Summary of E2MG Portal Video

The video shown below describes if not advertises a sociotechnical capability.  That capability is the E2MG Patient Portal for the fictional family practice and pediatric clinic, the Elijah-Elisha Medical Group.  The video includes graphics that demonstrate the purpose of the portal, forces supporting the portal, and even certain features.  The purpose of the portal is to provide a technical capability by which patient and practitioner may interact and share information.  The video demonstrates the features available in the portal that support that interaction.

A Sociotechnical Plan that Leads to Innovation

Introduction

     The purpose of this discussion board is two-fold.  This post begins with a short narrative explaining how the success of Polaroid Corporation was disrupted by the onset of digital imaging.  This post begins by discussing what went wrong for or with Polaroid.  The remainder of the post defines and reveals a sociotechnical plan.  The discussion of this sociotechnical plan includes an explanation of why this plan is relevant and the forces that support it.

What Went Wrong for Polaroid

     Polaroid Corporation enjoyed a great deal of success with their chemical-based instant photography well into the 1980s (Tripsas & Gavetti, 2000).  The 1980s and 1990s also began a subtle shift towards digital technologies including digital imaging.  The development of digital imaging did not catch Polaroid off-guard, and, in fact, Polaroid began their own research and development into electronic imaging and megapixel sensory (Tripsas & Gavetti, 2000).  Digital imaging became a disruptive technology to Polaroid despite their efforts because Polaroid’s top management viewed digital imaging as technology but not as a market shift.  Polaroid did not initially invest as they should in the sales and marketing of digital imaging, and competitors were able to gain market share (Tripsas & Gavetti, 2000).  Additionally, Polaroid was very tightly coupled to a business model based upon the retail of chemical film (Cozzolino, Verona, & Rothaermel, 2018).  As the retail of digital cameras flourished, Polaroid’s profits suffered.

A Sociotechnical Plan that Leads to Innovation

     According to Gordon Baxter and Ian Sommerville (2011), a sociotechnical process is one that considers human, social, and organizational factors collectively with technical capabilities in order to design said process.  Such a process exists to connect people via technology (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011).
     A sociotechnical capability this researcher would consider or plan to implement is a messaging that is specific to persons in a certain domain or are of expertise.  It would be to a question and answer (Q&A) sites.  Q&A sites generally have a singular purpose, and its users have a vested interest in the information shared there (Alam, 2016).  
     One such Q&A site is stackoverflow.com whereby software developers ask and answer questions relative to software implementation (Abdalkareem, Shihab, & Rilling, 2017).  This is site is supported by the technological force because the subject matter of the message threads is software development.  The social force is applicable as well because individuals of this particular skill socialize with one another and can even provide visual indicators that a suggested solution was successful.
     This Q&A site is relevant in that software developers glean answers to very specific questions and share program code.  Stackoverflow.com is a sociotechnical capability whereby the community of software developers is of benefit one to another (Abdalkareem, Shihab, & Rilling, 2017).  This researcher can attest this personally.

Summary

     Digital imaging was a disruptive technology to Polaroid Corporation because they did not initially recognize it as an opportunity.  They lost market share because of this.  Also discussed here was an example of the sociotechnical capability, stackoverflow.com.  It is the community of software developers sharing amongst themselves for the benefit of them all.

References

Abdalkareem, R, Shihab, E, & Rilling, J.  (2017).  What do developers use the crowd for?  A study using Stack Overflow.  IEEE Software, 34(2), 53 – 60.  doi: 10.1109/MS.2017.31.

Alam, A.  (2016).  Social question and answer sites:  The story so far.  Program:  Electronic Library and Information Systems, 51(2), 170 – 192.

Baxter, G. & Sommerville, I.  (2011).  Socio-technical systems:  From design methods to systems engineering.  Interacting with Computers, 23(1), 4 – 17.

Cozzolino, A., Verona, G., & Rothaermel, F. T.  (2018).  Unpacking the disruption process:  New technology, business models, and incumbent adaptation.  Journal of Management Studies, 55(7), 1166 – 1202.  doi:10.1111/joms.12352.

Tripsas, M. & Gavetti, G.  (2000).  Capabilities, cognition, and inertia:  Evidence from digital imaging.  Strategic Management Journal, 21(10 – 11), 1147 – 1161.

Inaccurate Forecasting and a Scenario Planning Alternative

Introduction

            Forecasting and scenario planning are two processes by which a business or enterprise attempts to predict their future (Wade, 2012).  Forecasting is the more scientific of two options.  Forecasts are based upon models of regression analytics (Dwivedi, Niranjan, & Sahu, 2013).  Forecasting considers dependent and independent variables and is considered a linear continuation of the present (Wade, 2012).  This may be where forecasts are flawed, though.  Forecasts are based upon mathematics and, thereby, will likely never be totally abandoned as a means of supporting strategic planning or change management.  They are based upon, however, statistics of what is currently known.  Scenario planning, by contrast, attempts to recognize a future of numerous possibilities that realistically may occur based the present (Wade, 2012).  It is more respectful of innovation in this way.  Scenario planning is more considerate of the realm of the possible or even the imagined versus what is strictly more scientifically likely.  Forecasting predicts a definitive future as regression analyses only have one dependent variable.  Scenario planning supports change management by recognizing the possibility of numerous realities or scenarios with the scope of these scenario being only limited by what is known in the present day.

            Unfortunately, there are some enterprises that can testify personally to the woes of being misled by forecasting.  Nintendo is one such company, and the consequences of their mispredictions are discussed below in this paper.

Inaccurate Forecasting the Nintendo 3DS

            Forecasts are based upon data analytics implemented as mathematical modeling and scripted programming.  Because of this, forecasts may be offered as often as the mathematical models or scripted analytics may be implemented.    It is very intricate to supply chain management (SCM), and supply chain managers regularly reforecast to accommodate for changes among variables as well as to ensure process improvement (Albarune & Habib, 2015).  Nintendo’s release of their 3DS is a cautionary tale concerning the misgivings of inaccurate forecasting that led to overcorrection during the SCM process.

            Between April, 2014, and March, 2015, Nintendo sold 8.73 million 3DS units globally (Lopez, 2017).  Nintendo released the base 3DS in 2011, but began the release 3DS XL in 2014 very likely because of success with the original model.  They were expecting that release of the 3DS XL would boost sales.  Nintendo forecasted in 2015 that approximately 7.6 million units—3DS and 3DS XL combined—to be sold in 2016.  By February, 2016, the predictive modeling had changed, and the forecast was modified (Lopez, 2017).  By March, 2016, Nintendo was now forecasting only 6.6 million units to be sold globally for that entire year, a million fewer than that predicted approximation a year prior.  The new modeling misled Nintendo; they sold 6.45 units in the U.S. and Japan alone.  The demand out-paced the supply, and according to Lopez (2017), Nintendo may still be facing shortages of the 3DS now because of conservative forecasting in 2016 and 2017.

            The Hanjin Shipping Co. of South Korea was the seventh largest shipping carrier in the world until they declared bankruptcy in August, 2016 (Kitroeff, 2016).  In terms of this company’s effect on Nintendo’s forecasting calculus for 2016, Hanjin was likely flailing long before they declared bankruptcy, and Nintendo 3DS sales started to suffer because of it.  It is believed that Hanjin’s demise negatively influenced Nintendo’s 3DS forecast (Lopez, 2017).  This bankruptcy would be considered a scenario, and even though Nintendo’s predictive analyses did reflect the decreased availability of shipping, the new forecast presumed that the demand for the 3DS would align with the slowed shipping, or so Lopez believed (2017).  This forecast was incorrect.

Considering Scenario Planning as an Alternative

            Valid scenario planning might require of think tank of individuals if for no other reason than to ensure as many as viable scenarios are considered as possible.  The think tank would be composed of stake holders in a continual dialogue discussing what-if scenarios.  Forces such as product innovation, diminishing demand, and the availability of suppliers would be regularly discussed.  The scenario planning think tank would be planning for the production of more innovative products than those currently on retailer shelves strictly to maintain the market share when the demand of current products diminishes.  The think tank would presume as a scenari9on that competitors were doing the same.  That think tank would also be considering the availability of external organization in the supply chain.  This scenario planning think tank would already be considering alternative shippers should Hanjin or any other shipper be no longer available.  The objective would be to have contingency plans in place as a result of the scenario planning to ensure seamless transition should one of those discussed what-ifs actually came to fruition.

 References

Albarune, A. R. B. & Habib, M.  (2015).  A study of forecasting practices in supply chain management.  International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 4(2), 55 – 61.

Dwivedi, A., Niranjan, M., & Sahu, K.  (2013).  A business intelligence technique for forecasting the automobile sales using adaptive intelligent systems (ANFIS and ANN).  International Journal of Computer Applications, 74(9), 7 – 13.

Kitroeff, N.  (2016).  Hanjin bankruptcy is the tip of the iceberg for flailing shippers.  Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hanjin-shipping-industry-crisis-20160913-snap-story.html.

Lopez, E.  (2017).  How Nintendo’s forecasting miscues led to 3DS shortages.  Retrieved from https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/nintendo-shortage-3ds-supply-chain-failure/435662/.

Wade, W.  (2012).  Scenario Planning:  A Field Guide to the Future.  Hoboken, NJ:  Wiley & Sons.

Traditional Business Forecasting vs Scenario Planning

Attempting to forecast a business’s future is the right thing to do in order to maintain relevance or at the least stay in business.  More times than not, long-term planning is actually an extrapolation of the future based upon the present (Wade, 2012).  Even while implementing genuine predictive analytics whereby a correlation is quantified based upon a dependent variable and multiple independent variables, said business or enterprise is still just forecasting the future based upon the present (Wade, 2012).

This type of forecasting creates an illusion that the business or enterprise controls their own future (Wade, 2012).  In fairness to this hypothetical organization, it is unwise to allow the future to become the present without any attempt to predict that future.  The illusion, however, is based upon adjusting independent variables that this business or enterprise can already foresee (Wade, 2012).  This type of planning or forecasting presumes a future that is very similar to the present with quantified correlations that represent the best-case future, worst case future, and most likely future but not including variables that could drastically change that future and/or force a paradigm shift obviously because such variables are unknown.

Woody Wade (2012) offers what he terms scenario planning as an alternative to traditional forecasting.  He concedes that planning for a future such that a business or enterprise is to remain relevant if not competitive is no small task but is vitally important.  His methodology recommends planning for a range of plausible alternative futures he refers to as scenarios (Wade, 2012).  Scenario planning challenges the idea that any one future is the most likely to emerge but instead plans for an array of possibilities.

The result of scenario planning is a portfolio of future scenarios.  Each scenario is a predicted future based upon the trends of today (Wade, 2012).  Each scenario comprehensively illustrates the landscape of the given business domain.  Competitors, customers, suppliers, employees, and stakeholders would all be represented in each scenario (Wade, 2012).  The scenarios are intended to differ one from the others but nonetheless be realistic and plausible given the realities of same business domain in the present day.  Given this portfolio of possible scenarios, the organization’s planning team should be able to formulate strategies that address each possible scenario (Wade, 2012).  As tomorrow becomes today, at the very least, any enterprise or business that went through the rigor of scenario planning is not starting over or behind a power curve relative to its competitors.

References

Wade, W.  (2012).  Scenario Planning:  A Field Guide to the Future.  Hoboken, NJ:  Wiley & Sons.

Penicillin:  From Accidental Innovation to Timeless Impact

Introduction

Innovation is considered the process of transforming an opportunity into a fresh idea that becomes a widely used practice (Zawawi, Wahab, Al-Mamun, Yaacob, Samy, & Fazal, 2016).  An innovation is an idea, practice, or product that is perceived as new and is expected to make a positive impact (Zawawi et al, 2016).  An adopted innovation covers a niche space and is always the catalyst or primary ingredient to change.

Some innovation has occurred by accident.  They were recognized rather than intended.  The discovery of penicillin is considered one such accidental innovation (Gaynes, 2017).  Today, penicillin is a well-recognized anti-bacterial agent (Derderian, 2007).  It is used to treat bacterial infections such as meningitis, syphilis, and streptococci (Etebu & Arikekpar, 2016).  It is mass produced globally and was a prized commodity during World War II which began approximately a decade and a half after penicillin was discovered.  Its discovery, however, was an unexpected phenomenon resulting from a culture left to grow for a month (Derderian, 2007)..

The Discovery of Penicillin

            Penicillin was discovered in 1928 by Alexander Fleming in London, England as he was researching the properties of staphylococci because of its particular type of cell wall (Derderian, 2007).  In July of 1928, Fleming left a culture plate smear of the staphylococci on his lab bench while he went on vacation.  Upon his return in late August or early September, Fleming noticed that many of the culture plates were contaminated with a mold that was inhibiting bacterial growth (Derderian, 2007).  After isolating the mold and identifying it as belonging to the Penicillium genus, he obtained an extract from the mold and called it penicillin after the extract’s active agent (Gaynes, 2017).  

The Forces that Drove this Innovation

            Fleming had been a bacteriologist, and with World War I in the recent past prior to the discovery of bacterial growth-inhibiting capabilities of penicillin, Fleming had been researching chemical cures to infection (Derderian, 2007).  It was already understood that soldiers were dying on or near the battlefield from causes aside from battle wounds such as blood poisoning and pneumonia (Derderian, 2007).  Fleming, himself, had been a member of the Army Medical Corps at the beginning of World War I in 1914.  It is likely that he witnessed sicknesses and death due to infection first hand.

            In light of the deaths due to infectious diseases during World War I, it is fair to say that the forces that drove the need for an innovation to cure infection were political at the very least.  This is further proven by the fact the United States government took authority over all production of penicillin in 1941 when the United States entered World War II (Gaynes, 2017).  The objective was to build a stock sufficient enough to satisfy demand from the Allied Forces.  There were even efforts made by the British government during World War II to prevent the production of penicillin from falling into enemy hands (Gaynes, 2017).

            During World War II, the death rate from pneumonia dropped from 18% to 1% (Gaynes, 2017).  With these types of statistics, the forces driving the use of penicillin easily became more global over time.  When Fleming discovered penicillin, it was not uncommon for women to die during childbirth due to postnatal infections (Derderian, 2007).  Similarly, infections such as diphtheria, syphilis, gonorrhea, tonsillitis, and rheumatic fever, illnesses easily cured in the present-day, were also causing many deaths.  In 1900, pneumonia and influenza were global killers.  By 1996, their high death rates had been replaced by that of heart disease (Derderian, 2007).

Conclusion

It is reasonable to conclude that when an innovation is discovered even by accident that the discoverer would have to have some type of expertise by which to recognize the phenomenon occurring in front of him/her.  Even Fleming concluded his observation had very likely been gleaned before but that perhaps due to a lack of interest in naturally-growing antibacterial substances, even other bacteriologists may have witnessed the same or similar phenomenon and simply discarded the cultures (Derderian, 2007).  In similar fashion as a researcher who proves his/her expertise in or mastery of the knowledge domain by writing a literature review, so did Fleming’s bacteriological education and expertise sharpen his ability to recognize the bacterial growth-inhibiting properties of the Penicillium mold.  As a result, Sir Alexander Fleming’s discovery has saved an unknown number of lives.  His impact in the realm bacteriology will be timeless.

References

Derderian, S. L.  (2007).  Alexander Fleming’s miraculous discover of penicillin.  Rivier Academic Journal, 3(2), 1 – 5. 

Etebu E. & Arikekpar, I.  (2016).  Antibiotics:  Classification and mechanisms of action with emphasis on molecular perspectives.  International Journal of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology Research, 4, 90 – 101.

Gaynes, R.  (2017).  The discovery of Penicillin – new insights after more than 75 years of clinical use.  Emerging Infectious Diseases, 23(5), 849 – 853.

Zawawi, N., Wahab, S., Al-Mamun, A., Yaacob, A., Samy, N. K., & Fazal, S. A.  (2016).  Defining the concept of innovation and firm innovativeness:  A critical analysis from resource-based view perspective.  International Journal of Business and Management, 11(6), 87 – 94. 

Technologies and Trends in Education

Introduction

EDUCAUSE is a nonprofit organization that exists to advance higher learning through information technology (IT) (EDUCAUSE, 2019), and this organization’s website displays numerous articles that discuss innovations where IT and education converge.

The technology this researcher chose to discuss is the Internet of Things (IoT).  It is a technology that is emerging whereby via a network of wirelessly-connected sensors, home appliances such as refrigerators and microwaves may be connected to the Internet and thereby be remotely controllable (Ali, Ali, & Badawy, 2015).  The trend of discussion is the redesign of learning spaces to increase accessibility to the digital technologies available in the learning space.

Technology

IoT is a technology providing the interoperability and automation of devices who purposes are quite heterogeneous.  Colleges and university have come to recognize the utility offered by IoT.  In classroom settings, IoT is offering the ability to remotely control environment systems and automate energy management (Benson, 2016). 

Trend

According to Brown and Long (2006), there are numerous trends that are influencing if not changing the appearance of learning or educational spaces.  There are now trends towards more usage of white boards to make the learning environment more interactive (Brown & Long, 2006).  Additionally, more comfortable chairs such as sofas and food are often being allowed in the classroom.  The trend is a more human-centered design for focusing more of the design of the learning on students learning rather than teachers teaching (Brown & Long, 2006).

Force 1:  Technological

Educational environments taking advantage of IoT are simply recognizing its practical benefit (Benson, 2016).  Though the implementation of a network-reachable HVAC comes with its own risks and an increased level of design complexity, the automated management of security and safety systems and perhaps even energy conversation weigh heavily in favor of IoT especially if certain IoT-related risks may be mitigated.

Force 2:  Social

The force influencing changes in the design of learning spaces is largely social recognizing that in human-centered educational environment, a great deal of learning is born of student interaction (Brown & Long, 2006).  Newer classroom spatial designs are intended to foster teamwork, social engagement, and an active learning environment in the most general sense.

Summary

This researcher’s conclusion of the EDUCAUSE website is that is very comprehensive and helps to fulfill the organization’s mission of fostering strategic and innovative decision-making in education.  Certainly, if IT professionals and educators are continually willing to contribute to the knowledge, then insights such as those mentioned above willing always to continue to push emerging trends and cutting-edge technology.

References

Ali, Z. H., Ali, H. A., & Badawy, M. M.  (2015).  Internet of Things:  Definitions, challenges, and recent research directions.  International Journal of Computer Applications, 128(1), 37 – 47.

Benson, C.  (2016).  The Internet of Things, IoT systems, and higher education.  Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2016/6/the-internet-of-things-iot-systems-and-higher-education.

EDUCAUSE.  (2019).  Retrieved from https://www.educause.edu/.

Group Decision-Making Methods

Group decision-making is the process by which a collective of individuals attempt to reach a required or minimum level of consensus on a given issue (Eliaz, Ray, & Razin, 2005).  Group decision-making can largely be divided into two phases:  deliberation where there is much dialogue or debate about the pending outcome and aggregation, the phase when the decision actually made.  In group decision-making, it is important that group members recognize that disagreement and/or not coming a conclusion or making a decision can have a profound if not disastrous effect on all involved and the process itself (Eliaz, Ray, & Razin, 2005).  Even when deliberation becomes heated debate, the objective still is to make a decision.

There are numerous techniques employed to facilitate group decision-making.  The choice of the group decision-making method is often driven by the context, i.e. the decision that needs to be made and/or the personnel involved (Bang & Frith, 2017).  This post discusses two such group decision-making methods:  the Delphi method and the instructed dissent method.

The Delphi Method

The Delphi method was developed by the RAND Corporation in the 1950s (Bang & Frith, 2017).  It is a technique that ensures that the opinion of groups is heard resulting in a combined judgement (Powell, 2003).  The Delphi group decision-making method is recognized and thereby commonly implemented because of its controlled responses and feedback; it is a very orderly decision-making process.  In complying with this method, group members privately outline their individual opinions and rationale.  Subsequently, the opinions are passed onto a moderator who aggregates the opinions into an anonymized summary (Bang & Frith, 2017).  To ensure a reliable consensus, occasionally, multiple rounds by which opinions are offered are employed (Powell, 2003).  The iterative process gives group members an opportunity to change their minds (Bang & Frith, 2017).

The Instructed Dissent Method

This group decision-making method, in contrast to the one discussed above, is greatly about dialogue.  Groups that comply with this method ask a group member or subset of the group to advocate for one side of the argument (Bang & Frith, 2017).  In accordance with this method, it is possible that group may argue for a position other than or in opposition to the one that member or members actually agrees with.  This may be where this method if flawed.  An individual group member or subset of groups making a contrived argument may argue with less enthusiasm and/or less confidence than those that argue from a place of genuine advocacy (Bang & Frith, 2017).

Comparing the Two Methods

The obvious difference between the two methods is one is centered around verbal communication whereas the other employs little verbal communication if any.  With the Delphi method, the group members write out their opinions as opposed to verbalizing them to keep the opinions anonymous.   By contrast, with the instructed dissent method, opinions of one argument or another may sway with the personality that presents it.

References

Bang, D. & Frith, C. D.  (2017).  Making better decisions in groups.  Royal Society Open Science, 4(8), 1 – 22.  doi:10.1098/rsos.170193.

Eliaz, K., Ray, D., & Razin, R.  (2005).  Group decision-making in the shadow of disagreement.  Journal of Economic Theory, 132(1), 1 – 38.  doi:10.1016/j.jet.2005.07.008.

Powell, C.  (2003).  The Delphi technique:  Myths and realities.  Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(4), 376 – 382.