Future Camp как часть глобальной Accenture Innovation Architecture призван помочь клиентам Accenture улучшить результаты внедрения инноваций за счет специально разработанной методологии и передовых инструментов креативной работы: Design Thinking, Liquid Studio и Open Innovation.Компания Accenture, один из лидеров мировых рынков ИТ, digital, консалтинга и аутсорсинга, открыла в Москве Future Camp - свой первый в России центр по работе с инновациями. Цель работы Future Camp - принести клиентам Accenture ощутимые результаты в работе с инновациями за счет применения специальной методологии и инструментов - в частности, быстрого создания прототипов и "гибкой" разработки программных решений.Здесь эксперты, стартапы, компании совместно с поставщиками технологий смогут создавать идеи для инновационного развития бизнеса, разрабатывать прототипы решений, тестировать их и масштабировать. Мощная методология для поиска и внедрения инновационных идей реализуется с помощью Design Thinking (для поиска инсайтов клиентов), Liquid Studio (для создания и тестирования прототипов и "гибких приложений") и Open Innovations (для исследования рынка и поиска инновационных партнеров).Вартан Диланян, генеральный директор Accenture Russia: "Accenture обладает мощной глобальной экспертизой, способной помочь нашим клиентам правильно выбирать и внедрять цифровые инновации. Future Camp как часть глобальной экосистемы компании предоставит российским клиентам эффективную методологию и уникальную творческую площадку, где клиенты совместно с нашими экспертами смогут разработать инновационные идеи для получения измеримых результатов. Это наш способ работать с инновациями".Design ThinkingОдна из ключевых методик Future Camp - это дизайн-мышление, позволяющее бизнесу посмотреть на свои внутренние проблемы глазами пользователей. Благодаря технологиям дизайн-мышления компании могут получить часто уникальные инсайты и затем трансформировать их в реально работающие бизнес-идеи. Future Camp позволяет не только находить новаторские решения и использовать более творческий и инновационный подход, но и разрабатывать модели и продукты, ориентированные на клиента, с использованием современных цифровых технологий.Liquid Studio - от идеи к реальному прототипу Future Camp специализируется на быстром создании прототипов цифровых сервисов и приложений. В течение нескольких недель или даже дней эксперты и разработчики программного обеспечения превращают идеи, разработанные с помощью Design Thinking, в реальные прототипы. Это происходит в Liquid Studio, части Future Camp, где клиенты работают вместе с разработчиками Accenture для создания пользовательских приложений с использованием облачной инфраструктуры, гибкой методологии разработки (Agile и DevOps), интеллектуальной автоматизации, технологии plug-and-play и микросервисов.Команда прикладной аналитики (Applied Intelligence) Accenture применяет технологии искусственного интеллекта и глубинной аналитики для поддержки поиска новых инсайтов и идей, а также быстрого создания прототипов решений. Это позволяет усовершенствовать процесс принятия решений и повысить эффективность командной работы во Future Camp.Дополнительную информацию об AccentureFuture Camp в Москве вы можете найти здесь: www.accenture.com/ru-ru/futurecamp-en-mainО компании AccentureAccenture - ведущая международная компания в сфере профессиональных услуг, предоставляющая широкий спектр решений и услуг в области стратегии, консалтинга, цифровизации бизнеса, технологий и операций. Более 435,000 сотрудников Accenture работают в 120 странах мира. В работе с клиентами компания сочетает свою уникальную экспертизу в 40 индустриях и всех ключевых бизнес-функциях, специальные навыки в реализации проектов, а также крупнейшую в мире сеть центров разработки и внедрения. Accenture объединяет лучшее из мира бизнеса и технологий, помогая своим клиентам повысить эффективность бизнеса и создать новую ценность для акционеров, привнося инновации, улучшая бизнес и жизнь людей во всем мире. Наш сайт: www.accenture.ru(https://www.accenture.com...)
V.F. Corp (VFC) inked a deal with Authentic Brands Group, LLC, to divest its iconic Nautica brand. The move is in sync with its five-year strategic growth plan.
ScrumTrek представит на конференции AgileDays 2018 рекомендации по применению agile-методов в государственном секторе
На крупнейшей agile-конференции AgileDays 2018 22—23 марта будет представлен проект рекомендаций по применению гибких подходов к реализации государственными структурами проектов как на федеральном, так и на региональном уровне.
Рабочая группа при Федеральном проектном офисе подготовила рекомендации по применению agile-методов в управлении проектами и для региональных государственных структур
Fast, loud and agile unions working at the frontiers of precarious employment are setting the pace for the futureThere is a group of organisations in this country whose most senior roles are almost exclusively the preserve of middle-aged white men. These people do not seem terribly interested in the future, even though it poses grave threats to them and what remains of their power. Indeed, as the economy is endlessly disrupted and transformed, it appears their instinctive response is to bury their heads in the sand.Though it does not bring me any great joy to say so, these are among the basic facts of 21st-century British trade unionism. Serially weakened by deindustrialisation and kicked around for the best part of 40 years, it is perhaps a miracle that the unions still have 6.2 million members. The work of representation, education and occasional mobilisation that their members continue to do is vital. For all that even leftwing people now seem to be questioning unions’ role within the Labour party, it is entirely right that some of the biggest unions have an organised means of political representation as a counterbalance to the infinite clout of capital. But that is not the whole story, and it is time some glaring failures were talked about in the open. Continue reading...
Как стиль работы IT-специалистов изменил нашу корпоративную жизнь
Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog, The Guardian ran an article yesterday by one of its editors, David Shariatmadari, that both proves and disproves its own theme at the same time: “An Information Apocalypse Is Coming”. Now, I don’t fancy the term apocalypse in a setting like this, it feels too much like going for a cheap thrill, but since he used it, why not. My first reaction to the headline, and the article, is: what do you mean it’s ‘coming’? Don’t you think we have such an apocalypse already, that we’re living it, we’re smack in the middle of such a thing? If you don’t think so, would that have anything to do with you working at a major newspaper? Or with your views of the world, political and other, that shape how you experience ‘information’? Shariatmadari starts out convincingly and honestly enough with a description of a speech that JFK was supposed to give in Dallas right after he was murdered, a speech that has been ‘resurrected’ using technology that enables one to make it seem like he did deliver it. An Information Apocalypse Is Coming. How Can We Protect Ourselves? “In a world of complex and continuing problems, in a world full of frustrations and irritations, America’s leadership must be guided by the lights of learning and reason, or else those who confuse rhetoric with reality, and the plausible with the possible will gain the popular ascendancy with their seemingly swift and simple solutions to every world problem.” John F Kennedy’s last speech reads like a warning from history, as relevant today as it was when it was delivered in 1963 at the Dallas Trade Mart. His rich, Boston Brahmin accent reassures us even as he delivers the uncomfortable message. The contrast between his eloquence and the swagger of Donald Trump is almost painful to hear. Yes, Kennedy’s words are lofty ones, and they do possess at least some predictive qualities. But history does play a part too. Would we have read the same in them that we do now, had Kennedy not been shot right before he could deliver them? Hard to tell. What’s more, not long before JFK was elected president America had been in the tight and severe grip of J. Edgar Hoover and Joseph McCarthy’s anti-communist campaign, in which lots of reality was replaced with rhetoric, something Kennedy undoubtedly had in mind while writing the speech. JFK was not just addressing future threats, he was talking about the past as well. But the writer slips into a much bigger faux pas right after: injecting Trump into the picture. It’s fine if someone doesn’t like Trump, but naming him there and then, in an article about ‘information apocalypse’, also means confusing objectivity with regards to your topic with subjectivity concerning your political ideas. While the Kennedy speech item relates to -advancing(?)- technology, a valid part of the apocalypse, mentioning Trump has nothing to do with that apocalypse, at least not objectively. Back to David Shariatmadari: The problem is, Kennedy never spoke these words. He was killed before he made it to the Trade Mart. You can only hear them now thanks to audio technology developed by a British company, CereProc. Fragments of his voice have been taken from other speeches and public appearances, spliced and put back together, with neural networks employed to mimic his natural intonation. The result is pretty convincing, although there’s a machine-like ring to some of the syllables, a synthetic stutter. Enough to recognise, if you already know, that this is a feat of technology, not oratory. We like to think of innovation as morally neutral. We empower scientists and engineers to range freely in the hope they might discover things that save labour and lives. The ends to which these are put aren’t the responsibility of the researchers. The agile robots produced by Boston Dynamics might look like they could cheerfully pin you up against a wall and snap your neck, but do we really want to close off this avenue of research? After all, they might equally be capable of performing life-saving surgery. The methods used to resurrect JFK can also help people with illnesses such as motor neurone disease – like the late Stephen Hawking – that affect their ability to speak. It’s certainly true that we are so ‘geared’ towards progress, we ‘conveniently’ forget and ignore that every next step carries its own shadow side, every yin comes with its yang. ‘Progress’ and ‘innovation’ – and related terms- ring so positive in our eyes and ears it borders on -wilful- blindness. That blindness is set to play a major role in our future, and in our acceptance as gospel of a lot of ‘information’. “Dual use” of technology is not a new problem. Nuclear physics gave us both energy and bombs. What is new is the democratisation of advanced IT, the fact that anyone with a computer can now engage in the weaponisation of information; 2016 was the year we woke up to the power of fake news, with internet conspiracy theories and lies used to bolster the case for both Brexit and Donald Trump. Ouch! See, he does it again. This is not an objective discourse on ‘information disinformation’, but a way to make people think -through a method he’s supposed to be exposing- that ‘fake news’ led to Brexit and Trump. That’s a political view, not a neutral one. Yes, there are many voices out there who connect ‘fake news’ directly to things they don’t like, but that’s just a trap. And as I said, it may have to do with the fact that the writer works for a major newspaper, which of course he wants to, and wishes to, see as some kind of beacon against fake news, but if he lets his own personal views slip into an objective treatment of a topic this easily, it automatically becomes self-defeating. There is no proof that Trump and Brexit’s success are down to fake news more than their opposite sides, ‘fake news’ is everywhere, and that very much includes the Guardian. The coverage of the UK government accusations against Russia in the poisoning case proves that more than ever. You can be anti-Trump, anti-Brexit and anti-Putin all you want, but they don’t define fake news or an information apocalypse, any more than ‘commies’ did in the days of Hoover and McCarthy. We may, however, look back on it as a kind of phoney war, when photoshopping and video manipulation were still easily detectable. That window is closing fast. A program developed at Stanford University allows users to convincingly put words into politicians’ mouths. Celebrities can be inserted into porn videos. Quite soon it will be all but impossible for ordinary people to tell what’s real and what’s not. That is am almost bewildering line. Does the writer really think ‘ordinary people’ can today tell apart what’s real and what’s not? If his paper had honestly covered his country’s, and his government’s, involvement in the wars all over the Middle East and North Africa over the past decades, would his readers still be supportive of the politicians that today inhabit Westminster? Or does the paper prefer supporting the incumbents over Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, because it owes its reputation and position and revenues to supporting the likes of Theresa May and Tony Blair? Yeah, I know, with a critical view, yada yada, but when has the Guardian labeled any UK politician a war criminal? Much easier to go after Farage, isn’t it? The question is: what part of this is fake, and what is not? What will the effects of this be? When a public figure claims the racist or sexist audio of them is simply fake, will we believe them? How will political campaigns work when millions of voters have the power to engage in dirty tricks? What about health messages on the dangers of diesel or the safety of vaccines? Will vested interests or conspiracy theorists attempt to manipulate them? This appears to make sense, but it does not really. We are way past that. ‘Ordinary people’ have already lost their capacity to tell truth from fiction. Newspapers and TV stations have long disseminated the views of their owners, it’s just that they now have -newfound- competition from a million other sources: the blessings of social media. The core issue here is that 1984 is not some point in the future, as we for some reason prefer to think. We are living 1984. Perhaps the fact that we are now 34 years past it should give us a clue about that? People tend to think that perhaps Orwell was right, but his predictions were way early. Were they, though? Also: Orwell may not have foreseen the blessings and trappings of social media, but he did foresee how governments and their media sympathizers would react to them: with more disinformation. Unable to trust what they see or hear, will people retreat into lives of non-engagement, ceding the public sphere to the already powerful or the unscrupulous? The potential for an “information apocalypse” is beginning to be taken seriously. This is a full-blown time warp. If it is true that people only now take the potential for an “information apocalypse” seriously, they are so far behind the curve ball that one must question the role of the media in that. Why didn’t people know about that potential when it was an actual issue? Why did nobody tell them? The problem is we have no idea what a world in which all words and images are suspect will look like, so it’s hard to come up with solutions. Yes, we do have an idea about that, because we see it around us 24/7. Maybe not with images as fully fabricated as the JFK speech, but the essence is manipulation itself, not the means by which it’s delivered. Perhaps not very much will change – perhaps we will develop a sixth sense for bullshit and propaganda, in the same way that it has become easy to distinguish sales calls from genuine inquiries, and scam emails with fake bank logos from the real thing. David, we ARE all bullshitters, we all lie all the time, for a myriad of reasons, to look better, to feel better, to seem better, to get rich, to get laid. It’s who we are. We lie to ourselves most of all. A sixth sense against bullshit and propaganda is the very last thing we will ever develop, because it would force us to face our own bullshit. But there’s no guarantee we’ll be able to defend ourselves from the onslaught, and society could start to change in unpredictable ways as a result. Like the generation JFK was addressing in his speech, we are on the cusp of a new and scary age. Rhetoric and reality, the plausible and the possible, are becoming difficult to separate. We await a figure of Kennedy’s stature to help us find a way through. Until then, we must at the very least face up to the scale of the coming challenge. We are not 'on the cusp of a new and scary age', we are smack in the middle of it. We haven’t been able to separate rhetoric and reality, the plausible and the possible, for ages. What’s different from 100 years ago, or 50 years ago, is that now we are faced with an information overload so severe that this in itself makes us less capable of separating chaff from wheat. So yes, that perhaps is new. But bullshit and propaganda are not. And labeling Trump and Brexit the main threats misses your own topic by miles. You could make an equally valid point that they are the results of many years of bullshit and propaganda by old-style politics and old-style media. Maybe they’re what happens when ‘ordinary people’ switch off from an overload of bullshit and propaganda forced upon them by people and institutions they grew up to trust. And then feel they were betrayed by. A sixth sense after all.
Семинар «Разработка vs Эксплуатация. Почему ни Agile, ни DevOps – это не волшебная пилюля», 22 марта, Москва
Мы запускаем новое направление Университетов DataLine — семинары по поддержке интернет-проектов и взаимодействию разработки и эксплуатации. Новым будет и формат — теперь мы будем вести онлайн-трансляции со всех наших семинаров! Дата: 22 марта в Москве. Тема: «Разработка vs Эксплуатация. Почему ни Agile, ни DevOps – это не волшебная пилюля, и как с этим жить.» Ведущий курса: Алексей Приставко, директор по веб-проектам DataLine. Осталось всего несколько мест, будем рады видеть ИТ-директоров, руководителей и инженеров команд разработки и эксплуатации, менеджеров и руководителей веб-проектов и всех тех, кто отвечает за производительность и работу крупных сайтов. Читать дальше →
Koninklijke Philips's (PHG) new Digital Radiography-Fluoroscopy system receives approval of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for marketing.
Cisco (CSCO) reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the stock? We take a look at earnings estimates for some clues.
Agilent (A) reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the stock? We take a look at earnings estimates for some clues.
Tim Ellis/Getty Images What does it take to cause something big about a community to change — something that no one individually has much power over, even something as big as a prevailing mindset? We know what it takes: a social movement. And social movements aren’t only the domain of community organizers and college students. Business people can set them in motion, too, as we are seeing right now. Currently gaining force is a movement to focus for-profit enterprises more on the essential work of enriching societies — that is, benefiting not only those humans who are their owners as publicly traded companies but also those who work in them and who stand to benefit from more purpose-driven innovation. Like any social movement, this one has started with many people starting small fires. Look around and you will see them: Individual CEOs and their boards deliberately deciding to take a stand. Note, for example, the spirited defense by Paul Polman of Unilever of his long-term, sustainable business philosophy in the wake of a takeover attempt. Note the far-reaching production changes Jean-Dominique Senard has made at Michelin to empower and engage workers. In China look at the unique organization of entrepreneurial cells Zhang Ruimin has created at Haier, and in France look at Vinci Group’s success, under Xavier Huillard, with a radically decentralized model designed to foster entrepreneurial creativity in its three thousand constituent companies. See also Rick Goings’s commitment at Tupperware Brands to increasing women’s economic empowerment in emerging economies as well as mature ones. Networks and communities spreading new norms and new forms of capitalism. From the Coalition for Inclusive Capitalism to the Conscious Capitalism organization, groups are forming with a mission (in the words of the latter) to “inspire, educate and empower companies to elevate humanity through business.” Some are designing new governance forms for enterprises, such as B-corps and cooperatives. Note especially the brave, innovative management reflected in social enterprises such as the Sampark Foundation, where Vineet Nayar, former CEO of HCL Technologies, is on a mission to inspire kids in rural India to learn how to think and invent like frugal innovators. Management thinkers framing the greatest challenges of our time as human ones. Witness the shift that is taking place in the global conversation about artificial intelligence and other advanced digital technologies. Increasingly there is an insistence that these powerful forces must leverage human creativity, not marginalize it. Smart machines can help us find answers more quickly, but cannot frame the questions to address. We must use these technologies to unleash human potential — undoubtedly the most underused resource on the planet — and bring greater purpose, meaning, and values to work. All these sparks of activity are generating heat and light. But how can the many small flames be fanned into a blazing fire? One key is for all these fire-starters to recognize that they are part of a bigger movement, not just individually acting on their own values but collectively working to change expectations and behaviors. Often this happens when people who would otherwise sit on the sidelines perceive a real threat in not acting, and are galvanized to join the movement. This is part of why Larry Fink’s open letter to CEOs, sent on the occasion of his investment company BlackRock’s 30th anniversary, has generated such acclaim. In it, he points to the growing threat posed by activist investors who push for short-term share-boosting tactics without regard for firms’ long-term viability. Management teams set themselves up for these assaults, he claims, when they fail to articulate compelling long-term strategies—visions of the future informed by “a sense of purpose.” Purpose, moreover, means for him social purpose. ‘The public expectations of your company have never been greater,” Fink writes. “Society is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose. To prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance, but also show how it makes a positive contribution to society. Companies must benefit all of their stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers, and the communities in which they operate.” Drucker Forum 2018This article is one in a series related to the 10th Global Peter Drucker Forum, with the theme “Management. The human dimension” taking place on November 29 & 30, 2018 in Vienna, Austria. Of course, the ideas that corporations must earn their “license to operate” and serve stakeholders that go far beyond shareholders are not new. But, as Judy Samuelsen puts it, “When the head of BlackRock, the largest investor in the world, says that companies must produce not only profits, but contributions to society, it sends a powerful message.” It kindles new interest and fans existing flames. Management educators and researchers can add their own fuel to the fire, if they will step up to it. Lately our formal institutions of management education have been outstripped by thinkers outside the academy in coming up with new frameworks and methods. Much of the welcome recent innovation in management practice has come from the fringes – new communities and groups developing approaches such as the agile (or Scrum) movement, design thinking, lean-startup methodologies and beyond-budgeting approaches, among others. But as Harvard’s Clay Christensen has noted, management thinking lacks common language and foundational theories; it badly needs a durable base for researchers and practice to build on and progress forward. This can be the major contribution of universities, along with a broad commitment to teaching management as a liberal art—a way of thinking outlined by Peter Drucker. The core tension for management hasn’t changed since Drucker wrote his first books: to establish a systematic approach for achieving collective performance in organizations without killing the entrepreneurial, creative and community-creating human center. In recent years the balance between the two poles has increasingly tilted towards the technocratic and financial-logic-driven side. Is it possible for a social movement to achieve a different capitalism, with a human face? No one has all the levers to change organizations and society over night. But collectively we have all we need to do this over time. The great management theorist and storyteller Charles Handy expressed this well in Vienna last fall, at his closing address to the 2017 Global Peter Drucker Forum. He urged managers to be inspired by their enterprises’ power to make a difference. “Let us just spark small fires in the darkness,” he said, “until they spread and the world is alight.”
HR must learn how to become an Agile business partner
The CIA, FBI and others will get a new layer of oversight.
Agile и SCRUM – это методики управления проектами, суть которых заключается в принципе «проверять и адаптироваться». Этот процесс заключается в том, что можно и нужно как можно чаще внедрять небольшие готовые вехи продукта, чтобы понимать, создается ли именно то, что нужно рынку и потребителю. Это означает, что аналитика рынка и потребностей проводится часто, и изменения от первоначального плана в случае изменения желаний потребителя желательны, если это необходимо. Реализация проекта осуществляется итерациями в 2 – 4 недели, что позволяет проверить «на бою» бизнес-идеи руководителей. Это значит, что каждый участник проекта должен обладать высокой степенью готовности к изменениям, а также внимательностью, готовностью к самоанализу, каждый должен быть честным и дисциплинированным. Как рекомендовал один известный блоггер в публичном докладе в госдуме РФ, сотрудники должны «стать прозрачными». Читать дальше →
The F-35 program is Lockheed Martin's (LMT) largest program. The fiscal 2019 budget proposal has allotted $10.7 billion for procurement of 77 F-35 jets.