It was a great joy for myself and the Encanvas team to launch our 'Squork' secure and live business social networking technology in Lucknow, India this month with our partners US Tech. We were cheerfully surprised by the enthusiasm that exists in India for new technology - even when it's technology that changes the paradigm of business computing and asks people to consider new ways of working. (A big thanks to the IIM-L team for making us so welcome!).
Through a series of meetings with leaders of academia and business around the purpose and opportunities offered by Squork business social networking, surfaced the fundamental reason why I believe India will be the powerhouse of world markets in the next decade.
You see, here's my point:
In Europe and the USA, I see IT leaders playing a game of 'got, not got' over the building blocks of IT technology in support of their enterprise computing stacks that always reminds me of the game we used to play as kids swapping football player cards with our friends at the school gate. It seems every IT leader has to have at least one of every technology genre whether it achieves a business outcome or not. So I'm always being quizzed by CIOs about 'what Encanvas displaces' and 'where does Encanvas (and Squork) fit' in the enterprise IT stack? This focus on innovation is firmly pinned to their NOW, and the norms of understanding and behavior as they see them today. They are focused too much on DOING THINGS BETTER and think too little about DOING BETTER THINGS.
Never once did I have that schoolyard conversation in India. The most common question was this: "How will Encanvas help me to achieve 100% growth in the next 2 to 3 years?"
This is a much more relevant business conversation.
It's not secret that companies around the world have spent millions on IT, and yet - with an average of 15 business intelligence tools, tens (sometimes hundreds) of shrink-wrapped software products, workflow tools, search tools, mapping tools etc. - most middle managers and C-level execs. still complain about the fit between IT and their business information needs. Nomatter how we measure it, IT has not, does not, deliver agile information systems that always stay in tune with the way organizations want to work.
In Indian I found businessmen and women who aren't shackled by the IT investment they've already made. Instead, they're interested in the potential of IT to be a competitive differentiator. The question they want answering is how technology can deliver the growth they want to see.I'm convinced that, as long as new innovation delivers on its promises, they will happily throw out their current IT - AND ITS ASSOCIATED NORMS OF BEHAVIOR - without a thought.
And that's why Encanvas is in India.
I don't mind so much sitting in meetings with IT leaders in Western Europe and the USA evidencing how the world of Web 2.0 - with its enterprise mashups, drag and drop mapping, agile business intelligence, instant mobile apps and business social networking solutions - can make a step-change difference to business growth. I don't mind because I know that for every stick in the mud corporate gate-keeper there are other IT leaders who are thinking about business outcomes and it's always fun to help any and all of these people to find their own reasons to change their perspectives on the potential of IT to bring about a competitive advantage.
New web 2.0 technology platforms like Encanvas that are built for cloud computing and a new generation of IT savvy business people are unstoppable in the hands of entrepreneurs and creative people with uncluttered minds. And today, there are more of those people in India.
If we are to see economies in the USA and Western Europe remain as major players in global business markets, somehow we need to get more business people (and particularly IT leaders) thinking more about the 100% growth of their organizations, and less about the completeness of their IT stack. The 'got, not got' game of corporate IT procurement has got to come to an end.
How? Beats me.
Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Why Enterprise mashups are more than a 'nice to have' for business leaders
Today I’m re-authoring the Action Framework system. It reminded me that in 2002, the Action Framework was the reason why I started on the journey to producing a better way of working with data that has since become known as enterprise mashups.
Under any other description, an Action Framework is a performance management system but unlike traditional performance management systems that focus too much on strategies and plans and not enough on reality, the currency of an Action Framework are the actions that happen across an organization on a daily basis.
When I started NDMC I was keen to find a better way of managing organizations because I’ve seen so many good and enthusiastic people find themselves in middle-management positions, not knowing why they’re doing what they’ve been asked to do. All too often, enthusiasm and effort does not translate into results and rewards because of poor instruction or poor alignment between the actions of these key people and the required outcomes of the organization. Another issue that I was keen to resolve was how organizations listen to their customers and learn what matters most to them. Normally organizations get this wrong because they have sales people doing the asking or they rely on satisfaction surveys with their ‘yes’ and ‘no’ black and white responses. So it made sense to me that a performance management framework needed to have installed mechanisms to listen to the outside world and adjust plans based on its ability to learn.
From these fragments of logic, my colleagues at NDMC and I created the first Action Framework in 2004. Initially our first attempt was built on spreadsheets that I used to capture strategic plans, budgets and actions and insights. Aligning all of these elements was not easy on a spreadsheet (I wasn’t convinced we were helping anyone see the woods for the trees with such a complicated landscape of data) so a year on we turned to the use of an SQL relational database and built a series of data capture and analysis applications in dotnet.
But there was a fundamental problem. Whatever we did to create ‘the perfect system’ for every organization, there were too many variables and far too many repositories and sources of data. In consequence, the cost of ‘feeding’ the Action Framework with up-to-the-minute data proved too expensive. We had a good model but not a good ‘system’.
What we needed was a method of creating Action Frameworks that would be different for every organization; that could capture data from pretty much any data source from across the enterprise and present insights in new and useful ways without the traditional overheads and burdens of IT projects.
It was with this fragment of common sense that we embarked on the production of such a system. Initially we went to all of the major suspects to see if we could use an existing tool but it didn’t take long for us to realize that our vision was at odds with what the IT industry believed to be possible.
Enterprise mashups are a very different concept in IT that requires a fresh perspective in the way such a technology can be applied. Unfortunately, most people in business apply the role of enterprise mashups into the current ways of working and uses of IT. They try to fit Enterprise Mashups into the present day landscape of IT and ask the question ‘ so what does it replace?’
People that do this miss the point.
The envisioned role of Enterprise Mashups is to provide a system and mechanism for creating an information management that is always in consort with the information needs of the community they serve. Any effective Action Framework cannot be affordably deployed (and therefore can not exist) without this level of agility in IT systems.
Anyway, back to re-building that Action Framework;-)
Under any other description, an Action Framework is a performance management system but unlike traditional performance management systems that focus too much on strategies and plans and not enough on reality, the currency of an Action Framework are the actions that happen across an organization on a daily basis.
When I started NDMC I was keen to find a better way of managing organizations because I’ve seen so many good and enthusiastic people find themselves in middle-management positions, not knowing why they’re doing what they’ve been asked to do. All too often, enthusiasm and effort does not translate into results and rewards because of poor instruction or poor alignment between the actions of these key people and the required outcomes of the organization. Another issue that I was keen to resolve was how organizations listen to their customers and learn what matters most to them. Normally organizations get this wrong because they have sales people doing the asking or they rely on satisfaction surveys with their ‘yes’ and ‘no’ black and white responses. So it made sense to me that a performance management framework needed to have installed mechanisms to listen to the outside world and adjust plans based on its ability to learn.
From these fragments of logic, my colleagues at NDMC and I created the first Action Framework in 2004. Initially our first attempt was built on spreadsheets that I used to capture strategic plans, budgets and actions and insights. Aligning all of these elements was not easy on a spreadsheet (I wasn’t convinced we were helping anyone see the woods for the trees with such a complicated landscape of data) so a year on we turned to the use of an SQL relational database and built a series of data capture and analysis applications in dotnet.
But there was a fundamental problem. Whatever we did to create ‘the perfect system’ for every organization, there were too many variables and far too many repositories and sources of data. In consequence, the cost of ‘feeding’ the Action Framework with up-to-the-minute data proved too expensive. We had a good model but not a good ‘system’.
What we needed was a method of creating Action Frameworks that would be different for every organization; that could capture data from pretty much any data source from across the enterprise and present insights in new and useful ways without the traditional overheads and burdens of IT projects.
It was with this fragment of common sense that we embarked on the production of such a system. Initially we went to all of the major suspects to see if we could use an existing tool but it didn’t take long for us to realize that our vision was at odds with what the IT industry believed to be possible.
Enterprise mashups are a very different concept in IT that requires a fresh perspective in the way such a technology can be applied. Unfortunately, most people in business apply the role of enterprise mashups into the current ways of working and uses of IT. They try to fit Enterprise Mashups into the present day landscape of IT and ask the question ‘ so what does it replace?’
People that do this miss the point.
The envisioned role of Enterprise Mashups is to provide a system and mechanism for creating an information management that is always in consort with the information needs of the community they serve. Any effective Action Framework cannot be affordably deployed (and therefore can not exist) without this level of agility in IT systems.
Anyway, back to re-building that Action Framework;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)