Sheryl, my partner and fiance, called my attention to an interesting question this morning. It’s not the first time recently I’ve seen this question raised in conversationbut the question seems to take many forms. My friend Jon Arnold asked just a week ago Is VoIP Really Happening?

Here’s a snip from the Information week story that got me started on this thread.

Is Anyone Actually Implementing UC?
Posted by Eric Krapf, Jul 17, 2008 09:51 AM

A debate has been going on over at No Jitter about whether enterprises are actually adopting Unified Communications (see here, here, here, here, and here). I tend toward the skeptical end of any conversation about how widely a hot new technology is actually being adopted, but I do see a few signs that enterprises are at least paying attention and, where possible, looking for an opportunity to get their feet wet.

I was chatting with a consultant yesterday who told me that in his last three engagements, he’d put Unified Communications into the specifications as an option for the companies to include in their RFPs, and in all three cases, the companies jumped at it. The reason? Business differentiation, i.e., the hope that UC could provide a new competitive advantage. This, by the way, supports a theory that Chris Thompson of Cisco (NSDQ: CSCO) expounded to me at VoiceCon Orlando, that during difficult economic times, it’s actually easier for enterprises to make investments in “aspirational” technology than that which is “perspirational”.

To me, that says the UC message is getting through to enterprises. There’s no guarantee that every company will ultimately make the ROI, in whatever way the individual user company calculates that ROI. Maybe the bids will come back and the business case just won’t be there.

[Read the whole story here]

I’ve been following VoIP from the beginnng and unified communications since before the term came into popular use, and I feel like I have a distinctly different viewpoint.

We write and provide an eJournal series, Unified Communications
in Realtime, here at the Realtime Unified Communications Community that gets added to our Digital Library each month. It’s also distributed through other channels.

In the three-part series for next month we’ve been working on a set of brief articles about the intersection between unified communications and social media. As part of that, I tried to explain what unified communications is to set a foundation for the discussion. Here’s an excerpt from the soon-to-be-published piece -

Unified Communications - A Broad Definition
Unified communications is an interesting phrase that’s come into widespread use in the past year or two. Many companies have made efforts to brand it as their own, but it’s really a mindset tied to the journey of network convergence.

When we’re connected effectively, we’re more productive. Many working professionals are also more creative. With easy access to the tools we use to perform, our work is simpler. We’re able to focus on the work they need to do. We perform at a higher level. Just as companies focus on their core competencies, we as people perform better when we put all of our energy into our primary work objectives

One of the biggest drivers of this increased productivity in the past ten years has been what we call convergence. Convergence is another one of those vague buzzwords that means many things to many people, but there have been some clear and distinct phases

Phase 1 - Voice and Data Converge on the Wire
Convergence really took hold as a concept in the late 1990’s. IP became the most widely accepted transport technology for data traffic. Around the same time Voice over IP (VoIP) came on the scene as potentially disruptive technology for telecommunications.

Prior to this, most large companies often managed multiple networks - one for voice and another for data. In many cases, these networks were supported by different administrative and operations groups.

Integration of voice and data onto a single wired circuit infrastructure helped many companies reduce costs and improve the bottom line. The convergence of network technologies brought efficiency gains in many different business areas.

Phase 2 - IP Takes Center Stage as the Convergence Protocol
The convergence of the physical network onto a single circuit was the start of something that’s still in motion. Voice over IP (VoIP) provided yet another catalyst for change. It was ballyhooed as the end of telecommunications as we knew it and the signal that the legacy telephone companies would be out of business.

VoIP hasn’t matured in the way those wild prognostications foretold but it has become the stable foundation for telecommunications infrastructure. VoIP proved to be an enabling technology that has changed our way of thinking about voice. VoIP pointed the way to voice as simply another service of the network.

Phase 3 - Unified Communications
This convergence of voice and data networks has continued around the globe for the past several years. Today there are many networks that still haven’t fully converged. The process continues, and for many companies, the end of the road is nowhere in sight.

Convergence became the term used to describe the integration of data, voice and video onto one unified network. These network services used to all use separate networks. Today they share the resources of the corporate network and the Internet.

In the past two years, the word convergence has given way to the phrase unified communications. For most people, unified communications simply means the fully converged network, supporting data, voice and video.

That’s unified communications of today, but the journey doesn’t end there. There are mission-critical business applications that will integrate more tightly through Communications Enhanced business Processes (CEBP). These include:

• Enterprise Resource Management (ERP)
• Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
• Supply Chain Management (SCM)
• Sales Force Automation (SFA)
• Human Resource Management (HRM)

There will always be room to further integrate for efficiency. One key added area that’s seeing a lot of current improvement is integrating people with voice recognition technology. The user interface will always be a key component of how we enhance the way people use computerized resources.

In the Information Week piece, Krapf asks is anyone actually implementing UC? I’d rephrase it differently - Is there anyone who isn’t implementing UC?

Unified communications is a buzz phrase like convergence. It means different things to different people. In today’s business environment, VoIP is prevalent. Jon asked is it really happening, but I’m often hard pressed to find places where it isn’t happening.

Unified Communitations is everywhere. Think about it. Voice services, video services and voice mail have converged onto a single unified platform - an IP network and our computers or other devices. Without unified communications, you have no social media - no Facebook, no Twitter, no comprehensive integration. Without unified communications, the web as we know it is a pipe dream. It had email and static web pages.

Web 2.0, the phrase we’ve all heard a million times is unified communications. Without UC, there could have been no Web 2.0. Unified communications, like VoIP, isn’t a product you write a check for and buy. It’s not a single product you implement and move on. It’s not as complex as vendors make it sound.

Unified communications in a foundation mindset of a single, integrated platform for doing business. Simple.

Sheryl and I are in the process of augmenting our work at Stardust Global Ventures. Our GeekSpeekTV has been very popular, but with the hectic moving process we’ve had to endure lately, it’s been difficult to produce our regular shows. We’re now in the process of incorporating Stardust Radio into our portfolio.

Stardust Radio

Sheryl and Ken

Sheryl & Ken’s regular radio talk show.

We’ve been laying groundwork and perhaps this is a good question for a kickoff show as the topic of conversation. With that thought in mind, I just scheduled a one-hour call-in show on our TalkShoe program.

I’ll be extending an array of invitations to some industry watchers, people I mention here all the time. I’m sure some will join in and some won’t. But you’re invited too. Our program is intended to be a talk radio sort of show, which means you’ll be able to participate in the conversation too. And it will be recorded and made available for download later for those of you who are interested but can’t make it. We hope you’ll come join us.

Technorati Tags: unified communications, VoIP, talk radio, internet radio

Jonathan Christensen

At the Emerging Communications Conference 2008, Jonathan Christensen of Skype speaks about the development of IP communications over the past 10 years. Christensen is general manager of audio and video at Skype.

The pioneers of VoIP developed the basic technology between 1996 and 2001. The first ever usable VoIP technology that people remember was the VoltaTec VoIP phone. Following that, companies that established gateways across end-points entered the market. They were followed by carriers that established gateways and POPs and connected them to the PSTN networks. The two important use cases that drove the VoIP market were — PC-to-PC ham radio users such as Jeff Pulver, and tandem trunking, or two-staged dialing.

Cost saving potentials and the regulatory framework of VoIP, have changed the telecom industry profoundly. New players have entered the market and influenced prices pushing them down and as a result, per the vision of Jeff Pulver, commoditizing voice.
[Read on ITConversations]

Technorati Tags: Jonathan Christensen, Skype, ITConversations, podcast

I’ve come to the conclusion that I’ve become too much a part of the echo chamber myself lately. It’s too easy a trap to fall into. So this morning, to offset it a bit I posted Of APIs - Smoke and Mirrors vs. Sustainable Business Models for Enterprise Solutions

Technorati Tags: value, echo chamber

Picture 5 monkeys placed in a cage. A new community is formed. From the ceiling of the cage hangs a bunch of bananas. A stepladder is placed under the bananas. As the first eager monkey rushes up the ladder, a firehose knocks him off and hoses down all the monekys. Shocked, they sit back and regroup. Later another monkey tries, with the same result. It make take repeated attempts by each monkey before they become conditioned (socialized really) to not climb the ladder.

At some point, the lesson has been learned by this closed culture and controls how they respond as a community. Then one monkey forgets and steps onto the ladder. But the firehose doesn’t have time to react. The other four monkeys grab the offender and beat him senseless. They’ve learned that in this society, you don’t climb the ladder.

Now the process of attrition and replacement in the society begins. One of the original monkeys is removed and a new monkey is added to the group. He spies the bananas and leaps onto the ladder, only to be dragged down and beaten by the rest of the group. After several attempts, the new monkey learns.

Another original monkey is replaced with a new monkey. And the same process follows. Then another and another and another. Soon we have a group of five monkeys who’ve never been soaked by the firehose, but won’t climb the ladder. This learned behavior was socialized into the group over time.

It no longer matters how many generations of monkeys follow. The new behavior is that a monkey climbing the ladder will be dragged off and beaten. None of the monkeys in the cage has ever been knocked off the ladder with a firehose. None have been soaked down. They don’t know what the consequence is because it’s been replaced by group behavior. They can’t remember being soaked. They don’t know why they do what they do. The accepted norm for this closed community is to beat anyone who tries to climb the ladder.

Isn’t that a lot like institutional memory? We don’t know why we do what we do. We do it this way because we’ve “always done it this way.” The real end consequence may no longer exist. It may not matter. It may have vanished. But we don’t climb that ladder in this cage buddy. It just isn’t done. We don’t operate that way here.

Today’s conversation led me to recount a seminar and book from several years ago (about 1990 or 91). Teaching the Elephant to Dance by Jim Belasco. That sent me on a quick Googleventure because I didn’t have my copy at hand.

“But, we’ve always done it that way,”

This is a warning sign, a symptom of impending disaster for any organization.

Shackled, like powerful elephants, to the past, organizations rob themselves of the ingenuity required to meet new competitive challenges and escape the “re” dimension trap of “re-engineering, re-organization and re-structuring that concentrate on short term fixes rather than long term solutions.

Elephant is a practical, hands-on guide for creating the right change in any organization, large or small, corporate or governmental, manufacturing or service based. Filled with illuminating case studies, it shows how to devise new corporate visions and strategies… how to overcome inertia .. and how to form labor-management partnerships. Clear, authoritative, practical and inspiring, Elephant provides a step-by-step guide for making the impossible happen.

One of the things Jim said in the small session he led that I attended was a simple tenet of business and change, but one that so often escapes managers.

If you keep doing what you’ve been doing, you’ll continue getting the results you’ve been getting.

I was pleased to see a quote from Stephen Covey on Jim’s web page. Jim’s approach to changing corporate culture is one that’s stuck with me ever since. I still have his book. I still refer to it.

Why are the obvious lessons still so hard for some organizations to learn? Change is a fundamental principle in our universe. The rate of change varies widely, but change is everywhere. Permanence is an illusion.

I don’t have an answer, nor do I seek one. I do observe that those who embrace change have an easier time of life. Those who go out and court change…embrace change…drive change, have fun and enjoy. If you resist change, well, as the Borg would say — resistance is futile. Only when we become the agent of change do we have any control over the direction change takes. Isn’t it better to steer the course and set direction than to strive to hold a straight unchanging course. Isn’t progress like sailing, constantly tacking against the winds of change? And if you insist on ignoring the wind of change, don’t you deserve that “jibe ho” just as the booms swings around to knock you into the drink?

And its’t true, Facebook is not just for kids any more.Technorati Tags: Jeff Pulver, breakfast, NBC5, Facebook. social media

This news release hit my mailbox yesterday, and I like this a lot. And it’s ready to roll. What a great use of a technology like Skype to mashup the pleasure of social networking with learning a new language.

Social network for language learners launches Video and Skype

VoxSwap.com, the social network for language learners, adds a video service and integrates Skype so users can see and hear as they chat and learn

VoxSwap the innovative social network for people learning and practising languages has added a video service and integrated Skype so budding linguists can now hear and see as well as type text.

It means users (who sign up for free!) can now watch education and entertainment videos in a wide selection of languages so they can see and hear the words and phrases they are seeking to learn and pronounce properly. VoxSwap users can add videos to the service at the press of a button to help one another learn and practise each other’s languages.

Also VoxSwap users can now hear and see one another when they are chatting. Until now, chatting had been limited to text but with the integration of Skype users can talk to one another, and even video conference, for free.

Co-founder Sean Hargrave believes this is a major step forward for the site.

“Our users have responded really well to being able to chat to one another through text but now we’re taking it a step further with video,”
he commented.

“The video section is great for listening to and watching native speakers pass on language tips and Skype is phenomenal. It really helps to be able to hear the other person and, if both parties agree, see one another in a video conference. With the latest upgrades to the site we’ve added sight and sound to the written word, it’s a very exciting time for the development of language exchange on the Internet.”

Sean set up the site with his wife, Nicole, at the start of 2008 to give social networking a purpose. Rather than compile lists of friends and have virtual snowball fights, VoxSwap allows people to talk in multiple languages so users can help one another progress - hence the site’s motto of ‘make friends, learn a language’.

The new features of video and Skype will sit alongside a virtual keyboard, which offers characters and accents users may not have on their keyboards, as well as a built-in Google Translator for understanding phrases and words.

Included with the upgraded to the site are new features to improve the internal email system and allow people to take more control over their contact with one another. These additions include the ability to delete emails and comments people no longer want on their profile or mail box, as well as the ability to block a user.

Thanks to Gary Kim for pointing this out. I don’t pay a lot of attention to Associated Press and would surely have missed it.

Just Say “No” to Associated Press
The Associated Press wants to charge you $12.50 to quote five words from news stories published by the news agency. Michael Arrington says TechCrunch simply won’t link to, or quote AP.

Of course, you can go their Web site and pay them. On this score, I agree with Michael. Just say “no.” I prefer Reuters in any case.

Like Gary, I rely much more heavily on Reuters and other news sources. This post brought to mind the reality that I need to actively ignore AP as a news source lest I accidentally incur their wrath.