It's Good To Be A Little Bad or Mad

Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great."

- Mark Twain

A lot of entrepreneurs worry about people stealing their bright ideas. In my experience, ideas are easy - its execution that's hard. And even if your idea is brilliant, the best ones aren't necessarily so. Any really good new idea will seem either bad or mad to most people; otherwise someone in China will already be doing it. Your idea needs to be almost good and it helps if the world around you helps turn your fad into a fashion. Look at all the money going into green energy - its even got its own name 'CleanTech'. Most funders are driven by consensus, not just within their firms, but within their community. Surely that's exactly how the credit bubble happened - everyone was doing it, so it must be a good idea. Not.

And being too clever ain't necessarily a good idea either. My claim to fame is that my Ph.D was part of a research project that won E.J. Corey his Nobel Prize. That research itself never generated anything that was directly commercial. However, the spin-offs that were successful were infinitely less ambitious in their goals, but solved real-world problems in an explainable way. It’s a great case study of how a small change of perspective and focus on an addressable market opened up a commercial opportunity – and why trying to be too smart is not always a good idea in the real world!

So when the next small-minded person tells you what you are trying to do is bad or mad, breath a sigh of relief that maybe you on the path to greatness! Someone right now is probably telling the next Google why what they are doing isn't such a bright idea. And he probably works for a bank!

Bonfires, Dry Stone Walls, Clouds, Inches & Death Computing

Colin Beveridge spoke at the 20/20 Vision event organised by Sandford Technology/Virtronix on Fighting the Trillion Dollar Bonfire (effective information systems for the 21st Century). His conclusion seemed to be that system integration is the way forwards. I have to agree. Most IS systems seems like good old Yorkshire stone walls - they require immense intricacy to put them together and great skill to build, then they fall down after a while because there's nothing but air and friction holding them together. What we need is some 'cement' to hold the functional bricks together and facilitate process, workflow, data sharing and increased productivity. Yorkshire Forward seem to have woken up to the fact that each 'brick in the wall' they fund is replicating data and not sharing it effectively with each other. They are introducing a CRM that all agencies can tap into, leverage and generally use. Great idea! I have been saying this for three year's and every other agency seemed to wave the data protection act at me as to why we can't share information more!!!

The death of the corporate datacentre seemed to also be on the vendor agenda with all our data being entrusted to third parties (like this blog and my emails). Ian Weatherhog and Mike Briercliffe waxed lyrically about how the PC was the root of all evil when it came to data security (he also spoke at our recent TechTalk event). I can remember far enough back when I accessed the old cloud i.e. our corporate IT server from a remote PC and the data could be viewed, but not manipulated. We used to say all this valuable data was "an inch from the desktop" and spent ten years going that final inch and start turning data into information, albeit with security and integrity compromised. Now we seem to be poised to unify the competing factions with the eventual promise of network computing and Larry Ellison's vision of thin clients that all they do is the final rendering.

I suppose it's only a matter of time before we all have enough certainty that "till death us do part" our data is safe and backed up in the cloud and not deleted when our credit card expires. Now that's what I call security.

Snow Report

‘Solutions for Business – funded by government’ is a package of business support to help companies start, grow and succeed. The launch event was fittingly held last Friday in a casino! Simon Hill from Yorkshire Forward explained how they have streamlined thousands of public-funded support products into a package of thirty. My take on it was that they have identified a set of product categories under which individual solutions would fit, which is not exactly the same thing! Like the fact that multiple inheritance in object-oriented systems is technically feasible, but not a good idea in practise, going forwards hybrid products that fit under two categories would disappear, which is perfectly sensible.

But let's remember this is just a conceptualisation of reality that dices and slices things to offer a palatable solution that hides complexity, maximised cohesion and minimises coupling (see my Keep it Simple Stupid post). For example, lets take business mentoring - it is valuable before and after investment but has been and probably will continue to be separated into investor readiness support and 'money with management'. And there's nothing wrong with that, but in another conceptualisation it could be brought together, but that would require closer coordination between organisations like Connect and the investment funds.

We all want things to appear as simple as possible, but as with systems biology, life introduces complexity as the thing evolves. That's not to say we shouldn't group together things - that's what an organ is. Eskimo's have twenty words for 'snow', because it's an important concept to them. Try telling them they don't need the other nineteen.