innovation times

Communicating research more effectively

2011-01-29T14:11:00.000+02:00

Communicating research more effectively: "Students and faculty who plan to attend the AERA Annual Meeting this year may be interested in a communications professional development course. A half-day workshop, Communicating research through effective presentations, social media, and writing, will focus on these sometimes neglected skills. Instructors will be Ron Dietel, assistant director for research use and communications at UCLA’s [...]"

Sosyal Medya ve Christian Doppler, ya da, Bildiğiniz Medya Ölçümlemesinin Sonu

2010-10-24T00:07:00.002+03:00

(Not: Bu yazım ilk olarak GENNARATION'da yayımlandı: http://www.gennaration.com.tr/internet/sosyal-medya-ve-christian-doppler/# . Ancak bazı yerleri "kesintiye" uğradığı için kendi blogumda "özgün" halini yayımlamak zorunda kaldım.)

Soğuk bir Kuzey Avrupa Şubatı... 2007 yılından o güne dek, Amsterdam Üniversitesi’nde kendi halinde bir öğrenci olan Jonathan Nip [@nipp], o sabah yolda yürürken, çok kısa süre içinde gerçek bir mikro-şöhret olacağını bilemezdi. Yaşam çizgisini değiştiren olay, Türk Havayolları’nın TK1951 sefer sayılı Tekirdağ uçağının, yerel saatle on buçuk sularında, Amsterdam’ın Schiphol Havalanının “Polderbaan” olarak da bilinen 18R Pisti’ne, gözlerinin önünde büyük bir gürültüyle çakılmasıydı. Olayın ilk tanıklarından olan Nip, Internet erişimi olan telefonunu çıkarttı ve saat 10:39’da, ertesi günkü gazete manşetlerini belirleyecek olan ilk mesajını, Twitter üzerinden ‘cıvıldadı’: “Amsterdam Schiphol Havalimanında uçak kazası!!!”. Bir dakika sonra ikinci bir mesaj attı: “Schiphol Havalimanı yakınlarında düşen bir uçağa bakıyorum”; ve hemen ardından da yeni bir güncelleme: “Ortalığa bir sürü ilkyardım görevlisi üşüşüyor. Hala başka haber yok. Ağda başka haber bulamıyorum”. Gerisini, Sosyal Medya kendisi halletti. Kaza haberine ait, [#Schiphol] ‘hash-tag’li mesajlar, önce Twitter’da ‘Kartopu’ gibi büyüdü, oradan bloglara yayıldı, sonra da sosyal ağlara. İlerleyen saatlerde, Channel 4 News haber kanalı [@channel4news], medya tarihinde küçük bir devrim yarattı ve Jonathan Nip’le tarihteki ilk Twitter mülakatını gerçekleştirdi. Kazanın gerçekleştiği 25 Şubat 2009’un akşamında, CNN International [@cnni] bu küçük çaplı devrimi haber yapmak zorunda kaldı. Bugün, artık bir mikro-şöhret olan Jonathan Nip’in adı, neredeyse Schiphol Kazası ve Twitter’la birlikte anılıyor.

***

19 Kasım 1803’de dünyaya gelen Christian Doppler’in ataları, duvarcı ustasıydı. Salzburg’da, 1674’ten beri başarıyla sürdürdükleri, gelenekselleşmiş bir işleri vardı. İşte sağladıkları başarıyla, Salzburg’un Hannibal Meydanı’na (bugünkü Makart Meydanı), bakan bir ev inşa ettiler. Christian da o evde doğdu. Ancak sağlığı, aile işini görütmeye elverişli değildi. Çelimsiz ve kolay hastalanan bir çocuktu. Bu nedenle de, ataları gibi duvarcı ustası olmak yerine, önce matematik sonra da astronomi okudu ve usta bir bilimci oldu.

Christian Doppler, 1840’larda “Doppler Etkisi” olarak da bilinen kuramıyla, fizikte çığır açtı. Doppler, ışık veya ses kaynağının hareket etmesi durumunda, kaynağın ürettiği dalgaların hızı ile kaynağın kendi hızının üst üste binerek, yayılan dalgaların frekansını arttırdığını kanıtlamıştı. Yani, hareket eden bir ses ya da ışık kaynağının ürettiği ses veya ışık, alıcıya kendi frekansından daha yüksek bir frekansta ulaşıyordu. “Doppler Etkisi” olarak da anılan bu fizik kuralına, yaklaşan ambülansın sireninin tonunun yükselmesi, ya da, yanımızdan korna çalarak geçen bir aracın kornasının tonunun, yaklaşana kadar yükselmesiyle, günlük yaşamda sıkça şahit oluyoruz. Ancak, Doppler Etkisi’ni görmeye başladığımız diğer bir ortam da, artık Sosyal Medya.

Sosyal Medya’da ‘Kartopu” Yaratan Doppler Etkisi

Jonathan Nip’i kısa sürede mikro-şöhret haline getiren olguyu, Sosyal Medya üzerindeki Doppler Etkisi’yle açıklamak mümkün. Bunda, elbette Nip’in kaza yerinden geçen ilk tanıklardan biri olmasını sağlayan şans faktörünün rolünü de gözden kaçırmamak gerekiyor. Ancak, konvansiyonel medya profesyonellerinin bir günde şöhret olduğu veya uçak kazası gibi çok da sansasyonel sayılamayacak bir olayı, haber atlatarak vermeleriyle şöhret oldukları bir durum, o güne kadar görülmüş-işitilmiş değildi. Nip’e saatler içinde şöhret getiren şey, Sosyal Medya’nın olağanüstü yayılım gücünün sağladığı haberin yayılım hızının, Sosyal Medya üzerindeki angajman hızıyla birleşmesiydi. Yani haber, Sosyal Medya üzerinde yayılırken, konvansiyonel medya üzerindeki gibi doğrusal bir yayılım göstermiyor, ‘re-tweet‘, ‘share‘, ‘like‘ vb. mekanizmalarla paylaşılarak, kopyalanarak yoğunlaştırılıyor; ve bu yoğunlaşma hızı (angajman) haberin doğrusal yayılım hızıyla birleşerek, ortaya Christian Doppler’in tariflediği yapısal sayılabilecek frekans yükselmesi çıkıyordu.

Sosyal Medya üzerindeki Doppler Etkisi’ni, Türk kamuoyu en son 12 Eylül 2010 Halkoylaması’yla birebir yaşadı. Özellikle Facebook vb. sosyal ağlarda paylaşılan, kimi video, görsel, yazı vb. politik mesajlar, paylaşılmaya başladıktan bir süre sonra, sadece politik aktivistleri değil, lehte veya aleyhte politik konum almak isteyen sıradan sosyal ağ kullanıcılarını da harekete geçirmeye başladı ve mesajların yayılımı angajman hızıyla birleşti. Aynı mesaj, bir süre sonra hiç beklenmedik bireylerden geri dönmeye başladı ve etkisi kendiliğinden arttı. Zira Doppler Ektisi’yle tariflenen mesajın yayılım hızı ile mesajın kendi hızı üstüste binmişti...

Ve yaşanan bu olgu, o güne dek ahir zaman allamelerinin bize sıkça anlatmaya çalıştığı, viral yayılım döngüsü veya ağızdan-ağıza pazarlama (WOMM – Word-of-Mouth Marketing) yaklaşımlarının çok ötesinde bir konuydu...

Sosyal Medya’yla Değişen Oyunun Yeni Kuralları

Geldik can alıcı soruya: “Sosyal Medya üzerindeki ‘Doppler Etkisi’ nasıl ölçümlenecek?”. Daha doğrusu, Sosyal Medya nasıl ölçümlenecek? Konu Sosyal Medya olduğunda, konvansiyonel medyanın ‘tiraj’, ‘reyting’ vb. saçmalıklarının, hiçbir işe yaramayan, modası, hatta son kullanma tarihi geçmiş palavralar olduğunu, artık en teknoloji özürlü yöneticiler bile biliyor. Ama hala daha, naftalinli Web 1.0, hatta ‘brochureware’ günlerinden kalan, ‘bağlantı süresi’, ‘bounce rate’, ‘üye (doğrusu bağlantı) sayısı’ türünden ‘cinlikleri’ önümüze koymaya çalışan yayınları gördükçe, bazılarının konuya halen ne kadar uzak olduğu anlaşılıyor.

“Başlangıçta gaz ve toz bulutu vardı” demekten geri duracağım için, Sosyal Medya Ölçümlemesi ve Metrikleri konusunu bir sonraki yazıma saklayarak, Sosyal Medya üzerinde Doppler Etkisi’ni ortaya çıkartan temel etkenin ne olduğunu açıklamaya çalışacağım. Bu ilk konuda emin olun, çok iyi tanımlanmış Anahtar Performans Göstergeleri’ne (KPI – Key Performance Indicator) sahibiz ve bu göstergeleri kullanarak Sosyal Medya üzerinde, her türlü ölçümleme ve takibi yapabileceğimiz teknolojik olanaklarımız da mevcut.

Sosyal Medya’da mesajı yoğunlaştıran unsurlar, elbette ki bireylerdir. Bu bireyleri Malcolm Gladwell, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference (Kıvılcım Anı: Küçük Şeyler Nasıl Büyük Farklar Yaratır adıyla Türkçe yayımlandı) adlı kitabında, Azınlık Kuralıyla tanımlamaya çalışıyor. Azınlık Kuralına göre, bu bireyler:

Bağlayıcılar (Connectors), yani olağanüstü güçlü bir ilişki kurma ve sürdürme becerine sahip, çok geniş bir çevresi olan bireyler;
Yetenekliler (Mavens), yani bizleri sürekli bilgi ve enformasyonla donatan bir tür ‘enformasyon brokeri’ gibi çalışan bireyler ile;
Satıcılar (Salesmen), yani ikna kabiliyeti çok yüksek olan karizmatik bireylerden oluşuyor.

O zaman, bu kişileri nasıl bulacağız, Sosyal Medya üzerinde? Kanımca bu soru, her türlü Sosyal Medya Ölçümlemesi’nden önce yanıtlanması gereken temel sorudur. Sosyal Medya üzerinde Doppler Etkisini yaratan kişiler, yukarıdaki üç grubun bütün özelliklerini taşıyorlar: yani olağanüstü güçlü bir ilişki kurma ve sürdürme becerisine ve çok geniş bir çevreye sahipler, bu çevreyi sürekli bilgi ve enformasyonla donatarak bir tür ‘enformasyon brokeri’ gibi çalışıyorlar ve ikna kabiliyetleri çok yüksek, karizmatik bireyler bunlar. Bu bireyler, son dönemde “Influencer” olarak da adlandırılıyorlar.

Influencer’lar, kendi aralarında “Social Influencer” (SI) ve “Key Influencer” (KI) olarak ikiye ayrılıyolar. İlk grupta yer alanların ektisi, diğerlerine göre daha düşük ve sınırlı. Asıl önemli olanlar, ikinci grup. KI grubunun, Sosyal Medya üzerindeki en temel etkisi, hem SI grubunu hem de bunların dışında kalan bireyleri harekete geçirerek Doppler Etkisi’ni yaratması.

Peki, kim bu Key Influencer?

KI, bağlantı sayısı, mecra ortalamasının (örneğin Facebook için 130) çok üzerinde olan, ancak aynı zamanda, belirli bir frekansta mesaj üreten veya paylaşan ve bu mesaj veya paylaşımlarına kendi bağlantılarından belli oranlarda yanıt veya tepki alan kişilerdir. Buradaki oranlar vb. ayrıntılara, ne yazık ki, bu konuda geliştirilme sürecindeki patentli bir teknolojimiz olduğundan, çok fazla giremiyorum. Ancak, konuyla ilgilenenlere memnuniyetle birebir ayrıntılı bilgi verebilirim.

KI, Doppler Etkisini nasıl oluşturuyor? Öncelikle KI, bir Bağlayıcı olarak kendi sosyal ağına sahip ve bu sosyal ağı sürekli geliştiriyor. İlişkilerini koruyor, kişisel temaslar, mesajlar veya paylaşımlarla güçlendiriyor. Sosyal ağlarda (örneğin Facebook) bu konuda zaten çok güçlü bir altyapı var. KI daha sonra, kendi ağındaki bağlantılarına sürekli ve düzenli olarak enformasyon, haber, paylaşım vb. içerik ulaştırıyor. Dahası, bunu takip de ediyor. Kimi zaman, aynı içeriği birkaç gün üstüste tekrarlamaktan da çekinmiyor. Son olarak da, içtenlik ve inandırıcılık dozunu korumaya, çok büyük özen gösteriyor; zira Sosyal Medya üzerindeki karizma, pazarlama dergilerindeki, kollarını göğsünde kavuşturmuş ‘başarı abidesi’ yapmacık ve kurgu fotograflardan değil, içtenlik ve inandırıcılıktan geçiyor.

Hadi gelin şimdi, Sosyal Medyadaki bu Doppler Etkisi’ni, anahtar kelime bazlı, ikili bool mantığında çalışan aramalarla ölçümlemeye çalışın; adama gülerler.

Bayanlar, Baylar! Çok üzgünüz, bildiğiniz medya ölçümlemesinin sonu ne yazık ki geldi. İnanmayanlar veya kendini kandırmaya devam etmek isteyenler için, Kaybedenler Kulübü durağına giden tramvayda yer ayırttık.

Kalkıyor, VAAARDAAA!!!

Gazeteler için yeni gelir kaynağı : uygulamalar

2010-01-28T00:30:00.000+02:00

Çağan Çağlar'dan:

Gazete tirajları ve gelirleri son 10 yılın en büyük çözümsüz sorularından birisi. Azalan tiraj ve gelirler karşısında gazete firmaları ücretli içerik yolunu (paid content)zorlayan stratejiler geliştiriyorlar birbiri ardına.

Kullanıcıların ise yorumu çok net; Ücretsiz başka yerde bulabildiğim içeriğe neden para vereyim ki?

Ücretli sunulacak içeriğe verilecek ekstralar ise kaynak gücü v.s. gösterilerek hep kısıtlanıyor nedense. Bu konudaki en güzel örnek Financial Times'dan. Bir biri ardına geliştirdikleri uygulamalar ile ücretli aboneliği sonuna kadar zorlayacaklar görünüyor.

Kullanıcılardan sadece internet için para almayı düşünmek te çok mantıklı değil. Apple sayesinde mobil kullanıcılar itunes'a zaten para ödemeye alıştılar. En çok indirilen ücretli uygulamalar oyunlar olsa da gazete haberleri, çeşitli mobil fonksiyonlar sunan uygulamalar da başı çekiyor.

En iyi ücretli örneklerden biri Guardian'a ait aplikasyon. Marka, Iphone uygulamalarının 70 bine yakın indirildiği haberini kendi teknoloji blog'unda 'Uygulama 2.39 Paund olmasına rağmen, bu başarı Iphone kullanıcılarının ödeme yapmaya istekli olduklarını göstermektedir' sözleri ile anons etti.

Kullanıcıların başka hiç bir yerde bulamayacakları bir 'hizmet' para almanın tek yolu.

Ama endüstri para bulmaya çalışmaktan, bu 'hizmetin' ne olabileceğini düşünmeye pek vakit ayıramıyor gibi...

'Markalı' içerik hiç bir zaman ölmez, ölmeyecek te. Ama formatta değiştirecek.. Okur ve kullanıcıların ihtiyaçlarının nereye, ne şekilde kaydığını takip eden, ve buna yönelik hızlı aksiyon alanlar da kazanacak.

Kazananın kimler olacağını da hep beraber 2010'lu yıllarda göreceğiz.

Thinking Big: How the Creative Class Is Changing Business

2010-01-28T00:18:00.001+02:00

From the Creative Class:

by Steven Pedigo

Richard recently appeared on Big Think to share his ideas on how the Creative Class is impacting the way businesses think.

“Now more than ever, companies need unconventional thinking to work within the new rules set by the economic recession. Richard Florida has persuasively demonstrated how artists, scientists, engineers, writers, musicians and more can revitalize an entire city from urban decay. With today’s companies dealing with a deep recession, what can members of the Creative Class do for businesses?"

What should we rename ‘FP8′?

2010-01-28T00:06:00.002+02:00

From Gary Finnegan (Blogactiv):

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”

- William Shakespeare

EU officials are toying with the idea of renaming Europe’s Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. At present, the seventh framework programme (FP7) is under review and governments are already jockeying for position in the battle for funding that will precede the launch of ‘FP8′.

The idea of renaming FP8 should be welcomed given its potential to improve public understanding of what the EU does in terms of its multi-billion euro support for research.

The move should also be welcomed by looking to improve SME involvement in the framework programmes. The trouble with the rather lengthy current title is that so few European citizens know what it it’s all about.

Imagine the framework programme were a product given to marketeers and brand managers to sell to the public. They would surely have come up with something shorter than the Framework Programme for Research and Technozzzzz…..

And they would have avoided adding yet another acronym to the alphabet soup of European science jargon. Who needs the FP8 when we already have ERA, ERAB, REA, ESF, COST, EIT, and KICs?

So. What should it be called?

Well, it has to be short, simple and, ideally, work in several langauges. At the very least it should translate readily or use familiar terminology.

One sugguestion might have been to go for something like Euroscience - but this is already taken.

You might prefer Euroresearch or Euroinnovation, although those are (a) not as linguistically universal and (b) not strictly accurate since the focus is on science and research rather than specifically on innovation.

How about SciFund? Or ResFund?

“Have you put in your SciFund grant application?”

Works for me.

Let us know what you think…

Unlocking Creativity

2010-01-28T00:02:00.000+02:00

From Idea Connection:

If knowledge is the mind of the Talent Age, creativity is its heartbeat.

A Transatlantic Innovation Dialogue

2010-01-27T23:58:00.000+02:00

From the EU:

A recent initiative between the EU and the US is to start a Transatlantic Innovation Dialogue as part of the Transatlantic Economic Council. This Council works on better mutual recognition of existing regulation. But the new emphasis is on future Innovations - such as electric cars, smart grids, eco-efficient or nanotech-based products - which will [...]

Bill Gates says innovation can leverage change

2010-01-27T23:54:00.000+02:00

From MSNBC Innovation:

The needs of the poor are greater than the money available to help them, but that's not enough to discourage Bill Gates in his work as co-chair of the world's largest charitable foundation.

2010: The Year of Innovation

2010-01-27T23:51:00.001+02:00

From Schumpeter's Century:

Thomas Friedman issues the call, which should be shouted from the rooftops (NYT):

What the country needs most now is not more government stimulus, but more stimulation. We need to get millions of American kids, not just the geniuses, excited about innovation and entrepreneurship again. We need to make 2010 what Obama should have made 2009: the year of innovation, the year of making our pie bigger, the year of “Start-Up America.

"VALLEY OF THE WOLVES"- ISRAEL

2010-01-15T13:10:00.000+02:00

Fron Deniz Tansi International:

Series of the Valley of the Wolves become a 'decoder' for Turkish viewers since 2003. Serie which is called by her fans as 'valley' completed the 7th year and reached to the international format with Valley of the Wolves Iraq. Serie applicated Ergenekon case's PR from 2007 reluctantly. Valley of the Wolves Iraq emphasized regional peoples' fraternity against US invasion in the context of Islamic sensitivities and Ottoman past. In spite of Ottoman approach, Turkishness was considered as a founder element. Meanwhile serie's heroic character Polat Alemdar took the revenge from US commander who was put sacks on Turkish officers heads in Erbil.
Valley of the Wolves Gladio recently tried to show that NATO's Cold War network which was called Gladio in Italy and Turkish branch was named as 'counterinsurgency' still continues. İskender Büyük character was evaluated as a composition about Turkish agents situation, why they call themselves as to serve Turkish state and nation but in fact to US and Israel.

Valley of the Wolves' advertorial was done in Valley of the Wolves Iraq. However, serie's producers announced that, the time is Valley of the Wolves Palestine's turn. It seems that, the new film guaranteed viewing records. Why in the last episode of the serie, Polat Alemdar impressed Israeli consulate, killed all Israel's security service agents and escaped his closest guy Memati Baş's son. According the serie's scenario, Israel didn't condemn Turkey because of child snatching. The serie's producers repeated their allegations from Valley of the Wolves Iraq related Israeli doctor's organ trade. According to valley's producers, Israeli media published these allegations.
When Polat Alemdar was killing the last Israeli agent in consulate, agents' blood bounced to Israeli flag. After the serie's last episode, Israel's deputy foreign minister Ayalon summoned Turkish ambassador Oğuz Çelikkol to his room in Knesset. He has invited Israeli press to his room and told them in Hebrew, 'look, he is sitting on the lower level from us, on the table only Israeli flag stands and we do not smile'. The behaviour was out of diplomatic kindness and was just like a child's attitude. In fact Israeli foreign minister and leader of Israel Beytinu Party, Avigdor Lieberman damages Israel's foreign policy not only related Turkey but also in many events and countries. But this situation is Israel's own problem.

Losing Turkey means 'strategic desolation' for Israel. On the other hand, Turkish-Israeli tension started with 'one minutes' crisis by Turkish PM Erdoğan. In the first year of the bilateral stress, reached worse point. In October 2009 drill crisis, after serie of Farewell crisis which concern Israeli soldiers as baby killer in Gaza operation deepened the crisis. And the serie was broadcasted in state run TV. (TRT)

Despite crisis, some positive steps were observed since Republic Day of Turkey. (October 29)Israeli trade minister Ben Eliezer attended Turkish embassy's reception in Tel Aviv. He has given messages as frankly. Ben Eliezer visited Turkey in November 2009. In December Turkish president Gül and Israeli president Peres met in Kopenhag during Climate Summit and peres repeated his invitation to Turkish president. After the summit, Turkey offcially invited Israeli defence minister and Labor Party's
leader Ehud Barak. The invitation was scheduled for January 17, 2010. However Valley of the Wolves Ambush broke the process. Aforementioned Ayalon's kindness risked Barak's scheduled visiting. Ayalon considered something about the behaviour, it was not agreed by Turkey. At last, Israeli PM Netenyahu intervened into the process. And he declared that, Ayalon apologised from Turkey. Turkey will evaulate the situation. Withdraw the ambassador from Israel is among the options.
Turkish PM aware of creating popularity in the Middle East with anti Israeli discourse. He is awarded by King Faisal prize by Saudi Arabia. But it must be understood that, foreign policy can be done with benefits not emotions.

Ayalon's inconsiderateness is the fact. But the situation must not be used an opportunity to legitimize of Neo Ottoman policies. Israel is US' strategic partner but also Saudi Arabia is one of the partner of US. It must not be forgotten that, Turkey is member of NATO and ally of USA.

There was an interesting incidence that Lebanon PM Hariri was in Turkey during 'lower sofa crisis' Hariri tries to cover Hizballah's political situation why the organization is one of the coalition partner in his cabinet. It means also to keep Iran's nuclear position why Hizballah is Iran sponsored militant organisation. But Hariri's bloc and Hizbalah's bloc were competitors in Lebanon elections. Hariri is a pro western Arab leader and closer with Saudi Arabia.

Series and films can create an illusion for Turkish foreign policy an even anti Israeli discourse could build a popularity for Turkish PM.
On the other hand Jordan, Lebanon (PM), Saudi Arabia and Egypt would not applicate anti Western approaches and not beliavable.

In the conclusion, like Israel and Saudi Arabia samples, each country has a different route to connect with US. Expectation from Turkish policy to get a balance with great powers (include Russia and China) and regional powers (include Israel,Iran, Saudi Arabia). It means to have connections with all parties. Why it is different from Cold War. And also Turkey's alliance to the West is essential with US and EU.

Through Arab countries facilitating to reach US patronage can be attractive with new Ottoman dreams for the current political spectrum in Turkey and can be gained new domestic political steps. Radical movements in Israeli cabinet can serve to the policy. But pro US Arab opening could conclude that, Turkey can be a further actor for Valley of the Wolves Iran.

New films' most important adventure can be realized in Kurdistan Regional Government's plato in Iraq.

EU innovation chief to leverage structural funds for research

2010-01-14T21:10:00.000+02:00

From EurActive:

Europe's incoming innovation commissioner is pledging to tap the EU's structural funds to build research infrastructure and capacity. Máire Geoghegan-Quinn also revealed she would chair meetings of EU commissioners with responsibilities for innovation as part of her new 'cross-cutting' portfolio.

Does Entrepreneurship Education Lead to More Start-ups?

2010-01-14T21:05:00.000+02:00

From Campus Entrepreneurship:

NO, according to a new study from the Kauffman Foundation (did you expect someone else to publish an entrepreneurship study? — yes, there is a monopoly in entrepreneurship research, but that is a discussion for another day).

The Venture Capital Blog at the WSJ highlights the research by Dane Stanler and Paul Kedrosky. They find that recessions, taxes, venture capital levels, and entrepreneurship education do little to affect new firm foundation. In fact, they found that during the period 1977-2005, start-up levels remained nearly constant (fluctuating between 3-6% a year). Here is a snippet from the WSJ:

Even entrepreneurship education and venture capital don’t seem to have a noticeable effect on start-up creation. The late 1970s to early 2000s “experienced a veritable explosion in efforts to promote and increase new-firm formation,” the authors write, pointing out that more than 2,000 universities offered entrepreneurship courses in 2005 compared with 200 in the late 1970s. At the same time, the amount of capital raised by venture firms rose to $100 billion in 2000 from $424 million in 1978, all the while the levels of start-up formation remained flat.

Awhile back we posted on the SBA study by Chad Moutray that found entrepreneurs are not business majors. This led to a paper by yours truly asking if all the money spent on entrepreneurship education was wasteful?

More questions: Are new firms the correct variable to measure? Are all start-ups equal? What about job creation? Is that really what we are after here? Or living standards and incomes? Lots more questions to be investigated surround entrepreneurship education and new venture creation. What are your thoughts on these studies?

12 Trends to Watch in 2010

2010-01-13T23:39:00.000+02:00

From EFF:

It's the dawn of a new year. From our perch on the frontier of electronic civil liberties, EFF has collected a list of a dozen important trends in law, technology and business that we think will play a significant role in shaping online rights in 2010.

In December, we'll revisit this post and see how it all worked out.

1. Attacks on Cryptography: New Avenues for Intercepting Communications

In 2010, several problems with cryptography implementations should come to the fore, showing that even encrypted communications aren't as safe as users expect. Two of the most significant problems we expect concern cellphone security and web browser security.

GSM, the technology that underpins most cellphone communications around the world, uses a deeply flawed security technology. In 2010, devices which intercept phone calls will get cheaper and cheaper. Expect to see public demonstrations of the ability to break GSM's encryption and intercept mobile phone calls. We hope that this will prompt the mobile phone industry to replace its obsolete systems with modern and easy-to-use cryptography.

SSL (in its newer versions known as TLS), the basic security technology of the world wide web, is exhibiting similarly severe flaws. Several powerful practical attacks against real-world SSL implementations were published in 2009; more problems and concerns will emerge throughout 2010. SSL security must be improved.

Despite flaws in how SSL is used, it's still the best system for web security around, and so it also needs to become more widely deployed. Google set a fantastic example this week when it set GMail to use SSL by default — in 2010 we hope to see other online service providers follow its example.

2. Books and Newspapers: .TXT is the new .MP3

Since 2000, the music industry has most spectacularly flailed (and failed) to combat the Net's effect on its business model. Their plans to sue, lock-up and lobby their way out of their problem did nothing to turn the clock back, but did cause serious damage to free speech, innovation and fair use.

These days, the book and newspaper industries are similarly mourning the Internet's effect on their bottom line. In 2009, Rupert Murdoch changed the tone of the debate when he called those who made fair use of his papers' content 'thieves'. We think 2010 and beyond will see others in the print world attempt to force that view, and break the fair use doctrine by lobbying to change accepted copyright law, challenging it in the courts, or by placing other pressures on intermediaries.

A cluster of similar battles around user control are also gathering around e-reader products like Kindle and Google Book Search, many of which rewrite the rules for book ownership and privacy wholesale.

So, in 2010, will the printed word step smartly into the digital future, or will it continue to stay stuck in the denial and bargaining phase that dominated digital music's lost decade?

3. Global Internet Censorship: The Battle for Legitimacy

For years, the obvious benefits of an uncensored Internet have kept advocates of Net blocking on the defensive. But new filtering initiatives in Australia and Europe combined with growing rhetoric around child protection, cybersecurity and IP enforcement means that blocking websites isn't just for authoritarian regimes any more.

That's not to say tyrants aren't paying close attention to the West's new censors. When democratic governments complain about Iran and China's net policing in 2010, expect defenses of 'we're only doing what everyone else does'.

2010 will see the publication of Access Controlled, a new book from the OpenNet Initiative chronicling the globalization of Internet censorship; we're excited to see it but concerned about the ways restrictions in different countries reinforce each other.

4. Hardware Hacking: Opening Closed Platforms and Devices

An increasingly active hobbyist community is figuring out how to make a range of devices more useful and open. They are learning how to install new software or make third-party parts, devices, and services work with proprietary high-tech products like video game consoles, printers, portable audio players, home entertainment devices, e-book readers, mobile phones, digital cameras, and even programmable calculators. And, oh yes, contending with restrictions on both cars and garage doors.

Frequently, indignant manufacturers are threatening these tinkerers with legal troubles. Often, these threats are legally baseless — but this hasn't stopped manufacturers from bullying hobbyists into keeping quiet about their innovations.

It confirms the prediction that EFF board member Ed Felten made in 2006: that the rationale offered for 'Digital Rights Management' was shifting away from hard-to-defend claims that DRM could stop copyright infringement, and toward uses of DRM to control the functionality of objects in general (often in ways only tenuously connected to copying anything).

In 2009, EFF asked the Copyright Office to protect hobbyists who unlock and jailbreak their smartphones, and we stood up for developers who figured out how to load new operating systems onto TI programmable calculators. EFF's panel of judges also chose to honor Limor Fried of Adafruit Industries with a Pioneer Award in part to encourage the hardware hacking community to continue their good work.

In 2010, phone jailbreaking will become even more mainstream, and the concept will be routinely applied to other sorts of devices. EFF's Coders Rights Project will have no shortage of work to do defending users and developers who want to make their hardware do more than it was designed for.

5. Location Privacy: Tracking Beacons in Your Pocket

It's easier and cheaper than ever for computers to keep track of where you are: there are so many more potential sources of information about your whereabouts, and so many reasons it might be useful or interesting to you, your friends, your boss, or the government.

EFF has fought for location privacy rights, including checks on the government's ability to use your cell phone to find you and to access the information that social networks, mobile operators, and transportation systems collect about where you are and where you travel.

In 2010, awareness of location privacy as an issue will enter the mainstream in the U.S. as a critical mass of end users voluntarily adopt technologies that use or share their physical location — and start to wonder who has access to this information. Many more courts will grapple with these questions this year, building upon the important 2009 decisions in the Connolly case in Massachusetts and the Weaver case in New York. EFF is awaiting the decision in U.S. v. Jones in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, where we asked a court to limit law enforcement use of these devices.

6. Net Neutrality: The Rubber Hits The Road

Anyone who watched John Hodgman's famous Daily Show rant knows what Net Neutrality means as an abstract idea. But what will it mean when it makes the transformation from idealistic principle into real-world regulations? 2010 will be the year we start to find out, as the FCC attempts to implement the plan it adopts after its 107-page request for input about how to ensure a neutral Net.

But how far can the FCC be trusted? Historically, the FCC has sometimes shown more concern for the demands of corporate lobbyists and 'public decency' advocates than it has for individual civil liberties. Consider the FCC's efforts to protect Americans from 'dirty words' in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, or its much-criticized deregulation of the media industry, or its narrowly-thwarted attempt to cripple video innovation with the Broadcast Flag.

With the FCC already promising exceptions from net neutrality for copyright-enforcement, we fear that 2010 could be the year when the FCC's idea of an 'Open Internet' proves quite different from what many have been hoping for.

7. Online Video: Who Controls Your TV?

Like the print business, the television business is being radically disrupted by the Internet. The disparate and powerful industries affected — telco, cable, satellite, ISP, software, and production — are engaged in a battle for dominance. But as big business dukes it out, consumer rights risk being left behind.

Two especially bad initiatives to keep an eye on this year: TV Everywhere is a new DRM-laden attempt by the mainstream television industry to trip up innovative upstarts like Boxee. Another scheme, Selectable Output Control, is Hollywood's latest effort to start driving analog interfaces into extinction in favor of DRM-restricted digital interfaces — meaning that Hollywood would decide what you can record on your DVR, rather than you.

In 2010, expect industry to advance those initiatives, as well as to introduce new and similarly problematic schemes along the same lines. EFF, as usual, will be there to try to stop them.

8. Congress: Postponed Bad Legislation Returns

In retrospect, 2009 wasn't disastrous for online civil liberties in federal technology law. With Washington entirely distracted by health care reform, a lot of the most problematic proposed federal technology legislation was delayed, postponed or temporarily forgotten.

In 2010, we may not be so lucky. Key provisions of the Patriot Act, having recently been granted a three-month extension, are up for re-authorization before April 1. The Snowe-Rockefeller Cybersecurity Act, which would grant the President the power to disconnect the Internet, is likely to return sometime in 2010. And, with immigration reform considered a top priority for Congress this year, we can expect to see the national identification card scheme REAL ID (or its twin, PASS ID) again soon.

9. Social Networking Privacy: Something's Got To Give

For some, social networking sites are the Internet. Facebook now has over 350 million accounts — roughly the same as the total number of Internet users worldwide a decade ago. That means that the bad guys who were exploiting security weaknesses in the wider Net in the last decade will now turn in force on the bigger networking sites. And by bad guys, we mean everyone from criminals, to unethical data-mining companies, to ISPs who can't resist snooping on that remunerative personal data passing down their pipes, to governments seeking new ways to track their citizens.

Will a major privacy scandal or two fix the social networking sites' casual attitude to their customers' personal data? Will new laws? Or will technologists and increasingly sensitive Net users find a their own way to protect their privacy?

10. Three Strikes: Truth and Consequences

In countries across the globe, the entertainment industry has been pushing for laws requiring ISPs to terminate their users' connection at the whim of the entertainment industry. In 2009, they got their wish — in France and South Korea, at least. This year will see the spin battle over what is actually happening in those countries.

Expect media industry reports describing amazing local declines in filesharing, aimed at policymakers in other nations considering the same. And look out for local press reports from these three strikes ground zeroes, documenting the calamitous consequences of disconnections, the lack of financial return to working artists, and the political blowback for the politicians who championed these unjust laws.

11. Fair Use of Trademarks: Mockery At Risk

Parody and mockery have long been favorite tools for online political expression and activism. But the powerful entities being mocked sometimes lack a sense of humor about the situation. Increasingly, they're turning to trademark law to badger would-be jokers into silence.

Of course, abuse of copyright law, which governs ownership of content, is nothing new. But until recently, we haven't seen as much abuse of trademark law, which governs ownership of names and logos. Fair Use principles, which allow creative re-use of intellectual property, apply to trademarks just as they apply to copyrights. In either case, IP bullies are just as happy to ignore those principles and make bogus legal threats.

Recently, trademark threats have been levied against activists like The Yes Men, who mocked the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. They've targeted NYTimes.se, which mocked The New York Times and corporations like DeBeers. They've targeted The South Butt, a clothing line which mocks The North Face. And, only a few days ago, they targeted environmental activist Brian DeSmet for mocking Peabody Energy.

In 2010, expect to see plenty of similar bogus threats. Some of them will lead to litigation, and those battles could in turn lead to important new legal precedents with serious implications for free expression online.

12. Web Browser Privacy: It's Not Just About Cookies Anymore

In the late 1990s, when the conventions for the modern web browser were being determined, certain expectations were established for web browser privacy. Users who wished to take extra measures to protect their privacy could simply choose to de-activate or limit their browser's use of cookies. This would protect them from most of the worst online tracking practices.

And that's how it remained for some time. Or so most web users thought.

As it turns out, corporations seeking to track individuals' use of the web were hard at work developing new and unexpected methods of profiling. For a long time, many of these methods either remained unexamined or were simply performed covertly and hidden from the public. But as we enter 2010, awareness and scrutiny of them is on the rise

Try browsing the web while using a tool like the Firefox add-on RequestPolicy, and you'll see that many major sites share your web activity with dozens of advertisers and advertising networks. With few technical or legal restrictions on the ability to track you around the web, companies you may never have heard of may have profiles of you which include things about your web use that you don't even remember.

This year the Federal Trade Commission is taking a fresh look at privacy and the use of profiles to target ads based on individuals' behavior on the web. We'll be participating in the process by providing testimony to the FTC, as well as launching our own study of just how easy individual browsers are to track, and how they can be made more privacy-protective.

New History on the Invention of Entrepreneurship

2010-01-13T11:32:00.000+02:00

From Campus Entrepreneurship:

Great new book (h/t Schumpeter’s Century) coming out this week on the ‘history of enterprise’. The title, The Invention of Enterprise: Entrepreneurship from Ancient Mesopotamia to Modern Times, is really intriguing and I look forward to reading it. It is an edited volume and is supported by Kauffman and its series on innovation and entrepreneurship.

According to Brian of Schumpeter’s Century, you can download a sample chapter at the book’s official website. You can also pre-order from Amazon. This appears to be a work of economic history and I look forward to experiencing their approach to entrepreneurship. Here is a short snippet from the book description:

Whether hailed as heroes or cast as threats to social order, entrepreneurs–and their innovations–have had an enormous influence on the growth and prosperity of nations. The Invention of Enterprise gathers together, for the first time, leading economic historians to explore the entrepreneur’s role in society from antiquity to the present. Addressing social and institutional influences from a historical context, each chapter examines entrepreneurship during a particular period and in an important geographic location.

I’ll let you know when I read this one. Looks to be worth reviewing.

10 Best Undergrad Entrepreneurship Programs

2010-01-13T11:30:00.000+02:00

From Capus Entrepreneurship:

According to US News & World Report, the 10 best undergraduate entrepreneurship programs in the US are led by perennial powerhouse, Babson College in Babson Park, MA.

The top 10 are below. If you want to see all top 24, you need to purchase a premium membership — I have not inquired as to its cost. I will see if I can find them some other way and will post if I do.

1. Babson College – MA

2. University of Pennsylvania – PA

3. University of Southern California – CA

4. Indiana University (Bloomington) – IN

4. Massachusetts Institute of Technology – MA

6. Syracuse University – NY

7. University of Arizona – AZ

8. University of California (Berkeley) – CA

9. University of Texas (Austin) – TX

10. Ball State University – IN

Pretty interesting top 10 entrepreneurship programs. The pack is led by a small college, but filled out by muscular research universities. Odd that no schools from Illinois, Michigan, or Ohio make the list, but Indiana has two top 10 entrepreneurship programs. Yes to Arizona, but nothing in Florida. Thoughts?

Career Development Opportunities Trump Pay

2010-01-13T11:27:00.002+02:00

From Creative Class:

Forty percent of employees in a survey were more interested in career development than pay and benefits.
From the Saturday Globe and Mail:

Career development prospects top the criteria for job candidates considering a new employer, a new survey finds.
Forty percent of 1,300 respondents to a survey by staffing service Right Management Inc. said the potential for career development is the most important factor when choosing a new boss.
That was followed by work-life balance (21 percent); innovative workplace (15 percent); and competitive pay and benefits (12 percent). Only 8 percent cared most about having good rapport with their manager.

My thought here is the answer likely depends upon where you are in your life. Certainly it makes sense for younger knowledge workers to prioritize career development opportunities as an investment — pay will come later. For those with young families (especially women, as per last-week’s discussion) work-life balance may be more important. And later in life the paycheck may trump everything as retirement looms and university-aged children are needing help.
What would you prioritize?

Big Blue's Smarter Marketing Playbook

2010-01-13T11:23:00.000+02:00

From NYT:

A London speech by I.B.M.'s Sam Palmisano provides a lessons-learned tutorial that explains the success of the company's Smarter Planet campaign.

İnternet sektöründen en güncel bilgilere "türkçe" ulaşmak için güncel adresler

2010-01-13T11:22:00.000+02:00

Sosyal Medya Pazarlama - Çağan Çağlar'dan:

Ben habere değil, haber bana ulaşsın' diyenlerden değilseniz, internet sektörü ile ilgili en güncel bilgilere aşağıdaki blog ve internet sitelerinden ulaşabilirsiniz.

Turk.internet.com
Kendimi bildim bileli okurum. Bir baktım da internet sektörüne girdiğim 2000'den bu yana yayında imiş, şaşmamak lazım :) İnanılmaz kapsamlı bir kategori yapısı var, 11 senelik arşivi düşünüldüğünde sektör için tartışmasız en değerli kaynak.

Webrazzi
Türkiye'nin özellikle web20 alanında en güncel bilgilere sahip blog'u.
Melek yatırımcılar, dünyada internet alanındaki önemli gelişmeler, mobil de yer verdikleri diğer konular.

Mindshare Interaction Blog
Türkiye'nin en büyük medya planlama ajanslarından Mindshare'in digital ekibi tarafından hazırlanan blog. Oldukça güncel olan blog'u tüm ekip farklı alanlarda destekleyerek yazıyor. Sadece müşterilerinden yazdıklarını sakın düşünmeyin, rakiplerin başarılı işlerini yazdıklarına bizzat tanık oldum. Blog'da digital dünyaya ilişkin birbirinden farklı konulara değiniliyor. Bazen bir viral, yeni açılan bir internet sitesi, bazen de yararlı istatistiksel veriler paylaşılabiliyor.

Bigumigu
2005 bu yana en düzenli güncellenen blog'lardan biri. Reklam, pazarlama, tasarım dünyasındaki yenilikleri ve gelişmeleri kullanıcılarına aktarıyor. Gerçekten çoğu zaman ilk onlardan duyduğum çok olmuştur.

Mediacat Online
Reklam sektörün en iyi dergilerinden biri. Son aylarda digital haberler bölümü ile güncel içerik sunuyor izleyicilerine.İzlemekte fayda var.

Pazarlamadunyasi.com
Kendini Pazarlama ve pazarlama iletişimi ile ilgili tüm bileşenleri bir arada sunan pazarlama portalı olarak tanımlıyor. Kendimi her ay sektörün önemli isimleri ile düzenli yapılan röportajları okurken buluyorum. Ayrıca çok ciddi bir bilgi de var içinde... sektörün önemli kitaplarından, ajans bilgilerine, önemli linklere tek yerden erişmek mümkün.

Digital Age
Digital alanda türkçe yayın yapan yegane dergilerden birinin internet sitesi.
Sektörden haberler, incelemeler v.b. için ilk başvuru adreslerinden biri olmalı.

Digithell
Son ayların en çok konuşulan dijital ajanslarından Digital MacCann'in blog'u. Henüz Mindshare'in ki kadar güncel değil, ama konuk yazarları da kabul edeceklerini açıkladıklarından, daha sıklıkla güncelleneceğine eminim.Ajanstan haberler, müşterileri için yaptıkları işler gibi konulara ilk elden erişebilirsiniz...

Mixing Open Source and Proprietary Software Strategies

2010-01-11T16:07:00.000+02:00

Fron Open Source Science:

Q&A with:	Gaston Llanes
Published:	January 11, 2010
Author:	Julia Hanna

Adopting a new business model can be a strategic, game-changing play in any industry. But knowing when and how to try something new can be tricky, particularly in the constantly evolving software industry.

The open source (OS) movement is one model—it's going strong after nearly 30 years and still has its die-hard supporters. Meanwhile, other firms try to maximize profits by keeping a tight, proprietary hold on all intellectual property. Increasingly, however, software companies are taking a "best of both worlds" approach by creating products that use a combination of OS and proprietary software code.

In their working paper 'Mixed Source,' HBS associate professor Ramon Casadesus-Masanell and postdoctoral fellow Gaston Llanes consider scenarios in which theoretical software firms compete through different business models under a variety of conditions.

Their findings highlight the complexities managers face in navigating an increasingly competitive industry. But if there's no easy recipe for software firms, even in the seemingly ideal balance of mixed source, these results indicate recurring patterns and strategies that managers can take into consideration when setting the course for their own firms. A Q&A with Llanes follows.

Julia Hanna: How did you come to be interested in this particular area of research?

Gaston Llanes: We started to look at this topic because so many commercial firms were devoting resources to developing open source products. That sort of behavior is initially puzzling to economists because the firm is participating in the development of something that is going to be given away for free. Once you begin studying these organizations, however, you notice that one way they do profit is by selling complementary goods and services. For example, IBM sells consulting services and proprietary software that are complementary to the OS software it develops, and Sun sells complementary hardware such as servers.

Another combination that interested us is mixed source software, where firms develop OS software while selling some part that is closed, or proprietary. That model sounds like it should work well for all companies, since it seems to represent the best of both worlds—innovation and value capture—but it's more nuanced than that, as our paper shows. We wanted to get a clearer sense of when a profit-maximizing firm should adopt a mixed source business model and what that model might look like under different circumstances.

Q: Can you first explain the technical details behind mixed software?

A: Sure. In industry speak, software is composed of two modules—the core, or base, and the extensions. There's an asymmetry between these two because the base can be used without the extensions, but to use the extensions you need the base. So, there are a few overall business models that currently exist in the software industry: proprietary, OS, or a mixed model, opening either the extensions or the base. In the software industry, the open extensions model is sometimes referred to as "open edge."

Q: Walk us through one of the market scenarios in your paper.

A: In the first case, we examine a monopoly-type situation, where the firm is the only one with a product in that market segment. We find that when the value of the complementary good and user innovation is low (meaning that the technical possibilities for users to improve the software are limited), the firm will choose a mixed source model. In this instance the firm doesn't open its core, because it has something to lose by creating a direct OS competitor. So the firm opens the extensions, because it can benefit from user innovation, but customers can't use the OS software without purchasing the core product. It's a relatively inexpensive way to become open—you don't lose much. Stata, a software product used in econometrics, is a good example of this.

In cases where values are intermediate, we find that the firm prefers to open the core product only. And when the value of the complementary good and user innovation are high in a monopoly situation, the firm will open both modules and use a pure OS model, because the quality improvement that occurs when modules are opened outweighs any potential competition.

Q: But it's not always a good idea to adopt an OS model.

A: Right, it really depends on your product and the competitive landscape.
For example, if you have an OS competitor like Apache or the Free Software Foundation, you may not want to be so open. This is an interesting point to make, because usually people think if you face competition from OS you are going to respond by becoming more open, always. But that's not the case.

In fact, one of the examples in our paper shows that a firm is more likely to use a proprietary business model when it faces competition from an outside OS project, particularly when the outside OS project has a base module. In that case, a combination of the outside base module and the proprietary firm's open extensions could result in a stronger free competitor. So the firm is more likely to open substitute modules, rather than complementary ones, to the outside OS project. We do find that the firm will prefer to adopt the modules developed externally when they're of higher value than the firm's own modules. In that case, increased openness obviously results in greater value creation and value capture.

Q: It seems that open source software, particularly when it's part of the 'mixed' model, is becoming more prevalent.

A: Yes, even Microsoft has jumped on the bandwagon to some extent. It's partnered with Novell to put some of Microsoft's technologies on Linux and other open platforms. The Mono project consists of porting the .NET framework onto Linux, and the Moonlight project is about providing an offer of Silverlight, a Web-based digital video technology, for Linux. And in July 2009, Microsoft agreed to contribute some of its technology to Linux under a licensing agreement that allows developers outside Microsoft to modify the code. They are being very strategic, approaching it product by product.

Q: Your paper also considers several different scenarios between two competitive, for-profit firms. Can you talk about those findings?

A: The method we use is a two-period game where in the first period (the strategy period) business models are chosen, and in the second period (the tactics period) firms interact by making tactical pricing choices as allowed by their models. Many different things can happen in this instance, so it's much more complex.

We study two firms, H and L, where we assume that firm H has modules of higher quality than firm L. We find that when the external quality difference between two firms is low, one firm competes through a proprietary business model and the other opens one module, generally the extensions. As the quality difference grows, cannibalization concerns lessen, and both competitors elect to compete through the same mixed source business model.

We also find that both firms may prefer to compete through the proprietary business model when H is the first mover, although that never happens when L is the leader—a low quality firm is more interested in competing through a mixed source business model than a high quality firm. But when the low quality firm is first to act in the market, and the higher quality firm reacts, the lower quality firm may "leapfrog" the higher quality firm. It's a good recommendation for the low quality firms and a cautionary note for high quality firms. If a low quality firm is quick enough to act in the market, it may surpass its higher quality competitors.

Another interesting outcome is that when user innovation between the two products is low—regardless of which firm moves first—one firm decides to use a mixed source model, while the other is proprietary. So a firm differentiates itself instead through its business model. But when the innovation and quality differential are higher in both firms, the firms tend to look more alike, choosing the same business model.

Q: Can you give an example of a firm adapting its business model?

A: Yes, this case actually motivated me to start working in this area. IBM was facing competition from JBoss, a growing new firm with an open source business model. In response, IBM in 2005 bought a small firm called Gluecode that sold products in the same market segment as JBoss. IBM then opened the Gluecode product and adopted a mixed source strategy as a response to the competition it faced from JBoss. It's a good example that shows firms can adapt their business models in response to competition from other firms.

Q: What factors should managers take into account when it comes to using, or not using, a mixed source business model?

A: They should take into account who their competitors are and what the nature of the competition is. They should also weigh the importance of user innovation for their market and the value of their complementary good. In the case of some software products, the complementary product is very important. For instance, a server operating system is very complex and will probably require support, or at least training, if you run into problems. But if you are talking about a desktop operating system that is easier to use, the complementary good is not as valuable—it's more difficult to use an open source model in that case because then you don't have much to sell in the way of services.

If anything, our research plainly shows that value creation doesn't necessarily lead to value capture. Instead, for-profit firms should choose a business model to capture as much value as possible, taking into account the likely strategic and tactical reactions of other firms. It's impossible to give a unique recipe for all software firms—it really depends on the industry's configuration and the placement of your product with respect to competitors.

Q: Your paper concludes by citing other industries where new technologies, regulatory changes, and customer demands have driven the innovation of new business models. Can you talk about that a bit?

A: Yes, even if your company is operating in an established market, some organizations have shown that it's possible to open up space in a crowded industry by thinking of a new way of doing business. Ryanair, IKEA, Cirque du Soleil, and Betfair (online betting) have all grown quickly through innovation in their business models.

Q: So are mixed source business models seen as the next big innovation strategy in the software industry?

A: This is being discussed quite a lot right now. In the past, a pure OS model was the big thing, but there were many firms that then found they had a hard time being profitable. For example, some observers say that Sun Microsystems ended up being acquired by Oracle because it was too open.

There is definitely a lot of thinking out there about what is the right degree of openness. The conflict between more 'fundamentalist' developers who believe all code should be open and those who don't see it that way still exists. In the long run, however, it goes without saying that you can only subsist if you have enough revenue to sustain the development of the product.

About the author

Julia Hanna is associate editor of the HBS Alumni Bulletin.

Arthur C. Clarke's ‘2010’ still beyond reality

2010-01-11T16:04:00.000+02:00

From MSNBC Innovation:

The year 2010 has arrived, but humans have yet to travel out to the gas giants of our solar system as portrayed by Arthur C. Clarke in his book '2010: Odyssey Two' — much less unearth alien artifacts on the moon.

Mobil Pazarlama 101 - Markalar için mobil'e giriş kılavuzu

2010-01-11T16:00:00.000+02:00

Cağan Çağlar'dan:

Bugün internet kullanıcıları, internete sadece PC'den, kucaklarında ki notebook'lardan değil, ellerindeki cep telefonları aracılığı ile de ulaşıyor.

Üstelik 'on the go' halinde ihtiyaç, masa başındakinden çok daha farklı, daha lokal, acil hatta gerçek ihtiyaca 'satışa' yönelik. Hal bu iken markaların mobil telefonlardan erişilebilinen mobil web sitelerine çeki düzen vermelerinin de tam sırası.

Ama peki hangi cihaza göre?

Minicik bir soru cümlesi bu, ama arkasında inanılmaz bir kaos, maliyet ve bilgi eksikliği de barındırıyor. Çünkü bugün dünyada birbirinden çok farklı platform ve teknolojilerde üretilen farklı cep telefonları, markalar, modeller mevcut. Biri için yaptığınız diğerine kesinlikle uyacak demek değil.

Basit bir örnek vermek gerekirse; Bugün şirketiniz için yaptırdığınız web sitesinin sadece Internet explorer'da değil, firefox'da, safari'de, chrome'da, kısacası tüm browser'larda çalışması için yazılımını ona göre planlamak ve geliştirmek zorundasınız. Mobil dünyada ise bu seçenekler onlarca kat daha fazla.

Mobil dünyaya adım atarken derin bir nefes alın, elimizdeki cihazlar küçücük ama mobil dünyanın kuralları hem kendine has, keşfetmesi her zaman çok kolay değil, hem de bazen yetişebileceğimizden de çok hızlı olabiliyor.

Mobil'de yolunu kaybetmiş, nereden başlayacağını bilemeyen marka sahipleri için bir mini rehber var aşağıda, umarım işinize yarar....

Markalar için mobil pazarlama 101.

Öncelikle Mobil siteye ihtiyacınız var mı karar verin. Eğer hedef kitleniz cep telefonu kullanmıyorsa elbette gerek yok, ama işin açıkçası bu kadar nishe bir markete bugünün dünyasında kim hitap edebilir, emin değilim.

Cevabın evet var, hem de nasıl olduğunu varsayarak devam ediyorum :)

Önce müşterilerinizin 'on the go' halinde sizin web sitenizde ihtiyaç duyacağı bilgileri ve fonksiyonları bir listeleyin.

Kampanyalar, ürün tanıtımları, fiyat listesi, bayi listesi, iletişim bilgisi
v.b. gibi bir çırpıda sıralanabilir. Elbette her markanın, hedef kitlenin ihtiyaçları birbirinden farklı, buna en iyi cevabı müşteriniz verecektir, size mobil sitenizden ulaşmalarına imkan verin.

Mobil site mi? Yoksa Iphone app'den mi başlamalı?

Evet uygulamalarçok moda, bugün özellikle Iphone, Android, Blackberry için markalar bir biri ardına aplikasyonlar üretiyor, yayına alıyor. Ama siz siz olun önce cep telefonu markası bağımsız, tüm cihazlardan erişilebilen bir mobil site yapmakla işe başlayın.

Bu mobil sitenin boyutları görüntüleyen cihaza göre mobil server tarafında ayarlanabileceğinden geniş ekranlı telefonlarda bu siteyi biraz genişleterek idare edebilirsiniz rahatlıkla. İkinci hedefiniz ise Iphone kullanıcıları olmalı, tabi eğer müşterileriniz arasında Iphone kullanıcıları hatırı sayılır bir oran oluşturuyor ise. Burada da yine Iphone app. değil, mutlaka önce dokunmatik ekranlara uyumlu bir tasarım ve uygulama hedefleyin öncelikle. Kısacası önce mobil web'i çözün, herkesler size ulaşabilsin, işini görsün, extralara sonra başlarsınız.

Mobil siteyi şirket içinde çözebilir miyim? Nereden destek alabilirim?

Web sitenizin yazılım faaliyetlerini eğer şirket içerisinde çözümlüyorsanız, mobil'i de burada yaparız demeden önce iki defa düşünün. Mobil dünyanın farklı kuralları olduğunu, bu işin iyi bir yazılımcı /digital ajans ile çözülemeyebileceğini öngörün. Sürekli gelişen, yeni teknolojilerin takip edilmesi gereken inanılmaz bir sektör.

Sitem hazır, peki mobil sitemi nasıl duyurabilirim?

Kesinlikle öncelikle marka web sitenizden. Tüm mobil sitelerinizi, aplikasyonlarınızı, ürün ve servislerinizi buradan tanıtın. Sizin markanız ile ilgilenen müşterilerinizin ilk bakacağı yer orası.

Yönlendirmeleri aman unutmayın. Bugün web sitenize giren kullanıcının mobil cihazdan bağlandığı rahatlıkla görülebilir. Mobil sitenizin adresini bilmeyen kullanıcılar doğal olarak web sitenize gireceğinden, onların hayatını kolaylaştırın ve mobil sitenize yönlendirin, emin olun çok hoşlarına gidecektir. Üstelik cihazlarına uygun tasarımlı farklı bir site varsa, mobil server'ınız bu bilgiyi de doğal olarak ayrıştıracaktır, direkt o özel tasarımlı siteye yönlendirebilirsiniz. (Elbette sitenizin footer'ında ana siteye dönebilmek için bir link ile.)

Türk mobil kullanıcılarına ulaşmanın yollarını bulun. Ürün/servislerinizin kalitesine dikkat edin, bırakın müşterileriniz aralarında konuşsun, yaysın.

Lansman döneminde mobil sitelerde 'mobil pazarlama' reklam kampanyaları yapabilirsiniz. Bugün Türkiye'de mobil kullanıcıların en çok ziyaret ettiği sitelerin bir listesi malesef bir yerlerde yok. Ama operatör siteleri, haber siteleri, oyun siteleri her ülkede olduğu gibi Türkiye'de de çok popüler.

Yatırımlarınızı planlayın.

Hepsini bir arada yapmaya çalışıp zorlamayın kendinizi. Adım adım ilerleyin. Dünyada da markaların da kafası karışık bu konuda, kabul etmek lazım. Kimi android'e, kimi Blackberry'ye, kimi de Iphone'a yatırım yapıyor.

Siz siz olun, markanızın kafasını karıştırmayın.

Tüm sorularınızın cevabı her zaman olduğu gibi müşterinizde saklı.

Putting the "Public" In Publicly-Funded Research

2010-01-11T15:57:00.000+02:00

From EFF:

Sometimes an idea is so blindingly, obviously good that you have to wonder why it hasn’t already been implemented.

A few years ago, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had an idea like that. Why not create a free, public, online archive of findings from research studies that were funded by Americans' tax dollars? That way, members of the public could keep up to date on the latest health findings by reading about discoveries that they paid for and would otherwise be unable to access. To ensure academic publishers could recoup any investment made by publishing research in traditional print journals, scientists could wait 12 months before making the research available to the public, but no more. The policy was voluntary at first, then made mandatory — much to the consternation of commercial science publishers. (Make no mistake — scholarly publishing is a significant profit center, for publishers if not authors. For example, a subscription to Brain Research, the leading neuroscience journal, can cost a library over $23,000. Much of that is pure profit, as authors provide the content free of charge.) When Rep. John Conyers introduced legislation to end the policy earlier this year, public criticism and a wave of protest helped stop the bill in its tracks.

Now the Obama Administration (specifically, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, or OSTP) is considering extending the policy to other federal agencies that fund academic research. For example, the National Science Foundation spends $6 billion a year supporting basic research in America's colleges and universities. If the fruits of that research were publicly accessible online, the taxpayers who actually paid for it could read and use it in new and interesting ways, just as patients and their families have used the newly accessible NIH-sponsored medical studies to help make informed medical decisions. Scholars and entrepreneurs could also access the research, promoting innovation in science and technology. Moreover, creating a publicly available research archive is simply fair. Your tax dollars paid for this research; you should have a chance to actually see those dollars at work.

Now, the public has an opportunity to show support for this innovative, common sense idea. Since December, the OSTP has been hosting an involved discussion on their blog, asking for input on every angle of public access, including which federal agencies should adopt public access policies, which file formats could help solve compliance and archival issues, and what the ongoing role of the government should be. The OSTP was originally going to close the comment period on January 7, but the moderators have decided to keep it open until January 14 in light of the holiday season's effect on the ability of the public to comment. If you care about the availability of research and want the government to implement a policy that's good for innovation, consider contributing to the great discussion taking place on the OSTP blog. You can find the complete collection of public access policy blog posts here, and the most recent call for comments here. Even though commercial publishers don't like it, public access policies are an obvious way to maximize the usefulness of scientific research that taxpayers pay for. Head to the OSTP blog and share some ideas for how it should be done.

The European Year of Creativity and Innovation 2009 has ended. Long live creativity and innovation!

2010-01-11T15:56:00.000+02:00

From Innovation Unlimited:

On the 16 and 17 December, the Swedish EU presidency formally closed the European Year of Creativity and Innovation 2009 with a conference entitled Create Innovate Grow. However, many of the participants did not want to view the conference as an end point.

New year, new science

2010-01-11T15:54:00.000+02:00

From Nature:

Nature looks at what key events may come from the research world in 2010.

Campus Builds Capacity to Absorb Its Own Innovation

2010-01-11T15:51:00.000+02:00

From Creative Class:

In University and the Creative Economy, Richard Florida and colleagues build an economic development case around a region’s ability to capitalize on innovative technologies and research being produced at universities. Silicon Valley and Research Triangle are exemplary models. What if a region does not have this ability? Appropriately, they suggest a region work on developing the capacity to absorb university output through campus-industry partnerships. Otherwise, valuable intellectual property goes elsewhere. Or, worse off, and probably more common, it disappears into a black hole of uncommercialized ideas and patents.

Now, for regions that have universities but neither the current ability to absorb, nor the means to create a working capacity, is there an additional solution? Is it time for the universities to build their own infrastructure to absorb and commercialize their own creativity? Maybe this is the crossroads where higher education and economic development policy can tango?

How about new policies that substantially invest in universities absorbing their own innovative output when a region is not equipped? Incentivize the universities to transform economy by building infrastructure to commercialize the talent and academic ingenuity they harness. Maybe University Hospitals is a viable model in health care, but expand into other industry development aligned with a university’s output. Maybe we can learn from Chinese university-run businesses. Let’s equip universities, as my grandma used to say, with the whole “kit and caboodle” so a region can benefit.

What’s the risk in doing so?