Category Archives: Technology

It’s Faster PussyCat; not Faster Idiot!

Fashion. Mobile Devices. Software. Everything is moving faster and faster. Maybe LOLCats need to move faster because their expected lifespan is one sixth of ours. But we don’t. We’re moving so fast that we’re bringing back infinite scroll and software mystery meat. We’re building mobile devices so thin that they bend, sewing new clothes after they are already out of fashion, and re-launching movies from the 80s because no one has time to even think of an original idea (so forget about taking one to completion).

There’s a place for speed — and it’s on the racetrack. And while first to market is nice, in the long run, it’s usually best to market that wins. The same goes for organizational technology. It’s not about being the first to have the shiny new toy, it’s about identifying and implementing the right technology the first time. A shiny new toy always looks good, but what good is a toy that sits on the shelf? And that’s exactly what happens when you buy a piece of software that looks good but doesn’t support organizational processes and do what needs to be done.

Slowing down isn’t just for buddhists and chess masters, it’s for anyone who wants to get ahead in business and Supply Management. While it’s important to be efficient and effective when doing non-value added tactical tasks, when it comes to important, strategic, activities that, if done right, can generate an ROI that is effectively multiples of the resources invested in the activity (but, if done wrong, can cost the company millions), speed is not of the essence. Getting it right is. If it takes an extra hour, an extra day, an extra week, or even an extra month to get it right, sometimes that’s the right thing to do.

And in each of the examples given above, the extra time would make a big difference. With enough time, developers would be able to research, understand, and build software that did what people want the way they wanted the software to do it — there’d be no mystery meat. And while the mobile iPhone version of your site might need to be infinite scroll because, let’s face it, you can’t click a button the size of a flea on a 4″ screen, no one wants that garbage on a regular 13″ laptop screen and they definitely don’t want it on a 27″ desktop monitor! You could take the time to research exactly how thin and light you could make a phone that was still resilient enough for everyday use and you could design practical, fashionable clothes that people actually wanted to wear, and not just wear the day a model walks them down the runway.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting to go as fast as you can, but going fast just for the sake of going fast doesn’t help anyone. It just makes your organization look stupid. So slow down once in a while, figure out where you are, figure out where you want to be, and work out a detailed plan to get there. The results might surprise you.

And now, to (software) developers everywhere who bring us infinite scroll and mystery meat on a regular basis, LOLCat has a special message just for you!


LOLCat says you're stupid!

BYODD is the Norm, But What Should This Tell Us?

According to a recent post on Spend Matters, BYODD (Bring Your Own Damaged Device) is Now the Norm, and the doctor has to agree. Not only are mobile devices ubiquitous in today’s workplace and home-life, but so are damaged ones. With essentially one in two mobile devices in use being damaged in some way, this means that at least one in two employees are using a damaged mobile device.

According to the author, the solution is to follow the advice in the referenced 2014 ZAGG Device Damage Study. Specifically, if companies are encouraging employees to bring their own devices to work, then those companies should be buying screen protectors, cases, and other damage defense products for their employees to make sure that these employees not only have damage free products to work on but to represent the company.

That is sound advice, and a precaution that should be taken, but that’s not the solution. That’s a fix. The solution to the problem is to address the root cause, and the cause is the proliferation of devices that are, simply put, way too brittle. While the doctor is not suggesting that we all need to be carrying around military-grade tech that can withstand blows, high-impact falls, and desert terrain, we should not be carrying around phones that bend in our pockets.

In other words, the real problem is the proliferation of devices that are being made flimsier and flimsier in a ridiculous effort to make a device that is not only lighter than the predecessor, but, as far as the doctor can tell, lighter than (compressed) air. And while 23.6 pounds (which was the weight of the first portable computer) is a bit heavy for a laptop, we can easily lug around a laptop that weighs 10 pounds considering we used to carry around textbooks that weighed 5 to 7 pounds each. We don’t need a 3 pound laptop (which is the rounded weight of a Macbook air), especially when a gust of wind can shred it! The same goes for phones. We used to lug around cell phones that weighed almost 2 pounds. We can certainly handle a pound if that’s what it takes to make it resilient and reliable. At 4 ounces, it can blow away with the wind!

So just like we need to avoid developers who insist on putting look before feel and functionality, we need to avoid manufacturers who focus more on making devices featherweight then on making devices resilient and support those manufacturers who take a more balanced approach to device production. When the money stops rolling in, this will quickly convince all manufacturers to kick their obsession with making featherweight devices and get back to reality.

Twenty Five Years Ago Berners-Lee Proposed the WorldWideWeb Project and Web Software Still Sucks. Why?

Because too many software designers and project managers think “Look and Feel” stands for make it look awesome because then you’ll feel good when you look at it. They don’t realize that “look and feel” refers to the “feeling” you get from using it, not just from looking at it.

And that’s why software still sucks. When it comes to software, looking good is important, but not more important than being usable. If, as Thomas points out in this post over on Spend Matters on why you should “Understand Your Use Case First — Develop Later!”, it’s impossible to find the button or menu item you need, or determine if it even exists in the first place, as good as the software looks, it still sucks, at best.

Software has to support whatever process it was designed for, and it has to make it easy for the user to accomplish that process — if it doesn’t do that, then it fails — spectacularly! It might look damn good when it fails, but it still fails.

And as long as developers continue on this ridiculous hidden-menu, infinite scroll, more features than you need but none you actually use kick, software will continue to suck and keep us in the technological dark ages.

So what can you do? Shun software that puts look first and functionality second. Developers will get the message, and eventually so will their managers. Then software can continue to progress forward.

Want Real Progress? Disrupt Your Procurement!

Today, TechCrunch Europe kicks off in London. Designed to highlight up-and-coming technology start-ups, it pits them against each other in a start-up battlefield where the top fifteen, chosen from the hundreds that attend, get to pitch their products live in front of a a panel of expert judges and a live audience of thousands. After demos, pitches and questions, the judges select six to do it again the next day. The top company then takes home £30,000 (about $50,000 US on a good day) to try and take their start-up to the next level.

While the doctor doesn’t know how productive it is for hundreds of start-ups to waste tens of thousands of hours battling it out for a mere £30K, the fundamental idea of disruption could be very beneficial to your Supply Management organization if it truly wants to get to the next level on its Supply Management journey.

It’s time to get real. The reason 92% of organizations are not in the Hackett top 8%, and on their way to strategic business enablement, which is the third level of organizational maturity (as defined in Sourcing Innovation’s white-paper on Taking the First Step on Your Next Level Supply Management Journey), is because they don’t have the right Ts. Talent, Technology, Transition, Tracery (and two more Ts that will only come into play when they have the first 4 Ts down, which will be revealed in the sequel white-paper series).

The organization doesn’t have the right technology in place to help it automate the tactical and focus on the strategic. It hasn’t transitioned to the right process to maximize its efficiency. And its talent doesn’t have the knowledge and skills required to compete at a higher level of achievement. The status quo has to be disrupted for progress to be made.

Of course, since a primary precept of risk reduction is disruption elimination, disruption will be strongly resisted. That’s why you will have to provide the team incentives to support it.

Get permission from the C-suite, and a bit of a budget, and take a lesson from Disrupt and offer incentives to the team members who come up with the best ideas for process improvements, technology upgrades, and knowledge improvement. It doesn’t have to be large cash rewards — it could be public recognition (in an awards ceremony), extra time off, or even a bigger bonus if the effort generates a Return on Investment and extra realized savings at Procurement time. It doesn’t have to be a big cheque up-front. Most Supply Management professionals want to make things better, and if you give them a good incentive, they will go against the grain and disrupt their daily routine in an effort to make it, your Supply Management department, and your organization better.

So get disruptive.

60 Years Ago Today TI Launched the Mobile Music Revolution

Steve Jobs may have wanted you to think that the iPod launched the Mobile Music Revolution, but it was just a new-and-improved mobile MP3 player which replaced the portable CD player which replaced the portable cassette player which replaced the portable 8-track player which replaced the portable radio.

And guess what made radios portable — the transistor. Before transistors, invented in 1947, revolutionized computing for the masses, these semiconductor devices used to amplify and switch electronic signals and electrical power, revolutionized the portable music industry with the transistor radio that was announced by Texas Instruments 60 years ago today. Before the transistor radio, the average small vacuum tube radio weighed about 20 pounds or so and didn’t fit in a pocket, whereas a small transistor radio weighed less than a pound and fit in a (large) pocket.

And those who were Young at Heart could take music with them wherever they went.