Twitter has been tremendously successful at removing communication -- and cultural -- barriers across individuals and organizations using the internet. It's simple platform encourages a high degree of information sharing, thus leading to powerful viral effects.
Google Wave now promises to introduce an equally powerful set of communication tools and platforms for the web. While more collaborative than Twitter, both offer better ways of discovering information through technology.
But, should Twitter be careful about losing its prestige, dominance, and sexiness to Google Wave -- similar to what happened to Apple in the late 1980s when Microsoft stepped in with Windows? Granted, Microsoft has always lacked in the style and design factors, but ultimately won market share over Apple through the commoditization of the PC, thus bringing down the cost of ownership. Secondly, Microsoft offered developers a dynamic platform for building applications, enhancing the value proposition for the PC.
Certainly, Twitter is a free service, and it appears Google Wave will be as well. However, will the ubiquity of Twitter fail to meet the more open and progressive Wave system? Although cost of ownership was a primary factor between Apple and Microsoft in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the "software gap" between the two brands seemed to hamper the success of Apple. Will the limited functionality of Twitter force the same consequences?
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Blue Ocean Strategy
I just finished reading Blue Ocean Strategy by W. Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne. The book is an excellent read for aspiring entrepreneurs or managers looking to create differentiation in an existing marketplace that may appear to be saturated or already "well known" (called a "red ocean"). Creating "blue oceans" requires companies to think beyond their existing customers and locate non-customers, a process that may sounds impossible or incredibly difficult without the appropriate analytical tools.
Perhaps the greatest takeaway from Blue Ocean Strategy is the strategy canvas introduced in the beginning of the book. A strategy canvas, though a bit ubiquitous, is excellent for visually and analytically determining how a company can locate new pools of customers or look beyond the competition for alternatives. My favorite example in the book discusses how Callaway Golf used the Big Bertha golf club to bring in country club guests who did not regularly play golf and claimed they found it difficult to hit the ball. Callaway was able to ascertain a new market opportunity for these non-customers by introducing a driver that had a bigger head, making it easier to hit the ball. Using a strategy canvas, they were able to see that Callaway competitors did not have a product that targeted such a demographic, thus simultaneously creating alternatives in the segment.
Below is a sample strategy canvas I found on the web for Yellow Tail wine. Check it out; you can see how new opportunities can be engineered when companies "go against the grain".
See also: The Strategy Canvas @ blueoceanstrategy.com
Perhaps the greatest takeaway from Blue Ocean Strategy is the strategy canvas introduced in the beginning of the book. A strategy canvas, though a bit ubiquitous, is excellent for visually and analytically determining how a company can locate new pools of customers or look beyond the competition for alternatives. My favorite example in the book discusses how Callaway Golf used the Big Bertha golf club to bring in country club guests who did not regularly play golf and claimed they found it difficult to hit the ball. Callaway was able to ascertain a new market opportunity for these non-customers by introducing a driver that had a bigger head, making it easier to hit the ball. Using a strategy canvas, they were able to see that Callaway competitors did not have a product that targeted such a demographic, thus simultaneously creating alternatives in the segment.
Below is a sample strategy canvas I found on the web for Yellow Tail wine. Check it out; you can see how new opportunities can be engineered when companies "go against the grain".
See also: The Strategy Canvas @ blueoceanstrategy.com
Google Wave and AllThingsD
I am way overdue on this, even though Google Wave was announced yesterday. Check back for a post on the D conference and Google Wave.
IT as Change
Andrew McAfee wrote a thought-provoking entry in his blog over a week ago about the future perception of IT among business leaders. He posed the following question: Is IT becoming more of a commodity or a driver of change?
The post is thorough and an interesting read. I commented on it, and had this to say about where I see IT moving in the future:
The post is thorough and an interesting read. I commented on it, and had this to say about where I see IT moving in the future:
What do you think? Am I spot on or way out in left field? Let me know: I, like McAfee, am equally interested in learning more about what others think about IT in the enterprise.
Only until the CEO ('E' for executive) can rationalize IT -- to the extent a CEO currently understands the use of electricity in the workplace -- can technology be depicted through the IT-as-electricity imagery; essentially, marginalized as a commodity in the enterprise. Certainly, some facets of IT, like software and workstation deployment, have become more commoditized over time and give the company little competitive advantage, if any. However, most of today's emerging technologies (like cloud computing) are still rather fragmented (in the sense they are less standardized relative to business processes like software and workstation deployment); therefore, I do not agree with the IT-as-electricity imagery and continue to look at IT as change.
IT-as-change makes the most sense to me. Sure, I think it is understandable to see future commoditization of cloud computing services like Amazon AWS, let's say, given the economies of scale associated with on-demand infrastructure. However, these are public clouds and I believe much of the shift in cloud computing will move toward private cloud usage. As others have said in this comment roll, companies will use IT and cloud computing to their benefit in different ways; but crafting this strategy is where the CIO's role begins to evolve, rather than disappear (hence, my support for IT-as-change). Data is the true commodity here, but using this data to engineer the company's next competitive advantage is where IT must, and will, persist.
Though only a recent graduate, possessing (relatively) limited professional experience through internships, I have nonetheless seen companies design, develop, and implement their own private cloud services in-house to achieve greater efficiencies through collaboration and mass distribution of on-demand, highly-custom software. This is not new, but incorporating the right balance of public-private services and SaaS applications is critical. Obviously, just plugging into a cloud platform without any purpose or direction will not yield many benefits for the business -- and this is where CIOs see their next challenge.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Time To Play Catch Up
I am a bit behind in my reading. Considering I just graduated yesterday from Bryant University, and will not be starting work until the first week of July, I'm going to try and finish those books that I have neglected over the past semester.
I have also been on an Enterprise 2.0 kick lately, trying to catch up on some reading in that fast growing interest area of technology. Essentially, the term "Enterprise 2.0" begs the question: how can social media be effectively used in the workplace? Boston will be hosting an upcoming Enterprise 2.0 conference this June. I have already secured pavilion tickets.
On a side note, I've also built up a small sample of writings over the past two years at Bryant. If you'd like to see a few, check out The Archway's website.
And most importantly, congrats '09!
I have also been on an Enterprise 2.0 kick lately, trying to catch up on some reading in that fast growing interest area of technology. Essentially, the term "Enterprise 2.0" begs the question: how can social media be effectively used in the workplace? Boston will be hosting an upcoming Enterprise 2.0 conference this June. I have already secured pavilion tickets.
On a side note, I've also built up a small sample of writings over the past two years at Bryant. If you'd like to see a few, check out The Archway's website.
And most importantly, congrats '09!
Monday, May 11, 2009
My Next Project
For those who know me, they have probably heard of my web service known as appACT. When I initially built the application two years ago, I wanted a system that allowed users to tag their messages by data type, not data subject. To do this, I created a series of miniature web applications, cleverly nicknamed "web apps" on appACT, to solve this problem. You can now find the same concept on Facebook, where you are able to add specific link, video, and application data to a wall.
I am now looking to redefine the appACT idea to better align with evolving modes of modern communication. By applying new and exciting ideas from the Enterprise 2.0, I hope to leverage some exciting technology to make this possible. Unlike appACT, I hope this project becomes a group effort, and ultimately, a business.
I apologize if I am being overly broad and vague about my new idea. I'm still trying to grasp my head around the service's inner-workings and more research must be done; but as progress is made I'll surely provide more updates, if not questions, on this blog.
I am now looking to redefine the appACT idea to better align with evolving modes of modern communication. By applying new and exciting ideas from the Enterprise 2.0, I hope to leverage some exciting technology to make this possible. Unlike appACT, I hope this project becomes a group effort, and ultimately, a business.
I apologize if I am being overly broad and vague about my new idea. I'm still trying to grasp my head around the service's inner-workings and more research must be done; but as progress is made I'll surely provide more updates, if not questions, on this blog.
RMBS Transparency
Summer goal: Consistent blog postings!
Having taken a bond analysis course this semester, I have been able to study the "technical" side of mortgage backed securities (MBS).
Residential MBS and Commercial MBS securities are inherently different loan types, as identified in their nonrecourse and recourse attributes, respectively. Residential loans in an RMBS pool share similar characteristics and metrics, such as consistent loan-to-value ratios and interest rates. However, commercial loans in a CMBS pool cannot be analyzed from an aggregated basis; instead, each loan's riskiness is based on its projected cash flows from an income producing property and subsequently discounted. In this situation, a loan-to-value ratio doesn't make much sense, so a case-by-case evaluation of each commercial loan based on geographical, industry, and seasonality factors help determine the loan's riskiness.
While there are many other differences between RMBS and CMBS, like the treatment of prepayments, the process in which underlying loans are analyzed remains an important distinction. So what's the problem here? Though CMBS are still relatively ambiguous instruments, RMBS are sometimes even less transparent. Investors only have credit ratings to follow to gauge a basic understanding of underlying collateral, sometimes without information regarding geographical dispersion of loans.
At the European Securitization Forum in Decemeber 2008, the group released a set of voluntary guidelines for RMBS issuers to follow. Inside the report (PDF) there is a list of several fields that the organization asks European investment banks to disclose at the security's pre and post issuance and on a regularly scheduled basis.
This specific loan-level information is vital and must be made accessible to individual and institutional investors of RMBS. For example, portfolio managers must be attentive to geographical loan characteristics due to potential differences in prepayment speeds -- a factor critical to RMBS performance. Therefore, the question arises: should investment banks (or credit rating agencies for that matter) post this information, in an organized, structured, and standardized fashion along side its ratings? Or is such a change negligible as the system possess much greater risks?
Having taken a bond analysis course this semester, I have been able to study the "technical" side of mortgage backed securities (MBS).
Residential MBS and Commercial MBS securities are inherently different loan types, as identified in their nonrecourse and recourse attributes, respectively. Residential loans in an RMBS pool share similar characteristics and metrics, such as consistent loan-to-value ratios and interest rates. However, commercial loans in a CMBS pool cannot be analyzed from an aggregated basis; instead, each loan's riskiness is based on its projected cash flows from an income producing property and subsequently discounted. In this situation, a loan-to-value ratio doesn't make much sense, so a case-by-case evaluation of each commercial loan based on geographical, industry, and seasonality factors help determine the loan's riskiness.
While there are many other differences between RMBS and CMBS, like the treatment of prepayments, the process in which underlying loans are analyzed remains an important distinction. So what's the problem here? Though CMBS are still relatively ambiguous instruments, RMBS are sometimes even less transparent. Investors only have credit ratings to follow to gauge a basic understanding of underlying collateral, sometimes without information regarding geographical dispersion of loans.
At the European Securitization Forum in Decemeber 2008, the group released a set of voluntary guidelines for RMBS issuers to follow. Inside the report (PDF) there is a list of several fields that the organization asks European investment banks to disclose at the security's pre and post issuance and on a regularly scheduled basis.
This specific loan-level information is vital and must be made accessible to individual and institutional investors of RMBS. For example, portfolio managers must be attentive to geographical loan characteristics due to potential differences in prepayment speeds -- a factor critical to RMBS performance. Therefore, the question arises: should investment banks (or credit rating agencies for that matter) post this information, in an organized, structured, and standardized fashion along side its ratings? Or is such a change negligible as the system possess much greater risks?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)