrugated layer, without getting trapped inside the box. More importantly, no additional material is required to manufacture the box. 

Now this is what I call a real "Jugaadoo" innovation...one based on Jugaad (Frugal Innovation), repurposing something with minimal resources and making it significantly better while addressing a "steaming" need! 

R.I.P. Content, Long Live Apps! : The next BIG disruption

Couple of days ago I came across Pratik Dholakiya's blogpost "Why Apps Will Dethrone Content as King of Digital Marketing" which had couple of interesting graphics:

Pratik makes a strong evidence based case for bidding farewell to the static web:

The sites with the best tools have almost always dominated the web, but this is changing from something we expect from elites to something we expect from every corner of the net. As we move away from the PC and onto our mobile devices, we increasingly find web browsers dull and boring compared to the immersive experience of apps.
Apps are the future of marketing. Don't say I didn't warn you.

And today I came across another interesting blog post with corraborating evidence. This time it is Philip Elmer-DeWitt's blog post : Apple's App Store: 'The insidious march of a disruptor". Here's a graphic from his piece which says it better than words:

He says:

To state the obvious: iTunes music downloads are down while downloads of apps are up sharply: 35% year over year and 50% in December alone.

He extensively quotes from Horace Dediu's : Of Bits and Big Bucks

Is this enough evidence?

Is the writing on the wall?

Are apps ready to be the disruptors dislodging other digital content for our entertainment time share. If yes, are marketers, content creators and others ready for it?

Who are going to be the big gainers or losers when the big shake out driven by this disruption happens?  

Social Media 101: When Social Media meets a Burger

Twitter: I am eating a Burger.
facebook: I like Burgers.
YouTube: This is how I eat my Burger.
LinkedIn: My skills include Burger eating.
Instagram: Here's a classic picture of my Burger.
Blog: Here's my Burger eating experience.
Pinterest: Here's a Burger recipe.
Four Square: This is where I eat Burgers.
Snapchat: What Burger? you're too late.

Adapted from a comment I saw on LinkedIn. Can you think of any more to add?

Customer focused Information Architecture/Enterprise Architecture - A Commonsense Approach

I was in a conversation recently with a Fortune 500 manager handling Voice of the Customer (VOC) initiatives. I think she just needed  to vent steam. 

The gist of her story was that she felt her company was not treating customers right, making them run through hoops to get even basic information to help them understand their invoices and on and on. 

The processes and systems were not structured to deal effectively and efficiently with customer requests for information. 

“I would not want to be my own customer” is what she said as she described how on the personal front she had switched a vendor for providing the type of service her company was providing its customers.  

My question to her was how does the company treat its own employees? Do they have to run through hoops to get information, get claims reimbursed etc.? The answer was a resounding “Yes”.  I was not surprised. 

My premise is that customer service like charity “begins at home”. The reason is not just semantics or platitudes but more nuts and bolts. Organizational DNA has an information architecture strand. It remains same whether it is dealing with external customers or with internal employees. 

It is very unlikely that a company with excellent  internal processes would have lousy customer facing ones and vice-versa.

How can organizations get their Information Architecture right? My answer is “with some COMMONSENSE”, by building an architecture, systems and processes which focus on :

·                     Collaboration – “Can we all work together ?”

Are people, systems, processes, technologies working in a collaborative way? Does the architecture support that? Has it emerged from that?

Ownership and Oversight - “Who is minding the candy store? ”

Governance, Stewards

Mediation – “ Can we get a referee ? ”

Who breaks the tie of conflicting information needs? How?

Maintain  - “Houston! We’ve got a problem”

Does the architecture facilitate trouble shooting, problem solving?

Open- “Help yourself”

Does the architecture facilitate users/customers helping themselves? Does it help in monetizing new value streams?

New – “ What have you done for me lately”

Does the architecture showcase new and emerging trends? Does it have the flexibility to leverage them?

Strategic – “ Boldly go where no man has gone before”

How effective is the architecture in enabling the future state vision for the organization

Enterprise wide- “ whole kit and caboodle”

Can the architecture be scaled for the entire organization?

Necessary – “Keep the lights on”

Does it ensure that  legacy systems stay operational and can be leveraged to the extent possible

Scout, Speed, Scalable, Selective - “We are the Special Forces”

Does it allow innovation : a small "Special Forces" contingent which can quickly scout new options , build prototypes, execute limited precision deployments for a selected target audience. Focus is on 4 S's : Scout, Speed, Scaleable and Selective.

Evolutionary: Parameters, Process, Performance – “Go with the flow”

Plan, Build, Run: The larger "Infantry" component focuses on scaling up some of the early wins of the Special Forces component , establishes a process framework around it and launches them for mass deployment. Focus is on 3 P's: Parameters, Process, Performance.

And if organizations do not get these right, they end up with:

Conflicting priorities and resource allocations

Rapid growth of unorganized data and inability to deal with emergence of newer technologies

Arbitrary decision making focused on the short-term/tactical rather than the strategic

Political jockeying amongst departmental heads in the organization and within IT departments resulting in sub-optimal decision making.

Needless to add, this results in crappy service for both external customers and internal employees.

But as they say “Commonsense is very uncommon”

Rochester, not 2 cities but Rochester: One City. For All.

I was one of the two guest essayists for op-ed pieces in the Sunday (Jan 5, 2014) issue of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle (highlighting the inauguration of the new mayor - Lovely Warren's term).

The other guest essayist was Joe Seligman (President, Univ. of Rochester). His essay "A new way forward" focused on the need to further strengthen the symbiotic relationship between the University of Rochester and the City of Rochester.

My own piece "No more two cities"  focuses on the need to move beyond the divisiveness of the electoral campaign ("two cities") to a new paradigm (Rochester: One City. For All.). A message which can resonate well with other cities too (esp. New York City where the contest also saw the "two cities" theme play out.)

New Year Musings : "small data"- Is it the next BIG thing?

Every Yin has a Yang, Destruction has creation, BIG DATA should have small data, right?

 Lol, leaving metaphysics aside there indeed is "small data" and it could very well indeed be on the way to being the next BIG thing (am I stretching the pun too far?)

Researchers at Cornell NYC Tech describe it as "Small data are derived from our individual digital traces. We generate these data because most of us mediate or at least accompany our lives with mobile technologies." and have already figured out some uses for it esp. in the medical realm. They also talk about the need of this "trail of breadcrumbs" to be shared back with the users who create them rather than it being the preserve of the service providers only.

Think of a patient suffering from a debilitating disease who starts a new medication. An app based on the small data generated by his/her cellphone usage can detect that s/he is up and about at 7 am now instead of 10 am and notify the patient as well as the doctor about efficacy of the medication.Cool indeed.

Relevance to say a Printer/copier company? I would think that the clicks from meters on the printers which flow back to the company could be considered "small data" - bread crumbs generated during the process of usage of the printer. Right now they are primarily used to determine billing and replenishment of supplies etc. by the company. Stored up history of meter data could be viewed as "Big Data" - available to be mined for trends etc.

But could the "small data" itself be wrapped up and provided back to the customer as a monetized service? Copiers/printers proactively telling the users - " You are going to exceed your color print limit on this printer, better pick printer XYZ to minimize your monthly bill". I would think. yes. But then I may be getting ahead of myself. Lol, that's why I call these "musings".

Murmurations....and Information Architecture

Murmurations. What is that? It's the flight of flock of starlings - millions of birds that fill up the evening skies crisscrossing in intricate patterns without ever colliding. 

What's that got to do with IM or Architecture - exactly my thoughts before I had fathomed that Architecture arises from the abstract before it gets to the stage of boxes and lines on Visio diagrams. 

J.P. Rangaswami (salesforce) got his inspiration from food laid out on on a plate and Don Tapscott (IT visionary) laying out four principles of the Open World gets his from the murmuration of starlings. The murmuration starts around 14:30 in the video.

Interesting indeed. 

Chicken: To be or not to be; Same question different answers.

Chicken: To be or not to be; Same question different answers.
Birla and Ambani dwell on L'Affaire Chicken!

The proverbial question "Why did the chicken cross the road ?" seems to be on top of mind for the head honchos of two of the leading business houses in India. Each one of them is also on most global lists of the rich and the powerful.

Kumar Mangalam Birla (Aditya Birla Group)  has decided to let the chicken cross the road and jump into the frying pan at cafeterias in his global establishments as he recounted in a commentary published in the McKinsey Quarterly (Butter Chicken at Birla)

On the other hand Mukesh Ambani (Reliance Industries) has decided to let the chickens roost as he backed out from a decision to launch chicken based products (Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Retail chickens out, stays vegetarian)

Looks like each one of them had their "Chicken Soup for the Soul" moment and came up with different conclusions.

Both, however I hope will stick to what another tycoon had said about the bird:

Business is never so healthy as when, like a chicken, it must do a certain amount of scratching around for what it gets.
                         - Henry Ford

Leadership- Projecting Warmth....the socio-cultural perspective

The July/Aug 2013 Harvard Business Review lead article "Connect, Then Lead" focuses on the role of "warmth" in leadership.

They then talk about various ways of "projecting" warmth including body language cues.

My feedback to the authors on this Interesting article was " What I found missing was a juxtaposition with the socio-cultural context. In some cultures a firm handshake is a sign of confidence while in others it may be perceived as rudeness. Similarly maintaining eye contact may be a sign of straightforwardness and honesty in some cultures while it may be a sign of disrespect in others.

The over-generalization of body language cues as indicators of warmth vs. confidence can lead to disastrous consequences unless they are overlaid with the socio-cultural context. Also, these over-generalizations can help perpetuate stereotypes which can result in sub-optimal decision-making (e.g. people prefering tall people over short for elected positions in the US because of the perceived projection of strength and confidence)."

An abridged version of my observations alongwith the authors' response has been  published in the October 2013 print issue of the Harvard Business Review. 

HBR October 2013 Page 20

“Anekāntavāda” and Innovation

Is it a phone? A camera? A GPS device? A movie player? A book reader? A gaming device?  When thinking of smartphones the answer could be one of these, a combination thereof or all of them. It depends on the perspective of the user. The phone is the same with all the attributes it has but what it is perceived as depends on the user and the attributes which are significant for them or they are aware of.

This essentially is the premise of the ancient Indian Jain doctrine of “Anekāntavāda” – doctrine of non-absolutism or non-one sidedness or non-exclusivity . A classical elaboration of the doctrine has been the parable of the Six Blind Men and the Elephant where each man depending on where they touched the elephant described it as a spear (tusk), snake (trunk), wall (side), fan (ear), rope (tail) and tree (leg), with none of them able to visualize the animal itself.

This has a bearing on all aspects of innovation where the breakthrough innovator or platform disruptor needs to exhibit the ability of  visualizing or grasping  all aspects and manifestations of a process or technology (the “elephant”) while all existing players have been caught up with the spears, snakes et al. This may well be the philosophical premise behind the – customers often don’t know what they want- quote attributed to Steve Jobs.

Also could be a precursor or corollary to what we are familiar of today as thinking out-of- the-box.

How can an Innovator develop the ability to see beyond what others are seeing? How can this approach be built into the innovation process as  a systemic and systematic component?

A potential solution lies in an integrated use of Anekāntavāda which encourages stepping back and seeing the big picture with two other related concepts from the same philosophical stream - syādvāda—the theory of conditioned predication and nayavāda—the theory of partial standpoints.

The theory of conditioned predication would require the innovation process to answer a series of seven questions which as an example  I am applying to the smartphone innovation I started the piece with:

1. in some ways, it is  a phone, How? Why ?
2. in some ways, it is not a phone, How? Why?
3. in some ways, it is, and it is not phone, How? Why?
4. in some ways, it is a phone, and it is indescribable, How? Why?
5. in some ways, it is not a phone , and it is indescribable, How? Why?
6. in some ways, it is a phone , it is not a phone, and it is indescribable, How? Why?
7. in some ways, it is indescribable. How? Why?

Each of these seven propositions will help the innovator examine the complex and multifaceted nature of the innovation from a relative point of view of time, space, substance and mode enabling him/her to  see facets which can otherwise stay hidden.

The “indescribable” questions will help the innovator see beyond the current timeframe-  It may be indescribable now but what can it be described in the future. Could it be described as a payment transaction processing device, Voila, Square is born. Can it be described differently for different points of time – say night vs. day ? Voila, we get the flashlight feature for the phone.

If it is not a phone and is on my body can it measure my heartbeat or perhaps detect my mood or maybe detect how I react when I am served my coffee at a temperature I am not used to by a store which I frequent? What is it? What is it not? If yes, why? If not, why not?

Is it a guitar, No. Why not?......mmmmm sure it can be one, let’s build an app for it.

The theory of partial standpoints or viewpoints would then help to arrive at a certain inference from a point of view. A smartphone  has infinite aspects to it, but when we describe it in practice, we speak of only relevant aspects and ignore irrelevant ones. This does not mean it does not have other attributes, qualities, modes and other aspects; they are just irrelevant from a particular perspective. For example , when we talk of a "white iPhone" we are simply considering the color and make of the phone. However, the statement does not imply that the phone  does not have other attributes like volume, screen size, camera quality etc. This particular viewpoint – “white”  is  a partial viewpoint. Splitting up the attributes like this can enable the innovator to see the total picture part by part, functionality by functionality. This will help resolve design conflicts arising out of a confusion of standpoints since it clearly establishes where the standpoint is arising from.

There is nothing new with the precepts outlined here. They have been around for a few thousands of years and have generally just been viewed as philosophical doctrines. But as shown above they can very well still be leveraged to create breakthrough innovation in an organized, systematic way. Scholars have said “because anekāntavāda is designed to avoid one-sided errors, reconcile contradictory viewpoints, and accept the multiplicity and relativity of truth, the Jain philosophy is in a unique position to support dialogue and negotiations” which can very well be the cornerstone for a successful Innovation Process Framework.

Reference: Wikipedia: Anekantavada

“Big Bang” vs. Evolutionary – Same Disruptions, Different Viewpoint.

Check out the May 2013 print edition of the Harvard Business Review. Some of my thoughts are carried in the "Interaction" section on Pg 21.

A more detailed version of what my thoughts on the issue are:


“Big Bang” vs. Evolutionary – Same Disruptions, Different Viewpoint.



Apropos of Big-Bang Disruption (March 2013) by Larry Downes and Paul F. Nunes (Harvard Business Review, March 2013), while I agree with the general premise of the potential cataclysmic effects of Disruptions, I disagree with the authors’ premise that “You can't see big-bang disruption coming (until it's too late).You can't stop it. You can't overcome it."

The authors have highlighted several Big Bang Disruptions in the article, however almost all leverage a single platform : the Smartphone. The disruptors in my opinion are not the parking app or GPS app or payment app but the open, adaptive, secure platform called Smartphone (what I will call a “Platform Disruptor”) which has made all the other disruptors possible.

This may have a bearing on how established players react to and prepare for disruptions. They need to be on the lookout for such "Platform Disruptors" and run some What-if scenarios even if their own product/service does not appear to be directly impacted by the disruptor. e.g. say medical device manufacturers with such an analysis can figure out potential disruptions that may arise in their area due to potential remote medicine, monitoring body functions, medical database storage etc. capabilities of smartphones.

Will they be figure out all the possible disruptions, perhaps not but they would definitely be in a better shape than if they do not do the exercise at all.

Also, the Platform Disruptions are generally evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Smartphones, Big Data, Automobiles etc. none appeared in a Big Bang. Some of the downstream disruptors which these “Platform Disruptors” spawned may appear to emerge in a Big Bang. The pace of these Platform Disruption evolution is slow enough to be monitored by and reacted to by established players. But unfortunately by focusing on the downstream disruptors and failing to recognize these Platform Disruptors, companies are missing the woods for the trees.

And organizations do react knowingly or unknowingly to these Evolutionary Platform Disruptions. Case in point is how, many universities have reacted to the evolution of online distance education by making more of their own content available on the same platform. This way they have got co-opted into the evolution process and would not have to react to it ala Big Bang disruptors the articles' authors indicated.

So this one will be one disruption which will not be a Big Bang Disruption for them.

I would hypothesize that most Disruptions can be prevented from having a Big Bang effect by smart companies by:

- early identification of emerging trends

- what-if /SWOT analysis to identify impact on existing business

- identify opportunities to leverage the emerging trend

- get "co-opted" into the evolution process

- ride the evolutionary wave and reap the benefits.

Companies which do not do so will feel the impact of what was actually an evolutionary process as if it was a "Big Bang". Guys who see an oncoming bus and prepare for it can run alongside it a bit and then board it ; guys who are oblivious will be "hit by a bus".

So that’s why I view most disruptions as evolutionary rather than Big Bang and recommend that organizations prepare for them that way. For each of the companies that have been highlighted as being affected by the Big Bang disruption there will be countless others who would have thrived from the same disruption.

The Power of the Magic Words: Please, Sorry and Thank You.....in the Corporate World!

As I read "The Two Most Important Words" by Robert A. Eckert, ex-Chairman &CEO of Mattel Inc in the April 2013 issue of The Harvard Business Review, I could not but help break out in verse (well if you can call limericks as verse) adding a couple of my own words to the mix of wonder words that are essential for success:

Thank You!......Please and Sorry!

Thank you to the employees and all other stakeholders

should be an easy trait everyone engenders

but surprisingly its often forgotten

in the mad rush for getting things "done" 

when in fact it can work wonders.

How about adding "please" and "sorry" to the mix

gifts from grandma's bag of tricks

modern day management can sound complicated

when in fact the reality has been distorted

After all the foundation is in basic human values and ethics.

No shortcuts to getting to the College of your dreams!

Suzy Lee Weiss very rightly mentioned "sour grapes" in the beginning line of her recent Wall Street Journal op-ed piece "To (All) the colleges that rejected me". (WSJ, March 29, 2013)

Other than that I was able to make no sense of the article albeit getting a whiff of the smug sense of entitlement which seems to pervade many of our youth - I am lazy, I am not smart, I do not have any goals for my life, I do not care for what rest of the world is doing; yet I deserve a place in the college of "my dreams". Just because "I am being me"

My advice to Suzy- either set her dreams appropriately or else do what rest of the world does, dream big but work hard to achieve those dreams.

Or perhaps, Suzy will have the last laugh as this piece as a college essay might yet open the doors of the college she is interested in, for her. And the irony that many who consider her rant justified will totally balk if the same logic were to be applied for sports related admissions at colleges - I like the game, don't play it well, so what, get me on the team!

Winning with IT : Innovate as well as Plan, Build and Run

Some of my thoughts on this issue in response to a recent McKinsey Quarterly article:

Increasing the "meaning quotient" of work - Who tells who? Boss or Employee

McKinsey Quarterly in this article expounds that through a few simple techniques, executives can boost workplace “Meaning Quotient” and inspire employees to perform at their peak. I believe that the reverse also holds true - many a time it is the CXO who has lost the "meaning" and needs to be guided or prodded to figure out the true meaning of his/her corporate existence.

Architectural "Perfection" : implications for IT Projects

This is hot off the press and appears relevant esp. the part about “Architectural Perfection”. Some of it is the usual “consultant-speak” and would be preaching to the choir but I’m sure there are some nuggets to be gleaned.


McKinsey surmises that the key to success lies in mastering four broad dimensions, which combined make up a methodology for large-scale IT projects that they call “value assurance.” The following elements make up this approach :

• focusing on managing strategy and stakeholders instead of exclusively concentrating on budget and scheduling

• mastering technology and project content by securing critical internal and external talent
• building effective teams by aligning their incentives with the overall goals of projects
• excelling at core project-management practices, such as short delivery cycles and rigorous quality checks
According to survey responses, an inability to master the first two dimensions typically causes about half of all cost overruns, while poor performance on the second two dimensions accounts for an additional 40 percent of overspending.

Not surprisingly, the urge to seek Architectural “perfection” is indicated as a cost/timeline over-run driver. Brings back memories to me of some conversations with team members on “satisficing” vs. “perfect” solutions!

McKinsey underestimates traditional retailing alternatives in Emerging Markets

My published comments:

Full Comments:

I think the authors have missed two critical variables which will have a key role in determining the shape of retailing in emerging economies:

1. Real Estate Values

2. Transportation (not of the goods to the stores but for the consumers)

Mom and Pop stores may look archaic from a modern retailing and logistics perspective but they can generate high per square foot revenues at minimal costs. A very critical variable in economies such as India where real estate is at a premium.

Building mega-stores and hyper-marts in less crowded areas is sub-optimal because then lack of transportation makes it difficult for consumers to reach them and cart their purchases from store to home.

Also most consumers do not visit the Kirana store, a quick phone call ensures that all grocery items are delivered to their doorstep. In many cases the storekeeper knows the shopping list and delivers the products on a periodic basis. Not only that, they can fine tune the list and supplies based on local conditions - increase sugar and oil quantities ahead of a major festival, unrest brewing in the neighborhood - double up on the milk and eggs etc.

So viewing the mom and pop Kirana store as just a retail outlet will not suffice. It is essentially a close-to-the-customer customer service continuum. Most consumers believe that big stores will not be able to provide that level of service.

I would not call them "buggy whips"; Bicycles in an era of fast cars is a more apt analogy - both coexist and people are increasingly realizing that despite the faster, sleeker cars, the humble bike is not such a bad idea after all.

To Be, Or Not To Be.........Like Apple!

One of the aspects of Change Management or Building a Culture of Innovation is benchmarking against others and attempting to emulate best practices. However, that can be a challenge when attempting to emulate companies like Apple, a recent McKinsey & Co study - "The perils of best practice: Should you emulate Apple?"   expounds (sign in may be required to read full article). The reason being it is truly "exceptional" and hence an outlier.

They also talk about a "innovation at scale" approach which may be as relevant as a "disruptive innovation" approach for most corporates.

I shared some feedback on the article which has been published on the McKinsey site:

Web of Wellness

Rising healthcare expenses is a key issue plaguing area employers and employees alike. These rising expenses attributed to increasing healthcare costs and declining employee wellness (often caused by poor lifestyle choices) are impacting corporate competitiveness and profitability; as well as leading to reduced employee motivation and morale as these increasing costs are passed on to the employees.

Traditionally, individual employers have tried to deal with this issue by working with providers to reduce costs; and encouraging employees to lead healthier lifestyles.

A team of us looked at this issue as part of coursework at the Simon School of the University of Rochester.

Along with other ideas our team outlined an integrative approach leveraging interconnected players to enhance value by creating a “Web of Wellness”.

Here's what we see: Employers like Univ. of Rochester, Xerox, Paychex etc. want to reduce healthcare expenses. Local retailers like Wegmans, Tops, Walmart etc. want to increase sales of healthy options. Local gyms and health clubs like Midtown, RAC, Planet Fitness etc. want to boost membership. Also, individuals want to indulge in healthy lifestyle choices but often see no tangible rewards or are driven away by the high costs. What is missing is a framework, a "web" which brings these disparate players together and drives increased value for each of them.

And here’s what we think needs to happen: local associations like Greater Rochester Enterprise , Rochester Business Alliance etc. would need to step in. Pull all the players together to create a "Web of Wellness". Employees get a “Web of Wellness” card from their employers and earn points for using the gym (e.g. 100 points for every hour on the treadmill) or for achieving tangible health gains (e.g. 1000 points for every pound of weight loss) which can be redeemed for cash discounts on healthy products at local retailers (e.g. 500 points gets you $5 off your next purchase of healthy snacks) . Similarly buying healthy products at the stores could lead to points which could be redeemed towards classes at the local gym.

A lot of innovative deal-making will be required amongst all the players to come up with a workable solution but let’s get the conversation started. Perhaps Rochester’s “Web of Wellness” will become a model for the entire nation!

Published in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle as : Creating a 'web of wellness' in Rochester

India's manufacturing sector: Miles to go.........

McKinsey Quarterly's article "Fulfilling the promise of India’s manufacturing sector" made me opine:

The authors have rightly opined "India has a massive workforce, an emerging supply base, and access to natural resources needed in production" but what they did not allude to was a very lax and subjective environmental policy, poor infrastructure and an ill-defined land acquisition policy.

Prior to any expansion of manufacturing capabilities getting the environmental policy, safeguards and monitoring mechanism in place is critical if India does not want to end up with the kind of polluted environment China has. Expansion of manufacturing capabilities needs to be more than just moving smokestacks from one geography to another.

From "Kodak Moment" to Teaching Moment

From "Kodak Moment" to Teaching Moment

Much ink has been spilled over the last few weeks with countless pages being written about the misfortunes plaguing Kodak and the likely impact on the local community. One wonders and worries what all this means to our kids. The steady stream of disturbing news about lost jobs and economic despair.

However, I feel, as the Kodak moments fade away, several teaching moments emerge to help our kids make sense and learn from the Kodak related news they are confronted with on a daily basis.

One can start off with "never rest on your laurels" or "do not keep all your eggs in one basket". Kodak was so entrenched in its leadership of film and print photography that it was never able to make the transition to digital as that new world emerged. There could not be a better lesson for kids- scholars or athletes or artists, that as they strive to attain perfection in their pursuit of choice, it would be appropriate to develop some all-round skills that may come in handy for the challenges that life may throw at them in the future. Better be a jack of all trades, than a master of "one".

Another pithy aphorism that comes to mind is "a stitch in time saves nine", kids can be made to fathom from the Kodak experience that timely responses to issues is critical as else the issues will spiral out of control. It is important to confront the issues directly and vigorously ("grapple the bull by the horns") or else they will be left to "cry over spilt milk" or "closing the stable door after the horse has bolted". Kodak's late foray into consumer digital photography is a case study in doing too little too late.

Forever a fan of the "Happy Ending", I hope as Kodak makes a recovery from the bankruptcy, kids will learn a lesson, "The game is not over till it is over"; through perseverance, commitment and resolve one can rise like a "Phoenix from the ashes".

The Business Intelligence Chronicles Part 24: The difference a year makes! Gartner's 2012 Magic Quadrant for BI



Magic Quadrant for Business Intelligence Platforms 2011 vs. 2012

It has been a year since I posted : The Business Intelligence Chronicles Part 20: The Battlelines are drawn: Traditional Enterprise BI Platforms vs. Data Discovery Platforms
Gartner has now come out with the 2012 version of its Magic Quadrant for Business Intelligence Platforms.

The difference a year makes! Or does it?

Nothing much seems to have changed. The leaders  are essentially the same and more or less in the same positions. The same 2 players are the challengers, they have not been able to break through to the leaders quadrant. And, the niche players quadrant is as cluttered as ever.  What is a little disturbing though is that the visionary quadrant continues to be blank.

Where are the visionaries? The ones who are going to marry traditional platform BI, Data discovery/visualization, Google like search, Big Data, Data Mining, realtime Geo-location, Gamification, Twitter like notifications and deploy it via a socially pervasive framework like Facebook throughout the user community.

Btw, if this quadrant is based on surveys and data as part of a scientific process, why is it called "Magic"?

Ellison's Oracle vs. Plattner's SAP - Battle of "In-Memory"

The battle between Ellison’s Oracle and Plattner’s SAP seems to be heating up with Plattner having fired a salvo across Ellison’s bow with “HANA” (Hasso Plattner’s New Architecture – neither of these gentlemen can ever be accused of humility/modesty).

Plattner seems to have upped the ante by taking the battle beyond the usual mooning each other at yacht races and billion dollar acquisitions as bolt-on’s for their core platforms to the core of Oracle’s key strength – its underlying data base. SAP claims HANA which allows companies to store data in servers' main memory, instead of using the relational databases that Oracle dominates is significantly faster than Oracle’s Exadata .

The Jury is still out. T-mobile has taken HANA out for a test drive and has been impressed.

Ellison’s response- “Whacko”, adding he wants the name of SAP’s “Pharmacist”.

Read more in this article from the WSJ (01/26): Inside SAP's Skunkworks as It Takes Aim at Oracle

Key question: which way are the database technology winds going to blow – in-memory or relational?

In the BI space an in-memory application like Qliktech’s Qlikview emerged as a serious contender to traditional BI vendors (strengthening Data Discovery vis-a-vis traditional enterprise BI).

If SAP’s HANA pans out, I think the database market will see a new segment emerge for applications focused on “Big Data” (McKinsey’s definition: Datasets whose size is beyond the ability of typical database software tools to capture, store, manage and analyze) , with Oracle too strengthening its offerings in that area ( Oracle has bought an in-memory database company called TimesTen ).

It may be a few years before data in-memory database architecture really matures and comes center-stage. Process may be speeded up with a behemoth like SAP putting its financial muscle behind it. The strong demand for tools with ability to manage/ mine “big data” which companies are accumulating as a result of tapping into their customers web-usage, geo-location etc. is another driver.

Creating "Rypples" - Social Technologies and Performance Management

It all started with the McKinsey Quarterly article on "How social technologies are extending the organization". I liked the article but for me it raised a few questions which were published as a comment on the McKinsey Quarterly website:

• The growth of social technologies within organizations creates an interesting conundrum: how to reward employees for contributions they are making or changes they are driving across the organization by using thsee boundary-less social technologies? Many current performance-management processes focus on evaluating contributions to the “silo,” as judged by the supervisor or, in some cases, other stakeholders. However, social technologies can significantly increase the breadth and scope of an employee’s contributions. How are companies preparing their performance management processes to reflect the emergence of social technologies, and how do these tools enable those processes?
  

  Sooner or later, as social technologies become an integral part of the organization’s fabric, there will be a need to integrate them into the reward and recognition process for employees.

More details on an earlier blogpost:  How social technologies are extending the organization: My comments on McKinsey Article

Most of us have been in situations where the boss either has no clue or cannot fathom as to what we have been doing during the year ; a scenario which bites us in the back during the Annual Performance Review (or when "they" make lists on who to fire during downsizing). A problem likely to be compounded when with the new emerging social technologies an employee can be making contributions far beyond the span of the classical "silo" which a typical boss oversees.

Interesting dilemma, but seems like I an not quite the visionary I think myself to be :-) . The smart guys and gals at Rypple have already seized the bull by the horns ("The social way to improve performance at work : Build a results-driven culture and make reviews meaningful with Rypple’s social performance management platform").

Here's a look at how Facebook is using Rypple to manage the Facebook generation (How Facebook manages the Facebook generation. People at Facebook talk about how they use Rypple's social performance platform to support their social, collaborative, fast-moving culture.)

And looks like the mighty salesforce.com has now decided to ride and steer the bull (Salesforce.com Signs Definitive Agreement to Acquire Rypple – First Step Toward Human Capital Management for the Social Enterprise). They plan to rebrand/relaunch it as SuccessForce. 

The action has just started in this space and I can only see it hotting up as social technologies become part of the "life and blood" of more organizations; which will then need them to figure out ways to integrate them with performance appraisal; and the technology companies (SAP, Oracle, IBM) which will also need to figure out ways to incorporate these capabilities in their own offerings (What with  ZDNet blogger Dennis Howlett headlining it as:   Salesforce snubs SAP with Rypple flip )

Stay Tuned.