NGC Blog: The Innovation Exchange

No more ‘Bad Science’ in Hollywood

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently announced the creation of “The Science and Entertainment Exchange,” an initiative designed to connect entertainment industry professionals with top scientists and engineers to help the creators of television shows, films, video games, and other productions incorporate science into their work.

A good friend at Northwestern University sent me an email about this and he thought it was a cool idea. I agree, thus the creation of this post, and it certainly relates to a previous column earlier this year about STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) and America’s Real American Idols.

How many times have you watched a movie and wondered if what you were seeing was possible? Or, many popular TV crime dramas like CSI often use cutting-edge technology to solve crimes during each episode. But, is that technology real or just a Hollywood technique to create a dynamic storyline?

The depiction of science often poses a challenge to the entertainment community.

Though many of the world’s biggest problems require scientific solutions, finding a way to translate scientific findings to reach a wide audience has required a sounding board that has often been missing.

Until now.

We caught up with Jennifer Ouellette, director of The Science & Entertainment Exchange, to explain a little more about it.

What prompted such an initiative?
The Exchange represents the Academy’s first formal effort to reach out to the entertainment community and provide the creative minds of Hollywood with a direct connection to the creative minds of science. There have been several attempts to do something similar in the past by scientific organizations. The most successful is Hollywood Health and Science, established by Marty Kaplan, head of USC’s Norman Lear Center here in LA. The Exchange seeks to follow and build on that model. The idea is not to simply fact-check and criticize the “bad science” in Hollywood after the fact, but to get scientists involved earlier in the development process, so they can help inform and shape the scripts.

That sounds great, but in reality, how do you do that?
We need to foster those initial conversations/interactions between scientists and entertainment professionals in the hope that successful collaborations will lead to stronger relationships in the future. That’s why the NAS partnered with Janet and Jerry Zucker, a husband/wife producer/director team (AIrplane! movies, Ghost) and other leaders in the entertainment industry, along with key leaders in science. Everyone involved (including me) firmly believes that good science can actually spur creativity in character and story lines, and provide intriguing plot twists. Real science is so fascinating and sometimes stranger and fiction. We want to help Hollywood keep up with some of the more exciting developments in various fields

With everything else going on in the world, why do this now?
I think the timing is finally just right. There are so many science-themed shows on TV such as CSI, Bones, Numb3rs, House, The Big Bang Theory, Fringe, The Eleventh Hour, Eureka, etc. They, and filmmakers, are looking for verisimilitude in these shows and that means getting the science right… as much as good storytelling allows.

But, isn’t Hollywood really just about entertaining people?
We’re not trying to turn every TV show into a documentary or propaganda piece for science; we just want to encourage more believable fictionalizations on-screen, thereby cutting down on the more egregious howlers.

You mentioned the Zucker’s, who else is involved?
There are some very big names involved, but participation is open to everyone. We’ll be building a database of contacts over the next year or two to assist in quickly locating the needed expertise. Scientists participate on a volunteer basis; we may issue an invitation, but they’re free to decline. We want to draw on all levels to become involved, from the most prominent NAS members, to tenured professors, associates, staff researchers, scientists turned entrepreneurs, even grad students and post-docs.

Is it time consuming?
The amount of time involved is usually not onerous: a 30-minute phone call, a lunch meeting, with perhaps some minor follow-up queries after that. Even more formal tech consultant agreements – rare so far, but we hope to change that – generally don’t require more than a few hours a week; ditto for industry professionals. We want to reach out to producers, directors, art directors, writers, production/set designers, costume designers – anyone who plays a role in how science is portrayed in Hollywood. Which means, pretty much everyone. We’re already fielding queries from both sides of the aisle, so to speak; the response so far has been terrific.

What are the plans for outreach: conference, summit, TV show, etc.?
Our bread-and-butter activity is filling requests from those in the entertainment industry in need of scientific expertise for their projects. This can be anything from a 20-minute telephone conversation, reading over a draft script, meeting for lunch to discuss ideas informally, all the way to becoming officially “attached” to a project as a technical consultant. Our job is to make the connections and then get out of the way so creative collaboration can happen.  We do not negotiate contracts or financial compensation for any services rendered; that’s between the two parties involved. However, our activities will not be limited to that. It’s all about fostering those key conversations through which innovative ideas develop. So we plan to host smaller in-home salons; a workshop for scientists interested in how to be an effective tech consultant/ambassador for science in Hollywood; and other special activities. We’ll be partnering with universities, non-profit organizations, national labs, and the entertainment industry to put these kinds of things together. In short, we want to find the synergies and enhance those, so that even more creative collaborations can develop.

From the East Coast to the West Coast, the Innovation Exchange applauds the efforts of The Science and Entertainment Exchange. We here are strong advocates for STEM education and PR outreach to enlighten a wider audience on the important of science and technology in our world.

If Hollywood continues to boost their efforts to reach the masses on the importance of science and technology in today’s world, the knowledge economy movement will continue to build and cater to a much broader audience.

Oh, the possibilities…

High attendance, cautious optimism sums up Internet Summit

As a veteran conference attendee, it is important to take a moment to reflect and offer up some words of praise as well as critiques after this week’s Internet Summit in Chapel Hill.

There always will be room for improvement in whatever you do. Overall, event organizers did a tremendous job with the execution and delivery of a sold-out event in only its first year. Going a step further, here’s a more in-depth breakdown of the highs and lows from the day.

PLUS: Optimism
The attitude was refreshing. Despite a deflated economy, it was nice to be a part of a positive atmosphere where the overwhelming majority considers the Internet to remain a profitable platform.

MINUS: Caution
The technology community is known for disruptive discussions and innovative ideas. Surprisingly, many things discussed throughout the day have already been heard many times before, some jargon even a bit old school. Usually the shock and awe at events like this – especially on discussions around the Web – are much higher. Our current economic status probably caused this sense of tentativeness, but there is certainly many things happening online now that could have sparked some more timely discussions.

PLUS: Attendance
The event sold out in its first year, even with a soft economy.  More than 650 business leaders, investors and technology entrepreneurs packed the Friday Center. Definitely a positive!

MINUS: Separation
The conference was segregated into two main auditoriums with sponsorship vendors and active networking opportunities in the hallways between the two. At one point I wanted to attend the Blogging discussion, but couldn’t because the SaaS discussion was happening at the same time.  I was forced to choose between the two, which was unfortunate.

PLUS: Keynote participants
The Summit had a phenomenal lineup of panelists and presenters. The vast knowledge and experience made available for public consumption was definitely a highlight.

MINUS: The Topics
The Summit covered just about every aspect of the Internet today. There was high value on discussions ranging from the venture outlook and technology law, to SaaS and marketing in a 2.0 world. However, the agenda missed some topics. Personally, with so much talk being made about the importance of content, I would have liked to have seen a panel focused on writing for the Web. And, although there were several experts in Search Engine Optimization on panels, I would have preferred to have attended a discussion totally focused on SEO. Lastly, one of the critical components to the Internet is having a Web site. It would have been nice to have seen a portion dedicated strictly to the latest and greatest trends in Web site development and/or choosing the right CMS. These are just a few ideas for next year.

PLUS: SaaS Discussion
In a packed-to-capacity room, the SaaS panel provoked some dynamic conversations as many see the delivery model in this space as a critical component for developers to survive in our current economic downturn. The topic is really hot and the panelists involved on Wednesday were outstanding.

MINUS: Marketing 2.0 Discussion
Despite the moderator accepting audience questions via Twitter, the overall discussion really was disappointing. I’m no expert by any means, but some of the information being discussed was really dated and lacking in structure. The caliber of panelists was phenomenal, but the information was just a bit unorganized. Funny, even with the Twitter thing, it was like the discussion was more on the stage with the panelists instead of with everyone in the auditorium – thus the irony of the 2.0 title.

PLUS: Delicious Lunch
The vegetable lasagna, steam vegetables and crisp salad were excellent in providing the necessary fuel midway through the event. To top it off, the chocolate raspberry cake was the perfect end to the meal.

MINUS: Long Line and Seating
I waited and smelled the food for almost 20 minutes. Fortunately, waiting in line allowed for active networking with my fellow starving attendees. However, after 10 minutes of introductions and small talk, there wasn’t much else to talk about, creating an uncomfortable scenario for everyone. Then, after finally getting some food, there wasn’t enough seating for everyone and I also had to go on a dining room adventure to find a clean fork. Oh well, the food was great when I finally sat down.

In general, this was a great event. It would be difficult to give a high mark on something like this in its first year, so giving it a “B” seems more responsible. I do look forward to attending next year’s event and to see how the conversations that began in 2008 evolve a year from now. It should be interesting.

Internet Summit covers it all

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. – Some of the region’s sharpest Internet minds converged at the Friday Center last Wednesday to actively network and unlock some of the secrets of performing profitable business on the Internet.

The inaugural Internet Summit hosted by TechJournal South covered all aspects of living and working in a connected world. The economy, innovation, business intelligence, forward thinking and the importance of leadership were among the underpinning themes.

Even in a volatile economy, more than 600 business leaders, entrepreneurs, investors and marketers still see dollar signs and opportunity with new and evolving Internet trends, Web 2.0 technologies, and how industry as a whole can capitalize on shifting economic dynamics.

While many panel discussions noted how the economy continues to have an adverse affect on business, most remained optimistic that the Internet will remain profitable and continue to grow.

“In times like this, how do you re-motivate yourself,” pondered Bob Young, CEO and founder of Lulu.com, and former leader of open source pioneer, Red Hat. “If it’s not about growth, what is it in this economy? It’s really about execution.

“That’s what recessions are for … If you think of it from a society sense; it’s an opportunity for us to spend less time building mansions and more time on building, well-engineered products.”

The internet economy continues to grow and evolve with new business models, innovative ideas and new technologies. The Internet Summit spotlighted the spirit of prosperity in these areas.

“I’ve decided to come here today and meet some new people, share some ideas, see what everyone is doing and possibly find some new partnerships,” said Don Kozak, CTO, Lycos, who traveled from Boston, Mass., to be a panelist in the social networks and communities’ portion of the event. “This has been a great event and very informative.”

The event agenda was designed to cover all aspects of the Internet. Two rooms had consecutive topics going on throughout the day as attendees cherry picked from the most interesting discussions.
 
Subjects included blogging and new media, Software-as-a-Service, the Internet venture outlook, ecommerce ROI, marketing in a 2.0 world, Internet law, Internet entrepreneurship, social networks and communities, next-generation email marketing, best practices for the modern infrastructure, the present and future of Internet search, and mobilizing the Internet.

Each discussion provided insight into what’s happening now and what may happen later.

Presented by TechJournal South, Southern Capitol Ventures and Council for Entrepreneurial Development (CED), the Internet Summit supports Web oriented entrepreneurial activity, innovation, and the resultant economic development of the southeast region.

With a sell-out in its first year, sources tell LTW that plans are in the works to put it on again next year.

Executive Engagement: Leave the ‘techie talk’ at the office

The Global S.T.A.R. Conference on Tuesday at the Embassy Suites in Cary, North Carolina, provided enough inspiration for 10 blog posts. The presentations were dynamic and relevant to some interesting times that currently exist in our world.

One of the many motivating presentations was supplied by Theresa Payton, president and CEO of Charlotte-based Tripwire, LLC, and former White House Chief Information Officer. Payton and co-presenter Lee Zeichner, founder and president of Zeichner Risk Analytics and author of Cyber Security & Corporate Liability, focused on executive engagement, innovation and lessons learned.

The talk posed some interesting questions that sparked dialogue that filtered into the hallways. I had a chance to sit down with the pair after the presentation to go more in-depth on the topics they discussed.

First of all, Theresa, what is like working in the White House?
Well, I did the opposite of most of the speakers here today who worked in the public sector and moved into the private sector. I started my career in the private sector and moved into the public sector, so it was a very interesting move. Honestly, though, I found myself working in an environment with some of the most patriotic and brilliant people in the world. Everyone was so supportive and understanding, and it really was an honor to be a part of what was going on.

As a former CIO, what are some of the challenges you see?
In my former banking career, I found that providing information to customers was king, 24×7x365 without intervention. So going into my role at the White House, it obviously was much different because we had to provide the information around the clock but also provide a heightened level of security to protect the overall mission. But, as a CIO with any organization, I find that leveraging technology is only one of the many challenges. You have to be mindful of your language and talk in business terms, not like the Charlie Brown adult (wa wa wa). You need to ditch the PowerPoint slides, have real conversations with your executive management team, make them feel comfortable with the information you’re sharing, and be respectful of their time and information absorption. It can be difficult.

Interesting, can you elaborate more on presenting information to executives?
You really must have face-to-face, short discussions – whether you’re in the private or public sector. You need to leave all the techie talk back at the office and have a real conversation. Make sure you highlight your points for them in summary terms; this is what the mission is, this is what I believe you’re trying to accomplish on a daily basis, and here’s where I’m struggling to be able to protect you so you can get your job done. As soon as you start doing PowerPoint slides, memos and manuals, executives, even with the best intentions, just do not have the time to absorb every single threat or vulnerability that is out there. You have to respect their schedule and their other duties.

When it comes to technology security, how do you justify investments with decision makers?
That’s an excellent question. Most of us here will tell you the same thing; it’s hard to justify spending for something that hopefully won’t happen. It’s pretty simple. The reality is people are going to get into your systems and you have to design around that. The argument is to show how real the threats are and to prepare your organization as best as possible. In the event, something does happen, having the proper “clean- up” methods also is critical to restoring confidence and business continuity. It’s a tough conversation to have, but when I think about this, I think about Yoda from Star Wars – “Do or do not, there is no try.”

What are some of the greatest challenges currently facing our country’s economic security?
Two things really stick out to me. First of all, the current regulatory environment poses a challenge. We really do have a lot of regulations on the books, and I’ve been fortunate to work with some of the best and brightest in this area. But, some of the instruments being used are so sophisticated today, and many bright people coming out of school are going to work in the private sector because of the money they can make. Unless we can provide incentives so that more people choose the oversight and regulatory side of the public sector, we may create gaps in expertise that can pose challenges in enforcing regulations and oversight. Until we find a way to appeal to the patriotic sense of duty to incent additional people, we are going to run into problems. And the other piece regards information security. The basics are just not enough. There’s a pay to play such as purchasing hardware, software, and installing firewalls that everyone needs to do. The bad guys know this too and will find ways to work around what is in place.  This is where the executive engagement and the innovation come into play.

Lee, anything you would like to add?
Well, since being here today, one thing that seems to be hit over and over again is the problems we have at looking at long-term technology. And, I don’t really mean the hardware/software aspects. I really mean getting experts together to work out complex problems. It’s a social networking issue. It’s a trust issue. It’s a leadership issue. How do we rethink where we are? Most of us are doing on-the-job training, and it’s difficult to look 10 years out with what is on our plates today. It’s a challenging chasm to find those who work on this stuff on a daily basis and those who have the insight to think 10 years out to find the time to sit down at the table together. If we had this discussion 10 years ago, it would be a totally different dialogue.

So, you’re saying it’s going to take more than just collaboration?
Yes, I think so. There needs to be skin in the game. The idea behind creating this situation is to ensure that technology is managed by like-minded individuals who share a stake. Collaboration here is more about enabling productivity. When people think about collaboration, many of us think that we are all going to get along. What I’m saying is that you could hate the other partner and still work together in a joint venture for a common purpose. I think we’re getting to this second model now because we are getting more honest about our needs.  This is relevant to both corporations and governments, and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Interesting, indeed. Theresa and Lee, thank you for sharing your time with me.
You’re welcome. (Theresa adds) You know, someone with talent, time, money and motivation, really can do some innovative work in this space right now and make a difference. It is an interesting time we live in.

Global S.T.A.R. Conference

Theresa Payton (left) president and CEO of Charlotte-based Tripwire, LLC, and former White House Chief Information Officer, talks with Lee Zeichner, founder and president of Zeichner Risk Analytics and author of Cyber Security & Corporate Liability, about executive engagement, innovation and lessons learned.

Innovation Needs Experts

Sometimes there are too many frogs on the lily pad. And, what happens when that happens – it sinks.

In these frustrating financial times, global leaders are rethinking next steps and cutting costs anywhere and everywhere they can. Many are turning to “crowdsourcing” as a way to find inexpensive labor from the masses to create content and solve problems.  

The practice is expanding. As a result, businesses are managing diversified portfolios of innovation sources, which is a good thing. I’m all in favor of collaboration. But, in an age where everybody thinks they know everything, I believe that experts are still needed to do the job and do the job right.

A good online example of crowdsourcing is Wikipedia. It’s a great resource, but the problem is that the thoughts of the masses can sometimes be diluted or downright incorrect. Sorry, but it’s true. There are many user-generated falsehoods on Wikipedia accepted as fact, and that’s simply not the case.

What collaborative technology has done, though, is redefine the expert. Expertise no longer belongs to an exclusive domain of people. Collaborative technology and social media is diminishing that barrier to find skilled practitioners in unique and unexpected places.

Honestly, it’s one of the reasons I am able to do what I do.

Companies hire me on a contractual basis; where I am considered the subject matter expert and treated as part of the team. The organization saves money by not having to provide full-time employee benefits and other options. The model works, and current and previous clients have benefited because of it.

It’s now time to rethink the crowdsourcing idea and add experts to the portfolio of innovation sources.

Expert sourcing taps specialized talent as a brokered service. This model actually will better organize innovation; driving the full potential for ideas to turn into reality and finally maturity.

Think back to boom of the 1920s and the industrial revolution where the assembly line became standard practice in factories. Each person had a specialized job and the team was able to produce quality products fast. The idea isn’t new. What is new is how companies leverage today’s specialists to do the tasks that many businesses just don’t have the resources to do in-house.

By expert sourcing instead of crowdsourcing, the return on investment has unlimited potential.

Crowdsourcing is fine for stepping ideas forward, but it takes experts to make them sprint forward.

Please participate in the exchange. We would love to hear your thoughts on this for future posts.

Innovation Needs Experts

Sometimes there are too many frogs on the lily pad. And, what happens when that happens – it sinks.

In these frustrating financial times, global leaders are rethinking next steps and cutting costs anywhere and everywhere they can. Many are turning to “crowdsourcing” as a way to find inexpensive labor from the masses to create content and solve problems.  

The practice is expanding. As a result, businesses are managing diversified portfolios of innovation sources, which is a good thing. I’m all in favor of collaboration. But, in an age where everybody thinks they know everything, I believe that experts are still needed to do the job and do the job right.

A good online example of crowdsourcing is Wikipedia. It’s a great resource, but the problem is that the thoughts of the masses can sometimes be diluted or downright incorrect. Sorry, but it’s true. There are many user-generated falsehoods on Wikipedia accepted as fact, and that’s simply not the case.

What collaborative technology has done, though, is redefine the expert. Expertise no longer belongs to an exclusive domain of people. Collaborative technology and social media is diminishing that barrier to find skilled practitioners in unique and unexpected places.

Honestly, it’s one of the reasons I am able to do what I do.

Companies hire me on a contractual basis; where I am considered the subject matter expert and treated as part of the team. The organization saves money by not having to provide full-time employee benefits and other options. The model works, and current and previous clients have benefited because of it.

It’s now time to rethink the crowdsourcing idea and add experts to the portfolio of innovation sources.

Expert sourcing taps specialized talent as a brokered service. This model actually will better organize innovation; driving the full potential for ideas to turn into reality and finally maturity.

Think back to boom of the 1920s and the industrial revolution where the assembly line became standard practice in factories. Each person had a specialized job and the team was able to produce quality products fast. The idea isn’t new. What is new is how companies leverage today’s specialists to do the tasks that many businesses just don’t have the resources to do in-house.

By expert sourcing instead of crowdsourcing, the return on investment has unlimited potential.

Crowdsourcing is fine for stepping ideas forward, but it takes experts to make them sprint forward.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this for future posts.

Shoot for the Global S.T.A.R.

We all could use a little certainty in an uncertain world.

Large audiences packed Duke University’s lower level of Page Auditorium on Wednesday to hear five faculty experts discuss the current financial crisis that has swept across Wall Street and world financial markets.

Duke officials organized the program in response to the rapidly changing economy as expert panelists analyzed the situation’s causes, potential solutions and likely effects on the upcoming election.

One item that struck a chord in the news report was a statement by Cam Harvey of the Fuqua School of Business. He said a primary cause was “a gross failure of risk management at many different levels,” adding that “it’s no surprise to me that the American people are quite upset about this.”

Along the lines of risk management, business continuity and surviving current economic softness, I totally agree with this assessment and feel that leadership is the key to solving our fiscal woes.

There will probably be more of these types of events popping up around the country. This convinces me that people really are concerned with the state of our nation, which also makes me see a huge value in attending a conference later this month that addresses security, threats and risk from both a defense and security perspective and an economic perspective.

The Partnership for Defense Innovation will host the Global S.T.A.R. Conference: Security, Threats & Risk, on Tuesday, Oct. 21, at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Cary.                    

Hosted by the Fayetteville-based organization, the event features interactive panel discussions that focus on various critical areas including economic warfare, national intelligence, and security threats in the real world.

Among the alphabet soup of organizations participating include the Federal Bureau of Investigation, North Carolina Chamber of Commerce, North Carolina Military Foundation, North Carolina Military Business Center, North Carolina Technology Association, and the BRAC Regional Task Force.

The event has a pretty stellar lineup of expert speakers and should be informative for all who seek some clarity as to state of our nation and the world around us.

Keynote participants include Kenneth Marks, Chairman of the Board, Partnership for Defense Innovation/DSTA; Scott Perry, President, Partnership for Defense Innovation/DSTA; Nate Gray, Special Agent in Charge, FBI – N.C.; Kevin Mandia, President & CEO Mandiant; and Theresa Payton, Former CIO, Executive Office of The President at The White House.  N.C. Senator Bob Etheridge and N.C. Senator David Price both have been invited to speak.

The event has several key sessions that appear worthwhile:

• Economic Warfare, National Intelligence & You, featuring Kevin Favreau, Assistant Director Intelligence, FBI.

• Security Threats Inside & Out, Around the Globe & Home: featuring Chris Swecker, Senior Vice President Global Security Bank of America.

• What Security Means in the Real World: featuring Lynn Mattice, Chairman of Emeritus Faculty, Security Executive Council, and includes a panel discussion with Gen. Mike Jones (Ret.), Senior VP, Government Solutions, Saffron Technology; Allen York, Southeast Division Manager, Applied Research Associates; Pete Hernandez, VP, EM-SEC Technologies; and Timothy Stranahan – Supervisory Special Agent, FBI – Charlotte Division

• Preventing the Insider Threat: Managing a Secure Workforce with Michael Gelles, Senior Manager, Deloitte & Touche, and David L. Brant, Director, Federal Practice Deloitte & Touche.

“Economic espionage and global threats are on the rise and increasingly sophisticated,” said Joan Myers, Director of Special Projects, PDI.  “Understanding these threats is paramount to economic and national security.  This is a conference CEOs, CFOs and the public sector cannot afford to miss.”

Based on the state of things right now, I am open to explore new ideas and perspectives on how to protect our society. This is a critical time, and we all need be engaged in the situation.
  

Tackling data center power needs, virtualization opportunities

Among the many challenges IT executives face in today’s rapidly changing environment is data center power management and virtualization, according to a new independent survey released this week.

Avocent Corporation, an IT operations management firm based in Alabama, revealed results of an independent survey this week that showed companies are seeking better visibility into their data center operations to help mitigate business continuity challenges, better manage virtualized systems and applications, and control power consumption and overall complexity.

The survey was conducted on behalf of Avocent by Actionable Research and polled 299 IT executives in the U.S. in manufacturing, high technology, retail, banking, healthcare, education and government, asking them what they found to be the top challenges in aligning IT with overall business objectives.

“Our survey confirms that businesses are indeed challenged most by the need to effectively manage the increased complexity in today’s data centers, while at the same time keeping networks running smoothly and power consumption costs down,” explained Ben Grimes, Avocent CTO and vice president of corporate strategy.

“The findings further tell us that many administrators lack the tools they need to properly manage power usage in data centers – only 55 percent say they can monitor power usage today, and even then it’s mostly at the UPS level,” added Grimes. “These statistics show there’s a huge opportunity to improve overall data center management and a strong desire to implement ‘green’ IT solutions.”

Survey respondents said that energy conservation was the most difficult issue to resolve with their current tools. Respondents felt that managing the total cost of power was the second most difficult task, and many of the respondents noted that their interest and work with virtualization technology were influenced by the hope of ultimate energy savings.

The top reason for deploying virtual servers was for cost savings. Of those polled, 32 percent also stated they initially looked to virtualization as a means of decreasing hardware costs. Their responses, however, showed two key concerns with managing server virtualization: 45 percent said they had concerns about the lack of expertise that IT personnel had with virtualization; and another 44 percent said they were concerned virtual servers could fail from a component failure in a single physical server.

Business continuity, in the form of network uptime, is a constant challenge for those polled. There are significant costs tied to downtime, including disgruntled or lost customers, reduced worker productivity, and reduced revenues tied to network failure. Survey responses indicated that 35 percent of companies have lost mission-critical data due to unplanned downtime.

The survey also found that businesses plan to maximize the use of their existing servers and equipment to the fullest extent possible through the end of 2008. Last year, survey respondents reported that IT budgets included an average of 39 percent towards technology and 36 percent toward personnel.

These numbers were consistent across the different segments in the survey, with the largest companies spending slightly more on personnel than others. According to respondents, for 2008, there is little or no projected budget distribution change, both overall and among companies of similar size.

The survey is an interesting read and provides some good insight into the nature of challenges companies face when managing complex system, network and data center challenges as well as the unique issues faced when integration between dissimilar networks is necessary.

Regardless of specifics, it is clear from responses that issues relating to data center complexity will continue to shape many of the IT decisions made throughout the remainder of 2008 and beyond.

A full copy of the survey is available at http://www.avocent.com/

What’s Next After Now?

There is an endless amount of news and information on the Web. It truly is mind boggling and would take a small army to even try to keep up with everything.

While sipping down my fifth diet coke before 9 a.m. on Wednesday, I had an epiphany. I thought to myself, “Self, what is next after now?”

Now, of course, this is not about the afterlife or anything spiritual – this is strictly a futuristic forecast towards news, distribution and consumption.

“Good evening Mr. and Mrs. America, from border to border and coast to coast and all the ships at sea. Let’s go to press.” Walter Winchell began his radio show with this statement and is one of my journalistic heroes, an inspirational influence to pursue a career in the media. 

Winchell was an American newspaper and radio commentator who basically invented the gossip column by breaking the journalistic taboo of exposing the private lives of public figures, permanently altering journalism. Plus, he was able to evolve in a changing environment and bridge between media outlets; starting with newspapers, then radio and finally into the early stages of television. 

But, what if Winchell had the Internet? What if he had a blog? In his time, he was the top gossip reporter, whose newspaper column and radio show could “make” or “break” a celebrity. Today, in era of information overload, do you think his impact would be just as noticeable today as it was then?

Personally, I don’t think.

This is a very quick snapshot of our society’s media evolution:

1. Narrators or storytellers passing information verbally to their tribes
2. Stone carvings evolving into handwritten scrolls/books used throughout the middle ages
3. The printing press and print journalism
4. Pony express and postal service
5. Telegraph and telephone
6. Radio
7. Television
8. Computers, fax and email
9. Mobile phones
10. Internet

Obviously, there are a lot more, but this should cover mankind’s major media achievements. So, the big question is, what is No. 11?

Based on history, all forms of media have a life cycle, comprising of birth (technical invention and innovation), penetration, growth, maturity, self-defense, adaptation, and finally obsolescence. We are at a crossroads once again as our latest and greatest information outlet (the Internet) evolves and continues to impact older media in their struggle to survive.

The Internet has transformed our world, but this is only the beginning of the radical changes computers will bring to our lives.  What’s next? The next big adventure, in my opinion, is the stuff movies are made of – Artificial Intelligence.

Yep, instead of merely following human logic, I believe computers will have a form of intelligence that is significantly different from human intelligence and incomparably more powerful. As these computers literally feed on information and “grow” using a globally ubiquitous Internet, it will change virtually every aspect of our lives: business, investing, science, health care, entertainment, and more. 

Since most computing today is used merely to emulate human thought processes, the true revolution will come when computers think as humans cannot. And that, boys and girls, requires surrendering control to the machines (hopefully not Terminator style), letting them race into unknown territory.

The challenge, as it is now and in the generations before us, is to first accept and be comfortable with change and then leverage those new capabilities and technologies – and do so quickly, before the competition does.

So, what’s next after now? Only the future holds the answer to that question, but we all should be prepared for the next stage in information evolution because at one time, our society thought writing something down on a scroll and passing it off to someone was innovative.
 

The ad about nothing: Seinfeld and Gates go shoe shopping

Microsoft Corporation has signed comedian Jerry Seinfeld as the company’s new pitchman. The first commercial debuted last night during the first NFL game of the season.

As a marketing, PR dude, my initial thoughts of the ad: cute, but ineffective. And, I’m not the only one thinking that way.

Several bloggers and reporters are taking some serious shots at the commercial today. Perhaps, Microsoft’s overall marketing strategy is that any press is good press considering Microsoft’s Internet Explorer lost nearly a full percentage point in market share during August, the browser’s biggest drop in three months, and we won’t even go into all the negativity surrounding the Vista OS.

The commercial features Seinfeld and recently retired Microsoft founder Bill Gates shoe shopping in a mall. The 90-second clip employs quick-cut editing and the kind of “humor from nothing” approach that defined Seinfeld’s TV series. It tells the story of the odd couple’s day at discount emporium Shoe Circus in the mall, where Gates buys a snappy leather number called “The Conquistador.”

As they exit, Seinfeld asks if Microsoft is working on something to make computers “moist and chewy like cakes, so we can eat them while we’re working.” Seinfeld tells Gates to adjust his underwear if the answer is yes, and the software mogul does so, much to the comic’s delight.

The commercial closes with the words “The future. Delicious.” There’s no overt sales pitch for specific Microsoft products, though the company’s logo does appear briefly.

But this ad has a strange, overall tone to it. More than likely, we are going to be seeing a lot more of these Jerry and Bill spots in the near future, so let’s hope their chemistry improves on screen.

At one point during the awkwardly long ad (typically spots are 30 or 60 seconds, but this one appeared to be about 90 seconds) Seinfeld says, “Guess what Bill, you’re a 10.” Indeed, an interesting play on words, but that saying is a bit old school.

Didn’t the writers and directors watch the Olympics? A 10 doesn’t even exist anymore in gymnastics, well technically it does, but now that would be a really bad score. I think I know what they were going for, but whoever decided to use that line needs to be reminded that this is 2008.

MG Siegler at VentureBeat pointed out that using Bill Gates’ mugshot from an arrest for a traffic violation in 1977 on his Clown Club card is kind of funny. Good job, picking up on that, my friend.

Adweek’s well-respected ad critic Barbara Lippert, a week before the commercial aired, was none too enamored of Microsoft employing Seinfeld as a pitchman: “The pick is so preposterously unhip it’s as if the company had unconsciously internalized all of Apple’s knocks against the poor, frustrated PC guy.”

Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft is expected to spend an estimated $300 million on the overall campaign.

I tell you what, if I was a gymnastics judge in the Olympics and was force to rate this commercial, I might give this a 10, which, if you remember, isn’t too good these days.

What do you think?

In case you missed it, watch it here for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz6amk3P-hY

« Older Entries