text:
March 19, 2008
I was asked recently to contribute to the American Institute of Chemical Engineers Management Division newsletter and thought I would share a modified version of it with all of you.
A Recession is Coming, A Recession is Coming….
Is the sky falling or is it just a false alarm? Who knows right now, but it's amazing how a crisis focuses our minds. We all of a sudden do things we should have been doing all along and just put off. A few examples:
1. Planning. The Wall Street Journal has published a recent article on how good (and bad) various companies do this. But when you offer early retirement buyouts to a huge number of people, with the expectation and plan that a large number will accept, how is their function (note I did not say job!) going to be done? Is it really that the function was not necessary? Why have you been doing it this long? Shouldn't planning be done ahead of time and not in a crisis? Succession planning is a particular area of concern.
2. Customers. Do we treat them differently in an economic downturn? Why? Aren't they valuable all the time? Do we treat them special only when they tell us they are exploring "other alternatives"? Should we all of a sudden stop worrying about their long term needs and instead focus on the short term price reductions that the market forces upon us?
3. Innovation. Boy, have we turned the spigot on in the last 5 years after having drained the swamp totally in the previous ten, and having had the spigot on the previous 10 years. It's like a long term sinusoidal wave. Everyone's all excited. Now, things are getting tough. We can't afford innovation in a downturn, can we? Just cost cutting, downsizing (or is it "right sizing" nowadays), and focusing. Shut down those programs, stop asking customers what they want 5, 10 years from now. Stop asking what and who is going to replace your products and services. Get surprised at the answers you see elsewhere in a few years in exactly the same time frame.
3. Technology. Should we stop investing in new areas? New applications? It sure would save money, and in a few years we can see what others are doing and decide what we shlould have been doing. Then we play catch up...if it's possible.
4. People. They've been so hard to get lately. Hiring bonuses, retention bonuses. Things slow down and we think we don't need so many. Stop being nice. Stop those extra attention efforts. They won't notice because they're now insecure and you hold the upper hand (finally!). You're right, they won't notice until the next time… Aren't they the same people?
Let's think about our on and off switches and whether they should be variable dials instead. And let's also think about the response of those dial settings and maybe what their hooked to. This current situation reminds me of the reverse of the panel discussion I heard about 5 years ago at an IIR conference where someone said, "we're done with all the downsizing and restructuring, and it's now time for innovation". It was as if there was an assumption that the memory banks were suddenly wiped out by Cylon Borgs and people would have no memory of the massive layoffs and the "focusing" of activities, and we'd all be happy again and playfully march off into the new exciting world of innovation. If that's where you started a while back, think long and hard about your assumptions of peoples' perceptions and reactions.
Comment [36] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
March 13, 2008
Brownian motion is the random movement of particles suspended in a liquid or gas. This phenomenon was first observed by botanist Robert Brown in 1827 ("A brief account of microscopical observations made in the months of June, July and August, 1827, on the particles contained in the pollen of plants; and on the general existence of active molecules in organic and inorganic bodies.") and later introduced to the realm of physics by Albert Einstein in 1905 ("Über die von der molekularkinetischen Theorie der Wärme geforderte Bewegung von in ruhenden Flüssigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen.").
To illustrate the concept, consider a beach ball 30 feet in diameter. Imagine this beach ball in a sold out soccer stadium for a match between Manchester United and Arsenal. The ball is large enough to lie on top of many members of the crowd. The fans hit the ball at different times and in different directions with the motions being completely random. The ball is pushed in random directions, so it should not move on average. At other times, we might have 20 fans pushing right, and 21 other fans pushing left, where each fan is exerting equivalent amounts of force. In this case, the forces exerted from the left side and the right side are imbalanced in favor of the left side; the ball will move slightly to the left. This type of imbalance exists at all times, and it causes random motion. If we look at this situation from a helicopter above the stadium, so that we cannot see the fans, we see the large ball as a small object animated by erratic movement. Consider this animation to help illustrate the concept:
Now let's use this concept to describe an organizational dynamic all too common. If you consider the intentions of the members of an organization being positive (excluding then any malicious misdirection) we can assume that all employees are acting in a manner they believe to be beneficial to the organization that they serve. However, with no concise set of daily operational actions that was generated to support organizational objectives, the employee moves from crisis to crisis creating as many solutions as possible given the time they have to spend on them. This is far from ideal. This is ignoring the future to focus on the present. Sometimes it seems like this is necessary, but in the long run this behavior will make sure there isn't a long run.
Let's consider our animation of Brownian motion. The large blue disk is the organizations location in the domain of organizational performance. With a known starting location (the organization's current state) and no organized employee support for a specific future state (goal), the actions of the employees (the red disks) will move the current state (blue disk) slightly depending on any local bias without organized or intentional movement of the organization towards any goal let alone the ideal goal. This is Organizational Brownian Motion. Many organizations experience this dynamic on a daily basis and it is counter-productive. Trial and error derived solutions with no characterized ideal resolution as a target allows problem solving in an organization to produce the same effect in the evolutionary map of a system. There is no intentional maturation of a system in relation to the strategic adoption of functionality but rather a haphazard amalgam of problems with sub-optimal resolutions. Every time we allow this to happen we create competitive opportunity. So ultimately, lack of organizational focus, at the macro-scale and the micro-scale, is all our competitors need to take market share from us. Studies have shown how difficult it is to create loyal customers and any erosion of their confidence yields more losses in that area. We need an organized strategic planning apparatus that decomposes organizational goals into actions for every person in an organization. We also need a systematic approach to problem solving that yields solutions that not only support the aforementioned strategies but also optimizes system evolution and minimizes the creation of any competitive opportunity.
Comment [115] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
March 3, 2008
It is always interesting to hear the insights of leading innovation practitioners. The article, "Instituting Innovation: Tell-all advice from 4 leading practitioners", posted on Core77 doesn't disappoint in this regard. Here Arkadi Kuhlmann, CEO of ING Direct Bank; Ken Koziol, Corporate Senior Vice President for the Restaurant Solutions Group at McDonalds Corporation; Matt Mayfield, Senior Director for Mobile Devices of Motorola; and David Lawrence, Senior Manager of the Bicycle Product Development and Marketing division of Shimano, contribute their thoughts on how to build an innovation program.
In each case, an approach to innovation has been taken that is aligned with the general character of the company. Factors such as culture, innovation readiness, and industry rate of change influenced the decisions of which direction to take. And while the four companies demonstrate examples of the incubator, diffused participation, and tactical project driven approaches, there are common threads that run though all of the examples.
There is recognition that innovation is a process, not an event. In this process, there are many different actors which contribute different skill sets along the way. When building your innovation process, it is important to think about the different stages of innovation as a product moves through early stage ideation, conceptual materialization, validation and delivery, and the various skills that you need to have represented in the innovation team to be successful.
All four of the practitioners agree that innovation needs to speak to the customer to deliver value and hence success. Listening to your clients and understanding what they are trying to tell you are critical elements in any successful innovation practice. Oddly, the author of the article, Brianna Sylver, distinguishes this from seeking innovation through technology advances. However, the two approaches need not be at odds, they can be very synergistic. High value technology innovation is always driven by a need. Understanding the repeating patterns of technology innovation can be of tremendous value in finding the market winning approach to answering a customer need.
Once an interesting concept is identified, working with the organizations culture is key to achieving productive support. Contrary to the just do it approach which is often advocated, these executives advise to not emulate Sisyphus with futile efforts working against the corporate terrain. Instead, learn how the change mechanisms in your organization are structured and which methods will engender the best response.
The topic of measuring innovation success is also discussed. However, proceed with caution when considering the comments here. The discourse highlights an example from Shimano of a new coasting bike that has not met financial expectation. This is used to bolster the argument that short term profit should not be the only metric of success. In general, this is a valid point. Success metrics should be well balanced and capture the whole view of the innovation program goals. However, we should fall into the trap of trying to redefine success in order to salvage a poor result. In is import to be coldly objective in evaluating outcomes. The criteria of success should be defined from the start, and in so doing we should heed Clayton Christiansen's advice to be patient on revenue, but impatient on profit.
Related to defining good success metrics is the notion that your innovation program should always be aligned with the company's business objectives. It should go without saying, yet this is where many organizations go astray. As they strive to think out of the box, they begin to think themselves out of business. Koziol says it very well, "You need to always be in sync with the company's strategic vision. You just can't afford to be off strategy."
All in all, this is some great advice from four practitioners who are accountable for innovation in their companies. While each has created a program to fit their environment, there are common lessons for us all. As you think about these lessons may mean to your own innovation program, keep in mind that while each of these companies has elected to focus on one model of innovation, many companies achieve great success with hybrid models that blend the best aspects of all three of the approaches represented by this group.
[Crossposted from www.InnovatingToWin.com]
Comment [52] | Permalink
|Categories: Companies, Management, Strategy
February 18, 2008
In the last column, we reviewed and analyzed the benchmarking IBM study of corporate innovation. The aspects we discussed were the strategic look at innovation, the barriers, and the CEO's role in overcoming these and leading this ongoing effort. In addition, this study discussed the organizational aspects of innovation. Let's review and discuss these.
This study showed a positive impact at the bottom line of BOTH utilizing teams and recognizing individual contributions. This is really hard to do in practice, which is why so few organizations do it well. Google was specifically mentioned as an example of both communities of practice as well as the respect for individual input and contribution. There are few other companies that can match the growth in Google, its sales, its profits, and its stock price, so maybe there is something to this. The other closing observation was the frustration CEO's face in integrating technology and business. Those who had managed to do this successfully cited improved benefits in cost reduction, greater customer satisfaction, increased sales, and faster time to market. But how do you do these things?
I haven't talked to anyone at Google, but my own experiences at Dow, Cabot, Ansell Edmont, and the National Center for Manufacturing Sciences have taught me a few things. In 2001, I was responsible for leading a study for the Association of Managers of Innovation regarding failed corporate innovation programs. This study began without any pre-conceived notions of the results. The #1 key finding on the personnel side was that there was a huge gap between people styles of corporate management and innovation leaders, ultimately resulting in the loss of many talented innovators most of whom left and joined startups or became consultants and seemed to do just fine. I have continued this study informally and continued to make presentations on the updated information and find no exceptions to its findings. Everyone has their own favorite measurement tool and I don't want to get into a debate about this (use the ones you think are appropriate). We used the Myers Briggs and the Kirton KAI. There was a 90% correlation between Myers Briggs "N's" and a KAI profile above 125 with the innovation disconnect. This really shouldn't surprise us if we think about it for a minute. 80% of corporate managers are STJ's. An "N" is a disruptive person, asking all kings of "intuitive", open ended questions and willing to think and operate in a fuzzy zone. But they do ask questions (sometimes to a fault!) and see things not seen by others. A high KAI profile indicates someone who generates a lot of unfiltered ideas, is comfortable with lack of structure, and is not possessed by deadlines and schedules. Another major conflict with a typical CEO who is looking for closure, facts, and data. It is unlikely that either style is going to want to do the job of the other, so both extremes in styles need to understand each other and use each others' strengths. One of the scary things about the phrase that I despise the most in corporate America right now ("team player") is the implication that difference in ideas are not appreciated. We also like to clone ourselves in the hiring process. My days as a college recruiter also taught me how easy it is to hire someone just like yourself instead of hiring someone who might question, push back a little, and lead you in new directions
On the integration question, it is critical for CEO's to clearly define and understand what business they are in so the innovators have some kind of structure within which to innovate. Are you in the phone business or the communication business? Are you in the copy machine business or in the business of providing information storage? Are you in the car business or the transportation business? Are you in the food business or the nutrition business? Are you in the fabric business or the clothing business? No right or wrong about any of this, but if the business objectives are not matched with the technology work going on, a lot of time and money will be wasted, not to mentions peoples' frustrations. Innovators need to push this envelope they have a least a little to present to their CEO's possibilities. And they need to do this with facts and data since they are talking to STJ's. I don't have much sympathy for a high KAI, "N" Myers Briggs person who simply suggests to their management that they look at this "new thing" without having spent some time doing their homework and knowing something about markets, sales, competition, etc. This area of innovation/business management is the single biggest difference between innovation today and that of 15-20 years ago, and the innovators need to understand that. And CEO's need to listen and think a bit more about possibilities the way that Google, Skype, and Amazon have.
Comment [10] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
February 1, 2008
The IBM Innovation Study--What Does It Say?
The recent pioneering global study and interview of corporate CEOs regarding innovation and its importance provides many insights into not only the world of innvoation, but the competitive nature of it. If everyone but you believes that innovation is the number one focus of business right now and you don't, a serious pause for thinking is due. This study involved over 700 corporate leaders from arond the world. What does it say?
First, that innovation needs to be CORPORATE activity, not just an R&D activity. There are just as many opportunities in operations, finance, marketing, and services as there are in research and new product development. The business model used was cited as one of the most significant areas and had a payback twice that of innovation in operations. This raises the question again of deciding what business you're in. If you're supplying computer hardware, is your business building and selling computers or is it supplying a methodology for people to run calculations and store data? Is there a different business model? You bet! Consider the recent Forbes article (Feb 11, 2008, p37) entitled "The Death of Hardware". It describes the case of a major web business (Zillow) that provides up to date home pricing information to consumers. Doing this nationwide for 67 million homes takes up 4 TERABYTES of memory. Updating this for the recent housing price collapses in most parts of the country was going to cost a million dollars and take six months--unacceptable to its customers. Zillow ran the data over the internet using rented computer space from Amazon (are they in the book business or the information business you should be asking now) for $50,000 and it took 3 weeks. If you're the IBM or Dell salesperson calling on Zillow, how do you feel? Were you calling on the right customer? Who was?
65% of respondents to this survey indicated that organizational structural change was the most common business model innovation, followed by 50% indicating major strategic partnerships. Not new product development. What does this mean? That HOW we do business is just as important as coming up with the next whiz bang thing. Consider the example above. If you're Dell, is it time to rethink the focus on PC's? Why not rent programs and storage space that is accessible over the web with a very inexpensive home device? What's the impact on Microsoft of renting software vs. selling millions of copies of something that is used only once in a while? This is being done, but not by the major PC players. Computer data entry without keyboards is another intersting example. It will be interesting to see what happens long term. The study shows that business model innovation's impact on the bottom line is at least 5X that of innovation focus on products, services, or operations.
The most significant barriers to innovation cited by these global executives were government/legal restrictions and economic uncertainly (external) and unsupported innovation culture and limited funding (internal). This is truly an amazing response as we know so much about these issues (except the government!). The culture and funding are determined by the CEO's and their business managers themselves. If a CEO turns the innovation spigot on and off frequently and downsizes innovation at the first sign of uncertainty, this memory stays around a long time. We've been a part of and led studies on this and we keep reinventing the wheel and our knowledge. This key finding suggests that we have met the enemy and it is us. A leader can control funding and support. A CEO and the managers that report to him or her can question the hiring processes and the type of people hired. Are we cloning ourselves when we need to change ourselves? There are many psychological typing instruments that will accurately assist in assessing problem solving styles. Do we use them in team formation? Do we use them for career counseling?
The bottom line of all this is that business and people are the key concerns in the innovation area. You did know that, didn't you? And your business practices reflect that, don't they?
More on this study next time.
Comment [124] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
January 31, 2008
|Wal Mart is being complimented and criticized in equal measures for its Green Innovation program. As one of the most polarizing business entities in modern history, Wal Mart's ability to elicit this kind of dueling reaction is hardly surprising. The "Wal Mart" effect aside, though, innovation that is aimed at addressing cultural issues can be inherently controversial, and is therefore an interesting addition to the general innovation conversation. Jack Hipple pointed out in a recent commentary that innovation isn't always about new products or businesses, but it is always about dramatic positive change, and the green innovation programs that have sprung up over the past few years are both an embodiment and a proof of that idea. In Wal Mart's case, if we set aside for the moment the argument against the retailer's ability to participate in true green innovation (it goes something like this: when it comes to sustainability, big-box retailing is to goods distribution as clear-cut logging is to harvesting trees) and accept that big-box retailing is a modern reality, then it can be informative to look at its green innovation program. The green market space is today one of the most financially attractive, and the fact is that Wal Mart believes that it needs to be in it. Its same-store sales growth has slowed down. Its stock price, after rising 1,205% during the 1990s, fell 30% from the time Lee Scott took over as CEO in January 2000 through 2006. Add to that concerns illuminated by a McKinsey & Co. study that found that up to 8% of shoppers had stopped patronizing the chain because of its reputation, and Wal Mart had a legitimate crisis to respond to. Thus was born the Wal Mart green innovation intention - an innovation strategy aimed primarily at re-positioning the Wal Mart brand in the marketplace. Wal Mart defined its green innovation intention specifically and publicly - the company announced plans to eliminate 30% of the energy used in stores, reduce solid waste from its U.S. stores by 25% within three years, and invest up to $500 million in sustainability projects. It's also working with suppliers to figure out ways to cut down on packaging and energy costs and has already opened two "green" supercenters. The program is basically designed to reject the false choice between the environment and the economy, and to strategically position Wal Mart as not just the world's largest retailer, but also the greenest. It's also designed to be measurable: acting with unusual transparency, Wal-Mart published a benchmark calculation of its carbon footprint. The company estimates that its U.S. operations were responsible for 15.3 million metric tons of CO2 emissions in 2005. About three-quarters of this pollution came from the electricity generated to power its stores. It is in this kind of analysis, which has happened in direct support of the organization's innovation program, that the benefit of a green innovation intention is defined; after the green innovation program was implemented, Wal-Mart spent nearly a year measuring the company's impact. Fairly quickly, the environmentalists spotted waste that Wal-Mart's legendary cost cutters had overlooked - for example, Wal-Mart determined it could save $26 million a year in fuel costs on its fleet of 7,200 trucks merely by installing auxiliary power units that enable drivers to keep their cabs warm or cool during mandatory ten-hour breaks from the road. Before that, drivers had let the truck engine idle all night, wasting fuel. Another example: Wal-Mart installed machines called sandwich balers in its stores to recycle and sell plastic that it used to throw away. Companywide, the balers have added $28 million to the bottom line. Two lessons jump off the page: there is innovation gold to be mined by practicing the art of identifying heretofore generally accepted false choices and re-examining their merit, and innovation programs can be used as much to strategically reposition an organization as to develop new products or businesses. Dramatic positive change, indeed.
Comment [70] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Strategy
January 22, 2008
A look into string theory from the field of physics will give us an interesting analogy to leverage. String theory is a method of reconciling the fact that general relativity as a theory only works if we ignore the implications of quantum mechanics and perceive the world in a purely classical sense. String theory is an attempt to resolve this discrepancy. String theories come in two flavors (not to be confused with the flavors of quarks). Strings are either closed or open and include or do not include fermions (particle that makes up matter). Supersymmetry is the string theory version that allows fermions to enter the theory as long as each fermion is coupled with a boson (particle that transmits a force). So supersymmetry relates the particles that transmit forces to the particles that make up matter. So for every particle of matter there is a force partner. The same is true in the field of innovation.
I have written previously about four significant aspects of a deployment (Race Cars and Corporations):
If we now consider that these four aspects are material components of a successful innovation deployment we can add the forces responsible for each, thereby comprising a sort of supersymmetry. So let us discuss the force partners for the material components.
Culture: Culture is the ability to shape innovative behavior and practices on a widespread scale. The force partner for the proper formation of a culture conducive to a successful innovation deployment is the CEO of the organization. The tactical and strategic implications of systematic innovation create a need that can only be shaped by the senior strategist in the organization and this is the CEO. You could argue that Preservationary activities could be led by the COO but it is clearly the prevue of the CEO to shape the future (Evolutionary activities). So the innovation supersymmetry pair here is:
CEO/COO »» Culture
Infrastructure: Infrastructure is the technology and management supports that are necessary to grow and reinforce innovation. The force partner for the proper establishment of the infrastructure necessary to support an innovation deployment is a larger team than that listed for the cultural formation. Infrastructure has many components. Some of the key components are:
The formation of these items clearly necessitates the formation of a larger team. A senior executive reporting to the CEO would organize the effort and you could then probably assign this responsibility to a deployment manager (maybe a VP). Therefore, the establishment if infrastructure would be led by the VP of Innovation. So the innovation supersymmetry pair here is:
VP of Innovation »» Infrastructure
Method: Methodology is the standard roadmap for implementing innovation projects with a high probability of payoff. It is also the selection of tools and techniques that will be used to create a systematic approach to problem solving and concept generation. The VP of innovation will need to work with a team of internal and/or external experts to identify the composition of the method portfolio. The need to problem solve must be analyzed along with the need to create novel concepts. The methods selected must also integrate with existing methods like Six Sigma and/or Lean. So the innovation supersymmetry pair here is:
VP of Innovation/SMEs (internal and/or external) »» Method
Proficiency: Proficiency is the ability to ramp up world-class innovation capability in the shortest possible amount of time. Again, the leader of the deployment and the SMEs need to establish the criteria that will identify when the learning objectives have been met. A key criterion is being able to apply the methods to effect change and produce economic benefits. So the innovation supersymmetry pair here is:
VP of Innovation/SMEs (internal and/or external) »» Proficiency
Supersymmetry has more than one analog here. The application of systematic innovation as a deployment needs to focus on improving existing systems as well as producing new concepts for future revenue generation. This means that each aspect discussed above has two parts. This makes the activity more complex and amplifies the amount of planning needed prior to execution. It also reiterates the necessity of all the force transmitters identified above to work together in support of a common strategy that is set by the CEO.
Comment [26] | Permalink
|Categories: Management, Methodology, Strategy
January 10, 2008
It's the New Year. What's new? Innovation is still the "buzzword", but I go to many presentations at meetings where the talks are not about innovation, but about astute business choices (plant locations, etc.). I'm afraid that innovation is becoming a buzzword without focus, in part captured by conference organizers who know it will get people's attention. YOU need to decide what innovation is to you. Other than being something significantly different and a bit radical from what you are doing now, let's consider some of the options. Traditionally we tend to think of innovation in a product or business sense--how can we get into a new business? Sell a new product? This focus may take us in the direction of analyzing how our R&D budget is allocated, acquisitions to be able to deliver a new technology to the market, a review of our hiring process and who we hire, how we physically locate our new efforts, or how we manage the reporting structure of the new "business". How much innovation can you afford? Do you want? I've seen this latter question answered without thinking at all about the consequences to the existing core business. Not a good idea--lots of internal conflicts develop. Have you thought about the reaction and morale of the parts of your businesses that have a focus on "core" businesses? How do you keep their enthusiasm up while you're celebrating all the new stuff? Is your reward and compensation system going to be the same for the more risk taking folks? Have you promised that their jobs will be there if the new venture doesn't go? Are they potentially going to be rewarded with new venture ownership if the new venture goes? Can this risk be traded for compensation? Look at the Thermoelectron (recently acquired by Fisher Scientific) model.
Innovation isn't always about new products or businesses. It IS always about dramatic positive change. If you're a leader in a commodity materials business like paper or chlorine, and you want to maintain your position, there are lots of paths for innovation. The most obvious is cost reduction. A second is a fundamental new process, protected by a patent firewall that can generate significant royalty income. There is nothing that can't be done cheaper, better, and faster. What's the process you use to collect ideas for process improvements throughout the entire organization, including the midnight shift operators? You'd be amazed at how many really neat ideas people have, but they've never been asked! Make them feel important and recognized for their contributions and see what happens! What about your legal and accounting functions? We generally tend to tolerate these functions and just deal with them, but people like Fidelity and Schwab have made a fortune by optimizing the simple business of collecting money, providing customers and potential customers the information they need, and reselling other firms' products at no cost to the end customer. As was once said in the famous Watergate case, "follow the money" and see where some opportunities might be. What about distribution? If you could save a cent a pound on shipping a billion pounds of commodities, what's that worth? We talk about "open innovation" nowadays, another new buzzword. Use other people's brains. Have you talked to the shipping companies you use? The packaging and shipping functions? Are you supplying your customers an over engineered package that takes time and energy to disassemble and throw away? The possibilities are endless! The term "open innovation" has come to characterize our rediscovery that we don't know everything.
Parallel universes are some of my favorite topics. Who else, or who else's products, perform or produce the same FUNCTION that you do (NOT the same product or business area). For example, in a recent innovation session, the connection between air traffic control displays and software/hardware interfaces was discussed. How many computer display conferences do you think the ATC designers had been to? How many FAA conferences on ATC displays did the computer display people attend? You guessed it--ZERO! Think of your own parallel universes to stimulate your innovation this year.
Innovation takes many shapes. Don't let buzzwords and the most recent books warp your brain about what innovation is to you. Make sure it's semi-radical, don't downsize it because you're not sure how to do it at first, and get input from others. Make sure you've thought about innovation in the context of YOUR business and what you want it to be. Don't have blinders on when you do this thinking.
What about your people? If you've decided that an "innovation" effort is required, are you assuming that you can just send out an office memo? Remember that these may be the same people who have spent years streamlining and downsizing. What's their profile as measured accurately by tools such as Myers Briggs, Kirton KAI(TM), or some other tool that you may have used? Can you really expect Myers Briggs ESTJ's to think like N's? Not possible!! How are you going to change this culture? How are you going to convince your people that your new found interest in innovation won't disappear during the coming recession? How are you going to convince them that the effort will continue and only its focus may change? Memories die hard from your last downsizing. Have a plan as how you are going to build your credibility.
Have fun this year making innovation real and sustainable to you and your people.
Comment [28] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
January 7, 2008
Before a problem should be solved it is important that it be decomposed into sub-systems. That way each sub-system can be analyzed and the problem can be solved one part at a time. This is an important aspect of actual problem solving. Many problem solvers have been thwarted by attacking a complex system and then being overwhelmed by the complexity associated with that task. Problem decomposition solves many of these issues. The Heuristic Redefinition Process (HRP) is a powerful method for accomplishing the decomposition of a problem into its constituent elements. HRP is simple enough and the basic steps of the process can be described as follows:
HRP is a simple approach that can dramatically improve the results of the problem solver's activities. It should be part of every problem solving effort and is an important part of defining the problem.
Comment [163] | Permalink
|Categories: Methodology, Strategy
January 3, 2008
A very insightful article appears in BusinessWeek online titled "The Long Nose of Innovation." Written by Bill Buxton of Microsoft, the article discuss the fact that great innovations don't just happen, but rather they are the consequence of many events leading up to the eventual introduction of the high-value manifestation of the concept.
Bill cites the examples of the mouse and RISC technology to show how the time between invention and successful delivery of an innovation maybe many years (thirty in the cases cited). These are good examples and of course they are far from unique. History teaches us that there are very discernable and predictable patterns of evolution that inventions follow as they mature. One doesn't have to look far to see the evidence of this in the many things we take for granted everyday such as electric light, digital photography, and so many other things.
Consider the lowly ballpoint pen… The John Laud patented designs for a ballpoint type pen in 1888. However, the state of ink making was not well enough advanced to allow his device to be practical. It wasn't until nearly 50 years later when the Brio brothers developed new designs and new ink formulations that the ballpoint pen took its next big step forward toward viability.
Invention is not enough. Innovation is the process of deriving value from invention. Where invention, application, and support systems intersect is where value, and hence innovation, is found. This is the clear message of history that is played out time and time again in the present.
Bill closes his article with a particularly interesting observation. He states, "To my mind, at least, those who can shorten the nose by 10% to 20% make at least as great a contribution as those who had the initial idea." Here, Bill has given some very good direction for innovators.
There is a predictable and visible future. The elements that make up this future exist today. The ability to see that predictable future and understand the path from immature technology to successful product is a high value component of sustainable innovation practice. This ability is something that the average innovation practitioner is capable of developing through a combination of the right technical infrastructure aggregate a view into the current state of a technology and the application of proven methodologies for analyzing the evolutionary tendencies of technologies.
The value of the opportunities you will miss if you don't integrate this skill into your innovation tool bag is huge. (See "The Tyranny of Either-Or" for one such example.) So now the question is, what are you doing to recognize and act upon opportunities to shorten the long nose of innovation?
[Crossposted from www.InnovatingToWin.com]
Comment [15] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Strategy
December 28, 2007
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat." - Sun Tzu -
A great idea is never enough. Excellent execution is not enough. In today's complex business environment, a confluence of expertise must be coordinated in order to assure anything close to victory. A bad idea can be implemented ideally and a great idea can be implemented poorly. Neither will help you win the race to long term survivability. You can also have a great idea that is implemented ideally and still miss the needs of the business. You need the right need identified, you need the right idea that will meet the need, you need the right execution, and on top of all of that, the timing needs to be right.
From this perspective, it is easy to admit that Six Sigma is not enough. There isn't any single method that is enough. Not yet anyway. Competitive Excellence should change the landscape by presenting a holistic approach for business success that can do all that is asked of it.
"Do not repeat the tactics that have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
A business must perform across many domains in order to move from concept to commercialization. The initiating event is the identification of a societal need (SN). A societal need is an unmet desire/need that exists in society. It is the prime mover for the development of an idea (product or service related). Identification of an unmet societal need is the critical step in the commercialization of anything. Society wanted to change the television channel without leaving its seat - the remote control was a response to that need. Society did not want to die from small pox - the small pox vaccination was the response. In order for a business to develop a product or service to meet an identified unmet societal need, the need must be converted to a set of customer requirements (CRs). This translation starts to move the business in the direction of an actionable set of criterion. Responding to an unmet societal need must decompose into action like strategy must decompose into work (Drucker). The customer requirements describe the attributes the product or service must possess in order to meet the societal need. The correlation between the SN and the relevant set of CRs describes the quality of the solution. When a product or service is released to the consumer and the CRs are not met, competition is invited into the space. The leverage that competition has is proportional to the number of unmet (or partially met) CRs. The set of CRs must be converted into a corresponding set of functional requirements (FRs). The identified functions identify a language that the product/service developers use to create a concept. The functions are those necessary to meet the CRs that in turn deliver the SN (SN--CRs--FRs). This decomposition decays the strategic need into a set of necessary functions that the system must provide in order to be a viable response to an unmet SN. The FRs are actionable as they are the drivers for concept generation. The identified concept(s) must provide the functions, that then meet the CRs, which satisfy the SN (SN--CRs--FRs--Concept).
While concept generation is not its own domain, it is the critical transition point from need to response. Once a concept has been generated, design parameters (DPs) must be identified that will deliver the functionality inherent in the concept. The DPs are the language necessary for the reduction of a concept to practice. The DPs must correspond to the FRs and this correspondence strength determines, in part, launch success (SN--CRs--FRs--Concept--DPs). The DPs identify the architecture a product or service must represent in order to provide the necessary functions. These functions meet the CRs, which satisfy the societal need. The DPs must be converted into the language of production in order to be manufactured and/or assembled. This is called the process variable domain (PV). The same correspondence should be preserved: SN--CRs--FRs--Concept--DPs--PVs.
Although there is much that takes place in the commercialization process, these five domains categorize the centers of activity appropriately. Therefore, a business needs competency across these domains. The plot continues to thicken though. Just being able to execute a good idea efficiently is no guarantee of continued success. The business needs to identify the ideal state it seeks to attain. It must also assess what its current state is and identify the gap between the two. The business must identify the appropriate path of action to bridge this gap. These larger strategic issues form the backdrop upon which concept commercialization is played. There is also a larger need for an infrastructure able to support multiple methodologies. All of this works together to create a complex need state for an organization. Also, the strategic alignment will provide a polarizing force that will allow the entire organizational resource pool to pull the organization towards the ideal state.
Without a polarizing force, the organization is in a state of Corporate Brownian Motion (CBM). Brownian Motion is (named after Scottish botanist Robert Brown) is the random movement of microscopic particles suspended in liquids or gases resulting from the impact of molecules of the surrounding medium. Corporate Brownian Motion is the phenomenon where members of a corporation do what they think is best for the organization and also react to each others activities. There is no concerted effort to achieve, just effort to do.
Comment [111] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
December 18, 2007
What Have You Done in the Past Year?
It's nearing the end of 2007 and it's been a turbulent year for many businesses and organizations. Everyone seems to recognize the critical role that innovation plays in the long term survival of an organization. It's time for an audit.
What did you do and accomplish in 2007? Did you encourage anyone in your organization to step outside their normal box and evaluate an opportunity that looks a little risky? What happened to them? Have you thought about what you are going to do to sustain your innovation effort when the inevitable recession occurs? Are you preparing outplacement plans or are you asking people right now how you could reduce your costs by 50%? That's no less an innovation challenge than a glamorous new product!
Do you know what your FUNCTIONAL core competencies are? What else can they be used for? Have you identified the biggest threat, not to you, but to your customer? What can you do to assist them? What materials do you use and buy that could be eliminated, but their function still performed? What scarce or unique raw materials are going to get caught up in the global surge for the same materials (rare metals is an example)? How are you going to react to a dramatic increase in price or non-availability? How will your business change?
Your business is focused to a major extent on helping a customer achieve a desired function, NOT to supply a product--a major mistake in focus we frequently make. How else could that function be achieved? If your product or service was suddenly unavailable to your customer, what would they do? If you don't know the answer to that question, you're in a lot of trouble long term.
Many of these questions, which should drive a major part of our innovation efforts, are independent of the world economy. China's need for platinum for catalytic converters for the millions of its cars that don't exist yet will have a dramatic impact on users of platinum for high volume, low volume commodity chemicals and plastics that we take for granted. I realize that this assumes this requirement will come, and I bet it will sooner or later. Innovation is about the future. Given this opportunity or threat, depending upon how you want to look at it, there's a huge incentive to develop an alternative way of eliminating exhaust emissions. A basic change in car design is one, and if you're a supplier of platinum, you have huge incentive to understand all of this. There's also a huge incentive to develop alternative chemical processes. Think about the parallels in your businesses.
Do your people now believe you and your organization are serious about innovation? The audits that I've been involved with frequently show a hug gap between senior management's views and those of the troops in the trenches. Regardless of what you plan, what do your people think you are going to do with the innovation efforts when business goes sour? Refocus it, or eliminate the "program"? It's time to sit back for a few minutes and reflect on the past year and ask if you have poured the foundation for innovation or just a sand pile that will collapse when the sea of change (in whatever form) comes.
Comment [103] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Management, Strategy
December 13, 2007
"Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece."
Crowdsourcing seems to be a popular topic these days. But, I can't help thinking that its popularity will be short lived. There doesn't seem to be any credible evidence to support this practice as being particularly productive.
Certainly no one can expect that the random crowd will demonstrate great insight and wisdom in helping to solve a problem. There are innumerable examples that show exactly the opposite to be true. Two well know examples of this are the 1630's Dutch tulip frenzy and the witch-mania that was common throughout the Renaissance and Reformation periods. History teaches us that the wisdom of the crown is a fiction and that the intelligence of the mob regresses to the mean.
While one can not rule out the possibility that a truly great concept may emerge from a lone voice within the crowd, this method of searching for great innovations can not be called efficient or repeatable. The crowd does not know or feel your pain; they know not what your goals are or what you value. This method is well likened to the search for the needle in the haystack--the larger the crowd, the larger and messier the haystack.
Some people suggest that crowdsourcing is a natural extension of team collaboration. But this is not so. The dynamics of the crowd are not related to those of the team. More of the same is not the same.
The best achievements in sustainable innovation are seen in those organizations that understand that the quest for innovation can not be divorced from internal expertise. This is not to say that external knowledge and contribution is not of value. In fact, the integration of external concept sources is vital to breaking free of natural inertial forces that develop within organizations. But this integration must be done in a rational manner guided by the in depth understanding of the enterprises capabilities, objectives, and the needs of the client.
What do you think about crowdsourcing?
[Crossposted from www.InnovatingToWin.com]
Comment [121] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Strategy
December 3, 2007
It seems every time I scan the recent blog postings on innovation, I see at least one or two posts declaring patents are stifling innovation. This certainly wasn't the intent of the patent system. To the contrary, the idea was that by providing the temporary monopoly granted by a patent, the cause of innovation would be advanced by publishing the latest state of the art so that other innovator could learn.
In a brightly lit room somewhere, the question is asked, "So, how does this patent busting method work?"
"It is really quite simple," comes the reply. "The Doctrine of Equivalents and its application in case law give us very good guidance as to how you can break through a competitive IP barrier. In short, if you follow a simple 3 step process you will rarely fail to find a new non-infringing way to accomplish the goal.
"One, Identify each of the independent claims of the patent in question.
"Two, Model each claim so that its design intent is unambiguously represented.
"Three, Refactor each modeled claim consistent with the principles of the Doctrine of Equivalents.
"Your newly refactored set of models now represent potentially distinct, non-infringing IP. Of course, there are a few subtleties to this method, and you should always run your new invention by your patent group to be doubly sure, but that is essentially the way it works."
Although this conversation might sound like a work of fiction, it isn't. I can't even count the number of time I have had this conversation over the years, nor can I count the number of time I have discussed the results people have had applying this and other similar methods.
Yes, it seems clear to me that patents are a springboard for innovation. If you have the right tools and understand the associated best practices, patents represent a rich source of ideas to spur innovation.
[Crossposted from www.InnovatingToWin.com]
Comment [45] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Methodology, Strategy
December 1, 2007
The Battle of Poltava was a resounding victory for Peter the Great. He defeated Charles the XII and 14,000 Swedish cavalry with a superior force of 45,000 Russian soldiers. The battle lasted all day with the outnumbered Swedish soldiers making several valiant efforts against the superior Russian forces. Ultimately the Swedish soldiers had taken too many losses to effectively continue the battle and Charles retreated to Moldavia for five years before he could finally return to Sweden. The captured Swedish soldiers were taken to St. Petersburg and they helped to build the great city.
From October 1941 to January 1942 the Germans attempted the invasion of Moscow and then suffered a counter-attack after the city had been defended. Operation Barbarossa called for the Nazis to capture Moscow in four months but the brutal Russian winter and the lessons of Napoleon were ignored. The Battle of Smolensk slowed the Wehrmacht down and the tide was completely reversed at Moscow.
What are the implications these battles have for the modern corporation? Charles of Sweden underestimated the skills of the new Russian cavalry under the innovative leadership of Peter the Great. Hitler underestimated the Russian resolve and the Russian winter that decimated his blitzkrieg. Corporations also make similar mistakes in judgment. Leaders assume that prior supremacy will sustain the organization even when an upstart challenger enters their field of excellence. Charles assumed that the legacy of the powerful Swedish cavalry could not be matched by the new Russian horse soldiers. The skills of the entrepreneurial organization are not to be underestimated. Peter the Great made this point at Poltava. The power of a discontinuous innovation will propel the upstart to the market space and the mature market share will erode. Customers have proven to be disloyal unless they have become advocates of a particular product or service. Other organizations believe that their superior capital will protect them from any onslaught. They also believe that a swift response to competition will quench any threat. The next generation of an existing product or service remedies all challenges. Or at least they hope this is the case. The fickle and ever-changing competitive landscape can render these advantages useless as the money follows the features and benefits of the function being provided. The prevalent corporate force can find itself unprepared for the challenges ahead as the Third Reich experienced as it forayed into Russia.
If Charles had not underestimated his opponent he would not have brought 14, 000 soldiers to battle 45,000. If Hitler had not assumed that his previous victories would be replicated in Russia without consideration of the famous Russian resolve and the accompanying infamous Russian winter things would have been much different. So too, if the corporate leaders of today will prepare for the foe that is coming after their market share, they will not be defeated. Complacency will be their undoing. Leaders must embrace the science of innovation as they have the sciences of productivity and quality. This is the first step in dodging that exile that Charles found himself facing.
Comment [102] | Permalink
|Categories: Companies, General, Strategy
November 27, 2007
OK not really. However, I am going to describe an approach to innovation that does allow you to leverage the intellectual capabilities of OTHER problem solvers for the generation of solutions to YOUR problems. This can be achieved by utilizing previous problem solving output and adapting it to suit your purposes (what I call Adaptivation). Adaptivation may take place if you will transition your problem statement that is specific to the realm of the abstract. The realm of the abstract allows you to connect with a repository of problem solving information that is found in Contradiction Theory which is a Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ) subset. Patents have been analyzed and each specific problem has been affinitized at the abstract level. The same process has been applied to each solution. Therefore, if you convert your problem to the abstract you can match it to an abstraction from Contradiction Theory. Then you will benefit from the resultant solution abstraction. This gives you the necessary kernel that may be used by analogy to create a solution that applies to your specific problem (Adaptivation). This method introduces you to the problem solving thought processes of others who needed a solution and have produced information to that effect. So in a sense, you are benefitting from their knowledge directly. This approach is both open (leverages knowledge you or your organization does not possess) and efficient (not creating a unique solution when an adaptation will work). You can increase your intellectual capacity by using some structured and effective techniques that allow you to benefit from other people's work.
You can read more about this concept in my recent Real Innovation article on Adaptivation titled: "Smart Innovation Adapts to any Problem or Situation."
Comment [100] | Permalink
|Categories: Methodology, Strategy
October 31, 2007
|Halloween is a good day to remind us of the choices we're faced with in the context of our innovation conversations. I don't know if the "trick or treat" paradigm was invented by Halloween, but it was certainly popularized by the holiday. It's so common to hear the words, I never even think of the inherent choice they imply, the hidden threat they contain. Trick or treat? I've chosen wrong in the past, and wound up with a yard full of toilet paper damp with morning dew. This is a good day, maybe the best day, to talk about choices. I think most of us involved in the innovation conversation have already decided that choosing to develop and maintain an innovation intention is a good idea for the organizations we work for and with. It's possible, though, that we made the choice so long ago we've forgotten how important it is to re-set the intention, to remind decision-makers (and maybe even ourselves) of the arguments for actively pursuing a strategy that centers on innovation. I can think of two choices inherent to the innovation conversation that should be re-set at least once a year: to innovate or not to innovate, and when and how aggressively to pursue an innovation-focused strategy. My best argument for why to innovate (I'd like to hear yours, too, so please feel free to comment back) goes something like this: revenue, profitability, market share, and customer satisfaction are all examples of metrics that provide insight into your organization's current health and market position. However, none of these metrics can help you develop strategy for tomorrow; they are inherently backward-looking, and markets change too quickly to accelerate into the future using only your rear-view mirrors. Value and innovation, however, are forward-looking and work very well together in creating strategy. Without paying attention to innovation, your organizations will be stuck with with strategies that are designed to keep pace with market trends, which is what everyone else in your market space is already doing; without innovation, you're stuck in a cut-throat environment with margins that must inevitably decline over time. Value is a perfect compliment to an innovation focus, as it requires you to pay attention only to innovations that buyers are willing to pay for. After reminding yourself of why strategies based in an innovation intention are superior to those based on competitive benchmarking, it's a good idea to revisit your assumptions on which markets have the most opportunity to value-innovate. In general terms, markets are made up of companies that either compete on offerings common to the industry group (me-too organizations), companies that compete on their innovative offerings or innovative approaches to the market space, and companies that are somewhere in between. While two of the three market types require innovation in order to successfully compete, the third - the market made up of me-too business - offers excellent opportunity to value-innovate, expose new markets, and drive double-digit growth. So there you have it - you can be tricked into falling into the trap of designing strategy that will lock you into entrenched, head-to-head competition, and all the morning-after clean up those strategies entail, or you can treat yourself to a strategy based on value-innovation and enjoy the pleasure of having a market all to yourself. Choosing right is like having a bag full of candy and no one to share it with.
Comment [64] | Permalink
|Categories: Strategy
October 16, 2007
Well, it's official. Yesterday, Kathleen Casey-Kirschling, the first baby-boomer, filed for Social Security benefits. She becomes the first of as many as 80 million individuals who will qualify for benefits in the coming years.
This should be a major wake up call for corporations. With many of their most experienced and capable workers moving ineluctably towards retirement, companies must consider what this means to their capacity to innovate. Don't fool yourself by thinking that these are stodgy old geezers who have passed their prime. These people are many of your most creative and valuable resources.
Have you thought of how you will capture their expertise and pass it on to the next generation of innovation workers? What does your enterprise know, and how can you mobilize that knowledge? Are your innovation systems capable of feeding the ideation engine in real time, or will your product pipelines run dry just when you need revenue stimulation most?
Are you addressing these questions? Or, are you getting ready to hit the beach and go fishing?
[Crossposted from www.InnovatingToWin.com]
Comment [49] | Permalink
|Categories: General, Strategy
October 15, 2007
TRIZ Journal and Real Innovation Commentators talk a lot about the methods of innovation, but we don't talk very often about the sense of mission and commitment that are frequently needed to keep an idea alive while all those methods are being used.
Dean Kamen is well-known in the invention community – his Segway is an icon of "out of the box" creativity, his stair-climbing wheelchair was featured at one of the first Altshuller Institute meetings, and his use of his personal fortune to sponsor invention workshops and contests for schools has gotten extensive press coverage.
Go ahead – watch the video. It takes 5 minutes, so I won't make the commentary any longer. Think about what Kamen and his people did in 13 months. http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/82
TRIZ lesson: did you spot the use of trimming? He mentioned it twice.
Comment [71] | Permalink
|Categories: Companies, Methodology, Strategy
October 14, 2007
We are accustomed to solving problems using a linear two-step process. This process is as simple as problem » solution. Our psychological bias is the foundation for our ability to solve problems using this simple process. We have an innate ability to solve problems rapidly that is derived from our automatic intellectual function. This function is a subjective analytic based on the intersection of our education, experiences, and other cultural and environmental bias found in our surroundings.
Psychologists have demonstrated that the automatic intellectual function is ideal for problem solving involving fight or flight scenarios and less than ideal for other problem solving types. We find that the majority of problems that we face are not fight or flight therefore we find ourselves using a problem solving algorithm that is not the ideal most of the time. This is much of the cause for finding ourselves surrounded by products and services that are awash in compromise and mediocrity. These two characteristics allow us to be susceptible to pressure from our competition and the markets we serve. We need to adopt a problem solving process that involves a higher level of intentionality and objective analysis.
Our ability to problem solve will be greatly increased if we incorporate abstraction and analogic thought into a non-linear multi-step problem solving process. This process in its simplest format would be specific problem à generic problem à generic solution à specific solution. We would leverage abstraction for the transition from the specific problem to the generic problem and we would leverage analogic thought to transition from the generic solution to the specific solution. This non-linear abstract and analogic problem solving model defeats the bias innate in the linear two-step model and allows the user to problem solve using the open and potentially adaptive innovative approach. The quality or solutions generated using this approach will be considerably higher. Also, compromise will be minimized thereby reducing competitive opportunities.
Much is to be gained by adopted non-linear processes for problem solving and we can see evidence of this by looking at the non-linear problem solving model found in Six Sigma. Six Sigma uses a model that is comprised of the following key steps: practical problem à statistical problem à statistical solution à practical solution. This model allows for the utilization of abstraction and analogy with a focus on statistics. Statistics allows for the inclusion of qualitative and objective (data based) decision making. We can include these same benefits in problem solving that does not involve optimizing a closed system. We would call this innovative problem solving. Innovative problem solving allows for the generation of solutions that are outside the system (open) as well as the opportunity to adapt someone else's solution to solve your problem. These are critical elements of the science of innovative problem solving and are leveraged when a non-linear problem solving method is adopted.
Comment [94] | Permalink
|Categories: Management, Methodology, Strategy
|Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6


text:
CAMBRIDGE, England (UPI) — British researchers say predator-scanning behavior of meerkats in Africa is altruistic, practiced for the benefit of the group rather than just the individual.
In order to spot potential predators, adult meerkats often climb to a higher vantage point or stand on their hind legs, ready to sound an alarm to a meerkat colony if a threat is spotted.
Researchers from Cambridge University said their studies found adult meerkats were more likely to scan for predators when young pups are present in the group, suggesting it's an altruistic behavior rather than for just the individual meerkat's own preservation.
"You see similar behavior in a range of mammal and bird species, and we know from previous work that other group members are less likely to be attacked by predators when someone is on guard," Cambridge doctoral student Peter Santema said.
"Biologists have been debating, however, whether the protection that other group members enjoy is just a side-effect or one of the reasons why individuals perform these guarding behaviors."
Scientists observed non-breeding adult meerkats in the period just before the dominant female's pups had joined the group on foraging trips and then again immediately after the pups joined.
After the pups had joined the group on foraging trips adults showed a sudden increase in their vigilance behavior, they said.
"These results are exciting, as they show us that individuals are not just on the lookout for their own safety, but that the protection of other group members is another motivation for these behaviors," Santema said.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Santiago is fantastic. And has included more life experiences than should be had in just a month. The journey across Argentina and the Andes was sweet, although mostly by night. Despite the concerns of my mother and grandmother, it was not an overcrowded bus covered in fruit vendors and chickens; it was a cozy coach bus with ample room, Hollywood movies, and dinner and breakfast served. We woke up in the morning at the border, about 12,000 feet up in the mountains, to go through customs. This gave us a chance for the Mexican interns in our group to make their first snowballs, always a treat in the middle of July. We arrived in Santiago with lower expectations than the excellent time we had in Buenos Aires. This was justified when no one showed up to lead us to the house for a half hour…but then they did…and the adventure began.
|At the top of the world. (Border between Argentina and Chile, in the background)
To compare Buenos Aires to Santiago is literally like comparing Rome to Los Angeles. They might be a two hour flight apart but culturally are so distinct. The accent, the way people look, the transportation system, the food, the architecture, the geography, everything is different. Diego and I were fortunate enough to make a fantastic friend named Pati at an AIESEC conference in March in Puerto Rico, who happens to be in a leadership position in the local committee of AIESEC in Santiago. Instead of living in the international 'frat house' like in Buenos Aires, we have the opportunity to live in a more traditional Santiago neighborhood with Chileans. This gives us a chance to really see what Chilean life is like (which is absolutely amazing).
|Chileans watching the Copa America game against Peru.
The job experience here is also very different. In Buenos Aires, I was able to work with a team of interns lead by an Argentinian to organize a soccer tournament; here we get to teach English in middle- and high schools. The first day we arrived we were given the news that student protests have moved the students' winter break to the first two weeks of our Chile adventure. Being typical AIESECers, our group ran off and explored South America. Some went to the snowy south; some went to the coast, to the cities of Viña del Mar and Valparaiso; some up north to the desert; and some spent a week to visit Machu Picchu, in Peru. Diego and I are cheap, so we stuck around to explore the city and its surroundings.
Our friend Pati also had another AIESEC friend staying with her, a Parisian guy who has spent the last ten months travelling throughout Latin America to learn Portuguese and Spanish. For our first week or so, the four of us climbed mountains, went out on the town, and saw all the touristy stuff. Then we began to get antsy for work. We weren't exactly sure what to expect, especially since our job descriptions for Buenos Aires were so vastly different than what we actually did. But we knew it was supposed to be teaching English or creating workshops for students.
|Me, Christopher, Pati, and Diego at the statue of la Virgen de Santiago at the summit of Cerro San Cristobal.
Day one was one of the greatest days I have had in the college period of my life. The nine of us who work at Colegio Valle Hermoso discovered the transit route the night before, and met up in two groups the next morning to go up to the school. The bus took us farther and farther from the city center, and closer to the mountains. We finally got to the end of the route as we arrived to the snow line at the base of the mountain, and were welcomed by all the teachers and students immediately. Although most of the students were not around because they were staying downtown to protest the Ministry of Education, it was great to begin teaching English to kids who were more than eager to learn.
The past few weeks have been a blast, meeting some of the coolest kids I've ever met and learning that teaching could be a hat in my future. My experiences down here, although far too short, will be a life changer. I'm excited to see where this goes and even more so to see how I've changed once I arrive back home. Diego is making a documentary about the student strikes so tomorrow we'll be going down to Plaza Italia to film. Tell you how it goes ;)


text:
Eliminate Supply Chain Waste With Real-Time Asset Management SolutionsJuly 23, 2013 8:02 am | by Zebra Technologies
In difficult economic times, Lean thinking strikes a chord for manufacturers as it promises to reduce costs, improve quality, and transform the bottom line by eliminating waste in every area of the value stream. Its goal is to eliminate non-value added processing from the customers' perspective, enabling less inventory, less space, less resource, less time and less cost to produce more – and all highly responsive to customer demand.
Energy Intelligence Report: An Eye On EfficiencyJuly 22, 2013 4:03 pm | by Anna Wells, Executive Editor, IMPO
Our fourth annual Energy Intelligence Report has been designed to spark some ideas for cost savings measures, as manufacturers continue to face tightening budgets and competitive pressures. We hope you can find something of value as you look at your own plant floor and try to determine where to start.
Let's Get VisibleJuly 22, 2013 3:35 pm | by Anna Wells, Executive Editor, IMPO
Asset management, at its core, is all about profitability. If a manufacturer can gain a clear picture of how and where assets are being used, they can account for overuse, underuse, lost items, bottlenecks, theft, and more. And in doing so, there is an endless list of tools to consider.
ISM Polls Show External Effects On Manufacturing And The Supply ChainJuly 22, 2013 3:25 pm
The Institute for Supply Chain Management held their 98th Annual International Supply Management Conference & Educational Exhibit April 28th through May 1st in Grapevine, TX. More than 2,000 professionals attended the conference and several "instant" digital polls were held, taking a look at reshoring and tax concerns. Thomas Derry, CEO of ISM, discusses the results of those polls and how they are affecting business and the economy.
Barriers To ReShoring: A Detailed LookJuly 22, 2013 3:20 pm | by Joel Hans, Managing Editor, Manufacturing.net
Not too long ago, an article outlined some major reasons why reshoring, for all its business viability and value to the American economy, faces real problems with aging machinery and a workforce in need of new, well-trained people. Naturally, these concerns stem from a variety of flaws in the educational and training systems, and from a lack of foresight from manufacturers, who were not prepared for such a wide skills gap.
Product Update: Lighting Retrofits At Pro Weld Inc.July 22, 2013 3:11 pm
Pro Weld Inc., a Michigan manufacturer of material handling containers, set goals to improve the quality of their product, eliminate re-work, and reduce energy costs in their welding and painting operation that runs three shifts per day. A key improvement in the final painting and inspection portion of the building was increasing the levels and quality of light so the employees could clearly see their work.
Product Update: Lighting Retrofits At Southeast PackagingJuly 22, 2013 3:05 pm
Southeast Packaging has been on the fast track to lead its industry in energy-efficient, environmentally-friendly, "green" programs. So when management began investigating ways to improve the efficiency of lighting at its packaging facility in Concord, NC, they turned to OEO's "BIG LIGHT."
Product Update: Lighting Retrofits At Saint-GobainJuly 22, 2013 3:01 pm
With more than 15,000 people working at 58 manufacturing sites worldwide, the Saint-Gobain brand Verallia is a worldwide leader, specializing in high quality glass containers. When the time came to renovate a quality control and packing hall at its Neuburg glass packaging plant in Germany, Verallia was looking for a more efficient lighting solution to replace its 250W HPS high bays that were actually drawing 300W.
Convenient, Efficient, Green Maintenance ChemicalsJuly 22, 2013 2:55 pm | by Rachel Leisemann Immel, Associate Editor, IMPO
Industrial manufacturers across the world need to stay efficient, productive, and safe in an ever-increasing competitive global market. They turn to industrial cleaners and degreasers to quickly and effectively sanitize and disinfect, improve the appearance of their facility, prepare surfaces for plating or adhesive bonding, eliminate the potential for contamination, and more.
CMMS: A Laser FocusJuly 22, 2013 2:52 pm | by Anna Wells, Executive Editor, IMPO
Before the world began clamoring for "big data," there were industrial companies who pioneered via systems like CMMS or EAM in order to better structure their maintenance programs. Having an opportunity to make truly informed decisions due to better tracking of maintenance procedures, asset usage, breakdown costs, and efficiency of resources meant a competitive advantage.
CNC Machines Go HorizontalJuly 22, 2013 2:43 pm
Suburban Manufacturing has been in business more than 33 years and has a gleaming, state-of-the-art 30,000 square foot CNC machine shop. According to vice president Brian Nuibe, Suburban is a "true job shop. We have vertical machining centers and horizontal machining centers, single- and multi-spindle CNC lathe machines, saws, hones, sand blasting, part marking — a huge array of operations."
Wrapped Around InnovationJuly 22, 2013 2:38 pm | by Rachel Leisemann Immel, Associate Editor, IMPO
Pat and Bill Lancaster believed that pallet loads of product could be better protected — that billions of dollars of unsalable product due to shipping damage could be reclaimed and energy spent recycling, repurposing, or disposing of this damaged product could be regained. Pallet loads could be better stabilized and product should be — and could be — better protected in transit.
TIC's Control Plant Expansion: Creating Jobs, Space, QualityJuly 22, 2013 8:02 am | by Rachel Leisemann Immel, Associate Editor, IMPO
TIC required more capacity to produce medium voltage adjustable speed drives to meet increasing demand, as well as keep up with the growth of our other product lines including low voltage drives, motors starters, and rail transit products.
Restoring The 'Tech Belt' With Next-Gen ManufacturingJuly 22, 2013 8:01 am | by Joel Hans, Managing Editor, Manufacturing.net
The "Tech Belt" region of the U.S. has undergone explosive growth in the years since the Great Recession. Some of the hardest-hit cities have seen manufacturing's return with very positive upward trends. Among the region's largest success stories is winning the nationwide bidding contest for the NAMII, a public-private collaboration to develop next-gen manufacturing processes based around additive manufacturing.
5 Signs It's Time to Replace Your Motor Disconnect SwitchJuly 19, 2013 9:38 am | by Mennekes
Dust, water, corrosive chemicals, and airborne particles are severe hazards to many manufacturing and production facilities. Any environment where critical electrical equipment is exposed puts this equipment at risk. This critical equipment includes your motor disconnects and switched receptacles.
Supply Chain Innovations Lead To 'Hyper Innovation'July 19, 2013 9:38 am | by Joel Hans, Managing Editor, Manfuacturing.net
Back in May, KPMG released their fourth annual Global Manufacturing Outlook, which was built around a poll of 335 C-level executives on a global scale. The results show that U.S. manufacturing seems primed for an era of "hyper innovation," in which companies develop not only new products, but entirely new product categories and new ways to build them.
5 Quick Questions With The CEO Of BlueGrace LogisticsJuly 17, 2013 8:02 am | by Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director
It didn't take long for the novelty of social media to fade, and the search for practical application and measurable impact of these vehicles to become a priority. Despite the commercial success of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and several other platforms, manufacturers are still seeking out answers as to whether the time spent on social outreach is worth the effort.
Manufacture ERP Success: Plan For Change, Not TechnologyJuly 17, 2013 8:01 am | by Randy Copperman, Vice President of Support Services, Channel Technologies Group
Manufacturers look to ERP systems to build success. But change does not come from investment in ERP — it comes from commitment to strategic implementation. Installing ERP provides manufacturers with technology. Implementing ERP provides a culture of data-driven decision making, equipped to develop solutions with lasting value.
Modern Mechanical Carbon Materials For Aircraft ApplicationsJuly 16, 2013 8:03 am | by Glenn H. Phelps, Technical Director, Metallized Carbon Corporation
Modern mechanical carbon materials are being used in a wide variety of applications – a few examples include aircraft gear boxes, air turbine motor starters, and main shaft seals for both aircraft turbine engines and APUs.These self-lubricating materials are composed of fine-grained, electrographite substances that are impregnated with proprietary inorganic chemicals to improve their lubricating qualities and their oxidation resistance.
Why PLM Is So Important For High-Tech ManufacturersJuly 16, 2013 8:02 am | by Kevin Prendeville, Managing Director, Accenture
Product lifecycle management (PLM) may sound like one of those deep-in-the-weeds business terms, but it has become one of the most important arenas for accelerating product deliveries, reducing costs, and generating more revenues in major manufacturing industries. So what is product lifecycle management?


text:
Meets or exceeds ANSI/BIFMA standards Wood reception seating with arch arms and upholstered back. Wider seat for more comfortable reception seating. With stain-resistant upholstery. Seat: 21-3/4w x 21d. Back: 21-3/4w x 13-3/4h. Overall 21-3/4 x 24-1/4d x 31-3/4h. Chair Type: Stationary Chair; Folding/Stacking: N\A; Width: 21 3/4 in;Depth: 24 1/4 in.
Shipping Weight: 30 lbs.


text:
We have been asked by the National Institute of Health to partner in a study to test the DNA of 50 of our members and their extended families. If you are interested in participating in this study--you must have had
a) preeclampsia in the past two years
b) a surviving infant who you are willing to swab the inside of their cheek with a Q-tip to collect a DNA sample
c) willingness to ask members of your immediate family to donate saliva samples (you will just provide them with the package and they will be able to mail it directly to the lab.)
d) willingness to fill out an NIH survey.
Please either email me (email@example.com) to indicate your interest, or post a response to this message in the forum.
Thanks [:)]
Admin Director/Webmaster
Preeclampsia Foundation
Tel: 425 885 3498


text:
CS 115 — Introduction to Computing (3)
This course is an introduction to the broad and dynamic field of computing. While addressing the differences between Computer Science and Computer Information Systems, the class covers topics including how a computer functions, how data is encoded, architectures, operating systems, high-level programming, information systems, applications, limitations of computing, and ethical questions in computing. Offered spring semesters.
CS 116 — Fundamentals of Programming I (3)
This course begins a two-class sequence that introduces students to problem solving and program design. Topics include types and expressions, control structures, libraries, functions, parameter passing and array processing. Offered fall semesters. Cross-listed as CIS 116.
CS 117 — Fundamentals of Programming II (3)
This course is the second of a two-class sequence that introduces students to problem solving and program design. It begins where CS 116 left off and covers more advanced topics of programming including problem solving and fundamental algorithms for various applications in science and business. Offered spring semesters. Cross-listed as CIS 117. Prerequisites: CS 116 or CIS 116.
CS 232 — Data Structures (3)
This course is an introduction to the implementation of data structures including lists, stacks, queues and trees. Additionally, this class will cover advanced programming techniques such as recursion, efficient sorting and searching algorithms, fi le I/O, and storage management. Offered fall semesters. Prerequisites: CS 117 or CIS 117, or consent of the instructor.
CS 305 — Programming Languages and Compilers (3)
This course covers design principles and implementation issues of contemporary programming languages. Topics include the syntax and semantics of programming language constructs, translation of high-level languages to machine languages, compiler optimizations, and managed runtime systems. Offered every other year. Prerequisites: CS 232, or consent of the instructor.
CS 310 — Advanced Data Structures (3)
An advanced look at more complex data structures including balanced trees, graphs and dictionaries. Additionally, this class will cover fundamental algorithms for various applications in science and business. Offered spring semesters. Prerequisites: CS 232, or consent of the instructor.
CS 328 — Theory of Algorithms (3)
This course is an introduction to the techniques for designing efficient computer algorithms, proving their correctness, and analyzing their running times. General topics include asymptotics, solving summations and recurrences, algorithm design techniques (such as divide-and-conquer, dynamic programming, and greedy algorithms), analysis of data structures, sorting, searching and selection, and an introduction to NP-completeness. Prerequisites: CS 310, MATH 235, or consent of the instructor.
CS 364 — Operating Systems (3)
An introduction to the major concepts of modern operating systems. Topics include operating system structure, process and thread management, inter-process communication and synchronization, scheduling, memory management, input/output operations, and file systems. Prerequisites: CS 232, or consent of the instructor.
CS 370 — Computer Architecture (3)
This course is a study of the relationship between hardware and software. Topics include computer architectural and organizational issues; structural and behavioral characteristics of system components; processor, memory hierarchy, and input/output issues; and evaluation of design alternatives. Prerequisites: CS 232, or consent of the instructor.
CS 420 — Advanced Programming (3)
An advanced look at significant concepts underlying modern programming languages including expressions, advanced topics on inheritance, pointers, garbage collection, and explicit memory management from a prospective of implementation issues. Prerequisites: CS 310, or consent of the instructor.
CS 448 — Artificial Intelligence (3)
An overview of the main topics and issues in Artificial Intelligence (AI). This course studies the philosophy and history of the field, presents a view of AI that is centered around the notion of an agent acting on an environment. Topics include searching, planning, ontologies, uncertain reasoning, and learning as problems faced by our agents. Overview of more specialized fi les such as natural language processing and robotics will be covered as time permits. Prerequisites: CS 310, or consent of the instructor.
CS 480 — Software Engineering (3)
This is a capstone course incorporating the senior integrated assessment. Topics include project planning; system requirements; structured software design; testing for verification and validation; and security and privacy considerations. Project presentation is required.
Open to junior and senior Computer Science majors upon approval of the Chairperson or Program Director.
CS 490 — Topics in Computer Science (3)
The course covers current topics in Computer Science as selected by the student and instructor. Individual or group work is supplemented by guided research in order to gain mastery of the topic selected. Open to junior and senior Computer Science majors upon approval of the Chairperson or Program Director.
CS 491 — Independent Study in Computer Science (3)
Projects in a specialized area of Computer Science under the supervision of a faculty member in the Computer Science program. The student and faculty member define the scope of the project and meet regularly throughout the semester. Open to junior and senior Computer Science majors upon approval of the Chairperson or Program Director.
CS 499 — Computer Science Internship (3)
An option for junior or senior majors to gain practical experience in the application of computer systems. Regular meetings with a faculty coordinator are required.


text:
Anne Rice discusses her new book, 'True Blood' and Halloween
Anne Rice is releasing her "The Wolves of Midwinter," the sequel to her popular book, "The Wolf Gift."
Kristin Bauer Straten walks the good-evil line as Pam on 'True Blood'
When we last left HBO's "True Blood," the war between the humans and the vampires had just reached a boiling point and the air was thick with the threat of impending violence. Well, more violence. A lot of blood is spilled in this show, but there's a lot of humor as well. More than most shows of its ilk, "True Blood" has managed to strike a fine balance between darkness and light, much like the tenuous truce — now broken — the humans and their undead counterparts had forged. Pam — the bisexual, acid-tongued, bar-owning vampire, who stomps all over human and vamp underlings alike in spike-heeled boots — exacts violence and comedy in equally skilled measure. We checked with Kristin Bauer Straten, who plays Pam, before Season 6 premieres on June 16.
Benjamin Percy translates modern worries into werewolves and the apocalypse in 'Red Moon'
Benjamin Percy didn't set out to write a typical werewolf novel. The 34-year-old author says he's "always loved the epic […]


text:
By Luxpresso | February 20, 2013, 5:00 pm IST Work & Life
When Masaba Gupta was signed on as fashion director at Satya Paul, talk of her shifting base to Delhi was doing the rounds. No longer a rumour, the designer attended her first welcome lunch at the swanky Olive Beach restaurant in hotel Diplomat.
Host Sanjay Kapoor of Genesis Colors, was able to gather quite an impressive crowd in the capital, with the likes of AD Singh, Sujata Assomull Sippy, Anand Bhushan, Rudra and Sumaya Dalmia, and Shrivan and Narresh in attendance.
(In the pic: Rudra and Sumaya Dalmia, and Sanjay Kapoor and Masaba Gupta)


text:
News from WTOP
News from the AP
Mike Causey
Shows & Panels
Shows & Panels
Shows & Panels
Shows & Panels
- The 2014 Big Picture on Cyber Security
- AFCEA Answers
- Ask the CIO
- Building the Hybrid Cloud
- CDWG/NetApp
- Connected Government: How to Build and Procure Network Services for the Future
- Continuing Diagnostics and Mitigation: Discussion of Progress and Next Steps
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal Tech Talk
- The Future of Government Data Centers
- The Future of IT: How CIOs Can Enable the Service-Oriented Enterprise
- Government Perspectives on Mobility and the Cloud
- The Intersection: Where Technology Meets Transformation
- Maximizing ROI Through Data Center Consolidation
- Mitigating Insider Threats in Virtual & Cloud Environments
- Modern Mission Critical Series
- Moving to the Cloud. What's the best approach for me
- Navigating Tough Choices in Government Cloud Computing
- The New Generation of Database
- Reimagining the Next Generation of Government
- Satellite Communications: Acquiring SATCOM in Tight Times
- Targeting Advanced Threats: Proven Methods from Detection through Remediation
- Transformative Technology: Desktop Virtualization in Government
- The Truth About IT Opex and Software Defined Networking
- Value of Health IT
- Air Traffic Management Transformation Report
- Cloud First Report
- General Dynamics IT Enterprise Center
- Gov Cloud Minute
- Government in Technology Series
- Homeland Security Cybersecurity Market Report
- National Cybersecurity Awareness Month
- Technology Insights
- The Cyber Security Report
- The Next Generation Cyber Security Experts
Shows & Panels
Feds rank leadership low in annual survey
Thursday - 4/26/2012, 9:09am EDT
|Leadership Trends - Table 1
|Effective Leadership Score
The Federal Leadership Challenge revealed that leadership was one of lowest ranked workplace categories, scoring 54.9 out of 100, according to data from the Office of Personnel Management's 2011 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. The data showed senior leaders receiving low rankings in a variety of areas, from the ability to generate motivation to managing employees fairly.
Despite the low rankings, the trend in leadership has improved steadily since the rankings debuted in 2003. [See Table 1].
Employee satisfaction with supervisors and senior leaders has also improved steadily since 2003. Employees ranked their satisfaction with their supervisors at 58.6 in 2003 and 63.9 in 2011. Employee satisfaction with senior leaders rose from 42.7 to 49.3, during that same period. The survey defines senior leaders as "the heads of agencies, departments and their senior management teams."
Why are leadership scores lagging?
The report highlighted four rankings to illuminate the low rankings leaders received — Empowerment, Fairness, Senior Leaders and Supervisors. [See Table 2].
Only 46.3 percent of the feds responding to the survey said they experienced "personal empowerment with respect to work processes," according to the report. Also, just 50.7 percent of the respondents felt satisfied with their participation in the decisions impacting their work.
|Governmentwide Leadership - Table 2
|2011 percent positive
|Senior Leaders
Just 42.6 percent of respondents felt that senior leaders generated "high levels of motivation and commitment," the report said, with only 48.1 percent feeling satisfied with the information senior leaders were providing them about the status of their organization.
In terms of honesty and respect, senior leaders ranked slightly above the 50 percent level. Of those surveyed, 52.9 percent felt their agency's senior leaders "maintained high standards of honesty and integrity." Also, just 53.5 percent expressed having a high level of respect for top management.
Leaders working closer to their employees received higher rankings, with 66.9 percent of employees saying their team leader or immediate supervisor was doing a good job. Likewise, 64.2 percent said those leaders gave them chances to show their leadership skills, and 63.8 reported that immediate supervisors backed employee development.
Employees ranked concerns over fairness at 54.3 percent, with only 48.6 percent of respondents feeling that "arbitrary action, personal favoritism and coercion" occurred in partisan political matters.
Best agencies for good leadership
The PPS also reported how large agencies and small agencies ranked (from 1 to 100) according to the survey.
The top five large agencies and their overall leadership scores were:
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission - 72
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation - 70.8
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration - 67
- State Department - 61
- Office of Personnel Management - 60.5.
With a ranking of 47.6, the Department of Homeland Security was at the bottom of the list of large agencies, followed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (47.7) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (49.5). Of those three, only HUD improved from its 2010 ranking, while both DHS and SEC dropped slightly.
The top five small agencies and their overall leadership scores were:
- Surface Transportation Board - 82.5
- Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board - 78.8
- Federal Labor Relations Authority - 71.4
- Overseas Private Investment Corporation - 70
- Federal Trade Commission - 66.7.
Bottoming out the small agencies were the Broadcasting Board of Governors (45.2), International Boundary and Water Commission (45.5) and Federal Housing Finance Agency (46.9).
The report also contained Subcomponent Rankings on Effective Leadership, offering insight into effective leadership demonstrated by offices within departments.
The top five offices in those rankings were:
- Office of Inspector General (Treasury)
- John C. Stennis Space Center (NASA)
- Environment and Natural Resources Division (Justice)
- Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (NASA)
- Civil Division (Justice).


text:
Soaked in Luxury
Fobini Shirt
Shipping 3-6 working daysOver 850 brandsScandinavia's No 1 Fashion Site
Transparent blouse from SOAKED IN LUXURY. Button fastening at the back as well as extra layers of fabric in the front.
Made of 100% Polyester.
Model is 171 cm tall and is wearing a size Small.
Item no.: 110515-0014
Colour: Black
Size reviewsSmall in size
Complete the look
More about the brandSoaked In Luxury - city girl with attitude. Luxury clothing and style does not necessarily mean expensive. It is the feeling, the attitude and the fashion that creates "everyday luxury - be Soaked in Luxury". Nelly.com is to offer Soaked In Luxury fashion.
Others have also bought
Customer reviews
No reviews have been written yet.


text:
This study aimed at examining the fuel supply mechanisms in Internally Displaced Persons' (IDPs) camps of Northern Uganda. About 1.2 million IDPs in Northern Uganda have put a lot of stress on the wood resources (major source of fuel) resulting into forests depletion, making firewood scarce, expensive and not affordable by many IDPs. The conditions related to or resulting from cooking fuel scarcity have an impact on food security, health, environmental protection and, also enhance gender-based violence. Although fuel shortage impacts in camps are known, the fuel issues are rarely thought of by the government, NGOs and other relief agencies. The main objective of the study was therefore, to gain an insight into how fuel supply in the IDPs' camps can be made reliable, secure and adequate.
Recent Articles
- Why Humanitarian Aid Became Professional: the experience of MSF
- "No patients, no problems:" Exposure to risk of medical personnel working in MSF projects in Yemen's governorate of Amran
- Without Precedent or Prejudice? UNSC Resolution 2098 and its potential implications for humanitarian space in Eastern Congo and beyond