protoposting

Reflections on 2010

Back in 2000 when I was working for Sony I worked on a concept project titled 2010. I developed a series of concepts that foretold what was to come. Looking back at those concepts I have to say we had a lot of things right. The big themes were home, entrepreneurship, personalization, sensory, and services. Although the last two years have been a slow climb back. I think as a global culture we are poised for a new renaissance. My antennas tell me that the change makers are taking stock of what really matters in life. It's a blend of personal relationships, community, entrepreneurship, and constant learning. It's about re-thinking our obsession with hard-edge technology for smarter, softer, collaborative, organic solutions. I've been designing the future since I was a college student in the basement of Crown Hall in Chicago. I have never been so hopeful about the delight and purpose so many new inventions are poised to bring us. Happy New Year.

Reflections for President Obama and His Peers.

Dear President Obama,

I want to offer you as well as your peers some reflections I have regarding our struggles with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. I would like to focus on two interrelated roots to the problem. The first has to do with the recruitment of young boys of largely poor families. The second is the systematic destruction of educational opportunities for young women. How are these two things interrelated and why are these things the roots of the problem? By nature mothers strive to nurture and care for their children. If a mother cannot provide for her babies then they become lost children, and soon enough desperate young adults. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda prey on this situation. They offer food, shelter, and monetary support to these children and their families. Denying women education certainly perpetuates the cycle of helplessness that many families face. To me the answer is clear- help support, protect, and defend the education of women and let nature do the rest.

Although this is not a strategy that addresses the current situation and will take time to have a lasting effect, with every new word a young girl learns, hope spreads its sweeping wings. The struggle between theocracy and secularism has been going on for thousands of years and you will not turn it around by the next 4 or 8 years. There will be no shortage of opportunists that will use religion, fear, and force to satisfy their own  beliefs and objectives. What you and your peers need to do is put a system in place- one that outlasts you and the current militant jihadists. This system you must build needs to focus on educating women in this region of the world. This system needs to provide support to poor families today so their children are not victims of a movement that prey on the weak, the poor, and the uneducated. This system needs to be a clearly stated and bold in vision- a global G.I. Bill for women. This system will give greater purpose to the missions our men and women in uniform so bravely perform.

There is something deeper that needs to be touched on and this is not only for the President. This struggle between the militant jihadists and the world they denounce is also fed by many of us. These young boys are initially motivated to join this movement because they are hungry and poor. They become suicide bombers not "God willing" as they say but because our collective present world does not provide ample space for this natural human aspiration to reach beyond the here and now. Suffering children, starving children, abused children, and soldier children are testaments to the fact that our world is suffering from dis-ease.  We all need to arm ourselves with a better knowledge and understanding of our collective pasts and paths crossed that join us in the present state of affairs and be vigilant to the shape of our collective future. The modern world, this present we all share, is a giant river who's tributaries run rapid from all of our past beliefs and aspirations towards a future that may become so polluted it will no longer be safe for our children to drink and thrive from. We must take responsibility of our contribution to the damages done not for the sake of our nation, but for the sake of our humanity. We owe it to each other.

Learn a new word today maybe one that's old and in a language you don't know- imagine and act towards a better world. Om Shanti Shanti Shantihi.

3D Mobile Phone UI with Cloth Dynamics

This is a 3D prototype UI design developed by Protohaus for a mobile phone. The concept is to connect the common elements of a mobile UI with cloth dynamics. In this UI you can push, pinch, and twist the cloth. Using your finger to browse icons, they follow the dynamic path of the cloth. This prototype also leverages multi-touch and was developed on Nvidia's Tegra chip. There is a new generation of mobile UIs coming - now that this platform and others like it are becoming available.

At Protohaus we believe that 3D UIs are here to stay. Many 3D concepts borrow very tired metaphors for navigating through spaces. This metaphor ends up really being a series of transitions between elements of a UI. We choose the metaphor of a cloth because of it's natural dynamic beauty. If you look through the history of Art you will see that representations of cloth are everywhere so the idea is not new. The other aspect of a UI we feel is important and often neglected is its playful nature. The ability to poke, flip, twist, and twirl something gives us great joy.

As is often the case our best work comes from constant iteration between designer and programmer. We're always trying to push each other in a creative back and forth. User Interface design is very much an exploration of possibilities one that aims to satisfy the usability of the system but also acknowledges that our human system seeks joy.

Empathy is physical and unconscious

I had a really amazing and inspiring talk with Shin Shimojo today. His Psychophysics lab at Caltech is doing some ground breaking work on essential aspects of being human. Besides being an extraordinary researcher he's also an artist. His work, exhibited world wide deals with visual perception and illusion. He jokes about neuro-hyper-reality as a way to stimulate our neuro perceptual systems in ways that are more real than reality. A few years ago he recieved a grant to study the neural basis for aesthetics. As part of that project he's been studying the foundations of empathy and has uncovered some interesting facts. He runs this experiment where he asks an experimenter and a subject to point their fingers at each other at close proximity and then measures the micro movements of the two fingers. Alternatively he asks the subject to consciously follow or not follow the experimenter's finger with their own finger. It turns out that when the subject consciously trys NOT to follow the finger their finger infact moves at a micro level in sync with the other finger. After 30 min of consciously following the other finger - the unconscious syncronicity is higher. Based on this study and others he is inclined to believe that empathy is built bottom up. That is- our bodies unconsciously physically mimic each other. So the next logical question is how does that mimicry feel, familiar or novel? Which leads me to another study he did looking at which voice we find the most attractive. It turns out that in his study the voice we find most attractive is our voice transposed to the opposite gender. How self centered of us. What if we are able to design systems to have a deeper more direct expereince of the other? Can being self centered lead us to more empathy?  Keep an eye on Shin, he's likely to dissapear before your eyes.

Protohaus & Stratagem

Protohaus is excited to announce that it is part of Stratagem, a network of strategic marketing consultants. The Stratagem site, press release.

How science can help us design better people.

I'm writing this short article as a sketch for a more detailed article to come. The thoughts I'm relating here are still gestating. The area of interest for me has to do with the intersection of design iteration and the scientific method. I have become fascinated with experimentation as a way of living and a way of creating value in business. I know intuitively that if you iterate on a design your design gets better. I am also starting to see the same pattern in business. Business is made up of many parallel and overlapping processes. The more optimized these processes the smoother your operation. The process of refinement is essential to both design and business. How does this refinement come about? In most cases it's a simple process of trying things or experimenting to see what works. This is why I am drawn to try and better understand the scientific method. One can not deny the tremendous effect this method has had on our humanity. What I want to know is how this method relates to the process of creativity? I have just started to look at the work of Gaston Bachelard who was both physicist and a philosopher. I need to take a deeper look at his work but at a high-level there are some compelling interconnections between creativity, science, and morality. It turns out that his thinking on scientific activity illuminates our common understanding of the idea of paradigm shifts. It is interesting how science and morality seem to flow in different streams. What if creativity, experimentation, and dialogue, are the necessary processes for better design, better business, and a better life? Maybe I'm being too optimistic? I don't think designing the right experiments is an easy or trivial thing to do. What I do sense is that keeping things simple is critical.

How to build a great core team?

This is the single most important question for a start-up. The makeup of your partnership or core team will be the largest contributing factor to whether you succeed or not.  The right partners and the right execution team are two different problems. In this article I want to focus my thoughts mostly on the question of partners or core team members.

You may be thinking about inviting someone in because they bring with them financial resources. What you need to consider is that money alone is worth a lot less than you think. If a potential partner is willing to contribute money ask yourself this- once this partner is done bankrolling you what does he add to the team? Sooner or later their appetite will run out, and it will probably be at the worst of times. If you are going to take money from someone make sure that they have experience with start-ups, connect with their active business network, be certain they are truly inclined to contribute to the endeavor in other ways beyond their bank account. As a start-up you don't want anyone idling. Don't take money for money's sake and don't believe that there are 'silent' partners.

Another reason to bring on someone early- is to complement your skill set. One rule of thumb is to choose someone that is better than you at doing what they do. If you want to win choose winners. You need to really look hard at their past and look for real success. It's more valuable if they can point out how specific failures led to success. Success alone is luck. Success from failing is learning. If they can't show or don't talk about how they learned from failure you are setting yourself up. Look at their life in general not just business related concerns.

At the beginning of a start-up what skills are critical and need complementing? Let's say every product needs to be supported by a three legged stool. The three legs are viability, desirability, and feasibility. Now, which two of the three are the most important? As a designer I'm inclined to hold onto the idea that desirability is essential. The reality is that products succeed when you are relieving a real pain in the market. Focus on both making something that is desperately needed and the revenue stream to support that continued making. Once you have those two legs you can then design your product and service to be desirable. It's not as if design isn't important on the front-end- after all you have to first 'design' your product and 'design' your business model. What I'm saying is don't worry about making it beautiful or perfect just make it work. So what makes a good initial team? One person skilled at making and another one skilled at selling, those are the two essential skills that need to be complemented in a start-up.

Risk comes for the Greek word for root and was used as a metaphor for difficulty to be avoided at sea. Risk can be a beautiful thing. Does your team agree with you? Risk is what drives change in this world but few are even comfortable with the thought of it. Understanding the level of risk your core team is willing to take is essential. It's very easy to be excited about a new venture in the beginning. It's very easy to have thoughts of positive outcomes. The reality is that people loose interest when things don't go well. People start fearing the worst when things are bad. It takes a delusional tenacity to change anything.

I recently watched the Soderbergh film Che. I was struck by two things about Che's persona. The first and most relevant to the topic is- his continuous culling of his men. It seems as though he understood that at every turn it was necessary to trim the fat. He would constantly provide an opportunity for people to walk away. He would also present the stark consequences and allow people to reinforce their commitment or walk. This is a necessary process for any start-up.

The other thing that struck me about Che was- during the campaign for Cuba he was patient but new when to cut his losses and his decisions were quick and sharp. He was focused on the goal. When it came to Bolivia he was incapable of doing the same. He had to have known that things were not going well and yet he continued to barrel ahead. I think every entrepreneur is likely to face the same dilemma. It is a dilemma that cuts deep into our humanity. Why was it that Che could not make the right decisions in Bolivia? I think it was because his personal ties weighed him down.

If you're going to start a business you are going to involve people in a very intimate way whether you like it or not. When the high likelihood of money being lost is present be prepared for a lot of personal disappointment.  If money has seemingly been lost you may feel an enormous sense of responsibility towards all those that have contributed directly or indirectly. You may go out of your way and do ridiculous things to keep things afloat. Despite your best efforts people will blame you and walk. Do you still think risk is a beautiful thing? Making money and being caring towards others can often seem like two different things. There is no right answer you can not predict nor can you prevent your success or failure. You have to prepare yourself for either temporary outcome and be willing to keep at it. Above all value people and people of value will come through. If you are lucky they will be with you till the end.

How Big Companies Kill Innovation

Real learning occurs at the point where theory and practice meet. As the saying goes, "I've learned it the hard way". And learning things the hard way is always humbling.

It has been a goal of mine to continually innovate. Innovation creates demand - which is what drives economies. It is only when something innovative is created that we discover we actually need it. I have had the experience of innovating inside large companies and through my own start-up. What my experience has taught me... is that large companies have an extremely difficult time innovating inside or out.

The classic challenge inside large companies is for the business units to think beyond the coming quarter, next model or feature. While they race to capture the revenue stream that exists today, new entrants disrupt the market. Often, companies will have R&D groups that are flush with innovative ideas but completely disconnected from the business units. One of the ways to overcome this is to have the R&D group and the business unit agree on a time frame and a shared vision. The R&D group can then go off and execute in line with that vision, with the business unit's buy-in. This is important inside a large company - but buy-in alone does not equate with successful innovation.

The challenge outside is different. Sometimes, large companies approach small start-ups to see how they can benefit from each other. This can be a very risky proposition for a start-up. You must be hyper aware of the fact that everything is going to take much longer than you anticipate. Alternatively, large companies should be very careful about engaging small start-ups. If you are a large company thinking about approaching a start-up, make sure you have a clear goal with a set time-line and budget on hand. If you don't have all these things, please don't waste their time. Time is the life-blood of a start-up.

As a small start-up, you have to be ruthless about how much time you are willing to invest in a potential partnership. Be very clear about what your expectations are. If the conversation does not unfold according to plan - deadlines are missed, calls are pushed back, more information is requested - stop. Refocus on where you are going and move things forward on your own path. Set a hard time-line with a definable goal - and if you don't meet eye-to-eye with your potential partner, let go.

So what is the path of innovation? It's taken me a lot of time and money to come to what I believe is a better understanding. First of all, big ideas start small. Now, I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't think big - thinking big is critical for innovation - but you must scale back what you attempt as the first iteration. Find the essence of the idea by removing complexity. Start with this essence and scale-up according to the real data you collect from the implementation of your idea.

Second innovation requires a small inspired team or individual. In many ways, this is the most difficult part to get right. People are complicated - often, they can't help but make things even more complicated for themselves. You have to know that everyone on the team respects each other. The wrong person can poison your team and lead you astray. Innovating should be joyful. I don't know how many times I was put on a team in a large company and thought to myself, "I would never choose to work with these people". As an aside - if you haven't heard of non-violent communication, please Google it. In general, people can really afford to learn how to understand and express their needs better. The big lesson here is to always take responsibility for what happens to you and accept that you always have a choice - nobody but you is to blame.

I have to admit I've been an innovation snob. I have had this misguided belief that innovation happens in the sleek and shiny black, silver, and reflective surfaces of corporate R&D labs - or somewhere in the 5 feet between my bed and my desk, in my home-based start-up. But innovation happens on the street. It happens wherever there is the immediate potential for money to exchange hands. Of course, you need to think about what's desirable and what's feasible - but you must not forget what is viable. All three have to be present from the inception. I live close to LA's fashion district. Strolling past the shop vendors selling garments, you will notice that they're constantly yelling out their offers. It's a dynamic marketplace that is super efficient and in order to succeed, you have to sell - and sell now. The global pace of innovation has made the world into a bazaar. If you fancy yourself an innovator, you don't have much time to dream up your ideas, refine them and coddle them. You need to know if they sell or not. Innovation is about generating a small revenue stream to start with and then iterating on it. If you're a large company, your best approach to innovation may be spinning off teams. You need to find the right people willing to take the risk and let them break free of corporate bureaucracy.

Iterate on your idea. Iterate on your team. Iterate on the implementation. Iterate on your revenue stream. Iterate and improvise. I really enjoy musical metaphors - I can't stop thinking about large companies as faded-out pop stars from yesteryear. They're still getting their residuals, but they're burnt out. Some of them still make decent music, but they've become so big that they're like gigantic marching bands - very impersonal. Everyone thinks and acts the same inside the organization and everyone is counting on the band leader. A good place for innovation is a small jazz band. The musicians respect each other, share the joy of music making, improvise, and speak the same shared language - yet each voice is unique to its instrument. If you want to innovate, be in that jazz band - and make certain that it's got gigs.

--written by Eduardo Sciammarella --editor Lucia Micarelli

Mobile Social Networking Compartitive Chart

I have put together a pretty extensive chart on the leading mobile social networking players. I can't verify that 100% of the information is accurate, but I did a pretty thorough job. I'd be happy to make any changes if there's any mistaken info. This kind of information gathering takes time to do and is worth sharing. I included our product Fidg't. We've been one of the thought leaders in this space for a long time. Just take a look at the gearON project on our site under the mobileUI tag. Here is the link to the spreadsheet. Mobile Social Networking Comparative Chart

Regional

I met Joshua Kauffman this past month and I think he's doing some amazing work. Joshua and his partner Gwendolyn Floyd are crisscrossing boundaries, responding to critical questions, and creating new patterns.  Please take a look. Regional