Tower of Babel - Software Development thru Brain Machine Interface

 

Blackberry Thumb

            Blackberry introduced two-way pager in 1996. It provided its users with a cellphone that has instant messaging system, email, web browser, trackball to scroll and a full QWERT keyboard. More than 50 million of them were sold in 2011 (Appolonia, 2019). During its peak of success, the company was worth few billion dollars. It was a status symbol of many wealthy. A new medical condition called ‘blackberry thumb’ appeared. Yet, it ended up in Time’s ‘The 20 most successful technology failures of all time’ (Eadicicco L. et. al., 2017). Steve Job introduced iPhones that offered everything that blackberry offered to its customers but had better user experience. Blackberry failed to foresee the disruption that iPhone was creating. It failed to adapt quickly to the changes. By the time Blackberry introduced touchscreens other companies have mastered the technology. Blackberry did not allow its instant messaging service to be installed in other devices and number of other app developers jumped on that opportunity. Steve Job’s marketing and innovation brilliance and Blackberry’s resistance to change were the reason for its downfall. 

            Sociotechnical systems incorporate collaboration between people and technology in the workplace. Even though technology could resolve many issues it could introduce new issues. When Blackberry was first introduced, many corporations jumped on the opportunity to keep their employees connected 24/7. Not all employees who got Blackberry were thrilled by it. Some called it ‘technology leash’ that kept them under control all the time (Krippendorff, 2011). Because of these technologies, some employees find it had to let go of work, even after leaving work. It spoils their personal life and adds unnecessary stress. Technology also introduces risks like data breach. Nowadays, a data breach could bankrupt a company (Galvin, 2018).  

            A newer technology introduced at work could soon become obsolete. Just like New Coke, Blackerry, pagers, Segway, Window 8 and Google Glass became obsolete, a technology could become irrelevant or obsolete for multiple reasons. Some forces that could make an innovation fail are market competition, customers’ preference, technology glitches, practical issues in adapting to newer technology, cost, geo-political climate, and cultural barriers. 

 

References

Appolonia  A. (2019). How BlackBerry went from controlling the smartphone market to a phone of the past. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/blackberry-smartphone-rise-fall-mobile-failure-innovate-2019-11

Eadicicco L. , Peckham M., Pullen J., Fitzpatrick A. (2017)., The 20 most successful technology failures of all time. Retrieved from https://time.com/4704250/most-successful-technology-tech-failures-gadgets-flops-bombs-fails/

Krippendorff K. (2011). The Flow of Technology Adoption Reverses. Retrieved from  https://www.fastcompany.com/1755281/flow-technology-adoption-reverses

Galvin J. (2018). 60 Percent of Small Businesses Fold Within 6 Months of a Cyber Attack. Here's How to Protect Yourself. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/joe-galvin/60-percent-of-small-businesses-fold-within-6-months-of-a-cyber-attack-heres-how-to-protect-yourself.html

Scenario Planning

Forecasting and scenario planning try to foresee the future with the understanding of past events. Statistical forecasting uses systematic analysis of data to understand causal relationship between influential factors. Systematic analysis of past data using statistical forecasting models provide a repetitive and a reproducible analytical pattern. Scenario planning on the other hand, helps to innovate and tries to predict the future that is different from the past. In scenario planning, instead of relying on past data, one’s intuition is used to provide a story about the plausible future. As per Shell Global’s scenario guide (2013), scenarios “may describe a context and how it may change, but they do not describe the implications of the scenarios for potential users nor dictate how they must respond”. Scenario planning organizations to prepare to face uncertainties in the future (Aldabbagh, & Allawzi, 2019).

Scenario planning is a collaborative, conversation-based process that uses ideas from people within an organization to come up with plausible future state. It allows people with varying amount of expertise and knowledge to come together as one team to generate ideas. Scenario planning requires a congenial environment where free flow of ideas is allowed. Any idea, unless deemed logically implausible, should be allowed, and discussed. The presence of people with diverse knowledge in the discussion allows different perspectives to be presented for each scenario. Unlike forecasting, for scenario planning, consensus is not required (Shell Global, 2008). Stories from scenario planning should be measure using quantitative or qualitative methods. Measuring each story systematically would allow organizations to face uncertainties better than just documenting future scenarios. Having measured outcomes for each scenario would also enable organizations to take new initiatives to address future challenges.

            Though scenario planning helps with innovation and has many advantages over forecasting, it has some weaknesses also. As per Aldabbagh, and Allawzi (2019), “a qualitative approach has to put a strong emphasis on the selection of suitable participants/experts, and in practice, this could not be an easy task to fulfill. Thus, a deep understanding and knowledge of the field under investigation is necessary”. Thus, the success of scenario planning is directly dependent on the knowledge and the wisdom of the participants. Scenario planning takes time to generate ideas and collect data. Participants in scenario planning could be biased and completely ignore inconvenient and uncomfortable future plausible scenarios. Scenario planning could potentially provide wrong level confidence in facing future challenges. Management could fall into the trap of over confidence by wrongly assuming that all future risks have been properly hedged.

Scenario planning at Royal Dutch/Shell company

            Royal Dutch/Shell company has been using scenario planning for more than 45 years to innovate and get ready for future changes in the marketing place. Scenario planning has helped Shell to successfully navigate thru the oil crisis in the 70’s. As per Wilkinson  and Kupers (2013),  “Shell scenarios are intended to set the stage for a future world in which readers imagine themselves as actors and are invited to pay attention to deeply held assumptions about how that world works”. It encourages the participants to not just look at the data but to make wise judgements about future plausible scenarios. In scenario planning, it is possible to generate numerous scenarios that are not relevant. At Shell, the scenarios were required to be relevant and challenging. Shell emphasized on “Deep listening” through structured interviews to allow uncomfortable scenarios to be carefully analyzed (Wilkinson & Kupers, 2013). To discuss tough scenarios, story telling was encouraged. It allowed employees to avoid arguments and successfully discuss complex and tough scenarios. Scenario planning created a culture in which ideas could be freely discussed. When questions are asked, it forced the managers to provide thoughtful answers. Future scenarios were carefully analyzed, and numbers were attached to the scenarios. It allowed these scenarios to included as part of future strategic planning. When the oil crisis of 1973 occurred, Shell has already analyzed a comparable scenario ahead of time and they were ready to face the crisis.

Summary

            Scenario planning is a powerful tool that could be used for future innovation efforts. When the right set of participants are chosen carefully and free flow of information is encouraged, scenario planning could reveal plausible future scenarios and spur innovation. It is not just required to come up with plausible future scenarios, but they should be carefully analyzed and also should be added to the organization’s broader future strategy.  

References

Aldabbagh, I., & Allawzi, S. (2019). Rethinking scenario planning potential role in strategy making and innovation: a conceptual framework based on examining trends towards scenarios and firm's strategy. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 18(5), 1-14. Retrieved from https://proxy.cecybrary.com/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.proxy.cecybrary.com/scholarly-journals/rethinking-scenario-planning-potential-role/docview/2386340930/se-2?accountid=144789

Schwarze, M. L., & Taylor, L. J. (2017). Managing uncertainty — harnessing the power of scenario planning. The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(3), 206-208. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.cecybrary.com/10.1056/NEJMp1704149

Shell Global. (2008). Scenarios: An Explorer's Guide. Retrieved from https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/new-lenses-on-the-future/earlier-scenarios/_jcr_content/par/expandablelist/expandablesection_842430368.stream/1519772592201/f5b043e97972e369db4382a38434d4dc2b1e8bc4/shell-scenarios-explorersguide.pdf

Wilkinson A. & Kupers R., (2013) Living in the Future. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/05/living-in-the-futures