Have we over innovated?
A paragraph from an excellent post from Luca Filigheddu got me thinking about voice and where its at and where its going.
“All that being said, it’s very difficult for me to see another major disruption coming in the short term to impact mobile communications. I’m referring to changing the way people use their mobile phone to communicate. In a nutshell, people are used to performing two simple actions: dial a number on their mobile phone’s keypad and click the green button”
I think the same kind of idea was pitched last week regarding Twitter by Kara Swisher
The average customer is so far down the line that all of us as voice/data operators need to give them a little time to catch up with us.
We have some amazing products as Luca mentioned but ask the average guy on the street about voip or internet telephony and its 100% guaranteed that the first word out of his mouth will be “Skype”
Myself and Luca have always discussed this matter when we have met in person, sometimes the discussion becomes quite lively, I actually discussed the same matter with Moshe Maeir at Etel over a year ago. Something bought this home to me again on Thursday, I was having coffee with two friends whose company are responsible for building and maintaining one of Ireland mobile companies radio network, I happened to mention femtocells and was greeted with a blank response, this is a company at the very edge of cellular network design.
So the question is.
How far ahead of the loop are the early adopters?
Can companies cash reserves hold them whilst they wait for the customers to catch up?
what’s your opinion?
17 comments...What do you think?
Trackbacks...
- Robin Blandford [ ByteSurgery.com - Digital Media Engineering ] » Blog Archive » Have We Over Innovated? No.
Twitter: shanekny - Innovation; Too Much of a Good Thing? | VoIP MoVoIP Blog
Twitter: shanekny - Damien Mulley » Blog Archive » Comfort zones, Iterations, Innovations and Product Design
Twitter: shanekny - Unfortunately, I was right | LucaFiligheddu.com
Twitter: shanekny - The Curse of Innovation : Alexia Golez
Twitter: shanekny - WillKnott.ie » Blog Archive » The innovation of Crowds
Twitter: shanekny
Great post! I think we really are that far ahead of the curve. Until they catch up, the cash reserves that are there should be used to take the existing technologies, and make them better, easier, and more cost efficient. As more people use them, the profit margin will then be higher, generating more money to once again, over innovate.
Pat, I blogged a reply: http://www.bytesurgery.com/blog/2008/05/06/have-we-over-innovated-no/
Thanks for the kind words Pat. The problem is even worse: I found myself looking for simplicity and for what I have always been used to. But I’m and engineer and a geek…as well as early adopter… so, what about “normal people” ?
A definite risk Pat, especially with things like “mashup”. I think where 2.0/Live net is different is that most applications and services can be set up and activated, and deliver fair value, in around 3 to 5 clicks. I think a lot of the “clever clever” stuff around presence updates, and availability etc., will get very “chip enabled” with Nokia and Intel making it super easy to get GPS *Friends *available etc. For people in the telco game, the name of the game is get back to 3 clicks to deliver fair value. If you can do that, and the customer can understand the value, you can’t go far wrong.
I like the click thought…. “3 click max” is a nice tagline.
Great post Pat and it is so true. I find myself launching the same initiatives today, as I tried in 2005, only this time there is actual uptake on them.
Sometimes it is tough always being on the bleeding edge, but at the end of the day we all have to keep in mind that most folks are not like us.
Therefore need a little more time to adapt and therefore we should operate our businesses in a manner in which allows for both “bleeding edge” and “mainstream” users to benefit from the service. What this means is that we must innovate through simplicity…simple service, that also has advanced “early adopter” features (or uses), yet mimics the “traditional” usage patterns a mainstream users expects.
I am not saying this is easy, but for those who can achieve these usability levels will find great success.
Pat:
Spot one. I have been thinking about the something for quite sometime now. Web 2.0 is becoming more and more geek stuff than building something for the average Joe. What really matters is that an average Joe adopts the service and is willing to pay for the same. Nevertheless it doesn’t mean that innovation is not good, but it should be incremental. I guess recently the valley is echoing the sentiment of solving a big problem rather than building cool stuff for geeks. Unless startups find a big problem and solve it, it’s gone be hard to survive the turbulent times. Innovation should be incremental built on basic needs
Cheers,
Omfut
Well said – this is something that has been becoming more and more prevalent (as Robin alluded to in his blog post) – innovation is almost speeding up.
Garrett says it right also, stuff that wasn’t accepted two years ago is only been slightly considered now (the largest mobile telco in Ireland’s R&D department couldn’t see the reasons for a Jaiku-presence-style client when I demoed it on a pile of handsets in 2006!). I think there’s a big gap out there.
My big confirmation of this was when I joined the workplace after absence last year – while it’s easy to go and pick up the phone to call, the tv still works as normal; I had a serious hill to climb to re-acquaint with newer techs(the signature on my emails is now theoretically about 15 lines long for all the contact options which is ridiculous) – something most people have no interest in chasing.
Take twitter, most ‘normal’ people aren’t willing to even consider changing the status on gtalk/skype, let alone twitter 10, 20, times a day. We haven’t even got most people to the concept of using ‘presence’, let alone any further.
I don’t believe innovation should slow down but there’s definitely a case for filtering out the mess (which it is). KISS is something that comes to mind
How to we explain all these cool concepts (which some really are!) to the masses?
WWSJD?
Steve Jobs made a market for the iPod in what was a very open and possibly saturated market. Sell a complicated idea to Steve and he’ll hack it to bits and make the same thing have mass market appeal. Apple made the almost 25+ year old mobile phone more usable and easier for the average consumer but also brought in more “complex” innovations than ringing someone yet the general consumer is very au-fait with Google maps now.
I wish we had more innovation that transfered to general consumers, instead we give them iterations that we’re comfortable in thinking that it will make them comfortable. Build the bridge of simplicity that will take the complex solution to a future problem to the consumer who won’t realise they are doing something different or new.
Pat, it’s like I always say; there is no point in selling something that nobody wants to buy (or even understands) right now.
It’s great to be all innovative and all us geeks can sit around and have a big techie w*nk-fest about the latest and greatest (pardon my French) but it’s all about the money. And that’s not VC money, grants and other forms of inward investment. It’s cold hard cash that your customers are willing to pay for your product or service.
That cash will not come if nobody can understand or use your product. History proves the salesman as the winner not the innovator.
Evert,
Has hit it on the head. If u’re not solving a problem that the user is willing 2 pay 4 then forget.
Sure u can create Twittery type stuff 4 the geek crowd and get some traction but thats <1% of the overall market.
Paul S has a very valid point in that if it ain’t easy 2 use – forget it
Now saying that Damien is also correct in that iPhone ‘came out of the blue’… but at the same time IS SOLVING a problem – mobile (in the US) was all about voice and now u have internet ability (if anyone thinks the average Joe was using Internet on their mobile u’re dream’n)
My 2c.
Lal