Capgemini Report: dramatic proof most big companies lag on IoT strategy!

In writing the SAP “Managing the Internet of Things Revolution” i-guide to IoT strategy for C-level executives, my research led me to believe that most big companies were still clueless about the IoT and how it would revolutionize every aspect of their operations.  Now a great report by Capgemini, “The Internet of Things: Are Organizations Ready for a Multi-Trillion Dollar Prize?” seems to answer its own question with a resounding “No!” It’s a must read, whether you’re late to the game, or if you’re looking for entrepreneurial opportunities. Let’s start with the conclusion:

The IoT represents the next evolution of the digital universe. The speed at which nimble startups and Internet players are capturing IoT opportunities should serve as a wake-up call to larger, traditional organizations. Analyst estimates point to a world where startups will dominate the IoT market. Fifty percent of IoT solutions are expected to originate in startups less than 3 years old, by 201732. They may be less nimble, but bigger organizations need to step up to the plate. As with all digital disruptions, being an organization that is in catch-up mode will be a deeply uncomfortable place to be. ” (my emphasis)

Earlier, it emphasizes that success will require both a paradigm shift and mastering new technologies such as big data analysis:

The IoT prize will be won by those who achieve a change in mindset, from a product world to a service world. However, that fundamental mind-shift is not the only requirement. Organizations need to get the right IT infrastructure in place, quickly acquire capabilities in analytics, and strengthen a whole host of functional capabilities. “

Got your attention yet?

The report was most emphatic about an aspect of the IoT that I don’t think I’ve emphasized enough in the past, the shift from products to services. Once again, I look to GE as one big company that “gets it” about the IoT transition, building sensors into its products that rotate, then monetizing the investment by offering real-time data about the products’ operations to customers so that they can optimize their operations — and charging for that data.  The study said that within a year after GE began offering its “Predictivity” line of IoT services in 2012, it generated $290 million in revenues.

One of the reasons why I really like the analysis is that it zeros in on a range of management issues that executives must address to capitalize on the IoT.

The study of more than 100 US and European companies reported that most don’t have the in-house expertise to make the switch from selling products to offering services:

“They now need to be able to envision new services, develop commercial models and design service contracts that result in continuous revenue streams. Our discussions with senior executives revealed that these are not areas of strength for many product- centric organizations.”

In particular, it targeted salespeople as a problem area: “For IoT solutions, a sales force needs to be comfortable in articulating the value proposition and potential benefits, which is critical to convincing often-reluctant customers to pay for a new class of services.” Customer support will also need to be beefed up — and delivered faster to customers who come to expect real-time data.

 The research showed that most companies were only in the early stages of IoT implementation — if at all. Fewer than 30% support remote operation of devices, and fewer than 40% use sensor data to offer customers the kind of performance improvement insights that GE gives.

One major gap that jumped out to me is that most of the big companies just don’t get my “Essential Truth” that you have to begin asking “who else can use this data”?,” and begin opening up proprietary systems so that third parties will enrich your offerings by creating new combinations and complementary offerings. Fewer “than 15% of organizations offer IoT solutions that integrate with third-party products and services.” (my emphasis) If mighty GE can team with Quirky and Electric Imp, what’s your excuse? On the more positive side, the research revealed that nearly 60% use partnerships to develop IoT solutions, so there’s hope.

The gaps are technological as well as human. 67% of the respondents said they don’t have the technology (shout-out to SAP’s HANA) to handle the massive amounts of big data the IoT will generate.

Another obstacle that the report identified was one I’d not come across before: resistance from within. “An executive at a medical technology company outlined how resistance can come less from the customer – and more from within the organization, explaining, ‘We only have 20% resistance from the customer and 80% from our own organization. Consequently, it is a significant challenge to align our existing business processes with new IoT-based service offerings.’”

The final section is an action agenda to get companies up to speed on the IoT:

  1. Put the Right IT Infrastructure in Place and Acquire Data Analytics Capabilities.
  2. Strengthen Functional Capabilities across Product Management, Sales and Marketing and Customer Support
  3. Use Trainings and Incentives to Prepare the Sales Force to Sell IoT Solutions. Augment Product Management Capabilities with Services Expertise and Emphasize Ease-of-Use in Product Design
  4. Develop Customer Support Capabilities to Drive Real-Time Issue Resolution.

Bottom line, Capgemini concluded that a shocking 42% of all companies don’t provide any IoT services. That, in my mind, is a clarion call to action!

You simply must read this report — then act on it.

comments: Comments Off on Capgemini Report: dramatic proof most big companies lag on IoT strategy! tags: , , , ,

If This, Then That (IFTTT): essential crowdsourcing component to speed IoT development

I’ve been meaning to write about IFTTT (If This, Then That, pronounced like “gift,” but minus the g) for a long time, because I see it as a crucial, if perhaps underappreciated, component to spread the IoT more rapidly and increase its versatility — by democratizing the IoT.

That’s because this cool site embraces one of my favorite IoT “Essential Truths.” We must start asking:

who else could use this data?

I first started asking this question in my book, Data Dynamite, which largely focused on a fundamental paradigm shift away from the old view of data, namely, that you could gain a competitive advantage if you had proprietary information that I didn’t have. It was a zero-sum game. Your win was my loss.  

No longer: now value is created for you if you share data with me and I come up with some other way to use that data that you hadn’t explored. Win-win!

As applied to the IoT, I’ve explored this shift primarily in the context of corporate initiatives, where it becomes possible, for the first time, to share data instantly among everyone who could benefit from that data: everyone within the company, but also your supply chain, your distribution network, and, sometimes, even your customers. 

samples of IFTTT recipes

Here’s where the benefit of sharing data with your customers on a real-time basis comes in: there are a lot more of them than there are of manufacturers, and I can guarantee you that they will come up with clever uses that your staff, no matter how brilliant, won’t. Exhibit A: during last year’s World Series, GigaOM’s Stacey Higginbotham, did an IFTTT “recipe” that turned her HUE lights red (too bad for her, the Sox scored more runs. Wait until next year…). What Philips researcher would have ever done that on company time?

By harnessing crowdsourcing of ideas, the IoT will progress much faster, because of the variety of interests and/or needs that individuals add to the soup!

So, how’s IFTTT work?

Here’s a brief outline (or go here for details):

  1. a “recipe” is made up of a “trigger” (i.e., if this happens, such as “I’m tagged in a photo on Facebook”) and an action (then that happens, such as “create a status message on Facebook.”).
  2. the building blocks for recipes are called channels — 116 as of now, and growing all the time — each of which his its own triggers and actions.  The channels include a wide range of apps and products, such as Nest thermostats or Facebook.

There is a wide variety of recipes on the IFTTT site (you can subscribe to have new ones involving a given channel that interests you sent to you as they are shared) or you can easily create your own — with no programming skill required. How cool is that?

Yes, IFTTT can be fun (“email your mother Foursquare checkins tagged #mom. Useful for brownie points“), but I’m convince that it’s also a critically important tool to speed deployment and impact of the IoT, by harnessing the power of crowdsourcing to complement the work of app developers and device manufacturers.

Now get going!

 

The New IoT Math: 1 + 1 + 3 — Jawbone UP24 now controls Nest thermostat

A chance conversation about the IoT the other day turned me on to this elegant proof-of-concept that what I call “Smart Aging” to help seniors be healthier and avoid institutionalization is possible: my Jawbone UP bracelet could now control my Nest thermostat (if I had one: with three heating zones in my house, I’m gonna wait until the NEST price drops before I’ll buy them…).

That, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly what I’m talking about with my concept of “Smart Aging” for seniors, which would combine:

  • Quantified Self devices such as Jawbone UPs, Nike FuelBand, the congestive heart failure necklace,  or the Biostamp sensor (more about that one in a future post!) that will easily and unobtrusively monitor your bodily indicators and, if you choose, report them to your doctor, both to improve diagnoses, and to encourage you to adopt healthy practices such as a daily walk.
  • smart home devices such as the NEST or the voice-activated Ivee hub.

Even better, if device manufacturers get it about one of my Essential Truths about the IoT:  who else could use this data?, they will allow free access to their algorithms, and someone will realize that 1+1=3: the two devices are even more powerful when linked! In this case, the Jawbone UP is powerful, and so is the Nest, but something totally new is possible when they are linked:

“By connecting your UP24 with your Nest Thermostat, the temperature of your house will automatically adjust to a temperature you prefer – the moment you go to bed or wake up.

“Through UP Insights, we have shared the fact that an ideal sleeping environment is cooler, between 65 and 72 degrees. With the Nest integration, we no longer just tell you this fact. We make it a reality. Once your band enters Sleep Mode, your thermostat will kick down to your ideal temperature. And when you wake? You guessed it. Your thermostat will automatically adjust to a warmer temperature… all without leaving your bed.”

Nest-2_thermostatJawbone_UpHow cool (or hot, depending on the season…) is that?

I particularly like it for seniors because of one UP feature: instead of setting a precise wake-up alarm, you also have the option of creating a 30-minute window when it it should vibrate to wake you, with the exact time determined by what the UP determines is the ideal point in your natural sleep cycle.  Some working people on extremely tight morning schedules may not want to take advantage of that option, but for seniors, answering to no one but themselves, that would be an added benefit: get the best possible sleep, AND get up in a warm house (oh, and while you’re at it, why not link in some Phillips HUE lights and a coffee pot plugged in to a Belkin WeMo socket, so that you’ll also have fresh-brewed coffee and a bright kitchen?).  Sweet!

Do the math: one IoT-empowered device is nice, but link several more of them, and 1 + 1 = 3 — or more!

Smart Toothbrush: another example of “just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should”

I absolutely love my current Braun electric toothbrush, because it (unlike the first one I had, which basically just spun around) has a timer that reminds me to brush each quadrant of my teeth for 30 seconds.  In the past, I never thought about what amount of time was optimal for brushing, let alone monitored how long I actually did so. As a result, I’m confident that I’m really keeping my teeth clean.

smart toothbrush

However, I just don’t get it about why I should transfer that info via Bluetooth to an app. Shouldn’t we be content with the bare minimum of technology that gets us to adopt better health practices, and, where relevant, to transfer that information to our doctors so they can get a better idea of our daily practices and state of health?  Maybe I’m nitpicking, but I do think it’s relevant to relay to your doctor potentially highly-variable data such as your daily Fitbit or Jawbone readings (as patients at certain MGH or Brigham & Womens’ practices can now do), but it seems to me that in the case of toothbrushing, it should be enough to simply provide feedback that lets you know you’re brushing enough, and leave it at that.

Thus, the “connected” toothbrush to me seems to violate one of my “Essential Truth” of the IoT, that “just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should do it.”

Again, I realize I may be splitting hairs here distinguishing between reporting some health data and not other. What do you think?  Let me know!

comments: Comments Off on Smart Toothbrush: another example of “just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should” tags:

My speech on how the Internet of Things will aid Predictive Analytics

I spoke yesterday at the Predictive Analytics Manufacturing conference in Chicago, about a theme I first raised in the O’Reilly SOLID blog, about how the Internet of Things could bring about an “era of precision manufacturing.”

I argued that, as powerful as Predictive Analytics tools have been in analyzing manufacturing data and improving forecasting, their effectiveness has been artificially restricted because, for example, we can’t “see” inside production machinery to detect early signs of metal fatigue in time to avoid a costly breakdown, nor can we tell whether EVERY product on an assembly line will function when customers use them.

By contrast, I argued that the IoT will give us all this information, and, most important, allow everyone (from your supply chain and distribution network to EVERYONE in your company) to share this data on a real-time basis.  I warned that it will be management issues (those pesky IoT Essential Truths again!), such as whether to allow this sharing to take place, and whether to end departmental silos, that will be the biggest potential barrier to full IoT implementation.

Believe me, it will be an incredible transformation.  You can read the full text here.

Apple’s HomeKit: will it hasten widespread smart home adoption?

Been too busy to comment until now on Apple’s HomeKit platform, announced last week at its WWDC event.

(PROMINENT DISCLAIMER! Having to send huge amounts of money to Loyola of Maryland for the next three years [I feel like I’m in the Weimar Republic and must carry tons of money to Baltimore in a wheelbarrow, LOL] to secure my youngest’s sheepskin has led to a part-time sales job at the Apple Store — which doesn’t give me any inside insights into their strategy. Rest assured that nothing that will ever appear in this blog about Apple will be gathered from anything other than public sources. I know only what you know, and the opinions expressed here are solely my own).

As the announcement aimed at developers said,

“HomeKit is a new framework for communicating with and controlling connected devices in a user’s home. Apps can enable users to discover devices in their home and configure them, or you can create actions to control those devices. Users can group actions together and trigger them using Siri.”

As I wrote when Google bought Nest last winter, the most immediate impact will probably be to boost public visibility and understanding of the IoT and smart homes.

Beyond that, the ability to leverage Siri’s growing versatility will probably be a major factor in promoting IoT ease-of-use (given my pre-occupation with use of smart-home technology to encourage “aging in place” among seniors, it will be very important in getting the tech-averse and those who have trouble typing on a smart phone to use HomeKit-compliant devices. And then there’s the companion Health Kit, also announced at WWDC, which I’ll review in my next post.).

As you might expect given Apple’s overall zeal for close hardware and software integration, the developer’s kit emphasizes protocols and standards compliance — which should in turn enhance overall security and privacy protections, benefiting all players:

“Home Kit provides seamless integration between accessories that support Apple’s Home Automation Protocol and iOS devices, allowing for new advances in home automation. By promoting a common protocol for home automation devices and making a public API available for configuring and communicating with those devices, Home Kit makes possible a marketplace where the app a user controls their home with doesn’t have to be created by the vendor who made their home automation accessories, and where home automation accessories from multiple vendors can all be integrated into a single coherent whole without those vendors having to coordinate directly with each other.

Home Kit allows third-party apps to perform three major functions:

  1. Discover accessories and add them to a persistent, cross-device home configuration database.
  2. Display, edit, and act upon the data in the home configuration database.
  3. Communicate with configured accessories and services to get them to perform actions, such as turning on the lights in the living room.

The home configuration database is not only available to third-party apps, it’s also available to Siri. This allows users to give commands like, ‘Siri, turn on the lights in the living room.’ If a user creates a home configuration with logical groupings of accessories, services, and commands, Siri can make it very easy to accomplish sophisticated operations with voice control.”

Most important, individual IoT apps and devices can come together into “scenes,” in which a variety of actions (such as starting appliances, turning up the heat, etc., when you wake). IMHO, this emphasis on inter-operability is critically important to public acceptance of the IoT.  As I’ve written before about my IoT “Essential Truths,” two critical things we need to do is to ask “who else could use this data?,” and to democratize innovation. As I understand the above description, it will be like the iPhone ecosystem, where Apple will review all apps and decide whether they can be sold on whatever “store” the company creates for the IoT, but developers will be encouraged to run wild with their imaginations to create both new hardware and to come up with innovative mashups of data from all the various devices that will help integrate them into a comprehensive ecosystem in which, for example, an action by one device may trigger a follow-on action by another device.

The framework, logically, uses a home metaphor to organize all the components into a hierarchy:

  • Homes (HMHome) are the top level container, and represent a structure that a user would generally consider to be a single home. Users might have multiple homes that are far apart, such as a primary home and a vacation home. Or they might have two homes that are close together, but that they consider different homes—for example, a main home and a guest cottage on the same property.
  • Rooms (HMRoom) are optional parts of homes, and represent individual rooms in the home. Rooms don’t have any physical characteristics—size, location, etc. They’re simply names that are meaningful to the user, such as ‘living room’ or ‘kitchen’. Meaningful room names enable commands like, ‘Siri, turn on the kitchen lights.’
  • Accessories (HMAccessory) are installed into homes and assigned to rooms. These are the actual physical home automation devices, such as a garage door opener. If the user doesn’t configure any rooms, Home Kit assigns accessories to a special default room for the home.
  • Services (HMService) are the actual services provided by an accessory. Accessories have both user-controllable services, like a light, and services that are for their own use, like a firmware update service. Home Kit is most concerned with user-controllable services.A single accessory may have more than one user-controllable service. For example, most garage door openers have a service for opening and closing the door, and another service for the light on the garage door opener.
  • Zones (HMZone) are optional groupings of rooms in a home. ‘Upstairs’ and ‘downstairs’ would be represented by zones. Zones are completely optional—rooms don’t need to be in a zone. By adding rooms to a zone, the user is able to give commands to Siri such as, ‘Siri, turn on all of the lights downstairs.'”

As Fast Company observed, the HomeKit’s greatest contribution to the smart home may be streamlining interaction between various apps and devices through Siri:

“By opening up Siri to control third-party peripherals, the smart home experience will become infinitely more seamless. Up until now, controlling a smart device has meant unlocking a mobile device, launching an app, and then making adjustments–a bit too much friction for lowering the volume of the TV or dimming the lights.”

Apple has already lined up a great assortment of partners: iDevices, iHome, Cree, Honeywell, Haier, Philips, Kwikset, Netatmo, and Withings. Hmm: no Nest?

Still to come, of course, is to find out what Apple itself will develop in terms of smart home hardware, such as the long-rumored iWatch (again, I know nothing about this beyond what we’ve all read in blogs, etc.).

No matter what shape the company’s IoT strategy takes, the fact that the world’s second-most profitable company, and leading retailer,  has made such a public commitment to the IoT and smart homes should dramatically speed public adoption, and, perhaps equally important, create public awareness. After all, remember how quickly and dramatically the iPhone transformed the cell phone paradigm — and our lives.

NEXT: Apple’s Health Kit.

 

comments: 2 »

My piece in Harvard Biz Review blaming #370 crash on lack of “Internet of Things” thinking!

Hey, everyone else has weighed in with an explanation on why Flight 370 crashed, so I did, today, with a piece in the Harvard Business Review blog in which I blamed it on lack of “Internet of Things thinking.”

May sound crazy, but I think it’s true, because of two of my “Essential Truths” about the IoT — two things that we can do now but never could before, which open up a huge range of possibilities for change:

  • limitless numbers of devices and people can share the same data on a real-time basis
  • for the first time, we can get real-time data on how devices are actually operating, even conditions deep within the device

In this case, if Malaysia Air had only been willing to pay $10 more per flight, it could have had a wide-ranging flow of real-time data from the plane’s engines. Under regular conditions this data could have allowed the company to tweak the engines’ performance, while also allowing them to do “predictive maintenance,” catching minute problems as they first emerged, in time to make safe, economical repairs rather than waiting until a catastrophic failure.

AND, it also would have allowed them during the crisis two weeks ago to have immediately switched to monitoring the engine data when voice transmissions ended, so they would have known immediately that the plane was still flying, in time to have launched planes to intercept the plane and land it safely.

HOWEVER, what was missing was this “Internet of Things thinking,” so they didn’t think expansively about the value of sharing the data.  They saved $10 per flight, but lost 290 people. Somehow the math doesn’t add up…

#IoT ESSENTIAL TRUTHS: IF REAL-TIME DATA WAS SHARED MH370 MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAVED!

Pardon me for “shouting” in this headline, but I just had a stark realization that if one of my Internet of Things Essential Truths had been practiced by Rolls-Royce and Malaysia Air, Flight 370 might have been saved:

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?

What I realized was that if Malaysia Air and Rolls-Royce and the air traffic controllers had simultaneous access to the real-time data from the engines’ sensors (rather than Rolls-Royce alone having it, simply to measure engine performance), the airline would have realized that the plane was still in flight, and planes could have been scrambled immediately to search for it, rather than waiting days before the data came to light.

That’s a bone-chilling reminder that with the IoT, we must always ask the question:

who else could benefit from having simultaneous access to real-time data?

Wow!

IoT Essential Truths: Just Because You Can Do It Doesn’t Mean You Should

Posted on 9th December 2013 in Essential Truths

Whilst (aren’t I the Anglophile?) walking the dog this morning, the “social sensing badges” that I’d slammed a while ago as crossing my personal line in terms of invasion of privacy popped into my head.

As I thought more about these monitors of your personal interactions in the workplace, I thought that one of my comments about them deserved elevation to the level of one of my “Essential Truths” about the IoT (i.e., such basic principles that they should be considered throughout the design and launch of any IoT service):

Just because you can do it doesn’t mean you should do it!

Primarily, it seems to me this adds a crucial ethical component to the IoT, which should never be far from our thoughts because of the omnipresent issues of privacy and security that pervade so many IoT services. In the case of the “social sensing badges,” Sociometric Solutions paints a strong case for how their badges can lead to a more productive workplace, but, IMHO, that fails to outweigh the omnipresent invasion of workers’ personal privacy that the badges represent, especially in today’s poisonous workplace environment (that’s my judgment: love the humane workplaces that prove me wrong!).

Medical solutions should particularly be subject to this test, because the information they gather and diffuse is so personal and potentially harmful. I am a huge fan of these solutions — many can literally save your life, while most will improve your quality of life — but I think they carry with them the need to place heavy emphasis on privacy and security protections if they are to be introduced.

And there’s a corollary to this Essential Truth that companies need to keep in mind:

Just because you can do it doesn’t mean I have to buy it!

That one comes to mind every time I read a breathless new update on the IoT’s Holy Grail. I speak, of course, of the “smart refrigerator!” I’ll grant you that each iteration does add more services, but suffice it to say that I ain’t making a down-payment on any of those on the market, and I doubt whether I ever will!  Why? I don’t buy a lot of prepared refrigerated foods, and I’m making at least a half-hearted effort to eat locally and farther down the food chain. Veggies and grains from the bulk bins at my store don’t come with bar codes, so I can’t personally see paying a premium for a fridge that really isn’t going to fulfill the promise of monitoring my food intake and generating my shopping list. If you’re contemplating a new IoT solution, make sure it’s really worthwhile, vs. just a gimmick.

I’m not sure where I stand on the issue of whether a new technology is essentially good or evil (except for the A-bomb…) or whether it’s ethically neutral.  However, I do think that the IoT, by virtue of its great strength of generating such high volumes of real-time data, does continually bump up against ethical questions, so it’s just smart policy to constantly think of whether you should do it just because you can.

What do you think? I’d love your thoughts on this important issue!

comments: Comments Off on IoT Essential Truths: Just Because You Can Do It Doesn’t Mean You Should tags: , , , ,

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