Stuart Oliver: Entrepreneur, Technology COO / Operations Director, Interim Manager.

Back in Jan, I wrote a post, about how many [corporate] companies were banning access to social networking sites, citing issues relating to productivity.

More recently, I read [yet another] article, claiming that “One in four employers bans workplace access, citing productivity issues”.

Would you believe that 23% (of those surveyed) banned access to sites completely.

I think that whilst, today, claims are made that the biggest impact on productivity are networking sites, as soon as “access policies” and “fair use policies” are authored and imbedded into HR documentation, they’ll be something else that’s preventing people working.

But hold on a minute. Aren’t we just looking for something to blame?

Productivity is close to the heart of every business owner and so I understand the concern. However, if folk don’t want to be productive then they won’t be. It’s that simple. If people enjoy their work, the people, etc etc then they will be productive. Take away social networking as a way of “wasting time” and they’ll smoke more instead, spend more time on their mobile, take longer lunches, whatever it might be!

Also, let’s consider this. If people are maintaining their network then we should assume that there is a high probability that this will positively impact business. If you are a product supplier and your staff are maintaining their network, some of whom may work in companies that purchase your product, then guess what….

There is of course another reason for preventing access. Concern that your staff maybe headhunted or poached by other organisations. But really, do you think blocking access from the office will prevent this practice? I didn’t think so.

So, by all means manage access but, please, concede that networking can be productive and so don’t tar/block everyone. As with most management responsibilities, manage the exceptions.

I have to chuckle when I read this article regarding the new, automated, face scanners that are now being trialled in the UK.

In brief, you arrive at the airport from outside the UK. You enter the immigration area and then walk into a booth which has entrance and exit doors. As you enter the doors behind you close automatically. Place your passport in the reader, look at the camera and if your face matches the passport then off you go. Simple, right?

Not quite. I was fortunate enough to be in an immigration queue (manned by humans), adjacent to an unfortunate lady who was win the automated one. “Place your passport in the reader”, the device hailed to it’s unintended audience of c100 of us queuing. That’s when it began…Oh the hilarity and embarassment. All we could do was watch, listen, and feel the poor lady’s frustration as, now “trapped” in the device, she was clearly going to die there. The machine started issuing orders…

“Remove your glasses”

“Step closer to the reader”

“Stand still”

“Move away from the reader”

“Stand Still”

“Step closer to the reader”

“Stand still”

“Move away from the reader”

“Stand Still”

…and so it went on. Alas, I never saw whether this poor lady made it out alive, or sane. Someone did mention that the doors that close around you are bulletproof. Frankly, I can understand why as putting up with that frustration could drive anyone to anything, simply so they can get out.

OpenSocial, if you don’t know about it, is a fantastic idea for those of us that have profiles on the web. You know, those online community thingys on the interweb.

I’ve been thinking a lot about how many believe that their millions will be made in marketing. For those that I’ve spoke with who’ve said this, I don’t believe them but wish them buona fortuna.

I think that, in order for to make money from marketing, the success of marketing in general needs to improve by orders of magnitude. Forget traditional logic that goes along the lines of;

1. Send out X (spam) emails.

2. 5% of X read them

3. 2% of X click a link to view a product

4. 0.01 of X buy something

I think there is a very simple solution that could be summarised by saying it needs to be more targeted.

Many of us will say that we don’t like marketing, that we don’t like see advertisements. I would say that most of us don’t mean this rather we mean that we don’t like most marketing. I would also say that the reason we don’t like most marketing is either because it’s inappropriate or ill timed.

So, what if we could address the appropriateness and the timeliness? What if data could be used from social networks? What if the deliver could be to mobiles? What if I controlled the delivery….?

Social networks are as common today as bacon and eggs. It would appear that many believe that a social network for your business, your product, your neighbourhood, whatever it is, is the answer to all your woes. Really?

What is interesting to me is how to actually make money from social networks. Putting aside the high profile big boys like MySpace and Facebook, what will happen to the others? One thought I’ve had is that they might end up being worthless. I get here on the basis that the value of a network, any network, is in the data of the membership. Given that few, if any, of us are a member of a single social network it means that our data is shared across at least two. Therefore, if one of these has value does it mean that the other is worthless? Not necessarily but it’s an interesting thought.

I am certain that value is not gained simply through numbers. That is to day, the number of members, the number of blogs, the number of clubs. All of these bring me to ask “so what?”.

I think that many fail to see how easy it can be to build communities of knowledge, groups of expertise etc from networks. Many are looking for the quick win. As if this isn’t bad enough many want the quick win brought to them. Long may they be waiting.

Based on my recent readings I thought I should be a more active proponent of RFID and author some post on good uses of RFID.

So, here is the first - RFID tagged products in your supermarket.

What if your phone or pda had an RFID reader? Well, you could wave it (yes, somewhat like a wand) near a tagged product. This would receive a unique ID for the product (and probably the specific jar/packet too) that could then be cross referenced in real time. Want to look up reviews (think amazon book reviews) of the product, voila, there they are on your phone. Want to check allergy advice, voila, there it is. Maybe you want to add this to your online shopping list, hey presto, it’s done.
Sounds convenient and beneficial doesn’t it…(?)

OK, now I should give the downside so that the same criticism isn’t levelled at me that I’ve levelled at others for being grossly biased.

This tagged product could be used to track/trace/follow your movements around the store, should the store wish to do so.  This product could be explicitly linked to your credit card (and therefore you personally) or your store loyalty card (and therefore you personally) and so you may feel or decided that you are not comfortable with the data being gathered.

The flip side to all of this is that should the product be subject to a recall then it will be easy to contact you immediately and advise you accordingly.

As mentioned previously, I’ve been reading Spychips.

On the whole, unfortunately, it’s been a disappointment. Given my own high level of interest in RFID this has been an achievement for the authors!

As I proceeded through the second half of the book, the underlying that all RFID technology is evil and exploitative simply became too tedious for me. The unfortunate thing is that the authors, in the main, have many valid points to make but their constant accusatory tone means that, as the reader, you almost start to wonder if there is a personal dislike of companies connected with RFID. In fact, having read the book, I don’t doubt there is.

The main point, made in the book, is - simply put - data. Data captured on you an me. What we bought, where, when, how much we paid for it, how we paid for it etc. This can all be captured through exploiting RFID technology. After sale though, there is an interesting challenge…what happens to the RFID tag that was in the garment you bought or a pair of shoes perhaps. If the RFID tag remains and remains active then, in theory, you can be tracked with immense accuracy and without being aware. The days of the traditional P.I. could soon be over, to be replaced by virtual P.I.’s who, with the help of subscriptions with RFID readers located anywhere can trace your every move, from anywhere. It all sounds very Sci-fi and, to a degree, it is however this is all tested theory also. So fiction it may be but only for now.

As I went through the book, I folded the corners of pages where I disagreed with the authors comments and thought I’d put my own views across here. There are simply too many, c20 at the moment, and I know that any reader would simply navigate away from this blog.

Like many things in life benefits are traded off against undesirable benefits. RFID technology has plenty of each. Talk to americans about guns and you’ll hear of a plethora of benefits to owning one and using it. You may also hear of a plethora of reasons why you shouln’t own one. I think this is a fair analogy with RFID. No, it’s not lethal however the benefits and pitfalls really are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum in that the benefits are really great and the pitfalls are really not great.

So, to draw this to a close. Spychips is a good book that will make the reader aware of how RFID may be used and abused. However the reader should also bear in mind that it’s massively biased and so if you want to put the book down feeling educated and either unbiased or able to form your own opinions you will need a mental filter in place first.

I’m hoping to meet with the authors as opinions made through reading often change once introductions are made in person.

One of the fundamental barriers to widespread adoption of RFID is the side effect it has on privacy. Like too many things in life there is a trade off with demonstrable benefit…

IBM has announced the manufacturing of it’s privacy friendly RFID solution. The solutions works by having an external antenna that can be removed (easily) by, say, a consumer after purchasing an item.

So, in-store, the RFID tag can be garment specific to allow inventory tracking etc and out of store the tag should be rendered useless. Should be. As noted in this article not everyone is convinced that it will and it’s easy to understand why. Removing the antenna vastly reduces the range over which it can be used and this is not the same as preventing it being used.

I would be happy with a statement similar to “..the tag cannot be interrogated at distances greater than x centimetres”, but not everyone will be happy with this. So, can the sceptics ever be convinced? Do they actually want the tag to be destroyed once it’s original use has been satisfied?

RFID will be one of the most influential technologies over the forthcoming years and it’s easy to see one barrier to market - privacy concerns. This is unfortunate timing given the recent high profile issue of loss of personal data, privacy is high on peoples mind. If your product exploits RFID technology what will you do to address the privacy concerns of potential clients?

Reputation is the killer app for the foreseable future and so if your product doesn’t have a reputation that builds trust, you are already on a slippery slope. You might decide that, if your RFID enabled product is not privacy friendly, it may be time to define a new strategy.

I wrote the above as if writing for the future. I think that SMEs will lead the way in flexible working, not the bluechips, the corporates.

The reason why is simple. Change. Change the most common cause of big issues, budget overruns and staff churn. There are very very few good change managers out there although, a quick look through any networking site might lead you to think differently. In contrast, a quick look at any online resource for change management failures will yield many results. See where I’m going…?

So why SMEs? They are still small. They are still adaptable. They still expect to adapt. To many bluechips, a change project runs for months, sometimes years. This isn’t change, it’s evolution. These leads me to wonder if we will see an acceleration in the growth of SMEs and a “normal” rate of growth in the bluechips. Let’s see

I think that, to a certain extent, there is a power shift from employer to employee. For years, the employer has been doing the employee a favour. We pay you. We give you holiday. And you even get a canteen. However, as companies realise that their competitors are now not within 50 miles of their office, they’re not even in the same country, they also realise that they need flexibility from employees.

Recruitment websites are going to need to change. Employers don’t want full time employees anymore. They don’t want part time either. If you want to compete in the new recruitment market, your online offering will need to be able to place individuals based on their availability and the requirement of the client. Maybe it’s 2 days/pw, maybe it’s 2 hours one day and 3 the next. Whatever it is, if your recruitment business can’t offer this then you’ll soon be out of the game.

Gone will be the days where employers don’t give out mobile devices because of “security risks”. This has long been a way of saying “we don’t feel confident we can mitigate against these”. If you don’t have decent security staff then you might want to get some soon. And those guys who have prevented you using pda’s, blackberrys and laptop on the grounds of security risks should get fired.

Lastly, I suppose I should mention all things green. If your company is serious about being green then the use of remote workers will help your staff reduce their carbon footprint.