Co-location – the Super Food of Collaboration

In the western world we have a huge choice of foods that we can eat. We know which ones are good for us, and which ones aren’t, yet many of us are overweight, getting fatter and suffering from the health consequences of poor dietary choices.

The obesity problem is worse in areas of low income – why? One of the  main reasons is that good, healthy food is expensive and for the most part cheap food is unhealthy. This cheap food is normally processed, has travelled a long way from areas of low cost production and is purchased on a whim without the burden of preparation. It makes us feel good because it’s full of sugars and fats that our addicted brains crave but it doesn’t provide a healthy nutritional diet.

Teleconferences are the fast-food of collaboration. We set them up without consideration because they are cheap and immediately accessible. They allow us to use resources from wherever they are in the planet without consideration for those resources and, sometimes, with little consideration for the quality of those resources. They help us to believe that we are collaborating, which we are, but only in the same way as a fast-food burger is food.

Co-located collaboration is different, like organic wholefood it’s more expensive but it’s significantly better for us. The extra expense makes us respect it more so we make sure that we get all of the value out of it that we can. Organic wholefood requires extra preparation to get the right ingredients together but the results are amazing and the same is true for co-located collaboration. Co-located collaboration feeds all of our collaboration dietary needs in a way that the fast-food teleconferences never can, we never really get to know people on teleconferences, they’re just voices. There is marked difference in the level of collaboration that we achieve with people that we have physically met compared to those we haven’t. The most healthy collaboration is achieved when we are co-located with people we know well, this is the super-food of collaboration.

The occasional fast-food teleconference collaboration isn’t going to kills us, but it’s not healthy to live on it.

Managing the white-space | Leaving the smaller screens behind in iOS 11

One of the things I’ve noticed as the user of both an older and a newer iPhone is that the 4.7″ screen that is on the iPhone 6/7/8 is now the baseline standard being used for iOS design decisions.

In iOS 11 Apple have made a number of design decisions that increase the amount of screen being used by items.

In the AppStore, as an example, the icons have got bigger and the titles have got bigger, so that the number of apps you see in the Update section have reduced and the titles are often truncated on a 4″ iPhone 5/5S:

20171003_104203000_iOS
AppStore Updates on the iPhone 5S 4″ Screen with iOS 11.

Another example of the design choices being made is the lock screen and associated notifications. If you have a clock on your lock screen and you are playing some audio then notifications are almost useless because you only get part of the first notification without scrolling:

Lock Screen
Lock Screen on the iPhone 5S 4″ Screen with iOS 11

Screen design decisions are a balance between content and white-space, white-space is the space between the content. Good design is defined by the white-space more than the content. That’s where the iOS 11 design decisions are being driven from, as screens have got bigger on the iPhone 6/7/8 (4.7″) and the 6/7/9 Plus (5.5″) Apple are increasing the amount of white-space so that the design stays good on those devices.

Anyone who has used a corporate application will know how awful it is when white-space is ignored and content is crammed on to screens. Apple could have used the extra screen space on the newer iPhone models to squeeze in more content, which I’m sure they’ve done, but they’ve balanced it with an increase in white-space. Those design decisions mean that the content on the 4″ screen feels like it’s a bit too spaced out.

The Huge Failure | Dilbert on Open Plan Offices

I’ve really enjoyed the recent series of cartoon from Scott Adams on open-plan offices:

Some of the comments on these cartoons are just as fabulous:

Let’s not forget that cubicles were a massive failure before open plans managed to out-fail them.

Open spaces are supposed to invite the open flow and exchanges of Ideas. And they do, ideas like……”How bad traffic was this morning?….Did you catch the game last night?….how was your weekend?…..etc” Maybe some work topics might get discussed

Working environments is a very emotive subject and rightly so. Many of us spend more time at work than we do at home and we want to be productive.

What fascinates me is that many organisations spend huge amounts of money creating something that people don’t want.

Here’s something I wrote earlier: Productivity and place: Where are you most productive?

Outsourcing our Brain and the impact of SatNav

On Tuesday this week the Guardian wrote an article with the title: “All mapped out? Using satnav ‘switches off’ parts of the brain, study suggests”

This article was reporting on a study that was investigating the processes that the brain uses when mapping our environment and planning routes. The headlines emphasises that when we are receiving instructions our brain turns off many of these processes:

The study found that characteristic brain activity linked to simulating the different possible routes for a journey appears to be entirely absent when a person is following directions rather than independently planning a route.

The brain is quite good at not doing things it doesn’t need to do, but that has consequences.

Having read through the article I thought to myself that this would make a really interesting extension to an article that I had previously written on outsourcing our brain functions.

The basic idea of the post was that we use tools to outsource our brain functions and in so doing we risk reducing our brain function. By not exercising the brain capabilities we find ourselves in the place where we are dependent upon the tools and struggle to function without them. A basic example of this is the ability to do mental maths which, on my own unscientific assessment, is completely missing from the younger generation that has always had a machine to do this arithmetic for them. Another example is the memory of phone numbers which people no longer need to do; if you’ve given me your phone number in the last 5 years I probably don’t know it, I still know numbers prior to that time. This time coincides with increased use of mobile phones and no longer needing to know the number to call someone.

So where is the link to the post that I wrote?

I searched this blog for the post.

I searched Google for the post.

I searched my Evernote for this post.

I couldn’t find the post.

Without one of these tools telling me where this post is I’m stuck. Having outsourced that part of my memory I’m completely dependent upon them.

The irony wasn’t lost on me.

Consumer technology in the business world – today’s example

Today I was at a relatives house who needed to get their heating boiler fixed, so we called them a service engineer from one of the large utility companies here in the UK.

Due to the particular circumstances they came out quickly and started to take the boiler apart.

Unfortunately the boiler needed a part which the service engineer didn’t have.

The corporate ordering system would get him one by the next day, but he wanted to get it fixed before that, so what could he do?

That’s where the consumer technology came in.

The service engineers who work in this particular area of the UK had a WhatApp group so they could help each other out: “Give me a few minutes and I’ll check the group to see if anyone else has one of these parts so we can get it fixed today.”

In just a few minutes it was clear that no-one else had the part and we’d have to wait for the morning, but at least he tried.

I have no idea whether this was a company sanctioned way of working or whether this was something the engineers had decided to do, but it showed how deeply consumer technology has ingrained itself into the way that we work and play.

We talk about Shadow IT which I recently heard someone describe as “an abomination”, I don’t see it that way. Consumer technology will always move ahead of what a corporate IT organisation can, and should, do. Corporate IT needs to move to be the broker that enables people to get access to the tools they need to best do their job, where that needs to be something regulated then fine, but when there’s no value to be added corporate IT organisations should get out of the way.

Working with the Double Negative – Is my microphone on, or not?

I’m in a Skype for Business call and I’m getting confused by the blue button in this screen:

Skype for Business Microphone

In maths and in the English language it’s quite clear that a double-negative is a positive:

“I can’t not smile when she does that”

Means:

“I smile when she does that”

Or in maths:

0-(-1) = 1

likewise

0+(-1)= -1

The icon on this screen is the mute icon – so that’s (-1) and the icon is highlighted so that’s + resulting in -1 which means that the sound isn’t flowing therefore I’m on mute?

That’s makes sense, and that it exactly what happens.

mute icon highlighted = on mute

But, I can’t help thinking that this is all more complicated that it needs to be. It would be far less confusing to use a microphone icon rather than a mute icon. Then icon selected would mean microphone on and icon not selected would mean microphone off. I wouldn’t have to run an logic equation in my head to be confident that I wasn’t that annoying person on the call who’s disrupting everyone else by the high levels of background noise.

For me it’s just not intuitive for it to be a mute button.

I suppose it’s back to Norman and his doors.

Facebook and Google dominate the 2016 Top 10 US Smartphone Apps List

According to data from nielsen the most popular smartphone application in the US in 2016 was Facebook, but that’s not the only Facebook asset in the top 10 – Messenger is #2 and Instagram is #8.

The Facebook number is impressive at over 146 million average unique users per month. The US population now stands at around 324 million which means that over 45% of the US population uses Facebook on a smartphone every month.

The other dominant force on the list is Google who take places #3 to #7 with YouTube at the top of the list at over 113 million average unique users.

The two remaining spots on the list go to Apple and Amazon.

The Amazon app is also the fastest growing application in percentage terms with Google Search and Google Play in the slower growth lane: