John Roese’s Blog CTO, Nortel

Global Employee Session in Mixed-Media, Enterprise-Integrated Virtual World

Location: Ottawa, Canada

Thanks to all for the comments and dialogue on the previous posts. Today, I'll get back to discussing technology, which is the real purpose of this blog. :-)

One of the goals that drives me and certainly one of the big challenges and opportunities for the industry is to figure out how we can achieve a better-than-reality communications experience through the use of technology.

I wanted to share with you an event that happened at Nortel this week that represents a step on that journey.

Yesterday, I held a global employee session within a virtual mixed-reality world, using a prototype platform we’re investigating as part of an incubation effort. We had 150+ people participating in the virtual environment, hundreds of others participating by congregating in real-world auditoriums or large meeting rooms (where they could see and hear on large screens what was happening in the virtual world, through the “eyes” and “ears” of one of the Avatars), and others participating from their desktops using more traditional web conferencing tools.

The experience was fantastic. I was able to present, dialogue with employees, and answer questions within the virtual world but also in a way that all of the employees using other more traditional mediums – audio and voice conferencing and sitting in auditoriums – could also be a part of.

What was different about this, versus doing a large company meeting in an environment like Second Life, is that a host of different technologies could be part of an integrated experience within Nortel’s own enterprise application architecture. Everything was linked to our telecom infrastructure, corporate security and identity management systems. In other virtual reality experiences, like Second Life or multi-player on-line gaming systems, you need to go into their footprint and are limited by their capabilities. For example, although a name may be attached to an Avatar, you have no way of really knowing who that individual is in the real world. Yesterday, the virtual experience (complete with high-quality spatial audio) became part of our own IT ecosystem.

There were a few minor glitches along the way – to be expected with any prototype – but it was successful and allowed us to accomplish the task of a quarterly update to a globally distributed work force. The reality of it also sparked a huge number of new potential applications and uses. In the model of learning by doing, this kind of real immersion into new systems is a critical path to future innovation.

Our goal is to create a better-than-reality communications experience through technology. Today that’s just not possible. During conference calls, unless you know the speaker’s voice, you can’t identify who is speaking. Although telepresence is a dramatic improvement to the teleconference, facilities are costly, not widely available, you have to be in a particular place at a particular time, and there are issues with scale.

Although today’s broadband networks are giving us the ability to put communications wherever we want to, if we simply put legacy communications paradigms into these mobile and extended environments, we won’t really solve the problems. What we need to do is to create something that allows an experience that is at least equivalent to – if not superior to – a real world experience anywhere the broadband network exists. So, step 1 is to build a broadband network. Step 2 is to improve the experience by including all of those attributes that make the human-to-human experience exciting and effective.

That’s why much of our research and next-generation investment is focused on this area – identifying what makes the real-world experience special and effective and then replicating those capabilities through technology.

In that respect, I’d love your input. What is it about the real-world face-to-face experience that makes it a superior one over any technological experience that exists today? Is it visual? Emotive? Spatial? Dynamic? Simple? Transparent? Etc. And what are the technologies that you think could help replicate that experience?

Trackbacks/Pings

  1. […] couple of weeks ago Nortel conducted internal presentation using a prototype “virtual mixed-reality world”. This environment joined together […]

  2. […] World / Mixed Reality Experience April 2, 2008 — dusanwriter John Roese recently blogged about his experience in a “global employee session within a virtual mixed-reality […]

Comments

  1. Dear John,

    On the previous debates you left a lot of questions totally unanswered and I personally fail to see the purpose of engaging in any other meaningless discussions on subjects that Nortel’s management is apparently either not willing to or capable of giving clarity on! Don’t start something you are not prepared to finish - I think many of us feel foolish being ignored in this way. Personally I think it’s extremely unprofessional and it makes me think if that’s the general way the company is being lead…resulting in completely unsatisfactory share price performance. Start taking some responsibility!!!

  2. I think it’s the quality of the audio/video that makes a difference. Anything that distracts the user back to the “real” world around them will reduce their impression that the telepresence was as good as face-to-face. Think of when you watch a movie in a high-tech theater, the more the “outside” is drowned out by sound, sight,and feel; the more you feel a part of what you are watching.

  3. I’m thinking this is one of those “you- had- to- be- there- to- appreciate- it” moments. And I’m not sure about the new mission statement ;>) “Our goal is to create a better-than-reality communications experience through technology.” Maybe I just don’t get it.

  4. It’s the stock-price “Stupid”!

    I am very surprised you continue to blog about other topics when your biggest problem is the stock price. You, your CEO and BOD should be addressing this but instead you put your heads in the sand and continue to ignore the biggest threat to OUR Company – Analyst are cutting the target price and there in not one piece of positive news, in fact all I see is negative news – see: http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/1008095.html

    As indicated in the article above — Nobody has any faith in the senior management or the BOD (Myself included). One action from the senior management, the BOD and the Company would start to change all this; Start buying Nortel Stock and buy a lot of stock!! If you cannot do this then it is time to get out and leave the company as you already have done much damage!

  5. I agree that this blog should be focused on technology. The stock price rants are mostly just noise. Can we get some focus on wireless technology discussed in the above newsobserver.com article.

    Can Nortel compete for large LTE contracts in Europe since they do not have a large installed base of products?

    In the US, I read that another supplier will be required for 2.5G to be accepted with handset manufactures. Does Nortel’s 2/2.5G to 4G migration plan rely on 2.5G acceptance?

    Why has Nortel been having a hard time landing WIMAX contracts in the developing countries against smaller niche suppliers? What is Nortel doing to counter this trend?

  6. Nortel competes in UMTS and will compete in 4G in the core network transport, services and applications. I do not see much of a future for them in the RAN.

  7. As a nortel employee, I had the opportunity to see and witness the technology that John is talking about. It is mind-blowing and one of the most innovative peices of tech I’ve seen come out of the Ottawa lab in quite some time. I love the direction that this company is going in from a technical perspective. Virtual worlds that allow meetings/conferences with incredible sound are a greener alternative to travelling and the application of this technology is limitless….from retail to telecom to support…wow! Lots of potential markets that could benifit from this technology. Can’t wait to see this go public. Furthermore, its proof that Nortel continues to be a leader in innovation an can re-invent itself in non-traditional spaces. The future is all about value-added applications…many of us having been waiting for nortel to moves up the technology food chain into the software and services and multimedia-rich applications space. Telepresence, and the described technology are just the beginning of what I think you’ll see come out of the R&D labs at Nortel. Way to go John….love the incubation proess you’ve setup at Nortel. I think in time you’ll see some rapid adoption of it…and its a good way to stimulate all the bright minds in Ottawa and other R&D locations…I’m positive you’re going to continue to see a ton of amazing ideas come out of left field using this process…bravo!

  8. WRT#4 by Disappointed

    >
    and
    >

    Somewhat coursely put, but none-the-less VERY true from an investor’s standpoint.

    WRT#5 by rizcorpl

    >

    OK, but I’m here as an INVESTOR. If the technology can’t add to the “bottom line” why else discuss it? The company won’t stay in business just for the joy of invention.

    WRT#7 by Sacha

    You DO sound VERY positive about this company >

    How long have you been and when was your latest purchase of company stock? I’m guessing you haven’t been arount since 2000.

    >

    Not going to tell you what that sounds like, but it rhymes with bass fishing. (That is, IF Sacha Gera is your real name ;>)

  9. My apologies that my last post didn’t show correctly.

    WRT#4 by Disappointed

    “It’s the stock-price “Stupid”!”
    and
    “Start buying Nortel Stock and buy a lot…”

    Somewhat coursely put, but none-the-less VERY true from an investor’s standpoint.

    WRT#5 by rizcorpl

    “… this blog should be focused on technology. The stock price rants are mostly just noise. Can we get some focus on wireless technology discussed …”

    OK, but I’m here as an INVESTOR. If the technology can’t add to the “bottom line” why else discuss it? The company won’t stay in business just for the joy of invention.

    WRT#7 by Sacha

    “As a nortel employee…”

    How long have you been and when was your latest purchase of company stock? I’m guessing you haven’t been arount since 2000.

    ” Way to go John…bravo!”

    Not going to tell you what that sounds like, but it rhymes with bass fishing. (That is, IF Sacha Gera is your real name ;>)

  10. As an R&D/tech employee that has been with Nortel since well before the boom (pre 2001) - I am EXTREMELY excited to see what has been happening over the past months. This is just one of many exciting technologies that are actively being explored, not just from a tech perspective, but coupled with business expertise as well. I had previously been very frustrated with how difficult it was to pursue new ideas within Nortel.

    The new R&D model that was put in place by John and co. now allows for R&D folks to freely come up with ideas, and develop them - gaining business support as required.
    Ideas are only pursued to the next step if they have shown both technology and business validity, which requires testing with customers etc.

    From my perspective, I have seen a SIGNIFICANT shift over the past year, and I believe that it will have a bottom line impact - from research to prototype to product to revenue and new market growth, which at the end of the day is what positively impacts share price (or so I am lead to believe, I am a techie after all :) ).

  11. WRT #7, I agree..bravo! Dig in to the shareholders’ money and award yourselves another raise, maybe another 20% or so!

    I’d be much more excited to read an anecdote about how a *customer* used this technology.

  12. John,

    Why is Nortel investing time and effort into this technology?

    If we look at the gaming industry, one of the main reasons why it’s so successful there is because it gives people a way to escape from the ‘harsh’ realities of the real world and allows them to live the life they’ve always dreamed of. For example, I know of a physically disabled person who loves the virtual world because he is one of the most powerful people in it. In other words, if you look at the market, people are willing to pay for this technology because it improves their quality of life.

    Now let’s shift focus to Nortel’s customers, the SMBs and Enterprises. I recall that you mentioned in a previous blog that IT departments are being asked to do more with less. I think most CIOs would agree that this it true but my question is, doesn’t this technology go against that vision? Specifically, if an Enterprise were to adopt the technolgy, it would require a non-trivial expense (i.e. hardware, software licenses, training, helpdesk support etc.) for, what would appear to be, minimal benefit. Honestly, it’s not clear how this technology provides substantial benefit over Microsoft or Cisco’s web-casting/meeting technologies.

    Any thoughts?

  13. WRT#10 Glad to hear all the positive thoughts. Are you buying any NT stock in the open market? Can you tell us why the company no longers employees to purchase NT stock via the LTIP? Thanks in advance.

    WRT#12 Great questions.

  14. John,

    This could trackback to the “Getting the Work Out……” posting

    A technologies ability to accurately reproduce what happens between the limbic system and the pre frontal cortex in a live encounter is one of the ultimate goals of any unified communications system.

    What businesses need from this technology is that same thing people want from all communications technology. Resonance. The ability for the technology to not only convey information but the group or individual EQ. Of course, this quality has as much to do with the messenger and the connection between people as it does with the medium.

    As well, many of these technologies have a high signal to noise ratio with complex setups and too many bells and whistles crteating disonence. The term “mixed media” is unfortunately more sccurate than companies realize

    A combination of a good story, compelling characters played by limbicaly attractive people, a visual experience that accurately reproduces or in some cases enhances visual reality - IOW a good movie is an example of this. IMO the Cisco “telepresence” commercial with the young man visiting with his family while he is overseas, is a good example, even with that bad Sarah Vowel impersonator they use for a narrator.

  15. John

    I noticed a recent article explaining how Nortel’s data network for Unified communications products offered

    “Up to Seven Times the Resiliency, Up to 20 Times the Performance, Up to 50 Percent Total Cost Savings, vs. Competing Solutions.”

    if this is the case and has been verified by independent reports from the Tolly Group and Infotech, why does the publication stop short of naming specific competitors, after all

  16. John

    I noticed a recent article explaining how Nortel’s data network for Unified communications products offered

    “Up to Seven Times the Resiliency, Up to 20 Times the Performance, Up to 50 Percent Total Cost Savings, vs. Competing Solutions.”

    if this is the case and has been verified by independent reports from the Tolly Group and Infotech, why does the publication stop short of naming specific competitors, after all I think we all know that the comparisons are aimed at Cisco,Avaya and to a lesser extent ALU.

    Wouldn’t these articles carry more marketing punch, because if you make a reference as to how Nortel’s products stack up against specific competitors’ similar products it would then be easier for a potential customer’s ability to gauge the specific advantages of Nortel’s products compared to their competitors.

    marketing made simple= simple for the mind’s eye to discern=Business made simple!

  17. Link to quote in post #16:

    http://www2.nortel.com/go/news_detail.jsp?cat_id=-8055&oid=100237981&locale=en-US

  18. My initial thoughts where very close to #12. My first impression was hope this is a beta. Poor graphics, floating people (not very realistic), can’t see presenter, charts hard to read, virtual people trying to jump on stage like a rock concert. What company would pay for this? Given that most global/remote companies are more concerned with the content and presenter then what Jonny or Susie is wearing or doing in the crowd.

    Now consider what the technology already available in the video game industry. High Definition, Multi Player, Internet based and the network is already there to support it (think mutliplayer, high definition video and digital surround sound video)

    With all the new Unified Communications applications offering, how many is Nortel using witin Nortel? I mean
    all across Nortel. We need to lead by example.
    Just hope we get a better (closer to existing technology) product offering sooner than later.

    Overall, was not impressed with the Virtual GIS concept.
    Seemed more like a video game developer tool kit creation, and not a very good one.

  19. John,

    Just read that Mike Z and Mr.Pearce are buying NT shares — Way to go!! I am now thinking of buying another 10,000 shares. I would do this in a heartbeat if I read that the senior leadership of Nortel are also buying.

  20. Looks like the Z man and the COB have been buying. So stop ranting about no insider stock purchases.

    http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/72911/000090342308000262/xslF345X02/zafirovski-f4_0325ex.xml

    http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/72911/000090342308000261/xslF345X02/pearce-f4_0325ex.xml

  21. Don’t get to excited about insider buying. The CEO couldn’t take the heat and angry outbursts from the shareholders anymore. This way he feels he can get a seat at the table at the shareholders meeting in April. If the company were stable and had a strong balance sheet the Board of Directors would approve a BUY BACK that would have more effect on the share price than insiders buying a small number of shares. It’s window dressing. Look at the senior convertible notes at the SEC that were recently executed. Nortel will have to explain to shareholders at the annual meeting how they intend to pay the debt $698 million due Sept.2008. That is what you need to worry about. Nortel isn’t buying back shares because they need the cash and a whole lot of financing to pay the debt in Sept. 2008. The senior convertible notes a rated below investment grade by Moody’s and S&P. To top it off what do you will happen when Nortel issues the aditional 62 million shares as a result of the class action lawsuit. The shares are diluted even more and of cousre that affects earnings per share. Do you think they might consider another reverse stock spit. What a bummer that would be.

  22. WRT #19 - I would buy a lot of shares if I heard that the senior leadership of Nortel was leaving.

  23. You really need to get a handle on the problems that confront Nortel in 2008. Forget the rise in recent share price which in my view is do probably to insider buying.

    Look at this and ask some questions about the current stability of Nortel. Maybe someone can find an expect to interpret this and how this has affected the cash balance this month.

    The 2012 Notes and 2014 Notes are each convertible into common shares of the Company at any time based on an initial conversion rate of 31.25 common shares per $1,000 principal amount of Notes (which is equal to an initial conversion price of $32.00 per common share), in each case subject to adjustment in certain events.

    The Company expects that the net proceeds from the sale of the Notes will be approximately US$1.125 billion and plans to use these net proceeds to redeem on or about September 1, 2007 at par a corresponding amount of its US$1.8 billion outstanding principal amount of 4.25% Convertible Notes due 2008. Pending this redemption, the Company plans to invest the net proceeds in money market instruments.

    Check the SEC filings by Nortel and you can see for yourself.

    I know this sounds alarming. I’m sorry for that.

    How on earth can Nortel expect to pay off or refinace this debt in view of the current commercial loan and credit problems not to mention the revised stringent rules for creit rating by Moody’s and S&P.

  24. I think there was a good discussion about multimedia presentations recently with the Virtual GIS being hosting.

    Google and Apple have some demos of ways to go further with some really exciting technologies. There is even a demonstration from Cisco.

    It is an off site link, but well worth it. Trust me.

  25. Has this ( “coherent technology” ) been discussed? I couldn’t find it in this blog.

    http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=63d99bf8-b127-4d10-aec7-57c498bb7f09&p=2

  26. What is the deal with the change in R&D? Is this going to kill the stock price, Again?

  27. This isn’t a response to the blog per se, but a (positive) reaction to this mornings Technology Executive Breakfast talk run by OCRI. And this from a rather disgruntled shareholder who has been put through the mill.

    It seems Nortel may finally be acquiring a vision of where they want to go, with enough humility to realize they cannot be everything to everyone.

    In the talk it was mentioned that there is a need to partner with both government and academic sectors, as well as other businesses. One modest collaboration is already going on, and it started but is not limited to Ottawa. This is the Foresight Synergy Network, started by mid-level public servants to try to outline the issues that will hit government — and the rest of us of course — in about 15 years. There are a few academics and consulting types too, but so far business, and especially the ICT sector are sorely noticeable by their absence. I run the wiki at the website nash.management.uottawa.ca/fsn. You need a login to contribute — just ask. And we meet on average of every 6-8 weeks to hear ideas from a wide perspective. We’ve had an architect talk about ways to get groups to react to ideas and find consensus and the chaplain of Lindisfarn to describe his experiences and understanding of the surge in interest in spirituality. But we also need some tech. material too.

    Ladies and gentlemen?

    John C Nash
    Professor of Management
    Telfer School, U of Ottawa.

  28. Re #27 above. Here’s a link to the session: http://www.ocri.ca/events/teb_upcoming.asp. John Roese was very impressive and truly seems to be making some fundamental changes to R&D at Nortel. As a shareholder, I certainly hope he’s successful, and as an Ottawa resident I hope some of the key players in the region take note of his call to action - the time is now to get serious about developing a coordinated regional plan for economic development. Other regions and other countries are moving ahead in the area of ICT and if we don’t act soon we are going to get left behind. This is a great place to live but John’s right - we need to make it a great place to do business in and a great place to invest in.

  29. WRT#27 and #28 SPAM?
    ————————————
    On a different subject: “Nortel to rethink R&D work plans, executive says”

    http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/080327/nortel.html?.v=1

    So now we’re going to outsource some more? Time for another company name change, methinks.

  30. Forgive me for this diversion. Now Nortel’s biggest threat is lack of scale and footprint. But you can turn your weakness in streanght. Korea is the example: the right JV makes you gain market share by leveraging your technology streanght. Would be great to imitate your Korean experience in: Russia, Egypt, India, Brazil and South Africa. Local strong partners with your global streanght. Through your partners, you will get the right access to the next emerging country economic boom. Finally you will be focused at shaping the 5-10 choices on the right telco infrastructure at the right cost. Revenues growth and profitability will stream in. In Europe Telefonica-Telecom Italia Group and Telenor will be your target-customers. Good luck from a suffering shareholder.

  31. John

    When the entire market has lost faith in you and the BOD….how the hell can customers take you seriously. You guys have left a legacy that will haunt you throughout the rest of your business careers….

    “No one listens to them,” said analyst Brian Modoff at Deutsche Bank in San Francisco. “When you lack credibility, there’s a significant discount that’s applied to everything you say and do.”

  32. Aren’t we about due for a new post?

  33. This should explain the real problem and smoke screen with the recent stock purchase by the CEO Mike Z and his purchase of 83,000 shares. What he should have done is quite evident to bolster the share price of the stock and reassure shareholders. It is great reading. It looks like the initial surge after he bought his shares is on the decline again.

    http://biz.yahoo.com/indie/080328/1152_id.html?.v=1

  34. Just for good measure:

    QUOTE: Worth Noting: Nortel executed a 1-for-10 reverse stock split in December 2006. Adjusting for dividends and splits, Nortel’s historic range is $0.43 (October 2002) to $890.00 (August 2000). The company has not paid a dividend since June 2001. ENDQUOTE.

    http://biz.yahoo.com/indie/080328/1152_i…

    ’nuff said (and I’m a long-term long) (technically speaking, of course ;>)

  35. This tells the whole story about the unwillingness of Nortel to to truthful with the shareholders. If anyone should have the answer they should have it and they should not be subjective. It is appearant that they refuse to give truthful information about the financial condition ofthe comapny.

    The below post is my email and their answer to me with regard to a very important question. I omitted my full name and email address to obvious reasons. You should discuss thie Nortel response with others in financial circles to get thier opionion on this important question. I would like to see a new post if someone can that.

  36. Please disregard # 35 above. This is the corrected post.

    I hope a shareholder that attends the May 7th annual meeting will ask this question. By the way the meeting will be web cast.

    This is very alarming. Nortel is demonstrating their unwillingness to be honest with shareholders with respect to their present financial condition. They are admitting that their answer would be subjective.

    Everyone should expect it to be truthful. Why would a shareholder have to rely on another analyst that has no access to the financial condition on Nortel to offer an opinion.

    I hope someone that reads this takes the time to refer this issue to someone who may inquire of the company.

    I would like to see a new post here to help shareholders understand the future risk on this issue.

    The below is the Nortel answer. Read to the bottom to see the original question. There is an example so they don’t misunderstand the question.

    THE BELOW IS THE REPLY EMAIL FROM NORTEL.

    Thank your for your interest in Nortel and your query. Nortel does not provide non-GAAP results such as the financial metric you have noted since the decision as to what reported accounts to include in the measure can be subjective.

    There are a number of financial websites that do perform these types of financial analysis which you may find to offer more objective and therefore, comparable results to other companies.

    Investor Relations
    Nortel
    195 The West Mall
    Toronto, Ontario M9C 5K1

    Tel: 905-863-6049 (North America)
    Tel: 888-901-7286 (International)
    Email: investor@nortel.com
    Website: www.nortel.com

    The information contained in this e-mail message is of a general nature only and may not reflect all of the relevant facts or circumstances for the recipients. This information is being furnished to the recipient for information purposes only, and is not intended to be relied upon for trading or any other purposes. The information contained in this e-mail message is not to be used, circulated, quoted or otherwise referred to without Nortel’ express written consent.

    This e-mail message may contain information that is forward-looking and subject to important risks and uncertainties (see the reports filed by Nortel with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission). Nortel disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise

    THE BELOW IS AN EMAIL TO NORTEL INVESTOR RELATIONS.

    Sent: Wednesday, March 11,2008
    Subject: Question on Capitalization ratio

    What is Nortel’s capitalization ratio? The article below should help you understand the question. Thanks, a shareholder.

    An Example:
    Assume that TEST COMPANY (a pretend company) has equity of $3.45 billion, intangibles of $3.17 billion and total debt of $3.96 billion. This means that TEST COMPANY’s tangible net worth is $28 million ($3.45 billion of equity less debt of $3.17 billion).

    Let’s also assume that TEST COMPANY took out a bank loan in late 2000 that will mature in 2005. The loan requires that TEST COMPANY maintain a capitalization ratio no greater than 70%. A typical capitalization ratio is defined as debt represented as a percent of capital (debt plus equity). This means that TEST COMPANY’s capitalization ratio is 53.4%: debt of $3.96 billion divided by capital of $7.41 billion (equity of $3.45 billion plus debt of $3.96 billion).

    Now assume that TEST COMPANY is faced with an impairment charge that will wipe out half of its goodwill ($1.725 billion), which will also reduce equity by the same amount. This will cause the capitalization ratio to rise to 70%, which is the limit established by the bank. Also assume that, in the most recent quarter, the company posted an operating loss that further reduced equity and caused the capitalization ratio to exceed the maximum 70%.

    In this situation, TEST COMPANY is in technical default of its loan. The bank has the right to either demand it be repaid immediately (by declaring that TEST COMPANY is in default) or, more likely, require TEST COMPANY to renegotiate the loan. The bank holds all the cards and can require a higher interest rate or ask TEST COMPANY to find another lender. In the current economic climate, this is not an easy thing to do

  37. John,

    We’re hosting Virtual Worlds London on 20-21 October 2008 and would be delighted if you would consider speaking. Virtual Worlds London is the leading event for businesses seeking to understand and maximize business strategies within virtual worlds.

    Virtual Worlds London is produced by Virtual Worlds Management (VWM), the leading virtual worlds trade media company (we have produced 3 large scale real world events focused on Virtual Worlds here in the US over the past 18 months). My contact details are on the web site and I hope to have one of my colleagues reach out to you directly in short order. More details on Virtual Worlds London can be found at http://www.virtualworldslondon.com/

    I look forward to speaking soon.

    chris

  38. Your website software sucks. After entering a well considered and insightful comment, my browser replied that there was a DNS failure. The bug is your software cleared my POST data, clearing the form when I navigated back, thank you very much. Perhaps this is just an example of how underlying bugs go unfixed as long as superficial glitz works?

    Briefly, better than reality commucation is about taking an average speaker and translating what they say into the native language of the listener while also adjusting the message so the words and concepts are more quickly grasped. Audio and video enhancement is minor compared to what better speaking skills can do in getting a message accross.

    I had an example conference call with a NYC CIO customer, support engineer in Turkey, developer in India, QA manager in China, and product manager in the US, and VP in Canada; technical to non-technical translation, problem to career impact translation etc.

    Non-communication is also important. One might say: “we hired (and trained) over 1,000 new college grads…” and let people think they are close to exciting things going on, but not saying “…mostly in India, China, Turkey, and Mexico where inexperienced engineers cost us even less than in North America!”

    The perception of cost saving is wrong here, as in many Lean Six Sigma initiativs. Quality, customer satisfaction, and reputation are harder to quantify and weigh against percieved cost savings, so they lose out. Lack of quality is why sustaining engineering and support ate up half your budget. If you just retire old, buggy products, and replace them with fancy, new, buggy ones, your costs may go down. Revenues too as reputation falls.

Leave a Reply