Friends,
 
Although I usually don’t comment on politics, there is upcoming legislation that I felt could not go unnoticed.  As  many of you already know, Congress has been working to pass two pieces of legislation, the Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), that I believe would be devastating to many of our members.  Although their intent is to curb internet piracy, these bills will permit the federal government to shut down and financially disable websites that are perceived to be linking to copyrighted content. 

Recently, these bills have recently come under fire from several organizations and companies, including social media websites and major media publications, for several reasons.  The recent article by Forbes magazine sums up many of their issues with the legislation:

“The act would allow the government to go after and block websites and search engines that post or link protected content without permission. How it defines protected content is the problem… [The bill] would affect legitimate and law-abiding start-up sites like Twitter, Birchbox, Etsy, Foursquare and Pinterest that curate content from different sources.”

The problem with the legislation is that it is written too broadly.  For instance, the bill states that to prevent liability sites and their hosts must take “technically feasible and reasonable measures” to prevent unlawful content from appearing on their site.  Unfortunately, the broadly interpreted definition of “technically feasible and reasonable measures” means that a judge could determine just how stringent a university’s network security measures should be.  This is a dangerous precedent, as instead of leaving internet security professionals in charge of determining what necessary steps need to be taken to protect internet networks, the bill turns over that authority to a judge, which may or may not have a basic understanding of how the internet functions.  System administrators and web developers would have to constantly update security features to meet the requirement de jour of their institution’s websites.
 
Recent outcry from the technology community has halted the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House, and now this is the time to act in the Senate.   If you live in Ohio, please call Senator Brown (who is a current co-sponsor) and Senator Portman today and tell them that you would like them to oppose the Protect IP Act:

Senator Sherrod Brown: (202) 224-2315
Senator Rob Portman: (202) 224-3353

Please ACT NOW … call your Senators, and consider writing a letter to your member of Congress, or newspaper.
 
Thank you for taking the time to speak out about this legislation, and in addition here is a huge list of organizations, academics, and companies who are also opposing these bills.
 
 Rick
 

I posted this quote on Twitter and Facebook yesterday:

This was a observation made by management guru Peter Drucker several years ago, and it is still true today.  I posted it because I continue to see large companies line up to claim that they are adopting program x or strategy y to make the company more ‘innovative’. When you look behind the curtain, you find that they certainly have adopted new programs, but they continue to overlook the most important element: CULTURE.

It’s a sad truth, but they are just burning cash and energy … while the stated objective remains a distant dream.

Comments welcome.

Rick
 

There is a great podcast on the issues with our patent system at The American Life this week. I highly recommend it for anyone that cares about innovation, patents and business. Take a listen and let me know what you think.

Is the current patent system relevant today? Some have argued that the world moving too fast for the current patent system. So, what do you think?

Rick

Organizations are often consumed with market research and competitive analysis. They say they want to innovate, but their products and services are nothing more than a reflection of the current market. They a stuck in today’s paradigm, eking out incremental change, year after year.  The signals they use to plan and develop new products and services is much like the frozen ruts in the icy roads near my home on a cold winter day.

How should companies escape from this trap? Years ago, Wayne Gretzky said:  “Skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.”  Steve Jobs referenced this quote a few years ago at the launch of the iPhone, to describe Apple’s strategy. I recently read again in a 2007 interview of Greg Joswiak, who at the time was Apple’s Product Manager for the iPod and iPhone. He quoted Gretzky, and then continued, “… We try to understand as we develop our product road map, what’s going to be exciting in the future. And that’s one of the advantages we have over our competitors. Our competitors tend to put the cross hairs on where we are now, and by the time they come up with a product that tries to match where we are now, we’re beyond them. We’re one or two generations beyond, moving faster than they are.”

I am not suggesting you should ignore the competition, but I am suggesting that the future is often right in front of you. Embrace it! Exploit it! Let me know what you think.

Rick

I have always had an intense interest in patents and the patent system. I am listed as an inventor on several, and have been called on to review many other patents. (No, they are no fun to read. If you have insomnia, this may be your best cure).

I just read a very interesting article: “Wolfe’s Den: Mad Rush For Eneterprise 2.0 Patents” by Alexander Wolfe of InformationWeek. The author made this observation: 

Like any nascent technology, Enterprise 2.0 is still searching for its sweet spot. Right now, the first wave of adoption has seen heavy user uptake of wikis. But wikis are just the curtain-raiser, and a minor first act, at that. The main performance is the crop of serious, first-generation products currently rolling out from vendors such as Cisco, IBM, Jive Software, Microsoft, and SAP.

Which got me to thinking: Whenever a new area starts to take off — before it hits the public consciousness, actually — companies rush to lock up its intellectual-property underpinnings. This means patents.

Looking at patents is worthwhile, because they give a heads up on interesting developments which might lie down the road. They provide inferential insight into vendors’ possible product plans, or, more correctly, the type of stuff they’ve been thinking about and the problems they’ve had to work to overcome.

Mr. Wolfe continue with a review of recent patents by the major players  … an excellent article and I recommend. 

The real reason for this post is to consider the impact of our patent system on innovation. For about 200 years this system has served us well. It promoted innovation by rewarding the innovator with exclusive rights to intellectual property for a period of time. It also provided a path for the spread of new technology through disclosure. 

Today the system is in need a a major overhaul. It is burdened by it’s own legacy and a mountain of bureaucracy. A few observations (my short list):

Patents take far too long to publish
When you are the inventor, this can work to your advantage as it allows you to keep your IP ‘hidden’ for a period of time. The implications of the slow system are well illustrated in the smart phones legal battles we witness in the news today.  In the rush to obtain exclusive rights to new IP, companies flood the patent office with new applications. The volume of patents further slows the process.  What happens next is that overlapping patents are granted. This sets in motion years of legal battles.

What is an innovation anyway? 
I have read hundreds of patents. I often walk away asking myself, “Is this really an invention”.  Applying known science to new applications seems obvious, but in today’s system, this results in a patent. One test for patentability is that it is not suppose to be “obvious to those skilled in
the art.” A quick note: A very large percentage of patents that are in the system have never been used.  I have heard numbers as high as 95%.

Patent Trolls
A patent troll is a holding company that owns a portfolio of patents. These companies exist for one reason: to build this portfolio, and then to sue others for infringement. Some argue that these organizations have value. I feel that they are destructive. They do nothing to innovate or spread innovation. I argue that they exist because the system is flawed. The are a symptom of the problem.

Conclusions
The patent system is in need of an overhaul. I am not sure anyone in the position to deal with it has the passion or energy to deal with it. It is in need of radical simplification, faster processing and patent rules that encouage real innovation. What do you think? 

Rick

I have been accused of being an Apple Fanboy.  I  admit to owning a number of ‘i-things’, but nothing like this: 25 Signs That You Might Be An Apple Fanboy.  I do not have an Apple tattoo, no Mac-couch, or any of the items on this list. I am guilty of enjoying Apple products. 
What is the big deal with Apple anyway? I am sure that everyone has an opinion on this. There is not much middle ground: they seem to be loved or hated. 
Apple is brilliant at using design to provide an amazing customer experience.  It is not just about the product. The experience is managed at every touch-point. Customer service, packaging, product, iTunes … it is all part of the experience that we call Apple. 
I have been reading, Do You Matter?: How Great Design Will Make People Love Your Company by Brunner, Emery and Hall (Sponsored link). The authors made the following observation:

We think that most
people are prone to define design, particularly good design, more narrowly than they should. When you see an iconic product, such as an
iPhone, for instance, [...] it’s so easy to overlook the big picture of
how the product fits into the company’s future – and the future of
similar products in general. We want you to consider a far broader view
of the significance of design.

Speaking of product design, the authors wrote that:

The difference between a great product and a merely good product is that a great product embodies an idea that people can understand and learn about – an idea that grows in the minds, one they emotionally engage with.

Can a product, and a company, be successful based on design alone? Not necessarily.  The author pints to the “total concept – how the product operates, how it sounds, and how it feels.” Does it resonate with customers? That is what is special: you experience Apple. 

If you want to look at an interesting case study, consider the Motorola Razr. Clearly this was a popular phone. Was Motorola able to use this to sustained the success they enjoyed from the early success? They tried to migrate the Razr ‘looks’ to next generation of devices, but they never really understood this: Design, as the author points out, establishes the relationship between your company and your customer.

I highly recommend this book.  It should be read by every engineer, marketer, and business person. As for Apple – that’s your call.  I love my i-things.

Rick

Photo: By multisanti

I was fortunate this week to attend the World Innovation Forum in New York City. What an amazing experience. The speakers were great and the people I met were all so inspiring. Over the next few days I will share a few of my take-aways. Here is an outline fo the three days. I have so many things I want to write about.

Monday: The day before the event, I attended afield trip to Pfizer and Virgin US. The trip was let by !WhatIF!. It was interesting to observe the contrast between Pfizer and Virgin. The culture and their approach to innovation was so different. The folks at ?WhatIF! did a great job and provided some wonderful, thought provoking insights.

Tuesday: Speakers included Michael Porter,Andreas Weigend, Chip Heith, Buz Stone (co-founder of Twitter), and others. Chip Heith is a great speaker!

Wednesday: Seth Godin, Robert Burnner and others. I cannot say enough about Seth Godin. He also joined us for Lunch. This was a much smaller group and provided an opportunity for great insights.

It was amazing to hear from these great speakers and to compare notes with people in other industries. More to follow.

During my workout today, I listened to a recent DFJ Entrepreneurial Though Leaders Seminar. This is a podcast that is co-sponsored by BASES (a student entrepreneurship group), Standford Technology Ventures Program, and The Department of Management Science and Engineering (Standford University). The speaker for this session was John Seely Brown.  John has a technical background, having served as a Senior Scientist at Xerox. His bio is impressive, but I was far more interested in his discussion about the ‘Collaborative Innovation and a Pull Economy‘. I was so impressed by his remarks that I download his latest book,  “The Power of Pull: How Small Moves, Smartly Made, Can Set Big Things in Motion” (Sponsored link).   

In the space I have here, I cannot begin to discuss everything Mr. Brown discussed. His comments, contrasting the 20th century business model, to what will be required in the 21st century are insightful. In a couple of paragraphs I thought I would attempt to tie a couple of his comments back to education, and even ‘new media’.

First, an observation: The 20th century model is founded on principles taught by Alfred Chandler. Mr. Brown called it the ‘Push Economy’. This model is hierarchical, with a ‘center-out’ approach to business. The goal of business in this model is “Scalable Efficiency”. Mr. Brown noted that the infrastructure was key to creating this economy (roads, cars, trucks, ships, and airplanes .. etc). Organizational architecture were built around this infrastructure, leveraging it, generating scalable efficiency. The goals of this were (and largely still are):

- Predictability
- Hierarchy
- Control
- Organizational routines
- Minimizing variance (can you say Six Sigma).

He said, “Build a lot, use transportation mechanisms to distribute it, bah bah bah”.  What he said next ties back to my last post. He briefly contrast the 20th century education system to this model. He said:

Our K through 12 schools are built on scalable efficiency, a factory model. Basically, we can predict for you what things you’re going to need for ten to 15 years away, and we’re going to build you a stock of assets for you to learn, to acquire so that eventually, you get to use them, very much like how corporations work.

This reminded me of a chapter in Linchpin: Are You Indispensable? (sponsored link) by Seth Godin: “Indoctrination: How We Got Here”. The chapter starts with this quote:

We’ve been taught to be a replaceable cog in a giant machine. We’ve been taught to consume as a shortcut to hapiness. We’ve been taught not to care about our jobs or our customers. And we’ve been taught to fit in”

There has been a fundamental and long-term change that will ripple through the business world for the next few years. In the new economy, the Pull Economy, will be built around ‘digital infrastructure’ and collaborative innovation. What we call social media today is just one element of the pull economy. This change will require that we think differently about everything from intellectual property to education. Take a few minutes to watch the video and consider what he has to say. I know it made me think hard about many things. I look forward to reading Mr. Brown’s book.

Watch the video and let me know what you think.

Rick

I have been reading “Linchpin: Are You Indispensable?” by Seth Godin. This is an outstanding book. Today I came across the following comment. I apologize that I do not have a page reference, I am reading it on my Kindle. 

Wikipedia and the shared knowledge of the Internet make domain knowledge on its own worth significantly less than it use to be. Today, if all you have to offer is that you know a lot of reference book information, you lose, because the Internet knows more than you do.

Depth of Knowledge combined with good judgment is worth a lot. Depth of knowledge combined with diagnostic skills or nuanced insight is worth a lot, too. Knowledge alone, though, I’d rather get faster and cheaper from an expert I find online.

… Depth of knowledge is rarely sufficient, all by itself, to turn someone into a linchpin.

I hope this hits you between the eyes. It did me. Now, I would like you to do is to think of this in terms of how we educate our children. Get that really clear in your head. Got it? Now, hold that thought for a minute. 

Last week, I attended the 140 Character Conference in New York City. This was an amazing, wonderful event, put on by Jeff Pulver (@jeffpulver).  I should take a timeout to blog about how it. It had an impact on me that I can’t put into words. I will say this: If you have an opportunity to attend a #140conf, GO. Just do it. You will not regret it.

Now back to education. During the first day of the conference, Chris Lehmann of the Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia, PA gave the following presentation .. listen close: 

I am going to keep this short. Yes, children need to learn to locate information. Unfortunately, what we seem to do best, or at least what we seem to focus on, is training them to take test. Chris is right, we teach subjects instead of children. We train instead of teach. We need to teach them to use their minds and to create. The future can be bright, but we must change how we educate. I love the message. Get involved in your local schools or with our youth. This is important.

Rick

I spoke to a group on Wednesday evening on the subject of ‘Time Management’.  I used Keynote on my Mac (I love Keynote).  Just before the presentation was set to begin, I broke one of my personal rules and decided to check out (‘experiment’) with an iPhone app.  What does that have to do with the presentation? The app that I decided to checkout was Keynote Remote.  I already have a remote that I use for presentations. It connects via USB and does a great job. I decided to check it out anyway. What a peasant surprise.

This is a great applications. Some of the key features:

- Swipe to advance slides (forward or backwards)
- View presenter notes can be displayed on the iPhone
- Landscape or portrait view (not perfect, but it works)

You need to be connected to WIFI to use it, but it is great. (See the link below for other options). 

The app cost 99 cents, but it was well worth the investment. I recommend you read some of the reviews that have been posted on iTunes. I have only used it for a few days, but so far, I plan to continue using it. Now I am checking out similar apps for PowerPoint. Any suggestions?

Rick

Technorati Tags: Keynote, Apple, iPhone, App, Presentation