• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to footer

David Bressler

The next twenty

  • Blog
  • Bio
  • Subscribe
  • Buy my Book

Reflections on Last Week’s Smart City Symposium

January 24, 2018

I had the oppor­tu­ni­ty to address the Smart City Inter­na­tion­al Sym­po­sium in Chica­go last week. I hope the audi­ence had as much fun lis­ten­ing as I did pre­sent­ing a vision of secure, expe­ri­ence-dri­ven cit­i­zen engage­ment.

My goal was to share my unique-ish point-of-view on expe­ri­ence dri­ven mobile com­put­ing, what soft­ware devel­op­ment assump­tions need to change to embrace said future, and some ideas of the ben­e­fits that would result.

I had hoped that the metaphors I used to explain my point of view would enable the audi­ence to reframe some of their chal­lenges in ways that would help them achieve their objec­tives in a more cost-effec­tive man­ner with­out com­pro­mis­ing secu­ri­ty.

A few arti­facts:

  1. My pre­sen­ta­tion (apolo­gies as there aren’t any speak­er notes at the moment, you can can down­load and lis­ten to a record­ing I made of the ~30 minute ses­sion). The pre­sen­ta­tion is in-full below as well.
  2. A recent post on the ROI of Data. I believe a lot of peo­ple con­fuse “big data” (and data analy­sis) with “lots of data” (and sim­ply cre­at­ing an infra­struc­ture for shar­ing data out­side of appli­ca­tion silos, with­out nec­es­sar­i­ly ana­lyz­ing it).
  3. An exam­ple health­i­er smart city “offer­ing” that could reduce health insur­ance costs, improve cit­i­zen health, and become a mod­el for how to deploy “cit­i­zen solu­tions” instead of “gov­ern­ment process” for get­ting cities more con­nect­ed.

Get­ting ready for my talk I set­tled on some key points to make sure I cov­ered my ses­sion:

#1 Citizen value will be extracted from a smart infrastructure using software

I’m just not that impressed with the things them­selves. I mean, they’re impor­tant. And cool. But if we only think about the device and then the “stack on top of it” (the appli­ca­tion “silo”) it’s not going to be that inter­est­ing. Take, for exam­ple, smart park­ing garages. It’s great to have an app that lets me know where the spots are, helps me elim­i­nate pay­ment fric­tion, and so on. But, it’s not going to be real­ly inter­est­ing until that ties into the traf­fic sys­tem, and near­by event venues, and local events, so that when I’m try­ing to get to a con­cert it takes all of this into con­sid­er­a­tion to help min­i­mize trans­porta­tion fric­tion.

The val­ue of a smart city infra­struc­ture will be real­ized through soft­ware Click To Tweet

Anoth­er sim­ple exam­ple. Smart trash cans allow for more opti­mized garbage pick­up sav­ing fuel, salaries, and lead to clean­er streets. Amaz­ing ben­e­fits.

We have a cus­tomer who’s using the sen­sors in trash cans though to track rat infes­ta­tions (depart­ment of health stuff) and do more effi­cient home­less out­reach. They can sense when a can is being rum­maged by a human, dif­fer­ent than a rat rum­mag­ing around by the way. They can tell when the can is on fire, and when it’s cold they can use their own expe­ri­ence with home­less pop­u­la­tions to know that the fire has been delib­er­ate­ly set to stay warm. Instead of hav­ing out­reach ran­dom­ly roam­ing the streets to keep the home­less warm, direct­ed out­reach helps more peo­ple at a low­er cost.

But think­ing of that exam­ple… will some­one look for a “waste man­age­ment sys­tem” that sup­ports the home­less? Or, is it a com­mu­ni­ty out­reach piece of soft­ware that sup­ports waste man­age­ment? Words fail us as we try to con­nect hor­i­zon­tal­ly using the data avail­able, instead of the more tra­di­tion­al silo-ed approach to con­sid­er­ing soft­ware.

If that’s a con­fus­ing descrip­tion read my post on a smarter city is a health­i­er city and tell me if you think what I’m describ­ing is an insur­ance app, a smart city app, or a bike app? It’s it part of a patient record sys­tem or some­thing else? These words and cat­e­go­riza­tions mat­ter… and the real chal­lenge is that there are too many peo­ple who ben­e­fit, so it’s hard to move every­one for­ward because who, ulti­mate­ly, is respon­si­ble? It’s much eas­i­er for man­agers to stick with what they can direct­ly man­age rather than work through influ­ence when they can’t con­trol every­thing. (This of course is an incen­tive prob­lem… well beyond the scope of this post.)

Cities need to mod­el them­selves as a Mod­ern Soft­ware Fac­to­ry™ so that they can cre­ate an inno­va­tion plat­form just like Apple and Google have for their devices. If I had to depend on Apple to devel­op all the soft­ware for my iPhone, it would not be near­ly as use­ful as it is today with a glob­al com­mu­ni­ty of devel­op­ers cre­at­ing appli­ca­tions.

#2 Data is important, but there’s more

There’s some real inno­va­tion hap­pen­ing with smart devices, but device avail­abil­i­ty are not what’s hold­ing inno­va­tion back. There’s plen­ty of data avail­able today that’s too hard to access. Com­pa­nies need to build a data plat­form, and gov­ern the plat­form to make sure data is used “prop­er­ly” (what­ev­er that means in con­text).

There’s more.

I’ve been in the inte­gra­tion space for over 22 years. A while back I cre­at­ed my own mod­el for think­ing about inte­gra­tion projects that’s quite sim­ple. I struc­ture con­ver­sa­tions around three key things:

  1. Data
  2. Process
  3. Events

Using these three, I feel like I can dis­as­sem­ble any “busi­ness require­ment” into a well under­stood inte­gra­tion project.

(As an aside, one of my favorite rants is about being more event-dri­ven using mod­ern, action­able noti­fi­ca­tions.)

In an econ­o­my dri­ven by cus­tomer expe­ri­ence (as ours is becom­ing), there’s anoth­er three-part lay­er to the three above:

  1. Per­sona
  2. Moment (on the cus­tomer jour­ney)
  3. Job (to be done for that per­sona, at that moment in time)

For a per­sona, at a moment in time, a city (or com­pa­ny) uses the data, process­es, and events at their dis­pos­al to help com­plete a job.

How­ev­er, there’s one more bit. In the mobile world, the plat­form informs the expe­ri­ence.

These sev­en items can be used to com­plete­ly struc­ture any con­ver­sa­tion about a tech­nol­o­gy project and map the tech­nol­o­gy to the busi­ness out­comes. (I wel­come ideas or feed­back.)

#3 The economic model is harder than the technical one

It’s easy to come up with ideas, and while I think my 7-point ref­er­ence struc­ture is good, it doesn’t address the ROI or busi­ness mod­el for jus­ti­fy­ing a project.

In my exam­ple of home­less out­reach as a side-effect of a smart waste man­age­ment solu­tion above… I know that city couldn’t jus­ti­fy the cost of smart cans for the home­less out­reach ben­e­fits. In fact, as I under­stand it, they couldn’t even jus­ti­fy it for the sav­ings on smarter col­lec­tion. The way they were able to get the project approved had to do with rain. The cur­rent trash cans didn’t have cov­ers, and they had to vis­it them any­ways to install the cov­ers. The city was wise enough to real­ize that they could use that project to improve the ROI of installing sen­sors in the cans and cap­i­tal­ized on it.

These sorts of jus­ti­fi­ca­tions are going to be even more dif­fi­cult in the future (if I’m cor­rect) because I believe we need native mobile appli­ca­tions to max­i­mize the expe­ri­ences cre­at­ed. That’s an expen­sive and pos­si­bly divi­sive point-of-view. It’s going to require that we change the way we think about these projects.

One way I’ve start­ed to explain how we can think dif­fer­ent­ly about the eco­nom­ics of these sorts of projects has to do with data.

#4 Software development organizations make a lot of assumptions that they don’t realize we’re making

This point is actu­al­ly wor­thy of a post of it’s own.

I believe that there are many assump­tions about soft­ware devel­op­ment that have been made to help com­mu­ni­cate how soft­ware is devel­oped to non-tech­ni­cal parts of the orga­ni­za­tion. These assump­tions get insti­tu­tion­al­ized and they become hard to change.

Reminder: cross-plat­form UIs mean your prod­uct looks con­sis­tent to you and weird to all of your actu­al users. https://t.co/NvT3X8KKDS

— Bene­dict Evans (@BenedictEvans) July 4, 2017

A great exam­ple is the idea of “write once, run every­where” devel­op­ment. We’ve been able to use desk­top devel­op­ment prac­tices (in the enter­prise) and fake mobile inter­ac­tion mod­els… for exam­ple, using emails for noti­fi­ca­tions and believ­ing that’s enough. but I believe that with aug­ment­ed real­i­ty (AR), that’s final­ly going to change. There won’t be any way for some time to cre­ate high-qual­i­ty cross-plat­form AR solu­tions.

AR by itself isn’t a plat­form but it is pre­cise­ly the kind of plat­form fea­ture that makes cross-plat­form impos­si­ble. https://t.co/A8NqOSIvq5

— 🧘🏻‍♂️Steven Sinof­sky ॐ (@stevesi) August 30, 2017

I have a few draft posts on this top­ic, and even a prod­uct idea in my head on this one (that I’ll prob­a­bly share because I don’t real­ly want to start a tech­ni­cal prod­uct com­pa­ny).

#5 Private-public partnerships will bring a mission-oriented focus to commercial smart city efforts

At the Smart City Sym­po­sium a pan­el of may­ors talked about their efforts to mod­ern­ize their cities. Not one talked about tech­nol­o­gy (at least direct­ly). They talked about inequal­i­ty, how trans­porta­tion impacts qual­i­ty of life or abil­i­ty to get/keep a job, and how to get peo­ple to come togeth­er as a com­mu­ni­ty.

Back at point #3 I men­tioned how the eco­nom­ic mod­el is hard. That’s only (in part) because we don’t real­ly val­ue mis­sion-based cit­i­zen ben­e­fits as equals to oth­er stake­hold­ers. We’re used to pay­ing cus­tomers, or cus­tomers who exchange some­thing (like pri­va­cy) which can then be mon­e­tized through adver­tis­ing.

Here’s an exam­ple on my mind, just because I saw an arti­cle on bank fees ear­li­er today. When some­one bounces a pay­ment they pay a fee. Let’s say I have $10 in an account and make 3 pay­ments: one for $3, one for $15, and one for $6.

If the bank process­es them in the order I list­ed (and let’s pre­tend that’s the order they hap­pen), the cus­tomer pays 2 fees. The $3 pay­ment goes through, the two remain­ing bounce.

The bank could choose to process them as first, third, sec­ond, to min­i­mize fees. What’s their incen­tive? Cus­tomer ser­vice? That’s not enough incen­tive for man­agers try­ing to hit rev­enue tar­gets (and bonus goals).

The third way to process them would be to max­i­mize fees by pro­cess­ing the largest first. That one busts the account, and the cus­tomer pays three fees in total for each of the three pay­ments.

As crazy as the third option sounds, some banks were caught doing just that.

Pro­cess­ing them in the order they were made is “fair”. Put the onus on the cus­tomer. But that’s the oppo­site of a good cus­tomer expe­ri­ence where we are sup­posed to min­i­mize the cus­tomer bur­den. How­ev­er, jus­ti­fy­ing the idea that if fees are min­i­mized today so that the cus­tomer can get ahead in some unknown future (maybe) and be a bet­ter cus­tomer… that’s not going to hap­pen because banks need to make mon­ey. They’ll go so far, but it’s going to take some­thing com­plete­ly dis­rup­tive to elim­i­nate fees that oth­er­wise seem fair.

An exam­ple of a com­pa­ny inno­vat­ing here is Robin­hood, who com­petes with the e-bro­kers by elim­i­nat­ing trad­ing com­mis­sions. I believe Robin­hood is an excep­tion that proves the rule. They can be effi­cient on their back end because they emerged and start­ed from scratch with­out hav­ing to deal with a lot of lega­cy tech­nol­o­gy or busi­ness mod­els.

Pri­vate pub­lic part­ner­ships are an oppor­tu­ni­ty to deliv­er mis­sion-dri­ven smart city ben­e­fits to cit­i­zens Click To Tweet

We have to fig­ure out how to incor­po­rate a mis­sion-dri­ven approach to smart cities, and I believe that city, state, and fed­er­al work­ers can hold us account­able to their mis­sions in a way that makes how we apply our tech­nol­o­gy more impact­ful than it oth­er­wise would be.

Related

Filed Under: API, CA

David

If you like this post, you'll absolutely LOVE my book: 'The Elephant in the Room has a Paycheck: a fun & socially conscious blueprint to help the 99% get started investing'.

It's a quick read, and, if you can believe it considering that it's a book on investing, fun.

If you're looking for a simple and successful investing strategy, one that's purposely designed to keep you motivated, The Elephant's Paycheck is for you. And if you're already an accomplished investor, this book is likely for your spouse or your children so that they can become interested in what you're doing with the family's wealth.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Footer

Subscribe to stay in touch

If you enjoy the content I create, or the insights I share, please let me email you what I think will help you do better work.

IMPORTANT: If you're a CA employee, I suggest either (1) use a personal email or (2) make sure that whitelist the davidbressler.com confirmation email in your spam mailbox.

If you don't double-opt-in by confirming your subscription, you won't be subscribed.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
Copyright © 2018 · Genesis Theme Framework · WPEngine Hosting