NCES.
NCES will provide Department of Defense (DoD) organizations ubiquitous access to reliable, decision-quality information through a net-based services infrastructure and applications to bridge real-time and near-real-time communities of interest (COI). NCES will empower the edge user to pull information from any available source, with minimal latency, to support the mission. Its capabilities will allow GIG users to task, post, process, use, store, manage and protect information resources on demand for warriors, policy makers and support personnel.
It really is quite interesting to see the parallels between what some big industry players are doing with their service infrastructure capabilities and the objectives of the DoD's Core Service Portfolio. While these are all some cool technology capabilities; the key is how they provide a flexible and adaptive base for some truly unique business offerings - which is why Amazon and Yahoo are putting them together and offering them. Now that we are beginning to see the tools to execute on the "Web 2.0" vision, I think its time to really go outside the traditional comfort zone of technology for simply obvious coolness factor and really try to understand how it apply to the value space. I'd ask how to articulate the business value proposition is for these capabilities - and what short-term or long-term ROI are the companies looking to reap? I started to look a little bit at the current business models of Amazon and Yahoo to pinpoint the role of rolling out these services to the general public. I came across the following article in business week that is quite related:
"Wow, the news is all about shifting paradigms and changing models, with Apple and Amazon seriously beginning to sell movie downloading services and Ford seriously beginning to get serious about remaking itself into a 21st century auto company."A bit further down in the article is a link to another business week article (thank goodness for blogging, track-backs and other cool technologies that allow us to navigate and build upon the connections in information across the web that others have made for us.) I saw the following:
"It is increasingly important for managers and designers to go outside their traditional paradigms and structures to learn about innovation and poker--yes poker-- may provide useful insight. Thanks to a four part series called "Upping the Ante: Understanding business & design through casino poker" by Dirk Knemeyer, founding principal of Involution Studios, the tactics and strategies of this booming game are now revealed.
The first part of the series is about knowing who is playing in your competitive space. Knowing your poker opponent, really knowing the person, means winning or losing. Superficial understanding won't do. In like fashion, knowing your consumer, deeply knowing your consumer in an intimate manner, also means winning or losing. Accepting superficial, market research-generated generalities about their personas, could lead companies to lose their game."
What I take from this is the following:
- To achieve the objectives of a shifting paradigm and changing model - including the technology innovation to support - it has to be taken seriously. Not only within individual programs, but across the DoD. This means business as usual will NOT be acceptable. Despite the creation of several transformational programs, the way that the DoD does business and acquires capabilities must also be taken into consideration.
- Understand the players - deeply and intimately. Do we understand who would want to weave business capabilities together in the DoD? What are their needs that aren't being met - that can be achieved through this type of model? How does this model change the incentives (and power structure) through which things get done across the DoD? What message are they looking to hear apart from a technology perspective? How does this message translate into technology?
- How can/should we accommodate the differences between Amazon & Yahoo and the DoD - both from a mindset, from an operating model, from a financial model, from a market offering and the value proposition to its customers? Who do we consider the customers of the DoD - and what are we offering them? Can the transformation that we're looking to execute through technology really occur without the DoD 'getting serious' about the operating model? Finally, what 'bets are off in the DoD' that are perfectly valid and appropriate assumptions in the commercial world?
I think this technology is fantastic - and it represents incredible strides in the bottoms-up capabilities that are helping to drive evolution toward a service oriented enterprise. Of course, Amazon and Yahoo see a business value in offering these services - and aren't just offering them (I don't believe) for the good of developer/customer-kind. They do or will drive revenue and profit, which is how shareholder value is created - and the measuring stick by which the success will be measured. If it truly is a coolness factor, we need to remember that Amazon and Yahoo most likely have that factored into their strategy as a component or driver, but not the end result.
We also should remember that transformation is also about top-down understanding. The top-down between commercial and govt (esp. military) entities is significant - and we are uniquely positioned to identify and address these differences. So my challenge to all of us would be to identify really what is the applicability of this type of technology to the business model of the government. In particular, what is the actual market offering - and why will the targeted customers bite? AND, how does the financial model support it? Traditional tools and metrics that can be used for Amazon & Yahoo just don't apply as nicely in the public sector, but that doesn't mean that a value proposition isn't there. It just has to be expressed differently.
