Disqus - Latest Comments for pangaro

Re: Don’t Abandon Innovation — Simplify It

pangaro — Mon, 06 Jan 2014 10:29:15 -0000

I agree overall but let's keep going --- for why should our community settle for anecdotal observations about "companies that are good at innovation"? No client should accept such a vague offer. Instead let's insist on explanatory / prescriptive models, for example, my colleagues and I offer these works: http://www.dubberly.com/art... and http://pangaro.com/design-f.... We seek a rigorous debate about *why* certain processes succeed and thereby want to converge on a "methodology" instead of just bag of ideas.

Re: Is Design Thinking Dead? Hell No

pangaro — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 10:20:55 -0000

Is design thinking sufficient for innovation? If not, what else is needed? Instead of spending time defending it, can we supplement it?

Re: App Turns iPad into Second Monitor for Mac

pangaro — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 14:09:19 -0000

wish the getting started and doc in general were clearer, if only for non-techies, but even better formatted and written out. under "install" on launching the ipad app, it says "Install" --- turns out, that means "Install helper app on your Mac". couldn't that be explicit? then, what's an 'ad-hoc network'? some of us know, but shouldn't the walk-thrus be crystal clear and perfectly designed? why not?

Re: Empowering Your Team

pangaro — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 09:09:46 -0000

the question is, why does "everyone is CEO of something" actually work? a simple answer is, because it brings clarity and validity across the entire organization. clarity about who does what; and validity that each action fits in a relatively coherent system that delivers the strategy. at a micro scale, each individual is empowered and responsible, and also clear about WHY what the do fits into the whole; knowing the WHY let's them interpret new situations correctly and to act autonomously, without seeking instructions. at a macro scale, it's a focused effort for everyone. there are other advantages too, see http://tinyurl.com/yhqhcy7

Re: Why Social Beats Search

pangaro — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:02:41 -0000

it's been said before, but "search" is not the problem—because it implies that "to find" is the goal. sometimes, sure, but nearly always it's something more. here's a set of categories adopted from the ed-psych literature: find, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, create. can machines help? sure. can social help? sure. sorry, what was the original question?

Re: A Lot Can Happen In Five Years

pangaro — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 10:22:36 -0000

it's all the same organizational relationships, quite right. the power of "formal models" is the clarity and prescription they bring to complex systems. this stuff applies very well to social systems also, per http://pangaro.com/littlegr... and http://pangaro.com/ashby/

Re: A Lot Can Happen In Five Years

pangaro — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:59:26 -0000

planning, action, and patience are a nice set, much is implied by each. what needs to be called out? is "action" enough? see also http://pangaro.com/figures/

Re: The Golden Triangle

pangaro — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:53:32 -0000

mobile + social + realtime + local = ME

Re: Aggregate, Curate, Publish To Create Local Media

pangaro — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:13:57 -0000

"quality" has multiple dimensions. losing journalistic values, where they are important, creates risks. VILLAGE VOICE is an interesting example; would we feel differently if it were the NYTIMES [an edge case] or even BOSTON GLOBE [more local but still with strong editorial and reporting values]. much has been written about citizen journalism but the curating of journalistic practice appears to be under-served. see globalreportingroom.com for a project aimed at that aspect.

Re: Search is broken – really broken.

pangaro — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 13:28:59 -0000

in response to invitation to share ideas: social networks help search because they represent a valuable conversation involving language and values shared by an
individual.

another opportunity (as yet unrealized) is to understand and design for human conversations, not in the sense of talking or "natural-language processing" but in the sense of supporting an individual to use the sole means of understanding and generating knowledge: the internal conversation we all use to grok our world.

our interfaces are still designed for "users", that is, humans who click buttons and receive information from machines. if instead we designed for "participants in conversation" in a strict sense---the development of points-of-view that hold beliefs that are subject to challenge and evolution---we might improve more than just search (at best we'd remove the false choices between searching and browsing, consuming and generating content).

since "conversation works", that is, we are fined-tuned by evolution to converse effectively, it seems to me that the adoption of conversation as the means to design interfaces has a long runway and much to contribute to interface design. for further development of the approach, see http://pangaro.com/search/

Re: Mobile In/Mobile Out

pangaro — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:13:48 -0000

user goals for "text on devices" can also involve scanning, filtering, finding key items of interest, or compare-and-contrast. a modest approach is offered at http://tinyurl.com/ay5h6p; use http://tinyurl.com/8fp2pl for iPhone viewing.

Re: The Founder's Footprints

pangaro — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 10:31:19 -0000

i agree with comments about the influence of founders and leaders on an organization. it's also commonly stated that the 'culture' of the organization is important, but these points don't explain why some organizations can transform and others cannot. it is the organization's openness to the 'creation of new language' --- that is, it's ability to understand change, and to converse with a changing environment --- that is the fundamental power of a company or government over time. see http://pangaro.com/littlegr... for a detailed thesis.

Re: We Need Price Transparency In The Splurge

pangaro — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:14:31 -0000

here's a colleague's perspective:

$700B needed? There is another way to get it.

The $700B "bailout" is something we've all been asked to swallow --- including those of us, the vast majority of Americans, who aren't that wealthy and who didn't make our money from the huge shift of capital from "Main Street" to "Wall Street" over the last 20 years. We've heard that there's no way to "get it back" but actually there is --- a one-time wealth tax.

Let's amend the congressional bill to impose a one-time tax on the wealthiest Americans and contribute it toward the $700B. Why not figure out who to tax --- say, individuals of net worth above $10M, just a starting guess --- and also how much to tax them --- say, 10% --- so that ONE-HALF of the $700B comes from the individuals who have been taking our money.

This would be a return of capital from those who took it, back to those it was taken from.

Why not?

You might say this would never pass in legislation. But is that a reason not to talk about it?

Re: Zemanta

pangaro — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:33:50 -0000

zemanta functions are an excellent basis for a training system. removing barriers to understanding equals bridging the gap between content and a specific user's mental model. through personalization and the calculation of that gap, content could be offered to bring the user to a point where the current text is comprehensible. such an addition to the zemanta plug-in would make every browser a learning machine.