The British economy may technically be out of recession, but it is still not creating the jobs and growth needed to turn back the clock to the upbeat days of the past. And with a looming fiscal crisis, it’s not hard to see why some commentators are predicting the terminal decline of the British economy. I don’t think the situation for Britain is dire — yet. But if businesses want to regenerate economic engines in the future they do need to change.

Astute business leaders know that dramatic social, economic and political changes — in addition to changing workforce demographics, globalisation and rapid developments in social and business technologies — are now fusing together. Ultimately, they will affect every aspect of UK private enterprise – and competitiveness.

Having spoken to prominent industry figures and the Institute of Directors, I am more convinced than ever that the solution to this change is a move to a “hybrid” business model. That means UK businesses need to change their thinking, structures and operations and adopt a more flexible approach or lose out to more nimble competitors in the future.

A looser hybrid model has many benefits, although it isn’t without challenges. In the hybrid business, fixed office space is rejected in favour of giving staff access to shared space in bureaus. Such structural changes have huge benefits, including increased profitability (reduced rental overheads), greater responsiveness to shifting demand and more intense collaboration between workers – not to mention improved agility as businesses quickly spot and exploit market opportunities.

It’s not all sweetness and light though: less fixed office space can put off employees and create a sense of insecurity. But it’s become clear over the last few years that the notion of the office is changing and employees want a flexible approach to work. There is a noticeable move towards sharing in cities such as London, Manchester and Birmingham where office space — as well as coffee, light and power — are shared.

A hybrid approach to business is far more employee orientated. In my view, it recognises the blurring demarcation between work and home life. That involves recognition from businesses that as part of expecting staff to be on call 24/7, they must also be able to access modern communication tools — such as social networks and online shopping tools — in the office at all times.

This is liberating for workers, and it makes easier for employers to retain them amid a highly competitive global pool of talent. Company loyalty — not to mention control over the various workers operating from multiple locations — will remain an important aspect of business. There is a danger that an overemphasis on flexibility could actually lead to chaos, lack of creativity, miscommunication and ultimately poor service.

An overemphasis on flexibility is a real danger – one that all companies seeking to implement a hybrid model should be keenly aware off. But it is a risk worth taking because the harsh reality is that whether you like it or not, our foreign competitors are already implementing aspects of the hybrid model. From Shanghai to Seattle, workers are increasingly diffused, IT systems are being accessed via the cloud for a fraction of the cost, and businesses are moving quicker than ever before to exploit new opportunities.

In short, determined foreign competition means that unless we change with the world, the overall competitiveness and agility of UK plc will suffer. I don’t want to see Britain relegated to global economic irrelevance, which is why I passionately believe a move in this direction is a good move for our businesses, economy and society.

A few months back we were approached by the Society of Chief Librarians to provide some insight on how changes in society and technology may offer some opportunities for us to radically change the way in which we live, work and play – a topic regular viewers will know we enjoy and have some opinion on .

Fundamentally – I am convinced that the library is one of the primary pillars of community and as such it’s role in developing and nurturing that community is absolutely essential – however, my view is that some things need to change if we are to make the most of the opportunity (and the challenging circumstances in which we find ourselves today).

I was captivated by Alberto Manguel’s concept of the library as a “pleasantly mad place” – it struck a chord with me and re-enforced my opinion that the library needs to be many different things if it is to survive in the current environment – but whatever those things are they need to be built on the principles that have made libraries successful for thousands of years.

You can find highlights of the key recommendations I made to the SCL in this episode of the Envisioners:

Download the webcast here – The Envisioners Episode 6 or click here to subscribe to the Envisioners podcasts on iTunes.

You can also download the slides I used here – Open Government and the Future of Public Libraries – like all the content we create, they’re available for use under Creative Commons license, so feel free use them if they’re helpful to you, but please respect the copyright of the image authors (see speakers notes in each slide) and ensure you are licensed properly for their use.

If you’re a sucker for punishment, a webcast of the full presentation is also available here for download:

• Download the Hi-res (640×480) version here:
  Open Government and the Future of Public Libraries (Hi-Res)
• Download the Low-Res (320×240) version here:
  Open Government and the Future of Public Libraries (Low-Res)

It’s a great overview and expertly edited _down_ to a mere 16 minutes – genius!

You can find the podcast here…

A few months back, I was approached by a colleague that had been thinking about the collision of a number of key events: the turbulent economic environment, political uncertainty, changing workplace dynamics and the consumerisation of IT – individually, these topics have all been visited here at the Envisioners and yet the bleedin’ obvious had, until now, escaped us – what happens when you bring all of these events together at once?

We know that each one of these topics is enough on it’s own to start a conversation around how the business world needs to change (in both public and private sector) and yet here we are, presented with a once in a lifetime opportunity (I hope) where the convergence of compelling events in each of these areas create the mother of all incentives to become more agile and effective in the way we live work and play.

The Hybrid Organisation work comprises of three studies by distinguished thought leaders in their field; Prof Michael Hulme on the impact of current social change, Philip Ross on the opportunity provided by changes in the “built environment” and finally Ken Wood from MSR and myself on both the current and future potential offered by technology.

Alone, each one of these studies mark an incredible insight into each specific area, yet combined they create an incredibly compelling view of how organisations, leaders and individuals need to change in order to take advantage of the opportunities being offered and more importantly, how to stay relevant and competitive in our changing world.

To help organisations and individuals understand how to make these changes happen, we’ve created a final summary report which outlines the key themes from each of the papers and outlines 20 things every organisation should do on it’s journey to becoming hybrid.

I know all the cynics out there will be rolling your eyes and saying, “we’ve heard all this before” and that it doesn’t matter – well two things spring to my mind:

1. The unprecedented convergence of the recession, the election, workplace demographics and IT consumerisation is something that _cannot_ be ignored.
2. Read the reports and judge for yourself – Look at the 20 point plan and ask yourself (honestly) where you and your organisation stand…

There were a number of really compelling things that came out from both the presentation and the ensuing discussion:

1. Understand the Opportunity Cost of any savings you make.
   OK, so you lot know I already get that one, but wow, Dell apparently are able to plough around 50% of their savings back into strategic IT (and when you’re making a $160m saving p/a, that’s a big deal). Read on to find out how they get away with that -especially at a time when most CFO’s want every penny they can get – and then some.
2. Use the Time:Cost ratio as the pivotal argument, not simply Cost savings alone.
   Robin (and the group) talked about the difference in motivating the "business" when you factor in the time to market for IT solutions rather than simply talking about cost savings alone. It sounds simple when you say it like that, but it’s a hard won position with many CFO’s/Steering Boards. If people understand the difference in time to market that more complex IT makes, it makes it easier for them to support you in making it simpler.
3. Pursue "Ruthless Standardisation"
   Driving a standards based architecture is a pretty tall challenge, no point in doing it then if you’re only going to go halfway. It’s tough, but if you’ve done the above, you can make it happen. Dell have only _2_ images for their 22,000 server estate. That’s pretty ruthless, but it enables them to do a lot more.
4. Create a path of least resistance
   The Dell guys talk about the "Happy Path" vs the "Unhappy Path" when it comes to IT Architecture and solutions design. Follow the "happy path" (i.e. use standard tools/architecture etc) and you will get your solution in place more quickly and more cost effectively. It is possible to walk the "unhappy path" but it’s hard work so only those that are committed take it.
5. "Good enough" is good enough
   It was in fact, the great Dash (from Disney’s Incredibles – see how I spare you no cultural expense on this blog that said (and I paraphrase) "When everyone is special, it actually means no-one is". Nowhere is this more true than in the internal IT vs Business debate. The more special we allow different groups/departments to be unique and special the more expensive their IT solution. This recession will force organisations and departments to come to terms with this (I hope)
6. Rigidly define flexibility
   Oxymoronic at first blush, but it simply means, leave a little wiggle room, so people still feel empowered and part of the solution. Avoid "doing things" to people, collaborate with them instead.
7. Finally (and another of my favourite topics) be cognisant of the effects of "Consumerisation"
   Robin talked about the "Sunday Night/Monday Morning" concept, whereby people have a great IT experience on Sunday night as they catch up on personal tasks on-line, then go into work the following morning to receive a comparatively poorer experience. This isn’t about embracing the millenials, but about providing a range of service that suits a range of generational stereotypes.

Although the discussion was mostly business focussed, there were a couple of key technological points that I felt we worth calling out:

1. Power consumption is the new gold
   Based on the granularity of their server provisioning approach (smallest unit of MIP "currency" is a 2U box), Dell reckon that it is now power consumption that drives their hardware refresh cycle. Robin currently reckons that a 3 year refresh cycle will provide sufficient financial savings in power consumption alone to pay for the refresh.
2. Virtualisation alone is not enough
   Although it took a record breaking 60 minutes into the discussion before anyone mentioned the "c" word (Cloud, that is), what was clear that a big part of Dell’s success in the rationalisation of their data centres was the automation of the server provisioning. This is a topic that we’re beginning to see again and again, a virtual server is still a server, it still needs to be provisioned and patched. You only get the big savings, when you can automate that process sufficiently (and model it so you know what you’re doing is right).

Although the overall sentiment in this article is positive, I am bemused by the use of the term “hacker”.  It’s perhaps just too broad a term – one one hand it means simply “an enthusiastic computer hobbyist“, on the other, “a person who breaks into computers“.  I actually have a problem with both of these definitions in this context.

The opening up of government data should be about empowering normal citizens to make informed choices about the services they need, use and more importantly about the role they can play in their local/national community.  Why then, do we feel the need to paint this excercise as something only the cyber elite can particpate in ?

It worries me deeply as I think it scares people off from engaging, preventing them from thinking about what could be achieved and simply re-inforces the “technology is bad/complicated” message we see all too often in the media.

We need to turn this around, just for a change, why don’t we lead with the quote Chris Taggart from Openly Local ends the article with – “It’s about engaging the community“.

The IT function needs to disappear in it’s current form and re-appear as something that is pervasive or embedded in every business function as a natural part of what people do.  We need to be confident enough in our own (and our organisation’s) use of IT to let go, safe in the knowledge that we have built the right foundations.

I know it’s a big step, and it’s not one you take at once, but we need to stop the illusion of “complicated” and “special” IT because our users, customers and competitors either know that it isn’t or simply don’t care. (As a test, go and ask your wife/partner/kid/dog if they care how complicated their favourite website/game/gadget is?  If they answer in the affirmative then they’re either in IT already or you’ve been “bigging” your job up too much and they’re just humouring you 

I begin my final year of studies at University next week, and I could see something like this being incredibly useful.

These thoughts entered my brain again a few days ago but from a different angle. It was 11 o’clock at night and I was responding to a bunch of urgent emails when I suddenly thought that if I didn’t have the technology I wouldn’t feel the need to write emails late at night. The ability to “always be connected” has increased our expectations around work but also socially. I often feel that my friends expect me to respond (rapidly) to their messages, comments, tweets and pictures online. If you don’t respond online people will try your mobile phone. Too often I feel like there isn’t enough time to manage it all but I guess that it all becomes part of a routine that you don’t think much about.

The amount of unpaid work hours has soared over the past decade and the amount of time we spend with our families has decreased. It is clear that technology  has imposed new burdens on families and individuals and there aren’t many signs of improvement. The big winners are of course the companies we work for, as we can now work from anywhere at any time. Work and private life are becoming increasingly integrated but it seems like work is eating away at life at a rapid pace.

I not right to put all the blame on technological advancements but it is of course part of the problem. It is also important for us to remind ourselves that no matter how much technology moves forward, human beings still have rationale and ability to make their own decision on what is right or wrong, that is something technology can’t replace. Employees and employers will need to take more responsibility to ensure that this doesn’t spiral out of control because that is where we are heading. A glance at government statistics shows that “over-work” is one of the primary causes of growing ill health, both physically and mentally.

These thoughts made me think a bit differently about technology and maybe technological advancements aren’t always positive. The ability to “always be connected” has definitely eaten in to the amount of time people spend together but does the buck stop with us or is technology the one to blame?  Or maybe it’s just that our economy has become more demanding?

Click here to view the embedded video.

For the second of our regular monthly podcasts, we’re joined by two of our latest additions to the Envisioners team – Robin Cavonious and Jonathan Peach who have been working over the past year on some research around the impact and challenges that the Millennial generation will bring to the workforce.

I’ve been really fortunate to work with both of them over the past couple of months and they very kindly agreed to share this research with me by both contributing to this blog and by providing us with an opportunity to hear a summary of their work to date.

It’s a great perspective and rather unusually, it’s from some real life millennials, (rather than those of us that have to pretend what it’s like…)

Sit back and enjoy…

You can download the webcast here (right click and “save as”) or click here to subscribe to the Envisioners podcasts on iTunes.