(1 votes, average: 9 out of 10)
Loading ...Blogging is not like traditional media - Part 1
People who read my contributions to this blog have noticed me say “Part 1″ a few times. This happens when I start a topic that I know will take more than a few pages, and I know that too many pages doesn’t work well on a blog. So I plan to break the article up.
Sometimes, however the “Part 2″ never happens. The main reason is a lack of feedback that drives interest in pursuing a given story.
Read the rest of this entry »
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(5 votes, average: 9.4 out of 10) Loading ...Legacy Modernization in Government
A previous era saw the shift to legacy mainframe systems designed, developed, installed and maintained by a then new generation trained or self-educated in these technologies. We are now facing a major skills gap in maintaining these technologies. The Baby Boomers who are retiring in large numbers are leaving with their knowledge. It is essential that the new generation of IT professionals be cross trained… new, younger people in the legacy technologies hand in hand with Web 2.0 (see Mainframe computing jobs vacant as the Baby Boomers who set up systems begin retiring with few educated to fill the spots http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-sat-tech-jobs-ibmapr05,0,2110029.story).
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. We are seeing the same thing today with the rise of Web 2.0. There is a new generation of people who understand and have been trained in Web 2.0 in all its facets – wikis, Facebook, blogs, RSS feeds, online communities, crowd sourcing and more are going to conceive, install and build the new Web 2.0 environments that will change the way the world works.
It is inevitable that Web 2.0 environments will support or displace the legacy mainframe systems. I’d like to highlight some of the issues that will be important in that transition.
I remember ‘back in the day’ when business started to move from paper-based accounting systems to computerized systems running first on mainframes and later on smaller computer systems. The migration path from one system to another involved keeping both going in parallel until the new environments proved stable and the organization adapted around it. I would suggest that conceptually both environments can be maintained in parallel during the move from legacy systems to Web 2.0 environments, as was done in the past, yet at a far faster rate now. Also it is important to understand that Web 2.0 requires organic growth that can take time in order to build the requisite communities. So the task is to plant seeds, nurture them and allow time to see them grow.
Citizens will increasingly expect more personalization, as well as a more responsive and agile government. Web 2.0 will create healthy competitive tension in government capable of democratizing a sector, meaning giving it back to the citizens, including them in its various processes. As citizens are experiencing major shifts in personalization, data control and accessibility through use of Web 2.0 technologies, businesses will also demand the same from government.
The recent earthquake in China and the use of social networking tools by citizens and their government during the crisis demonstrates the potential for change (see: http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/C/CHINA_THE_QUAKE_ONLINE?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-05-18-13-00-37).
Watch for security issues. Web 2.0 sites are vulnerable to attack by ‘enemies of the state’ and other malicious interests
The move from legacy to Web 2.0-based systems will minimize, rationalize and make things more transparent, which will enable everyone to see the inefficient work of the public sector. e-government is capable of democratizing a sector, meaning giving it back to the citizens and including them in various processes
Governments, like every other employer, are desperate to attract and retain quality staff and ensure that employees work in an environment that is socially and technologically similar to their existing experience of the world. Therefore, instant messaging (IM) and wikis are must-haves for these new workers.
Public servants will increasingly expect a work environment that reflects their interests, networks and ways of communicating with their colleagues and peers. Web 2.0 technologies will influence the internal processes and cultures of agencies as much as interactions with citizens.
Engage stakeholders – citizens, internal users, and IT staff – with standardized Web 2.0 environments using well-founded change management tools to guide the transition out of legacy systems.
The ultimate destination of this transition will support the public interest by preparing citizens for a world of plentiful (and sometimes unreliable) information, and help excluded groups to take advantage of this information.
Envision government agencies with a high level of confidence regarding the identity of the online user. They will be able to place people in control of the transaction and protect their privacy. This is the online approximation of a person presenting a passport or other proof of identity document in-person to an agency.
(http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2007/04/29/5-principles-govt20/)
Several ideas were advanced from http://blog.executivebiz.com/government-web20-trends-for-2008/:
Due to the application of Web 2.0 in government, there will be increased interactions among users internal to the government and with citizens. Every interaction is an opportunity to learn of an unmet need, which is an opportunity to fuel innovation.
Enterprise mashups based on enterprise data are already an expectation among the workforce, but the deployment of this capability in government has been slow to take effect. As government organizations see how others do it, the deployment of secure enterprise mashup capabilities should accelerate.
Knowledge workers need ad-hoc and situational data, which is dynamically integrated in small amounts. As more government enterprises deliver secure mashup capabilities, the ability of the government workforce to efficiently and effectively accomplish their mission should increase, which should have a positive impact on retention, fueling additional benefits to the government’s mission.
It is well known that John Kennedy’s vision of getting to the moon was accomplished through the mobilization of thousands of engineers in a huge program using large mainframes. This can be done through the massive increases in computing power woven together with Web 2.0 collaborative tools. Imagine what could be achieved? Tackle something big to harness the power of Web 2.0, such as reinventing provincial health care delivery systems.
This article was written with the assistance of Howard Oliver, CEO of What If What Next™, he is an expert in Web 2.0.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(4 votes, average: 10 out of 10) Loading ...Trying to Throw the Brick through the Cloud – Microsoft/Yahoo vs. Google
There has been much press and discussion about the potential merger between Microsoft and Yahoo (the brick) in an attempt to become a formidable force against Google (the cloud). Yahoo management does not want to be taken over and they have recommended rejection of the offer, turning this into a potential hostile takeover. The hostile takeover of Yahoo seems to be somewhat probable based upon market reaction and the premiums offered by Microsoft to Yahoo shareholders. Microsoft certainly has the capability, with its’ multibillion dollar ‘war chest’ for huge acquisitions. I am sure Yahoo will put up quite a fight. There are reports that Yahoo is trying to align with AOL and even Google to fend off the Microsoft bid.
Whether the deal does go through or not, as would be expected, Microsoft is laying plans to integrate Yahoo effectively. The word is out that Microsoft’s executive and product teams are mandated to do the integration/mash-up between Yahoo and Microsoft quickly. The integration will be a challenge because Microsoft and Yahoo have very different styles and very different philosophies. Let’s take a moment to explore just how different they are.
Microsoft invented software for the PC as an engine for empowerment. Microsoft enabled the next step in ‘islands of automation’ beyond the glass house of the datacenters. They went on to dominance of the shrink wrapped products (bricks) selling operating systems and suites. Along the way, Microsoft built a reputation for a style of slow development with security loopholes – something that does not work in the security sensitive and integrity sensitive world. Microsoft admits it was late to see the vision of the PC being really more trivial than the power of the network or ‘cloud’. The cloud is really the power of the network connecting all those PC resources and media together into the collective of the web and more importantly Web 2.0.
Yahoo really defined the meaning of the internet portal as a landing and jumping off place to the web and has built a large following for instant messaging, as has Microsoft. Yahoo has not been able to get unstuck from where it was and is not as innovative or creative as Google. So in fact Google is not a leader in Web 2.0 either. Let’s look at Google for a point of comparison. Google’s philosophy works for the impact on People, not for money. That is one of the reasons why Google is so successful. Google has been able to keep up with the redefined web to stay on the curve. There is a great write up about this at: Google - Our Philosophy ‘Never settle for the best’ - http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html . They have also published “Ten Things Google has found to be true” which are:
1. ‘Focus on the user and all else will follow.
2. It’s best to do one thing really, really well.
3. Fast is better than slow.
4. Democracy on the web works.
5. You don’t need to be at your desk to need an answer.
6. You can make money without doing evil.
7. There’s always more information out there.
8. The need for information crosses all borders.
9. You can be serious without a suit.
10. Great just isn’t good enough.’
This Google mantra is great, but how does it really fit into the enterprise computing world, is this just another security threat or way to defeat the integrity of our information assets?
So what we see is a binary with Microsoft and Yahoo on one side and Google on the other. What about the customer here? It is the CEOs, COOs, CFOs, CIOs and CTOs who are ultimately going to pay the freight for this acquisition. They are going to ask the Microsoft account people, if the deal goes through, ‘what are the new solutions?’
Based on my experience those senior IT people will be asking: ‘How does this fit to my enterprise IT operation?’ How will these merger ‘mash-ups’ fit back into our operations and large complex enterprise databases which we rely on? How does this empower my users and employees, while still integrating into the greater whole of our enterprise safely with integrity? How will Yahoo/Microsoft/Google applications or portals talk to my enterprise platforms? What is empowerment anyway? Is it really a codeword for lax security and impulsive undisciplined behaviour or real breakthrough creativity? Will this end up like herding cats? Does this belong in the enterprise?
If these questions are not answered correctly, Microsoft will be facing a cool reception and that high per share price for the hostile takeover will be a great misstep. The result could be as impactful as throwing a brick though a cloud.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(2 votes, average: 9 out of 10) Loading ...Some sober second thoughts on 2008 IT predictions
The New Year always starts with a bang of predictions on what’s hot and what’s not. Most of these predictions are just more hype to get you going with some new technologies or get some more zip into your conversations.
The best list of predictions I have seen for 2008 is the in the McKinsey Quarterly, January 9, 2007 entitled ‘Eight business technology trends to watch”. To quote this paper, ”Technology alone is rarely the key to unlocking economic value: companies create real wealth when they combine technology with new ways of doing business. … The McKinsey trends fall within three broad areas of business activity: managing relationships, managing capital and assets, and leveraging information in new ways.”
The piece is well written. It describes trends for technology as business or organizational outcomes and objectives and not just technical jargon. You can confidently send this along to your business and IT counterparts whose eyes tend to glaze over from management buzz words or techno-speak.
Highlighted is the ubiquitous move to collaboration, social networking and the new web (Web2.0) is given prominence as a collaborative tool for organizations and individuals:
“Web 2.0 technologies—it has become a more widespread platform for interaction, communication, and activism. Consumers increasingly want to engage online with one another and with organizations of all kinds. Companies can tap this new mood of customer engagement for their economic benefit.”
That is fair enough. Fact is, for many large organizations and financial institutions with very serious security requirements web 2.0ish implementations have to be handled carefully. But there are “sandbox” solutions out there that work admirably.
I suggest getting IT planning, security and communication groups work together to explore the opportunities and evolve new processes that can succeed for companies where reputation and security are core raison d’être.
Effective Web2.0 is not the only issue for beleaguered IT leaders. There is much pressure to get into virtualization, green computing, open source, and a plethora of new approaches. Here are some things I know from my advisory work and experience which must be included on your list for 2008:
• Relentless pressure on cutting costs and contributing to the bottom line
• Improved security that runs throughout the organization’s interactions, people and its systems, not just around them
• Protecting your information assets right down to the attribute level
• Using software as a service effectively and getting it properly deployed
• Further integration of your systems to allow for slicing and dicing your data into business information that can be used to better manage or build new businesses
• Unplugging the mainframe and less efficient technologies which can no longer be efficiently or properly supported
• Getting on track with ‘green computing’ so you continue to minimize your environmental footprint and eventually go at least ‘carbon neutral’
• Start making ‘the cloud’ work, network computing and sharing of resources through virtualization and other techniques really is giving us a headache.
These are some opening thoughts for discussion in 2008 and beyond… I ask for your contributions, comments and insights as part of this blog.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(2 votes, average: 4.5 out of 10) Loading ...Another BlackBerry distraction
News yesterday that Facebook has signed a deal to put its platform on RIM’s BlackBerries should cause at least a twitch of concern for anyone managing a staff that uses the devices.
The Internet and personal e-mail already pose large enough distractions for workers. Their productivity promises to take another hit with the inclusion of a social networking platform that might very well be the only thing more addictive than the “CrackBerry” itself.
And it’s not as if only teens are the ones glued to Facebook; the firm’s co-founder and vice-president of engineering, Dustin Moskovitz, said that members over 35 are the fastest growing segment of adopters. That means working people — professionals with BlackBerries in their briefcases and purses.
Once again, managers, in conjunction with IT departments, will have to ensure an appropriate usage policy is in place to deal with the latest potential productivity drain. It’s the only way to effectively achieve what they want to in deploying the devices in the first place.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(2 votes, average: 10 out of 10) Loading ...Where in the world are Toronto’s tech firms?
I’m sure there are a lot of IT managers who would love to pull up something other than Google when they want to find the vendor they need for a given IT project, especially if they’re looking for a local supplier. For those in Canada’s largest city, the Toronto Technology Map may be the answer.
The brainchild of those involved with the TorCamp series of conferences (or un-conferences, as they prefer to call them), the map will show relationships between fledgling technology companies.
Here’s how it works: You go here, enter “TORCAMP” in the field marked Survey Code and follow the steps through a questionnaire which is designed to help the mapmakers identify issues and opportunities within Toronto’s growing ICT community. And yes, there are prizes: you’ll also be eligible to win a video iPod or tickets to upcoming Technology Innovators Breakfasts at the Toronto Board of Trade.
A number of years ago one of the consulting firms (PricewaterhouseCoopers, I think) had a print version of this idea. I used to have a copy, which we posted in our office to help staff figure out who’s who. At the time I asked the consulting firm about an electronic version, but they were barely able to get it onto CD-ROM. Just goes to show you what a difference Web 2.0 can make.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(2 votes, average: 9 out of 10) Loading ...Blogged down – Why blogs aren’t yet a business buzzword
By Joaquim P. Menezes -
“To blog or not to blog.”
That isn’t the question – to die-hard champions of corporate blogging it isn’t.
To them, the query would seem superfluous and silly, and the answer self-evident.
“Duh,” they would say. “Of course they should?”
If pressed further, they would recount for you all the business benefits offered by this Web 2.0 tool – from brand recognition and insight into stakeholder needs, interests and concerns, to market intelligence for better product development et al.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(1 votes, average: 10 out of 10) Loading ...Mindmapping as an enterprise strategy
Last night a friend and I went to see A Mighty Heart, based on the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and the subsequent book written by his wife, Marianne. As she and the police tried to trace her husband’s journey into a network of terrorists they frequently updated a whiteboard, drawing all kinds of arrows and pasting headshots next to relevant sources and contacts. It looked confusing to me, but mindmapping applications sound like a similar (though obviously electronic) approach.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(1 votes, average: 7 out of 10) Loading ...Business 2.0’s bumpy ride
There was a lot to admire in Time Warner’s Business 2.0, a magazine that seemed to be aimed more at the departmental decision-maker than traditional IT manager. A New York Times story suggests it is all but closing, while Henry Blodget at Internet Outsider believes the nails have already been driven into the coffin. Among other features, I always liked “What works,” a section on best practices. Perhaps, like so many other niches, this kind of material is best suited for the Web, where the distribution channels are a bit more fluid and the decision-makers are easier to reach.
Add to: del.icio.us | Digg IT | Furl | Google | magnolia | StumbleIT | Wink | Yahoo! Technorati
(1 votes, average: 9 out of 10) Loading ...A Web app by any other name
Well, someone had to do it. Richard McManus of Read/Write/Web has come up with what he believes is the definitive list of the Top 10 Worst Web App Names. My favourites include a social networking service called Layoffspace and an online music service called Fairtilizer. I wouldn’t have included Gravee, which isn’t a horrible brand for a search engine that aggregates items of interest.
For some reason I have a fascination with the branding of software and wrote about the weirdness of Web 2.0 names myself about a year ago. I tried to figure out if there was a science to this process, but I’m not sure if I got very far.
