Wikinomics Chapter 10

Chapter 10: Collaborative Minds

This chapter is essentially an attempt to tie the rest of the book together neatly at the end. The four principles: Openness, peering, sharing, and acting globally are reinforced one more time.

The "innovator's Dilemma" is an interesting one. I think it is far-reaching though. Once you are the market leader, it's hard to stay on top. To be the "best" at anything, you have to constantly be on your guard. It's similar to being a great athlete. Being the best golfer in the world in 2006 only means you have to work harder to keep that position in 2007. You are the person to beat; everyone is training just to beat you. Last years workouts aren't going to cut it just like last years business plan isn't going to work anymore.

Next up, internet phones. Why not Skype? When I found out about this, I thought-what's the catch? Why isn't everyone doing it? I think organizations that aren't doing it will be doing it soon. Who pays long distance anymore? And really, on an individual level, who has land lines anymore?

The authors hint around at a sort of touchy subject: old people and technology. And by old people I mean not Net-gen. people. The book encourages people unfamiliar with facebook, you tube etc to try it out. Immediately, I envisioned trying to explain these things to co-workers who had no idea what I was talking about. Although the impending retirement of the baby boomers will affect the makeup of firms, it is unlikely that whole firms are going to exist of people under the age of 30. So my solution- Continuing Technology Education. Doctors have to keep up with advances in medicine, lawyers have to keep up with new laws, so why shouldn't businesses encourage employees to keep abreast of new technology.

One last takeaway is that of organizational flexibility and communication. If a CEO wants any of the principles discussed in wikinomics in her firm, she’s going to have to shape the culture in a manner that is open to things that have never been done before. Otherwise, employees are going to capitalize on their ideas elsewhere. It's a huge risk to say: this has never been done before, but we're going to try it. But the reward potential is there.

Wikinomics- Chapter 9

Chapter 9- The Wiki Workplace

This chapter was substantially more helpful than the last. The Geek Squad was a great example and gave insigt as to ow one might incorporate “wikinomics” principles into a business in the future. Although the Geek Squad ended up not using the original wiki as planned. But, would this work in a company that wasn’t made up of self-proclaimed Geeks?

Net Gen:
It’s interesting to think about how businesses are going to be run in the future when the “Net-generation” takes over. Are the principles of “wikinomics” going to be the exception or the rule? For Google, for Amazon, for all these “non-traditional” companies, how many failures were there? They are good examples, but doesn’t the average millionaire have 5 failures before striking it big? I wonder what the stats are for businesses.

As I’ve said before, I think one of the great things about our generation is a sort of disbelief when it comes to authority. We have question and we get answers. We do things our way. I’m promoting anarchy here. Just saying that it is good to ask why things are done a certain way and how they can be done better.

Bottoms up:
The bottom up approach is an interesting proposition. I would agree that a lot of times, employees have super valuable knowledge that managers are not tapping into. Especially those employees that interact with customers. Transparency-to a certain extent- is a good thing because all employees should be aware of what’s going on in a company. It’s a two-way street. Opening communication (either top down or bottom up) will lead to the other opening direction opening up- if people are willing to listen. The Sun Microsystems CEO’s blog is a great example…

As far as non-traditional business practices, I’m hoping that time allocation (google was the example in the book) is one of the first things to change. I’m seeing 3-day weekends becoming the norm fairly soon…. And if not, I'm holding out hope for fiesta or aloha Fridays...

Wikinomics Chapter 8

Chapter 8: The Global Plant Floor

Seriously? I’m starting to get annoyed with this book. Perhaps I’m being too critical, but it seems like the authors are just stating the obvious about the state of the world. Something I could figure out by skimming a newspaper. Maybe this book is geared towards those who are out of touch with technology or live under a rock… on an island… far, far away.

First, look at the examples given: Apple, Intel, Boeing, BMW. What do these firms have in common? Oh that’s right, they’re already successful. They’re names are recognized around the world and have been for quite some time.

The key element of this chapter is integrating supply chains into networks. This seems like a logical procession from the development of competitive advantages. I’m good at this, you’re good at that, so together, we can have a great product or be efficient, whatever the case may be. So then the supply chain evolved and now it’s the network. Instead of a typical supply chain,

We get:

Or something like that….

It is interesting that BMW is a prime example. I guess they’re safety standards are at an optimal point already and everyone is aware of that. (?). Also BMW has built up its brand so everyone equates BMW with high quality. In an undergrad management course, I remember the professor telling us that even if GM was 99% accurate in putting together its cars there would still be thousands of safety related problems per year. So it is kind of startling to me to think of BMW’s being put together and just working. Same goes for Boeing. It makes sense though that BMW would choose to concentrate on its marketing, etc. and leave the dirty work to up and coming specialists who are experts in digital engineering. I think the authors try to differentiate this “global collaboration” from outsourcing, but it is one and the same.

The authors also insinuate (not too subtly ) that BMW should open up even further. Yes, it works for Amazon because they sell books (and assorted other products). They don’t sell vehicles which we view as safe little bubbles that transport us from here to there. Book accidents don’t kill people, but car crashes do. Slight difference.

Finally, at the end the authors encourage the readers to ponder the global plant floor + healthcare. I’m just not feeling it.

Wikinomics-Chapter 7

Chapter 7: Platforms for Participation

It took me until the middle of this chapter to figure out exactly what “platforms” are. From what I understand, they provide a foundation upon which collaboration is placed. The main examples used (eBay, Amazon, and Google) don’t really seem like platforms for collaboration to me though. But maybe that’s because I’m looking at this as a consumer, not a developer. Also, the Amazon success story sounds really great, but I feel that capitalism is still at work and collaboration is still an ideal. Was Amazon operating the same way before they were raking in the big bucks? Probably not. I think that once organizations have established themselves as very successful, it’s much easier to participate in novel business practices because they already have financial security.

The People Finder that was formed in the aftermath of Katrina was really inspiring. Normally, the system would have taken a lot of capital to develop. But it is amazing what can get done when it has to. Why aren’t great things like this happening every day? No sense of urgency? People aren’t motivated to things unless they’re going to get something out of it?

As far as government information being available to the public, I think it’s long overdue. I’m not sure what the status of information is now, but I’m sure it’s not where it should be. The area where I have experience is legal research. LexisNexis and Westlaw have taken every statute, every case, etc. from every jurisdiction and organized it all in a way that it is (somewhat) easy to find what you are looking for. You can search by issue, by statute by case, by party name, etc. The catch is that they charge hundreds of dollars per search. (as law students, we get free access to both). Anything that is “public” information should be available (and easily searched) for free.

I just checked out Scorecard and although the data for Leon County is a little old…. It is still a good start.

Follow Up on Ch. 6

An article on Slate about the less than up to date laws...


Actually, it's a series and this article is on point too. I think Lessig (quoted in the article) is the law professor quoted in Wikinomics also.

Tolerated Use: The Copyright Problem

In case you don't feel like reading the whole article, this quote sums it up:

"The formal result of that is what we have today: a copyright law that covers almost everything we do in the digital world.

But the paradox is that the current law is so expansive and extreme that the very firms that first sought it cannot even make use of it. Nor would they want to. In a well-functioning political system, the copyright law might be reformed in a grand negotiation between all interested parties, with the long-term goal of separating out the harmful infringement from the harmless. But in 21^st-century America, that's not a result our political system is capable of reaching."

Wikinomics Chapter 6

Chapter 6- New Alexandrians

While reading this chapter, I kept thinking to myself, where does this fit in? What does this chapter have to do with anything and why did they put it here? Supposedly the New Alexandrians are organizations, individuals, and the like who fathom the importance of “openness.”

An example is the Human Genome Project. It would make sense that the aggregate of the knowledge of millions of scientists and researchers working together would be more effective and efficient than if they were working independently. In the case of this project, it was true. However, Chapter 6 offers evidence that pharmaceutical developments are not advancing at the rate that they should be (or we would expect them to be.) The authors try to explain how software open sourcing is much easier than scientific research. But, shouldn’t they be using software to do the scientific research?

In my notes, I wrote down that competition does not equal innovation. I’m not sure what that means, but what I think I had in mind was that this is the same problem all over again: incentives are not aligned. Pharmaceutical companies are not out to save the world or eradicate every disease. These companies make products to keep you alive enough to sell you more products that solve problems you did not even know you had. Have you ever listened to/read the side effects of sleeping pills like Lunesta, etc.? Seriously, I’d rather lay awake all night than have to deal with memory loss, dizziness, lightheadedness, changes in behavior and thinking, withdrawal, Etc. But, I digress. So, although there is competition, pharmaceutical companies can be profitable without saving the world. University partnerships might be a step in the right direction.

Finally, the last point I have written down is: is law keeping up with society? I would have to say-negative. But has it ever? No. As far as IP rights, there are public policy, ethical, and legal arguments. But seeing as how it’s taken this long to get IP protection where it is now, I don’t think the courts (or congress) are going to rush into any scaling back efforts. So where does that leave us? In the grey area, as usual.

Wikinomics-Chapter 5

Chapter 5- Prosumers

Prosumers seem like the next logical step from customer customization such as NikeID products, etc. What better way to guarantee the success of a product than to let customer design it themselves. This chapter compares “hacking” and “creating.” Two sides of the same coin. Whatever you call it, it’s going to happen. The key is to turn it into a positive (creating) and capitalize on it. (ie, Lego)

Secondlife:

At first I thought it was ridiculous. Now, after reading and learning, I’m tempted to try it out. Stories like that of “Anshe Chung” (who has made a lot of money in secondlife) make me think, why am I not getting in before this thing takes off and making money? On the other side, my “first life” takes up a lot of my time. The thing about these communities is that it’s kind of like a black hole for time. But maybe that’s what some people are looking for, an escape from their first life. Aside from interesting income tax conundrums, it will be fascinating to see where second life ends up. (That is, where the “prosumers” take it)

YouTube:

YouTube offers a great video library. It’s been going on for a few years, but I always thought that people who had videos on their MySpace and Facebook pages were ridiculous. It was too overwhelming. But I recently discovered the greatness of YouTube when I wanted to share a certain segment of the “Gingervitis” South Park Episode with my sister. While this mass compilation of videos is an awesome tool, there are many concerns. For example, the UF “Don’t taser me, bro” incident. While the kid clearly knew what he was doing, the UF police looked like morons. I don’t have a problem with that, but if you are UF, it gives a whole new meaning to negative press. And on an individual level, my friend always jokes that he can never run for office because there are too many YouTube videos of him singing bad karaoke. While funny, it is also true.

In conclusion, Prosumers… True? False? Good? Bad? Innovative? What does the instant gratification generation do when they get what they want? They want more