IoT Essential Truths: Coordination

Posted on 1st November 2013 in design, Essential Truths, Internet of Things, M2M, maintenance, management

Just as I’ve written repeatedly about one of the “Essential Truths” of the Internet of Things is that we have to learn how to collaborate, there’s another “co- word” that’s crucial to realize its full potential: coordinate!

That’s brought to mind by news from this week’s Internet of Things World Forum in Barcelona, where SAP (full disclosure: I’m working on a project for them), and SK Solutions, the global leader in anti­-collision software (heck, I didn’t even know there was such a thing as anti-collision software, let alone that SK was the leader!) have teamed to create a system helping engineering and construction companies increase collision avoidance and protect workers through real-time information sharing.

I’d never thought of it, but modern construction sites are a nightmare in terms of the need for coordination, with huge cranes, a multitude of construction vehicles, and many workers on the site.

The system, being tested at a construction site in Dubai, is gathering actionable, real-time data (historical data is pointless when so many players are interacting right now!) from mobile field workers, equipment and operational processes.

When you think of it, it’s difficult to maximize productivity and cut costs on a job site because so many operations have to be coordinated.

Here’s how it works:

“SK Solutions deploys sensors on cranes and construction vehicles to pull data such as 3­D motion control via inertial motion unit, location via GPS and load weight, equipment usage and wind speed and direction. This data is loaded first into the Navigator real­time operating system and its on­board set of applications, including collision avoidance. The data is then fed through the SK Navigator Anywhere Agent, which uses SAP technology. Site and project managers monitor the equipment via a dashboard built with SK Asteroid, which uses the SAP HANA platform, SAP® 3­D Visual Enterprise applications and SAP LumiraTM software. SK Asteroid 360 Middleware is a cloud­based platform that provides connectivity to SAP® Business Suite software.”

That leads me to another “Essential Truth” of the Internet of Things:

We have to start asking, where are there situations where real-time data from a variety of sources could help coordinate inter-related activities to improve safety & efficiency and reduce costs?

Whether it’s coordinating hospital rooms, integrating supply chains or assembly lines — even traffic flow — there are situations everywhere in which the Internet of Things can improve productivity, reduce operating costs — and even save lives.

N.B. For those who are interested in what the prefix co- really means, it’s from a Latin prefix of the same name, and means togethermutuallyjointly. Class dismissed..

comments: Comments Off on IoT Essential Truths: Coordination tags: , , , , , ,

First survey of C-level execs’ view of the IoT

For a big project I’m working on, I’ve fruitlessly combed the Web for surveys of C-level executives’ view of the Internet of Things — until now!

ARM has just released results of a worldwide June survey, “The Internet of Things Business Index: a quiet revolution gathers pace,” that included many C-level executives, which the Economist‘s Intelligence Unit did for ARM about respondents’ attitudes toward the IoT.

I’d strongly advise you to read the entire report for a reality check on the current state of the IoT (provided, of course, that the sample population really reflects corporate attitudes as a whole — in my mind, that’s a big if, because most companies just haven’t been disclosing much information about IoT initiatives. Of course that might be because they view IoT initiatives as a real strategic advantage!).

I was happily surprised, given the low level of business media coverage of the IoT until recent months, to see how many of those surveyed knew about the IoT and were actively involved in planning for corporate initiatives, although most of those initiatives were only in the early research stages and most companies weren’t convinced the IoT would be of major near-term benefit.

The report concluded that companies are taking the IoT seriously, although without a lot of public notice:

“The Internet of Things (IoT) is an idea whose time has finally come. Falling technology costs, developments in complementary fields like mobile and cloud, together with support from governments have all contributed to the dawning of an IoT ‘quiet revolution’. Now, after more than a decade of slow progress, the business community is beginning to look seriously at the IoT—to the extent that a mere 6% of business leaders believe that the idea of IoT is simply hype…”

Here are the major findings:

  • “over three-quarters of companies are either actively exploring or using the IoT. The vast majority of business leaders believe that it will have a meaningful impact on how their companies conduct business, yet there is some divergence about the wider effect it will have”
  • “optimism about the IoT is not yet matched by investment.” 96% expect to use the IoT in some way within 3 years, but they aren’t spending much on it: only 30% have increased their IoT spending by double-digits since 2012.
  • 61% think “companies that are slow to integrate the IoT into their business will fall behind the competition.” Consider yourself forewarned!
  • only 24% felt that the IoT would be “very relevant, used by the majority of the business” within the next 3 years.
  • “A lack of IoT skills and knowledge among employees and management is viewed as the biggest obstacle to using the IoT more extensively. To address these gaps, organisations are training staff and recruiting IoT talent, raising the potential for IoT talent wars. Others are hiring consultants and third-party experts, seeking to build knowledge and identify successful IoT business models.” (sounds like a lot of opportunity for our ilk!)
  • Here’s one that particularly resonated with me because of my relentless emphasis on collaboration as one of the “Essential Truths” of the IoT: “Companies must learn to co-operate with players across industries, including competitors…. businesses must be willing to adopt a different mindset. Successful IoT rollouts require interconnected networks of products and services, but few senior executives currently expect their business to become more co-operative with competitors as a result of the IoT. ” Oops: too bad for you — it ain’t just a technological shift, but an attitudinal one as well!
  • It’s going to lead to a data explosion. While companies think they’re up to this challenge, “….prior experience of storing and analysing large amounts of “big data” may lead them to underestimate the additional talent and skills needed to spot new uses and revenue steams emerging from it.” It will also increase needs for security and privacy. 

The Economist chose the ARM report as the setting to announce a new IoT Business Index, which will be updated to track progress toward actualizing the IoT. In the benchmark edition of the index, most businesses are in the “research” stage (at  point 4 on a scale of 1 to 10). They are more likely to use the IoT at this point for internal operations and processes instead of external products or services. As I’d expected, European companies are in the lead, and, among industries, manufacturing is the leading one. Hmm: wonder if that means a growing number are installing sensors on the assembly line?

The survey included 779 senior business leaders, among whom almost half (49%), were C-level executives or board members. The sample included:

  • 29% from Europe, 29% from North America, 30% from Asia-Pacific, and  12% from Latin America, the Middle East and Africa.
  • 19 industries. About 10% each from financial services, manufacturing, healthcare, pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, IT and technology, energy and natural resources, and construction and real estate.
  • The sample is evenly split between large firms, with an annual revenue of more than US$500m, and small and mid-sized firms.

All in all, I think this is an important reality check in terms of commercialization of the IoT. It seems that it’s increasingly on the corporate radar, but that hasn’t translated into a lot of concrete action. It will be interesting to track annual updates of The Economist‘s IoT Business Index to see if analysis turns into action.

comments: Comments Off on First survey of C-level execs’ view of the IoT tags: , , , , , , ,

Just thinking: could Quantified Self devices lead to #IoT BYOD for companies?

Posted on 21st October 2013 in health, Internet of Things, M2M, management, privacy, security, strategy

I’ve been noodling how do you introduce the Internet of Things to companies that haven’t even heard of it, let alone have a strategy to capitalize on it. It would probably have to be something that would have minimal up-front costs, provoke aha! moments that would stimulate other IoT initiatives, and would provide some quick return on investment.

Jawbone UP

Having just read SAP’s interactive report on mobile strategies, it dawned on me: if companies are now comfortable with creating BYOD policies covering smartphones and tablets, what if they were to create formal policies to encourage employees to bring their Quantified Self  devices — Jawbone UPs, Nike FitBits, and the like — after all, the workers are probably already doing so anyways!

What if — thinking out loud here — the company could enter anyone using one of the devices during the work day in some sort of contest with fitness prizes, or, — this is more controversial because of privacy concerns — if they offered discounts on health insurance for workers who were willing to share their QS data with the company (since companies are penalizing overweight workers, shouldn’t it work the other way as well?).

Heck, given the payback in terms of  lower absenteeism, higher productivity, and lower medical claims, I bet you could make a plausible case that it would be in the company’s enlightened self-interest to actually pay for the devices for those who don’t already have them.

It’s just a thought, and there would be a lot of details to work out, but I think it merits consideration as a way to introduce the IoT’s benefits to corporate America. Let me know how you feel!

GigaOM’s Mobilize conference full of IoT insights!

Posted on 17th October 2013 in design, health, Internet of Things, M2M, management, manufacturing, marketing

I’ve been busy for the last two days, so I’ve only been able to view a couple of them, but from what I have seen (I’ll blog about specifics later), the GigaOM Mobilize conference has been an absolute goldmine of insights, especially into the nuts and bolts of the IoT. As soon as the livestream video is archived, don’t miss them!

comments: Comments Off on GigaOM’s Mobilize conference full of IoT insights! tags: , , ,

Light Some Candles: 1M Raspberry Pi Boards Produced!

Posted on 8th October 2013 in Internet of Things

Another indication that the Maker Movement is alive and flourishing is the news today that a Welsh factory that took over production of Raspberry Pi boards for Western markets (there’s another that produces for China) has just built its 1 millionth board!

comments: Comments Off on Light Some Candles: 1M Raspberry Pi Boards Produced! tags: , ,

Launching New Service Speaking About the Internet of Things

I’ve given speeches to business and academic audiences around the world for nearly 30 years, but haven’t tried my hand at paid public speaking until now!

However, I feel so strongly about the transformational potential of the Internet of Things that I want to evangelize on the Big Stage now, reaching corporate management, associations, and — very important — college and university students, with the message about how the IoT will change everything, and the challenges and opportunities it will bring.

So, I’ve added a new page to this site, promoting myself as a paid speaker and seminar leader.

While I’m glad to custom-craft a speech to your audience’s interests, I have several main ones tailored to various needs:

“It’s Not Just About Things, It’s About People… and Their Dreams”. Sometimes the emphasis on Internet of Things technology obscures the deeper truth: the IoT is really all about people – and improving their lives. This speech introduces laypeople and business leaders to the Internet of Things’ potential to transform every aspect of life for the better! From slippers that save the elderly from falls to hyper-efficient assembly lines that bring manufacturing jobs back to America, I give an uplifting, rapid-fire overview of the many ways the IoT is already changing our lives – and preview the even greater changes to come! I also talk about the important steps, such as new mind sets that value sharing information over hoarding it, that are necessary to fully realize the IoT’s potential.

Josh Siegel is 24. He is Reinventing the Auto Industry (this lecture is specifically aimed at college students). Josh Siegel is a 24-year old Detroiter, MIT grad student and entrepreneur. He uses the IoT to reinvent cars – whether or not Detroit is ready. Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino is 32, and created an IoT sensation, the Good Night Lamp. Dulcey Madden is 32 (her partners are both 24), and her Peeko “onsie” is saving the lives of infants who might otherwise die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.

In this lecture you’ll hear about these and other young visionaries and inventors who are discovering new entrepreneurial opportunities in the Internet of Things. I challenge young listeners: what’s your passion? How will you find satisfying – and enriching – work in this exciting new field? What problem can you solve by inventing an IoT device?

P.S: Ask me to stay around the day after my speech to meet with your senior staff to advise them on how the IoT will affect your college or university, and how you can use it to increase efficiency and cut operating costs!

“I … see all … the devices in your home and … control them”. That’s how a Forbes reporter woke up an unsuspecting homeowner who’d bought an advanced home automation system – and got non-existent security in the bargain!

The Internet of Things might come to a grinding halt if the public and companies feel that their privacy and security are being violated. That’s a very real possibility – former CIA director David Petraeus waxed poetic about its potential as a spycraft tool, and a number of sensationalistic mainstream media reports have detailed the possible dangers of lax IoT privacy and security measures.

In this speech, I may scare you, but I’ll definitely get your attention! I lay out all the risks, issue a challenge to everyone involved in the IoT to make security and privacy a priority, and detail the current state of collaborative efforts to improve security and privacy.

I’m enthusiastic, well-informed, witty, (add positive adjective of your choice here …… , LOL) and convincing! If you’re interested in booking me, just fill out the contact form and download my “speaker one sheet.”

comments: Comments Off on Launching New Service Speaking About the Internet of Things tags: , ,

Chatting up Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino.There at the beginning!

Posted on 19th September 2013 in Internet of Things

I’m about to launch a new venture: paid speaking about the Internet of Things to corporate audiences and college students (details to come in the near future — but feel free to contact me NOW if you think of an audience that would be open to my evangelism for the IoT!).

One of the speeches I’m preparing is aimed squarely at college students — I’ve been excited to see how many 20 and 30-somethings play a lead role in the IoT and I’m also concerned about the future for these kids (my youngest very much included) in terms of the conventional economy — we’re in the process of leaving them with a very sorry mess, and I think they’re best advised to think outside-the-box and create their own opportunities.

WHICH IS A LONG WAY OF GETTING TO A GREAT CONVERSATION that I had at six AM today with one of those leaders who I plan to feature in the speech to provide inspiration, Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino,  who I knew primarily as the designer of the Good Night Lamp. I was quick to learn that she’s done much, much more, and was really there at the beginning of the IoT movement!

Here’s what I learned!

Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino

She began studying product design in Montreal, and her professor told her to investigate the field of interactive design.

Wanting to go back to Europe, she enrolled in the program that many credit with being the home of the first maker movement in the IoT, as one of 17 students in the Design Institute of Ivrea, Italy. If that rings a distant bell, it’s because that’s where the Arduino board was developed, which has been the entry point for so many to the IoT. It was during this period that she actually designed the Good Night Lamp.

 

Good Night Lamps

She then moved to London, forming an Arduino distributorship with inventor Massimo Banzi.

She grew the business to about 12 people, which also did R & D on inter-connected products for companies such as BBC and Nokia.

Deschamps-Sonsino closed the business and then went back to consulting in 2010. In early 2013 she revisited the Good Night Lamp, getting it into production.

When I asked her whether her lack of a programming background was a handicap, she laughed, and said “I still don’t know how to program, but I know enough to be dangerous .. I have a really good understanding of what’s possible and what isn’t” in terms of programming. She thinks her awareness of programming is much higher than most product designers, who are ” …  still interested in designing chairs and salt and pepper shakers!” She thinks that design education must evolve — too much of it is still focused on the kind of mid-20th century design that created cults around designers such as Philipp Starck. She is adamant that there is a role for product designers in the IoT, saying that most of the products have been designed by programmers, who come at product design from a technology perspective. In fact, she thinks that a lot of education will have to change because of the IoT, which she sees as a disruptive technology:  “We have to get away from vertical learning niches, and put more emphasis on collaboration.” She shakes her head at one leading European manufacturer, where the product designers are physically isolated from the technologists and others, making collaboration impossible.

When I asked whether she’d faced any discrimination in the IoT world as a woman, Deschamps-Sonsino said:

“Not really, being a woman was actually useful because there aren’t many around: as long as it’s to my benefit, gets me in front of audiences, it’s OK. Some  who got involved in the IoT in their 30s act inappropriately,but I’m managing it!”

Since I’m hoping to use these speeches to motivate young people to seek IoT careers, I concluded by asking her what the future holds:

“I think it has such tremendous potential, incredible opportunities. I think curiosity is the key. Start looking online for examples of IoT products: people keen to get feedback on their designs. Try to engage: take a 2-day workshop with Arduino. I’d particularly say to younger girls, the idea that tech for boys is total bullshit.

Young people have a lot to contribute. Opportunity for a lot of products because of the freshness of their outlook. You don’t have to learn to code.  Other parts of the industry are ossified , but this is so open.” (my emphasis)

We wrapped up the conversation after 45 minutes. My day was already made! What an inspiration. Thanks, Alexandra!

comments: Comments Off on Chatting up Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino.There at the beginning! tags: , , , ,

More Evidence #IoT has Arrived: CNBC Docu ToNite

Posted on 18th September 2013 in Internet of Things, M2M

On the heels of Tom Friedman’s Sunday NYT column, here’s more evidence the IoT is achieving mainstream recognition: CNBC will air a 1-hour documentary tonight, titled “Rise of the Machines,” 9 PM EDT tonight.

The blurb for the show says, breathlessly:

“All around us, there’s a technological revolution underway powered by devices as small as a grain of rice. They are sensors, capable of tracking and recording everything we do. They’re in our smartphones, our cars, our appliances, even our bodies, and they’re connected to the Internet to share information and make our world smarter. Virtually all products that use electricity – from toasters and coffeemakers to jet engines and MRIs – now have the ability to ‘talk’ to each other, and to us. And, what they have to say is profoundly transforming our lives – the way we travel, treat disease, and enjoy our homes.”

Yep.

Segments in the show will include:

Should be interesting. Insightful or just skimming the surface? We’ll see!

PS: thanks to my book agent, Mike Snell, for tip on this one!

 

Could IoT Allow Do-over for Privacy, Security — & Trust?

Posted on 13th September 2013 in communication, management, privacy, security

Expect to be reading a lot here about privacy and security between now and my panel on those issues at the IoT Summit in DC, Oct. 1 & 2, as I prep to ask the panel questions!

Here’s another, from Stacy Higginbotham (BTW, she does a great podcast on IoT issues!), based on a conversation with ARM CTO Mike Muller. It’s reassuring to see that this IoT-leading firm is taking privacy and security seriously. Even more refreshingly, theirs is a nuanced and thoughtful view.

Muller told Higginbotham that IoT vendors should learn from some of the missteps on privacy on the Web so far, and make amends:

“’We should think about trust as who has access to your data and what they can do with it. For example, I’ll know where you bought something, when you bought it, how often and who did you tweet about it.

“When you put the long tail of lots of bits of information and big data analytics associated with today’s applications we can discern a lot. And people are not thinking it through. … I think it’s the responsibility of the industry that, as people connect, to make them socially aware of what’s happening with their data and the methods that are in place to make connections between disparate sets of data (my emphasis). In the web that didn’t happen, and the sense of lost privacy proliferated and it’s all out there. People are trying to claw that back and implement privacy after the fact.”

Higginbotham adds that “… what troubles Muller is that today, there’s nothing that supports trust and privacy in the infrastructure associated with the internet of things.”

What struck me, as someone who used to earn his living doing corporate crisis management, is that one of the critical issues in trust (or lack thereof) is guilt by association may not be logically valid, but is emotionally powerful: if people’s preconception of IoT privacy and security standards is that they’re simply an extension of Internet ones, there’s likely to be trouble.

She goes on to differentiate between security, privacy — and trust.

“Trust is the easiest to define and the hardest to implement. It relies on both transparency and making an effort to behave consistently ….  When it comes to connected devices and apps, trust is probably most easily gained by explaining what you do with people’s data: what you share and with whom. It might also extend to promises about interoperability and supporting different platforms. Implicitly trust with connected devices also means you will respect people’s privacy and follow the best security practices….

“Privacy is more a construct of place as opposed to something associated with a specific device. So a connected camera on a public street is different from a connected camera inside your home. It’s easy to say that people shouldn’t be able to just grab a feed from inside your home — either from a malicious hack or the government (or a business) doing a random data scrape. But when it comes to newer connected devices like wearables it gets even more murky: Consider that something like a smart meter can share information about the user to someone who knows what to look for.

“So when thinking about the internet of things and privacy, it’s probably useful to start with thinking about the data the device generates….

(As for security:) “To protect privacy when everything is connected will require laws that punish violations of people’s privacy and draw lines that companies and governments can’t step over; but it will also require vigilance by users. To get this right, users should be reading the agreements they click through when they connect a device, but companies should also create those agreements, especially around data sharing transparent, in a way that inspires trust.

Governments and companies need to think about updating laws for a connected age and set criteria about how different types of data are transported and shared. Health data might still need the HIPAA-levels of regulations, but maybe looser standards can prevail for connected thermostats.”

Sounds to me as if there’s a role in these complex issues for all of us: vendors, government, and users.

But the one take-away that I have from Muller’s remarks is that IoT vendors must realize they have to earn users trust, and that’s going to require a combination of technical measures and unambiguous, plain-English communication with users about who owns their data and how it will be used. To me, that means not hiding behind the lawyers and agate-type legal disclaimers, but clear, easy-to-understand declarations about users’ rights to their data and companies’ need to directly ask them for access, displayed prominently, with the default being that the user completely denies access, and must opt in for it to be shared. 

What do you think?

Higginbotham concludes that “we need to stop freaking out about the dangers of connected devices and start having productive discussions about implementing trust and security before the internet of things goes the way of the web. Wonderful, free and a total wild west when it comes to privacy.” Hopefully, that’s what will happen during our October 1st panel.

comments: Comments Off on Could IoT Allow Do-over for Privacy, Security — & Trust? tags: , , , , , ,

Good Paper by Mercatus on IoT Privacy and Security

Posted on 12th September 2013 in privacy, security

I’m politically on the liberal, not the libertarian side, but I’ve come to respect the libertarian Mercatus Center, in large part because of the great work Jerry Brito has done there on governmental transparency.

As part of my preparation to moderate a panel on security and privacy at the IoT Summit on October 1st in DC, I just read a great paper on the issue by Mercatus’ Adam Thierer.

In comments submitted to the FTC for its November workshop on these issues titled “Privacy and Security Implications of the Internet of Things,” Thierer says “whoa” to those who would have the FTC and others quickly impose regulations on the IoT in the name of protecting privacy and security.

Opposing pre-emptive, “precautionary” regulations, he instead argues for holding back:

“…. an “Anti-Precautionary Principle” is the better default here and would generally hold that:

“1. society is better off when technological innovation is not preemptively restricted;

“2. accusations of harm and calls for policy responses should not be premised on hypothetical worst-case scenarios; an

“3. remedies to actual harms should be narrowly tailored so that beneficial uses of technology are not derailed.”

He reminds us that, when introduced, such everyday technologies as the phone (you know, the old  on-the-wall kind..) and photography were opposed by many as invasions of privacy, but social norms quickly adapted to embrace them. He quotes Larry Downes, who has written, “After the initial panic, we almost always embrace the service that once violated our visceral sense of privacy.”

Rather than imposing limits in advance, Thierer argues for a trial-and-error approach to avoid unnecessary limits to experimentation — including learning from mistakes.

He points out that social norms often emerge that can substitute for regulations to govern acceptable use of the new technology.

In conclusion, Thierer reminds us that there are already a wide range of laws and regulations on the book that, by extension, could apply to some of the recent IoT outrages:

“…  many federal and state laws already exist that could address perceived harms in this context. Property law already governs trespass, and new court rulings may well expand the body of such law to encompass trespass by focusing on actual cases and controversies, not merely imaginary hypotheticals. State ‘peeping Tom’ laws already prohibit spying into individual homes. Privacy torts—including the tort of intrusion upon seclusion—may also evolve in response to technological change and provide more avenues of recourse to plaintiffs seeking to protect their privacy rights.”

Along the lines of my continuing screed that IoT manufacturers had better take action immediately to tighten their own privacy and security precautions, Thierer isn’t letting them off the hook:

“The public will also expect the developers of IoT technologies to offer helpful tools and educational methods for controlling improper usages. This may include ‘privacy-by-design’ mechanisms that allow the user to limit or intentionally cripple certain data collection features in their devices. ‘Only by developing solutions that are clearly respectful of people’s privacy, and devoting an adequate level of resources for disseminating and explaining the technology to the mass public’ can industry expect to achieve widespread adoption of IoT technologies.”

So get cracking, you lazy IoT developers (yes, you smirking over there in the corner…) who think that security and privacy are someone else’s business: if you don’t act, regulators may step in, and stiffle innovation in the name of consumer protection. You’ll have no one to blame but yourselves.

It’s a good read — hope you’ll check it out!

 

http://www.stephensonstrategies.com/">Stephenson blogs on Internet of Things Internet of Things strategy, breakthroughs and management