Technology and risk

Twenty years ago, in 2003, I remember learning about ‘Project Oxygen’ - an initiative of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Laboratory for Computer Science (LCS) whose mission was to "Bring abundant computation and communication, as pervasive and free as air, naturally into people's lives." For all the wonders that the fledgling Internet promised to realise for individuals, desktop computers still reigned at the time. Networking lagged way behind computation both in terms of power and priorities. One could still notice by the look and feel of their website that perhaps hasn’t had a major upgrade in all that time.

The world those researchers envisioned then was esoteric and fanciful even for me - as someone who was genuinely inspired by the idea. I dedicated one of my weekly columns in the newspaper to explore it, without being able to fully appreciate how far reaching those ideas were or how soon - if ever - they would be realised. I was clearly naive to only imagine its potential benefits and be completely blind to the risks such a network would pose.

What I saw in their depiction of what ‘Oxygen’ was about (below) seemed a lot more innocuous to me then, than it does now.

Over the last twenty years, perhaps I have grown to recognise that computers, sensors and networks are neither good nor evil. They are merely computers, sensors and networks. It is true for large corporations and therefore, naturally, also for individuals. Indeed, the whole world is digitally transforming and not keeping pace with that can seem like too great a risk. Indeed it is. But there is more to it than that.

First, adopting new technology and adapting to new technologies are very different things. New technologies and advancements in existing technology can often seem like one of the primary drivers of change in our lives and societies. And change is never easy to manage - especially when it is imposed, forced, mandated, and made necessary as a result of a failure to anticipate the contours of perpetual transformation in the environment. This is true for both organisations and individuals. Successful change is inspired; and implemented with clarity of vision and purpose. It appeals to our desire for creative expression rather than to our fear of failure or loss.

Therefore, it is easy to argue that we should adopt technology as part of a strategy aimed at wresting the initiative, rather than reactionary. If our objective is to adapt to an environment that has already changed without us being able to anticipate or notice, given the pace at which they change, we may already be too late. But our digital transformation should be proactive; aimed at shaping the environment and improving it. Not only does that kind of strategy have greater potential for success, but it is also less costly even when it ‘fails’. That kind of change is a source of growth - regardless of the outcome. We even have a special word to describe it: 'innovation'.

But as with everything in our lives, what matters is good judgement. Adopting new technology and changing for the sake of it is as dangerous as rejecting change altogether. The basis of a decision to adopt a new technology can be either a visionary strategy as much as desperation or vanity. Why does your department need new software? Why do I feel like I need to upgrade to the latest smartphone, or join a new social network?

‘Where does good judgement come from’ you ask? Of-course it is a skill honed over years of observation and experience. Of-course there is no magic formula or iron-clad laws. But when it comes to adopting new technology - in our businesses as well as in our lives - there is a simple piece of advice that I have found more helpful than others. That is: before you try to understand the technology and its benefits, make sure you understand their business model!