Recently I wrote a response (see here) to a friend CIO at an analytics company's question on... What is transformative in the analytics space? What can work with entrenched platforms and systems while allowing for breakthroughs to occur?
Sounds like a familiar concern if you are a CIO of any company that deals with large amounts of data, hence, CPG, FMCG, airlines, finance, etc. The large investments in Oracle, SAS, SAP, etc. cannot be supplanted, yet they can be complimented.
I am on the Board of Advisor of what I consider the world's first data analytics company that unifies the transformation being desired, i.e. unification of semantics and statistics, in real time. Please see a set of video-logs that shares how Saffron is being used. With a bit of marketing, the examples will highlight the breakthrough.
See details here... enjoy!
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Electric Cars - The Reality
From the Wall Street Journal:
"Electric vehicles have been with us for almost 180 years. The first, an electric carriage created by an inventor named Robert Anderson, made its appearance in Scotland in 1832."
"If you are looking for a car that makes good economic sense in these tough times, PEVs simply don't make the grade. Unless crude oil prices rise close to $300 per barrel and battery costs fall by 75%, a PEV is more expensive than a gasoline-powered vehicle."
See complete article here.
"Electric vehicles have been with us for almost 180 years. The first, an electric carriage created by an inventor named Robert Anderson, made its appearance in Scotland in 1832."
"If you are looking for a car that makes good economic sense in these tough times, PEVs simply don't make the grade. Unless crude oil prices rise close to $300 per barrel and battery costs fall by 75%, a PEV is more expensive than a gasoline-powered vehicle."
See complete article here.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
China and US Bonds
Via good friend Mr. Tony Tsai, CEO – BHG Retail Innovation Institute and EVP Operations – The BJ Hualian Hypermarket Co.:
"China has reduced holdings of US bonds for three consecutive months; China reduced holdings of US Treasury bonds by $5.4b in January: March 15, according to statistics issued by the US Department of Finance, China reduced holdings of US Treasury bonds by $5.4b in Jan. China has reduced holdings of US bonds for three consecutive months. China is still the largest holder of US bonds. China's holdings of US bonds were reduced to $891.6b by Dec. 2010."
"China has reduced holdings of US bonds for three consecutive months; China reduced holdings of US Treasury bonds by $5.4b in January: March 15, according to statistics issued by the US Department of Finance, China reduced holdings of US Treasury bonds by $5.4b in Jan. China has reduced holdings of US bonds for three consecutive months. China is still the largest holder of US bonds. China's holdings of US bonds were reduced to $891.6b by Dec. 2010."
Thursday, March 10, 2011
US Patent Changes!
Having written about patents in general, see here, here and here, the new changes USPO are creating excitement!
From Yahoo News, details here:
"The most substantial change brought about by the bill would be to switch the United States to a "first-inventor-to-file" system for patent applications used by all other industrialized countries rather than the current "first-to-invent" system. Supporters say the first-to-file system would put American innovators on the same page as their overseas competitors, making the process simpler, more certain and less expensive."
From The Hill, details here, the reader comments are enjoyable.
From The Wall Street Journal, details here:
"The Patent Office would also gain power to set its own funding, a move that is likely to mean higher application fees but also greater resources to process an application backlog that exceeds 700,000."
From The New York Time, details here:
"... the House is unlikely to take up a patent bill anytime soon, and people with an interest in the patent system say they expect its bill to be significantly different."
"Many smaller companies and inventors opposed the change, however, arguing that it favored companies that could hire legions of lawyers to quickly file applications for new permutations in manufacturing or product design."
"A consortium of technology and computer companies are already lobbying House members to resist addressing procedures to re-examine patents in their bill. The Information Technology Industry Council, whose members include Dell, Google, I.B.M. and Microsoft, said in a letter to Mr. Leahy earlier this month that it opposed the bill’s provisions to alter how patents could be re-examined, asserting that this would increase litigation rather than reduce it."
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
US's competitive edge being lost
Paul Otellini, Intel CEO: "You see us investing in good times and in bad times when other people don't." Otellini, added NBC, "fears the country is losing its competitive edge to Asia. He blames high corporate taxes and an education system that's falling behind the rest of the world in math and science."
Monday, February 28, 2011
Ford - Flexible Manufacturing
I had the opportunity to meet Dr. Abid Ghuman in Pakistan at NUST (http://www.nust.edu.pk/) During our conversation, it became clear that he was the key mind behind Ford's "Simplified Flexible Manufacturing". Though not adopted in the USA till the pain of economic downturn, now it is becoming the reason for Ford's success.
This article highlights the complexities of large corporations here. The loser of course first is the consumer, then the customer and finally the company. USA Today treats the subject in more recent terms here.
See Dr. Ghuman's patents on manufacturing and tooling here.
Friday, February 25, 2011
A New Way For Analytics
A good friend, executive at a large analytics company, asked me how I would articulate the next product in the space. Here is my attempt:
New markets require new analytics products that begin in a new fashion.
A generic and current example would be: We can dissect the consumer population into demographics (have schema), and run campaigns on them (poor distributions, hitting same consumer with many, at times conflicting messages).
New approach... Let's define the demographic we seek, and develop the application around understanding it.
For example, there is no analytics application that comprehends the Muslim Consumer in-depth. The new application has to be incremental in learning, i.e. it never stops learning; it has to comprehend the unseen, i.e. it is schema free, hence, leading to intuitive outcomes; it has to be real-time i.e. no more running the models for days to get an answer; it has to be built upon existing infrastructure i.e. it does not throw away the clients current spending on IT; it has to provide the unification of statistics and semantics i.e. no arm twisting to "try" to make "sense".
There is no such application in the market currently. Such a proposition is where insights into products for families living below $2/day can come from. This is where the analytics engine begins to develop a “memory” of the entity, may it be a consumer or a automotive.
This is NOT aspirational, this IS the “Near Tomorrow” (Copyright 2011 The RBR Group).
The execution requires for example for CPG/FMCG: (1) Understanding a client's goal for new market entry, (2) developing the ideal consumer (no, not digging within the existing, looking back at the past data, it was yesterday), (3) searching for the ideal consumer, (4) begin to consume all data on the closest matches in the method defined above, i.e. schema free, incremental, with statistic and semantic unification.
This delivers the consumer’s unstated needs, where the value is the highest for a product that fulfills it. Example, the consumer had no clue they wanted an iPhone. Keypads, smaller and smaller were fine too!
For the 21st century, analytics is the when predictive goes to forecasting to deterministic.
For a thought provoking look at engine technology that delivers the above, see Saffron Technology.
New markets require new analytics products that begin in a new fashion.
A generic and current example would be: We can dissect the consumer population into demographics (have schema), and run campaigns on them (poor distributions, hitting same consumer with many, at times conflicting messages).
New approach... Let's define the demographic we seek, and develop the application around understanding it.
For example, there is no analytics application that comprehends the Muslim Consumer in-depth. The new application has to be incremental in learning, i.e. it never stops learning; it has to comprehend the unseen, i.e. it is schema free, hence, leading to intuitive outcomes; it has to be real-time i.e. no more running the models for days to get an answer; it has to be built upon existing infrastructure i.e. it does not throw away the clients current spending on IT; it has to provide the unification of statistics and semantics i.e. no arm twisting to "try" to make "sense".
There is no such application in the market currently. Such a proposition is where insights into products for families living below $2/day can come from. This is where the analytics engine begins to develop a “memory” of the entity, may it be a consumer or a automotive.
This is NOT aspirational, this IS the “Near Tomorrow” (Copyright 2011 The RBR Group).
The execution requires for example for CPG/FMCG: (1) Understanding a client's goal for new market entry, (2) developing the ideal consumer (no, not digging within the existing, looking back at the past data, it was yesterday), (3) searching for the ideal consumer, (4) begin to consume all data on the closest matches in the method defined above, i.e. schema free, incremental, with statistic and semantic unification.
This delivers the consumer’s unstated needs, where the value is the highest for a product that fulfills it. Example, the consumer had no clue they wanted an iPhone. Keypads, smaller and smaller were fine too!
For the 21st century, analytics is the when predictive goes to forecasting to deterministic.
For a thought provoking look at engine technology that delivers the above, see Saffron Technology.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Most Innovative?!?!
MIT's Technology Review has declared 2011's 50 most innovative companies., see them all here.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
How green was my Valley!
As the president of TIE Carolinas, an entrepreneurial non-profit, I engage with business men and women from across the world. A trend is clear and omniscient - the world at large, specifically Asia and Africa, have a populace that is aspirationaly committed to improving their lot... from the mother living in the Mumbai ghetto whose girls are working as data entry clerks to the Asian billionaires building the 21st century multi-nationals. I do not find it true of business men and women in the USA, where I have found the entrepreneur unable to "dream" for the past three years... dreams, which are essential to risk taking. Are things improving... they will and can though in a new paradigm yet to emerge.
Thanks to Financial Times for an excellent analysis of the reality of technology driven leadership and entrepreneurism in the the USA... Mr. Richard Waters writes in "A dip in the valley" - "Early stage investors appear to be losing interest in the painstaking work needed to sustain America's lead in the advanced industries that can generate many future jobs."
An example showcasing a macro trend in full swing (though it impacts micro economics as well) is: "When Massachusetts came up with $58m of incentives in 2008 to encourage Evergreen Solar to build a plant, it looked like the US state had found a new lease of life for a disused military base. Until last week, that is. Evergreen is shutting the facility with the loss of 800 jobs. The future location of Evergreen’s wafer making: a plant in Wuhan, China."
[Click to enlarge the graphic in the right.]
Again I am reminded of Gordon Moore's (Intel co-founder) lament that chasing returns has left a gap in invention in the USA. More strongly worded though is: "The belief that American individuality and creativity somehow assure future leadership is “a clear exposition of the arrogance of empire”, warns Michael Moritz, one of the Valley’s leading start-up financiers. Freed of “the debilitating effects of affluence”, he adds, “the need to succeed is far greater in the emerging economies”."
The article discusses US's inability to turn out enough engineers, decreasing share of its world R&D spending, sense of decline in the US, some of the existing invention's business being lost to Asia (ex: LED), etc. The article documents Mr. Moritz statement,"A company that loses its ability to develop its own manufacturing is on the road to oblivion."
And of course, such a conversation cannot end without evaluating current and desired policy - One area being talent, growing it, acquiring it and maintaining it: "Sophie Vandebroek, a Belgian engineer who moved to the US in the mid-1980s to train, says that at the time it was “the place to be – this was where the hot research was happening”. Ms Vandebroek stayed and eventually became chief technology officer at Xerox – in spite of the low status accorded to engineers in the US: “It’s kind of at the bottom of the professions.” Now, she and others warn, US immigration rules that make it harder for foreign students to stay, along with the availability of good jobs at home, are causing the country to leach much-needed foreign workers."
The second, the conduction of business: "If it is not to become left behind in businesses such as [solar, energy storage, green tech], the industry’s leaders say, it is time for a policy rethink. “Simply put, the US needs to decide it is ‘open for business’ and willing to compete in the global marketplace for factories and jobs,” says Paul Otellini, chief executive of Intel. “Costs are higher here, not driven by labour rates but rather by lack of incentives or tax credits that are available to US corporations in most other countries.” Without education reform, there will be a “critical engineering skills gap [that] will ultimately translate into fewer jobs and inventions in this country”."
The article concludes with the Valley still has a spark, "But for the country at large, it would not pay to take that much for granted."
See the complete article here.
Thanks to Financial Times for an excellent analysis of the reality of technology driven leadership and entrepreneurism in the the USA... Mr. Richard Waters writes in "A dip in the valley" - "Early stage investors appear to be losing interest in the painstaking work needed to sustain America's lead in the advanced industries that can generate many future jobs."
An example showcasing a macro trend in full swing (though it impacts micro economics as well) is: "When Massachusetts came up with $58m of incentives in 2008 to encourage Evergreen Solar to build a plant, it looked like the US state had found a new lease of life for a disused military base. Until last week, that is. Evergreen is shutting the facility with the loss of 800 jobs. The future location of Evergreen’s wafer making: a plant in Wuhan, China."
[Click to enlarge the graphic in the right.]
Again I am reminded of Gordon Moore's (Intel co-founder) lament that chasing returns has left a gap in invention in the USA. More strongly worded though is: "The belief that American individuality and creativity somehow assure future leadership is “a clear exposition of the arrogance of empire”, warns Michael Moritz, one of the Valley’s leading start-up financiers. Freed of “the debilitating effects of affluence”, he adds, “the need to succeed is far greater in the emerging economies”."
The article discusses US's inability to turn out enough engineers, decreasing share of its world R&D spending, sense of decline in the US, some of the existing invention's business being lost to Asia (ex: LED), etc. The article documents Mr. Moritz statement,"A company that loses its ability to develop its own manufacturing is on the road to oblivion."
And of course, such a conversation cannot end without evaluating current and desired policy - One area being talent, growing it, acquiring it and maintaining it: "Sophie Vandebroek, a Belgian engineer who moved to the US in the mid-1980s to train, says that at the time it was “the place to be – this was where the hot research was happening”. Ms Vandebroek stayed and eventually became chief technology officer at Xerox – in spite of the low status accorded to engineers in the US: “It’s kind of at the bottom of the professions.” Now, she and others warn, US immigration rules that make it harder for foreign students to stay, along with the availability of good jobs at home, are causing the country to leach much-needed foreign workers."
The second, the conduction of business: "If it is not to become left behind in businesses such as [solar, energy storage, green tech], the industry’s leaders say, it is time for a policy rethink. “Simply put, the US needs to decide it is ‘open for business’ and willing to compete in the global marketplace for factories and jobs,” says Paul Otellini, chief executive of Intel. “Costs are higher here, not driven by labour rates but rather by lack of incentives or tax credits that are available to US corporations in most other countries.” Without education reform, there will be a “critical engineering skills gap [that] will ultimately translate into fewer jobs and inventions in this country”."
The article concludes with the Valley still has a spark, "But for the country at large, it would not pay to take that much for granted."
See the complete article here.
Friday, February 18, 2011
eGFI - An Excellent Place for Young Engineers
I serve on the Board of Advisors for School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering at University of Oklahoma. My engagement with university education has been in large part due to my tremendous unhappiness with the engineers I was trying to hire at P&G and my friend, mentor and colleague Dr. Farrokh Mistree since 2006.
This has led me deeper into engaging in engineering education, one result being co-developing "Product Innovation: Designing Open Engineering Systems" with Dr. Dirk Schaefer, Dr. Mistree and Dr. Jitesh Panchal, and teaching it.
Yet, what about engineering education through K-12, guidance and learning about the possibilites for the high school students. A good place is eGFI, see here:
"eGFI is proudly brought to you by the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). We are committed to promoting and enhancing efforts to improve K-12 STEM and engineering education."
I found the sight to be delightful, easy, engaging and most importantly... intuitive.
This has led me deeper into engaging in engineering education, one result being co-developing "Product Innovation: Designing Open Engineering Systems" with Dr. Dirk Schaefer, Dr. Mistree and Dr. Jitesh Panchal, and teaching it.
Yet, what about engineering education through K-12, guidance and learning about the possibilites for the high school students. A good place is eGFI, see here:
"eGFI is proudly brought to you by the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). We are committed to promoting and enhancing efforts to improve K-12 STEM and engineering education."
I found the sight to be delightful, easy, engaging and most importantly... intuitive.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Unique (first mover) Vs. Distinctive (competitive)
In all my commercialization efforts, from shampoo bottles to molecules to wireless antennas to software, I always look at whether there is an opportunity to have the first mover advantage, in some cases it is merely marketing based perception.
Apple has charged its app publishers 30% for AppStore (article here). Google is countering with 10% cut. Apple made 20% more by entering the market first and delivering a consumer value and winning them while earning from the customer and enabling the customer to reach the consumer.
Just to emphasize what this means, Apple earned 30% of $250MM AppStore sales in December 2010 only. Unique (or first mover) advantage $50MM!!
Please see the very nice work done by GigaOM folks here in detailing the number of AppStore users and their application buying behavior and data.
I have taken the liberty to publish their information graphic below. The comments to the article are insightful as well.
Click to enlarge
Apple has charged its app publishers 30% for AppStore (article here). Google is countering with 10% cut. Apple made 20% more by entering the market first and delivering a consumer value and winning them while earning from the customer and enabling the customer to reach the consumer.
Just to emphasize what this means, Apple earned 30% of $250MM AppStore sales in December 2010 only. Unique (or first mover) advantage $50MM!!
Please see the very nice work done by GigaOM folks here in detailing the number of AppStore users and their application buying behavior and data.
I have taken the liberty to publish their information graphic below. The comments to the article are insightful as well.
Click to enlarge
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)