Good post and great recommendation for Capability Cases. I have been
looking for a new methodology to help define where/how/why technology is
appropriate. I will have to read up on Capability Cases.
On a similar topic the founder of Nouncer, a microblogging solution, is
discussing their challenges and reasons for closing shop:
http://www.center...
-----Original Message-----
From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Ken
Arakelian
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 8:57 AM
To: [address removed]
Subject: [semweb-25] Re%3A%20Semantic%20Web%20Business%20Intelligence
Thanks Marco the Monitor110 post mortem was a good read. I haven't worked
in a startup but I think all organizations struggle with the same issues of
solving real problems that people will pay you to solve. You need to
understand what the ROI horizon is for your client and adjust your focus on
operations(using current tools to solve problems that bring revenue) and
strategy(developing/finding new tools or combinations of tools to operate
more effectively/efficiently or solve new problems).
I was part of the "envisioning strategy group" at my last company. At first
we didn't make much progress. The technologists in the group had some ideas
about cool new technologies that might apply somehow and the business folks
had some ideas about cool new technologies too. The technologists lamented
that business people were thinking of technology and not giving good
business requirements. The technologists just needed the business to frame
problems and then the technologists would solve them. The central problem
is that business people won't know they have a solvable problem unless they
understand the underlying technology and the opportunities it might provide.
Its silly for a business person to say they'd like to teleport goods to save
transport costs. So the technologist would like the business person to
simply require that a technologist figure out how to save money on transport
costs. This is flawed because there are innumerable aspects
of a business that need improving and you can't evaluate all of them to see
if new technology or combinations of technologies offer an opportunity to
save money. This problem is why the person that understands both the
business and the technology is so valuable. They have a great big ontology
in their heads that model the business and technology concepts and because
of this they can see opportunities for arbitrage.
Robert Coyne wrote "Capability Cases" [
http://www.amazon...
205766] and in it he describes a way for everyone to focus on their domain
but still make progress to solving problems.
Essentially - Business problem --> Capability --> Technology
Business people define problems and suggest what capabilties might be used
to solve them and technologists list capabilities that technology can
provide. Semantic technologies offers a way to model this and let people
collaborate productively on what is essentially the crux of a successful
business
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on
this mailing list ([address removed])
http://semweb.mee...
This message was sent by Ken Arakelian ([address removed]) from The New
York Semantic Web Meetup Group.
To learn more about Ken Arakelian, visit his/her member profile:
http://semweb.mee...
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here:
http://www.meetup...
Meetup Support: [address removed]
632 Broadway, New York, NY 10012 USA
