After 3 years of publication, with our 3rd birthday this

In June 2010, the Globe Innovator changes will be announced. We’re looking at updating the publication, to provide more ongoing content on innovation across cities, business and policy. We’re also examining more frequent shorter content centred on single ideas.

Let’s look back over the last 3 years. There’s already been a lot of change since our 2007 inception, and what it is about that change – is that it changes us.

A Jaunt around the Boston Common. Our birthday of our first post from Boston MA, on April 23rd , 2007 tracks how far this site has come from a travel journal of innovation in cities worldwide. > Read our first post on Boston Walking City.

This was during the announcement of the first Innovation Cities ranking 2007 (now Index), and first Global Innovation Review process. I was staying in the Westin Copley Place at the time, and writing about Innovation Cities.

Cities of Innovation. Since that time, this year 2thinknow are into the 4th year of Innovation Cities, now featuring a Report, Program, Index and Framework (published in the aforementioned report).

Changing Formats. Over the same period this site has morphed immediately into a journal of change in politics and foreign affairs, then briefly into a journal of a broader view of innovation, and a finally an innovation analysis / news site moving domains only in 2009, and growing to its current standalone domain address.

Web 2.0. I still recall the panicked responses to my (albeit overwhelming) first seminar on web 2.0 in Melbourne, Australia later in 2007. Now some of the newbies of that period are leading social media voices in Australia.

The GFC Prediction. During this time our readers saw us (well, mainly me!) predict a “September 2008 shock turmoil event” for shares, a U.S. recession and even a potential depression as far back as October 2007 and in detail on December 2007. I said Australian shares would fall to 4,500 at the same time most forecasters saw only “blue sky”.

At the same time in February 2008, I warned our readers of U.S. bank nationalisation. this was foreseen by virtually no major U.S. commentators… Ultimately though, I was one of the handful of voices like Harvey Dent who analysed the basics, and saw a different view.

The prediction differed in that they were specific not general, time-limited and contained no ‘counter-predictions’.

The one that got away. The one area I was wrong is Australian house prices. I believed I undervalued 4 factors – 1) the sentimental flight to bricks and mortars of scared investors, 2) the government willingness to prop-up property prices at all costs, 3) relatedly, the size of the consequences of falling prices to create a general economic collapse and 4) foreign purchasing of Australian assets due to trade and legislation.

Wither Finance. Yes, I warned of the financial services industry over-dominance at a city-level in 2007 book – the Global Innovation Review 2007 Annual. Indeed, this was a major reason why I took the sometimes criticised decision to rank London low for innovation in 2007. I (rightly) saw that creativity-led innovation would drive successful cities into the future, all socio-political factors otherwise being equal.

Some more thoughts…

Often this site became a test ground for these ideas in other speeches, workshops or printed reports. Sometime the ideas copped flack – like my infamous bogan piece railing against Australian anti-intellectualism, which we later archived as it came to dominate all comments and over-shadow ideas. When Melbourne’s Lord Mayor Robert Doyle was elected, anti-bogan hoon-ism (if there’s such a term that can be conceived) was part of his platform. I felt that in some small way we contributed to that.

Ideas need testing, and thinking needs validating – and occasionally rejecting. Like markets readers are great validators (or not) of ideas. Whilst I always preferred civility, some of our commenters were not so kind.

For this reason, I see change as a process, innovation as a process, and this site as a testing ground for ideas leading that process. But it is this testing and validation that enables ideas to turn into implementable business concepts, and ultimately models. And 2thinknow is at that stage.

Now we stand in 2010, awaiting the ides of August-November 2010 to know how deep the trouble goes. As Mises and Hayek would point out you can only delay the inevitable, inevitably. And I see 2 cycles that have a probability of occurring, but the outcome 2021 is the same.

Oh, and yes, updates have been non-existent over the last 6 months. Why? Well, we are in implementation phase for launching new products and services, and Globe Innovator, is a part of that.

The key is to be relevant, and commercial, and that’’s what we’re working on ensuring our relevance. But the times must match the ideas, and the ideas must match the times. Those who see only the din and clash, who hear sound and fury, miss the sense of what actually is happening. It’s ripples in a pond.

Right now, we face an uncertain period, conversely, that can be perceived with certainty. So, as an innovation agency, we are seeking to position this publication at the right point in the continuum from innovation to conservatism, relative to the time. So, this publication must adapt to the current global circumstance. There is also, always, the value equation.

By the by, in the mean time, I will post some economic thoughts soon, regarding innovation policy and process and economic effects at the macro and micro level.

P.S. Thanks to those of you who have written us saying you miss our updates!

Keep innovating,

Christopher Hire

We have elected to go with the new Arthemia theme by Michael Hutagalung with some inevitable manual customisations using PHP, to integrate videos and slideshare as elements.

For now we’ll be adding existing content you may not have seen before to the journal, and recategorising exisiting content. So, thanks for any patience this may need! We also have to add back pictures manually. [Don't ask - different field names.]

Expect a few surprises including that will be worth the wait!

Yet the same great, informal style of open ideas will be with us still…

I would add a deadline, but this is one of many concurrent projects.

I was kindly invited to analyse innovations at the event as a guest of Jackie Taranto of Hannover Fairs, organizers of the Conferences & Exhibitions.

Some Coverage.

Tweets: Also my live tweeting (@christopherhire) attracted quite a lot of attention; especially as twitter-penetration not high in either the AusInnovation or eGovernment forums.

Radio: You can hear a CeBIT wrap-up from Ryan Egan producer of the TechStream Program; for of ABC Radio Australia. My innovation focused analysis is on the final 5 minutes of the MP3:

About ABC Radio Techstream and MP3

Media mentions: Many of the innovative themes & companies (like Daniel Draper’s Net Fox) that I discovered I will be mentioning in future interviews or media.

Articles: It was good to see some familiar faces; but also to meet new innovative stands. In a coming analysis, there will be a list of some innovations you may not yet have heard of.

Whilst there were many more; I selected a few that have global potential.

They will all be posted here where you are reading now: www.2thinknow.com/innovation

More in Print: In addition I’m working on some print magazine articles & a book; and will post here if any of those mention CeBIT themes, speakers & exhibiting innovators.

What’s Next…

My next article(s) will be the series 5 Key Themes for Business & Government from CeBIT.

If you’d prefer to listen: download the MP3 (last 5 minutes, though > I thoroughly recommend you listen to Ryan’s whole Techstream program on your mobile device!)

Hope this is a useful Executive Summary of CeBIT for you all!

Innovation Cities 2009.

After adjusting the data file & criteria in 2008, flagship 2thinknow Innovation Cities Rankings are bigger & better than ever before.

Ranking more cities on more criteria, the 2thinknow Innovation Cities Index is a benchmark for what constitutes Innovation in Cities worldwide.

Launching January 09, final rankings will be announced to participating cities in May 09, with the Index published June 2009.

This will be announced, and relatedly an entirely new section of the 2thinknow website will be launched.

2thinknow Online.

2008 was the year the web & social web came of age globally. 2thinknow have spent 2008 experimenting with new forms of communication & publishing.

The dramatically revamped 2thinknow website with a full listing of products & services will be released. In addition, we have finalised our social media partnerships, and those sites will be coming online in February 09.

This Journal.

The purpose of the Global Innovation Conversation is to capture global innovation. Accordingly in 2009 we will be implementing a new format focussed on innovation across the world. More news soon.

More Trends.

2thinknow correctly predicted the economic crisis as far back as October 2007 (describing a September shock event), as well as deep US recession and the peak of the Australian stock market.

Watch for our new trend product offerings, using our pioneering original technique ‘Nascent Trend Analysis’ (which allowed us to make these predictions).

Shortly, before NYE 08, we’ll be posting 2009 predictions. So watch out!

Think Global.

2thinknow think global, act local. We will be reducing our emphasis on Australia & NZ and increasing emphasis on the US, UK & German markets in 2009.

We will in 2009 be moving our web presence to a US data centre, so the link & CGI problems we hear about from time-to-time will be gone (It’s now almost impossible to get decent ICT or back-office services in Australia by US standards).

Eagle-eyed readers would have spotted our new logo & the start of our new branding. The visual idea is “turning the corner”. Neat.

2thinknow’s new logo & branding will be rolled out in very early 2009 across all web & printed materials.

We are also planning to be moving our long delayed back office arrangements to San Francisco, Vienna or Frankfurt sometime in 2009. All the remaining broken links & issues with the website or global telephony will be resolved by January 11 2009, once we use the Xmas season to test & do a final roll-out.

News.

Watch this site for exciting new updates starting February 2009.

Meanwhile – keep up-to-date with 2thinknow, and the issues, 24/7 on twitter – www.twitter.com/2thinknow

Merry Christmas to all & to all a good night!

How so many directors keep getting roles with less than stellar performance.

As a competent, good Director, he is mystified.

Shhh…

Of course no-one in the community says this publicly. I am a member of peak body AICD, and never heard it there! Truth begone! Top-down folk there.

With some Directors, often I get the feeling they want to investigate, interrogate you, and pick your brains. That’s if they can’t find out whose son you are.

It’s like university lecturers. Publicly, they will not tell you many are pressured to accept students who have not acquired necessary skills. That was struck from an ACS report on the ICT industry in 2006.

Not an Australian disease alone, off-balance sheet disasters, and debt-buyouts are rubber stamped by the professional board class.

Boards need to assert more influence on the managerial class. Michael West makes the point, as well.

Ians?

Catherine Deveny, called them Ians, yesterday.

The public service is infested with these types, we need them.

Innovators typically can’t fill out forms, do admin or accounting. Ad agency people I met are lucky to have matching socks. But maybe that’s intentional!

When someone does something innovative, Ians add all their costs, projections and overhead. And outsource it. And pretty soon it’s too expensive to do.

Often they tend to be judgmental of innovation. Or not cautious enough, employing outdated metrics to measure it. Cost, cost, cost is the cry.

The old needs the young to renew. And innovators with judgment. To make revenue from opportunity.

Eddington’s $20 Billion of Waste.

I have read quite a bit on Eddington’s plan for Melbourne.

In short, a couple of $10 billion tunnels.

As usual, rather than fixing infrastructure and managing it well, we just throw some big numbers at it. We perhaps, shock, need competent management of what we have, within a new paradigm of innovation.

I saw Eddington speak, and found there was a lack of intellectual depth in his arguments.

West mentions Eddington’s other interests. Eddington, for his mettle, was director of failing Allco. Allco, and David Coe, tried to take over Qantas.

Had Qantas been taken over Qantas would now be in serious trouble, given the proposed debt load. Where are the questions in and of the Qantas board?

Perhaps it’s the ‘don’t rock the boat’ survival instinct for boards?

And I don’t – unlike a few people – believe diversity, or gender, have much to do with it. Margaret Jackson supported the Qantas Allco bid.

Common sense & ethics are gender neutral.

Yet right now, Eddington is being made king in deciding Australia’s infrastructure priorities.

And, I can’t picture Sir Rod trying to get to the work on the Glen Waverley line.

Money, mo’ money.

Out of touch.

Problem is, the idea that you have to spend huge sums of money is a typical idiotic bureaucratic and corporate response.

The collapse of ABC and others, pricks the balloon of some of the glowing analysts reports sitting in shelves everywhere. How efficient ABC was at childcare? When profits came from chicanery of property development zero-shuffling. Allco. Centro.

Analysts writing those reports told retirees to ‘hold-tight’ as stocks fell.

Opportunity, instead.

In the 2thinknow view, there are so many opportunities. Not for costs, but profits.

All that is needed is a new understanding of business.

Instead of looking at sustainability as a cost look at it as a revenue opportunity.

Transport is a money-losing venture because the Government are incompetent. The managers are incompetent. And everyone is hamstrung.

But there are opportunities, 2thinknow can identify for profitability.

But it requires dropping the mind-set of costs. Put Garnaut in unimaginative too. Yes let’s all eat roo meat. That’s realistic!!

Action Arnold.

California is getting on with the job building Australian solar plants that can’t be built here, because everybody is busy paying Deveny’s Ians to write reports.

I would like to see some intelligent opportunity from Rudd not more committees, waffling academics and usual corporate suspects. I am still waiting.

Incompetence of MBA.

When I was at AGSM I was struck by how incompetent & inaccurate the MBA program was. The curriculum represents the negatives of business, advising virtually all free market, no regulation, debt-finance.

In only one example, one of my senior classmates from HP in the IT class felt the lecturer had no practical concept of IT, despite his ‘experience’. The lecturer is now fortunately shoving pins into corporations consulting for a big firm, where his theory will be useless.

AGSM, a pre-eminent as a business school teaches dogma, not how to think.

The great lecturers there, Alex Malley & Grant Foster, were great in the practical aspects of their subjects. They had real commercial experience.

It’s time we stopped praising academic waffling mediocrity, or corporate climbers, because they just have an imprimatur.

It’s an opportunity for an ideas-based meritocracy. A great conversation of great ideas and great minds.

Instead?

ABC was incompetent and badly run. Turns out they had no special skills, despite analysts glowing reports.

ABC couldn’t even do their 123s of accounting, according to Julia Gillard in Question Time.

Allco was at best optimistic, at worst, fill in an adjective.

Centro was stupid & naive.

Babcock & Brown’s model has serious ethical issues.

Macquarie. Sydney airport. Toll roads. Mmm. Kaboom.

NAB is badly run, but at least they have money.

There’s more blood in the streets. Because the people running these places focussed on costs, debt and lacked operational management.

In short, did they do something? Other than zero-shuffling?

Next for Australia?

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Qantas forced to merge. And Macquarie in trouble.

And I suggest we look at high-debt business that have low-margins. Kaboom.

Interestingly Time must lose money on its flagship. No adverts.

Business is done by doing. Let’s thin the ranks of the executive dead wood and managerial pretenders who do nothing but manage-up.

We need those Ians, but let’s not pretend they have original ideas. Nor vision.

We get in to trouble when we believe our corporate PR.

Australians who want to get ahead, go offshore, that’s the message.

Meritocracy of ideas is a thought whose time has come.

We have a nice new office overlooking the skyline city of Melbourne, in the inner-city suburb of Southbank.

Of course the copier is not yet plugged in, servers not working, and the writers are not yet being edited.

The espresso machine is working though. Thankfully.

In Australia inevitably you end up being ‘hands on’ with any task (if you need it done right), so it was 3am the night before.

Talk to 2thinknow

2thinknow will be expanding further into international markets in 2008 and 2009.

The phone +61 1300 76 8176 is still the main number, but if there’s problems with the diversion you can also email us at talk@2thinknow.com

All mail to

GPO Box 3375,
Melbourne, VIC 3001
AUSTRALIA

When you see us in Southbank, we’ll make you a coffee.

Christopher

But first we have to get over this industrialist mass-produced thinking.

Here’s how the current global model goes:

Produce goods in a large a quantity as possible.

Ensure all production and pollution is outsourced to a developing country.

Ship goods all over the world.

Repeat until planet chokes.

Follow this with:

If goods don’t sell, discount them.

If goods sell well, mark them up.

When goods expire or don’t sell, bury them in landfill.

In this process use all the Earth’s finite resources.

The sad thing is this seems to be the only model of production. It was taught to me in post-graduate business, and is the paradigm of thinking I have discovered in many businesses.

So what’s the alternative?

The innovation is in moving to a model of:

More localised small-scale quality production.

More regional branding.

International shipping using solar sail boats, not oil-based boats.

More efficient point-to-point distribution.

This thinking needs to get out there. I have been noting nascent trends in this area, but their acceleration is sadly waiting for major shock events such as recession, depression, plagues or major weather events.

But the existing free-market laissez-faire economic thinking where we leave everything to the market is hopelessly inadequate without government guidance.

The only problem is that it is a brave politician who does something.

And conservatives, are by nature, conservative.

It’s Up to a ‘Brave New Deal’?

There is a strategy for a New Left here, a new mission instead of capitulating like Tony Blair, and giving into blatant Thatcherism or Neo-Conservative thinking.

At 2thinknow, I have been analyzing global thinking for some time, and there are massive opportunities in the area of a Left based movement to focusing on redefining business and production.

Nationalization is also not a bad word any more.

Privatization merely transfers wealth to corporations from the public hands.

Debate over privatizing is ignorant and in most cases ill-informed and short-term economic balance sheet wizardry, Enron-style.

There are limited circumstances where competition over services can be better (as in Telecoms), but the infrastructure should be national.

And in Australia, it’s time to have the bravery to nationalize public transport. And invest in it.

So New Left, do you want a mission?

Or do you want to slink off in the café, talk of the past, and pretend that being Conservative-Lite is good enough?

Let’s start a Brave New Deal, that’s what I think, and that’s the future 2thinknow see for the world. It’s a huge opportunity.

Take care,

Christopher

Whilst I applaud many fine Print Journalists, the fact is that the bias inherent in many publications and TV, means that media is increasingly untrusted.

The average person knows on some level that the mass media exists to propagate a message that is not about enlightening debate.They know Rupert’s media on some level is about Rupert…

People know Fox News is biased, and has dragged all media to the Right.

Those people who vehemently support Fox are simply people on the Right.

But in subtle ways, the media has shifted to far too the Right.

The average person feels powerless, so they watch satire.

Whilst there are many fine stories the selection of stories predicates a bias towards certain topics.

It really is about maintaining a power-base of support for ideas an uber-rich autocracy, like the autocracy Murdoch and the far-Right’s Neo-Conservative cronies, support.

Of course, there are rival factions, and some the support for Bush is fickle (as he recently discovered), as the supporters fight amongst themselves for more power. Even Murdoch is fickle, it’s about power.

Cheap oil has made these people super-rich, and they want to keep it. Simple. In fact they cannot visualize the world any other way. Green? Would weaken their power-base.

Many justify that they are ‘acting in the people’s interest’, but confuse the people’s interest with their own personal interest. Some don’t bother with the confusion.

War in Iraq is about cheap oil and strategic independence.

Nuclear weapons in Iran debate is about Iran’s unique geographic position.

Abortion is a ‘conscience’ topic talked up to divide people.

Why are these the only topics we hear about in US media?

If you watch the Daily Show excerpts, you will see one Right-wing Presidential candidate talk about nuking Iran! Stewart lampoons him. Yes, the Iranians are somehow a threat to the most powerful country in the world. Right. Okey-dokey. Logic, where?

One of the most popular self-serving bits of rhetoric ideology is that the perfect economy is a market economy without any interference or regulation. How then to ensure a level playing field?

This is not debated, just regurgitated as popular wisdom. Private is better than public? Not always. The reality is, it is time for a moderate position of government intervention in the economy to ensure fairness.

Instead, of debate over big ideas: much of what is said in the most popular mass media is a carefully selected suite of distractions, inaccuracies, dichotomies, demagoguery and ideas.

So the people know it is merely opinion disguised as fact, and return to satire.

Why Satire not News?

If you think this is the first time in history, look back.

The satirical cartoons lampooning the British pre-dated the American War of Independence.

Satire is what people turn to when there is a shortage of real news.

Satire allows people to ’say what they think’ in an environment of oppressive thinking, and political correctness. Satire is in Ancient Rome, Shakespeare, and Ancient Greece.

Whenever power goes ‘off-the-rails’, satire rises.

Whenever people feel powerless to control their lives, satire arises. It is a safety valve.

Citizens are mostly moderate, it is some leaders who are extremist. Howard moved too far to the Right in Australia, and he was removed from power. FULL STOP. (Analysis here)

And media proprietors who keep pushing the media to extremism of the Right, or Left to increase their power. Murdoch has supported both the Far left (Australia 1970s) and Far Right (USA, 2000s) , his ideology is ‘Murdoch’.

Moderate, balanced news that is structured and logical is what most people want.

Not Info-tainment, as I explain here. (Thanks for those of you, like Jody and Chris, who sent me some enlightened comments.)

Not everyone can understand why they dislike a program, but the ratings should tell you that The Daily Show, Colbert Report and Chasers, which lack the resources of a news network are more popular.

Let me say that again: under-resourced programs are more implicitly truthful, and therefore rate well.

The truth is disguised as satire to reach a mass audience in today’s world.

In the Chasers case, an under-resourced ABC, hamstrung by government appointees, on a program made by less-serious journalists, in an inconvenient time-slot, is able to out-rate ’serious news’.

Not everyone wants to read large slabs of newspapers, journals and serious books by Al Gore and Al Greenspan. I think their ideas are important, so I do, but then, that’s me.

Most people like their truth in a pithy video form.

And satire TV, is giving them a drop of the water of truth in an oasis of ‘interest’.

And people take the drop of water over the oasis.

The people are smarter than you think Rupert.

Take care,

Christopher

Background for our global readers: Rudd is from the Left, although a moderate. Howard was from the Right, and part of a NSW branches of the Right that are increasingly moving far-Right, by Australian standards (although not yet Neo-Conservative).

And Australia generally prefers moderates and punishes radicalism.

The true significance of this win, has been lost on some commentators. Here’s why…

The significance of Rudd win

Australia politics are a barometer of sentiment in global developed English-speaking countries.

A government measured on economic scores of low unemployment, relatively low interest rates, budget surpluses and sustained growth was removed from power.

The Australian voters chose a government promising a plan of action. The exiting Howard & Treasurer Costello were generally still perceived as the better economic managers.

The PM Howard even lost his own seat (almost). It’s down to handful of postal ballots, which may favor him.

In politics there is a saying, oppositions don’t win, governments lose. Yet Howard lost whilst ‘lead indicators’ said people were ‘well-off’.

As we don’t have fixed terms in Australia, Howard had been in power for almost 12 years.

So the incumbent government were ‘kicked out’ whilst the economic party was going on, and the NSW Right were passing around the cocktail umbrellas. Howard should have taken more care in listening to the NSW Right.

Significance to innovation

Globally the significant issue was that the citizens prefer governments who try to deliver services. People expect some ‘care’ from the State.

This fashion for removing ‘all state intervention’ from the economy, and the persecution of Keynesians, has been significantly set-back.

The significance of this victory is a swing back to the State providing some services to the public. And that is significant in a world where the far-Right have ’stolen a march’.

We need more moderation, the market alone is not ‘perfect’, and the State is better at some things. That’s the Wisdom of Crowds, for you.

Conversely, Howard argued the government should only step-in in market failures, if then. Everything should be private.

Under Howard most health-care became private, with more expensive yet highly-decreased levels of service for most patients. Schools became increasingly private. Roads became increasingly toll-ways. Telecoms became private, but we still don’t have world-class broadband internet. Howard also outsourced most tax collection to business owners.

Peoples’ houses tripled in price, and they ‘never had it so good’. And jobs became easy to come by. So they borrowed more and more, paying more and more for the same house.

It seems silly, but if everyone says your house is worth 300% more in 4 years, then it is. And Australians see property as ‘easy-money’.

But significantly they had to work harder and harder. They may have been able to eat in fancy restaurants, but especially for the younger generation (under 30) who voted Howard out, they increasingly realized that it was getting harder every year to get education, home, marriage, kids – which is what most people of all backgrounds want.

3 in 4 young people polled were voting against Howard. Baby Boomers were mostly for him.

Now of course property prices are stagnant in most locations, except WA, where Howard still enjoyed strong support. So some of those battlers and baby boomers turned.

But the catch-22 for the wealth: under Howard everything was ‘user-pays’.

The electorate said, rather than economic indicators, we’re full now and we want to ‘feel better off’ and that means the State taking caring of some basic services.

They would rather have the State take care of healthcare, education and basic services in some instances and pay more taxes. They would like better roads. And there are instances in nation-building where government should foot the bill.

Broadband, world-class universities, some research, childcare assistance.

It’s like the West Wing episode about the man sending his child too college. “It’s should be hard, I like that… but not too hard.”

They told Howard that for those under 30, and some under 60, it was too hard !

Howard dolled out tax-cuts, but it actually worked against him. Polls showed it.

It’s about balance, and ‘ideology’ never fits with balance.

The lesson is ‘State Providing Services’ is back again

And balance between private and public. A moderate position.

Extreme: Under Howard food production in Australia has been partly outsourced to China. We are the foodbowl of Asia, and yet we outsource basic food to China. There have been numerous safety scandals here in food and goods and in the USA. The profits have not been passed onto consumers in lower prices. They have been retained by ever-larger companies. If anything basic good and food prices keep rising.

People know when they are getting a raw deal on basic goods. That is what people talk about at home. They know when quality decreases over time.

And Howard gutted John Button’s great manufacturing /export incentives.

Rudd won primarily on a few issues, but mostly he won on the perception he had a plan to give people services: other than tax cuts.

Howard made the mistake of most Right-wing economics true believers — he forgot how well off is about how people feel, and that people fear losses more than they appreciate gains.

You have been informed, this is a nascent 2% stage trend. Expect to hear more. Services are important to tax-payers.

Good bye Mr Howard, perhaps we can get some balance back and remove some of your extreme-economics.

And Mr Rudd, congratulations, and we hope you stay moderate.

PS> MORE POSTS ON RUDD HERE (including our accurate predictions of the victory)

Take care,

Christopher

However, every single person, almost in that room was writing on a laptop.

The wireless internet crashed in the first 15 minutes. A few people were asked to turn off ‘Bit-torrent’ a heavy duty file downloader/sharer. Napster-ish.

We’ll contrast that later with an event in Australia last week.

And by the way, we’re talking ‘big-pipe’ US broadband here. I was never without broadband in 8 days in San Francisco and the Bay Area. That is itself a contrast.

People were blogging in real time about the event, and twittering, powncing and who knows what else. The audience were a mix of techies, new media types and a broad range of people who fit under the category of writers.

In the US, new media is happening.

Many of the attendees accounts of the event, formed part of the news coverage.

3 out of 5 people were using laptops. More had laptops with them, but didn’t have access to a powerpoint, although powerboards were strewn underneath the rows of chairs.
One woman next to me, a professionally trained writer, was writing notes on paper. She was very much the odd one out.

A contrast in Australia

Last week, one afternoon I was at a business function and there were around 500 business people.

By the by, I have a Fujitsu Lifebook tablet PC that had the sound off, with screen set to dim.

My neighbor was writing copious amounts of paper notes. With paper the notes have to be transcribed and carried. Which she will likely lose, and then never access again. My laptop notes are right here…

In any case, there was only one other laptop I could see in 500 people.

Not the real issue – paperless thinking

Paper-less office? Efficiency? Yes and no. There are instances where paper is more efficient. But look long-term, paper-less technology has opportunities for corporate efficiency gains.

Efficiency and strategic use of technology means profits, and where there are profits to be had, companies will follow. There are also instances where paper is better.

Eventually, a workflow of data stored in a network will be de rigeur for the networked organization.

Learning organizations don’t lose their notes! They share and collaborate. It’s started in the USA.

And since I stopped carrying all but the most necessary paper files, and switched back to a tablet PC, my bag is down around 3-4kg, which is much better than my old 8-15 Kg paper-laden bag.

For me a tablet PC is a tactical advantage in most instances. Occasionally strategic.

And wireless releases benefits and challenges for our organizations. Real-time commentary on events in a Web 2.0 environment raises challenges that we all have to deal with. It’s happening anyway.

The benefit of a technology is not the same for everyone, and the value as a technology has to be assessed relative to our personal or business strategy.

Take care

Christopher