Chip and Dan Heath, authors of the business best seller, Made to Stick, recently released their latest book titled Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard. A synopsis of their book was written up in the February 2010 issue of Fast Company magazine and provided some great insights in dealing obstacles that one might encounter in life or business.

The basic premise of the book has to do with taking a different approach to confronting change. The Heath brothers encourage their readers to move away from analysis and towards locating any positive elements within the problem or issue. As we all know, change doesn't come easy to people or employees.

Chip and Dan point out that when encountering difficult problems, most people try to discover the solution by over analyzing the problem. Rather than analyzing all of the negative components of the issue the authors advocate finding the positive elements or bright spots within the problem. Instead of looking at what isn't working, why not focus the spotlight on what is working. And clone those elements to resolve the problem.

According to the Heath brothers, psychologists have discovered that our minds are ruled by two different systems - emotional and rational systems that compete for control. The rational mind wants to change something while the emotional mind wants it to stay the same. By using emotional keys to drive the rational changes, change can indeed be accomplished. It is all about discovering those keys and incorporating them into the solution.

Using a narrative style of story telling to get their points across, the authors provide real world examples of how this is being done across the world. According to the editorial review of Switch, Switch shows that successful changes follow a pattern, a pattern you can use to make the changes that matter to you, whether your interest is in changing the world or changing your waistline.

According to Publishers Weekly, "The Heath brothers...address motivating employees, family members, and ourselves in their analysis of why we too often fear change. Change is not inherently frightening, but our ability to alter our habits can be complicated by the disjunction between our rational and irrational minds: the self that wants to be swimsuit-season ready and the self that acquiesces to another slice of cake anyway.

The trick is to find the balance between our powerful drives and our reason. The authors' lessons are backed up by anecdotes that deal with such things as new methods used to reform abusive parents, the revitalization of a dying South Dakota town, and the rebranding of megastore Target."

You can find this book on Amazon or at your favorite retailer. Understanding how to best deal with changes in your life or your business is critical if you expect to keep moving forward. Of course, if you are perfectly content to stay where you are, then you won't need to learn these lessons.

How do you deal with change? Do you embrace it or fight it?

 

 

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging 

According to a recent article in Psychology Today online, titled "Peak Performance in the NFL, Fortune 500, and Life", the author, Dr. Leslie Becker Phelps, states that besides the tried and true ways of improving performance, there is another factor not normally discussed by most of the so-called experts in the field that is the underpinning of most high perfromance individuals.

The tried and true ways of achieving peak performance that Dr. Phelps mentions are:

      ·         Developing a clear goal

·         Breaking your goal down into small steps

·         Focusing on the individual objectives

·         Rewarding yourself for completing an objective

 She points out that these are all necessary and important components in becoming a peak performer, but there is an additional element that is frequently left out. This element has to be considered if one expects to become a peak performer. That element has to do with the origin of one's motivation.

It is obvious to most people that motivation is a key element. But discovering the origin of your motivation is not so obvious. Dr. Phelps breaks motivation into two types: extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic motivation originates from outside your self. Extrinsic motivation is more about materialism and acquisition than fulfillment. It is about working hard to acquire that big house, fancy car, lavish lifestyle...those sort of things. Extrinically motivated people do it for the acquisition of stuff.

Intrinsically oriented people seem more connected and passionate about achieving their career and life goals. The autonomy they feel and their capacity to meet the challenges they encounter drives them to succeed. According to Dr. Phelps, intrinsically motivated people are happier socially and seem to have a higher sense of well being. Compared to extrinsically motivated people who seek wealth and fame, intrinsically motivated folks suffer less depression and seem to stay healthier.

The better managers provide their subordinates with autonomy and positive reinforcement to encourage their employees to perform at their peak. These managers try to inspire their subordinates by making sure the employees see the value and importance of their role within the organization.

Positive reinforcement and other non-material rewards tend to help the employees stay engaged and motivated. When the employees understand the value and importance of their role in the company, they have a vested interest in the success of the organization and are more likely to perform at their best.

This management philosophy parallels intrinsic motivation. Part of the secret is ensuring that your colleagues and subordinates have autonomy in their approach to their jobs. In my management career, I always thought the best management technique was to provide my subordinates with goals and guidelines and then leave them to their own devices and methods to get the job done. Give them ownership of the process and they will feel compelled to achieve the goals and objectives you have set for them. They will also understand more clearly how their role fits into the successful completion of the their team's overall goal.

Peak performers are almost always intrinsically motivated. You have to love what you do to succeed at the highest level. It is critical to have a burning desire to succeed. Consequently, you will do whatever it takes to reach your goal. Peyton Manning said in an interview once that he loved playing football and would do it for free. He went on to say, "Obviously, I wouldn't tell my owner that, but I think I would (play for free)". Peyton is certainly is one of those peak performers who is internally motivated. 

Supporting a person's autonomy and inner motivation has been proven to help in addiction suppression such as weight loss and smoking cessation. In Fortune 500 companies, research studies revealed that workers that were given autonomy ranked higher in job satisfaction and showed increased job performance. It has also been used successfully in sports training at the highest levels. Athletes with a burning desire to win usually do.

Peak performers are very passionate about what they do. They understand that to achieve their goals they will have to be totally dedicated and make sacrifices. Persistence is another key ingredient of peak performers. Each small failure is just another step up the ladder to success. If the passion is there, the peak performer will find a way to succeed.

As Dr. Phelps reminds us, "If you want to achieve peak performance, it is essential that you begin by pursuing a goal that grabs your heart... and surround yourself with people who help breathe life into that dream".

What is your philosophy on motivating people to perform at their highest level? How do you motivate colleagues and subordinates? What is your dream? How have you motivated others to help you realize your dream? How have you helped others realize their dream?

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if we recruit enough of you, we can positively impact business and political policies around the country.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging 

Bailouts haven't done much to help our faltering economy, so how could technology save the economy? What would you do with $100 billion? Spend it wisely we hope. That is what President Obama and the U.S. Congress are hoping. That's the amount in the stimulus package devoted to discovery, development and implementation of technologies in energy, healthcare, a smart grid, broadband and R&D.  

The short answer to the question is yes, technology can and should save our economy. In the short term, most experts believe that this infusion of capital into the various technology sectors will produce 3 million new jobs over the next two years. And most economists also agree that 80-90% of new economic growth comes from advancements in science and technology.

The breakdown of allocated dollars is as follows: Energy - Renewable energy incentives will be $200 billion which are primarily tax credits to individuals, companies, utilities and research. $16.8 billion will be given out in grants for energy efficiency and renewable-energy research. Health-care - total allotment for this sector is $19.6 billion. Most of this money will go to health-care providers who upgrade, standardize and utilize electronic record keeping systems.  Smart Grid - The government has allotted $11.0 billion for this sector. You might be amazed at just how much electricity is lost during transmission. Research and Development -- $19 billion, with the majority of the funding going to the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, NASA and Department of Defense.  Miscellaneous Funding  -- $8.4 billion going to loan guarantees for renewable energies and transmission technologies.

So what would be the downside of the government's new stimulus package? First, let me say that there is a lot more upside than downside with this plan. And yes, $101.9 billion is a lot of money regardless of how it is spent. There are a few areas where the money might not be going to the right sectors. But that is a very small part of the total package. For example, investments in extending broadband into rural areas and some of the proposed renewable energy projects might take too long to get a reasonable return on the investment. 

Extending fiber optic cable to rural areas might not be the best use of stimulus monies. A small portion of the stimulus plan calls for extending broadband reach to underserved areas and some experts believe that is not a good idea. It would have been a good idea 5 or 6 years ago. Of those who don't currently have broadband today, less than 5% say they would like to have it, but that leaves over 95% who say they don't want it, either because they don't feel they need it or because it would be too expensive at the current pricing.

In the area of renewable energy, some worry that there are some areas of renewable energy that will never be cost effective. Remember ethanol? The government has spent millions helping growers, refiners and producers in the ethanol sector, yet it still requires more energy to produce than it saves. Others worry that the smart grid might run high power transmission lines to remote solar installations and wind farms that produce energy that is too expensive to compete with more traditional sources like coal or natural gas. The price of oil and natural gass will determine just how competitive renewable energy is in the future.

In the coming years, I believe that the technological advancements in generating these renewable energy sources will make them competitive. One of the major benefits of the stimulus plan is that it will protect these renewable energy companies from coming completely unraveled due to market forces in the faltering economy. The advancements in this field need to be pursued even if they aren't financially feasible today.

Company executives in the renewable energy fields, like solar, wind and biofuels point out that they have been hanging on by a thread just to stay in business. Yes, there are some areas that might never come to fruition because of the cost of production. But if we don't help them through the next few years, then the U.S. could very possibly remain dependent on foreign oil until the Middle Eastern oil companies pump out their last barrels of crude.

Bottom line. If the bulk of these funds are used wisely and America is able to begin creating more green jobs and move towards a renewable energy economy, then this money will have been well spent. We certainly need to come up with a plan that will help our citizens go back to work, particularly in the manufacturing sectors. If the stimulus package accomplishes that and moves us in the direction of energy independence, then all these billions of taxpayer dollars will have accomplished the stated goals of the stimulus package. If not, then you best fire up your human powered pedal generators. You will need them soon to light your homes and power your laptops and TV's.

Do you have an opinion? Are you a Baby Boomer? If so, why not consider joining our web community at www.boomer-insight.com. It takes less than a minute to sign up and you can participate in our polls, forums and discussions on important issues facing America like stimulus packages and renewable energy funding. Our goal is to attract enough members so we can affect policy decisions in Washington in a positive manner. We are open 24/7. Thanks for your support.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy 

The world wide web has brought people and ideas together far better than anyone could have imagined just a few years ago. Being able to communicate with anyone, anywhere at any time has made the world a much smaller place and provided us access to information and ideas no one dreamed possible a couple of decades earlier.

Citizens across the globe can discuss news, politics or any other subject with impunity. Of course, impunity could be part of the problem that I am addressing. Don't get me wrong, freedom to express one's views is a fundamental right in this country.  It is essential to the evolution of our society for everyone to express their views on what's happening in the world. Of course, spreading misinformation can help a group dominate the debate on any issue and this sort of thing happens all too frequently on the web.

On the web, news is gathered continuously and made available as soon as it happens anywhere in the world. Information about ongoing events can spread across the world in a millisecond. In some cases, this sort of thing happens much to the annoyance of governments or business entities that would prefer such information not be made available to anyone. We have seen this during the Iraq War, the Iranian elections and numerous other events across the world.  Social media has spawned a number of i-reporters that call people to action by giving their versions of news or events as they unfold across the world. Some are quite objective and others are not very close to the truth at all.

A recent example is the "death panel" myth that was broadcast both on the internet and television by numerous conservative groups and individuals. The healthcare provision in question was about compensating doctors for consulting with patients about end of life planning so the patient can determine exactly how they would like to be cared for in their final days...not to determine whether they should get life saving treatments. In the past, doctors were not compensated for this consultation and consequently didn't encourage it. Once a patient reaches their final days of life, the conversation cannot take place and hundreds of thousands of dollars can be spent sustaining a condition the patient might not want sustained. Whether you are for or against healthcare reform, misrepresenting the issues detracts from the real debate. Scare tactics have been a staple of both political parties and I am sure will continue to be part of their arsenal.

When the stories originate from a trusted source like CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS  or a myriad of other credible news organizations, it is as good as it gets. Unfortunately, other interpretations of news events and stories as told by so-called internet journalists can vary from being somewhat slanted to downright fabrications of the truth. Of course, when everyone has access to the same medium for reporting, then one would be naïve not to expect exaggerations, misinterpretations or complete fabrications of the truth to be broadcast. Fortunately, there are sites that deal specifically with uncovering the facts and exposing myths or outright lies on the net such as snopes.com, wikipedia.com, truthorfiction.com, smokinggun.com, etc. Major news organizations take part in the debunking as well.

Okay, we agree that biased and inaccurate reporting will always be an issue on the web. What does that have to do with polarizing of America? The polarization has to do with where we congregate when we go online. Most people are attracted to sites that share their ideological, cultural and lifestyle views. In doing this, we are unknowingly choosing sides and drinking the coolaid. The battle lines are being drawn and we are being told to rail against the other side or group. 

Remember not so long ago when we all got our news from the same broadcasts on television and read the same newspapers? At that time, we used our selective perception and intellect to hone in on stories and news that interested us. But we were all drinking from the same well. It was up to us to assimilate the news of the day and come to our own conclusions. With the advent of the internet, we can have someone else to provide us with our point of view based on where we fit in the political and social spectrum.

We draw our own line on the internet when we determine which special interest group to join. It seems to me that we are letting our group, party or lifestyle affiliation determine what we think and how we perceive the news and the current events of the day. We are being spoon fed our take on America and the world. We get calls to action daily on how we should react to these events and how we should feel about them.

Frankly, that doesn't seem much like democracy in action. And yes, I realize that America is not a true democracy, but a republic, so don't get incensed and correct me. It is easier to let our web groups tell us what to think and how to act. But is that a good thing? Are we becoming the lemmings described by George Orwell in his book, 1984, albeit special interest lemmings? Do we need to let someone else interpret the news and draw conclusions for us? Recent town hall meetings would suggest such behavior, as would the left calling for prosecution of the previous administration for war crimes.

I am not suggesting you cut your ties with your favorite sites relating to your political party, special interest groups or other affiliations. I am only suggesting that you look at more than one side of an issue or event and draw your own conclusions.

It seems to me that the best ideas come from spirited intellectual debate not predetermined conclusions made for us by our party affiliation or Facebook group. One of the reasons my partners and I started www.BoomerOpinion.com was to democratize the process. BoomerOpinion.com has no affiliations with political groups and encourages open discussions on every issue. Sure, each of the partners have their own political views, but our polls and discussions do not reflect those views. Our content is all about the collective voice our membership. So if you are a Baby Boomer and you are ready to independently voice your own opinion, and not your party or group's opinion, then please come join us.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 

Time magazine's November 22, 2009 article, "The ‘00s: Goodbye (at last) to the Decade from Hell" points out that the first decade of the new millennium might be one of the worst decades for America in recent history. How could they have drawn this conclusion?

In the last ten years, we have experienced two financial meltdowns - first in 2000-2001 when the internet Bubble Burst. Then again in 2008-2009 - that one shouldn't be that hard to remember. America also suffered through 9/11, Anthrax letters, Hurricane Katrina, massive corporate bailouts and major unemployment. And last, but certainly not least we have had to deal with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that continue take American lives and siphon off more and more of our tax dollars and resources.

So have we learned anything from the last decade? We should have learned a lot, but if Washington D.C. is any indication, we may be doomed to repeat the last 10 years. Have you seen any new government policies to address the problems on Wall St. and in the investment banking community? Have we put in place new regulations to prevent Wall St. and investment bankers from overleveraging their capital and gambling on speculative investments and derivatives? No.

Has our government initiated the legislation that would provide funding to rebuild America's dilapidated infrastructure to prevent future catastrophes such as those that took place in New Orleans and Minneapolis? There has been a lot of talk on capitol hill and some small projects approved, but no real progress in funding major infrastructure projects. Has our government put a priority on job creation or required the banking industry to use some of their TARP money to open up credit lines to small businesses? No.

While we are drawing down our troops in Iraq, it appears that the President plans to build up our troop levels in Afghanistan. I am still waiting to hear what our objective in Afghanistan will be and why we need an additional 35,000 troops at a cost of one million dollars per soldier per year. I thought we were getting out of the nation building business.

Seems to me that Afghanistan will just be another Iraq. We initially went into Afghanistan to get Osama, yet we don't even know if he is there or in Pakistan. Won't our occupation in another Middle Eastern country just increase the terrorists resolve.  If we run Al Qaeda out of Afghanistan and Pakistan won't they just move their operations to another country? Do we really need to spend $35 billion per year to democratize Afghanistan? My son and I are both veterans, so don't accuse me of being a pacifist. I am just trying to determine how our national security is protected by occupying Afghanistan.

How did we reach this point in history and how can we prevent repeating the same mistakes in the next decade? Most historians would say that we reached this point through neglect, greed, self interest and losing sight of our responsibilities both in America and globally.

So how can we get back on track in moving America forward? The economy should be our number one priority. Job creation should be right at the top. In the next ten years, our top priorities should be green jobs, investment in small business, rebuilding our infrastructure, alternative energy research subsidies, designing and building a smart power grid, and more comprehensive information sharing in key sectors like government agencies and medicine - ie. electronic medical records. Had the FBI shared information on the shooter at Ft. Hood with the military, could that tragedy been averted? Maybe, maybe not.

Financial regulations need to be put back in place to regulate Wall St. and the investment bankers. When it comes to banking regulation, investment banks and commercial banks should not be under the same umbrella. They are very different and they should be regulated and insured differently. Why should the government treat investment banks the same as commercial banks and insure speculation on the part of investment bankers? It doesn't make sense.

The American people need to become more involved in government, business policy and government regulation of business. As long as the industry lobbyists continue have major influence over legislators in policy making in Washington, the people won't have a say in how business and industry is regulated and controlled. We need to take back our government from corporate America and the lobbyists. Isn't it supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people?

One way we can ensure that our voices are heard in Washington would be to leverage the internet and mobilize our voices. By democratizing the web and galvanizing public opinion on each issue, we can use the internet to tell the politicians exactly how we feel about each of these issues as they arise.

The major political parties and their leaders seem to be more interested in working against each other than addressing these issues. Instead of doing the job for which they were elected, they only seem interested in blocking each others progress, rather than working to pass the needed legislation to get America back on track. I'm not suggesting deconstructing our political party system, but giving Washington a non-politically biased barometer of what their constituencies are thinking about a particular issue at any given point in time. If millions of Americans voice their opinions on these issues, don't you think our fearless leaders will listen and act? 

It is all about the numbers. I started my web community, www.boomeropinion.com, to give Baby Boomers a voice in America. Boomers represent one of every three adults in America and control 70% of the wealth in this country. One would think their opinion counted for something. If even 10% of the 77 million Baby Boomers in America voiced their opinions on these critical issues, I am convinced Washington would begin to listen.

Within the next few months, we will upgrade Boomer Opinion to allow our users to create their own polls, ask topical questions and start discussions on topics of their own choosing. We will follow that with opinion portals for Gen X and Gen Y. Once we get traction, maybe our political leaders will start working to fix America instead of fighting each other over partisan agendas.

What is your take on the last decade and democratizing the web? Is America ready for this? Let us know what you think.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub 

A recent Op-ed piece in the Washington Post by Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO,  discusses disturbing trends that he believes demonstrate America's failure to maintain its leadership position in innovation. The trends he points to have to do with searches related to delaying back to school purchases last fall and increases in searches for payday loans over the past two years.

Mr. Schmidt believes that the best ways to curb unemployment and spur job creation will be through business and product innovation. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke has talked about America's ‘innovation deficit'. America has been the global leader in innovation for generations, but it appears that we are losing our leadership position.

In the area of green energy, China and Germany are making significant technology advances and threaten to become the ‘green silicon valley' soon if we don't redouble our efforts and get some help from Congress. Schmidt clearly states that America relied on big investments in NASA and the military to create new technology breakthroughs, but that is no longer the path to the future for America's innovators.

According to the Google CEO, the internet provides the tools and information to anyone with an idea and access to the web. He goes on to say that the next breakthroughs are just as likely to occur in a coffee shop as they are to occur in the lab of a major corporation. His best advice to the government is to get out of the way and eliminate any roadblocks that might stand in the way of small business or individual entrepreneurs.

 He believes that any legislation that is considered by Congress should promote competition rather than protecting the interests of the established businesses and corporations. Generally these protectionist policies are encouraged by lobbyists and special interest groups in Washington. As we know, many legislators try to protect businesses and corporations in their districts. Competition is critical to business innovation.

He also believes that we need to create a culture that tolerates failure. As Eric states in his article, "Show me a program with a 100 percent success rate and I'll show you one with 0 percent innovation." Remember the light bulb? Let's see, how many element combinations did Thomas Edison try before he succeeded in creating an operational light bulb? You get the point.

Mr. Schmidt applauds the decision by Congress to double science funding, but says they need to take it a step further. He advocates an R&D tax credit in order to encourage more businesses to invest in their future and America's future. Eric also believes that information needs to become more open and accessible. Government funded research should be made public to everyone through an internet platform similar to Wikipedia.

Mr. Schmidt also thinks that the government should loosen its reign on Visas since so many of the best and brightest foreign students that come to study in America leave after completing their programs in America. He thinks we are losing too many gifted and talented people to our foreign competition.

I agree with Eric 100 percent. America's global leadership position has always been about being able to outsmart and outthink our competitors, whether it was in battle or in business. And when it came to innovation, look what we have accomplished in the last 100 years. Think about Henry Ford, Xerox, IBM, Apple, and a myriad of other innovative leaders.

Our economy is in the tank. Unemployment is too high. It seems to me that our only hope of recovery is innovation. New ideas translate into new industries which translate into new jobs. And let's keep those jobs here for a change. One of the reasons we are in this pickle is because we didn't just outsource jobs overseas, we outsourced our technologies.  Let's try to be smarter this time.

What is your take on this topic? Do you have a million dollar idea? Do you agree with Mr. Schmidt on how to erase the innovation deficit? We want to hear your thoughts.

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if enough of you speak up, we can profoundly impact the tone and direction of business and political policies in America.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging 

In the past, Americans have always provided for future generations, but our political leaders reversed that trend. Will a new movement emerge with the aim of providing our children with a brighter future or will we just leave them with budget deficits and mounting debt?

In a recent Op-ed column in the New York Times, David Brooks wrote about the failure of politicians to provide for future generations. In his column, Mr. Brooks wrote, "One of the keys to healthy aging is what George Vaillant of Harvard calls ‘generativity' - providing for future generations."

Mr. Brooks went on to write, "The odd thing is that when you turn to political life, we are living in an age of reverse generativity. Far from serving the young, the old are now taking from them." He brought up the fact that the federal government now spends $7 on the elderly for every $1 it spends on the children. Add to that the enormous debt load we are leaving to future generations and the future doesn't look to bright for our kids and their kids.

The federal government and its policy makers have thrown in the towel when it comes to solving America's financial problems and ceded them to our children and grandchildren. It is like continuing to operate your business at a loss year after year, and then hoping your kids will be able to fix it when they get to take over the business. That is just postponing the inevitable. Not smart.

It should be obvious to most people that our current system of government is self corrupting and has become counter productive. Regardless of how sincere our newly elected representatives are, they can't seem to make any real progress towards getting America back on the right track. The lobbyists and special interest groups have a stranglehold on our political process and only want to pursue programs that serve their own greed and self interests.

Add to that, opposing political factions that seem to only want to ensure that representatives from the opposing party don't succeed in addressing the issues at hand, and you have a recipe for no progress. Consequently, our political leaders are getting nothing accomplished. Their best intentions are ridiculed and lambasted by their political opponents and big business interests. America is marching in place, not moving forward.

What's the solution? I believe there is a solution. Spontaneous social movements have been successful in the past. Anti-war and racial equality movements in the sixties ultimately changed America. Gender equality was another. Where would we be today without those movements? Back then they had only the network broadcast media to help them move their causes into the limelight.

With the internet, the playing field has become wide open to anyone with a voice and a web connection. Recently, web campaigns like the Obama campaign and the Tea Party movement have both been very successful in drumming up support for their agendas. The internet created instant traction for those movements in America.

There are a couple of ways we can get the ball rolling? A great many of you have called for term limits. In reality, your vote is an excellent method of enforcing term limits. All you have to do is register and exercise this privilege. If the incumbents are so totally consumed with raising money from special interest groups to get reelected, whose future will they be voting for in Congress. Not ours.

Recent elections have demonstrated that most folks are fed up with their current representatives or party affiliation. In those elections, most prognosticators have said that those elections were votes against the President and his party. I say the voters were just demonstrating that they wanted a change, regardless of party.

Besides throwing out the old guard, it is up to all of us to weigh in on the issues and voice our opinions. Go to the news and opinion sites and let your collective voices be heard. Isn't that how spontaneous social movements get started. If enough of you speak out against the current political shenanigans going on in Washington, maybe some of these guys will get the message and begin actually doing the job for which they were elected. If not, just vote them out of office.

Taking our elected officials to task is not the complete answer. They obviously need our advice. Unless you think that being advised solely by lobbyists is okay for your representative, then we need to speak up. Broadcasting your ideas about how we can best address the critical issues facing America is another way you can help. Particularly those of us 45 and older need to bring our collective wisdom to the table.

Since we are already being blamed for the majority of problems facing America, we should be the first to offer our political leaders advice on how to fix them. Don't you want to help to ensure that our children and grand children have a bright future? Well, if you do nothing, then nothing will change. You can just sit back or you can jump in with both feet and make a difference. It is up to you. 

My web community, www.boomeropinion.com is all about weighing in on the issues and voicing your opinion. The site already provides polls, discussion forums and articles on critical issues facing America. And we are currently redesigning the site so that each and every one of you can suggest your own polls, ask your own questions of the membership and submit your own discussion topics and follow the discussion as it progresses. Why not join today? It only takes a minute to join.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging 

The debate has gotten hot and heavy in the last few weeks and I am amazed at the misinformation that is being disseminated by the shouters and disrupters at the Town Hall meetings across the country. I realize there are a lot of legitimate beefs with healthcare reform. You certainly have a right for your voices to heard. Just like you guys, I want my voice to be heard. But, I am not interested in shouting down my Congressional Representative or my Senator. My political views not withstanding, I am most interested in what is best for America and American Business.

First, let me say, that I have health insurance and I am satisfied with my coverage and my provider. I can go to the doctor of my choice for a small co-pay and get my prescriptions filled for a small co-pay. Being an old guy, and a very active one at that, I feel very fortunate to have this insurance. In the last year or so, I have had my knee scoped, my cholesterol checked, my wrist operated on, and several other examinations and consultations. I have been seen by my family doctor, my cardiologist, my orthopedist, and an endocrinologist. 

I can understand why a lot of you guys are skeptical of the government becoming more involved in our healthcare. Based on the government's ability to manage other areas of our lives, you have good reason to be skeptical. Given the fact that the U.S. government has mismanaged numerous projects and contracts over the years from defense to building bridges to nowhere, it stands to reason that you should be concerned about them getting involved in the healthcare business.

That said, I would remind you that the government has been running Medicare for the past forty five years. And they have done a pretty good job with Medicare. Ask any senior if they would give up their Medicare coverage and I am quite confident you wouldn't find any takers.  Is it perfect? Not really, but it is better than a number of private plans. So what does Medicare have to do with healthcare reform? It demonstrates that the government can manage a healthcare program and do it well for the long term. It also dispels a number of myths that many of the dissenters have raised about government run healthcare.

With Medicare you can choose your doctor.  Yes, there are small percentage of doctors who don't participate, but most do. Medicare pays for your prescriptions. Medicare will take you regardless of pre-existing conditions. There are no death panels determining who gets to live and who doesn't. Most private insurance providers want you to convert to Medicare when you turn 65. The older you get the more healthcare you require and the more it would cost those private providers. Medicare doesn't ration treatments or procedures. Medicare doesn't require that you drop your current plan when you turn 65, if you are satisfied with your coverage.

Current private healthcare is responsible for a lot of waste and inefficiencies.  There are many physicians that will recommend tests and procedures that you might not necessarily need just to protect themselves from potential medical malpractice suits. As long as the costs of these procedures and tests fall within provider guidelines, the private providers pay for them with no questions asked. So litigation definitely is a factor in rising healthcare costs. The lack of online universal record keeping systems translates into redundant tests, missed diagnoses, prescription interactions and lots of other problems that result because those practitioners don't have access to your complete medical history. Private providers don't encourage or pay for preventative procedures in most cases. That raises healthcare costs as well.  

 AARP has come out in favor of healthcare reform. Obviously, they want to see the final bill before they endorse it, but they know that the system is broken and needs fixing. They also know that Medicare has been good for Americans and will cost taxpayers less if people received better healthcare before they turn 65. Can the government fix healthcare without putting our great grand children in debt? I certainly hope so. Cost will be a concern, but I believe they can accomplish this through better efficiencies and preventative care. Plus, if there is a public option, that will cause the current providers to become more efficient, put more pressure on the drug companies to be more realistic in their pricing, and in turn make private sector healthcare more affordable. That will be a win/win for everyone concerned.

I would also like to point out, that one of the reasons American businesses have not been able to compete with their foreign competitors is partially the result of skyrocketing healthcare costs they are paying to keep their workers insured. In fact, that is certainly one of the problems our automakers have had to deal with for the last couple of decades. Add to that, the rise in litigation in America relating to corporate, product and service liability and you can see why American business has lost its competitive edge. Tort reform should be next after healthcare reform if America is to regain its competitive position in the world of business.  

What's your take on this issue? Inquiring minds want to know. Comment on Linkedin and/or on my web site, www.BoomerOpinion.com. We are always looking for Baby Boomers with an opinion that don't mind speaking out and can successfully complete a sentence.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current 

 In the last thirty years I have worked as a product manager, marketing manager and sales manager. I even wrote a book on marketing in 2002 titled Marketing Alignment. Shameless plug number one - my book is available on Amazon.com. Based on my background, one might think it would be improbable that I would be in favor of banning any consumer advertising and marketing.

Sure, most people understand why companies can't advertise automatic weapons or cigarettes on television. And if you NRA members won't to take me to task on that issue, feel free, but remember I am an advocate of the second amendment. I suspect a lot of you would be in favor of at least limiting the TV advertising of fast food late at night or sugary cereal products targeting kids in the morning. After all, thirty percent of Americans are obese.

My complaint has to do with prescription drug advertising. Congress allocates the FDA $2.4 billion to regulate our foods, drugs and cosmetics. The big pharmaceutical companies spend twice that amount each year on consumer advertising.

About six years ago Congress, in their infinite wisdom, decided that the big pharmaceutical companies were wining and dining the healthcare professionals (doctors, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, etc) in order to get them to prescribe their company's drugs. So they passed legislation to put a halt to most of these practices. Well, the executives at the major pharmaceutical companies scratched their heads and came up with a different approach. They decided to go straight to the consumers and advertise their goods on national television. 

I am certain a great many of you would be happy if you didn't have to witness another erectile dysfunction or enlarged prostate commercial ever again. Include me in that group. There is a movement in congress these days to try to put some limits on this advertising. Representative Henry Waxman, (D) California, would like to see the FDA  bar consumer advertising for any drugs until they have proved safe in real world use. Another democrat, James Morgan of Virginia is sponsoring a bill that would ban ads for prescription sexual aids like Viagra and Levitra during prime time on grounds of decency.

The drug makers and their proponents contend that direct to consumer ads educate the public and inform them about medical advances. Personally, I think diagnosing yourself based on a television ad is dangerous and will do more harm than good. I also believe that this television advertising is a significant contributor to the rising cost of healthcare in America. It seems to me that the big pharma companies see this as an easy way to reach the more gullible hypochondriacs out there who will take any pill they can get their hands on. I believe that healthcare reform should include some type of ban on these prescription drug ads.

Marcia Angell, a senior lecturer in social medicine at the Harvard Medical School and former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, says, "Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising does exactly what it is intended to do - increase sales for drug companies. Increasingly, it does that by promoting medical conditions, as well as drugs. If the industry can convince essentially normal people that minor complaints require long-term drug treatment, its market will grow."  She goes on to say, "The argument that ads educate consumers is self-evidently absurd. No one should look to an investor-owned company for objective, unbiased information about products it sells. Do we ask the Ford dealer whether his cars are any good?"

Still, there are those that argue that these advertisements go a long way in educating the American public about specific medical conditions and how to treat them. That would be a good argument if it were true. A study that compared the health literacy between the U.S. and Canada demonstrates the fallacy in that argument. Canada, where these ads are not allowed, has a higher health literacy than here in America where we are bombarded daily with these ads.

James P. Othmer, a former advertising creative director and author of the forthcoming book, Adland: Searching for the Meaning of Life on a Branded Planet, had this to say about prescription drug marketing, "My all-time favorite pharmaceutical ad is for something called R.L.S. (Restless Leg Syndrome) a condition whose degree of absurdity is topped only by a drug's potential side effects: "Tell your doctor if you experience increased gambling, sexual or other urges." Mr. Othmer went on to say, "If I had a dime for every time I heard the words "ask your doctor" or saw a crude clip of phallic imagery during a commercial break from the evening news, or was forced to contemplate a stomach-turning side effect, I'd be able to afford my own health care."

So what is your take on this topic? Do you think these drug companies should be able to advertise freely on any medium they choose? Are you ready to contact your Senator or Congress person and tell them to ban this advertising?

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if we recruit enough of you, we can positively impact business and political policies around the country.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve 

 How could one technology do all of this? Prescription: Networking, an article in the December 2009 issue of Technology Review published by M.I.T., suggests that the implementation of standardized electronic medical records (EMR) would do all of these things.

According to the article, "If you ask how much in total medical spending there is in the country that doesn't need to happen-providing absolutely no clinical benefit-the answer is probably $700 billion a year. Healthcare IT is a fundamental part of getting rid of that." There is no doubt among any healthcare provider you ask that the $2.3 trillion cost of healthcare in America includes a lot of waste. This waste is mainly in the area of duplicated or unneeded diagnoses, treatments and tests.

It is estimated that less than 10% of the hospitals in the U.S. have adopted comprehensive electronic medical record systems. 8.3% of physicians that care for Medicaid patients use them and 13.2% of physicians caring for privately insured patients use them. Doctors that do use electronic medical records report a much higher incidence of being alerted to important lab results, avoiding drug allergies, being alerted to potential drug interactions, ordering critical lab tests, etc. The advantages should be quite obvious.

The real advantages will come once electronic medical record keeping is standardized and shared by every hospital, clinic, private practice and public health facility across the country. This is the only way to ensure that tests and procedures are not duplicated. It will provide every attending physician with all the facts before diagnosing and treating patients. It is amazing to me that these systems haven't been implemented in more medical facilities given the advances in computing and technology over the past 20 years.

The types of jobs that EMR will provide are the best kind-high tech jobs with a future. These jobs will serve the medical community well into this century and the next. The current stimulus package includes $19.5 billion to help fund this program. There will be penalties for those medical facilities that fail to adopt EMR. Medicare will see significant savings from the adoption of EMR over the next ten years.

Hopefully, the stimulus money will provide the catalyst needed to get this program moving quickly. Given all the rhetoric that has been circulating about the cost benefits of the proposed healthcare legislation, electronic medical records should help America jump start the goal of reducing our healthcare costs.

Remaking healthcare through the use of this technology will accomplish a lot of good things for America. Job creation is one of the most important benefits. And by reducing healthcare costs, we can help American business become more competitive around the world. Both of these things will help stimulate our faltering economy. Seems like Win-Win-Win. Let's hope that this movement takes off quickly and gets implemented as soon as possible. It is good for healthcare and good for America.

What's you take on this topic? Do you think electronic medical records can accomplish all of these things?

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if we recruit enough of you, we can positively impact business and political policies around the country.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm 

 Folks, you can't make this stuff up. Here is yet another candidate for my 2009 WTF Award. If I were to tell you that there are over 200 iPhone apps available that produce farting noises, would you be surprised? It never ceases to amaze me how far we have come since the invention of the telephone. Alexander Graham Bell is no doubt spinning in his grave as I write about this story.

A quote from Wired magazine illustrates the depths our national psyche has descended to when it states, "The producer of a farting iPhone app is making a legal stink over another flatulence app in a looming trademark battle over the phrase, ‘pull my finger'." The trademark suit was initiated by Air-O-Matic of Florida, the maker of the popular ‘Pull My Finger' app. Air-O-Matic claims that the maker of the rival iFart Mobile application has misappropriated the phrase ‘pull my finger' in its advertisements.

David Kravets, the author of the Wired article couldn't stop with the puns and bodily function references when he went on to write, "Such an assertion, according to iFart Mobile maker InfoMedia of Colorado, reeks of misunderstanding of American fart culture." I guess he just couldn't let go of this issue.

InfoMedia's attorney, Kevin Houchin, explained that the ‘pull my finger' phrase and derivations are generally known and widely understood in American culture as a prank regarding flatulence. The prankster requests the unsuspecting victim to pull his or her finger, and once the digit is pulled the prankster expels an inordinate amount of gas. Consequently, the phrase is understood to be a description of passing gas.

So there you have it. Teenage pranks have moved into the technology world and have brought about trademark infringement cases dealing with flatulence. In this case, the uses of keywords or phrases that have otherwise been thought to be part of the public domain have provided the ammunition for a lawsuit in Federal court. AOM attorney Karen Koster Burr wrote "InfoMedia's efforts have been directed at merging ‘Pull My Finger' and ‘iFart' in the consumers minds, so that searches for ‘Pull My Finger' pull up the iFart application. AOM is demanding $50,000 payment for damages.

On a more serious note, trademark issues have been gaining momentum since the internet came on line. I can tell you from personal experience that setting up a web site, web business or web app requires some serious trademark research and even then there is no guarantee that you won't be slapped with an infringement suit and taken to court. When we set up our web community we thoroughly researched our domain name. Yet, 6 months after our launch we were contacted by a law firm, told that we were in violation of their client's trademark and that we had better cease and desist using that derivation of their mark. Otherwise, they were ready to take us to court. 

 There are a number of considerations that you should take into account if you are in violation of someone's trademark. First, do they have a legitimate case against you? Are the trademark names identical or just similar? Second, how big an organization are you dealing with and how deep are their pockets. In our case, I really didn't believe their case was that strong, but our adversary was a global conglomerate with very deep pockets. My company, on the other hand, was a small startup and we really didn't have the legal resources to take them on in court. 

Fortunately for us, we did our homework and found another domain name that was actually more appropriate, and more in keeping with our value proposition, than our original mark. Since we had only been around for a few months and the transition to the new name was an easy one, we bit the bullet and changed it. In our case, discretion was the better part of valor and we worked through this issue successfully. So, if you are slapped with a trademark infringement suit, it doesn't necessarily mean you are out of business.

What's your take on this issue? Have you been sued for trademark infringement? Do you have a story you can tell about trademark issues. What do you think about the fight for iPhone superiority in the flatulence application business? Inquiring minds want to know. Comment on Linkedin and/or on my web site, www.BoomerOpinion.com. We are always looking for Baby Boomers with an opinion that don't mind speaking out and can successfully complete a sentence.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr 

 I am sure you have heard it all before. Get yourself a domain name and set up a web site. With the right concept, you will become rich beyond your wildest expectations. You will be jetting around the world and everyone will want face time with you. If you believe that, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you.

You know as well as I do, that it doesn't really work that way. What I do know is that most successful web entrepreneurs built their sites based on one value proposition and before their very eyes their site morphs once, twice or three times before really gaining traction and beginning to grow virally. So where are you? Plan A, Plan B, or Plan Z? Your concept is important, but if you don't build a platform that engages your audience, you will never achieve the level of success you expect.

Take Myspace, for example. When Chris DeWolfe bought the domain name Myspace.com in 2002, he initially expected the domain to become a data storage and file sharing site. The founders of Myspace, Chris DeWolfe, Brad Greenspan, Josh Berman and Tom Anderson met at eUniverse where they worked and were all members of Friendster, one of the earliest social networks. When they left eUniverse, the guys decided to strike out on their own and create their own social network similar to Friendster.

To make their social network different, they made a couple of significant changes. They designed the site to allow users to customize their profile pages and they encouraged anonymity by letting their members use any identity they wanted to use. The early version of Myspace initially targeted an 18-35 demographic and emphasized content revolving around indy rock and alternative music. Their connection to music and musicians helped fuel the early growth of the site and is still a primary driver of their traffic today.

By giving users the ability to customize their web pages within the site and upload their own photos, videos and music, Myspace morphed into a more general social networking site. Myspace's reach began to extend to folks of all ages who wanted to set up their pages any way they wanted. As the site grew virally, their value proposition morphed into something totally different from their original concept of appealing to musicians and music lovers, and the rest as they say, is history. Bottom line, they built a platform that not only engaged their users, but kept them coming back again and again to update their profile pages and see what their friends were posting on their pages.

When Mark Zuckerberg started Facebook, it was originally called Facemash, and his idea was to allow fellow students at Harvard to rank female coeds based on their physical attractiveness. Being a geek, Mr. Zuckerberg was trying to find the hottest coeds on campus and maybe even get a date with one of them. After toying with the original site for a time, Zuckerberg and his roommates determined that they could expand their little network if they changed their site into a campus directory for Harvard.

After recruiting thousands of students at Harvard and validating their new concept, his team then opened Facebook up to other campuses and the site began experiencing exponential growth. The design of the site was such that without purposely intending to do so, it became a social network for everyone, not just college students. The site differed from Myspace in that the users used their real identities and the site was open to application developers that developed apps that the users could use to mess with their friends. It also minimized the banner ads that overwhelm Myspace's pages. And another accidental internet empire was off and running. Bottom line: build a site that your initial users embrace and they will come.

Neither of these two sites became successful based on the founders' original target market, value proposition and vision. And they are two of the most successful web sites in the history of the internet. So lesson Number One is: If your site design does not truly engage your users day after day, month after month, and year after year, then regardless of how brilliant your original vision or concept might be, you've got nothing.

It is important to understand that you can't build a successful site based on content alone. Unless you have a very large global staff of extremely talented editors, journalists, copywriters and reporters, your content will not keep your visitors engaged. The best way to keep them engaged is by ensuring that they are the ones generating the content and interacting with the content generated by the others on your site.

By the way, Facebook is overtaking Myspace in unique visitors and members world wide. Rupert Murdoch's News Corp bought Myspace in 2005 for $580M. Chris DeWolfe and Tom Anderson initially stayed on to manage and guide Myspace. However since April of this year they have, for all intents and purposes, given up their active participation in the day to day operations and management of Myspace. Mark Zuckerberg is still the guiding visionary at Facebook and the company remains private. He relocated the company to Silicon Valley and has hired a number of highly qualified executives to manage the day to day operations of Facebook.

When I told my wife I was writing this blog, she asked me why I haven't created a billion dollar web site...if I knew all the secrets. My response was that we are in the process of enhancing our web opinion portal, www.BoomerOpinion.com, currently and will launch the new site design before the end of the year. And within a year or less, we should be able to put a down payment on my new Ferrari and arrange financing on that Chateau on Lake Como near Milan. Okay, maybe a new corvette and a house on Lake Travis. We wouldn't want to fritter away our entire fortune the first year would we?

What are your thoughts on this topic? Do you have a different idea about the secrets to building a successful web property? We want to hear about it. Post your comments and tell us what you really think. Stay tuned and next week, I will reveal secret number two in this series.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr web design myspace facebook friendster euniverse chris dewolfe tom anderson mark zuckerberg boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys 

Last week, I began this series on the secrets to building a billion dollar web property by giving a brief analysis of the early development of Facebook and Myspace. I discussed how their visions and value propositions morphed over time. I stated that the number one secret of their success was user engagement. And yes, your vision and value proposition will determine the level and frequency of user engagement, but not always on the first implementation of your concept. You have to continue fine tuning that vision until your growth becomes viral and exponential. If you missed my analysis of how these web properties got their start and want to read the full text, just go to http://tinyurl.com/yggag3z.

Neither Facebook or Myspace became successful based on the founders' original target market, value proposition and vision. And they are two of the most successful web sites in the history of the internet. So lesson Number One is: If your site design does not truly engage your users day after day, month after month, and year after year, then regardless of how brilliant your original vision or concept might be, you've got nothing.

Neither Facebook or Myspace would have been able to accommodate the exponential growth they experienced had they not considered scalability in the overall design of their sites. There are those who still think that building a successful web property is only about offering your visitors content, media or engagement they can't get from another web site. Without scalability, your site will crash often and die an early death once exponential viral growth overwhelms your computing resources. Hopefully, if you are in the process of starting a web community, scalability will be a major consideration.

For you non technical readers, scalability covers four critical areas. These critical areas include development platform and language, development talent, hardware and hosting, and last but not least, caching. Skimp or minimize resources in any one of these areas and you will never make it to the next level. Over time visitors don't return to sites that can't deliver on the promise of their functionality and content availability. It even happens to the major players...I just logged into Twitter and got this message: Twitter is over capacity...Too many tweets...Please wait a moment and try again. Twitter can get away with this now, but for how long?

Let's start with the software platform that was or will be used to develop your site. This includes the language and operating system platform on which your web site is to be built. Bottom line: selecting the right development language and platform is critical to building a scalable startup. If you choose a platform that allows you to get the web site up quickly, but is inherently un-scalable, your gamble will come back to bite you in the butt. If your site engages the users, you will also need a scalable database backend to maintain all the information about your membership and their profiles. If you don't have the technical expertise to understand scalability, then hire a web developer or partner with someone who has that expertise.

That brings me to the second critical factor in achieving scalability. Scalable web startups are willing to make the necessary investment when it comes to securing talent. Hiring and/or seeking advice from a web developers or web architects in the early stages of your site development is absolutely essential to your success down the road. You might counter by telling me that you can't afford such high level talent. My suggestion would be to seek out a web developer or developers with the required expertise and offer them equity in your startup. If you don't have the funding to pay them as regular employees, then maybe getting in on the ground floor will entice them.  If your vision and value proposition have merit in their eyes, then they will be satisfied just to work for a piece of the company.

Since my primary target audience is non-technical, I don't intend to get bogged down in the technical details of hardware and hosting scalability, so I will give the briefest of summaries on those issues. We have already discussed the development platform and talent required, but there are some additional areas that haven't been covered. It is essential to understand bandwidth requirements with respect to your server connections to the internet.

Suffice it to say, through the use of web hosting services, you can scale your bandwidth up over time as needed to accommodate the traffic on your site. Whether you use the hosting site's servers or your own, that should not be an issue. The primary difference has to do with costs and your web developers will help you make those determinations.  If your site really takes off, then you will have to transition to your own in-house server farms.

The last critical factor I will mention has to do with caching. Your development guys will understand the importance of caching and should have it as a very high priority from the beginning. Basically, caching takes the load off the disk drives and processes the routines and requests through temporary memory (mem-caches) which will speed up those processes. Speed and performance is critical to a successful web site and poor performance will have a very negative impact on your traffic. Users tend to stay away from sites that are difficult to log into or navigate.

So there you have it. Secret Number Two is: Scalabilitiy. From concept to launch, scalability has to be a major consideration when developing your site. The best web concept in the world won't make your site successful if you can't provide your users 100% availability and functionality.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr web design myspace facebook friendster euniverse chris dewolfe tom anderson mark zuckerberg boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys web design myspace facebook scalability boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current events news comments 

 In the beginning there was normal reality. What you saw was what was there. Then there was altered reality, but that was in the sixties and you needed a competent drug dealer to ensure you could return from your trip on Transcendental Airways. Next came virtual reality and if normal reality didn't do it for you, then you could create your own virtual persona and be as cool as you thought you should be. Now there is Augmented Reality. How many realities will we need to experience before it is all said and done? How about your own robotic surrogate? Wouldn't that be the ultimate augmentation? Well it is the twenty first century.

According to Wikipedia, "Augmented reality (AR) is a term for a live direct or indirect view of a physical real-world environment whose elements are merged with (or augmented by) virtual computer-generated imagery - creating a mixed reality. The augmentation is conventionally in real-time and in semantic context with environmental elements, like for example sports scores on TV during a match. With the help of advanced AR technology (e.g. adding computer vision and object recognition) the information about the surrounding real world of the user becomes interactive and digitally usable."

Practical applications for augmented reality are mostly about digitally overlaying information over what you are seeing in real time. These types of applications have been used by the military for years. Head's up displays in jet fighters, helicopters and tanks are just one example. The yellow first down line on a television broadcast of your favorite college or NFL game is another example. Some automobiles have digital displays projected on the inside of the windshield just above the dash board so you can check your speed or fuel level without taking your eyes off the road.

The most popular consumer uses for AR are apps for smart phones. Yelp was one of the first AR companies to develop apps for the iPhone. Using a Yelp app, you can aim your iPhone at a restaurant and it will overlay reviews and other information about that eatery. Another app will allow you to point the iPhone at an historical site and the app will provide you with a summarized history of that landmark or show you what that site looked like 100 years earlier.

There are apps in development that will use facial recognition to find entertainment or business celebrities in a crowd. Another will allow you to aim your phone at a classmate at a reunion and view that person's social networking pages. Of course, there will be apps that provide directions from your location to the closest Starbucks if you point your phone at the street sign in any major city.

What if everyone in New York or London is walking around holding their smart phone in front of their face to augment their own reality. How long will it take for them to run into a wall, another person, a poll or walk into oncoming traffic? You thought it was bad enough just having people around you talking or texting on their smart phones while walking or driving. In the future they might be looking through them.

Of course, if that technology takes off, people will purchase glasses or goggles that provide the digital overlays. I have even read about a company that is working on contact lenses that will provide you with terminator eyes complete with computer graphics layered onto your lenses. Naturally, you can expect Washington to provide legislation that will keep us from harming ourselves or others while using this technology.

In the movie, Surrogates, people had human like robots carrying out there day to day activities, while the humans cloistered themselves indoors in their homes or apartments. The humans controlled their surrogates through virtual eyewear and headset devices they put on when it was time for their robots to leave their homes and go about their daily routine.

Their surrogate robots interacted with other surrogate robots both at work and socially while the humans reclined in their beds and vicariously interacted with the other surrogates. I can't imagine how anyone could go without real human interaction for a long period of time. And if you thought obesity was a problem today, just consider how humans would look if they spent all day reclining in bed.

Is the authenticity of our human existence being supplanted by a digital existence? Social interaction and personal communication are being replaced by digital interaction via smart phones, email and Facebook. And if you think that I am a Luddite rebelling against all forms of technology, you would be wrong. After all, I am writing this blog on my Toshiba notebook computer and publishing it on my web site, Linkedin and Wordpress.

I do believe it is reasonable to question the impact of technology on our daily lives. I did grow up in the fifties when social interaction was the only interaction and the only reality. I can certainly see the value in having instant global communication capabilities and the world's knowledge base at your finger tips. Let's just not replace ourselves with digital devices. There is a lot to be said for the human experience and face to face human interaction. That is, after all, what makes us human isn't it?

What is your take on this topic? Technology evolution is impacting everyone on the planet. Now for my shameless plug: If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if we recruit enough of you, we can positively impact business and political policies around the country.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr web design myspace facebook friendster euniverse chris dewolfe tom anderson mark zuckerberg boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys web design myspace facebook scalability boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current events news comments augmented reality virtual mixed computer generated imagery iphones smart phones apple yelp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people 

 Since the recession began, California's budget deficit issues and double digit unemployment rates have a lot of people wondering if the state can continue leading the nation in technology and innovation. Ask most Californians, and they will tell you they don't believe their state is quite ready to throw in the towel. In fact, their ability to innovate will not only play a role in their recovery, but in America's recovery as well.

And even though I am a Texan living on the Silicon prairie in Austin, a city with one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country, I am convinced that California will do more than their share in helping lead this country out of recession. Why am I convinced California can bounce back and provide leadership in our nation's recovery? Even when I was a young guy growing up in the fifties, I noticed that most trends began in California and didn't hit the other states for at least six months to a year. Some trends never made it to Dallas, Des Moines or Minneapolis.

Of course, if that were my only evidence, I am not sure I could convince anyone that California would be able to maintain its position as a leader in technology and innovation. First, let's talk about green industries. There's Tesla, Fisker and Better Place. These are three electric car companies that believe they can compete with the big three automakers. California leads the nation in fuel economy standards and registered clean energy vehicles. The state leads the nation in the number of Hybrids, electric cars and natural gas powered vehicles on the road.

40% of the solar roof installations in this country exist in California. Solar prices are falling every day and most of the solar companies reside in California. Companies like SunPower, BrightSource, Solar City, eSolar, Nanosolar, and Solyndra. SunPower has over 5,000 employees and builds solar panels not just for residences, but massive power plants for utilities and roof top installations for big box stores. SunPower's Richmond, California plant assembles the world's most efficient solar panels in a plant where Ford built Model A's before World War II.  

The computer scientists and engineers are moving into renewable energy and combining their computer technology expertise with solar and LED technologies. eSolar is really a software application for controlling solar arrays in order to extract the maximum energy from these arrays regardless of the position of the sun. Biotech has been displacing the defense contractors in the San Diego area.

Biotech covers sectors such as Genomic medicine and photosynthetic algae technology. A number of discoveries and treatments have been developed recently through genomic medicine and they are really just scratching the surface. Photosynthetic algae technology could ultimately produce more fuel than corn, sugarcane or soy in the same space. Exxon Mobil and Synthetic Genomics are working on a $600 Million project together to develop fuel from algae.

Vinod Kosla, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems has raised $1.1 billion in venture capital to fund clean energy and biotech companies. Mr. Khosla has invested in Calera, a company working on a carbon capturing cement and Soladigm which is using semiconductor technologies to make energy efficient windows. Another of his investments is Amyris, a startup that is working on a process that will turn sugar into diesel fuel.

A major factor that puts the state on the leading edge has to do with the fact that California venture capitalists invested 43% of all the U.S. venture capital that went into high tech, biotech, renewable energy and other leading edge technology companies in 2008. They also have more scientists, engineers, marketers, lawyers, accountants and other knowledge workers than any other state in the union.

Cisco Systems, a California success that provides a significant portion of the infrastructure that powers the internet, spent millions developing their Telepresence system. Telepresence is the ultra high definition video conferencing system that has reduced the carbon footprints of large corporations that in the past found it necessary to meet with their contemporaries in person at locations around the world. One of Steven Speilberg's cinematographers helped create the feeling of intimacy in the video output. This is another example how one sector of California's economy teamed with another sector to improve the breed of both.  

Generally, the little guys like to see the movie star stumble and fall into disfavor. So while the rest of America might be writing off the state governed by a former actor and body builder, folks in California are saying that the recession of 2009 is just another speed bump on the road to glory.  And I, for one, would not  consider counting them out just yet. You know if California were a country, it be in the G-8.

What's you take on this topic? Do you think California will lead the nation out of recession?

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if we recruit enough of you, we can positively impact business and political policies around the country.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr web design myspace facebook friendster euniverse chris dewolfe tom anderson mark zuckerberg boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys web design myspace facebook scalability boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current events news comments augmented reality virtual mixed computer generated imagery iphones smart phones apple yelp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people california technology innovation green jobs renewable energy biotech electric cars solar job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs blogger 

 In a recent interview, Bill Gates was asked what the next big thing in computers and software might be. His answer was that it would be all about how humans interact with  computers and other digital devices. Frankly, I am not sure what kind of interface I would want in my next computer and/or phone. I hate using my notebook computer's keyboard and use a third party wireless keyboard and mouse in its place. The friendlier the device the happier I am. My cell is the old kind, so if you send me a text message, don't expect much of a response.

As you old time computer users know, before the graphical user interface and before the command line prompts on a video display became the norm, computer input consisted of batch files fed to the computer using key punched cards or paper tape. The computer's output came in the form giant sheets of perforated paper. Then came Video display units along with keyboards which provided computer operators with a screen that allowed them to read the commands they were typing into the computer and view the results on the screen. Thus, the command line became the standard computer interface in the sixties, seventies and early eighties.

Graphical user interfaces emerged in the early 1980's and made computers easier to use by normal people. This interface has been the standard since that time. The Apple MacIntosh which debuted in the late '80s was the first mass produced computer to utilize the graphical user interface. Windows for the PC followed shortly thereafter.  The mouse was actually developed in 1968 at the Stanford Research Institute by Douglas Englebart. He also demonstrated hypertext and shared screen collaboration at an event in San Francisco that year.

Today's computers utilize graphical interfaces, mice, and touch screen technologies. Although these technologies have existed for 20 years or more, they have been fine tuned to make computing and web surfing easy enough for most neophyte users to accomplish their tasks. The new smart phones have taken this touch screen technology to the next level and made computing a pervasive technology that can be accomplished from almost anywhere in the world using satellite communications and wi-fi. The multi-touch screen actually debuted in 1983 on an HP 150 computer.

So what does the future hold for the computer interface and will we adapt more easily to life with computing devices as these interfaces become more sophisticated and almost human? Gesture sensing will be one of those interfaces. Eye movement already exists for the multiply handicapped. In the future you will encounter projected displays in the air in front of you that will allow to use spatial positioning wands or even your own hands to communicate with various digital devices.

The Wii already incorporates some basic versions of activation via movement. Wouldn't it be cool if when your computer acted inappropriately you could take advantage of the old one finger salute? How would it respond? How many times have you already reacted to your computer's behavior by doing just that? It could be our revenge for the blue screen of death. The iPhone already has some apps that take advantage of this type of movement sensing.

Force feedback is another emerging interface component that will be used with touch screens in the future. Surgical training devices are embracing this interface to help surgeons become more proficient at complex procedures without having to practice on humans. Some game systems are experimenting with this interface and cell phone companies are researching the possibilities of this type of interface as well.

Gates spoke of verbal interfaces when asked about the future of computing. I remember a Star Trek movie from back in the eighties in which Scotty was attempting to use an American computer and tried first to talk to the computer. He soon realized that the computer didn't understand verbal commands, and he would have to type them in if he wanted the computer to do what he wanted it to do. And we can't forget the movie 2001:A Space Odyssey where the HAL 9000 computer tried to take control of the space station and in a last ditch effort uttered the famous line, "Don't turn me off Dave".

Voice recognition has been around since the seventies, but hasn't really taken off until the new millennium began. Not that we don't talk to our computers, it's just that they don't listen. With the advances of voice recognition this is about to change radically. The voice interface will probably be common in the next 5 to 10 years.

Imagine sitting in your office or cubicle while all of your officemates are talking to their computers simultaneously. Maybe we should hold on to our keyboards and mice for a while. The office could get pretty noisy. Sounds like a business opportunity for Bose, doesn't it? Whatever the emerging interface standard becomes, I am sure that we will still have plenty to complain about.

Don't be surprised if you encounter computers that can communicate directly with your brain in the next twenty years or less. Medical research has already come up with bionic nerve connection devices that operate prosthetic limbs simply by the amputee thinking about the moving that limb. Perception monitoring could be next. I am not sure I want the computer to know what I am thinking. Do you?

What do you think the next big interface will be?  Are you happy with your keyboard, mouse and other digital interfaces? Is your cell phone easy to use for a variety of tasks? Chime in. We want to hear your story.

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined our community, www.boomeropinion.com, please consider it. It is free and only takes a couple of minutes to sign up. You can share your viewpoint and voice your opinion on the critical issues facing America. And if we recruit enough of you, we can positively impact business and political policies around the country.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr web design myspace facebook friendster euniverse chris dewolfe tom anderson mark zuckerberg boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys web design myspace facebook scalability boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current events news comments augmented reality virtual mixed computer generated imagery iphones smart phones apple yelp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people california technology innovation green jobs renewable energy biotech electric cars solar job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs blogger future trends computers technology interface voice recognition mouse touch screen apple iphone cell phone smartphone boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging 

Since the internet became the go-to place for research, finding information, entertainment and socializing every business large and small has tried to come up with the best approach to branding, product recognition and monetizing their company's presence on the web. It doesn't appear that anyone one or any business has really figured out how to do this effectively.

Even the giants like Facebook and Twitter haven't cracked the code on how to monetize their traffic. While their valuations are in the billions their profits are non-existent. Facebook is valued at $9.5 billion while Twitter's value is estimated at $1 billion. Facebook has over 300 million regular users, but doesn't expect to go cash positive before 2010 and that doesn't necessarily mean it will be profitable. Twitter is not close to being cash positive, let alone profitable.

What does this say about the effectiveness of web advertising? What does this say about advertising your company, your brand or your products on a social media site? What it says to me is that no one, not even the most brilliant advertising executives on Madison Avenue, has figured out how to use this medium to bring brand recognition or brand awareness to their company or products.

The one exception is Google. Of course, they are not a social media site. Google determined this early on with their Adsense and Adwords programs. Being a search engine certainly gives Google a unique advantage and a head start on the other popular web sites. They have certainly done a tremendous job branding themselves over the years. Just "Google it". Their name has become a verb. Google is typically the first place anyone on the web will go to when they are looking for anything. Ads corresponding to that search make perfect sense.

The most popular social media sites will have to crack the code on effective web advertising soon. In order to survive they will need a better business model. Who will figure out how to help them do this - the web sites themselves, the advertisers or the advertising community? Some smart person, entity, or agency will generate some serious income whenever they do come up with a solution to this problem.

Currently banner ads just annoy most people and instead of reading the ad, they hurriedly try to figure out the quickest method of getting it off their screen. And why put the same ad online that you would put in a newspaper or magazine. Does the term multimedia ring a bell? Then there are the pop up motion ads that try to take over your screen while you are trying to read an article or get some needed information. Again, such ads tend to aggravate their audience instead of drawing them in.

On television or radio, the audience is captive and they don't have a choice other than changing the channel or the radio station. Of course, if you have Tivo or a DVR, then you can avoid even those advertisements. If you are watching a program using the internet as your medium, you will still be subjected to commercials, but in most cases there are fewer of them during the program particularly on sites like Hulu or a broadcast network site. Still the network ads are usually more compelling and more entertaining. Then again, how many ways can they sell us E.D. drugs? No more twin tubs please!

When it comes to social media, Steven Hodson in a recent column on Mashable.com, suggested that social media sites should ask for donations using Paypal to generate income. If you like Twitter or Facebook and use it regularly, then why wouldn't you want to contribute $1 or $5 a month. He calculated that if 50% of the Twitter users donated $1 per month, that would result in $500 million of revenue per month for Twitter. Personally, I don't believe users would fall for that concept, particularly given the fact that the users are the ones generating the content on that site. Without the tweets there would be no Twitter

Personally, I think the best approach would be a compelling well produced viral type video highlighting the advertisers' product or message. Videos that people would want to watch and not be forced to watch. You can view samples of this type of video at http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=140819. Check out the bottom of that page. These are agency produced videos that appear on YouTube. 30 and 60 second segments of these videos can also be seen in standard television commercials. On YouTube, the videos last 1-3 minutes. My favorites are the roller skating babies and the bulldog playing Tony Hawk's video game.

The most successful video ads would need a theme and be serialized. It is a proven fact that people recall and respond to ads that draw their attention. Recall is a logical process while recognition is an emotional process. Motion, such as video, evokes emotion, but the printed word normally doesn't do that. Of course these videos would need a recurring theme or character. There are plenty of well done TV ads that come to mind. The e-Trade baby is one. Remember Joe Izuzu? Okay I might have just dated myself.

These web videos could be original content or they come from a clip of a current box office hit movie that includes a clever use of your company's product. They could be elaborate productions or well thought out amateur videos. If you think that you can't produce an inexpensive video that draws millions of viewers, you need to watch the Pink Glove Dance on YouTube. This video was made to promote breast cancer awareness in a hospital using hospital staff as its cast and was done for very little money.

Come on people. It's time to think outside the box and get creative. A well-made, creatively done video ad should draw you in, not push you away. One option for Social Media sites would be to insert 15-20 second ads every 10-15 minutes. That might not be too intrusive for most people. If the user wanted to avoid these interruptions they could pay a monthly use fee to use that site, say $1 or $2. The web isn't going away and we need to come up with ways to make it a viable commercial enterprise. Wouldn't it be cool if the web ads were so good that your friends recommended you view some of these video ads?

With the advent of broadband and streaming video, web ads shouldn't be rehashed versions of print ads. That is sooo nineties. Video and/or clever animation is where it's at. Being able to quickly opt out of any web video should be mandatory. If a product ad isn't compelling enough to make its potential customers want to watch, then the viewer should be able to click it away. On the other hand, if it is good enough to bring you back several times, then the production will be well worth the investment.

What's you opinion about web advertising? Got a better idea? I would love to hear it. Comment on this blog and tell us what you really think.

If you are a Baby Boomer and haven't joined www.boomeropinion.com, then please consider joining our community. We are looking for Boomers who have opinions and don't mind ruffling a few feathers by telling America what they really think about the issues facing America.

Tags: chip heath dan switch made stick life skills business tools boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging peak performers motivation achievement goals objectives dreams passion psychology goal setting boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging baby boomers generation president obama u.s. sentate technology congress stimulus package renewable energy smart grid broadband research health-care electronic record keeping wind solar biofuel grants economy web internet social media polarization democratization biased reporting misinformation politics boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys ins 2000 9/11 stock market investments internet decade time magazine politics partisan congress senate wars iraq afghanistan deficit infrastructure wall st. investment banking commercial banks boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer pub innovation eric schmidt google technology green energy american leadership business internet congress commerce international boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public news comments blogs bloggers blogging politicians political parties internet web social media news sites deficit gererativity congress president national debt future generations boomer baby opinion 2nd poll opinions research online consumer public comments blogs bloggers blogging healthcare reform congress health insurance aarp business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics current advertising marketing prescription drugs pharmaceutical companies television bans ads business boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surve technology electronic medical records physicians doctors insurance companies healthcare providers stimulus job creation diagnosis treatments boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public news comm iphones flatulence trademarks trademark infringement technology boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey second debate democrats republicans people surveys insights popular topics curr web design myspace facebook friendster euniverse chris dewolfe tom anderson mark zuckerberg boomer baby opinion 2nd poll definition social causes political opinions research online consumer public survey