IMPORTANT! - Hangout with Prof. Pearce
Jim Anastassiou
Bob Haugen
Sensorica and OVNs.
We watched the video for breakfast today, and have been following the
discussion threads. I have a complex set of reactions that I would
like to discuss with everybody in Sensorica, when you are finished
with this project and can come up for breath.
> Go to SENSORICA's project page
> http://www.sensorica.co/home/what-we-do/projects/pv-characterization
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PV characterization project forum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to pv-characterization-pr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to
> pv-characterizat...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/pv-characterization-project-forum.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pv-characterization-project-forum/a90f1e27-4d1b-483b-ac77-2d37a27d4789%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Jim Anastassiou
--
Go to SENSORICA home
https://sites.google.com/site/sensoricahome/home
Go to our Working Space
https://sites.google.com/site/sensoricahome/home/working-space
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to SENSORICA group.
To post to this group, send email to Sens...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Sensorica+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Sensorica?hl=en?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SENSORICA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Sensorica+...@googlegroups.com.
Bob Haugen
<jim.ana...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ahhhh Bob, the suspense is killing me :)
> Complex questions or a complex vision?
Three teasers:
1. I think I finally can see how Sensorica can make its way in the
world. It's always been interesting, but its survival has always
seemed a bit precarious to me. It is, however, turning into a
world-class collaborative R&D org. Not too many of them in the world.
Also, as Lynn pointed out, it really helps to have a collaborative
client like Prof Pearce to make decisions. And we think the deadlines
actually helped. Like playing tennis with a net rather than without
one.
I could contrast this with previous Sensorica meetings (before the big
split) when people were lolling on the couch rolling their eyes while
somebody else incompetently pretended to be a scrum master. Here the
behavior I've seen has been totally collegial and focused on the goal.
Really well done!
2. Tammy could put together a through-story about this project (I'm
sure she knows what I mean), from video clips, diagrams, and people
speaking out their email conversations. The problem with a lot of
didactic videos is there's no story. This project has a story. Tammy
can tell stories.
3. One of the things we have never done well in the NRP software
project is help with R&D. Originally, Sensorica was presented to us as
a proto-manufacturing organization, that needed things like material
control and project management. When we visited Montreal, where we had
a great time with everybody, it became clear that they were doing
chaotic R&D (where everybody does their own thing whenever they want,
however they want, and thinks it is a burden to try to coordinate with
anybody else).
Now you are doing much better structured R&D. So we'd like to revisit
that whole topic and see if there are the things the software can do
to help, without getting in the way.
Steve Bosserman
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pv-characterization-project-forum/CA%2BSvw0UE2-h2xaVoH9G3aN4tVA4x6H5sdGiwtjNO_YjZZPEjbQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Bob Haugen
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Steve Bosserman
<steve.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Great observations and critical analysis, Bob.
>
> If I understand you correctly, your central thesis is that SENSORICA is or
> has the potential to become the next generation R&D organization. While I
> concur with your assessment, others hold the point of view that SENSORICA is
> a "soup to nuts" organization that can take concepts all the way to market
> as products and services. Are you suggesting that this more comprehensive
> view has been (or should be) scaled back?
They also got the smart pot project, which may make it.
Got no prescriptions, would need to be on the scene and in the flow to
have any confidence in those.
Kurt Laitner
Early experiments like kluster (now quirky) and other crowd sourcing platforms whose names escape me right now have concentrated on augmenting early product design. This has been in a lossy first past the post mode (prize available to one participant, other's efforts are in vain.
I would see a collaborative sourcing approach as an improvement on those services. Quirky is working with GE, who provided a patent portfolio to work with.
More to my interest in this pivot, and to riff on Bob's point;
One can think of processes in two categories, well known repeatable processes, and poorly known exploratory processes. Eventually the latter find the former, but it is the latter that is under served by infrastructure.
Bob and Lynn have created a support structure for IPO chains that are reconfigurable and where role assignments are open. This is an improvement and on typical fixed ipo chains (process definitions).
Typical corporate processes fall onto the well known repeatable type, see tasks as assigned to roles, and roles assigned to a node in a hierarchical organization.
R&D or innovation does not lend itself to fixed process as it is exploratory. This does not stop people from trying to create processess of innovation, as misguided as that may be. The goal of course is to cause more innovation to happen.
There is another way to cause innovation to happen, which is the class of problem I am very interested in. Rhizomatic processes cannot be defined in advance, and the 'happy path' is not known in advance (the whole point is to explore and find the happy path). This process is aided by a stigmergic support system that could be done similarly to bob and Lynn's current architecture, with the instance layer creating the plan layer if you will.
Ants will branch out randomly until they find food, then create signals to reinforce the best path, until that path becomes the superhighway.
Now for my thesis. I believe that value equations based on dimensions of value that are behaviors that increase the probability of adding value are the key to supporting exploratory, rhizomatic processes and the process of discovery of good outcomes will discover best paths to those good outcomes and needs to reinforce them. Eventually a 'happy path' can become a recipe.
I'll stop there for now.
/kdl
Kurt Laitner
Business Architect
Third Meta Consulting
780.938.3863
Bob Haugen
> R&D or innovation does not lend itself to fixed process as it is
> exploratory. This does not stop people from trying to create processess of
> innovation, as misguided as that may be. The goal of course is to cause
> more innovation to happen.
can be valuable in some cases), or in a more or less structured
fashion.
If more or less structured, the process will have a history, where the
next process can learn how decisions were made, and why this or that
option was selected.
> There is another way to cause innovation to happen, which is the class of
> problem I am very interested in. Rhizomatic processes cannot be defined in
> advance, and the 'happy path' is not known in advance (the whole point is to
> explore and find the happy path). This process is aided by a stigmergic
> support system that could be done similarly to bob and Lynn's current
> architecture, with the instance layer creating the plan layer if you will.