‘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.
Monday, 1 December 2008
Friday, 28 November 2008
Something For Nothing
Grave concerns about personal liberties and freedoms are thrown up by the proposed national identity card scheme, but judging by the discussion at TechTalk 2008, advertisers are already tracking our every move. Andrew Burke, CEO of Amino Technologies and former CEO of BT Entertainment said that media companies would need to look at supermarkets who run loyalty card schemes so they know exactly what customers are buying and when. Already Google analyse email traffic to target advertising based on content and Phorn are seeking to strike deals with ISPs to monitor all Internet traffic to profile user interests.
One of the investment forum presenters, Prescient, have developed a electronic nose and a recent applicant to the Yorkshire Concept fund has developed a vision system to profile people by age, ethnic origin, etc. Maybe not perfect, but better than nothing. What then stands in the way of not only profiling people by their data traffic but also their personal traits as we stand in front of an advertising display or shopfront? Maybe I am getting paranoid, but the thought of being offered a voucher for body products or a discount on a zimmer frame based on my appearance or body odour sounds just a step too far in personal profiling.
One of the investment forum presenters, Prescient, have developed a electronic nose and a recent applicant to the Yorkshire Concept fund has developed a vision system to profile people by age, ethnic origin, etc. Maybe not perfect, but better than nothing. What then stands in the way of not only profiling people by their data traffic but also their personal traits as we stand in front of an advertising display or shopfront? Maybe I am getting paranoid, but the thought of being offered a voucher for body products or a discount on a zimmer frame based on my appearance or body odour sounds just a step too far in personal profiling.
Tuesday, 23 September 2008
Keep it simple stupid
Complexity and chaos surrounds us as we try to steer our organisations through these uncertain economic times. The Utopian solution seems to be simplicity and calm which has a compelling magnetism for those exhausted by the rough seas of change or the choppy waters of the stock market. So can we engineer simplicity in and complexity out of our lives?
As a former system designer I applied three simple principles to tame complexity:
1) Do as much as you have to and no more. Minimalism is good; don't add bells and whistles until someone says they will pay for them. Technical people always want to over engineer things.
2) Seek functional cohesion by solidifying related activities into one place or unit so complexity is hidden inside rather than exposed to the poor consumer of the service. It's better that every body does just one thing well rather than lots of people doing the same thing a number of different ways twice. I'm not saying redundancy is bad, rather replication is good!
3) Decouple things so there are not intimate links between components. If you then want to swap one thing for another the whole can be oblivious to the change as everything carries on working as it should.
The key is to hide necessary complexity from the end user/consumer, but remember doing clever things is difficult and complex otherwise everyone would be doing them. Removing complexity can have its costs and can be far from a simple matter. As Einstein famously said "Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler". I'll take capably complex over stupidly simple any time.
As a former system designer I applied three simple principles to tame complexity:
1) Do as much as you have to and no more. Minimalism is good; don't add bells and whistles until someone says they will pay for them. Technical people always want to over engineer things.
2) Seek functional cohesion by solidifying related activities into one place or unit so complexity is hidden inside rather than exposed to the poor consumer of the service. It's better that every body does just one thing well rather than lots of people doing the same thing a number of different ways twice. I'm not saying redundancy is bad, rather replication is good!
3) Decouple things so there are not intimate links between components. If you then want to swap one thing for another the whole can be oblivious to the change as everything carries on working as it should.
The key is to hide necessary complexity from the end user/consumer, but remember doing clever things is difficult and complex otherwise everyone would be doing them. Removing complexity can have its costs and can be far from a simple matter. As Einstein famously said "Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler". I'll take capably complex over stupidly simple any time.
Monday, 8 September 2008
Seeing Beyond The Obvious
Having got a PhD in business strategy, I must know what I'm doing, right? More accurately I spent three years trying to teach a computer to think strategically. Bad idea! The problem was seeing the bigger picture and having a holistic view ain't something that bits and bytes find easy to do. Neither is it that simple as an organisation gets bigger and more than one person has responsibiliy for driving things forwards. If this rings true for you, then tune into our webinar series that will kick of with a session on Business Planning for Growth on the 16th September.
Running a business is all about having a bigger vision that the various 'factions', however you have diced and sliced the pie operationally, can understand, buy into and get behind without necessarily being 100% happy. In my experience, a decision that one department loves and another hates in invariably the wrong one for the organisation as a whole. This is what you get when silo mentality and operation detail dominates. But if decision makers don't know what the overall strategy is or what constitutes success in the longer term, i.e. the organisation is rudderless and going nowhere fast because there is no bigger picture, then all they can do is make the decision that's best for them, right here right now.
Unfortunately, the correct strategic decision can be often less than optimal tactically or indeed downright wrong from a short-term perspective, so devolved decision making has its risks. Seeing beyond the obvious and doing the right strategic thing is what differentiates the long-term winners, but equally empowering employees to make decisions is also crucial to success. So not surprisingly this is a tricky balance to strike - and if you are running a business it's your job to do this!
After once canning a development project because it was the right strategic thing to do, my technical manager said to me at the time: "We are the thoroughbreds in this space and this decision sucks. Apparently, horses can't vomit, so pardon me for the cliche but I am as sick as a very refined parrot".
Remember, if you are a business leader, feeling bad that you have had to make the right but difficult strategic decision is better than feeling good about making the obvious and easy tactical one. But if you ain't got a clear long-term business strategy, do the latter then sign up to our webinar on the 16th!
Running a business is all about having a bigger vision that the various 'factions', however you have diced and sliced the pie operationally, can understand, buy into and get behind without necessarily being 100% happy. In my experience, a decision that one department loves and another hates in invariably the wrong one for the organisation as a whole. This is what you get when silo mentality and operation detail dominates. But if decision makers don't know what the overall strategy is or what constitutes success in the longer term, i.e. the organisation is rudderless and going nowhere fast because there is no bigger picture, then all they can do is make the decision that's best for them, right here right now.
Unfortunately, the correct strategic decision can be often less than optimal tactically or indeed downright wrong from a short-term perspective, so devolved decision making has its risks. Seeing beyond the obvious and doing the right strategic thing is what differentiates the long-term winners, but equally empowering employees to make decisions is also crucial to success. So not surprisingly this is a tricky balance to strike - and if you are running a business it's your job to do this!
After once canning a development project because it was the right strategic thing to do, my technical manager said to me at the time: "We are the thoroughbreds in this space and this decision sucks. Apparently, horses can't vomit, so pardon me for the cliche but I am as sick as a very refined parrot".
Remember, if you are a business leader, feeling bad that you have had to make the right but difficult strategic decision is better than feeling good about making the obvious and easy tactical one. But if you ain't got a clear long-term business strategy, do the latter then sign up to our webinar on the 16th!
Thursday, 14 August 2008
Academic Commercialisation: The Third Way?
In an earlier post, Fail Fast Fail Early, focused on healthcare companies optimising their pipeline development, I asked whether there was a better way of commercialising medicines. Well GSK and Cambridge University have come with an interesting alternative development model using “academic incubators” to optimise the early clinical development of new medicines.
Cambridge will dedicate a team of academic experts to develop drugs with therapeutic potential, as well as bearing some financial risk for which they'd be compensated if the programme is a success. GSK will provide operational support, access to its in-house clinical research and imaging facilities, and background preclinical data on the drug. The agreement is fully aligned with one of the key recommendations of the Cooksey Review of UK Health Research Funding that consideration should be given to alternative drug development models, such as Public Private Partnerships, to optimise effective collaboration between industry and academic sectors in the development of effective new medicines.
Whether this is "ground-breaking approach" or just a sensible way of outsourcing development of low priority orphan drugs is open to debate. It does however establish a joined up pipeline from academic research towards commercialisation that may university inspired projects lack - despite their efforts to bolt on commercialisation activities. Also the fact that the projects are GSK sponsored gives a commercial focus to the activity from the outset that will undoubtedly benefit the eventual business outcomes. As we have seen with the Enterprise Fellowship projects backed by Yorkshire Forward, having some commercialisation DNA and focus at an early stage is invaluable.
Cambridge will dedicate a team of academic experts to develop drugs with therapeutic potential, as well as bearing some financial risk for which they'd be compensated if the programme is a success. GSK will provide operational support, access to its in-house clinical research and imaging facilities, and background preclinical data on the drug. The agreement is fully aligned with one of the key recommendations of the Cooksey Review of UK Health Research Funding that consideration should be given to alternative drug development models, such as Public Private Partnerships, to optimise effective collaboration between industry and academic sectors in the development of effective new medicines.
Whether this is "ground-breaking approach" or just a sensible way of outsourcing development of low priority orphan drugs is open to debate. It does however establish a joined up pipeline from academic research towards commercialisation that may university inspired projects lack - despite their efforts to bolt on commercialisation activities. Also the fact that the projects are GSK sponsored gives a commercial focus to the activity from the outset that will undoubtedly benefit the eventual business outcomes. As we have seen with the Enterprise Fellowship projects backed by Yorkshire Forward, having some commercialisation DNA and focus at an early stage is invaluable.
Monday, 4 August 2008
Making Your Own Luck
Gary Player once remarked "It's funny, the more I practise, the luckier I get". So should a failed entrepreneur be given a second chance? The argument goes that you learn valuable learn valuable lessons from failure, so you should be more likely to succeed second time around. But others argue that experience gained from one failed business is unlikely to apply to a second, due to the unpredictability of chance. "You can't learn to win the lottery" No, but if you are lucky you can influence the amount you win (my tip, don't select the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 as 10,000 others have then!).
Getting into a position to profit from being a little bit lucky is probably was differentiates successful entrepreneurs, but no one is lucky all of the time. So whether you eventually profit from a bit of good business fortune is very much down to the experience of the management team. All you can do is deal yourself a good hand, but whether you win a particular pot or hole a specific putt is partially down to fate. Embracing this risk is what equity investing is all about. So if anyone says they have only been associated with success they have either are a one-trick pony or very, very lucky! In business, lessons are best learned from those who have been mainly successful...
Getting into a position to profit from being a little bit lucky is probably was differentiates successful entrepreneurs, but no one is lucky all of the time. So whether you eventually profit from a bit of good business fortune is very much down to the experience of the management team. All you can do is deal yourself a good hand, but whether you win a particular pot or hole a specific putt is partially down to fate. Embracing this risk is what equity investing is all about. So if anyone says they have only been associated with success they have either are a one-trick pony or very, very lucky! In business, lessons are best learned from those who have been mainly successful...
Monday, 9 June 2008
TechTalk Speakers
We've got a great line up for TechTalk which will be held on the afternoon of our Investment Forum on the 18th June in Leeds. Deidre Bounds Founder of i-to-i; Kevin Walsh group Executive Director of Kingston Communications; Jonathan Straight Founder of Straight plc; and Neil Gaydon of Pace plc.
The TechTalk afternoon allows you to hear these high-tech businesses leaders give their provocative thoughts on the challenges facing the sector today. TechTalk 2008 offers the opportunity for you to debate topical issues and share valuable knowledge and experience. Find out how they succeeded and what they feel makes for a formidable business opportunity.
Who Should Attend? Anyone with an interest in the technology scene! Whether you are a leader of an established or SME technology business or an aspiring entrepreneur, TechTalk is the perfect opportunity to develop strategies for success. Equally if you are an investor or service provider with a passion for developing and investing in innovative ideas, TechTalk will help you hone your strategies for success.
Registration for TechTalk, including lunch and the champagne reception, is £75 plus vat. To register online, please Click Here. Alternatively, contact Connect Yorkshire with your full contact details on email: events@connectyorkshire.org or Tel: 0113 384 5640.
The TechTalk afternoon allows you to hear these high-tech businesses leaders give their provocative thoughts on the challenges facing the sector today. TechTalk 2008 offers the opportunity for you to debate topical issues and share valuable knowledge and experience. Find out how they succeeded and what they feel makes for a formidable business opportunity.
Who Should Attend? Anyone with an interest in the technology scene! Whether you are a leader of an established or SME technology business or an aspiring entrepreneur, TechTalk is the perfect opportunity to develop strategies for success. Equally if you are an investor or service provider with a passion for developing and investing in innovative ideas, TechTalk will help you hone your strategies for success.
Registration for TechTalk, including lunch and the champagne reception, is £75 plus vat. To register online, please Click Here. Alternatively, contact Connect Yorkshire with your full contact details on email: events@connectyorkshire.org or Tel: 0113 384 5640.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
