How to build a data architecture to drive innovation—today and tomorrow
Yesterday’s data architecture can’t meet today’s need for speed, flexibility, and innovation. The key to a successful upgrade—and significant potential rewards—is agility.
By Antonio Castro, Jorge Machado, Matthias Roggendorf, and Henning Soller – Over the past several years, organizations have had to move quickly to deploy new data technologies alongside legacy infrastructure to drive market-driven innovations such as personalized offers, real-time alerts, and predictive maintenance.
However, these technical additions—from data lakes to customer analytics platforms to stream processing—have increased the complexity of data architectures enormously, often significantly hampering an organization’s ongoing ability to deliver new capabilities, maintain existing infrastructures, and ensure the integrity of artificial intelligence (AI) models.
Current market dynamics don’t allow for such slowdowns. Leaders such as Amazon and Google have been making use of technological innovations in AI to upend traditional business models, requiring laggards to reimagine aspects of their own business to keep up. Cloud providers have launched cutting-edge offerings, such as serverless data platforms that can be deployed instantly, enabling adopters to enjoy a faster time to market and greater agility. Analytics users are demanding more seamless tools, such as automated model-deployment platforms, so they can more quickly make use of new models. Many organizations have adopted application programming interfaces (APIs) to expose data from disparate systems to their data lakes and rapidly integrate insights directly into front-end applications. Now, as companies navigate the unprecedented humanitarian crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and prepare for the next normal, the need for flexibility and speed has only amplified.
For companies to build a competitive edge—or even to maintain parity, they will need a new approach to defining, implementing, and integrating their data stacks, leveraging both cloud (beyond infrastructure as a service) and new concepts and components. more>
- How chief data officers can navigate the COVID-19 response and beyond, Kevin Buehler, Holger Harreis, Jorge Machado, Satyajit Parekh, Kayvaun Rowshankish, Asin Tavakoli, and Allen Weinberg
- Designing data governance that delivers value, Bryan Petzold, Matthias Roggendorf, Kayvaun Rowshankish, and Christoph Sporleder
Posted in Business, Economic development, Economy, Education, History, How to, Net, Technology
Tagged Data architecture, Digital transformation, Innovation, Internet, McKinsey, Productivity, Skills
Class action lawsuits hit innovative companies the hardest
By Alex Verkhivker – Corporate America has long complained that many class action suits are frivolous and an unfair tax on business. Lawyers have a financial incentive to file meritless suits because companies are often willing to settle—even when allegations are false—to save time, money, and public image. Lawmakers in Congress have wrestled with this issue for years without resolution.
But research suggests more reason to address it: the costs of such litigation weigh disproportionately on the most innovative US corporations, according to Chicago Booth’s Elisabeth Kempf and Tilburg University’s Oliver Spalt. Using data on more than 40,000 lawsuits filed between 1996 and 2011 against 6,111 companies, the researchers find that frivolous lawsuits tended to focus on highly innovative businesses, which represented juicy targets—and cost the average company in this group $1.1 million a year, or about 4 percent of annual profit gains. more>
Posted in Business, Economic development, Economy, Education, History, Media, Science, Technology
Tagged Business improvement, Capital, Chicago Booth, Innovation, Lawsuit, Patents, Technology
By Peter Engelke – Americans like to think of themselves as the most innovative people in the world. At least since 1945, they have had good reason to believe so. During the Cold War, the United States built the most formidable technology-producing innovation system the world has ever seen.
Coordinated action by the U.S. government, the private sector and academia, combined with America’s unique postwar culture, crafted this system.
But the American system has seen better days. America’s leaders, at federal and state levels, have failed to maintain this system much less upgrade it.
As a result, America’s long list of difficulties includes falling public investment in research and development (R&D, a critical and under-appreciated factor in national innovativeness), an under-skilled workforce, flagging support for public higher education, decaying infrastructure and much more.
The global tech-innovation economy therefore is more than a just crowded place. It is also crowded where it counts: at the very top, where it no longer can be said that the U.S. stands alone. Several of the countries listed here, plus others, routinely score higher than the United States in global innovation rankings.
The U.S. will not long remain the global leader in innovation unless it takes decisive action across several fronts. more>
Posted in Banking, Book review, Broadband, CONGRESS WATCH, Economic development, Economy, Education, History, Intellectual Property, Leadership, Media, Net, Regulations, Science, Technology, telecom
Tagged Business, Capital, Financialization, Government, Innovation, Internet, Leadership, Technology, United States
Thinking in Bets, Author: Annie Duke.
By Alan Pentz – As humans we are often overconfident in our decision-making and even if we are unsure, we become more confident after a decision has been made. Studies of confirmation bias show that we seek information confirming our views and filter out evidence to the contrary. That’s a great strategy to feel good in the short term but isn’t going to lead to the best outcomes for your organization in the long term.
Thinking in bets (or thinking probabilistically) forces us out of that framework. Duke points out that people who are asked probabilistic questions are less sure and tend to hedge. It’s easy to say, “I’m 100 percent sure about this,” when nothing is really on the line, but if I ask you how much would you bet that you are right, suddenly the calculus changes.
So how does this impact government innovation? more>
Posted in Book review, Business, Economic development, Education, How to, Leadership
Tagged Betting, Business improvement, Capital, confirmation bias, Government, Innovation, Leadership
By Steve Denning – As I suggested here and here, the subject of Strategic Agility is important because it’s central to the key business issue: how to make money from Agile? If the Agile movement is only about creating great workplaces for software developers (also important!) but doesn’t generate better business outcomes, its life expectancy won’t be long. Since I continue to get questions about the meaning of the term, “Strategic Agility,” a few more words about it are in order.
To begin with, it’s useful to recognize that “strategy” in management is contested territory. The term is used in different senses by different practitioners and writers. I am not suggesting that one sense of “strategy” is right and all the others are necessarily wrong. So long as we make clear how we are using the term, we can go on having a useful discussion.
Much of what I see in the world of Agile software development is, by my definition, operational Agility. i.e. making the existing products better, faster, cheaper and so on for existing customers.
Operational Agility is a good thing, and even essential, but it has a drawback. It usually doesn’t make much money.
That’s because in the 21st Century marketplace where competitors are often quick to match improvements to existing products and services, and where power in the marketplace has decisively shifted to customers, it can be difficult for firms to monetize those improvements. more>
A Tale of Seven Scientists and a New Philosophy of Science, Author: Eric Scerri.
By Edward Wasserman and Eric Scerri – Scientific discovery is popularly believed to result from the sheer genius of intellectual stars such as Darwin and Einstein. Their work is often thought to reflect their unique contributions with little or no regard to their own prior experience or to the efforts of their lesser-known predecessors.
Setting aside the Darwins and Einsteins – whose monumental contributions are duly celebrated – we suggest that innovation is more a process of trial and error, where two steps forward may sometimes come with one step back, as well as one or more steps to the right or left.
Instead of revolution, think evolution. This evolutionary view of human innovation undermines the notion of creative genius and recognizes the cumulative nature of scientific progress.
Plenty of other examples show that, in many realms of human endeavor, fresh advances can arise from error, misadventure and serendipity. Examples such as the Fosbury Flop, Post-It Notes and the Heimlich Maneuver all give lie to the claim that ingenious, designing minds are responsible for human creativity and invention. Far more mundane and mechanical forces may be at work; forces that are fundamentally connected to the laws of physics, chemistry and biology. more> https://goo.gl/aKnP2r
Posted in Book review, Economic development, Economy, Education, History, Leadership, Science, Technology
Tagged Genius, Innovation, Progress, Scientific discovery, Trial and error
By Saro Mohammed – In short, DARPA is a very well-funded, highly flexible, research and development agency that was created to minimize the red tape that usually slowed defense R&D, while simultaneously maximizing innovation and results. Beyond its funding, which is approximately 377 times greater than the national educational research budget in 2016, DARPA operates under the following unique design principles, outlined in detail at a 2012 national education R&D meeting:
- Risk: DARPA can take bigger risks than more traditional federally funded R&D projects.
- Flexible projects: DARPA can choose to fund partial proposals, or projects solely focused on brainstorming or “mindstorming” a problem. In addition, it can fund possible solutions to problems across proposals.
- Flexible partnerships: DARPA can work with or fund whichever entities it chooses, including private, for-profit, entities, and it can put partners together for projects (including across multiple sectors) that may or may not have applied for funding as partners to begin with.
- Flexible solutions: DARPA can also fund purchase orders for solutions or products that do not yet exist, and can fund “performance-based” contracts that allow their grantees to retain intellectual property and other proprietary rights to profit after their contractual obligations with DARPA are complete.
- Flexible timelines: Finally, DARPA can defund, increase funding, or extend project funding at almost any time, and for almost any reason. This allows funding to be quickly ramped up when successes are discovered, and ramped down when projects don’t pan out, taking some of the risk out of very risky bets.
One of the ideas is the possibility of an Advanced Research Projects Agency for Education (ARPA-Ed).
One of the ideas that was discussed was the possibility of an Advanced Research Projects Agency for Education (ARPA-Ed). more> https://goo.gl/H4igik
Posted in Broadband, Business, Communication industry, Economic development, Economy, Education, History, How to, Leadership, Net, Science, Technology
Tagged Broadband, Business improvement, Government, Innovation, Internet, Leadership, Technology, United States