13 Mar 2012
After seeing the recent iPad announcement, I had a thought: What if our
understanding of what Steve Jobs said in Walter Isaacson’s Biography is
a little skewed in regards to “an integrated television set that is
completely easy to use.” I believe it is bigger than just a
hardware/software based solution, I believe we are on the verge of a
bigger shift.
In the nineteen-seventies, a handful of people were crazy enough to
believe that computers would be personal and that we would have them in
our homes. Prior to that in the age of radio, only a few thought that
Television would succeed and dreamt that families would have multiple
Color Television sets in their homes. A few years ago, after many failed
attempts, only a few were able to shift personal computing to a Tablet
device - the iPad. It has changed the way we consume and produce.
I grew up in a time when houses had a landline phone and television
set(s). My televisions first had antennas and then cable service to
provide channels for my consumption. At present many homes don’t have
landline phones anymore (even VoIP phones from cable companies).
Homeowners opt to just use cell phones since coverage is generally good
and long distance is a moot point. However, most homes still have
television sets and content providers cable or satellite, but I predict
as tablets and other personal computing devices become more user
friendly in comparison with the traditional computer at a desk model,
the market’s use of television is shifting.
What if that integrated television set that Steve Jobs mentioned is the
iPad (with an Apple TV box for traditionalists)? I watch more video on
my iPad than I do my Television or my Computer combined. I can access
content from numerous sources - YouTube, Vimeo, Netflix and others. The
device has changed the way I consume media, and if I am at home I can
easily play content out via AirPlay to my AppleTV and broadcast on my
TV. It already is completely easy to use, however, I believe the
integrated shift is bigger than just the hardware/software layer. I
believe the integrated television set that was mentioned is a shift in
the way that we use television. It is similar to the shift that took
computers from mainframes to personal, from cellphones to smartphones*.
Apps are content channels. Netflix, YouTube and other similar Appss have
shifted the model of consumption from the surfing to
interactive.MLB.com at
Bat has
proven that direct distribution can work for original content creators.
It also bypasses the annoying regional filters that broadcast sports on
television face. This is the type of shift that Apple has long awaited,
it signals the end of digital empires that control what content is
broadcast to what screen. It is a similar shift to what iTunes has
pioneered with the Music Industry. I think this is the beginning of what
Steve meant. The sheer volume of 25 billion app downloads shows that the
platform is completely easy to use. I think that when he said “I
finally cracked it” he saw something similar to what he saw when he
first started Apple: a major shift in consumer behavior and an
opportunity to build a platform. We are at an intersection in terms of
television consumption and personal computing and I think what Apple has
in store is more than just a hardware/software layer change. I think
they have something much bigger in store, and I don’t mean in terms of
Television screen real estate.
*simply used for brevity’s sake.
13 Mar 2012
I didn’t see this one coming.
Posterous, once a blogging service competitive with Tumblr and now a
group conversation tool, has been bought by Twitter.
Interesting. Full Story via
AllThingsD.
02 Mar 2012
Dismissing an idea is so easy because it doesnt involve any work. You
can scoff at it. You can ignore it. You can puff some smoke at it.
Thats easy. The hard thing to do is protect it, think about it, let it
marinate, explore it, riff on it, and try it. The right idea could
start out life as the wrong idea.
So next time you hear something, or someone, talk about an idea, pitch
an idea, or suggest an idea, give it five minutes. Think about it a
little bit before pushing back, before saying its too hard or its too
much work. Those things may be true, but there may be another truth in
there too: It may be worth it.
25 Feb 2012
A very interesting Bill was recently introduced to the US House of
Representatives: the US Call Center Worker & Consumer Protection Act.
The Bill states:
To require a publicly available a list of all employers that relocate
a call center overseas and to make such companies ineligible for
Federal grants or guaranteed loans and to require disclosure of the
physical location of business agents engaging in customer service
communications.
Thanks to my English teacher I didn’t make it past the first line, take
a look again:
To require a publicly available a list of all employers
One should not expect that Bills introduced to the House of
Representatives might have been proofread.
The Bill seems aimed to target outsourcing call center operations and
penalize businesses that would move call centers outside of the United
States by listing them and making them ineligible for Federal grants or
guaranteed loans.
I am not familiar with Federal grants or guaranteed loans that
businesses could be granted, however I agree with the premise that
Federal funding does not seem best suited to build offshore call
centers.
In principle I am not opposed to outsourcing call centers, in fact I see
call center employees daily here in Cebu City. I have witnessed the
developmental effect that they have had on cities in the developing
world. They have provided thousands of jobs within Cebu City, which
allowed American (and other international) businesses to save thousands
(millions) of dollars on operational expenses which may or may not have
been appropriated properly from a shareholder’s standpoint. In addition,
I know that outsourced call centers have also had an effect on small to
medium sized enterprises (SMEs) by allowing them to expand or create
customer service operations in a cost effective manner.
In addition to the ineligibility of Federal funding, this Bill could be
interesting for a few business types.
SMEs
- NOTICE REQUIREMENT:
- (A) IN GENERAL.Not fewer than 120 days before relocating a call
center to a location outside of the United States, an employer
shall notify the Secretary of such relocation.
- (B) PENALTY.A person who violates sub-paragraph (A) shall be
subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each day
of violation.
One should certainly be on top of Notifying the FTC prior to relocating,
a $10,000 per day maximum penalty is intimidating.
- TRANSFER TO U.S.-BASED CUSTOMER SERVICECENTER.A business entity that
is subject to the requirements of subsection (a) shall, at the
request of a customer,transfer the customer to a customer service
agent who isphysically located in the United States.
This requirement could be complicated as it in essence stipulates that
you have a customer service agent physically located in the US. If you
have outsourced your entire customer support, you may need to
reconsider.
Generally, the Bill would make outsourcing call centers more complicated
for SMEs.
JPMorgan Chase
I know that they have currently outsourced at least part of their call
center operations to Cebu City & that they at one time received Federal
funding during the financial crisis of 2008. They were also one of the
first to repay the
bailout.If
we presume that JPMorgan was in part, able to pay the bailout money
thanks to outsourcing we might need to reconsider if this Bill is in
fact worthwhile.
Outsourcing can be a good solution for businesses, I personally feel
that maintaining a strong and direct connection between your business
and your customer is one of the smartest things you can do. I therefore
think that even if you outsource your customer service, it should be
outsourced as part of your business entity and not to a third-party.
Outsourcing also has risks and drawbacks, remember that just because
something is cost effective, does not always mean it works better in the
long run.
To the Representatives who have authored the Bill - I hope you realize
that it is not just call centers that are being outsourced, in fact many
business processes have already been outsourced (hint: Google “BPO”). I
suggest you contact these BPOs next time you have a Bill for submission,
at least then someone will proofread your work.
In the local market, I have seen an incredible competition arise for
qualified agents in which call centers are competing with each other to
recruit talent. This has driven the call center agent’s salaries up and
in the mid to long term will have a considerable negative impact on the
overall cost effectiveness of outsourcing. Outsourcing has certainly
lifted the experience, expertise and exposure within the local market. I
personally hope that this Bill will serve as a wake up call for the
Philippines. We cannot simply rely on outsourcing alone (or for that
matter any single economic driver: OFWs) as the sole development agent
of the country. Outsourcing has laid an incredible foundation to build
upon and I am optimistic that new businesses are going to spring up. The
government should invest in infrastructure and an environment that will
allow these new startups to succeed.
I am currently working on convincing call center agents with great ideas
to stop working for the Man and to startup their own companies. If you
have a great idea or want to help this next step of development I’d love
to hear from you - email me.
Full House Bill:
https://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/365010