I have big plans. Big Plans, I say!

3 big things in the works this week.


1. An article on privacy - headed to a top journal in my field.  This article has been troubling me for years because I could never find the right hook for it to be really good.  I think I found it.  The first draft was completed this week.  Once I get some preliminary feedback, I'll professionally edit and push the article out.
2. A completely revamped and amp'ed up web dev class is now under way.  I recorded my first two lectures yesterday.
and last, but most exciting...
3. My new business venture has kicked into high gear.  I have a writer, a domain name, a website under development, and the enthusiasm to get this done.  Currently scheduled to go live August 1st.

Stay tuned for more updates.

Another MIS major

A couple weeks ago I was snagged by the assistant dean while walking down the hall.  She wanted me to talk with a bright young student interested in the MIS degree.  So myself, the assistant dean, and the associate dean (all MIS faculty), spent 30 minutes answering the student's questions about MIS in general, our program, and job opportunities.  This week, I received the following note (hand written, no less) in my mailbox.

***********************************
Prof. Drake,
Thank you so much for taking time out of
your schedule on Friday to meet with me
about MIS.  The information you provided
was invaluable and thanks to you, I am
strongly considering changing my major to
MIS.

Thanks again,
[name withheld]
***********************************

Apparently, what we said had an impact.  Looks like we might have another MIS major starting next fall at ECU! 

IT business value density

While struggling today with an article I'm writing on IS evaluation and Objectivist Ethics, I integrated two ideas that have been on my mind lately, IT business value and value dense living.  If value density is the principle that individuals should seek to maximize values gained from their actions and resources by rationally evaluating synergies across goals and objectives, then IT business value density would be the principle that organizations should seek to maximize values gained from their IT resources and IT activities by rationally evaluating synergies across business goals and objectives.  I believe this concept would help to explain a number of issues in IS evaluation literature, including the productivity paradox, IT infrastructure investments, IT infrastructure flexibility, IT adoption and diffusion problems, and political issues in the evaluation process. There are probably more issues to discuss, but this is just a start to my brainstorming.  However, I can see enough value in this concept to warrant a massive review article for MISQ.  It would require a ton of work and would likely require a co-author or two.  But the reward would be immense.  And all of these issues can be tied to Rand's theory of ethics - at least I see the road map in my mind, I just need to translate it onto paper.

While this could be an exciting paper, I'm struck by the notion that I would virtually have to scrap my existing IS evaluation paper to write about this new concept.  But then again, I'm struggling with my existing paper because I lack a clear take-away.  As one researcher put it, there has to be a "so what?" moment.  I don't have that yet.  And I'm hesitant to put forward half baked article because other researchers will immediately pick up on that and slam the article (as they should) along with possibly Objectivism and me (as I do not want).  So unless I can find my hook soon (other than IT business value density), I may have to put the current article on hold and divert my energies elsewhere.

IT Governance

Here's a topic that I've been struggling to conceptualize lately.  What does information technology (IT) governance mean and why is it important?  This is another of my thinking out loud posts, so please feel free to offer any helpful suggestions for improving my understanding.

IT governance stems from the concept of business governance.  And the term governance is borrowed from the political concept of governing a nation.  When governing a nation, the government sets and establishes the freedoms and constraints on individual action and decision making.  I'm not saying this is the best definition of government, but it is my working premise.  Similarly, business and IT governance set the context for decision-making in organizations by setting freedoms and constraints.

Governance in both these contexts is differentiated from management and strategy.  Strategy can be described as the long term goals and objectives of an organization.  Established by the executives, this vision of the company's future drives lower level tactical and operational objectives.  Management involves the implementation of these long-term goals and objectives.  It involves the directing the people and resources so as to achieve the desired goals efficiently and effectively.  In my understanding of governance, it provides the framework for how to make management level decisions.

For example, a strategic goal may be to facilitate IT growth through outsourcing partnerships with major consulting firms.  At the managerial level, the expectation would be that decisions that require IT growth should strongly consider outsourcing partnerships.  The problem comes from ensuring that managers throughout the organization enact the strategic goal in similar and congruent fashions.  The solution to this problem is developing a governance board the creates frameworks for decision-making and reviewing major decisions to ensure compliance.  In the case of outsourcing partnerships, the governance board might establish policies for reviewing consulting companies in an objective and systematic way to ensure that the best partnership is established, that the existing partnerships are given full consideration, and that the IT solution is congruent with the overall strategy.  They may further review outsourcing proposals to ensure they meet the appropriate criteria and constraints.

Every organization will govern IT in unique ways.  Some will be very strict and require every new IT project to be approved by an IT governance board.  Some will only require medium and large project approval, say projects over $100,000 budget.  Some organizations will have primarily business managers on the IT governance board, while other organizations will stock the board with primarily IT managers.  Some organizations will have very weak governance, enabling local decision-making with few constraints, while other organizations will have a strong centralized governance.

IT governance becomes an essential part of an organization as it grows too large for a single person to confirm and direct the implementation of strategy by managers.  While the traditional hierarchical management structure works for simple strategies, the sprawl of today's organizations makes for radical differences in implementation of IT resources unless a governance board directs and reviews lower level decisions.  Furthermore, efficiency from economies of scale can only be gained when the entire organization uses the same IT infrastructure, which is only possible if a centralized decision making unit provides the necessary framework.

Not that all is rosy using governance boards.  There can be problems when governance boards become so restrictive that business units end up adopting new technologies that are not best for them, even if the technology is best for another business unit.  I saw an example of this at one of the consulting projects I worked on years ago.  Our client had adopted SAP's ERP system.  While we were implementing our proprietary project management system, their governance board was questioning whether they should scrap our project and use SAP's project management system.  However, the business unit with whom we were working strongly recommended against using this ERP module because it did not met their business needs.  We finished implementing our software before this disagreement was resolved, but articulates what I see as a potential problem with governance boards.

As part of this process in understanding IT governance, a colleague and I will, over the next couple years, start a research project looking at IT governance, particularly a subset called data governance, in a variety of organizations.  Some of the research questions we want to answer are: What, if any, are the relationships between governance structures and management practices?  What, if any, are the relationships between governance structures and methodology?  What, if any, are the relationships between governance structures and external regulations?  Since my colleague and I are both IT ethics researchers, our larger research question will be how does ethical and political theories influence data governance structures?  And how do those structures enable or prohibit ethical decisions in organizations?  We may also explore how various ethical perspectives of senior executives impact the choice of governance boards or how the ethical perspectives of the governance board impacts the choice of directives.  There are a number of angles we can pursue that should hopefully enable a better understanding of the role of ethics in IT organizations and suggest best practices for enabling organizational success.

On IT Business Value

Today, I was reading an academic article that defined information technology (IT) business value as the organizational performance impacts of information technology at both the intermediate process level and the organization-wide level, and comprising both efficiency impacts and competitive impacts (IT and Organizational Performance, MISQ, 2004, Melville, Kraemer, and Gurbaxani).  This definition did not satisfy me as an adequate representation of this concept.  In this post, I will attempt to think through my definition of IT business value and its relation to Objectivist ethics, so that I might apply it to an article I am writing.  As a thinking post, please consider feedback most welcome.  My ideas are not finalized on this topic.

Organizational performance strikes me as part of a larger concept for business value.  There is also missing a direction of the impact.  Impacts can obviously be good and bad.  Can we legitimately call it a value if the impact is bad?  I don't think we can.

To address organization impact, lets look at a root concept - business.  The purpose of business is to facilitate the creation of value for trading partners by systematically organizing resources for the production of goods and services.  Businesses are not transient one-time events, nor are they disorganized mobs of traders.  Businesses have a definitive boundary within which individuals interact in an organized fashion.  Business value can take on multiple meanings, depending on with whom you refer.  Business value can refer to the value-added process for a product that the business sells.  Business value can refer to shareholder wealth created from the business growth and profits.  Business value can also refer to the overall fitness or long-term sustainability of the business as a whole.  It is to this last notion of business value that I believe is most comprehensive context.  Using value in this way implies a relationship to ethical values.

As Ayn Rand described values:

It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it dies; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept of ‘Value’ possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.

In business, a similar constant alternative exists, the life or death of the business.  Business processes consists of generated and sustaining actions.  If the business dies, the people and resources remain, but its existence as such is gone.  It is only the concept of business life that makes the concept of business value possible.  Lest we take this analogy too far, businesses are sufficiently different in that they can be created by men, can be willfully destroyed by men, and can be recreated by men if they so desire.  So it is not self-generated action.  It is composed of many individuals acting together in mutually agreed upon ways, trading products and services with each other.

But, when entrepreneurs create a business, they generally do so with the purpose of continuing the business indefinitely.   Ethical values only refers to those values created for the individual, but in the entrepreneur's case, the business becomes an extension of the entrepreneur's value system.  The business value refers directly to value to the entrepreneur.  As the entrepreneur disassociates his personal values from the business values, the business can only continue its existence if its values perpetuate long term sustainability.   For example, a business must maintain a positive cash flow.  A business must organize the operations, logistics, and the supply chain to ensure raw goods arrive, are transformed into finished products, and sold.  A business find customers and demonstrate the value offered by what they're selling.  A business must systematically replace employees or grow into new business areas.  The topic of business strategy attempts to answer this question of business value in terms of long term sustainability.

Is the idea of long term sustainability sufficient for business value?  Is there more or less?  Is it all about profits?  What about the community?  Without going to far down this road, I will say that it is not all about profits, but profits are a healthy indicator that things are going right (just ask the auto companies).  And the community may be considered a healthy base for trading, so helping the community can often help the business.  However, the community does not hold any rights over the business and the business does not owe the community anything other than justice when trading with individuals therein.

So where does IT fit in?  IT business value, in my conception, is information technology that enables long term sustainability by fostering value creation in business processes, resources, and relationships. This value creation can take many forms - increased efficiency, more effective processes, improved flexibility, increased communication, decreased errors, improved relationships with stakeholders, better management of assets, heightened security, etc.  Value creation such as heightened security may increase long term sustainability by preventing competitors from stealing trade secretes, it may not increase organization performance, as the authors I first cited claimed.  In fact, the impact of heightened security might slow innovation and organizational decision making, but be a necessity for competitiveness.

So this is the extent of my thinking on this concept.  I believe the real innovative piece of thinking I'll be adding is the relationship between individual values and business values.  Hopefully, I can get some input from other Objectivists on my ideas in that realm.

Home computer systems

I'm loving the new technologies available for home life.  Lately, I've been strategizing on how best to invest in computing technologies for my family.  When our budget allows, I would like to buy a new computer or two to create an awesome technology environment.  I currently see three major roles for computers in our house.  The first is the entertainment hub, for TV, movies, games, and chatting with friends.  The second role is for day-to-day living paying bills and managing finances, looking up recipes, reading the news, email, Facebook, Skype, and general Internet activities.  Lastly, I need a home office for research, writing, statistics, web development, and other business-y things.

For my entertainment hub, the Xbox 360 almost takes care of all my needs.  Now that Microsoft has purchased Skype, they need to integrate that software with the xBox so that I can use my Kinect for video chats from my living room to other Skype users.  How cool would that be?  We also subscribe to Netflix, which xBox supports the instant downloads (as does our blue-ray player, but the player can't handle games).  We may also subscribe to Hulu for more recent TV shows when we kill our cable, which is also supported by xBox.  If only the xBox had a browser, it would be the perfect entertainment system for us.  I've looked at both Apple TV and Google TV.  They both offer some nice features, such as the ability to download apps and Internet browsers and what not, but they cost just a bit more than I want to spend.   For what they cost, I could just buy a small computer and use the TV as an extra large monitor.

In the second role, we already own a laptop and a netbook, which are close, but not quite what we need.  Their tethering to power cords is a bother, especially my laptop which quite literally has about 10 minutes of battery life left.  I desperately need to buy a new battery for it... or simply get a replacement.  And the keyboards make them take more space than I would ideally like.  I've contemplated a tablet PC, either the iPad or one of the Android tablets.  They have great battery life, are smaller and more convenient than a netbook or laptop, and could handle most of our day-to-day needs.  The downside, they do not integrate well with our other computing systems.  Although we could move to cloud storage, there may not be the apps for both the tablet and Window's computers to sync everything the way I want.  I've also considered spending a bit more on a Windows All-in-one touch desktops.  Perhaps we could put this in the kitchen so my wife could look up recipes, check email, watch the news, listen to music or anything else she wants to do while prepping her awesome meals.  She could keep her netbook in the living room so we could have Internet access there.  With our Netflix and Hulu subscriptions, we could still watch many shows while the kids and I are waiting for dinner or eating breakfast.

While I am sure to have sufficient computing resources at work, I would like to create an environment at home so that I can complete all of my work as efficiently as I can at the office.  For that, I would need a desktop computer with sufficient power and a dual monitor setup for maximum productivity.  I'm also really digging video conference calls, so would have a descent web cam and headphones for making any business calls.

Now, all I need is the money.  Ideally, I would like to create a value dense selection of systems to best meet our needs at the lowest price. How are you creating your home computing environment?  I would love to hear your thoughts.

Research update

While I did not keep the pace of article submission I had originally hoped over the spring, I did make significant progress.  

• I currently have 3 articles under review, with a fourth ready to submit today.
• I have two articles that I am editing and should submit for review before I move in July. 
• A coauthor is editing a seventh article .  The article is ambitious and geared toward perhaps one of the most prestigious journals in management, Academy of Management Review.  So my coauthors and I want to take our time and do it right.  While I am hopeful we can complete it this fall, I am willing to work on it however long it takes to prepare it for submission.
• An eighth research project has data collected.  Hopefully, one of my coauthors will have time to analyze the data this summer as I have too much else on my plate at the moment.
• And I just started brainstorming a ninth project with a new research partner.  Our tentative title is "Do CIOs care about ethics?"  This one would be another ambitious project, aiming for the top journal in our discipline, MIS Quarterly, so our timeline requires at least 2 to 3 years.

The hard part for me will be not pursuing all of the billion other project ideas I have floating around in my head.  Perhaps if I could find more collaborators and research partners, I would take on more projects, but I have been guilty in the past with not completing research projects (like my dissertation, which I finished sufficiently to graduate, but not well enough for submission to a journal) before moving on to new projects.  I will not make that mistake again.  If someone is interested in collaborating, here are some ideas that I would be interested in:

Ethics:

"How does a person's ethical perspective impact his or her response to privacy violations/ approach to online transactions/ group dynamics/ evaluation of IS resources/ etc.?"

"Are businessmen aware of their implicit ethical beliefs?"

"How does a student's implicit ethical perspective impact their participation and success in class?"

Decision making:

"How do individuals parse through large search results in order to make effective decisions?"

"What impact do explicit and implicit beliefs (especially ethical beliefs) have on the identification of alternative solutions to a problem?"

Pedagogical:

"What order of presentation is most effective for meaningful learning of MIS concepts?"

"What understanding of MIS concepts do students have upon entering an Intro to MIS class?"

"How Academic Service Learning introduces a false alternative?"

Reading and Writing in Information Systems

Edited notes from the Writing Across the Curriculum workshop.

Purposes for writing in our field

• To inform
• To record thoughts
• To communicate problems/solutions
• To document ideas/work
• To plan

Genres of writing in our field

• Documentation – technical & user
• Diagrams and mockups 
• Reports
• User manuals
• Meeting minutes
• Message boards
• Blogs
• Email

Audiences for IS writers

• Clients
• Users of a system
• Other IS professionals
• Management
• Self

As an IS professional, what are my reading purposes

• Learning new skills and knowledge
• Integrating ideas from multiple sources
• Conducting literature reviews for research
• To better understand requirements
• Enjoyment

Kinds of documents I read

• Business books
• General IS books
• Technical books
• Research articles
• Web sites
• Blogs
• Trade publications

Strategies I use for reading

• With blogs and message boards, I scan headings to find interesting content to read
• With books, I tend to read in depth
• With articles – depends on context, but often skip to parts of interest.
• An over arching strategy I use is dedicate time slots for reading.  This is done to minimize distractions and allow better focus and comprehension of material.

Singularity

To end my class in the Intro to Information Systems, I'm exploring future predictions of technology innovation.  There are a lot of interesting predictions, but one that I find fascinating is the idea of the Singularity.

Futurist and inventor Ray Kurzweil has predicted the singularity in about 30 years.  In this Ubiquity interview with Ray, he states his premise:

I make the case that this exponential progression will lead us to an understanding of human intelligence. And by understanding I mean we will have detailed mathematical models and computer simulations of all of the regions of the brain by the mid 2020s. So by the end of the 2020s we'll be able to fully recreate human intelligence. You may wonder: "OK, what's the big deal with that? We already have human intelligence; in fact, we've got six billion human brains running around, so why do we need more?" One of the answers to that question is that it will be a very powerful combination to combine the subtle and supple powers of human pattern recognition with ways in which machines are already superior. 

While I do not doubt our ability to understand pattern recognition to a very great extent, I believe that his definition of intelligence rests primarily on pattern recognition and not concept formation.  It may be possible to simulate concept formation in computers, I'm just not convinced it will be achieved in 20 years.  Regardless of the timeline, the ultimate effect may be profound.

Ray goes on to say:

My second point is that nonbiological intelligence, once it achieves human levels, will double in power every year, whereas human intelligence—biological intelligence—is fixed. We have 10 to the 26th power calculations per second in the human species today, and that's not going to change, but ultimately the nonbiological side of our civilization's intelligence will become by the 2030s thousands of times more powerful than human intelligence and by the 2040s billions of times more powerful. And that will be a really profound transformation.

The difficulty with this statement is how can intelligence be more powerful.  Is it simply faster?  Can it remember more?  Undoubtedly true.  Can it think better?  That is a subject we cannot fathom at this point, but sound highly suspect.

My second difficulty is with the assumption that human do not enhance their own cognitive capacities through integration with computing machines.  Simple electronic interfaces already exist in Cochlear implants, prosthetics, and BrainGate.  In 20 years, we may be able to achieve fantastic integration of computers and brain functionality.  Eventually, we may be able to download our memories or learn new skills Matrix style.

There is also the difficulty of moving this intelligence into economically feasible applications.  As another futurist Max More points out:

I also see a tendency in many projections to take a purely technical approach and to ignore possible economic, political, cultural, and psychological factors that could dampen the advances and their impact.

And to that I agree.

The Concepts of Data and Information

This week, while preparing for a class in information systems, I discovered an integration of the concepts "data" and "information" in terms of Ayn Rand's Epistemological framework as defined in Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology.  As a check on my thinking, I am posting my thoughts here for feedback.

I begin with Rand's definition of a concept:

A concept is a mental integration of two or more units possessing the same distinguishing characteristic(s), with their particular measurements omitted. - ITOE

Using my own words, concepts represent an abstraction.  By omitting measurements except for essential characteristics, a concept economizes our thinking process by allowing us to think about a vast number of things at the same time, without having to mental refer to perceptual concretes. But when it comes to thinking about the world, it is necessary for the mind to selectively re-introduce measurements to concepts in order to build context around one's thoughts.  For example, if I were to say to myself "I want to buy a new chair for my living room," I have re-introduced the measurement of location (and perhaps function) to my thinking.  Any additional thoughts about this purchase would necessarily introduce more measurements.  Is the chair a recliner?  Do you want it to rock?  What color?  Do you want it overstuffed?  Leather or fabric?  Quality of construction?  Metal or wood legs? Etc.  With these measurements re-introduced, we are prepared to evaluate real chairs for the possibility of purchase.


But what are measurements, other than facts about reality.  In terms of data, data is nothing more than specific facts about some thing.  They are measurements.  They are measurements of real world entity.  As Rand defines it:

Measurement is the identification of ... a quantitative relationship established by means of a standard that serves as a unit. - ITOE p. 7

Data are the result.  Data are the quantitative relationships recorded about a specific entity.

My next question delved into was how information relates to these concepts.  Unfortunately, I could find no definition of information in a dictionary that adequately captured the essential characteristics of this concept.  The definition I offer serves as a working definition.  With that disclaimer, I define information as a set of measurements that denote a perceptual concrete of a concept or set of concepts within a specific context.  If I say "Please provide me with all relevant information," I am requesting data about a specific context.  Not just any data though.  Information is data with meaning.  How do we establish meaning?  Meaning comes from concepts.  So in essence, information represents data re-introduced to relevant concepts within a specific context.  A short hand notation I used to help think about this was information = data + concepts.  The assumption is that the concepts define the context.  Since language serves as a set of symbols to denote concepts, a variation of the above notation could be written information = data + language.  Again, the assumption is that the language defines the context.

In computer terminology, programming languages are used to manipulate data in logically constructed ways in order to add meaning to numbers.  I believe the term programming language is very apt, in that the language is used to define the context in terms of a computer program.  This led to my last integration where information = data + computer program. With this integration, I believe it is possible to better understand the role of information systems and computer programs in helping us think and act.  While computers cannot replace our thoughts, they can add meaning to the vast abundance of data.  But the meaning is limited to the context established by program itself. 

So those are my thoughts.  I believe my overall approach to these concepts is sound, but I'm interesting in hearing your thoughts.

Textbook on the Introduction to Information Systems

As I mentioned previously, I expect to gain extra time from improving efficiency and gain time after I complete re-writing my Intro to Information Systems class.  With this time and interest, one project I would like to tackle in a few years is to write a textbook that captures and facilitates teaching this class that objectively identifies the principles used in designing, building, and using information systems. Essentially, I expect for my goal to evolve from one of building my ideal course into one of capitalizing on that work. 

By considering how to capitalize on my intellectual property, I have started to recognize the necessity for marketing this class to other professors and publishers.  Besides exciting me to work harder on my immediate goal, it has prompted me to write up some of my thinking for publication and conference proceedings.  When a colleague of mine suggested writing an article for a track in Innovative Education he is chairing next year at the national DSI conference, I immediately considered writing a manuscript that argues for this new approach in Intro IS classes.  I may do the same for other conferences aimed directly at IS academics, such as AMCIS or ICIS and various regional conferences.  I will also attempt to publish this approach and any objective measures of success in relevant journals.  By demonstrating the logic and practicality of this approach, I expect to create demand for something that does not yet exist, but will.

I would also like to thank Adam Reed for recognizing the value in this approach to teaching Information Systems, for inspiration by writing his own course based on these ideas, and for his offer to collaborate on a textbook.  His excitement has in part helped me to refocus my efforts for long term success.

Web 2.0 - an exciting new world

This coming fall, I'll be teaching our program's capstone class. Over the past couple years, other professors have taught this class by requiring students to design and build an AJAX application, connecting to various APIs, to create clever mashups. Following this theme, I will be requiring students to do the same. Only one little problem. Although I'm well versed in web programming, I shifted to academia before I had a chance to learn AJAX. Its about time I got caught up. So I'm going to have to teach myself a thing or two about this new technology in the next 3 weeks. I already understand the basics of how it works and have bought and browsed through Professional Ajax, 2nd Edition (Programmer to Programmer) published by Wrox. It doesn't look like I'll have much trouble getting a simple AJAX program created.

Of the technologies I would like to understand at the intermediate level this semester:
AJAX
JSON
RSS syndication and reading
Google maps API

Some other technologies that I may learn in the coming year:
Google Base Data API
REST vs. SOAP
Silverlight/ FLEX/ Flash/ JavaFX
Facebook API
Wiki
Google adWords/ Analytics

All kinds of exciting things are appearing in the world of web technologies. Hopefully, I will be able to keep up.

AT&T's monopoly

I rather enjoy spending time in class exploding the myth that monopolies are created by excessive competition. In my lecture on the history of the telecommunications industry, I present the facts that destroy this myth, at least within the realm of AT&T's monopoly. In 1910s, Bell's second patent on the telephone had already expired. There were literally thousands of telephone companies in the U.S. at the time (always a shock to students). However, the U.S. government decided that AT&T should have a legal monopoly on all interstate telephone traffic. This essentially gave AT&T a competitive edge that no other telephone company could compete with. AT&T subsequently bought out or forced other companies to connect with their phone system, least they be marginalized. The result, AT&T controlled both the long distance and local telephone market.

On their exam, students must answer a question like the one below:

How did AT&T obtain a monopoly in long distance telephone service?
a) AT&T charged prices so high that no competitors could make enough profit to attract investors.
b) The federal government believed that communication was so important that AT&T should have a monopoly and regulated the market accordingly.
c) A band of outlaws enforced AT&T’s patents even after they officially expired.
d) None of the choices are correct.

The 1982 anti-trust case against AT&T was really one branch of government (federal court) telling another branch of government (FCC and congress) to stop supporting this monopoly. The consequences of this case is an entirely different matter.

When one focuses on the facts, it becomes obvious how real monopolies are created.

Tools versus ideas - the role of inventions in changing society

In the history of information systems post, I outlined my goal with introduction to information systems class that I'm teaching. One module I'm particularly proud of is the one on "Tools versus Ideas" lecture. In this lecture, I start with the question "Which of the two, tools or ideas, is more fundamental to changes in business and/or society?" After spending a few minutes getting student feedback, I provide my answer through analyzing six different historical cases at the societal level. These six are:

1. Invention of writing
2. The Greeks
3. Emergence from the Dark Ages
4. Invention of the printing press
5. The industrial revolution
6. Invention of the electronic computer

For each of these cases, I explore the causes and effects. For example, the invention of writing is largely credited to be a solution to ever growing cities around 4000 BC. With improved irrigation and better farming techniques, more food was produced by fewer farmers, allowing people to migrate to cities. But with larger cities came larger bureaucracies and more commerce. In order to manage the increased complexity of the information flow throughout these cities, people start using a standard form of communicating with pictures and symbols.

Yet, even with the advent of writing, society did not change much. Empires became larger, but they were still despotic. Whoever had the strongest mob following him ruled the land. The invention of writing did not fundamentally change how society operated.

Compare that with the Greeks. What was fundamentally different about the Greeks? Why did this one culture discover the beginnings of science, philosophy, literature, great art, and a systematic study of history? And the answer lies with the Greeks unique ideas. The Greeks worshiped man. The believed that each individual man should become the best that they could be, physically, but more importantly, mentally. It was this respect for individual achievement and reason that fundamentally changed society as we know it.

The rest of the cases highlight this same theme. The inventions did effect society, but merely accelerated the transmission of ideas already present. When it accelerated the right ideas, such as when the printing press allowed more scientific and secular writings to be printed leading to the reformation, scientific revolution, and enlightenment, society started to change for the better. But if ideas are bad, such as the despotic form of government, inventions like writing did not make life any better or more enjoyable.

The major take away from this module is that information systems are only as good as the ideas that they transmit. The old notion "garbage in, garbage out" applies to any information system and its application to individual changes, business changes, or societal changes. Ideas matter! They matter far more than the tool. But once the right ideas are discovered, tools can accelerate the transfer of those ideas. Knowing which tools are right for which job is an entirely different subject and is the focus of the remainder of the semester.

History of Information Systems

Over the past 4 years, I have taught one class more than any other, Introduction to Information Systems. At every university I have taught this class (4 different ones), it is a core class for all undergraduate business students. While I agree that this class is essential for business students, I believe there is a general failure in how these classes are generally structured. Bill Gates is noted for saying that information systems are the "digital nervous system" of a business, but how can this essential system be portrayed to students in an effective way?

Many professors hate teaching this class. Reading through numerous textbooks for the introductory class gives a clue why. The textbooks bombard students with lots and lots of facts, like the difference between systems software and application software or what is a decision support system or name some hacking techniques to break into a computer. What is missing is a focus on integrating these facts into usable principles for utilizing and enhancing information systems for improved organizational performance. While most professors understand these principles, they feel it necessary to ram tons of facts down the throats of students and then ask the students to regurgitate the facts without applying them. For the professors that do ask them to apply the facts, most students are not equipped to do so. Without a focus on principles, most students are clueless on how to apply new technologies for business success. The professors certainly are not inspired. So there is little surprise that they cannot inspire their students.

To overcome these limitations, I have been redesigning this class to better highlight the principles of information systems. At first glance, the case study method offers a means of introducing facts by allowing sufficient discussion and contemplation to integrate the facts into usable principles. However, this method suffers from an over abundance of complexity. Often its is difficult for students to easily grasp the principles because there are often two or more different principles involved, complicating the issue. While I still use case studies, it is something that I utilize only after I have established the principles.

Instead, I have turned to history. It was amazing to me, that after I had completed my PhD in information system, I had no idea about where computers originated. To understand why computers are an integral part of business, its important to understand why they were introduced in the first place. By focusing on the historical aspects of computing, a bigger picture emerged about why they are so effective and popular. It also allows the instructor to focus on principles one at a time by picking historical examples the best exemplify its effects. It explains why in the 1940s, why 4 computer systems were invented independent of each other. It explains why IBM was so successful with the mainframe, but not nearly so successful with personal computers. It helps explain what email, cell phones, and Facebook have in common.

After introducing the historical aspects to information systems, I have received numerous comments from students that that was their favorite part of class. While my restructuring of the class is a work in progress, I have found inspiration from many of the great articles found in The Objective Standard that have effectively utilized a historic approach to present principles. For those of you unable to take my class, I have found a number of books that have really been key to my understanding. These include The Universal History of Computing: From the Abacus to the Quantum Computer, ENIAC: The Triumphs and Tragedies of the World's First Computer, Computing in the Middle Ages: A View From the Trenches 1955-1983, and Computer: A History Of The Information Machine, Second Edition (The Sloan Technology Series).

Appreciation luncheon

Yesterday, I had lunch with Ann Arbor SPARK at their mentor appreciation luncheon for their Entrepreneurial boot camp. What a great time! I meet several serial entrepreneurs including Mark Lundquist (Fulcrum Edge, Inc. and SellMyBusiness.com) and Dave Harriman, who now works in the Office of Technology Transfer at Univ. of Michigan. I love talking to productive businessmen creating value for themselves and others. It is inspirational.

I also meet several SPARK staff members who help make the boot camp run smoothly - Scott Olson, managing director of entrepreneurial business development and the person who recruited me as a mentor - Chuck Salley and Anik Ganguly, two of the boot camp's drill instructors. Anik is working with two companies that I may mentor. The first is a business designed to connect service provides (i.e. plumbers, carpenters, etc.) with end consumers by providing web advertising to this generally technology adverse group. The second business is an existing web development company looking to expand their business by selling a proprietary content management system.

The two other businesses I'm interested in mentoring are both web based. One is a web-based virtual trainer. The other is a web-based personal shopper. Both have good potential and I'm interested to see where they plan on taking these enterprises.

I'm loving it. So much so, that I'll probably return for the next boot camp, assuming SPARK wants me back.

SPARK Ann Arbor

As part of my AS-L fellowship at Eastern Michigan, I have to volunteer with an organization throughout the semester and keep a journal of my activities. I approached SPARK Ann Arbor, a non-profit organization whose mission is to start, grow, and retain businesses in the Ann Arbor/ Ypsilanti area. One of their most noted successes was helping Google open an office in downtown Ann Arbor. Google now has over 250 employees with plans for significant growth.

This post details my interaction with them.

Last week, I contacted Amy Cell, Talent Enhancement, at SPARK. Over the phone, I explained what I was doing and why I was interested in establishing a relationship with SPARK. First was for the immediate need of volunteering my services. Second, was to establish a relationship with them such that we might be able to match student groups performing real world class projects with businesses in need of information systems. She forwarded my information on to their team and set up a meeting with me to meet.

The next day I received a call from Scott Olson with regards to the first need. SPARK conducts an Entrepreneur Boot Camp for new businesses. In this boot camp, participant companies are partnered with industry mentors to help them with questions and advice they may have. This sounded like an exciting opportunity and agreed to be a mentor. It would be a great way for me to connect with businesses, build a reputation as an expert in the field, and establish a positive relationship with SPARK.

I met Amy face-to-face yesterday, along with Greg Fronizer, and we further discussed how I could build a relationship with SPARK. When I experienced interest in being an IT consultant, Amy’s eyes immediately lit up because that is one important role that SPARK provides to new businesses. She mentioned that my involvement with the entrepreneur boot camp is an excellent first step in building our relationship, especially if I want to be a consultant recommended by SPARK.

All-in-all, this looks like a great opportunity for me. I was a bit hesitant about the AS-L fellowship when I first applied, but it should work out tremendously for me in the long run.

Microsoft Live FolderShare

This week I've installed Microsoft's Live FolderShare on several of my computers and have been extremely pleased with it so far. This program utilizes P2P files-sharing technology that allows you to share any folder on your computer with a folder on any other computer. All documents are synchronized (either automatically or at your discretion) so that duplicate copies are maintained on both computers. All you need is an Internet connection (preferably broadband). Its currently in Beta, and open to the first 10,000 users.

The program has allowed me to overcome two persistent issues I've continuously struggled with over the past couple years. First, I always conducted my document backups by saving files on my school's network drive. While that practice was useful while I'm on campus, I had no means of accessing the files from home. With Foldershare, backups are made automatically when I make a change.

My second issue was with transferring files from my laptop to my office computer and back again. I used to send myself emails or use my thumb drive to transfer these files. The main drawback of this system of transfer was ensuring that the documents I was working with is the latest version. Now, versions are identical on both computers. Any changes on one computer is immediately reflected on the other. I tested this feature by saving a document on my office computer. I then turned to my laptop, which was connected through wirelessly to the same network, logged in, and viewed the shared folder. The document was already there. In less than 15 seconds, the entire word document had been transfered.

While I have tried out the "share with others" option, I'm guessing it works identically. As long as your colleagues have Live FolderShare installed on their computers, you both work on the same document. According to Microsoft

Sharing with friends, co-workers, and family is easy when you add and update files in a shared library. Large files? Not a problem - FolderShare can sync files up to 2 GBs in size. And it works on both Mac and PC.

I'm not sure what will happen if you both try to work on a document at the same time. But hopefully you will receive some sort of message/error if you do.

Microsoft suggests they will try to integrate applications into this FolderShare program in the future. How exactly that will be done, I'm unsure, but very curious to find out. If anyone knows more about this, please let me know.

My understanding of Kelley's error

With clarity, I finally understand the major error in David Kelley's approach to moral judgment. And oddly enough, the integration came from re-reading my systems analysis and design book. My goal in this post is to outline my thought process that lead to this understanding.

In systems development and design, their are different methodologies for understanding an information system. Traditionally, these have been through either data-driven methodologies and process-driven methodologies. In data-driven methodologies, analysts attempt to understand reality by identifying things (entities) that have properties. These things have specific states that may change over time, but not through any identifiable force. These things are only weakly related to other entities through relationships. In process-driven methodologies, analysts attempt to understand reality by identifying actions that must be performed. These actions refer to work that must be done, but are only weakly tied to people or data. In each of these cases, there is an implicit division between what is and what should be done. A division between consequence and motive. A division between facts and values. While it is true that these two methodologies attempt to cover both sides of data-process dichotomy, each is weak and requires an enormous amount of effort on the part of the analyst to tie them together. This effort has been manifested in my students who have attempted put them together for my class.

A similar dichotomy exists in types of programming languages. Some languages are procedural (Fortran, BASIC in its original form, C) while other languages are state-oriented (RPG, HTML, XML). While both styles of language have purpose in creating information systems, they both fall short in their ability to do so efficiently and effectively. Few people today still use a procedural or pure state-oriented languages (HTML was soon augmented with JavaScript for processing after a pages had loaded).

Today, there exists programming languages called object-oriented languages with a related analysis and design technique called Unified Modeling Language (UML) that rejects the implicit state-process dichotomy. Object-oriented programming emerged back in the 70s with the invention of SmallTalk, where inventor Alan Kay explicit tried to model human thought with a programming language that focused on objects that contained both attributes and methods (measurements and actions). Objects (which are real instantiations of a class of things, just like an object in reality is an instantiation of a concept) could "inherit" attributes and methods from broader abstractions and apply them where appropriate.

In a comparison between Ayn Rand's Objectivist epistemology with object-oriented methodology, Adam Reed discovered that there are a number of striking similarities (as a warning, this article is posted on the Atlas Society's website. The irony is that Reed's article helped me to understand why Kelley is wrong). While I haven't had time to throughly compare and contrast Reed's findings with my own understanding of reality, my brief read leads me to support his basic comparison.

While there are some striking similarities, the analogy only goes so far. Procedural languages and process-oriented methodologies are not inherently better or worse than object-oriented languages and methodologies. It depends on context. Objectivism's epistemology and ethics, however, are fundamentally "better" than other philosophies because it is true in all contexts.

What was important to my understanding of Kelley's error however is that an object-oriented approach to programming is a fundamentally different way of thinking about information systems and a fundamentally different approach to logic when designing applications. You simply can not combine procedural and state-oriented languages to get object-orientation languages. Just like you cannot combine process-oriented and data-oriented methodologies to get UML. An IT friend of mine, Jeff, showed me to some code that perfectly demonstrated this fundamental mistake from a new programmer who, while programming in Java, created a class that contained over 20 nested if-statements. Although he was using object-oriented language, he was thinking in terms of procedural languages. The vast number of if-statements gave evidence of an inability to understand inheritance (abstraction in philosophic terms). By adopting the procedural mind-set he was unable to use an object-oriented language appropriately.

While re-reading Diana's post about Kelley introducing the mind-body dichotomy into his analysis of moral judgment, I thought about this new programmer. Kelley, by starting with the mind-body dichotomy became stuck in that mind set and could not reconcile it with Objectivism, no matter how much fancy foot-work he attempted. This is what leads Kelley to reject the fact-value relationship, embrace the mind-body dichotomy, and evaluate motive and consequences differently. As Diana shows, this is fundamentally at odds with Objectivism. You can't understand Objectivist ethics if you start with the wrong mind-set, in his case from the mind-body dichotomy.

Programmers and Religion

It is any surprise that a profession that demands intense logical analysis would find a very large number of people rejecting a very illogical proposition. According to an self-report, non-random survey, the highest religious affiliation with almost every programming language is... Atheist! Knowing as much as I do about survey research, I can only take this finding with a grain of salt. There could have easily been vote early and often phenomena, or even the tell your friends but not your enemies phenomena that could have swayed the results. However, this survey does match some of my own observations in the geek world.

I know Rand said "there is no compromise between food and poison. Poison always wins." I can't remember if she said there is no compromise between the rational and irrational, but it certainly sounds like something she would say. So a profession that deals explicitly with identifying facts of reality and logical connections between these facts will likely attract individuals who question faith and reject irrationality on principle.