With Innovation, There’s Always a Catch

Wednesday, March 28, 2012 | Leave a Comment 

Even in the absence of its legendary leader, Steve Jobs, Apple has yet again taken the market by storm with the introduction of its iPad 3, released earlier this month. With improved graphics, camera and video capabilities, greater text readability and a dictation function, many will argue that the iPad3 is the best tablet yet.  A recent Computerworld article written by Ryan Faas argues that improved graphics, video and gaming capabilities make the iPad3 a winner. Now, companies in the mobile ecosystem, from mobile gaming companies such as Zynga and Glu to mobile marketing/advertising companies such as Jumptap, can display stunning, interactive graphics, and users will have a field day with the device.

The Computerworld article goes on to suggest that while the iPad3’s consumer appeal is unquestionable, it is also very well suited for businesses. The healthcare industry, for example, can take advantage of the device’s new graphic capabilities as an alternative to medical imaging workstations. Media, design and other creative firms can also take advantage of the retina display and improved graphic performance. And the list goes on. Furthermore, because of its consumer appeal and because every business user is also a consumer, the new iPad will ride the building “Bring Your Own Device” (BYOD) wave. In other words, the device will inevitably become a widely-used business tool.

While the iPad3 offers new, innovative, functionality and potential business benefits, it also poses challenges to IT departments that must manage how this new device connects to corporate networks. IT administrators who have already been contemplating mobile device management (MDM) strategies to secure their corporate networks will now have an even greater challenge as different devices, equipped with new functionality and capabilities, come to the market.

It is essential that future MDM strategies be scalable, flexible and able to evolve with the mobile market. After all, by the time you’ve ordered your new iPad3 on Amazon.com, another better, faster, smarter tablet is likely already in development (or in the marketplace). Don’t believe it? Rivals to the iPad3 have already shown up. The Asus Transformer Prime, which offers a detachable keyboard, has recently drawn praise from CNET, proof that the mobile market is continuously evolving.

The iPad3 and other tablets can not only delight consumers, they can also positively transform industries, and we are already beginning to see this happen. With innovation, however, there is always a catch. The opportunity for the iPad and other tablets to revolutionize business is clear, but this window of opportunity may close slightly if companies do not invest strategically in MDM now. How companies strategically and intelligently use and manage evolving mobile technology will help dictate which businesses move forward fastest and which will fall behind.

Jessica Boardman a senior consultant at Greenough. She can be reached via email at jboardman@greenough.biz or follow her on twitter @J_Boardman.

Give ‘Em What They Want

Wednesday, December 30, 2009 | 1 Comment 

So, you’d like a few tips, yes?

IDG recently issued a series of research briefs on aligning content and topics to social media platforms and buyer interests.  While the research focused on IT vendors and buyers, I’d guess that the findings apply to other markets as well.  One key lesson is that buyers report a significant preference for best practices on blogs.  So, without further ado, here are a few best practices for you, based on the IDG research.  (For the full reports, please visit the IDG Knowledge Hub)

The key lesson is this: align the format and subject matter of the content you offer to the social media platform.  According to IDG, "The number of available marketing content assets offered by vendors has increased by 60 percent over the past five years. Now, with the advent of social networks the rush is on to tie conversations into all that content. But the randomness of these efforts leads buyers to report that only 39 percent of offered links from social conversations to traditional content are relevant, resulting in buyer frustration and lost sales momentum."

Below are the top-ranked content topics and linked content types for a number of popular social media platforms.

1.    On blogs:

a.    Share: Best practices, news and case studies
b.    Link to: Case studies, ads and tutorials

2.    On forums

a.    Share: Evaluations, news, case studies
b.    Link to: Tutorials, free event registration, evaluation version

3.    On Twitter and Microblogs

a.    Share: News, perspective on industry issues, customer support
b.    Link to: Ads, technical knowledge, free event registration

4.    On Social Networks

a.    Share: News, insight on organization/political challenges, customer support and best practices
b.    Link to: Free event registration, ads, ROI calculators and planning worksheets

Overall, when linking to your company’s content from external sites, maintain an even balance between educational and promotional content.  Buyers responded that they prefer educational content about 43% of the time and promotional content 42% of the time. Don’t overdo it with marketing, but make sure people know about the great company behind the tips you’re providing. 

IDG’s research is valuable in initiating discussion about the importance of tailoring content and links to conversation platforms.  However, the results should not be taken as definitive, due to an extremely small sample size (about 100 respondents).  As IDG notes, "These aggregate findings only represent a starting point for discussion.  There is significant variance by investment type, buying role [and] focus."

In the end, despite the ease social media brings to publishing, it’s still important to know your audience and your surroundings when telling your company’s story. 

Contributed by Catharine Morgan.  Follow her @c_morgan

‘Tis the Season to Tame Your Inbox

Monday, December 28, 2009 | 1 Comment 

The holidays are here and as part of my "2009 clean-up" efforts I’ve got my mind set on getting my inbox under control. It’s not that I’m disorganized or lackadaisical about managing e-mails; it’s just that I get a lot of them and sometimes the process of culling through everything can be a bit daunting.

Manual clean up is a necessary evil, but I’ve started to realize that effective e-mail management really boils down to the ability to quickly search for and prioritize e-mails in the midst of a hectic workday. Keeping this in mind, I did a little digging online and found a few free inbox management tools I'd like to install on my desktop (pending approval from Paul, our IT guy, of course).

There are number of great options out there, but I felt that Xobni and Liaise were the most user friendly and comprehensive of the free tools available.

Xobni
Xobni (inbox spelled backwards) is a simple plug-in for Microsoft Outlook that makes it possibly to instantly find e-mails, attachments and contact information using a search box. Think of it as the “find” option on steroids.

Why it’s worth downloading?

Liaise
Liaise is a free beta tool that helps you identify key tasks/priorities within your flood of daily e-mails, so you can search for projects, assign tasks, update calendars and address pressing client issues more efficiently. It gives you access to everything you need to streamline conversations and projects right at your fingertips.

Why it’s worth downloading?

I can keep rattling off features, of course, but the easiest way to get a handle on this tool is by checking out a demo on YouTube. See below.

Both Xobni and Liaise make managing e-mails, tasks and client contacts easier, while streamlining the way you use Outlook. I’m in the midst of getting permission for Liaise, and hopefully Xobni, so I plan to dedicate a follow-up post to how these tools work in practice, and not just in theory, sometime in 2010.

- Contributed by Gretchen Doores. Follow her @canadiangal84

Catch a wave, and you’re sittin’ on top of the world

Tuesday, December 8, 2009 | 2 Comments 

Recently I was working on a writing project for our client Numara Software and was invited to use Google Wave by a product marketing manager there.  He was testing it out and thought it might cut down on the number of e-mail attachments we had flying back and forth and help us collaborate more easily.  I’d seen the buzz about Google Wave in the headlines, but didn’t really know what it was about.  But, hey, something invite-only from Google?  Of course I’d try it!

So I set up my account, signed in, and got ready to wave… whatever that could be.  I had something that looked like an e-mail inbox on my screen, and in it something suspiciously message-looking called “Welcome to Google Wave.”  I clicked and was greeted by a “Dr. Wave” in a white coat breaking glass in a pitch black science lab.

Thinking that I was smarter than this crazy mad scientist, I started clicking around elsewhere on my screen.  Dr. Wave disappeared.  Then I couldn’t get him back.  The video was nowhere to be found.  45 seconds into my Google Wave experience, I was confused.  (Never fear, a little sleuthing on YouTube, and I successfully tracked down the escaped mad scientist.)

If you haven’t used Google Wave yourself, it’s hard to conceptualize what it’s like.  Computerworld’s Preston Gralla provides a helpful, straightforward review in “Google Wave: It’s innovative, but is it truly useful?”

Google describes Wave as “an online tool for real-time communication and collaboration. A wave can be both a conversation and a document where people can discuss and work together using richly formatted text, photos, videos, maps, and more.”

“An online tool for real-time communication” – Wave can be used like a simple instant messaging tool, but as such, it annoyed me, because I had to move from keyboard to mouse to click “Done” each time I finished a message (lazy, I know!).  And when Google says “real-time communication,” it means real time as in “oh crap, another typo, I can’t type when I know someone’s watching each letter pop up, whoops another one” and “uh oh, I should rephrase that, I really hope no one’s paying attention, because that was really not how I meant for the tone to come across.”

“For communication and collaboration – A wave can be both a conversation and a document.” – I think Wave’s primary strength right now is its ambition and vision.  There’s no shortage of innovative and good ideas that went into creating Google Wave – real-time group collaborations, keeping conversations about content and content in the same place – but sometimes it’s overwhelming.  Google Wave feels a little like trying to use e-mail, Word, and IM – at the same time in the same screen.  A great idea in theory, but I didn’t like it in practice.  Sometimes I didn’t want the conversation part happening right within the document-esque part.  It’s distracting, and I lost pieces of it.  My “inbox” would tell me there were new contributions to conversations, but they didn’t appear right at the top (like an e-mail chain) or right at the bottom (like an IM conversation).

Once I got over my insecurity about my typing skills, I was able to use Google Wave effectively to collaborate on the writing project, but it wasn’t nearly as easy as I wanted it to be.  Google Wave lacks the instantaneous, intuitive usability we’ve come to expect from our technology.

In my opinion, Google also faces a challenge because of its heritage.  Google’s search technology changed the world, and Wave’s organization is based on searching.  If you’ve ever missed being able to sort by sender or by oldest to newest in Gmail, you’ll have a small idea of why replacing organization entirely with phenomenal search capabilities can be frustrating.

The bottom line?  Google succeeds because its innovation pushes limits, but Wave is trying to push too many limits in too many directions all at once.  Google has never tried to hide that its product is a beta version, I’m not a developer (despite the IT nerd jokes I get in the office), so I don’t have access to some of the latest and greatest features people all over are working to create…but if Wave succeeds, I think it will look vastly different from the way it looks now.   I won’t rule out success, but I think it’s still a fair way down the road.

Contributed by Catharine Morgan.  Follow her @c_morgan

The Rise of the Social User, IT Beware

Friday, October 23, 2009 | 2 Comments 

It’s time to face facts. Employees are tech savvy, mobile and social. New technologies and platforms, from Twitter to iPhone apps, have created a fundamental shift in behavior and culture, which has tipped the scale in favor of the end user. How? It’s simple. Thanks to social networks and mobile apps, end users can now circumnavigate their IT systems and access alternative means of communication and information that are difficult (if not impossible) to control.

Yes, IT can still manage or deny access to certain applications and monitor activity on their systems, but they can’t cover everything. And this rapid change in behavior has created some tension between IT management and employees; employees protest harsh restrictions on their ability to access or share information, while employers bemoan the increased risk to company assets and confidential information.

It’s a struggle for both sides and Patrick Thibodeau of Computerworld explains this power shift in his latest article, "Top 10 IT management trends for the next five years."  In the article, he outlines important new technologies and trends in IT, saying, “The top trends affecting technology infrastructure over the next five years can be summed up as largely a list representing where IT and users are battling for control over technology.”

Within this list, he highlights the importance of social media and mobile applications, cautioning companies not to be too restrictive or sluggish to adopt them, as users will find clever ways to get what they need regardless.

Thibodeau's comments echo Gartner’s recent announcement, which identified the “Top 10 Strategic Technologies for 2010,” and (surprise, surprise) number six on that list was “Social Computing.”  In the Gartner release, they suggest that workers don’t want to have two separate channels of communication, one for personal “external” use and the other, more restrictive one for work-approved means. The release also explains how social media affords a new opportunity for companies to bring internal and external communities together through social forums/networks.

That’s all well and good, but how can IT departments ensure they can open up without exposing themselves to unnecessary risks? The answer doesn’t have to be complicated, but it does require careful planning.

Both the Gartner release and Thibodeau's article allude to the importance of establishing clear guidelines and parameters for employees. In turn, helping employees to understand that they have access to social networks and apps on their phones, but anything they send out can reflect poorly on or negatively impact the company in which they work. Plus, these guidelines help IT managers reduce some of the risk associated with information leaks (e.g. tweets about acquisitions prior to public announcements) or push back from users looking to use Twitter or Face book.

That’s an important step, but how do companies make this happen? Should the IT team send memos on “responsible social media tips” or is a company-wide meeting in order? And, who gets to determine these rules?

It's a unique opportunity, but it’s tough to say who should take the lead on establishing guidelines and monitoring tools for highly-social employees. Perhaps it’s an opportunity for more collaborative decision making? We’ll have to wait and see.

Contributed by: Gretchen Doores  Follow her @canadiangal84 

Bookmark and Share

Cloudy with a Chance of Democracy

Monday, September 28, 2009 | Leave a Comment 

While Oracle’s Larry Ellison has received quite a bit of buzz himself for maintaining that cloud computing is little more than a buzzword, sometimes there’s something to be said for hype.

True, the use of “cloud” to denote the internet or network as the source of a service is not as new as much of the energy, confusion and discussion surrounding it.  However, while cloud computing may be neither new nor clearly defined (Gartner calls it “a style of computing where scalable and elastic IT-enabled capabilities are provided 'as a service' to external customers using Internet technologies”), the buzz is not without action.

Recently the U.S. government took a major step toward reversing its reputation as technologically behind the times and slow to adapt when federal CIO Vivek Kundra unveiled Apps.gov.  Companies, too, have their heads in the clouds these days, as a recent Wall Street Journal article notes. 

Over at CNET, James Urquhart wrote a great post, Five ways that Apps.gov is a trendsetter.

One of the most interesting points, I think, is how Apps.gov democratizes technology, allowing individual agencies to choose the applications they need as they need them and cataloging services in a way that matches users’ needs.  As Kundra wrote in a post on the White House blog,

"Like a utility such as electricity or water, cloud computing allows users to only consume what they need, to grow or shrink their use as their needs change, and to only pay for what they actually use. With more rapid access to innovative IT solutions, agencies can spend less time and taxpayer dollars on procedural items and focus more on using technology to achieve their missions."

In a world where we can scan our own groceries at the supermarket and never speak with a human teller at a bank, it sometimes seems like technology can help us with everything except technology itself.

Cloud computing, it seems, has the potential to change that by giving individuals and smaller groups of people more control over how their computing needs are met. Of course, security remains a top concern when it comes to cloud computing, and the answers to that question are still “up in the air,” if you will.  However, it seems that the buzz around cloud computing is shifting away from questions of adoptions towards questions of how and when.  Looks like the cloud has a bit more weight to it than just buzz.

- Contributed by Catharine Morgan.  Follow her @c_morgan

A Little Help, Please?

Thursday, August 27, 2009 | 1 Comment 

Are you suffering from information overload?  It seems to be a common plight in this day and age.  One of the things I love most about working in PR is the fast pace of the work, the way the ever-changing news landscape keeps me on my toes.  However, sometimes I feel just plain overwhelmed. There are endless possibilities of articles and blogs to read, outlets to explore, topics to research from just one more angle.   Every second, there is more information, more accessible, and changing more quickly than ever before.

People say this is what’s killing the newspaper, but I see opportunity.  Whether it’s the right opportunity for newspapers to take, well, that’s up to them.  I have two needs:
-          Analyze what’s most important
-          Summarize the pulse of the masses so I don’t miss anything.

As Tom Hayes and Michael S. Malone pointed out in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, The Ten-Year Century, “When a computer chip goes through as many computations in a single second as there are human heartbeats in 10 lifetimes, a 10-year year century seems positively pokey. But we humans have a slower metabolism, which will make this rapid fire of events ever more difficult to comprehend, much less manage.”

Microsoft’s recent series of Bing commercials does a great job of humorously portraying the hazards of information overload.

When technology – Web sites, blogs, twitter, social networks, and the like – churns through news like a chip going through computations, what’s the value of a daily paper?

For those of us with a more sluggish metabolism, I believe it could be a lot.  I say could, because I don’t think we’re quite there yet.  Perhaps it’s because newspapers – like the rest of us,find it hard to keep pace with change, or perhaps the information overload hasn’t become as bad as it soon will.

There are plenty of technologies (and surely more will come) that can aggregate, summarize, and filter content.  But as information becomes increasingly unmanageable, maybe the good old daily paper can help us cope.  Obviously, newspapers have a ways to go, as Howard Kurtz recently made clear in a Washington Post column on the inability of journalists to make the truth heard above the din.

Hayes and Malone sum up their piece with this astute prediction: “Without the luxury of time, trust will be the new currency of our times, whether in news sources, economic systems, political figures, even spiritual leaders. As change accelerates, it will remain one true constant.”

In the game of new media vs. old media, trust is one thing the old guard has on its side.  What do you think is the best way to wield it?

- Contributed by Catharine Morgan.  Follow her @c_morgan

Apple and Google: Too Close for Comfort?

Tuesday, August 25, 2009 | Leave a Comment 

It’s a given that competitive landscapes change over time, especially as cutting-edge technologies, such as the iPhone, reshape consumer behavior and create strong link between formerly unrelated markets. There’s no better example of this than the complex, often strained relationship that now exists between Apple and Google.

The two beacons of innovation used to operate in separate silos; Google would duke it out with brands like Yahoo or AOL for dominance in the search market, while Apple fought with HP or Microsoft to carve out a niche in the hardware/software industry. Since the introduction of the iPhone, however, the two brands are now operating in (more or less) the same spheres, competing directly against each other, while simultaneously sharing ideas (at least for now).

Let me explain.

Apple worked with Google executives to interweave several Google-related apps into the iPhone platform – such as Gmail or Google maps – to fulfill consumers’ demands for reliable e-mail access and location-based information on the go.  The sharing of ideas and technology was beneficial to both parties; Google could expand its reach into the mobile consumer market, while Apple could provide its customers with the practical search capabilities they needed.

All was going pretty well between the two companies for about a year or so, until Google wanted a larger piece of the mobile user pie. In September 2008, Google pushed the limits of its seemingly symbiotic relationship with Apple by introducing the G1 phone with Google’s new Android operating system. The G1 not only pitted Google directly against Apple, its mobile partnership with TMobile didn’t make friends at AT&T either.

To add insult to injury, Google’s new smartphone looked a lot like the iPhone and many (including NYT tech blogger David Pogue) felt it was clearly intended to be an iPhone knockoff – complete with the online downloadable app and music stores. Try as they might, Google’s phone and app store just couldn’t hold a candle to Apple’s sleek designs, which might explain why Apple chose to retain some close ties with Google execs – including Google Chairman Eric Schmidt who had a long-time seat on Apple’s board – even after the launch of the G1.

As Darcy Travlos (Forbes) points out in her latest article, “The Real Issue Between Apple and Google,” however, Eric Schmidt recently stepped down from the board of Apple, suggesting to the investor community that the two corporations are indeed converging and the relationship may hit the skids again.

As the two companies’ interests intersect, Apple and Google will undoubtedly find themselves in quarters that might be too close for comfort and we as consumers are waiting to see just how far either side will go to maintain a competitive advantage.

What do you think? 

Contributed by: Gretchen Doores; follow her @canadiangal84

Goliath vs. Goliath

Tuesday, July 14, 2009 | Leave a Comment 

Google vs. Microsoft. Chrome OS vs. Windows. Google search vs. Bing. It’s a battle and it’s only just begun. The two companies have gone head-to-head many times, but this summer things are heating up as they invade each other’s most lucrative markets.

The showdown is definitely creating a lot of buzz. Hiawatha Bray at the Boston Globe recently wrote about it and quoted Dave Girouard, president of Google’s enterprise service division as saying, “Office is a fine product, but it’s hard for me to believe that it defines the way people work in the 21st century.’’ Yesterday, The New York Times ran a piece on how Bing is delivering credibility to Microsoft in the search engine world. So who is the real frontrunner?

Do you agree that the companies will each remain top dog in their respective categories; that Google will continue to own search, while Microsoft dominates computer operating systems?  Will the heated competition serve them both well, or erode market share and create room for more innovative, young disruptors?  Is there room for more than one major player in search and OS?  Will Microsoft’s hilarious Bing commercials help win the world over? 


Should these companies stick with what they’re good at, or will their experimentation benefit us as consumers?  At this point, we’re all questions and no answers.  We’d love to hear your thoughts.

Contributed by Jena Coletti.  Follow her @jmcoletti

Internet Censorship in China. Could the U.S. be Next?

Thursday, June 11, 2009 | Leave a Comment 

As of July 1, the Chinese government is making it mandatory for computer manufacturers to equip PCs with sophisticated software that will filter out banned sites from the Internet. And it comes as no surprise that free speech advocates are up in arms.

In addition to blocking social media sites (check out our recent post on the topic) the rule bans pornography and Web sites that discuss a list of sensitive topics.

In less than a month, the top two computer manufacturers in the United States, Hewlett-Packard and Dell will be directly affected because they serve the Chinese market.  This is a red flag for me. If these two conglomerates are being forced to instate censorship it China, does their participation make it easier for the U.S. to roll-out a similar mandate?  Would this mean we couldn’t surf the Web and find information about 9/11?  That's a scary thought.

I can’t imagine Dell and HP have been quick to comply to the rule because the censorship software is said to be technically flawed. The faulty software is causing computers to crash and leaves them vulnerable to hackers.  Security is a huge concern in the U.S. and I hope it takes precedence over “unhealthy information” filters on the Internet.

What do you think?  Is PC censorship a possibility for the U.S.?  If Dell and HP abide by the new rules in China, does that change your opinion? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Contributed by Jena Coletti.  Follow her @jmcoletti