Something new

We're trying something new at the home office this week. A bit radical for us risk-adverse types but there's a new day dawning.

We recently completed some research on data centers. In short, they consume a mammoth amount of power and that has two significant implications -- large carbon footprint and the cost to the business.

To date it's received a fair degree of interest not just from the usual suspects but from many top business publications as well. We're doing the usual dog and pony stuff but today we're posting the report on Slideshare. (Click here to see the presentation.) You can review it and you can comment on it. About the only limitation we've placed on it -- you can't download it. So off we go into the uncharted waters of social media. Nothing radical but an important first step into the new era.

Eight things I learned at the MIT CIO Symposium

1. Ron Williams, CEO of Aetna, gets IT. His quote: "If you want to succeed in this firm you need to understand IT." Another: "IT isn't viewed as a cost, it's a way to achieve competitive advantage." His philosophy -- use IT to share information among products and also cut costs by using preventative medicine.

2. Consumers will better understand healthcare costs. Why, because they have to and because they can. New technology will allow costs to be more transparent for insurers and insured. For insurers, a way to control costs. For consumers, a way to make choices.

3. Google and Wikipedia are only the tip of the iceberg. Tom Malone, professor of management at MIT Sloan, views them as only the beginning of software that harnesses and organizes intelligence.

4. The number of software companies will decline. It's only natural with consolidation and a lot of software migrating to the Web, said Michael Cusumano, professor at MIT Sloan.

5. "SaaSified" and "SaaSifaction" are words. At least they were used by Gerri Martin-Flickinger, SVP + CIO at Adobe.

6. Centralized vs. decentralized. It depends. Stuart McGuigan, SVP and CIO of Liberty Mutual, talked about how much is decentralized simply because the business works that way and that's his company's strength. "The fact that we haven't centralized some things is not a sign of weakness."

7. As the value of business intelligence grows, the role if the IT shop will diminish. Why? Because business units can access data on their own and use SaaS to access and manipulate it. "This leaves IT out of the picture," said Dr. Claudia Imhoff, president and founder, Intelligent Solutions.

8. If a company is interested in data analytics the IT department can't stop or control it. Doug Tracy, CTO, Rolls Royce, says the best the IT department can do is help explain its value.

www.mitcio.com

Journalism as a business -- quote of the day

"Journalists need to remember that before push can come to shove on high ethical issues, the newspaper has to survive as a business"

That's Howell Raines in his May profile of Brian Tierney. (Click here for full article.)

Reporting on the China earthquake

There's been a lot of discussion lately about the China earthquake and the speed of coverage through Twitter and other online services. Robert Scoble seems to be crowing the most about how impressive this was. (Read his post here.)

Here's an example of his breathless excitement:

I reported the major quake to my followers on Twitter before the USGS Website had a report up and about an hour before CNN or major press started talking about it. Now there’s lots of info over on Google News.

How did I do that? Well, I was watching Twitter on Google Talk. Several people in China reported to me they felt the quake WHILE IT WAS GOING ON!!!

It's no doubt impressive live updates were coming out of China but to what end? Most of the "instant" news and feeds were either inaccurate or totally out of context. In fact, I found myself searching for news on the earthquake through the traditional media I follow - CNN and The New York Times. Sometimes news can be reported too fast.

John Murrell at SiliconValley.com's Good Morning Silicon Valley makes some good points. (Read full post here.)

An important tipping point in news dissemination during a disaster? In timeliness, maybe by increments over phones, blogs, text messages, e-mail, forum posts and the news wires (assuming that you’re an active Twitter user and happen to follow the right people). In reliability, certainly not. By any of the aforementioned means, initial information is going to be scattered, anecdotal and often flat-out wrong.

Twitter, and SMS, serve a great purpose in keeping people in touch and sharing information. But it doesn't mean the information is any more reliable.

What I don't understand about cell phone laws

California is about to join a number of other states in requiring drivers to use hands-free devices (aka a headset) when talking on a cell phone while driving.

As the resident of a state that requires such behavior -- and will fine you $100 for not doing so -- I've never understood the logic of this.

First off, yesterday's Wall Street Journal (story is accessible to subscribers only) casts doubt on whether this law it really makes drivers safer.

An excerpt from the article:

The study, from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California, predicts that the state's hands-free requirement, which goes into effect July 1, will reduce traffic deaths in the state by 300 a year. But the institute -- which reached its conclusion by studying state-by-state traffic-fatality data, including data from a handful of states that already restrict cellphones on the road -- found a decrease in deaths only when people drove in adverse conditions, such as in rain, or on wet or icy roads.

But here's the real flaw in this law: The real distraction of a cell phone isn't the act of holding it to your ear. Instead, it's the dialing of the number and simply talking. The latter requires a fair degree of concentration and takes away from what you're supposed to be doing while driving which is paying attention. I can't tell you how many times I've been on calls and been in near accidents or driven past my exit simply because I wasn't paying attention.

So pass all the laws you want. It still won't make the roads safer until people focus on the task at hand.

Companies that use Twitter

One thing I've noticed lately is the number of companies that have Twitter accounts. JetBlue, Zappos, Plaxo, Southwest Airlines are ones I've noticed. I'm sure I've missed a lot more.

I monitor all of the ones mentioned above not because I am interested in them as companies but because I'm interested in the way they communicate with customers. I've already spoken about Plaxo but it seems these companies are using Twitter for several purposes:

1. Track complaints and respond. And the response is usually public.
   
2. Set the corporate tone.  Tony Hsieh, CEO of Zappos, seems to have about 20 tweets a day about everything from contests to observations about his company. It makes a customer feel like he knows the company better.
   
3. Recruiting tool. I am going to guess that some will find these companies appealing simply because they appear to have open, engaging cultures.
   

And they don't use the medium to blast people with stupid promotional messages which I know a bunch of folks in marketing are hungry to do. Instead, it's interesting, useful content.

At a time where it's harder and harder for large companies to "control" the message these companies are realizing that by being part of the conversation they are gaining control.

Twitter IDs:

JetBlue

Zappos

Southwestair

john Mccrea (John McCrea, head of marketing for Plaxo)

What to do when you are sued

DSW, a specialty retailer, files suit against Zappos, the online seller of shoes. Nothing new there. What's new is how the CEO, Tony Hsieh, has chosen to handle this. His reactions are posted on Twitter. (Click here to follow Tony.)

I have no idea of there's any merit to DSW's suit which claims illegal use of DSW's name on Zappos' site. But I am impressed by Tony's openness. Nearly every other CEO which either not comment or issue a denial. Granted, Tony has mainly said in his Twitter posts that he's upset that he found out about this through a press release but I think any customer or fan of Zappos would sense Tony's authenticity and genuine concern about this. I like this post in particular:

Press release claims we were using DSW store photographs to mislead people. Obviously Zappos would never intentionally do that.

Click here for a copy of the press release Tony is talking about.

Plaxo listens. But is that enough?

So I am dabbling in Twitter and notice Andrew Spender comment about Plaxo. He had joined and felt "tricked" into joining. I respond by saying much the same thing. The 140-character limit on Twitter didn't allow me to say much more but I basically meant that when I joined, Plaxo ended up sending emails to all my contacts asking them to join. This was several years ago and I remember feeling that I had either been duped or at the very least I was pretty stupid for not fully understanding what was doing.

This morning I find a response on Twitter from John McCrea, head of marketing, asking me why. (Link to John's Twitter feed. Link to his blog.)

I have to say, I was impressed. He not only responded but did so in an open forum. Not sure if that's going to solve all their problems but it tells me they're at least paying attention and I give them credit for that.

The only problem with Twitter is that I wasn't able to provide John with a more thoughtful response. My issue with Plaxo now isn't the email blast they do -- for all I know that doesn't happen now although based on what Andrew said that's still the case. My issue is that it seems like a laggard. The few times a month I logged on it pretty much has all the material and feeds that Facebook, FriendFeed, Twitter, LinkedIn have. It doesn't seem to offer anything new.

What it did offer when I first joined -- automatic update of my address book -- is still valuable but all the other features offered by other sites make it less of a priority than it used to be.

Here's what I would do. Figure out a way to not only be an aggregator, which is what it is, but become the best. Friendfeed is close but it has flaws. (For example, it won't let me follow people who haven't joined Friendfeed.) Fix that and you've got a winner.