Ideas are Orange

Extreme Makeover: World Edition

According to internet sources, the cost of the Iraq war is somewhere at US$ 450 billion. This is more than the GDP of Spain, more than the revenues of IBM, P&G, HP and Motorola combined, and enough to hand out $91,000 dollars per US citizen.

The war is all about oil, there seems to be general consensus on that. But it is also about stimulating the economy. Defense companies, infrastructure companies, technology companies, etc... As long as that money is being spent to stimulate the economy, at least there is buy-in from economists (maybe not oil companies)

So here is my idea to wage the war on poverty. Give all that money to Ty Pennington, the host and leader of the show Extreme Makeover: House Edition. Have ABC create a show called Extreme Makeover: World Edition in which houses / towns / infrastructure is built in developing nations. Here are some ideas on how it could work.

• The US government sponsors building in developed nations to create infrastructure for personal and business purposes
• It flies construction crews in the same B-52 bombers that are used to carry bombs and ammo. Instead they carry materials and crews.
• US constructors travel all over the world as ambassadors, and become globally aware. No more FEAR, and they get a stamp on their passport. You could also spend some money on protection for them to give certain stakeholders some comfort.
• Crews build houses in 7 days, business centers in 10 days, towns in 30 days, etc... There could be an interesting association between what they build and the time it takes them.
• Business centers could have retail spaces for companies that buy into them; in order to get locals to do business with US companies. They could have mini-retail outlets from companies that want to do business with locals. Think P&G distributors, Amway salesmen, Kinkos copiers, etc...
• These US tax businesses could get tax breaks to go to underprivileged nations and invest.
• The US spends serious procurement cash on buying stuff from wholesalers  -such as Sears - that provide all the goodies.
• The US exports high quality labor, best practices, spends on raw materials, etc...
• The US could deliver training and guidelines as to how to improve standard of living.
• Ty Pennington is the US's Goodwill ambassador. He oversees events and uses his energy to link people together. He could fly around in a jet with the stars and stripes and visit in a week launches in all five continents.
• Several institutions get reformed. Defense companies can use logistical expertise to transport materials. Equipment management know-how to fix infrastructure, defense intel to protect what they build, etc...

I wonder if this really is such a far-fetched idea. There is major change that requires turning the industrial military complex into a system to yield out service across the world; that makes it impossible. It simply seems absurd to keep a war going while there are such pressing issues out there.

Realtime Iraq war cost: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost-of-War/Cost-of-War-3.html

Making American Soccer Work

Recently, there have been some major moves in order to revamp Major League Soccer (US). The most notable include signing David Beckham to the L.A. Galaxy, and a few days ago, it was revelad that Juan Pablo Angel (Colombian striker for Aston Villa) has signed with the New York Red Bulls.

These are bold moves, paying a lot of money for marquee soccer players! It assumes either Americans are warming up to soccer, or the market simply needs to be tapped using superstars.

But... did you know... americans don't like soccer. According to Harvard a Harvard Professor, whom I heard speak a few years back, and whose name I was not able to dig up, Americans don't like soccer because the scores are to low! Yup, americans are used to 100 point basketball games, 40 point football games, or 7 run baseball games. Very few want to stick around for a 1.5 hour match to see a 0-0 score.

So perhaps some changes or ideas to make MLS more [economically] attractive could be.

1. Eliminate or make off-sides more lax. Offsides make it hard for strikers to shine, and are the cause for a lot of anulled goals. What if offsides were ... but perhaps this would distort global soccer stats of goals scored and not scored. Or you could have off-side and non-offside goals.
2. Create new stats. Baseball game scan be just as slow. But in baseball you have runs, hits, and errors, you have batting averages, you have RBIs. Several stats. Soccer has less "activity" stats such as these and therefore people usually focus more on result measures. Think of it as "balancing the scorecard", including some new measures. They could include striking accuracy, or "near-scores", or out-of-area goal kicks. To get sportscasters and fans more interested, more stats are needed.
3. Allow power-plays. Much like in hockey, perhaps you could change the goalie for another striker... or 2 for that matter. I know it's controversial, and it would probably be suicide, but hey, it could be an opportunity to score more goals and keep stadiums full.
4. Crate a distinct food and gadget. MLB has cracker jacks, NHL has everything from octupuses to foam paws, NFL has beer hats, NBA has those soundsticks. Soccer needs its own tools. Perhaps something that resembles de "ole ole ole" chants for the tool, and smoething safer than fireworks. Some pop material gurus needed here.

With hispanic population being the most significant majority in the US, and americans saying in a survey that their favorite [american food] is tacos (official survey); the upside is huge, but the scores, the game experience and the regulations might need to change.

The RFID Anonymizer

As RFID becomes a mainstream technology in consumer packaged goods, the debate of its effects on consumer privacy also continues. There are a lot of interesting uses for RFID products when it comes to the supply chain, as this is what RFID was initially conceived for. Tracking razorblades that are easily stolen, or automating inventory count of crates, cartons and pallets are all fantastic uses.

But once those products hit the consumer's home, they might have a need to be anonymized. The supply chain benefits are beginning to get distorted by davvy marketers that want to know what's in your fridge, your closet, bathroom, etc...

As consumers, we need an RFID Anonymizer

RFID tags need to be anonymized. Perhaps there can be a product that allows to detect and RFID tag, and pull a trigger to disable it. Detection can happen in the same manner as keychains detect wi-fi networks, and disabling or anonymizing by pointing and pressing.

This creates two important things. First, the economies of RFID need to yield their benefits in the supply chain and not in the demand chain so that if tags are anonymized the RFID proposition as a whole doesn't fall appart. That is, it needs to focus on reaping the benefits before products hit consumers.

Second, the fact that RFID will inevitably will be used to learn more about consumer preferences, makes an RFID anonymizer an essential tool for paranoid and non-paranoid consumers. Consumers will not be able to opt out of buying RFID tagged products nor will all stores anonymize tags on exit, creating the need for a home device.

The Next Net - LinkedIn

Business 2.0 magazine published on its March cover the 25 hot startups to watch. It struck me that LinkedIn was not included in the top 25, as I think they will probably be 2007's most important web 2.0 application.

Here is the thing. Most web applications need only one thing, and one thing only to become great. Much like Google owns search, Flickr owns pictures and Youtube owns Video. Well, LinkedIn owns the people, who are what make it all happen. Or at least business people.

In any information system or application, there is always a bit of information to which all others are attached. In a CRM system for example, the basic input is having client accounts, that is to what you associate contacts and proposals. LinkedIn has the people, which is the piece of information to which everything is attached. The have begnu creating functionalities to "attach" certain things, like other people, answers, recommendations, but it can really be taken further.

LinkedIn is in a unique position to become the next killer app, because it can work as a hub to which all other apps. are attached. But they should be more concerned with linking the LinkedIn profiles with other things such as:

• Showing on your linkedIn profile the number of pictures you have on Flickr.
• Showing on your profile the amount of money you´ve contributed through Kiva.
• Showing on your profile Squidoo lenses that you´ve created
• Showing on your profile the [Lulu] books you have published
• Showing on your profile a map of places you have been (WAYN comes to mind)
• etc...

These could be attached through Widgets (what web 2.0 app. doesn't use widgets?)

The key thing here is that LinkedIn should focus on keeping and expanding the people, not the functionalities. The "people" functionality is more than enough, it simply needs to create a way to tap into other apps and make the profile more visible - by showing other bits of information (pics, kiva contributions, etc...) that people own.

Reuters's retail end

I recently read the article by Carl J. Loomis in Fortune about Bloomberg's Money Machine. It is of course fantastic. It really got me thinking about where Reuters is in the market and some ideas on that.

• We are heading towards an experience economy
• Owning the retail end of the business is where the experience is provided. That's why there's Apple Stores, Sony Style and Nike Town.
• In the next wave, you don't want to be in the back-end or being the provider of the guys facing the customer. Unless you are in India or China and your economy is at that stage.
• The experience requires great design!
• Reuters could use Jeff Han, to create a new kind of terminal that is organic in all features. That is touchscreen and motion enabled. That can be manipulated with fingers instead of keys. This would provide a great experience. I´ve seen and used a Bloomberg... not pretty.
• Reuters can beat Bloomberg in usability! If Bloomberg has the volume side of the market they can go for the margin side of that
• Reuters needs Microsoft for voice recognition purposes. With thousands of commands and options, these systems need some voice activated functions.
• Reuters should also apply some Wikinomics to the equation in order to get global ratings, build a massive investment guide, emerging markets information, etc...
• Reuters should be riding the ipod economy. Why isn't there a Belkin made accesory called the Reuters-Link that wirelessly downloads ll video and audio content to an ipod? Bloomberg can be accessed by a Blackberry... there are a lot more ipods out there. Reuters can learn from the Nike + Apple partnership.

I suppose it boils down to out-innovating your competition, but with a clear [blue ocean] differentiation, reducing features, raising content, creating usability, eliminating complexity.

Salesforce + eProject = Deliveryforce - Part II

I saw a lot of visitors to the Deliveryforce post, so I decided to expand a little on that.

This is what a "Service Economy" value chain (the simple version) looks like. Knowledge workers prepare or acquire skills and competencies that will help them escalate from technical, to human to conceptual roles. They use that knowledge to propose solutions to different issues that companies are facing, and most important of all, the need to deliver on the promise by planning, executing, controlling an engagement.

To sell, you need a process and an enabling technology (salesforce.com is my pick)

• You need to prospect and plan identifying opportunities (90% is starting in the right direction)
• You need to qualify leads
• You need to manage relationships
• You need to manage proposals and follow up
• You need to analyze the data around the sales cycle.

All this is enabled by functionalities in a CRM program. The key issue is that this needs to be web enabled and that sales techniques - including the process - change so much that you are better off purchasing web software that will be managed by an expert provider instead of having a system that will freeze your organization in time with practices that will tend to get old.

Why this is important:

• Organizations need to be about change
• The only way to change is to go from point A to point B
• To go from A to B you need a project or a change initiative
• To manage it you will be required to manage some key elements of a project like benefits, stakeholders, objectives, documents, third parties, risks, issues, changes, and others.

So... why do you need a PPM tool (case in point eProject)?

• Basic premise of project management is that it takes two to tango. You and the client. Projects are a team effort. So therefore, the enabling project management technology needs to enable teamwork, to be collaborative, or get ready for communication problems.
• Timeline management is a critical success factor. eProject for example imports MS Project and shows a web gantt chart that is spectacular.
• Schedule management is critical. eProject has a monthly calendar to plan all project meets, appointments, etc... No more one-to-one communication.
• Document management is perhaps one of the critical issues of large scale projects. People send sensible information via e-mail just like they send viral videos. eProject allows for a central repository of documents with version control and notifications.
• E-mail is for notifications... not for management. eProject provides notifications in a user-defined workflow to be notified about appointments, document changes, etc...
• Progress reports should not require sweat. In eProject, everybody updates the % progress of their tasks and you get an automated. No more calling everyone to update the MS Project File or incorporating changes to a .mpp file which always works out wrong.
• MOST IMPORTANT... are custom apps. You will need to build small apps to store other project information. I have used it to build an improvement opportunities matrix, a stakeholder map, a communications plan and others. you can build any dynamic web app to store the information digitally on a web data base and not in a document that will limit you when delivering a large project.

There are many opportunities with owning value chains, of an economy in general or industry specific ones. In this case, won proposals usually turn into projects (in the service economy), and delivering projects also has a key set of elements that some people / organizations take very lightly.

The Corporate Nintendo DS

I recently bought a Nintendo DS with games Brain Age and Big Brain Academy. I have to sharpen up for some tests and decided to try all available alternatives. I am stunned at how effective and fun this is. These games take the rust off the basic skills that help you think an react fast.

Nintendo should make corporate games! A DS is not a kids toy and corporate games could be a great alternative to engaging in business situations. Games such as>

• Virtual stock exchange (Stock simulator, could connect to the net to get daily close quotes for example... or have them be fake.)
• Supply Chain Manager (imagine a fictitious country where you can chose a fleet and have to stock different sales channels)
• Selling & Marketing (something around building brands and building brand value with consumers with several sorts of experiences and advertising)
• HR Management (something like a tamagotchi, except you recruit, train, develop, compensate, etc...). You could build a workforce... perhaps "export it" to second life.
• International M&A - A game on acquiring and merging companies through several mechanisms like LBOs, reverse mergers, equity swaps, etc... You could dominate the globe and create funds.
• CBM- Certified Busines Manager practice test questions. Why isn't there a GMAT, SAT, GRE, or LSAT preparation game?

I was not a DS fan, but think there is application for this beyond the traditional video games.

This makes interactivity accesible and portable, vs. carrying a laptop computer to "train your brain".

There could also be a market around getting companies to create their standard competency models and Nintendo getting them to be assessed on a DS. People could train with situations, cases, questions and other elements to build up their skills.

Anyways, I found it tremendously fun and will continue training my brain.

Kiva + LinkedIn = Contribution

"Kiva lets you connect with and loan money to unique small businesses in the developing world. By choosing a business on Kiva.org, you can "sponsor a business" and help the world's working poor make great strides towards economic independence. Throughout the course of the loan (usually 6-12 months), you can receive email journal updates from the business you've sponsored. As loans are repaid, you get your loan money back." Source: Kiva

LinkedIn, on the other side, is the premier site to register your professional network, keep track of business relationships, get business recommendations, create people-to-people connections that can bring new business; as well as provide other services as business answers.

Kiva is enabling a global objective, the need to contribute by way of lending to those in need.
LinkedIn is contributing to another global objective, the need to connect.

Kiva is basically creating visibility for a large set of small entrepreneurs that do not have access to capital, which in developed economies translates into small sums. This comes after largely know initiatives such as the Grameen Bank. The interesting bit is these people need the visibility because people are willing to contribute (lend in this case) but there is a need for more contribution platforms or mechanisms.

LinkedIn is interesting because it is mostly based on the concept of connection on a group level, but visibility on an individual level. People want their career and expertise to be visible, they strive to have several relationships, to the point where it exceeds those people you actually know, they strive to give expert answers to business questions posed, and ask for recommendations from others to certify their expertise.

Kiva could use LinkedIn

• By allowing LinkedIn people to lend money to entrepreneurs in regions of interest, areas of interest or others - linking Kiva into the profiles.
• By making loans a visible aspect of a persons LinkedIn profile. That is the amount that a person has lended and its global impact.
• By making contribution evident and showing members that contribute the most. The richest men in the world (Bill Gates + Warren Buffet) are now hip because they contribute, not because they can buy the world. You could have www.toplenders.com as they have www.toplinked.com
• By providing tools to show a global footprint of needs. Think a global map of where loans are required. If Kiva uses the crowd appropriately it could be satisfying capital needs in key areas of the world.
• LinkedIn could get "smaller" profiles in exchange. Is any profile to small in a world where we are all people? Although there is definitely a challenge in getting these entrepreneurs to use the net, and LinkedIn. US$ 100 laptop with the loan anyone? (that's another post... but every entrepreneur needs a laptop)

For Kiva this is a way to tap into a savvy business network willing to contribute and lend. The community is the judge, and the community is willing to judge how much people contribute. If [developed economy LinkedIn] people don´t mind, having not-developed economy people in their profile, its a way to start bridging the digital and economic divide. This is a practical way of putting capable individuals in touch with individuals in need.

The H Racer and Harry Potter marketing

One of the breakthrough 2007 HBR Ideas is Harry Potter marketing. What this means is that some brands can mature over time with their audience instead of focusing on a specific segment for life and acquiring, and losing customers over time. Instead, it aims at keeping those customers and evolving the brand with them.

I saw an innovative product that might have the potential to leverage Harry Potter Marketing. It is the H-Racer manufactured by Horizon Fuel Cell Technologies (HFCT).

• Small children could get their parents to buy the H Racer. HFCT could brand it around a key message of clean performance, cutting edge design, sustainable fuel and others. The main objective is to build a loyal fan base throughout different parts of the world that buys this message and loves this car.
• Then teenagers might have another H powered innovation that is more suited for them. Perhaps an H powered model airplane or helicopter, certainly something more advanced. Again, a small innovation to keep the brand maturing with the group.
• In the future perhaps HFCT might even make an H Racer for grownups, or license the technology to another company (like BMW). They will bring a brand and a loyal fan base (fans not customers) that would consider purchasing the car or other inventions that are H powered.

The H Racer is one of Time Magazine's best 2006 inventions. It would be interesting to see if they can pull off new inventions in the coming years catered to this evolving group of customers until that group reaches a purchasing power age.

Turning the Oscars into the World Cup

Why aren't the Oscars more like the World cup? Every year, the hottest filmmakers and artists gather in the same place to receive the same type of award. It is a great tradition, and Hollywood is a diverse, entertaining and representative business.

But the Oscars have maintained a sort of "status quo", where the most change you are likely to see is the shows host and the haute coutoure worn by actors and actresses alike. So I wonder, what prevents the Oscars from being more like the world cup? From being global and turning the hollywood "brand" into something that is

• Oscar hosting cities should have a competition to be the host city - this should be a global event. Why are countries not competing to attract superstars? They compete to attract star athletes...
• Oscar nominated actors should travel to that city - it gives them global exposure, global reach, a worldly sense, and a broader audience. People would flock to see hit actors and actresses.
• Locations could be more exotic. The Kodak theatre is interesting, but Dubai, Shanghai, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro, Bangkok, Moscow, Sydney, Hong Kong and others hold equally interesting places. How about setting up the whole Red Square in Moscow? or having the venue in the Forbidden City?
• The Oscars should be simultaneously translated into several languages during the transmission. They probably are, but that is if the country broadcasts the event - and that depends on global viewership.
• The Oscars need interaction! They need to consider some sort of watcher input throughout the show, they need to enable global online voting or local SMS message voting for some purpose. How about having a "people's award", where a specific film - other independent films for example are chosen in real time by the people?. They could learn something from reality TV.
• The Oscars need Youtube to have a new category. Best viral internet film... perhaps this could be voted by the people as mentioned before.
• The Oscars need more distribution. They need Apple Computer to set up an Oscar store the day after in order to pre-purchase the movie, purchase the Soundtrack, purchase outtakes or other material.
• The Oscars need Apple Computer to build an "Oscar Long Tail" of digital content that can be bought and downloaded. That would be to purchase historic movies, historic scenes, etc... They are digging up the past during the presentation, and that means Long Tail dollars.
• The Oscars need to contribute! They need to donate part of the proceeds from the show night to a local charity for different initiatives. They could be building great rapport with all of the hosting countries.
• The Oscars need Google Earth to [satellite] photograph the venue each night to keep a historic record of what the sky looked like. They could use Lasers to paint a global space message for example or create something remarkable.
• Some of the ad dollars could go to helping some invites that "can´t make it " by subsidizing flying - perhaps they could make up for it with viewer volume.

Tradition is great. Tradition does not mean that you cannot innovate and adjust to change sought by audiences and global connectivity on a social and technological level. I watched the Oscars last night and saw the same thing as before, so perhaps they are getting the same result as before.

Hollywood is a huge export with a huge fan base. So is soccer. But soccer is global, they understand the power of a global connection and going out to seek world audiences. Perhaps it is time for the Oscars to do the same.