Efficient Resource Utilization is not Innovation

Although it is very encouraging to see how Indian companies are finding value in down-market segments, it certainly doesn't represent innovation. The following TED talk is interesting more for its insights into how to yield asymmetric value from marginal improvements within a certain sector. For example, a $2k car sounds like a wonderful thing until further reflection indicates that it is only marginally better than a motorcycle (essentially adding more seats)--problems with safety, maintenance, etc. still remain.

The achievement here is not innovation, it is a demonstration of efficient resource utilization within regional constraints (low safety hurdles, cheap and educated workforce, etc.). The real innovation is the materials science that yielded out alloys cheap enough to create a low-cost chassis and the materials science that yielded composite fibers and adhesives for use--that is innovation. Creating something fundamentally new.

It is a false pride to confuse the two. I imagine that the speaker understands this but feels compelled to be a cheerleader. Far better would be for these burgeoning economies to give a "real" gift to humanity (rather than a shallow catch-phrase)--investment and collaboration on fundamental science--for that is where innovation actually happens.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/r_a_mashelkar_breakthrough_designs_for_ultra_low_cost_products.html

Employee Buy-In Through Process Ownership

One of the biggest challenges in leadership is to execute to Patton's advice consistently and particularly in small organizations: "Don't tell people how to do things, tell them what to do and let them surprise you with their results." Often the stakes are too high for error and the implications too dire. However, establishing a framework that allows employees to manage their own execution strategy in a goal-aligned structure. HBR has done a good job of highlighting the broad strokes of how this can be done. The trick is to ensure that the administrative overhead for any such structure is a very small percentage of actual work.

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/12/what_the_c-suite_needs_to_do_f.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+harvardbusiness+(HBR.org)

Intelligent monitoring systems = small number of offenders = quick fix to intractable problem: Driving behavior

Intelligent monitoring systems = small number of offenders = quick fix to intractable problem.

Interesting statistic from DriverCam supports theory that a small number of bad apples in any population cause the vast majority of problems. In this case, utility vehicle drivers. The challenge is finding them in an objective and fair method.

http://www.drivecam.com/uploads/Insights-Newsletter-18-Utility-Industry-Collisions-and-Behaviors-docx.pdf

LBS - Still waiting for a company to offer a more intuitively integrated use.

The following article provides a good understanding of where the 2nd generation of LBS currently resides the B2C world--high buzz, high sign-up, low use. Anticipate that this will persist until a 3rd generation company emerges with a more integrated use hook for what is an extremely powerful technology.

Checking in just doesn't have enough personal meaning--coupons may help, but that is a false economy. A company must be able to identify a "use" for the technology that has a map to the psyche--persona enhancement, creative platforming, something.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/can_gowallas_disney_partnership_help_location_chec.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+readwriteweb+(ReadWriteWeb)

Justin Saye

Justin Saye: "

I am a technology executive on an expat adventure with my awesome family

in Europe.

"

Justin Saye

Justin Saye: "Flavors.me page."

Measuring Charity Effectiveness: An Idea

Exposition on:

Our Ineffectiveness at Measuring Effectiveness

Dan Pallotta

http://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2010/11/our-ineffectiveness-at-measuri.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+harvardbusiness+(HBR.org)

Although an interesting article in discussing the symptoms of the problem of measuring non-profit effectiveness, I think that it misses the core problem and a potentially powerful solution.

Put simply, the core problem is that non-profits have little-to-no incentive to publish accurate and quantifiable metrics around their performance against mission. Rather, they thrive in a subjective and qualitative environment that allows them to consume resources with no consequential discipline applied to management. This isn't to say that they aren't filled with good people doing good work--they are. But, like any domain group, they play within the constraints established.

I would suggest that we take a few large leaps in a direction the author has identified while discussing new scattershot approaches--create a market for charitable giving/non-profit funding. With a disciplined brokerage scheme and common, transparent, legally-mandated and audited performance metrics. Given the clearing aspect of honest markets, I suspect that effectiveness and performance measures would shake out in a few turns of funding.

Certainly, the amount of money held and flowing to these organizations justifies a commonly reported market.