steelcase blog

The SLOW Movement…

… I didn’t even know it existed until this past week when I attended a wonderfully interesting, informative and inspiring conference in Camden, Maine called Pop!Tech.  The conference theme was The Human Impact.  On day one, as part of a sub-theme titled The Pursuit of Happiness, I had the pleasure of hearing about the SLOW movement from Carl Honore´.  The subject made immediate sense to me.  I stopped at the bookstore that very day and got his book In Praise of Slowness (A comprehensive look at the worldwide SLOW movements making their way into the mainstream – in offices, factories, neighborhoods, kitchens, hospitals, concert halls, bedrooms, gyms, and schools), and read it from cover-to-cover (I probably should have read it more slowly than I did).  Carl suggests that with the start of the Industrial Age, the world has shifted into high gear.  He calls it the ‘cult of speed’.  And it’s true.  Racing through traffic, twelve hour days, meeting-after-meeting, and Blackberry email into the night.  When you sit back and consider your life, it’s exhausting,… and depressing.  The author is not saying that every aspect of one’s life should be run at half speed. He merely is saying that for the health of our bodies and minds, we need balance.  Be fast when fast is what is needed, and slow when slowness is called for.

On the surface, technology seems to (although it could be just a giant hoax) allow me to get more done in a day.  I can check more web sites, I can run more financial models, I can communicate with more people, I can review the status of more projects, and much more.  Why would I ever choose to turn the speed of computing down or off, the work would just pile up…!  I think Carl would agree, you can’t do that,… but he would also ask, “do you need to be processing all the time…?”  His voice is ringing in my ear - leave the technology behind, take a walk, ride a bike, just sit on a bench and watch the clouds drift by.  It sounds idyllic, but how in the world would I ever find the time to do all that…?  But then I thought back to those times where I did throttle back the pace, and the truth was I didn’t fall behind.  In fact, it was a time that contributed to a positive outcome.  It was a better response, a more creative solution, a more thought-out strategy.  Thinking takes time.

Another speaker referenced a renowned Computer Science professor at Stanford, who years ago completely stopped using a computer for email.  Asked why, this professor said, “email exists to stay on top of things,… I am much more interested in getting to the bottom of things.”  I like that.  Trying to always be ‘on’ can turn you into a less intelligent person, as you never take the time to ponder and reflect.  Carl Honore´ encouraged everyone in the audience to find their hidden tortoise.  Change how you rate your time investment; doing things as ‘well’ as possible, not as ‘fast’ as possible.  It’s a sad state when the sounds of irritating ring tones or you’ve-got-mail vibrations are a substitute for an evening of jazz or opera, finding that last edge piece in that 1000-piece puzzle, resting long enough to manage seconds at the dinner table, or reading the last line of Goodnight Moon to a son or daughter drifting off to dreamland.  Life is a journey not a dash (to cross a finish line we never seem to reach).  Give those special moments your full attention and claim the joy within.  Are you speeding…?

Credible or Crazy…

… or a little of both…?  That’s what I was left feeling after reading The Singularity is Near (at least most of it), Ray Kurzweil’s most recent book and NY Times bestseller.  I normally wait until I finish a book before I comment on it, but it’s as if the author intentionally uses his bold predictions to prod the reader,… forcing one to have an opinion.  The book lays out in fascinating detail how the power and capacity of technological innovation will continue to escalate, at an ever increasing rate (Moore’s Law on steroids).  This acceleration is rapidly approaching what Kurzweil labels as ‘singularity’,… an exponential event with seemingly no limitations.  And we’re not talking a long ways off.  Kurzweil predicts that by the end of the 2020’s, we will have hardware/software systems capable of emulating human intelligence.  But then it really gets interesting.

It’s then that Kurzweil says we will, literally and figuratively, merge with machines,… and machines will “transcend the limitations of our biological bodies and brains.”  I agree we humans have limitations, lots of them.  We get old and don’t move as well, and we are forgetful to just name a few.  And a machine can run forever (assuming you have power), and memory can be virtually unlimited.  But it is interesting how Kurzweil suggests machines will eventually outperform us.  They will learn what our brains and bodies do well today, such as pattern recognition and DNA replication, copy it, and improve on it.  Kurzweil promises a world that is beyond what we can possibly imagine, one that is “human but that transcends our biological roots”,… a world in which we will be able to live as long as we want.  Kurzweil himself takes 250 supplements a day to turn back his own biological clock!

This is where I start to have problems with the book.  I’m not so sure that imbedding thousands of nanobots in our brains is going to make us more human, as Kurzweil claims.  I can see where technological capability will continue to advance, and I totally agree these advancements will allow mankind to achieve more than he can today,… I just wouldn’t say this makes us more human.  Technology is and will always be basically a tool, a tool to be leveraged by humans, no different than a hammer or a wheel.  Kurzweil himself invented some of these powerful tools – like the first reading machine for the blind.  But, the difference is it didn’t try and eliminate the person, it merely gave them an ability they did not have before.  Now Kurzweil’s singularity suggests we take our extensive knowledge of biochemistry, neurology and cybernetics and remake our bodies,… as in what we started with is not good enough.  I actually don’t mind that I forget the name of that old school mate that is approaching me on the street.  It’s a little awkward for sure, but something you get over and even laugh about it later that evening.  Missteps and mistakes are human.  To never make them because we have unlimited reference banks and operate under control of AI processors, doesn’t add to my experience,… it actually shortchanges it.

The book does an excellent job defending the value of technological evolution.  To be able to cure diseases like cancer would be wonderful.  To be able to provide natural forms of energy to satisfy the world’s growing demands, and bring life-giving resources (fresh water, electricity) to remote corners of the world, is phenomenal.  In my view, that’s leveraging the tools of technology to satisfy our human desire for compassion and caregiving.  But if machines take away the need to extend our hand in assistance to another, because it can solve the problem before we have a chance to form an emotional response,… then I think we all lose.  I also believe that placing machines as the end all, be all, solution for big global issues like the environment, somewhat minimizes the urgency to take personal responsibility now to do what is right.

I do plan to finish the book, as I said Ray Kurzweil gives a brilliant account of the potential within our grasp with technology.  My only hope is that we won’t have to become one with it to benefit from it.  Hardwired or Human…?

A Material World…

… it’s not just the lyrics of a Madonna song; it’s a reality of life, and one I think people would be  better off if they understood at a more personal level.  Basically, the world is made up of 1) materials that can’t be replaced (minerals for example) and 2) those that can (as in a tree).  And we use them both, at what seems like an alarming rate.  I saw a chart recently that estimated when the known supplies of a number of materials would be depleted,… used up, gone, eliminated from our global supply.  What’s really scary is that some of these materials hit their ‘end point’ just decades from now.  What is equally scary -- actually frightening -- is that there’s actually a third group of materials that hardly ever go away,… those materials we create, but never get fully consumed – the by-products of our material world.

But I’m convinced that materials innovation holds the promise in all three of these areas.  I was encouraged by a Global Innovation Forum we held last week  where marketers, engineers and designers from across the globe came together to discuss new materials and their unique application.  We talked about innovative ways to use materials that were destined for a land fill (steel mill scale called slag; powder paint overspray).  We talked about new materials that could replace the need to use those in limited supply (exfoliated graphite nanoplatelets, now that’s a mouthful).  And we talked about utilizing materials that grow naturally in the environment (such as the use of bamboo fibers, which can grow to full height in a couple of months).  It was heartwarming to see how seriously everyone was addressing the challenges before us.  It’s one of those design problems that we own together.

Our guest speaker at this Forum was Blaine Brownell; an architect, researcher of materials, and sustainable building advisor with NBBJ in Seattle.  A great speaker, a good guy, and he brings lots of props,… which make his talk super interesting.  He showed us totally green materials, repurposed materials, materials that serve double duty (e.g., structure and art), and many more.  You can find all of these in a reference book called Transmaterial that he edited.  It’s divided into sections – Concrete, Wood, Plastic, Rubber, Glass, etc.  In the forward to the book, Blaine puts the pace of material innovation (which he calls a Revolution) in perspective by suggesting it is a widely held belief that more new materials or material applications have been developed in the last twenty years, than in the entire history of material science prior to the last twenty years.  Now that’s amazing.

Of particular interest in Transmaterial are the seven categories/classifications which define the inventory of new materials.  They are ultraperforming, multidimensional, repurposed, recombinant, intelligent, transformational and interfacial.  It’s the last grouping, interfacial, that I would like to focus a bit on,… as it has a direct impact on the types of work spaces we are exploring.  Interfacial materials, as Blaine defines them, bridge the physical world and the virtual world.  It is at the heart of many of our research experiments, as we seek to find better ways for individuals and teams to interact with networked-content within a physical setting.  This is based on the premise that the unlimited content available on/across the internet doesn’t translate to useful information until it becomes in some way physical.  This could be on a screen, a wall, a table, in space.  The environment is, in effect, the canvas upon which digital bits are painted.  Holographic glass is both physical and virtual, depending on it its use.  Is it material…?

Enough is enough…

… it’s the reaction I often have when overwhelmed with information.  The upside of technology -- especially the internet -- is it’s ability to recall at will a virtual “horn of plenty” of information.  Whatever the subject, whatever the interest, the internet brings instant access to a virtual storehouse of information, from across the country and around the globe.  If it exists, it’s likely been stored in some digital file, and as such available for inquiring minds.  But most upsides have a downside or two, and information accessibility is no exception.  When you can access piles upon piles of data, that’s all you really have… piles and piles of data.  The downside of access is often understanding, or more specifically, the lack of it.

To demonstrate how illusive understanding can be in this sea of content, I Googled the word ‘simplicity’.  In .06 seconds it returned 69 million hits.  I thought if I condensed it more, to the keyword ‘simple’, that would help,… but in fact it returned over 1 billion references.  How is anyone supposed to make sense out of all of this information available to them, unless they have a lifetime to waste?  There is clearly an opportunity for more advanced search engines, getting better every day (if they could only read our minds to know what we’re really looking for…), as well as the interface design – how to make all this information useable, how to make all this information understandable.

This brings me to a recent interest of mine, information architecture, and how to best represent information visually.  I was prompted by reviewing some of the great work of Martin Wattenberg, an IBM researcher.  He’s developed a number of visualization tools that can make sense out of vast amounts of raw data -- my kind of guy.  One technique, called a treemap, uses mathematical algorithms to analyze large data sets in real time, and represent meaningful interpretations as visual images.  One example of this technique is a newsmap(www.marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm) which references the Google News aggregator to feed an ‘at a glance’ view of world media.  Color and scale are used to show how current (time) and pervasive (volume) published news stories are across subjects and/or geographies.  It allows you to quickly understand macro-level patterns of newsworthiness,… something you could never get, even if you read all the major papers each day.

You can get even more powerful insights when multiple data sets are related to each other visually.  For example, where stock prices are linked to blog traffic or news events,… or where on time shipment performance is tagged to product choices or weather patterns.  It’s the ability to gain a higher order of understanding from piles of data, that make information truly valuable.  Individuals could benefit from this, but team work literally requires it.  A team’s challenge is to develop what we call a ‘shared mind’ or shared understanding.  It happens by making everyone’s thoughts on a subject visible for all to see. And building on those thoughts with external references too.   Then the dance begins,… to compare ideas, to vote and prioritize, to combine themes in different ways, and, ultimately,  to create new knowledge.  As Richard Saul Wurman says in his book Understanding, “The goal of conversation is understanding between the participants.  Successful visual communication design can be defined as frozen conversation, much as wonderful architecture is referred to as frozen music”.

My fear is that the world’s ability to create new sources of information, is outstripping our ability to find the information we need, or have it presented in a way that we can quickly gain understanding and perspective.  In his book  Ambient Findability, Peter Morville (University of Michigan’s  School of Information) refers to this gap as information literacy, “a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate and use effectively the needed information”.  The challenge is greater for a team, which includes individuals, both face-to-face and virtual, all with varying levels of information literacy.  I’m a firm believer of the old adage, a picture is worth a thousand words — and so I see visual communication as a big way out of this dilemma.  And the next step is work environments that appropriately display (in scale and context) these visual representations,… as well as tools/software (e.g., digital whiteboards) that allow new ideas to be created and connected to these,… for team understanding, and a shared mind.  How’s your literacy…?

Quantum computing rocks…

… or is it “rolls”…?  The correct descriptor for what happens if you apply quantum physics to electrons in a computational device is -- it spins.  The famed physicist, Stuart Wolf, called the study of this effect ‘spintronics’.  I call it complicated,… and its potential impact on future society as mind-boggling.  You may have heard of Moore’s Law, which has fairly accurately predicted for years the increased capacity that becomes possible as we shrink circuits on silicon.  But many say  that this Law reaches its feasible limit sometime soon… maybe in the next 10 years.  So that’s where quantum computing comes in.  It avoids the heat of  densely packed circuits on chips, by ‘spinning’ electrons with magnets.  Don’t ask me to explain any more than that.  Just know that-- if this is possible, or I believe it is more accurate to say when this is possible -- we’ll have laptop computers with a hundred times… a thousand times… a million times… let’s just say a lot more computing power! Fortune magazine has a relevant article on this subject that sparked my interest in this topic entitled the article: "quantum leap".

What in the world are we going to do with all that power…?  We can already store more songs on an iPod than have ever been recorded (but we don’t have the time to listen to them all).  We already get Google results with millions of hits (but rarely go to the ‘o’ of Google for the 2nd page of search results).  We can already download emails and attachments anywhere in the world (except on airline flights if we obey the stewardess’ request to shut off all devices),… but still need to spend time weeding through a bunch of junk mail to find that one offer for a ‘free’ whatever if we just respond.  I don’t need more computing power.  I have more than I can effectively handle as it is.  Or do I…?

Maybe I’m reacting to the fact that more content makes it more confusing to process it all.  So is the answer to limit the content, or change the processor…?  Interesting.  If we could use all that computing power to have the processing be done for me … and my interface for receiving the results could be more of an extension of myself (possibly neural),… then we may be on to something.  And imagine that the environment I’m in, that you’re in, can become this real time filtering engine.  Then, instead of being overwhelmed with information, I am overwhelmed with the extent, and the way, to which the appropriate information has been brought to my attention.

I don’t need a digital recording of every sub-second of my existence, though I can imagine how an ear mike could save me the embarrassment of recalling the name of the person who is yelling ‘Hi’ from across the street,… and coming my way.  I don’t need to see everything I’ve ever written or read on a subject, but I can imagine the value of getting a hard copy of the agreement I need, --with key phrases/dates/figures highlighted in yellow -- as I arrive at the entrance to the meeting.  I can only imagine how much better of an idea I can generate or decision I can make, if iterations stream in and out of focus within my peripheral awareness at the turn of my head or the blink of my eye.  Can you imagine...?