Bradley Howard's Blog

Views of digital media, innovation, loyalty and business in the real world

Screens appearing literally everywhere

This video has been trending on YouTube recently - it's five months old and has been watched over 14 million times. It's a glass company which is theorising on the future of glass based appliances.

In so far as the video itself is concerned, it clearly cost a lot of money to shoot. Whether it was shown on television I'm not sure - putting it on YouTube and getting an audience of 14 million is worth a lot of media spend.

If the possibility of accepting meeting requests before you've washed your face in the morning is appealing, you'll love this video:


 

Why the single mobile device isn't possible

A true story (all the stories I tell on this blog are true - it's just this makes the story more dramatic) - I was standing in the kitchen washing the dishes last night whilst watching the television.

I find this to be the second most therapeutic place in the World - the first is in the shower (for more information about why we seem to think clearer in certain positions but never at our place of work, read Future Minds.

Anyway, back to washing the dishes, and I saw the new Sony Xperia Play advert shown below.

This got me thinking the same thing as the R&D guys and girls in every handset company in the World - what is the perfect handset/ mobile/ slate device? By perfect, I mean "what device will take over from all the other devices we own?" I remember conversations in the late 1990s when I worked at the Finnish Telco Sonera (for accuracy, I worked at a subsidary called SmartTrust - now part of G&D, however these conversations took place with the parent company) where we discussed more than 100% penetration of handsets in the World (i.e. more active handsets than people).

Why would people want more than one handset? Because you'd have a super smart/ fashionable one in the evening, an email device with QWERTY keyboard during the day, a sporty/ waterproof one on weekends and so on.

I remember hearing that the market research teams at Nokia (despite the recent bad news I'd recommend anyone with any technology interest to visit their amazing corporate headquearters in Finland) kept hearing that their users wanted tiny phones and massive screens; they wanted as few keys as possible and full QWERTY layouts; they wanted the simple, original, 'flat' Nokia menu and a gazillion functions on the phone. The users wanted the impossible - mutually exclusive functions.

After I'd finished the washing up (we have a large family and had guests that evening - these things take a while), I sat down and caught up on some recorded TV - Secrets of the Superbrands: Fashion when the penny dropped.

We won't be able to have a single device because of the following factors:

  1. Fashion - too many of us want the latest new shiny (or distressed as I learned on the Secrets programme) thing, for the sake of having the latest new thing.
  2. Best of breed. I use the toaster because it makes the least mess; I use the microwave because it makes hot chocolate quickly and without getting a saucepan dirty; I use the oven to roast chicken because I imagine it's going to taste nicer than the small microwave/oven (and I'm worried all future hot chocolates will taste a little chicken-ey).
  3. We want change. I like love Dairy Milk. But every so often I'll have a Flake, or a Twirl or a Wispa. Think of your favourite yet balanced meal - why don't you have it every night?

And for these reasons I don't think the single device to take over our wallet, mobile phone, laptop and paper pad is ever going to come along.


 

10 years since joining

16061p2010th20birthday1
This time ten years ago I joined IMG as the Development Manager to build a new Content Management System.

The digital division within IMG was about four years old at that point, and had bought the digital rights to a number of sports organisations with the hope that the advertising and sponsorship on those sites would cover the costs of writing huge cheques to the sports organisations. 'Hope' is a strong word, because at the time the Internet bubble was at it's height, and we all thought we'd be billionaires by Christmas.

When I joined, IMG was pulling out of a number of these deals, and looking for efficiencies with the tiny development teams.

The Internet was so different back then. Products were very expensive. Vendors and 'experts' were all learning as they were going along - so when we got stuck, we were well and truly on our own. For instance we tried different CDNs (Content Delivery Networks) to handle the huge amount of traffic we were experiencing, and ended up creating our own using Cacheflow servers. Just looking up the link just now made me laugh - because these boxes used to be the size of a fridge, and now they're the size of a PC. Once we'd got the Cacheflows stable, we simply migrated to Akamai.

I remember people, including the CTO, would sleep in the office when we expected incidents to happen. I remember arguments with database vendors about licensing - some wanted to charge for every visitor that accessed the website, because they saw that as a database user. I remember running analytics reports on websites that used to take several days to compile, and when we wanted to run the report again with a different metric, all the numbers in the report would change! That same report in SiteCatalyst now takes a second to run and end users run it themselves.

Most of the really difficult stuff back in 2001 is now a commodity. Half of those products now have a freeware solution.

In around 2005/6 I moved to the client side - project management and operations. The CMS was very stable, and it was time to look at a decent off-the-shelf solution because we were losing pitches because of our lack of multi-lingual support, versioning, WYSIWYG editing and advanced SEO support.

We chose Sitecore as the CMS platform, and for the first time we looked at offshoring to India to migrate our sites. Three months of total pain followed. For the first time since joining IMG, we missed deadlines (in sport, although it sounds obvious you can't miss deadlines - most of the time you might as well not deliver anything than deliver a project late). We pulled the projects back to the UK and an army of contractors joined the development team. Some were good, some weren't. We started to offshore to Eastern Europe instead. And it was a revelation:

  • Being able to fly there and back in a day (not recommended, although possible and sometime necessary);
  • The cultural similarities; 
  • The push-back nature from developers on some of the requirements.

Then in late 2008 we looked to outsource more work to Romania via Endava. What started off at a simple outsourcing deal changed at the last moment, and the staff TUPEd over to Endava in January 2009.

Since then we've worked on some new projects outside of sport, and the Web has become a stable, maturing, controllable entity. In 2001 we were looking only to stabilise our clients' sites.

Our traffic (bandwidth, visitors and page impressions) have all increased exponentially in ten years, with some exponentially, several times. Social Networks have come and some of them have gone. Do they compete? No, they simply direct more and more traffic to our clients' sites.

And now to the future. In 2011 we are looking at providing data insights, personalised experiences, full integration with back off systems, and providing a true ROI for our client's digital properties.


 

The future of technology and payments according to Visa

4852329918_9afdf3db3f1

Photo courtesy of Jack Snell on Flickr

Someone from Visa sent me a brand new whitepaper about Visa's view of the future of technology and payments, the future being the next 3-5 years. The main purpose of the whitepaper is the first in a series of thought-provoking, thought-leadership pieces to discuss in the industry. How they plan to discuss it, is interesting in itself - I'll deal with that at the end.

The whitepaper cleverly pulls together various emerging technologies into 7 key trends. The first 3 are technological and the last 4 are social.

Mobile and identity issues are raised as you'd expect. The future of payments is probably via a phone rather than a card. And pull mechanisms (also called invisible payments or background payments) such as regular top ups such as 'Oyster cards' are going to be more common - including us wearing such devices.

Put it another way - if you travel on the underground, purchase items on Amazon, eBay and the Apple App store, you won't need your card number at any point, because each sites remembers your card details. If I said ten years ago that you'll pay for computer programs, books, music or even second items in the same way as you pay for your electricity -- background payments without referring to your credit or debit card -- anyone would have laughed.

Whilst the continuation of the transfer from cash to electronic is going to keep increasing, I still think there will be a requirement for cash. If you disagree, try and find a tradesman (plumber, builder, electrician, etc.) who deals exclusively in electronic payments and you'll get my point.

At the other end of the spectrum, virtual currencies don't get a mention. My view is that virtual currencies inside websites such as Facebook and especially online games will become huge. At the moment Visa Inc is dealing with these new payment companies by buying them outright.

I'm being negative, however the document does pull together huge topics such as social media, mobile, personal identities, Big Data, invisible payments and cash into a short, clear and concise conversation starter.

And this is where the document falls apart. Visa want to discuss the document by email. That's 10 years ago, not 2011. In 2011 we expect at the very least a web forum to discuss the chapters in the document with industry peers. In 2001 a conversation was between 2-5 people. In 2011 a conversation is with hundreds or thousands. Emailing a mailbox called futurevision@visa.com doesn't entice an open coversation. In 2011 we expect to discuss these matters with thinkers/ people with faces -- not a faceless corporate mailbox.


 

Away on Thursday and Friday

Photo
This Thursday and Friday I’m in Bucharest, the capital of Romania, with all the Account Managers and sales people from Endava for a Customer Facing Unit conference. We’ll discuss the latest trends and industry observations, best practices (internally & externally), all with the aim of collaboration between clients, and how to help them in their businesses.

It’s interesting that these conferences are almost always held in Eastern Europe. There are several reasons why – the cost including flights is the same as using a London hotel; getting out of the office usually helps creative thinking; and connecting our global offices where we do most of our ‘delivery’ can only be a good thing.

The key points for this conference from my point of view are as follows:

  • The future of System Integrators (aka “IT services” in 21st century language) are to add value. The future is to provide domain expertise and help propel our clients forward. Not just answering our clients' current needs but helping them with their future roadmap.
  • Our clients need to collaborate with one another. They have something in common – Endava, and most can work in conjunction with each other rather than compete. This might be working practices. It might be efficiencies learned through one client and able to be transferred to another.
  • Working with product vendors more, mainly because product vendors [unsuccessfully] try to fit their products into an organisation (and often through the wrong route) rather than understanding a client’s requirements and then seeing if their product will help.

 


 

Census completed

Logo-census-landing1
Last night I completed the census form online. If you haven’t filled in the census yet, I recommend completing it online because it will be a much quicker experience. No worrying about conditional questions such as ‘Now skip to question 7’.

The website is fast, and although I didn’t need them, there are helpful ‘bubbles’ on each questions.

Despite having many children, and the census needs to be completed for each one, the entire process took less than 10 minutes.

Well done to the Information Architect(s) and whoever implemented the website.

The next stage is voting. Why can’t we vote online? The census felt very secure (long PIN number to enter the site and SSL throughout the site). It’s 2011 – half the country should be voting online and via mobiles by now.

The next step after online voting is micro-voting. Richard Watson described this in his book, where citizens constantly vote on detailed topics. E.g. should the UK be involved in Libya? 

The step after that is where citizens of one country are able to vote on international issues – such as an English person voting on whether the US should be involved in Libya.

The technology is already here – as the census proves. Politics needs to catch up with the technology.

 


 

Book review: Future Minds

Futuremindsbookcover1
Just reading Future Minds by Richard Watson was a story in itself!

I started reading the book as soon as it was released, because after I read Watson's first book, I've been thinking about his trends of the future ever since, and regularly comment on his blog. About one and a half chapters from the end though, I lost the book on the tube one night (after a few "sherbets" I should add), never to be seen again. I emailed Watson, asked for a second copy and it arrived. Thank you Richard. I waited until I'd finished reading "What Would Google Do?" before finishing off Future Minds.

By Watson's own admission, Future Minds started off as a different book to it's current title. Watson wanted to write a book on the best places to 'think'. What's the most appropriate architectural layout of a building? What works and doesn't work? Is a messy desk more productive than a tidy one? Thankfully my the messy one wins over the tidy one (e.g. my next door neighbour at work!).

Watson has an easy reading style. When I received the second copy of the book, I finished the last chapter and a half in one tube journey into work. And I'm not a fast reader at all.

What I appreciate about Watson's research is that it forces the reader to take a step back from normal life and look at it from a macro view. You want a more personal communication style? Then write a letter rather than a short email. You want a child to learn about something? Then let them read a paper encyclopaedia rather than perform a Google search. While you're reading the book, real life experiences will occur that confirm Watson's narrative. As with the first book, you find yourself like a nodding dog whilst reading it.

Watson goes into the process of creative thinking. Creative thinking will (according to Watson) become vital because machines and efficiency drives (Lidl need fewer shelf stackers because they simply put the pallet on show in the supermarket) will be able to perform a high percentage of all the tasks we currently perform. The only thing machines are less likely to be able to do in the medium term is creativity.

Whilst his attempt at creative thinking is good (we don't get our best creative thinking at work or in front of a computer, so take a long lunch break with the rest of your team and have a glass of wine), the best book I've read on creative thinking is from What If? and I've nothing else seems to come close.

One of Watson's recommendations is that for a day each week, you should turn all devices off, and your thoughts will naturally start to file themselves together, and you'll be able to think much clearer. When I met Watson, I said that this seemed very similar to the monotheistic faiths that all describe a Sabbath as that day of rest. Watson actually goes a step further and said that one day a year, try to do absolutely nothing - again most monotheistic religions have at least one day a year of fasting and all work is forbidden - in order to forget about our usual activities, and be able to concentrate (when was the last time you did that for 10 hours straight?).

I met Watson at the RSA where he gave a talk on the book (a long highlights version is on YouTube). His thoughts clearly polarised the audience. The first question from the audience was a woman who said that last week she opened the front door and saw some black clouds above. She went back inside to look up the weather report on her computer, and when it said "rain", the penny dropped and she realised her reliance on technology had taken over her common sense. Other people simply think he is anti-technology however I think he's trying to call out "Use it in moderation!" In the last 10 to 15 years the general population has jumped head first into social networking, Googling and texting. He's not saying any of those three are necessarily bad, he's just warning that they don't replace face to face friendships, encyclopaedias and conversations respectively. 

In summary I found the book as thought provoking as the first one. It's useful to work inside IT/digital media and have someone talk about technology use in moderation, and to remind me that my creative thinking doesn't occur in the office or in front of a PC - like most people, it's upstairs in the shower. Now that's a thought to leave you with.

 


 

My view of Wikileaks

Interpol
I've been asked a number of times this week about my view of the huge amount of publicity of the Wikileaks stories. I have a number of different views on this, so here they are, from a pro stance, to negative:

Pros:

  1. It's nice to see some behind the scenes communications rather than the public facing toned-down-to-suit-my-allies media sound bites that we're usually fed. I'm specifically referring to the Arabic countries asking the US (read: "indirectly Israel") to help solve 'the Iranian issue'. The Arabic countries can't do this in front of camera, so it's nice to see that behind the media façade, they're actually thinking sensibly.
  2. Many of the articles on the site seem to be more embarrassing than serious. I'm sure that some of the descriptions of key politician's personalities are no worse than those same politicians hear from comedians or the press. One would hope that the politician's have thick enough skin not to be affected.
  3. David Cameron wants an open government. Well Prime Minister, like you probably warn your children to "be careful what you wish for", Wikileaks is what you wished for. Every commercial brand who has ventured into social media has wanted to be seen open and transparent, and then tightly clenched their buttocks when someone on a social platform says something negative. The really open, transparent and consumer facing brands then use the platform and customer comments to respond and demonstrate customer service. OK, I've ventured off topic so returning to the main point - don't try anything half hearted on the Internet, because the Internet population will make sure you go the whole way. The Open Government initiative is an excellent start, but people want the fluffy bits in between the publicly available stats.
  4. If you don't want to be quoted saying something, don't say it. Why were some of the embarrassing emails ever written? Most people wouldn't write an email at work describing their boss in any level of negative detail, for fear of it ever ending up in HR or their boss's Inbox. Or they might not say anything negative because they are trying to be morally correct about their views (which is why we all prefer people who are positive and aren't two faced about other people). Granted I understand that not all the leaks are like this (such as minutes of meetings), although most of the newspaper's quotes related to descriptions of individuals that should never have been said in the first place.

Negatives:

  1. After reading a few of the newspaper articles, which seemed to hold up Julian Assange (the founder of Wikileaks) as some sort of superhero (including the Evening Standard's "if in doubt, a journalist should always publish first and question later", I didn't realise until today that Assange is a 'wanted man', with every country in Interpol looking for him. I think Mr Assange should be attacked in the press, because of the next point...
  2. Due to the simplicity of the site, it's just too easy for a copycat Wikileaks to appear. I'm sure there are already a few hundred. Unless the press make the practice of Wikileaks 'socially' unacceptable, Pandora's box will remain open.
  3. My final worry is about how this might will extend into the corporate world. A couple of years ago a website was setup where upset, anonymous employees could publicise internal memos/emails within companies. It was mainly used for companies announcing redundancies, hence it was called 'FuckedCompany.com'. The site has since been shut down. At the time it was very similar to Wikileaks. I'm not sure how much publicity the site generated, however you can imagine that with the level of publicity of Wikileaks, it would hit share prices very hard. It's a real worry that these sites may return because share prices rely on secrecy, hence 'Chinese Walls' exist within investment banking (a key role of the FSA) and the public companies.

Other comments:

  1. Tongue in cheek - I did joke with a a friend yesterday that the government and large corporations who spend hundreds of thousands of pounds a year trying to integrate their electronic documents together to make them easy to navigate, are probably scratching their heads at Wikileaks from a technical perspective! Mr Assange has received documents in all formats, from CDs to whatever else, and organised them in one site.
  2. How is Wikileaks funded? The site has gathered a lot of publicity, which will have sent a huge amount of traffic. Bandwidth needs to be paid for, and the cheaper hosting providers limit the amount of bandwidth for a website. I just can't believe that many people are donating money to the site, and the only advertising on the site is to it's own donation page.
  3. To demonstrate how far behind the curve the authorities are, if you go to the Interpol page for Assange, it says a picture is unavailable. Yet Google has about 2.9 million of him.

My overall view of Wikileaks is that it's illegal and should be shut down. Publicising what everyone else can be tried for treason for is illegal. Assange needs to be made to account for these potentially damaging secrets and politically unstabling releases. Governments also need to behave more, and watch what is said rather than worry if it's leaked. I think Assange will be caught, and governments won't change, for the time being.


 

Google the answer engine, not 'just' the search engine

200926553_0004d7f60d1

I watched my nine year old son doing some homework this week on the computer and noticed for the first time that Google didn't just point him in the right direction to answer a question, it actually provided the answer.

He didn't think anything of it. He thinks that Google is there to provide answers, and is an absolutely reliable source of those answers. He doesn't question the validity of the source any more than I would have questioned Encyclopaedia Britannica when I was his age. I found that it was a further leap for Google-kind than even, two years ago.

The question was "Who watched the ancient olympics?"

He actually typed in "who watch the ancient olympics?" which actually brought the answer closer to the top of the results than the grammatically correct question. That's a separate issue I'll have to deal with and it was difficult to ascertain whether he typed in the incorrect grammar to obtain the best results rather than a genuine mistake.

Education is changing at an amazingly quick rate. My son's [state funded, primary] school has an interactive projector in every classroom, and is aiming that within two years will have a laptop per child.

Children are being taught to use Google to search for answers.

In Richard Watson's book, Future Minds, he describes how it took less than a generation to go from reading long form (e.g. a paper article on Ancient Olympics) to consuming bite sized snippets on a screen. I don't have a major problem with this leap, except for the fact that we need to understand and accept that general knowledge will deteriorate because children will only know exactly what they've searched for, rather than anything broader.

Reading the paper article, or even one of the search results' full articles would have taught my son that the games used to be one day long, then five days long, the different events, and even that in boxing, the boxers would wear hard leather straps with metal over their knuckles - ouch.

Image courtesy of Arkntina


 

A cheap answer to the impending UK cyber attacks

287171643_5fbb72e2571

The news over the last week has been the biggest threat to the UK is cyber attacks on our power plants, transport infrastructure and water plants.

A simple solution - just disconnect them from the Internet. Anyway, why are they connected to the Internet in the first place?


 

Bradley Howard

Head of Digital Media at Endava, although all the views in this blog are purely mine and not necessarily those of Endava.

 

Subscribe to my RSS feed

 

 

Other ways to find me:
TwitterBuzzLinkedInDelicious