How do you choose?

This almost completed Federal election was about a lot of things, many of them contradictory, and beyond the wisdom of the bulk of the electorate to distinguish the rhetoric and spin from the facts. Does the sad view of the crumbling social and economic infrastructure taken by Paul Krugman in the NY Times apply as much to Australia as it does to the US?

Take the NBN broadband “debate” for instance. Depending on which commentator you read, or listen to, the answer is different, a 45 billion dollar bet on technology and a future need for the 100mps speeds to be delivered, or a 6 billion dollar patch up that will allow markets and technological developments to deliver a satisfactory  outcome. All the other debates in this election, health, education, infrastructure, and the rest (apart from the localised pork-barreling, everyone knows what that is for) are in the same boat, long on words, and promises, short on anything resembling a responsible analysis of the things we know, and assumptions underpinning those we do not know much about, but that may emerge.

One thing I believe, is that unless we have some sort of vision about where we need to be, and what we need to do to get there, together with the long term investments that need to be made, the institutions we currently have will erode further, as is apparently happening in the US.

As a start, lets find a way to bring back some of the manufacturing capability that has been exported over the last 20 years, as it is pretty clear now that actually making stuff is far better in the long run for the whole economy than just managing the transactions. 

Collaboration lessons from Canberra

This hung election has generated a tsunami of comment, but nothing I have seen on the mechanics of collaboration, a key factor in any lasting resolution to the impasse  I would have thought.

The idea of a “party” is simply an expression of the need for group action to get anything done. In the case of the two major parties the early collaboration around an idea has long been replaced by the institutional battle for survival, the original reason for the formation of the party forgotten.

By contrast, consider the Greens. They evolved from a protest group coalesing around opposition to the Franklin dam in Tasmania, through to political group with the power to protest in  a wider forum of proportionally elected houses state upper houses, (Federal senate, NSW Legislative Council) from which all we expected was protest, to a party that now carries a veto over all legislation, which is a far wider remit than a one issue protest.

This last step is a game changer, one the Democrats failed. But what of the three independents in the house of Reps? Almost by accident they have the power of veto if they act collaboratively, but it seems to be emerging that consistent collaborative action may fail them just because the rallying point around which they can coalesce is far more ambiguous than the Greens “save the Franklin” and the Democrats “keep the bastards honest” and therefore the collaboration lacks some of the “glue”  essential to a collaborative effort, and they lack the institutional organisation that is the alternative.

It will be interesting to watch, and I suspect that there will be an agreement that sees the “Mad Monk” as PM with the nominal support of the three independents, which will become very fragile as the next full moon impacts on Bob.

Scale, speed and technology

The challenge of competing successfully in the digital age is to build the advantages of scale, without  the inertia of the bureaucratic structures that usually come with it as a means to manage and control  activities and investment priorities, not to mention the governance and compliance challenges.

This remains as true for services delivery as it is of manufacturing demand chains, private, NFP  and public sectors.

The evolution of technology and its application to communication has wrought profound changes in the way we manage, and the pace is quickening.

For those of us who remember the emergence of the Fax, just 30 odd years ago, the sense that something extraordinary had happened was profound, but who has used a fax for the last 5 years? Since then email has emerged, followed by an explosion of web tools and mobile technology.

 It is probable that the next innovation is just around the corner, are you ready?

 

Mass amateurisation

15 years ago the task most organisations were applying themselves to was “mass customisation”. How do we mix the cost benefits of mass production with the individual needs of the customer?

Dell redefined the PC market by finding ways, as retailer Zara transformed fashion retailing, and Toyota transformed manufacturing cars, and beyond. 

The task now for many industries has changed a lot, it is now a question of how they deal with “mass amateurisation” a term coined by Clay Shirky in his great book “Here comes everybody“, of their services. As the communication tools available have removed the power previously held through communication and supply chains.

The obvious example is publishing, in all its forms, but it is also happening in almost all services businesses. Stock-brokers now compete with low cost/transaction  providers, accounting software has removed the bread and butter of many accounting practices as any office worker could now do the accounts, the list is almost endless, but the process is just getting quicker and easier as storage and data services migrate to the “cloud” reducing the marginal costs of data storage and communication to almost zero.

The need to be differentiated in ways meaningful to specific customers has never been greater.

The more things change…….

Conventional wisdom of the past decrees that copyright is essential to the well-being and motivation of the suppliers of the publishing stock in trade, authors.

This self serving position is contrary to mountains of evidence accumulating as the web goes into its teenage years of development beyond the geeks. There are thousands of new authors of everything from childrens fiction to scientific treatises on many subjects, and everything in between, things like this blog included.

In this Speigl article, the argument is made, convincingly so given the current evidence from the web, that copyright law is in fact an impediment to publication, and its benefits, rather than a protector.