the organizational psychology of the internet of things: how to use technology to drive behavioral...

The Organizational Psychology of the Internet of ThingsHow to Use Technology to Drive Behavioral Change

The worldis turning digital.

Analysts are

predicting big things

• 30 billion IoT devices in service by 2020- IDC, 2015

• 50 percent of new business products and services with IoT elements by 2020- Gartner, 2016

• $11 trillion of economic impact via IoT technologies by 2025- McKinsey, 2015

So how are organizations responding?

Anticipated impact on the rise

2015

23%

2016

18%

2017

17%

Low or no impact

* Source: Smart Industry 2017 State of Initiative Report

2015

32%

2016

22%

2017

14%

Neutral impact

2015

45%

2016

59%

2017

69%

High or critical impact

Digital strategies are maturing

‘15

45%

‘16

28%

‘17

19%

’15

30%

‘16

32%

‘17

33%

‘15

13%

‘16

20%

‘17

21%

‘15

12%

‘16

19%

‘17

27%

No strategy Informal strategy 1-2 year horizon 3+ year horizon

None or informal strategy Formal strategy with timeline

76%

(2015)

61%

(2016)

52%

(2017)

24%

(2015)

39%

(2016)

48%

(2017)

* Source: Smart Industry 2017 State of Initiative Report

1. Lack of executive sponsorship

2. Organizational misalignment

3. Low cross-departmental collaboration

4. Culture that is slow to adopt change

5. Inconsistent market feedback

* Benson, Mark D. “Five Avoidable Complications Of Corporate IoT Innovation Programs.” Forbes

(December 2016).

But people still present the biggest challenges

Getting an IoT product market ready is tough.

Organizational change and alignment is tougher.

IoT projects are similar to

assembling a complex puzzle

REQUIRESPEOPLE

HAS LOTS OFDISCONNECTED

PIECES

DOESN’T INCLUDE

DIRECTIONS

When solving a puzzle,

there are two primary strategies

INSIDE OUT OUTSIDE IN

IoT initiatives fail because they typically

invite misalignment from the start.

Any organization that

designs a system will

produce a design whose

structure is a copy of the

organization’s

communication structure.

Melvin Conway

Systems mimic the organizations that produce them

HIERARCHICAL MILITARISTIC SELF-ORGANIZED

CULT-FOLLOWING LOPSIDED

LegalEngineering

TERRITORIAL

*Adapted from Manu Cornet

User Experience,

Sales, and Marketing

Information

Technology

Systems

Engineering

Embedded

Engineering

Service and

Support

Your Web-based

Administration

Your Mobile App

Your Corporate

Data Archive

Your Gateway

Solution

Your Connected

Sensors

Your Connected

Product

Your Monitoring

Service

DEVICE COMMUNICATION USER INTERFACE

Your

Application

Servers

Your Data Mining

& Analysis Efforts

INFRASTRUCTURE

MANAGEMENT

+

Your Security

Identification

Process

Your Device

Provisioning

Process

Your Device

Management &

Support Tools

INFRASTRUCTURE

+

Your BLE

Connectivity

Your Cellular

Uplink

72 $

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

Rigid organizational structures…

produce IoT systems…

that are fragmented, brittle, and susceptible to failure

Successful organizations view IoT as a strategic decision

Resulting in a cohesive digital strategy

that ensures everyone is working

toward the same outcome.

Inverted Conway Maneuver

Design a system that models

the way in which your future

organization should

communicate and behave

Mark Benson

“All things are difficult before they are easy.”

- Thomas Fuller, 17th century English historian and churchman

Conscious Competence Learning Model

UNCONSCIOUS INCOMPETENCE

UNCONSCIOUS COMPETENCE

CONSCIOUS INCOMPETENCE

CONSCIOUSCOMPETENCE

Generally unaware and blissfully naive

Mastery as second nature

Acknowledgement of competency deficit

Success via concerted effort

The Trickiest Parts Are The Transitions

UNCONSCIOUS INCOMPETENCE

UNCONSCIOUS COMPETENCE

CONSCIOUS INCOMPETENCE

CONSCIOUSCOMPETENCE

Generally unaware and blissfully naive

Mastery as second nature

Acknowledgement of competency deficit

Success via concerted effort

These companies all innovate from the outside in

Five best practices for how organizations can build a sustainable IoT competency

1. Have a baseline current IoT competence in the areas

of digital innovation, technology maturity, business

model clarity and market readiness.

Best Practices for Building an Organizational IoT Competency

* Benson, Mark D. “Building An Organizational IoT Competency: What You Need To Know.” Forbes

(April 2017).

2. Develop and communicate a clear, compelling,

actionable IoT strategy across the organization that

includes executive support, funding from the top and a

mandate for cross-departmental collaboration.

Best Practices for Building an Organizational IoT Competency

* Benson, Mark D. “Building An Organizational IoT Competency: What You Need To Know.” Forbes

(April 2017).

3. Start small with early wins targeted at reducing

business risk while addressing pressing questions early.

Best Practices for Building an Organizational IoT Competency

* Benson, Mark D. “Building An Organizational IoT Competency: What You Need To Know.” Forbes

(April 2017).

4. Look for opportunities to standardize and reuse

common components across divisions and projects.

Best Practices for Building an Organizational IoT Competency

* Benson, Mark D. “Building An Organizational IoT Competency: What You Need To Know.” Forbes

(April 2017).

5. Close the knowledge gap by building the organization

from the outside in. Start with external help and,

simultaneously, develop and grow internal core IoT

competencies over time.

Best Practices for Building an Organizational IoT Competency

* Benson, Mark D. “Building An Organizational IoT Competency: What You Need To Know.” Forbes

(April 2017).

The way organizations respond to the IoT trend will define their success for the coming decade

Thank You.

Mark Benson

https://twitter.com/markbenson

https://www.linkedin.com/in/markbenson

http://exosite.com http://markbenson.io

https://twitter.com/exosite

https://www.linkedin.com/company/exosite