Using Apple Watches to assist waitstaff is interesting, but sort of over kill.
I’d assume they’d still need to take orders which probably works best with paper (or just memorizing), or at best a tablet or phablet. The watch is not very good for reading and gathering information: it’s better at taking quick actions, just getting quick info like the time or current temperature, and small notifications.
Still, any new use case people come up with is interesting:
Second, the use of the Apple Watch adds an interesting layer to day-to-day hospitality practices. Guest notes within reservations are nothing new, but employing a dynamic, real-time system to make sure that the people who need to read the notes actually do read the notes is a major step. The Apple Watch, for its… shortcomings, is arguably less intrusive than a mobile phone or larger screen, and can be checked far more discreetly. I can’t speak for restaurant floor managers, but from this side of the keyboard, this seems like an efficient technological upgrade.
Another interesting tidbit buried in the Eater piece: soon, ResyOS will support the ability to add other diners to a reservation so the restaurant has a clearer picture of everyone at the table — great news for couples who keep track of which reservation profiles have all of the “good notes.” (We all do that, right?)
Source: The Apple Watch in Restaurant Dining Rooms
Tyler Cowen suggests that we shouldn’t be freaked out by the emphasis on quarterly returns. Many public companies companies blame making quarterly numbers as a reason for short term planning, versus long term (one assumes) innovative strategies. The pieces suggests that that short sightedness may have a reason:
In information technology, the average life of a corporate asset is about six years, in health care it is about 11 years, and for consumer products it runs about 12 to 15. Very often it is hard for a company to plan its operations beyond those time periods, as the U.S. economy is no longer based on durable manufacturing machines. Production has shifted toward service sectors with relatively short asset lives, and that may call for a shorter-term orientation in response.
And, throw in all the “change or die”, digital transformation stuff and who knows what tomorrow will look like? As a counter, re-jiggering a company to be “digital” can take time. But, as Coleen suggests, investors don’t always seems to punish that (I’d add, if they have faith in management and the culture of the company):
Equity markets do not seem to neglect the longer run. Amazon has a high share price even though its earnings reports have usually failed to show a profit. Possibly the market judgment is wrong, but it’s hardly the case that investors are ignoring the long-run prospects of the company.
Further more, if I doesn’t work out:
If public shareholders are placing too much short-term pressure on their companies for a good quarterly earnings report, companies have the option of boosting their value by going private, as has been the trend. By 2012, the number of U.S. public corporations was less than half what it had been in 1997, in part because many companies went private. This is possible evidence that there have been problems with corporate short-termism, but on the other hand it shows that a market response is possible. Good governance is a scarce resource, and it may be that markets concentrate it in the places that need it most.
Source: Is corporate thinking too short-term?
Re-reading Nick’s piece on “digital transformation,” I like how he explains what’s new and different from past waves of IT innovation (lik ERP and econmerce), e.g.:
“Going digital results in an explosion in the amount of data you have. New channels of engagement between customers and organizations have resulted in new sources of information coming into the organization at speeds not seen before. In the past, customer interaction was mostly one-way – from the organization to the customer. Now it is about customer-directed, on-demand two-way engagement anywhere on any device. Customers want to communicate on their terms in their preferred channels. That causes organizations to have to transform the way they handle such information, since having a large call center may not be enough – or even that relevant in the future, given that so much communication will come via social media, in messages or increasingly via video. Add to that the explosion in information from Internet of Things (IoT) devices, and it’s pretty clear that the days of management by gut-feel and hunch are over, and data-driven decision-making is the only way to go.
And also, some numbers:
- “Less than 25% of organizations that participated in a recent 451 Research survey (451 Research VoCUL, April 2016) said they had a well-defined formal digital transformation strategy. So we’re in the early stages of digital transformation, and there’s lots of work to be done.”
- “Erik Brynjolfsson, Lorin Hitt and Heekyung Hellen Kim from MIT and University of Pennsylvania found that companies with data-driven decision environments have 5% higher productivity, 6% higher profit and up to 50% higher market value than other businesses.”
- “Our research shows about 65% of IT decision-makers using agile methods and about 40% adopting DevOps today (VotE Software-Defined Infrastructure Q4 2015).”
Source: Digital transformation: the what, the why and the how
It’s good enough that I’m posting a K-Mart commercial here.
(Via Hot Tacos Bob)
There is a News Feed that displays articles, updates or comments relevant to certain teams or, perhaps, to the entire company. The now-familiar Live service can be used to broadcast corporate communications, such as a presentation by the CEO. Workers can communicate in real time using a version of Messenger. They can also create private Groups for brainstorms or discussions—as of this week, groups can include colleagues or business partners that aren’t official employees. That feature wasn’t previously available until today’s launch.
It looks like $1-3 a month (I’m guessing). I mean: I’ve never used an intranet site that was worth a damn. You could do worse than using Facebook for it: it seems to do a damn fine job as the intranet for people’s lives.
What’s always mattered in these things is that the vendor (here, Facebook) keeps up with it over the course of 5-10 years. Otherwise, it become a big hunk of crap you can’t escape that never evolves. Google Apps (or whatever it’s called) is like this: aside from GMail, it never seems to evovle at a pace that makese sense, so you’re left with the ideas of 2-3 years ago. So, the question becomes: is Facebook in this for the long-haul?
Source: Facebook at Work: Workplace by Facebook Is Now on the Clock
(I mean, sure, it’s actually Ford, but, like, whatever.)
A lead-gen-y blog post, but with some good stuff, e.g.:
- “Gartner estimates by 2021, more than 50% of established corporations will be leveraging lean startup techniques at the business level to increase the pace and success of business transformation.”
- Nice MVP/small batch framing: “A critical challenge for many organizations will be adopting radical MVP thinking in the business (not just in IT). Businesses must define what is the least investment needed (in time, budget, resources, etc.) to test the most uncertain assumptions for the new product or service.”
- And a mini-case study of the Queensland state government which ain’t half bad.
Source: Why Big Companies Need Lean Startup Techniques – Smarter With Gartner
It’s easy to take all the recent advances in photography for granted. They all just sort of work. This overview from Sinofsky on the bokeh effect in the new iPhones explains what’s going on, and also highlights a mainstream – consumer! – case of how software, IoT, and hardware (mobile phones) are innovating what was a moribund field:
If you extrapolate from today you can start to see how mobile photography that incorporates multiple sensors, machine learning, and real-time compute will continue to create new types of images.
It’s a good example of what we mean by “digital transformation.” It means using IT to the maximum and, I think, is best understood by contemplating what exactly the opposite is: “analog.” There are so many things in our daily lives (both business and personal) that are not being augmented by software, let along “sensors” and “machine learning.” There’s almost an endless TAM out there to gobble up; rather, an infinite future of opportunity to create fun, new experiences and productivity.
Source: Photos: How Tools Start a Revolution
Last year I wrote several columns for FierceDevOps. Nancy Gohring was the editor there and graciously asked me to do so (she’s moved over to being an analyst at 451 and is doing awesome work over there). The FierceEmpire has shifted their stuff around and now it’s either impossible or impossibly tedious to find those pieces, so I moved them over to Medium. I’ve got to get my URLs to be my overly self-referential self, after all!
Here they are:
- Software Defined Businesses need Software Defined IT Departments
- Here’s how we can help push DevOps into the mainstream
- There’s no easy way to model DevOps ROI
- Management’s role in DevOps: orchestrating the why
- Barriers to DevOps in government
- Addressing the DevOps compliance problem
It’s okay to get things wrong and it’s okay to change our minds. If we’re strong enough to admit that we got it wrong, we can learn and adapt. If we accept that it’s okay to change our minds, we end up delivering something quicker as we made a decision based on the information at that time.
—Emma Hammond, Fidelity International
Source: Top 100 Quotes from the Cloud Foundry Summit Europe 2016, Altoros