We talk about knowledge workers, and an information economy, but do you know how to capture, develop and commercialise an idea? Matt Church does. If realestate property developers take a piece of undeveloped land, see its potential, build on it and commercialise it - then Matt Church is an intellectual property developer. Just like realestate, some ideas need to be constructed from scratch, some ideas need renovating, and some ideas just need some rented furniture to prep them for sale.

Matt is obsessed with ideas and has produced a methodical process for developing them and creating thought leaders. On the back of being one of Australia's most successful professional speakers, Matt founded Thought Leaders - whose mission is to "inspire thinking and facilitate conversations that rock the planet" - a lofty but worthwhile goal ... and he certainly walks the talk. 

Ideas are becoming a new currency, and there are other innovators building businesses around the concept. Yvonne Adele, who founded Ideas Culture is one of them. Ideas Culture teaches creative thinking techniques and facilitates brainstorming sessions - even taking it a step further and tapping into the ideas of others, with a crowd sourcing product called "ideas while you sleep". Businesses are starting to appreciate that fostering and developing these talents inside their organisations pays dividends. Innovation is certainly on the corporate agenda.

If you are a knowledge professional, I would encourage you to start thinking about your assets - your personal brand, your expertise, your experience, and your ideas - they are the components that represent your value in the market - and surprisingly enough are probably where your passion lies.

What do you think about the future of intellectual property development? Do you think there is a conflict between the corporate view of IP versus the individual. What impact do you think the "open movement" has on the commercialisation and development of knowledge?

Personally, I think Apple did not take enough risk with this product - I would loved to have seen some pushing of the touch interface and some good use of gestures - but hey, its a first generation product. It is clearly aimed at the Netbook segment, and will do well. It is well designed and well priced, and will carve out a very profitable business for Apple - but is this disruptive technology?

In answer to that question I would ask - if you attended the launch of the original iPod in 2001 what would your impression have been? Video below.

I would suggest that when the original iPod launched (I still own one), that there was already a nascent market. There were already some portable MP3 players in existence (although not particularly functional), and the true potential of the iPod (including the whole content eco-system) was yet to be seen. Always 20-20 vision in hindsight!

One of the key characteristics of a disruptive technology is that it typically comes to market with less functionality than the comparable market leader (contrast high-fidelity CD's versus low-quality MP3's) - that's what makes it so dangerous - market leaders tend to ignore it until its too late. One thing that Apple is great at is defining its own markets - this is one of the hallmarks of disruption - seeking a user base that will value the current features of your new product rather than chasing the wishes of an existing user base. 

Only time will tell how successful the iPad will be, however given their track record I would suggest that Apple have every intention of making it a success.

There has been a thirty year struggle to improve upon the basic keyboard as a method of interacting with our computers. The first real break-though was the mouse - which today does not seem overly revolutionary, but at the time was a hugh step forward. That said, the basic concept of the mouse has not been really improved upon - yes we have trackpads and now gesture based mice, however the mouse is still cumbersome to use - its interruptive - you need to stop what you are doing, use the mouse, and then return to what you were doing. For most of us, this has become second nature, however it breaks your flow.

The next major area of interface development was focused on trying to mimic natural behaviours such as speech and writing. Whilst speech recognition software has greatly improved, I doubt we will be talking to our computers "star-trek style" anytime soon. Speech input also has practical limitations - not great for an open plan office!

I did hold out hope for handwriting recognition - Apple were clearly ahead of the times with the Apple Newton - however I have come to realise that typing is overtaking writing as a natural input method. Even without touch typing skills, most people can type at a fairly fast rate, the text is always legible and it can be manipulated in a variety of ways. As sad as it is, it is likely that writing skills will take a back seat to typing skills - and as a result I doubt we will see interface designers putting large amounts of energy into handwriting recognition projects.

So what will the future of computer interfaces look like? It will be about touch!

I think we have seen a glimpse of it with the iPhone, and if Apple does release a tablet this week, you can be guaranteed it will incorporate a heavy use of a multi-touch and gesture based interface. Touch interfaces are very natural, they can change and adapt to the immediate need, and they can disappear when not needed. Below is a video from TED 2006 where Jeff Han from NYU demonstrates the possibilities of a touch interface - very cool.

Whilst its obvious that a touch interface does not make sense in every single application, I think we will see increased use of touch and gesture based interfaces - the technology has caught up to make them practical, and they are naturally understood by people - we are comfortable exploring our world through touch. So perhaps a "minority report" style interface is not that far away at all .... 

What are your thoughts on touch/gesture based interfaces? Where do you see the trend heading and what would you like to see developed in this area?

Whilst the device itself is nice, the most impressive part is the business model. Every Kindle ships with free wireless 3G mobile access. What that means is that you can browse the online Amazon book store and buy books from anywhere, anytime. Waiting at the airport and need a new book to read? A quick browse on the online store and 60 seconds later you have your new book downloaded onto your Kindle. You can even download the first chapter of any book for free to see if you like it, and then purchase the full book if you do.

The convenience is outstanding. I read a lot of books and usually have several on the go at once. The beauty of the Kindle is that I can carry them all with me wherever I go - in fact the Kindle will hold around 1000 books - enough for even the most avid reader. Plus you can archive books to Amazon's website and re-download them whenever you like. For students this will be a godsend - I remember having to lug tonnes of heavy textbooks around during university - and Amazon have also just released a larger, textbook sized Kindle DX aimed at this kind of use.

The reading experience itself is quite good. The Kindle has a digital ink screen - so it looks a lot like paper and is far easier on the eyes than reading off a computer screen. I thought it would take me a while to move away from the feel and sensation of paper, however after an hour or two reading on the Kindle became quite natural. You can also highlight passages, search for text and bookmark pages. Under normal usage, and with the wireless turned off the battery life runs into weeks.

For me the Kindle is a lot like the iPod. It's not just a technology device, but an end to end business model - which extends the content right through to the device and makes the user experience great. The Kindle and its successors will be as disruptive as the iPod - even now e-books outsold print books over Christmas.

Have you tried a Kindle? Did you like it? Do you think that paper books will eventually go the way of the vinyl record?

Update: Amazon has announced the Kindle DX will be available internationally from Jan 19th.

With Wave, Google are looking for an alternative to the traditional email paradigm. Email has been around since before the web, and it is not the most efficient form of communication - especially when you want to collaborate with a few people. One of the reasons I love Google Docs so much is for its collaboration capabilities - and Wave looks to extend that even further.

The other exciting aspect is that Google will make this an open system - not only via open API's (so developers can extend the functionality), but as an open protocol - so other companies can develop Wave systems, with a view to creating a federated model that could supplant email.

Google Wave is expected to be released (in beta no doubt) later in the year. Check out the video below for a sneak peak:

Look up ....

Not at the ceiling - at the top of this blog.

Yep, up there .. at the blog logo.

That logo is the result of crowdsourcing.

So let's rewind to a few weeks ago. I decided I needed a new logo for this blog. Normally to get this done, I would have to go out and source a graphic designer, review their work, create and articulate a brief, negotiate rates and then roll the dice and hope they came up with something I liked.

Instead of following this process, I decided to crowdsource my logo design. I went to 99designs, decided on a fee, put a brief together and then sat back and waited for the designs to come in. And come in they did.

In the course of a few days I had over 105 different logos to choose from, coming from many different designers. I could rate the designs, give the designers feedback, and the designers would modify and rework various ideas. In the end I chose a design I liked, awarded the fee, and had the original design files and copyright transfered to me.

It was a great process - with one huge benefit - I got to draw upon the ideas of many many designers from all over the world. I was not locked in to one designer, and I got to see and evaluate the ideas - iteration and engagement really worked.

So what is crowdsourcing? Well, like the example above, crowdsourcing is taking a task or project that you would normally just assign to a single person, and outsourcing it to a larger audience. The process of crowdsourcing is made substantially easier by the use of the Internet.

A number of businesses have sprouted up around crowdsourcing, 99designs being just one. Perhaps you have heard of the stock photography site istockphoto, which is another great example of the use of crowdsourcing. Or maybe you have heard of Wikipedia? An entire online encyclopedia produced collaboratively.

Crowdsourcing may not be perfect for every type of work, but for anything that is really enhanced by diversity and exposure to a broad range of ideas and approaches, then crowdsourcing can really work.

If you want some more info, here's a short video on crowdsourcing.

1. Doing More With Less
2. Establishing a Competitive Advantage
3. Staff Engagement

Given these priorities, I believe we will see innovative and aggressive businesses further exploit disruptive technologies such as Open Source Software, Software as a Service, and Corporate Social Networking to gain an advantage over the competition.

Open Source Software

Firstly, lets start with open source software. Open source is the poster child for technology disruption. Software is typically developed by a community (many of whom do so in their spare time), is typically distributed for free, and innovation is shared by all. For business, open source provides not only a very cost effective solution, it also provides a very open platform for innovation. In an environment where CIO's are being asked to deliver more with ever shrinking budgets, open source has to be a serious contender in any major technology decision. Open platforms and open ecosystems are disruptive and a huge competitive advantage as they allow others to extend your business and create a richer offering. The big players in this space include Red Hat (Linux) and Oracle (MySQL) (via the Sun acquisition).

Software as a Service

Software as a Service has many names - you may have heard it referred to as SaaS, Utility Computing, Cloud Computing or On-Demand. Regardless of what you call it, SaaS providers typically deliver an application over the web - you get to use the application - the provider worries about the technology stack (hardware, databases etc). Most services are sold on a subscription basis. A simple example of SaaS would be an online email account like gmail or hotmail. You get mail, Google operates the mail server. The beauty of SaaS is that small business can have access to the same leading technology applications that large companies do, without the capital costs of buying a whole lot of IT infrastructure. The advantage for a large company is that SaaS allows you to focus on your core business ... and not have to worry about having a huge IT department. SaaS is disruptive as it gives businesses a lot of agility and levels the playing field. The big players in this market are companies like salesforce.com (CRM), Google (apps), and Workday (HR); but a wide variety of applications from ERP to email to office productivity can be delivered via SaaS.

Corporate Social Networking

The new buzz in tech is "social", and even corporates can't avoid getting involved. Even with the hype, corporate social networking will become the logical evolution of today's corporate intranets - the big difference being interactivity. The typical corporate intranet is quite stale - information rarely gets updated, and content creation is usually centralised. The "social" extension of intranets will allow employees to more easily connect with each other, create content, vote for and suggest new ideas and initiatives - and do this in same way they already do on sites like facebook and twitter in their personal lives. Increasing your ability to engage with your employees, crowdsource ideas, and grease communication is disruptive as it fosters a more grass-roots culture of innovation and collaboration within an organisation. Some players in this space include Jive and Yammer. 

So whilst its never a bad idea to tighten the belt on the financial aspects of an organisation, in a contracting market, I believe there is a huge opportunity for innovative companies to establish solid competitive advantage and differentiation though the use of disruptive technologies - with very little if not zero investment! The great thing about the internet is that experimentation is usually low cost or free - it just takes a little sweat and a little vision.

British schoolchildren may soon be studying the tweets of Ashton Kutcher along with the sonnets of Shakespeare.

A leaked Government report due to be released shortly, recommends that British primary school teachers be given much more flexibility in deciding what lessons to teach.

And while it emphasises the continued necessity of teaching traditional subjects such as spelling, history and arithmetic, it also recommends that students be taught about online media and instructed about web-based skills including how to use a spell checker.

As a father of 3 (and involved in tech), it got me thinking - can schools keep pace with technology change enough to educate kids - or will kids end up teaching the teachers?

My kids have been exposed to technology from day 1 and are digital natives - they take technology for completely for granted (I know this is not true for everyone, but increasingly so). Given appropriate access to equipment, most kids will educate themselves pretty fast. Can parents and teachers keep pace?

Did I mention I am married to a teacher?

Only a few years ago I would have had all the gadgets in the study, but gradually, more and more technology is making its way into our living room.

Firstly there are the gaming consoles - the Xbox and the Wii. They used to be stand alone, but now to get the most out of them you need to connect them to the internet.

I retired the CD player for an Apple TV about 2 years ago. Now I use it not only for music, but for downloading TV and movies from the iTunes store - again its connected to the TV and the internet. 

Also, an average TV session will no doubt be accompanied by an iPhone - used as a remote control, or to surf the web. There are a number of factors that are driving this behavior:

• On Demand: We are getting used to consuming our media as and when we want it. This became a reality with the introduction of Digital Video Recorders (DVR's) like Foxtel IQ or Tivo, and is further evolving to internet based Video on Demand services like the Apple TV. Its getting to the point where putting a DVD in the player is actually inconvenient :-)
• Convergence: Traditional media and the internet are colliding, and consumers are looking for a richer content experience - such as an enhanced internet experience (eg Webisodes for a TV show)
• ADD: More than 58% of internet users watch TV at the same time as surfing the web. It could be considered a sorry state of affairs, but the age of digital attention deficit disorder is upon us. Want to look up the actor's bio or previous films on wikipedia whilst watching the movie - no problems.

Its fairly easy to predict that we will see the living room become the centre of our online world. This is going to have an interesting impact for some industries. For example, who really cares about the next DVD standard (Blue Ray) - the technology is being leap-frogged by internet delivered on-demand TV and movies.

It will be interesting to see if traditional media can keep up with the pace of change.

In early 2007, Guy Kawasaki published a great blog post entitled "Ten Ways To Use LinkedIn" (which has subsequently increased to 13). Two years on, and most of the items on his list are still relevant, some of them more so.

LinkedIn versus Facebook

One of the additional challenges I have faced is the relationship between LinkedIn and other social networking sites such as Facebook. Fundamentally the sites are very different - LinkedIn being built around relationships, and FB being more around communicating with your social network. That said, I do often get FB invitations from work colleagues or associates. I have adopted a fairly simple approach - I use FB for only close personal contacts (friends or family) and I use LinkedIn for everyone else - not to say that some people don't reside in both - but I do want to keep my professional and personal social networks separate. Maintaining a multitude of online presences can become a chore, however I will leave that for another post. 

Has anyone seen any other creative uses of LinkedIn, and are you seeing the value?