Beiträge

Was passiert, wenn Innovation auf Bürokratie trifft

Linkedin-Profilfoto

“Deutschland scheitert in kleinen Schritten”, titelt die FAZ ein Interview mit Rafael Laguna de la Vera. Der Software-Unternehmer ist ist Gründungsdirektor von „SprinD“, der Agentur für Sprunginnovationen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Mit ihr soll ein bisher für Deutschland einmaliger innovationspolitischer Ansatz zur Förderung von disruptiven Innovationen umgesetzt werden. Und auch wenn da bisher noch kein Wort mit der Endung -ung drin vorgekommen ist, wiehert schon bei dieser Beschreibung der Amtsschimmel.

Dabei bringt Laguna alles mit:  seit über 30 Jahren ist er als Unternehmer und Investor im Bereich Software erfolgreich. Bereits im Alter von 16 Jahren gründete er sein erstes Software-Unternehmen (Elephant Software), mit 21 programmierte er bereits ein komplettes Kassensystem für die Getränkewirtschaft (dicomputer) und mit 31 verkaufte er seine erste Firma (micado). Aktuell ist er hauptamtlich CEO von Open Exchange, Das Unternehmen ist mit 270 Mitarbeitern ein führender Anbieter von Open Source-Software für E-Mail und Office-Productivity. Da bleibt eine Frage ungestellt: Warum tut er sich das an?

Ich empfehle das Interview zur Lektüre – es wirft ein Schlaglicht auf die Innovationsfreude in Deutschland. Oder den Mangel daran.

Zu dem Interview geht es hier.

Die Revolution der Roboter

Quelle: 3Sat

Heute Abend um 20:15 bei 3Sat und in der Mediathek gibt es eine Reportage mit diesem Thema, die ich sehr gut finde. Warum? Weil sie nicht nur an der Oberfläche kratzt und niedliche Gimmicks wie Sonys Robe-Hund zeigt, sondern wie AI und Robotik bereits seit langer Zeit und immer mehr im Hintergrund unausweichlich geworden ist. Ich finde, daß man sich das anschauen sollte – und dann überlegen sollte, wie wir im Herzen Europas verhindern können, (völlig) den Anschluß zu verpassen.

Aus der Ankündigung des Beitrags:

In einem Postverteilzentrum in China transportieren und sortieren 300 Roboter in nur einer Halle jeden Tag 70.000 Pakete. Dreiviertel der Angestellten wurden entlassen. Noch überwachen zehn Angestellte das Ballett der Roboter, bald wird es menschenleer sein.

Intelligente Maschinen haben beinahe alle Bereiche der Arbeitswelt erobert: Sie sind Köche in Fast-Food-Restaurants, Polizisten in Dubai, Dirigenten in Pisa und massenhaft Fabrikarbeiter in der Industrie. Künstliche Intelligenz in Form von Software- und Datenbankanwendungen ersetzt derzeit vor allem Sachbearbeiter. In der Versicherungswirtschaft, in der Touristikbranche, in Banken und ganz allgemein in Kundenzentren. Aber auch die Jobs von Buchhaltern, Steuerberatern und Anwälten sind in Gefahr. Schätzungen zufolge könnte künstliche Intelligenz bis 2025 weltweit an 250 Millionen Arbeitsplätzen die Tätigkeit von Menschen übernehmen. Ist unsere Gesellschaft auf solche Umbrüche vorbereitet?

The Urban-Rural Divide – is the countryside left behind?

Source: https://connection.asco.org/

Unfortunately, the answer seems to be „yes“ in many ways – despite booming innovation in agricultural technologies for instance. Even though these are stereotypes, life is slower, less complicated in the countryside. The main issues that drive innovation for „Smart Cities“ simply do not apply for rural areas. Dense traffic, air pollution and such are not key problems. Also the people ask themselves „why do I need this“ much more frequently. While the people in Cities are not only faster paced with innovation and new trends, they also are more targeted for new stuff. Which is why innovation is propelled in Cities while innovators very often don’t even consider looking at rural areas. Where are new apps and tech products launched? Never in the rural world, mostly in big cities. Because people adopt new trends and tech quicker, have a higher affinity. And also just because there are more people there, in one place.

During my past activities I always tried to keep the dialogue going and to look at the needs of the people in less densely populated areas. Because they do not match those of the people in city centers. Their schedules look different. Their commute to work is different. Their shopping behavior is different. Their consumption of services, healthcare and the likes is different. And I always said that if a new digital service or product wants to be truly game changing and relevant, it needs to cater for both – the city people and the rural folks as well. Otherwise what is being created is an island-solution that does not work for the entire population. And that would widen the gap even more.

Another experience I made is that people in small towns and villages are much harder to convince to use digital services. Personal contact is more important. Also the demographics may play a role – audiences in cities are generally younger. I do not know if education plays a role, but the young, highly educated are also likely to be in densely populated areas.

I would see this as a chance and positive challenge when building digital products and services. Why not involve the people in rural areas? When they are convinced and love the product, it will surely work even better in the cities? The same applies to older audiences. Why not involve those in the development process to get their input and feedback? A great product is intuitive, does what it is supposed to and caters to people regardless of where they live or how old they are. (I know, this is a generalization).

Also, products and services designed for the City audience, that then end at the city limits, are not quite smart – how about those „inbetweeners“, that live in the commuter-belt of large cities? This applies for me. I live within the city limits of Hamburg, but many „smart services“ are not available because the population is not dense enough here in what some people call the „green hell“, suburbia. Car sharing is one. But pretty much any mobility services except for the good old taxi are not available. If you cross the city line into the neighboring state just a few 100 meters away, things get worse. Also this widens the gap between these areas as people living in rural areas would not sign up for such „city services“ – even when they come to the city. The list of examples is much longer than this.

In this context, I found a document written by people from Bertelsmann Stiftung for the G20 summit in Japan earlier this year, which I thought is worth sharing: „SOCIAL COHESION, GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AND THE FUTURE OF POLITICS The Urban-Rural Divide and Regionally Inclusive Growth in the Digital Age“.

You find it here. 

Generally, I think that when you google for „smart cities“ or the equivalent for rural areas, you find a ton of stuff for smart cities but quite little on the countryside. We should bear that in mind because the disparity is poison and can cause massive frictions and problems in the future.

 

„Digital Marketplaces Unleashed“ – a book worth reading.

dmu-coverIt´s been my pleasure to contribute a chapter to the new book „Digital Marketplaces Unleashed“, which is published by Springer on October 13th, with my dear co-author Björn Matthies.

This collection of different views on how digitalization is influencing various industrial sectors addresses essential topics like big data and analytics, fintech and insuretech, cloud and mobility technologies, disruption and entrepreneurship.

The technological advances of the 21st century have been massively impacted by the digital upheaval: there is no future without digitalization. The sale of products and services has left the classical point of sale and now takes place on a variety of channels. Whether in the automotive industry, travel and traffic, in cities, or the financial industry – newly designed ecosystems are being created everywhere; data is being generated and analyzed in real time; and companies are competing for mobile access channels to customers in order to gain knowledge about their individual contexts and preferences. In turn, customers can now publicly share their opinions, experiences and knowledge as User Generated Content, allowing them to impact the market and empowering them to build or destroy trust.

 

WEF: How Europe can build a Silicon Valley

wef_0There is lots of intelligence at the World Economic Forum – but this piece I like in particular for many reasons. Mostly, because it is honest and realistic. It simply just does not work that some city or metropolitan area tries to be the „Silicon Valley of XYZ“ by proclamation. Too many ingredients make the actual Silicon Valley what it is and next to public-private partnership and the close-tied web of relations, the cluster, the special openness to change, itarations and – yes – failure. Adoption of change and embracing of change. And let´s be fair, also the Silicon Valley is subject to change and has been time and time again. Currently the hottest companies leave the traditional „Silicon Valley“, named after the Semiconductor-Companies there, to be headquartered im San Francisco. So really we should talk about the greater San Francisco Bay Area. There will not be two areas of this kind on this planet, because you simply cannot replicate everything AND fill it with life, just because it is a political will. And especially this won´t work for a city or even one single European nation. So I like the analysis provided in this great article of the World Economic Forum: How Europe can build a Silicon Valley.