blogging at O'Reilly Radar for a bit

I'll be guest blogging on the O'Reilly Radar blog for a little while.

You can see my first post here.

Is language a function of your networking?

David Gravel is quoted as thinking so given the massive efficiency to shared languages in a global world.  It's a tidy and nice argument.

If you picked two people at random off the face of the earth and asked them to pick one language in which to communicate with someone they knew nothing about, which language would each person choose? The language they’d pick would depend on a series of “reciprocal expectations” — best guesses not just about which language you suppose the other person speaks but which language he thinks you suppose he will speak — which depends, in turn, on which one you think he thinks you suppose he will speak. And so on, until your head swims.

In today’s globalizing world, the probability is increasing that two random people would choose English for their best chance at unplanned linguistic coordination. And this isn’t merely a thought experiment: it’s being played out, with more information among the parties, in the decisions of hundreds of millions of people now learning English as a second language.

It reminds me a bit of David Foster Wallace's wonderful argument that grammar, too, is a function of your social setting (the pre-SNA way of saying networking).

You'll need a Harper's Subscription to view the link, but you should have one of those anyway.

These arguments make me wonder if, given this powerful network effect protecting the English language, there's any need to mandate a single language in the U.S., Britain. I'm also wondering just how the Quebecois intend to maintain French over time.

Indian Firms, Where Innovation Goes to Die

The Navi Radjou at the Harvard Business Blog writes about the dearth of innovation going on in India. It's a structure problem according to the analysis. The culprit works out to be family-run, risk adverse firms with nepotistic power structures.  

No doubt. 

The solution: bring on "Web 2.0" software to break apart the power structure and liberate the wisdom of crowds. 

No doubt, again, except....

...it seems to me that the real culprit is the "family-run, risk adverse" part. These power structures form when shareholders have few legally enforceable rights, so power is only transferred from an owner to trusted family agents, regardless of skill.  So you, the clever underling will never get at taking the reins of the company, lessening your desire to take on the risk of dramatically changing the direction of a firm.  (The counter point firm, Nokia, is not a "family-run" firm).

All the software in the world can't release innovation without incentives on the part of your clever workers, and in fact, the lack of leadership opportunities likely creates pressures on clever employees to take their ideas outside of the firm.  (It's interesting to note that overall innovation is strong in India, just not within established firms - with  venture investments in 2007  up 166% over 2006)

My takeaway - software is great, but culture and structure are far more important determinants of entrepreneurial success in a firm.  Firmer rule of law would free up the family-restricted transfers of power, and open up new incentives for Indian workers to donate their ideas to their firms.

when mbas go wrong

On a related note, my technology strategy professor laughed at the idea that Apple might have a competive advantage in "style and taste".