All posts by Jim Muttram

The Power of Big

I remember quite vividly years ago failing to convince anyone in my circle of acquaintances in b2b that Linkedin would have a future. The problem was that, though they were getting quite popular, they didn’t have an obvious business model and without revenue, it was argued, they had no future.

Of course, as things panned out LinkedIn discovered a revenue stream in recruitment head-hunting, got really big and then added lots of other ways to make money including lead generation. Few today can ignore LinkedIn as a power-house of social media.
The same was also true of Facebook – which used to be associated only with students comparing notes on parties and sexual partners, and where the only revenue seemed to come from people buying each other virtual gifts.
The news that Amazon, the world’s largest online retailer, has linked up with Facebook for social recommendations suddenly changes the picture. Of course Facebook was already making money from advertising (in fact is the largest display advertising site in the world now). But the direct link to ecommerce points the way to real monetisation of the 500 million customers the site now has.
All this has prompted Google to re-think its privacy policy and beef up its social efforts as it tries to find ways to compete – it now has Microsoft and Facebook as its twin rivals.
There is real value in being the biggest even if it isn’t always obvious where the money is coming from early on. And there is real danger in focusing too narrowly on the business model before you have the audience to support it. Being broad minded and playing the long game – provided you have the funding to afford to – does pay off.

Posterous

I sat through an inspiring presentation from Christian Payne (aka Documentally) yesterday in Quadrant House and it has prompted me to spring clean my online presence. So today I started to look again at Posterous where I set up an experimental blog some time ago which has been languishing ever since.

I have tried to modify Posterous so that my personal domain points to it (can’t tell if I have been successful until the DNS propogates) and if that works I’m going to start blogging through this site instead of my faithful old Blogger blog.

The reason? I had forgotten how power the post-anywhere from anything functionality of Posterous was. If my DNS experiment is successful, watch out for an increase in general activity.

Amateur thoughts on immigration

Yesterday I went to my son’s school for the annual Prize Giving ceremony. In all there were 134 prizes awarded to boys from all years in the school. What struck me was the number of pupils who were not from white British ethnic stock.

According to my own amateur stab at the maths (and judging only from what I could see) 31% of the children getting prizes fell into the category of 2nd generation immigrant and of those getting the prize for best academic performance in each form, more than one in five fell into the category.

Britain, and the rest of the West, has a major challenge finding its competitive place in the world in the 21st century and it seems to me that we will need all the help we can get from new, ambitious, eager blood arriving on these shores. It was immigration (added to resources and opportunity) which propelled the US to the top of the global league table. Bringing down the shutters is about the worst thing we could do.

Life in the Cloud

This may be the year that Cloud Computing really starts to take off – mainstream coverage has started to appear like this piece on the BBC website and it is appearing on corporate IS agendas.

I’ve been thinking quite a bit about this shift recently and I think under cover of this there is a much more profound change taking place – the shift from document centricity to web centricity.

By this I mean that the old client-server model which dominated the latter years of the last century gave way in this to a web-centric view of the world. Let’s call them the “Microsoft Way” and the “Google Way” since those two giants dominate each approach respectively.

The Micosoft Way focusses on the individual, sitting at his or her PC, loaded with software which empowers personal productivity, but in a off-line way. This was sensible – internet connections were slow and hard to come by and the best security came from having your documents on your machine.

Of course collaboration in this model was difficult – you created a document, emailed it to some colleagues, they each changed a bit and sent it back and you were left with the task of combining the results. This means multiple versions out them, many part-finished versions languishing on file and print servers, and email inboxes clogged up with documents.

The solutions, often quite complex and hard to use,  were then bolted on top – Track Changes to version documents, Sharepoint to store official version of documents, LiveMeeting to allow collaboration over the internet etc etc.

The Google Way is different. It starts with the internet – Google was born in a age when ubiquitous connectivity was becoming a reality.  The document in Google Apps starts life as an online document with the presumption it will be shared. Multiple people can edit the document simultaneously and all these edits can be tracked and rolled back seamlessly. Spreadsheets come with forms which can be emailed or embedded and which can update online spreadsheets which can be published onto intranets through Sites. Presentations can be instantly shared both in creation and play-back mode. Person-to-person communication through chat, video and VOIP is built in. Storage is no longer a problem – quotas are huge and growing.

Much of this can be achieved using the old paradigm but usually at an additional cost in licences (Sharepoint, Infopath, Livemeeting etc) and more often than not with the required help of internal IS staff who are needed to configure these complex add-ons.

This of course works for the IS community in corporations, creating jobs and a meaningful role in companies. But start-ups are not using these products – they are jumping straight to the cloud solutions – the Google Apps, 37 Signals, Saleforce.com solutions which are much simpler to use, and much more configurable by the users.

The result of this is dangerous – it has the capacity to create a real competitive chasm – building on a platform like Apps can empower ordinary knowledge workers to create quite sophisticated solutions without the intervention of programmers. The more they build the greater their propensity to build. And all of this extra functionality is coming at a very low cost and is increasing their agility.

In my view this is the real cultural shift at the heart of the Cloud Computing debate. Just putting your old apps into someone’s datacentre misses the point. Changing the way you work is the really smart move.

Twitter stopped

Today my Twitter timeline stopped updating and as I write it hasn’t started again. It seems I’m not alone in this – there have been a lot of people complaining of a similar thing over the past eight or nine hours. This incident got me to thinking just how important Twitter has become to me as a web tool.

I was an early user of RSS and have been very keen on Google Reader for years. However, in the last six months my usage of Reader to keep up with events had virtually stopped. My “web radar” these days is definitely Twitter.

I used to worry that I was missing a lot by relying on Twitter. But on the occasions when I did devote the time to ploughing through my thousands of accumulated posts on Google Reader, I seldom found anything I found I didn’t already know about.

I must say I’m a bit surprised to find how central Twitter has become – I wasn’t really aware of it. The disappearance of my timeline today brought it home.

The Long Nose of Innovation

I came across a very insightful article by Bill Buxton in Business Week called The Long Nose of Innovation which basically argued that innovations which make a difference are in fact based on technologies which have been around for a while. Buxton argues that innovation is really about the application of things already in existence as much as it is about inventing entirely new things.

This resonated with me as I thought about something Ray Kurzweil, the futurologist, said in a recent lecture (which I can’t now find!). He argued that since technology is growing exponentially, if you are building something (in his case computer translation software) you should design for what computers will be able to do by the time you are ready, now what they can do now.

It seems to me you could distill some good advice from these two: look for technologies and capabilities that are around now, but which have failed to reach their potential because computers or mobiles aren’t powerful enough – then design something which will be truly impressive once the power catches up – which it will.

Augmented reality – likely to be all the rage in 2010 – falls into this category. The technologies have been around for ages (camera, compass, GPS), but it wasn’t until they were combined into relatively cheap, powerful phones like the iPhone and Android that they could take off.

Recruiting by example

Techcrunch has an interesting piece about a job ad seeking a “Twitter Expert” in Greenwich Village, New York. The job ad, in Craigslist, explains how the applicant should apply:

1) Email me two tweets. The first should be about your experience. The second should by why you’re perfect for this job. If you exceed twitter’s allotted character count, you’re done.

2) Email me your Twitter name in link form (e.g. http://www.twitter.com/YOURNAME)

3) Tell me how many followers you have and how many people you follow.

4) Tell me who’s the best person you follow and why (in tweet form).

5) Tell me what’s the best way to get more followers (in tweet form).

6) Specific salary requirement.

They haven’t asked for a CV or a letter explaining qualifications or relevant experience. Instead they’ve gone right to the heart of the issue. If you can apply convincingly then there’s a very good chance you are perfect for the job.

I often think we should be recruiting our new journalists the same way. After all, we know what we are looking for these days – the ability to blog, to communicate two-way, to build a following – why not just limit ourselves to the evidence. We probably need a reference or two just to satisfy ourselves that the potential recruit isn’t a mass-murderer, but apart from that the evidence should speak for itself.

And think how much easier it was for the recruiter to assess all those job ads – total size 600 characters each applicant!

Is bootstrapping killing innovation?

A lot has been made of the game-changing way new start ups can now test their ideas with very little money using free, online tools and pay-as-you-go computing like Amazon’s EC2 and S3. But now Clive Thompson, writing the latest issue of Wired, has challenged that idea, suggesting that this bootstrapping fashion is limiting the vision of new start-ups.

These days, Valley entrepreneurs tend to pick a cool (but niche) idea; bootstrap it with minimal staff, open source code, and rented server space; and then build a user base until some lumbering technosaur buys them up……This system is more fiscally responsible than the con-job IPOs of the dotcom boom — but it favors entrepreneurs with modest ambitions.

 However, says Thompson, maybe it’s just that truly revolutionary ideas are just plain hard to spot.

People sniffed at Google because they thought AltaVista and Infoseek had already “solved” search. Microsoft, too, was seen as a joke: Real men built hardware, not software. And as for eBay — dude, who’s gonna buy someone else’s cast-off Weebles?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]