Podcasts about technology development

Carl Walz is an astronaut, a pioneer of space exploration, and a proud Clevelander! As an astronaut, Carl is a veteran of four spaceflights, logging a total of 231 days in outer space and performing three spacewalks during that time.A physicist by training, with degrees from Kent State and John Carroll University, Carl made his way to NASA via the Air Force, where he served as a flight test engineer and managed all engineering activities related to F-16 avionics and armaments.At NASA, he was a mission specialist on STS-51 in 1993, an orbiter flight engineer on STS-65 in 1994, a mission specialist on STS-79 in 1996, and ultimately served 196 days in space as a flight engineer on ISS Expedition Four from 2001 to 2002.His expansive career at NASA includes missions aboard the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS). Most notably, Carl served as a flight engineer for ISS Expedition Four, living and working in space for 196 consecutive days. Later, as Director for the Advanced Capabilities Division at NASA Headquarters, Carl led critical programs involving Human Research, Technology Development, and Lunar Robotic Exploration.To say this was an awesome conversation would be the understatement of Lay of The Land…Our conversation explored his rigorous journey to becoming an astronaut, the profound experience of living and working in space, the awe-inspiring perspective gained from orbit, and the unique challenges of transitioning back to life on Earth. We also discussed his role in shaping the future of private sector space exploration (Oceaneering, Orbital ATK), international collaboration in space missions, and even his time performing with the only astronaut band in history!00:00:00 - Introduction to Carl Walz and His Journey  00:05:39 - The Path to Becoming an Astronaut  00:07:49 - The Ohio Astronaut Legacy  00:10:07 - Experiences in Space Missions  00:12:37 - The Awe of Spacewalks  00:14:58 - Life on the International Space Station  00:17:33 - Scientific Experiments in Space  00:19:46 - Dealing with Adversity in Space  00:21:41 - The Fulfillment of Space Exploration  00:23:56 - Transitioning Back to Earth and the Private Sector  00:30:55 - Navigating the Challenges of Spacecraft Development  00:35:09 - The Evolution of Public-Private Partnerships in Space  00:38:36 - The Future of Space Exploration: Mars and Beyond  00:43:59 - Perspectives on Extraterrestrial Life and UFOs  00:45:40 - The Unique Experience of an Astronaut Band  00:50:38 - Hidden Gem-----LINKS:https://www.linkedin.com/in/carl-walz-21b4579/https://www.oceaneering.com/-----SPONSOR:Roundstone InsuranceRoundstone Insurance is proud to sponsor Lay of The Land. Founder and CEO, Michael Schroeder, has committed full-year support for the podcast, recognizing its alignment with the company's passion for entrepreneurship, innovation, and community leadership.Headquartered in Rocky River, Ohio, Roundstone was founded in 2005 with a vision to deliver better healthcare outcomes at a more affordable cost. To bring that vision to life, the company pioneered the group medical captive model — a self-funded health insurance solution that provides small and mid-sized businesses with greater control and significant savings.Over the past two decades, Roundstone has grown rapidly, creating nearly 200 jobs in Northeast Ohio. The company works closely with employers and benefits advisors to navigate the complexities of commercial health insurance and build custom plans that prioritize employee well-being over shareholder returns. By focusing on aligned incentives and better health outcomes, Roundstone is helping businesses save thousands in Per Employee Per Year healthcare costs.Roundstone Insurance — Built for entrepreneurs. Backed by innovation. Committed to Cleveland.-----Stay up to date by signing up for Lay of The Land's weekly newsletter — sign up here.Past guests include Justin Bibb (Mayor of Cleveland), Pat Conway (Great Lakes Brewing), Steve Potash (OverDrive), Umberto P. Fedeli (The Fedeli Group), Lila Mills (Signal Cleveland), Stewart Kohl (The Riverside Company), Mitch Kroll (Findaway — Acquired by Spotify), and over 200 other Cleveland Entrepreneurs.Connect with Jeffrey Stern on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffreypstern/Follow Lay of The Land on X @podlayofthelandhttps://www.jeffreys.page/

(2:30) - Smallest walking robot makes microscale measurementsThis episode was brought to you by Mouser, our favorite place to get electronics parts for any project, whether it be a hobby at home or a prototype for work. Click HERE to learn more about another micro-topic - micro-mobility - and how it will/already is changing our urban infrastructure! Become a founding reader of our newsletter: http://read.thenextbyte.com/ As always, you can find these and other interesting & impactful engineering articles on Wevolver.com.

Highlights from this week's conversation include:False Hope in Data Roles (1:17)Naivety of Junior Data Analysts (4:27)The Challenge of Defining Data (6:41)Struggles with Enterprise BI Tools (9:43)Career Advice for Data Professionals (12:36)Generational Shifts in Data Roles (16:51)Self-Service Data Requests (18:17)The Importance of Analysis Skills (19:46)The Broader Context of Analysis (21:44)Boring Challenges in AI Deployment (23:29)Technology Development vs. Human Absorption (26:14)VC Resolutions for 2025 (27:00)Value Addition in Leadership (32:08)Final Thoughts and Wrap-Up (33:06)The Data Stack Show is a weekly podcast powered by RudderStack, the CDP for developers. Each week we'll talk to data engineers, analysts, and data scientists about their experience around building and maintaining data infrastructure, delivering data and data products, and driving better outcomes across their businesses with data.RudderStack helps businesses make the most out of their customer data while ensuring data privacy and security. To learn more about RudderStack visit rudderstack.com.

Welcome to episode #966 of Six Pixels of Separation - The ThinkersOne Podcast. Christine Rosen is a thinker whose work boldly interrogates the intersections of history, technology, and culture, and she's someone I've long admired for her incisive intellect. Christine's new book, The Extinction of Experience - Being Human In A Disembodied World, invites us to reflect on what we lose when technology mediates so much of our lives. In this conversation, we unpacked the book's provocative thesis: that the human experiences most fundamental to our identity - face-to-face connection, serendipity, patience, and risk - are at risk of atrophy in an increasingly virtual world. Christine, whose earlier works include Preaching Eugenics, My Fundamentalist Education, The Feminist Dilemma, and Acculturated, takes a nuanced, critical stance on technology. She acknowledges its benefits but urges caution about its unintended consequences. Together, we explore the blurred boundaries between virtual and real, the societal implications of a two-tier care system, and the surprising resurgence of physical community spaces like libraries and malls post-pandemic. Christine's historical perspective, informed by her background as a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and her experience as a columnist for Commentary, lends depth to her argument that we must actively choose to reclaim experiences that ground us in the physical world. She shared insights on how tools like AI might aid healthcare but warned of the risks when they replace human judgment in areas like justice or personal relationships. Her reflections on community, loneliness, and the enduring importance of “third spaces” remind us that connection is essential to our humanity. If you've ever wondered how to balance the convenience of technology with the richness of lived experience, this conversation is a must-listen. Enjoy the conversation... Running time: 1:06:40. Hello from beautiful Montreal. Listen and subscribe over at Apple Podcasts. Listen and subscribe over at Spotify. Please visit and leave comments on the blog - Six Pixels of Separation. Feel free to connect to me directly on Facebook here: Mitch Joel on Facebook. Check out ThinkersOne. or you can connect on LinkedIn. ...or on Twitter. Here is my conversation with Christine Rosen. The Extinction of Experience - Being Human In A Disembodied World. Preaching Eugenics. My Fundamentalist Education. The Feminist Dilemma. Acculturated. American Enterprise Institute. Commentary. This week's music: David Usher 'St. Lawrence River'. Chapters: (00:00) - Introduction to Christine Rosen and Her Work. (02:57) - Defining Humanity in a Technological Age. (06:06) - The Ambivalence of Technology: Optimism vs. Skepticism. (09:09) - The Role of Critical Questions in Technology Development. (11:58) - Balancing Innovation and Regulation in AI. (15:00) - AI in Healthcare vs. AI in Defense. (18:07) - The Impact of Technology on Human Connection. (20:56) - The Deterioration of Local Communities. (24:05) - The Consequences of Living in Public. (26:53) - Navigating Online Dating in a Digital World. (30:02) - The Importance of In-Person Connections. (39:00) - The Role of Technology in Human Connection. (42:29) - Navigating Confirmation Bias. (45:50) - Collective Action and Community Solutions. (49:12) - The Challenge of Parenting in a Digital Age. (51:06) - The Evolution of Writing and Communication. (55:02) - Reading Trends Among Youth. (01:00:59) - Physical Challenges and Personal Growth.

Nano One Materials CEO Dan Blondal joined Steve Darling from Proactive to share news the company has announced that the company has secured $18 million in financing from the Government of Québec to advance its innovative clean technology initiatives. The funding package includes a $15 million loan from the Ministry of the Economy, Innovation and Energy, facilitated by Investissement Québec, and a $3 million grant from the Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks through its Technoclimat program. Blondal explained that the financing will support the piloting and commercialization of Nano One's proprietary One-Pot™ process and expand production capacity at the company's lithium iron phosphate (LFP) manufacturing facility in Candiac, Québec. The $15 million loan backs $63.4 million in eligible expenditures between January 2023 and December 2026, with $30 million already incurred. The loan repayments will commence 60 months after the initial disbursement and extend over the following five years. The $3 million grant is earmarked to reimburse expenses incurred at the Candiac plant and to facilitate the transition to cleaner, more efficient manufacturing practices. Blondal emphasized that this funding strengthens Nano One's mission to deliver sustainable battery materials and supports the company's role in advancing Québec's clean energy and manufacturing ecosystem. #nanoonebatterymaterialscorp #tsx #nano #otc #nnomf #BatteryTech #CleanEnergy #LFP #Innovation #RenewableTech #GreenTech #Sustainability #ElectricVehicles #FutureTech #MaterialsScience #TechNews #EnvironmentalImpact #EnergyStorage #TechInnovation #Cleantech #NanoMaterials #2024Updates #EcoFriendly #AdvancedMaterials #InvestmentOpportunity #invest #investing #investment #investor #stockmarket #stocks #stock #stockmarketnews

Associate Chief Medical Informatics Officer Josh Lesko, MD, joins us to discuss the need for physicians to have a voice in the development of the technology they use. Dr. Lesko talks about the benefit of having a degree in computer science as a physician, how practices can involve clinicians in technology development and lessons learned from the rollout of the EHR. American Medical Association CXO Todd Unger hosts.

In this episode, Bill Bellows and Andrew Stotz explore the intersection of variation and quality through awareness of the "Paradigms of Variation.” In a progression from acceptability to desirability, Bill created this 4-part model to offer economic insights for differentiating “Zero Defect” quality from “Loss Function" quality," with the aim of avoiding confusion between precision and accuracy when desirability is the choice.   Learn how to decide which paradigm your quality management system fits into! TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.5 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 31 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. This is episode 7, The Paradigms of Variation. Bill, take it away.   0:00:30.3 Bill Bellows: Thank you, Andrew, and welcome to our listeners, as well as viewers, if you have access to the viewing version. Yeah, so I went back and listened to Episode 6. I'm going out bike riding 2-3 hours a day, so I listened to the podcast, listened to other things, stop and write down. Let me go write that down. And, so, we're going to pick up today on some major themes. And, what I keep coming back to is, is I think the difference between acceptability and desirability is the difference between how most companies operate and how a company inspired by Dr. Deming would operate.   0:01:29.3 BB: And, I just think of, if there was no difference between the two, then... Well, lemme even back up. I mentioned last time we were talking about why my wife and I buy Toyotas. And, yes, we've had one terrible buy, which I continue to talk about. [laughter] And, it's fun because it's just a reminder that even a company like Toyota can deliver a really lousy product, which we were unfortunate to have purchased. And, we're not the only ones that, and they've rebounded and they've apologized, they've had issues. There's no doubt about that. They have issues, but they have notably been inspired by Dr. Deming.   0:02:30.6 BB: The one thing I brought up last time was relative on this thinking of acceptability, desirability, where acceptability is looking at things and saying it's a quality system of good and bad. It's acceptable, which is good and unacceptable is not good. And, that's how most organizations view quality. Again, the focus of this series is Misunderstanding Quality. Our previous series was broadly looking at implications for Dr. Deming's ideas. And, here our focus is quality. And, so what I'm trying to get across here is quality management, traditional quality management.   0:03:17.4 BB: In most organizations, in all organizations I've ever interacted with is acceptability basis, good parts and bad parts. It's a measurement system of it meets requirements, we ship it, if it meets requirements, we buy it. And, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think a system focused on acceptability can explain... To me, it does not explain the incredible reliability I have personally experienced in Toyota products.   0:03:46.9 BB: Now, I'm working with a graduate student and I wanna pursue that as a research topic in the spring, 'cause for all I know, the reliability of components in all cars has improved. I don't know if it's, I only by Toyota, 'cause so this woman I've met recently and I'm mentoring her and we're working on a research project. And, I thought recently, I'd like... And, I'm not sure how to do this, but I just know, I think I've mentioned I worked at my father's gas station back in the '70s and I remember replacing water pumps and alternators and all this stuff. This was before Japanese cars were everywhere. There were Japanese cars, but not like you see today.   0:04:33.3 BB: And, so I'm just used to all those components being routinely replaced. And, all I know is I don't routinely replace anything but the battery and the tires and change the oil. I think that's about it. Everything else is pretty good. But, I do think the differentiation between Toyota and most other companies is their appreciation of desirability and how to manage desirability. And, that's why I keep coming back to this as a theme for these sessions. And, what I think is a differentiation between a Deming view of quality and all other views of quality. What I tried to say last time is I just give you indications of a focus on acceptability. It's a quality system which looks at things that are good or things that are bad. It's, last time we talked about category thinking. It's black and white thinking. If the parts are good, then the mindset, if they're good, then they fit.   0:05:38.4 BB: Well, with a focus on continuum thinking, then you have the understanding that there's variation in good. And, that leads to variation in fit and variation in performance. And, that's a sense of things are relatively good, not absolutely good, whereas black and white category thinking is acceptability. They're all good. And, if they're all good, then they should all fit. I was, when I was at Rocketdyne, met, and the one thing I wanted to point out is... Again, as I said in the past, so much of what I'm sharing with the audience and people I've met through these podcasts or people I'm mentoring, helping them bring these ideas to their respective organizations or their consultants, whatever it is.   0:06:29.0 BB: And, so I like to provide examples in here for things for them to go off and try. You at the end of each podcast encourage them to reach out to me, a number of them have, and from that I've learned a great deal. And, so one guy was... A guy I was working with at Rocketdyne, he was at a site that did final assembly of rocket engine components. And, so one thing I'd say is the people who... And for those listening, if you wanna find people in your organization that would really value the difference between an acceptability focus and a desirability focus, find the people that do assembly, find the people that put things together. 'Cause the ones that machine the holes, they think all the holes are good. People that make the tubes, all the tubes are good. But, find the people that are trying to put the tubes into the holes. Those are the people I loved working with because they were the ones that felt the difference every day.   0:07:31.1 BB: And, so I was in a workshop for a week or so. And there's two people ahead of me. They came from this final assembly operation of Rocketdyne. And, during a break, I was trying to clarify some of the things I had said and I used, I shared with them an example of how when we focused on not the tubes by themselves or the holes by themselves, that we focused on how well the tubes go into the holes, which has a lot to do with the clearance between them and the idea that nobody owns the clearance. One person owns one part, one owns another. And, what we realized is if we focused on the relationship, what a big difference it made. So I'm explaining it to him and he turns to me and he says, he's like, "Oh, my God," he says, "I've got hundreds of turbine blades and a bunch of turbine wheels and the blades slide into the wheel." And he says, "I can't get the blades onto the wheel."   0:08:31.0 BB: And I said, "But they're all good." He says, "They're all good." But he said, "Well, what you're now explaining to me is why they don't go together. Why I have this headache." So I said, "Well, do you know where the blades come from?" He says, "yeah". And I said, "Do you know where the wheels come from?" He says, "yeah". I said, "Well, why don't you call them up and talk to them?" He says, "There's no reason for a phone call 'cause all they're going to say is, "Why are you calling me? They're all good." So, he just walked away with his head exploding 'cause he's got all these things.   0:09:05.8 BB: And, so I use that for our listeners is if you want to find people that would really resonate with the difference between acceptable and desirable, talk to the people that have to put things together. There you will find... And, so my strategy was, get them smart. Now they have to be patient with the people upstream 'cause the people upstream are not deliberately doing what they're doing to them. So, what you don't want to do is have them get... You want their consciousness to go up but you now wanna use them to talk to the component people. Now you've got a conversation. Otherwise, the component people say, "Why are you talking to me? Everything I do is good."   0:09:51.6 BB: So, I just want to talk at this point, just to reinforce that I think there's something going on with Toyota that is very intentional about managing desirability when it makes sense using acceptability. So, it's a choice. And, so indications of a focus on desirability is when you look at options that are acceptable and you say, "Of all these apples, I want this one. It's the ripest. Of all these donuts, I want this one. It's got the most sprinkles. Of all these parking spots, I want this one. It's a little bit wider than the other. I want this surgeon. I want this professor for this course."   0:10:33.8 BB: All right. So, what we're saying "is of all the choices, I want this one". So, some new ideas I want to get into tonight are the Paradigms of Variation A, B, C, D, and E. Paradigm A we looked at in the past. That's just acceptability. Does it meet requirements or not? The quality focus is achieving zero defects. And tonight I want to get into B and C. The next time we'll look at D and E. In explaining these ideas recently to someone who listened to one of our previous podcasts and were focusing on, he started asking about decision making. And that got me thinking about, of course, I took years ago decision making with Kepner and Tregoe. And there they talk about decisions. We're gonna look, we're gonna go buy a car, go buy a house. We're gonna make a decision.   0:11:29.4 BB: And, once you decide on the decision, you then list the criteria of the decision. And you come up with all the things you want in this decision. And then you look at each of them and you say, "is it a must or a want"? And let's say you're looking at houses. It could be a lot of houses to go look at. What makes this focus on acceptability, it's musts and wants. And must is very much acceptability. So you say: "We're looking for a house that must be one story, it must be in the middle of the block. The house must be in the middle of the block. It must have four bedrooms, must have two bathrooms". So now when you're looking at all these houses, acceptability says "I'm only gonna look at the ones that meet those requirements". And, so now the strategy is to go from hundreds of options down to an order of magnitude less.   0:12:25.1 BB: Now we're going to get it down to maybe 20. Now you look at the wants. So you've got an original list of all the things, the criteria, and you look at each one and say, "is it a must, is it a want"? And what I've just said is the first screening is all the ones that pass the must get into the next category. Well, with the Kepner-Tregoe folks, they talk about must, which is acceptability, and the wants are about desirability.   0:12:51.4 BB: And then here it ties into Dr. Taguchi's mindset, and we'll look at Taguchi in a future session. Taguchi looks at a characteristic of quality, such as the diameter of a hole, the performance of an automobile, miles per gallon. And he says, in terms of desirability, there's three different targets. There is desirability, I want the smallest possible value. So, if you're buying a house, it could be, I want the lowest possible electric bills where zero is the goal. It's not gonna be zero, but I'm looking, of all the ones that pass the must, now I'm looking at all the houses, and I'm saying "I want the lowest possible electric bill". That's a Smaller-is-Best.   0:13:35.9 BB: Larger-is-Best is I want something which is as big as possible. It could be I want the most roof facing the sun, in case I put solar in. That's a Larger-is-Best characteristic, where Taguchi would say the ideal is infinity, but the bigger, the better, as opposed to Smaller-is-Better. And, the other characteristic is what Taguchi calls Nominal-is-Best, is I have an ideal single value in mind. And in each case, the reason I point that out is that desirability is about going past acceptability and saying amongst all the things that are acceptable, I want the smallest, I want the largest, or I want this. It is a preference for one of those.   0:14:19.4 BB: So, I thought... I was using that to explain to this friend the other day, and I thought that would be nice to tie in here. That desirability is a focus on of all the things that meet requirements, now I want to go one step further. That's just not enough. All right, so now let's get into Paradigms B and C. And I want to use an exercise we used in the first series. And, the idea for our audience is imagine a quality characteristic having a lower requirement, a minimum, otherwise known as the lower spec, the lower tolerance. So, there's a minimum value, and then there's a maximum value. And, when I do this in my classes, I say "let's say the quality characteristic is the outer diameter of a tube." And, then so what I'd like the audience to appreciate is we've got a min and a max.   0:15:18.9 BB: And, then imagine your job as listener is to make the decision as to who to buy from. And. let's say we've got two suppliers that are ready to provide us with their product, these tubes that we're gonna buy. And, your job as a listener is to make the decision as to who to buy from. Who are we going to buy from? And, so we go off and we tell them, "Here's the min, here's the max," and they come back. And, they each give us a distribution. And, so what I'd like the audience to think about is a distribution. Just think very simply of two normal distributions, two Gaussian distributions. And, let's say the first distribution goes all the way from the min to the max. It takes up the entire range.   0:16:08.5 AS: So wide and flat.   0:16:12.1 BB: Wide and flat. That's supplier one. And supplier two, let's say is maybe three quarters of the way over. It's incredibly uniform. It uses a very small fraction of the tolerance. So that's tall and narrow. That's distribution two as opposed to wide and flat. So, imagine we've got those two to buy from. But imagine also, and this is a highly idealized scenario. And, I use this and this is why I want to share it with our audience. Because it becomes a great way of diving into what I think is a lot of confusion about meeting requirements. And, so what I want you to imagine is that no matter who you buy from, they both promise that they will deliver at the same price per tube.   0:17:00.8 BB: So, no matter who you buy from, price-wise, they are identical. To which I'd say that's highly idealized, but that's a given. Criteria number two, the delivery rates are the same. So, we cannot differentiate on delivery. We cannot differentiate on price. The third condition we find out is that everything they deliver meets requirements, 100%. So, if there is any scrap and rework, they don't ship that to us. So, everything they deliver meets requirements. And, again, that's highly idealized.   0:17:41.6 BB: Number four is the distributions are in control. And, that means that the processes are predictable and stable. And, that's guaranteed. So, imagine these distributions day by day every order is the same shape, the same average, the same amount of variation. Also, it will never change. It will never change. And, the other thing I want to point out in this fourth point here is that your job as the buyer is to buy these. They are used as is within our organization. , 0:18:15.5 BB: And, the fifth point is that there's a min and a max. And, so I've been using this exercise for, gosh, going back to 1995, and I throw it out there and then I show them the distributions. I say "same price, same schedule, delivery rate, everything meets requirements, distributions never change shape or location. You're going to use as is. And there's the min, there's the max. Who do you buy from?" And, I give people not only do we buy from one or two, but I also say I'll give you a third option.   0:18:51.5 BB: The third option is it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. So, what I find is that three quarters of the audience will take distribution two, the narrow one. And when I ask them, why do you like distribution two? They say, "because it has less variation". I then say, "From what?" Then they say, "From each other." And, that's what a standard deviation is, variation from each other. So roughly 75% plus and minus...   [overlapping conversation]   0:19:25.8 AS: When you say of each other, you're talking about each other curve or each other item in the...   0:19:31.3 BB: Each other tube.  So, the amount of variation from all the tubes are close together, so the variation from each other.   0:19:38.6 AS: Okay. Each item. Yeah, okay.   0:19:41.8 BB: Standard deviation is the average variation from the average value. So, when I ask them, why do you like two? Okay, and then I asked the ones who take the wide one in the middle, I say, "why do you like that one," and they say because... And, actually, we'll come back to that. This is pretty funny. They will take that, but a very small percent say it doesn't matter, and here's what's interesting, if I didn't show the distributions, if all I did was say there's two suppliers out there, the same price, same schedule, that guarantee zero defects, the results will never change. Here's the min, here's the max, I'm willing to bet if I didn't show the distributions, people would say "it doesn't matter, I'll take either one". But, as soon as I show them the distributions, they want the narrow one. And, I use this for our attendees, this is a great way to show people that they really don't believe in tolerances, 'cause as soon as you go past meeting requirements, what you're really saying is, there's a higher bar.   0:21:05.6 AS: Okay, so requirements would be... Or, tolerances would be the extremes of that flat, wide curve. And, any one of those outcomes meets the tolerance.   0:21:17.5 BB: Yes, and so for companies that are striving to meet requirements, why is it when I give you two distributions that meet requirements... Why is it when I show you the distributions, and I'm willing to bet if I don't show you the distributions and all you know is they're 100% good, then you say "well, it doesn't matter," Well then what changes when I show you the distributions?   0:21:43.6 AS: I know why I'd choose the narrow one.   0:21:48.1 BB: Go ahead.   0:21:49.1 AS: I know how damn hard it is to reduce variation and I forget about any tolerance of anything, if I have two companies that show me a wide distribution, and another one shows me a narrow one, and let's say it's accurate. I'm much more impressed with how a company can do the same exact output as another company, the same product that they're trying to deliver, but they are producing a much more narrow range of outcome, which could be that they just have automation in their production line and the other one has manual.   0:22:27.4 BB: And, I have seen that within Rocketdyne, I've seen processes do that. I have seen the wide become the narrow through automation. Yeah. Okay, so hold that thought then. So, what I do in my graduate classes is I show that... Not only do I give them two options, I give them four options. So, I throw in two other distributions, but really what it comes down to is the wide one versus the narrow one, and then the other two, I throw in there that usually aren't taken, they're distractions. All right, so what I'll do in a graduate class in quality management is to show that and get the results I just showed. If I present the same exercise and then say, "imagine the average value of distribution one, the middle of distribution one, imagine that is the ideal value".   0:23:24.7 AS: That, you're talking about the wide and flat.   0:23:28.4 BB: Yes. So, all I do is I go back to the entire exercise and now I add in a line at the average of the wide distribution, and then go through and ask one more time, who would you take.   0:23:46.3 AS: So, now the dilemma that the listener has is that now we have a, within limits, within tolerances, we have a wide but flat distribution that's centered on the middle point between the upper and lower tolerance.   0:24:06.4 BB: Yeah, yes.   0:24:08.8 AS: And, then we have... Go ahead.   0:24:11.7 BB: Well, yeah, that is distribution one, same as the first part, we went through this, and all I'm doing now is saying, "imagine the average value of the middle is said to be the ideal value".   0:24:29.4 AS: And, now you're gonna tell us that the narrow one is not on that central or ideal value.   0:24:36.2 BB: No, that is still where it is at the three-quarter point, all I've done is now said, this is desirability. I'm now saying "that is the ideal value, that is the target, that is the value we prefer". And, people still take the narrowest distribution number two.   0:24:58.8 AS: I wouldn't take the narrow one because I would think that the company would have to prove to me that they can shift that narrow curve.   0:25:06.6 BB: Well, okay, and I'm glad you brought that up because according to the explanation I gave of equal price, equal schedule, meets requirements. I deliberately put in the criteria that you have to use them as is. So, now I'm forcing people to choose between the narrowest one over there at the three-quarter point, and the wide one on target. And, there's no doubt if I gave them the option of taking the narrow distribution and sliding it over, they would. Every single person would do that. But, when I give you a choice of, okay, now what? So, two things here, one is, is it calling out the ideal of value, 'cause desirability is not just beyond acceptability, it is saying, "I desire this value, I want this parking spot, I want this apple, I want this value". And, that's something we've been alluding to earlier, but that's what I wanna call out today is that...   0:26:13.7 BB: So, in other words, when I presented the exercise of the two distributions, without calling out what's desirable, all I'm doing is saying they're both acceptable, which do you prefer? But, instead of saying it doesn't matter, I'd like the narrowest one, and it may well be what people are doing is exactly what you're saying is the narrowest one seems better and easily could be for what you explained.   0:26:40.8 BB: But, what's interesting is, even when I call out what's desirable as the value, people will take the narrowest distribution, and so now what I wanna add to our prior conversation is Paradigm A, acceptability, the Paradigm A response would be, it doesn't matter. Choosing the narrowest one, otherwise known as precision, we're very precisely hitting that value, small standard deviation, that's what I refer to as Paradigm B, piece-to -piece consistency. Paradigm C is desirability being on the ideal value, that's piece-to-target consistency. And, in Dr. Taguchi's work, what he's talking about is the impact downstream of not just looking at the tubes, but when you look at how the tubes are inserted into a hole, perhaps, then what he's saying is that the reason you would call out the desirable value is what you're saying is how this tube integrates in a bigger system matters, which is why I want this value.   0:27:54.2 AS: Okay, so let's go back, A, meet requirements, that's acceptability. Anything within those tolerances we can accept. B is a narrow distribution, what you called precision or piece-to -piece consistency. And what was C?   0:28:12.8 BB: C is, I'll take the wide distribution where the average value is on target, that's piece- to-target consistency. Otherwise known as accuracy.   0:28:27.3 AS: Okay. Target consistency, otherwise known as accuracy. All right, and then precision around D is precision around the ideal value.   0:28:37.7 BB: Well, for those that want to take the narrowest one and slide it over, what you're now doing is saying, "I'm gonna start with precision, and I'm going to focus on the ideal". Now, what you're doing is saying, "step one is precision, step two is accuracy".   0:28:56.4 AS: Okay. And step three or D?   0:29:00.9 BB: Paradigm D?   0:29:02.7 AS: Yeah.   0:29:02.7 BB: Is that what you're... Yeah. Paradigm D would be the ability to produce, to move the distribution as needed to different locations.   0:29:17.4 AS: The narrow distribution?   0:29:18.9 BB: Yes, and so I'll give you an example in terms of, let's say tennis, Paradigm A in tennis is just to get the ball across the net. I just wanna get it somewhere on the other side of the court, right. Now that may be okay if you and I are neighbors, but that doesn't get us into professional level. Paradigm B, is I can hit it consistently to one place on your side of the court. Now, I can't control that location, but boy, I can get that location every single time. Next thing you know, you know exactly where the ball is going, and that's Paradigm B.  Paradigm C is I can move it to where I want it to go, which you will eventually figure out, so I can control where it goes. Paradigm D is I can consistently hit any side of the court on the fly.   0:30:11.0 BB: So, Paradigm D is I can take that narrow distribution and move it around for different customers, different applications, and Dr. Taguchi refers to that as Technology Development, and what Taguchi is talking about is developing a technology which has incredible precision in providing your sales people the ability to move the next move it to accuracy and to sell that product by tuning it to different customers as you would in sports, move the ball around to the other side of the court. So now you're going to the point that you've got incredible precision, and now you've got “on demand accuracy,” that's Paradigm D.  Paradigm C is I can do one-size-fits-all which is, which may be all you need for the application.   0:31:06.9 AS: I wanna separate the Paradigm B, the narrow distribution and that's precision around some value versus Paradigm D is precision around the ideal value.   0:31:20.7 BB: And, the idea is that desirability is about an ideal value. And, so if we're talking piece-to-piece consistency, that means it's uniform, but I'm not paying attention to... I have a value in mind that I want. And that's the difference between Dr. Taguchi's work, I mean, it's the ability to be precise. Again, accuracy, desirability is I have an ideal value in mind. And acceptability is it doesn't really matter.  Precision is uniformity without accuracy. And so, if you are... What Dr. Taguchi is talking about is, is depending on how what you're delivering integrates, being consistent may cause the person downstream to consistently need a hammer to get the tube into the hole.   0:32:24.2 BB: So, it's consistent, but what you're now saying, what Taguchi is saying is, if you pay attention to where you are within requirement, which is desirability, then you can improve integration. And, that is my explanation for why Toyota's products have incredibly reliability, that they are focusing on integration, not just uniformity and precision by itself.   0:32:49.8 AS: I would love to put this in the context of a dart thrower. The Paradigm A meeting requirability or acceptability, they stand way behind and they throw and they hit the overall dart board.   0:33:04.3 BB: Dart board. It's on the board. Yes.   0:33:07.2 AS: And, the narrow distribution is, well, they hit the same spot over to the left, right towards the edge, they hit that spot consistently. And, then basically, I'm gonna jump to D just because I'm imagining that I'm just gonna ask the guy, Hey, can you just move over just a little bit, and I'mma move them over about a half a foot, and when I do, you're gonna start throwing that dart right at the same location, but over to the right, meaning at the target. The center of the dart...   0:33:43.9 BB: The bull's eye. Yeah. Yeah, well, that's... And you call that C or D?   0:33:47.6 AS: I call that D.   0:33:49.5 BB: No, I would say, let's call that C being on target, meaning that C is, for games of darts where the most points are being on the bull's eye, that's Paradigm C.   0:34:04.0 AS: So accuracy, yeah.   0:34:05.4 BB: Paradigm D would be a game in which the ideal value changes. So now, okay, now I watch the... When I play darts, I'm sure there's lots of darts games, but one game we used to play it in our cellar at home was baseball. So, the dart board is divided into has numbers one, two, three through, and you'd go to... There'd be a wedge number one, a wedge number two, a wedge number three, that's Paradigm D that I could hit the different wedges on demand. But that's what it is. So A is anywhere in. B is consistent, precision, but again, the idea is if you can move that, but now what we're talking about is, is there an impulse to move it or are we happy just being precise? What Taguchi's talking about is the value proposition of desirability is to take precision, take that uniformity and move it to the ideal value, and what you've just done and doing so, you're now focusing on not this characteristic in isolation, you're now focusing on how this characteristic meshes with another characteristic. And, it's not just one thing in isolation, one thing in isolation does not give you a highly reliable automobile.   0:35:38.9 AS: Is there anything you wanna add to that, or are you ready to sum it up?   0:35:45.0 BB: No, that's it. The big summation is, we've been building up to the contrast between acceptable and desirable. I just wanted to add some more fidelity. Desirable is I have a value in mind, which Dr. Taguchi referred to as a target. So, for people at home, in the kitchen, the target value could be exactly one cup of flour. We talked earlier about our daughter, when she worked in a coffee shop and then, and at home she'd give us these recipes for making coffee and it'd be dad, exactly this amount of coffee and exactly that. And, we had a scale, it wasn't just anywhere between. She'd say "dad, you have to get a scale." I mean she was... We started calling her the coffee snob, 'cause it was very, this amount, this amount. So, in the kitchen then it's about precisely one cup. Precisely one this. And that's desirability.   0:36:40.6 AS: And, I was just thinking, the best word for that is bull's eye!   0:36:48.3 BB: Yes.   0:36:48.8 AS: You hit it right on the spot.   0:36:50.6 BB: Yeah.   0:36:51.6 AS: Great. Well, Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. It was not only acceptable, it was desirable. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And, if you want to keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn. He'll reply. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "people are entitled to joy in work."

Episode 49: Improving the UK's Approach to Technology Development in Conversation with… RWE & LM Wind In the past couple of months, we have seen some big news in the UK offshore wind sector focused on our approach to the industrialisation of offshore wind technology. In April, we had the publication of the much anticipated Industrial Growth Plan for offshore wind, which sets out a pathway to grow the offshore wind supply chain to accelerate and de-risk delivery, as well as develop market share and technology leadership for the UK. Then just a few weeks ago, we were very proud to announce an £85.6m investment from our colleagues at UKRI to upgrade and expand our testing facilities at our National Renewable Energy Centre in Blyth. This game-changing development will future proof the UK's capability to de-risk turbine technology and incentivise a strong UK presence across all areas of offshore renewable energy. The upgraded facilities will be able to test blades of up to 150m and drivetrains up to 23MW. And with that, the theme of this episode of the ReEnergise podcast is around unlocking the future of technology development and industrialisation in offshore wind. Our Director of Technology Development, Tony Quinn, was joined by Danielle Lane, RWE's Director of Development for UK and Ireland, and Andrew Bellamy, Managing Director at LM Wind Power UK. Discussions included: 1) How do we prioritise our objectives for offshore wind? 2) Have we underestimated the challenge of simultaneously scaling both the technology and production capacity? 3) Are we suffering the consequences of a disproportionate allocation of risk and is there a more equitable solution? 4) How do we take a more robust approach to technology confidence, gained through testing and validation and shared knowledge to enhance the whole industry? 5) How does the UK's approach stands up against other markets, and what are some of the lessons we can take?

Tune in to our latest episode, "Maritime Domain Awareness: What Does It Mean to India?" where Dr. Y. Nithiyanandam, Professor and Head of Geospatial Research at the Takshashila Institution, engages in a captivating discussion with Cmde (Dr) Arun Pratap Golaya (Retd). While Dr. Nithiyanandam approaches MDA from an academic perspective, Cmde (Dr) Golaya, a renowned expert and technology leader, offers insights from his extensive practical experience. Notably, during his distinguished career with the Indian Navy, he served with the National Security Council Secretariat and led the Technology Development and Acceleration Cell of the Indian Navy. In this enlightening conversation, they delve into a wide range of topics, including an overview of Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA), its strategic and geopolitical implications, technological and operational aspects, collaboration and international relations, policy considerations, and the crucial role of geospatial technology in MDA. Don't miss this opportunity to broaden your understanding of MDA and its significance to India. Listen now and join the conversation! All Things Policy is a daily podcast on public policy brought to you by the Takshashila Institution, Bengaluru. Find out more on our research and other work here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://takshashila.org.in/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Check out our public policy courses here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://school.takshashila.org.in

Tern is on a mission to modernize travel advisor technology! Tern founders, David Shull and Katie Williams, share how this innovative platform is streamlining advisor workflows, prioritizing user feedback, and redefining the advisor-client relationship. By actively listening to user feedback, responding to queries, and receiving input on new features, Tern has created a loyal fan base that feels heard, valued, and connected. The genuine interactions and transparency in communication have elevated the user experience, driving enthusiasm and excitement among advisors. Tune in to learn about the platform's development process, prioritization of features, and the future of technology in supporting travel advisors. As the travel industry continues to evolve, the human touch, coupled with cutting-edge technology, will be the driving force behind success in industry! About with David Shull and Katie Williams: In 2014, Tern's founding team worked together as a part of the earliest team at Handshake. After eight years they had helped Handshake grow from a living room in Northern Michigan to the second largest professional network in the US and a $3.5B valuation. Tern's CEO, David was on a trip to Greece in 2021 when he missed a ferry schedule change. Instead of enjoying their first Greek Isle, David & his wife spent six hours in a (very hot) parking lot waiting for the next ferry. In that parking lot, David thought of his in-laws & that they used an advisor for all their trips. He thought, maybe if he had partnered with Wendy he wouldn't be in that parking lot. David called Brian and Katie and shared the earliest version of an idea for Tern. What they didn't know was if anyone needed it. They packed their bags and headed to ASTA where they talked to as many advisors, agencies, and suppliers as they could. The answer was clear. The travel industry was desperate for better technology. David, Katie, and Brian started working on Tern in 2022 and went full time in 2023. Since then the team has grown and remains laser focused on building incredible technology for travel advisors. tern.travel Today we will cover: (02:15) The development of Tern (07:10) Getting advisor feedback on pain points in the industry (17:00) Balancing Innovation and Practicality in Technology Development (22:45) What is Tern? Who is it for? (26:40) Creating a loyal customer base; importance of user feedback (33:45) Progress over perfection mindset (37:00) Technology trends in the travel industry (45:40) Creating a streamlined and seamless user interface (48:10) Tern's ideal user (50:10) The long term vision for Tern CLIENT COMMUNICATION TEMPLATES tiquehq.com/client-communication-templates THE LEGAL PAIGE: https://thelegalpaige.com/collections/industry-travel-advisor/?aff=143 Travel industry agreement templates _____ JOIN OUR NICHE COMMUNITY: tiquehq.com/niche FOLLOW ALONG ON INSTAGRAM: instagram.com/tiquehq CHECK OUT OUR SERVICES & PROGRAMS: tiquehq.com

In this episode, host Shikha Jain, MD, speaks with MOLLI Surgical co-founder and CEO, Ananth Ravi, about inventing surgical technology to provide better patient care, addressing inequities in surgical tool access and more. •    Welcome to another exciting episode of Oncology Overdrive 1:15 •    About Ravi 1:27 •    The interview 2:10 •    Tell me about how entered this field and how you ended up founding a company that invents surgical instruments.  2:42 •    How did you end up moving from Zambia to Canada?  5:02 •    Tell me more about MOLLI Surgical. How is this precision surgery unique from what is already out there?  6:47 •    What is your background to help you go from ideation to implementation, and how did you take the steps to make your ideas a reality? 10:31 •    How do you address rural and global disparities when it comes to accessing these technologies?  16:12 •    In an ideal world, where would you see this technology being utilized, and are there any other technologies that you think will revolutionize this type of care?  19:32 •    What else excites you about this space? […] How did you find going from the academic space into this role in the business/corporate space?   22:19 •    Jain and Ravi on work-life balance.  25:51 •    What's next for you in the next three to five years?  29:26 •    If someone could only listen to the last few minutes of this episode, what would you want them to take away? 30:15 •    How to contact Ravi 30:42 •    Thanks for listening 31:39 Ananth Ravi is president, CEO and co-founder of MOLLI Surgical. We'd love to hear from you! Send your comments/questions to Dr. Jain at oncologyoverdrive@healio.com. Follow Healio on X and LinkedIn: @HemOncToday and https://www.linkedin.com/company/hemonctoday/. Follow Dr. Jain on X: @ShikhaJainMD. Ravi can be reached at www.mollisurgical.com or via email aravi@mollisurgical.com.  Disclosures: Jain reports no relevant financial disclosures. Ravi reports he is president, CEO and co-founder of MOLLI Surgical.

Shrikant is business Head and Executive Director at Praj Americas Inc., a role he has held since June 2022. With a rich 23-year history at Praj Industries, Shrikant has risen through the ranks, demonstrating his expertise in biofuels, especially bioethanol. His journey began as a Trainee Engineer at Praj in 2001, evolving through various roles, including Process Engineer, Senior Engineer in Technology Development, and Manager in Technical Sales for decarbonizing bioethanol facilities. During his tenure at Praj, Shrikant was instrumental in the design and implementation of numerous bioethanol projects. His innovative approach and commitment to research have led to the acquisition of four patents, primarily focused on cellulosic biofuels production and pioneering decarbonizing technologies for bioethanol production. His contribution is not just limited to technical advancements but also includes driving growth through strategic business initiatives and partnerships. He has been instrumental in forging various strategic associations and collaborations in the Americas. https://www.praj.net/ https://nexuspmg.com/

Annika Ölme, CTO and SVP of SKF, speaks about technological innovation and the industrial future. Drawing from her SKF Group tenure and leadership roles at Arcam and SAAB Radar Solutions, she highlights the importance of diversity in driving innovation. Join her for insights into navigating the evolving landscape of technology and industry.

NASA's Boeing Crew Flight pushed to Tuesday May 21st. Blue Origin has announced that its seventh human flight, NS-25, will lift off from Launch Site One in West Texas this Sunday, May 19. Axiom has announced that they are partnering with Virgin Galactic to send Turkish Space Agency astronaut Tuva Atasever on a suborbital flight on June 8 to conduct microgravity research, and more. Our 2024 N2K CyberWire Audience Survey is underway, make your voice heard and get in the running for a $100 Amazon gift card. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Miss an episode? Sign-up for our weekly intelligence roundup, Signals and Space, and you'll never miss a beat. And be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Our guest today is Immigration Lawyer Sophie Alcorn. You can connect with Sophie on LinkedIn and learn more about her practice and podcast on her website. Selected Reading NASA's Boeing Crew Flight Test Eyes Next Launch Opportunity New Shepard's Crewed NS-25 Mission Targets Liftoff on May 19- Blue Origin Axiom Space Partners with Virgin Galactic to Send Second Turkish Astronaut to Space SpaceX launches 50th Falcon 9 rocket of 2024 on Starlink mission – Spaceflight Now ESA - The spacecraft control centre of the future AAC Clyde Space wins SEK 27.0 M order for 16U satellite ISS National Lab Announces Up to $750,000 in Funding for Technology Development in Low Earth Orbit Space Force should consider alternative launch sites, lawmakers say 173: In Orbit with Alice Carruth: Insights on Space Exploration, Communication, and Innovation | Alcorn Immigration Law Astreas Delivers Chocolate Spheres to International Space Station- Newswire T-Minus Crew Survey We want to hear from you! Please complete our 4 question survey. It'll help us get better and deliver you the most mission-critical space intel every day. Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Want to join us for an interview? Please send your pitch to space-editor@n2k.com and include your name, affiliation, and topic proposal. T-Minus is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last week we sat down with Dave Riess, the CEO and co-founder of Wunder. They're working hard to scale mid-sized commercial solar projects, where they believe the real TAM is in this market. Dave is an awesome guy who's been grinding in the space for years now, so we naturally had a ton to talk about.* (00:02:55) Introduction and Guest Overview: Introduction of the hosts and the guest, David Reese, co-founder, and CEO of Wonder (formerly Wonder Capital).* (00:07:33) Network-Based Energy Infrastructure: Discussion on evolving energy infrastructure to a more network-based architecture.* (00:40:42) Commercial Solar Market Challenges: Analysis of why the commercial solar market isn't scaling more quickly.* (00:50:25) Pricing and Merchant Exposure: Examination of pricing strategies and the risks of merchant exposure in solar projects.* (00:57:49) Reducing Transaction Costs: Strategies to streamline the underwriting, structuring, and de-risking processes in solar projects.* (01:27:39) DERs and Market Dynamics: Insights on the role of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) and their impact on the energy market.* (01:34:42) Future of the Grid: Speculations on how the main grid might evolve or shrink in favor of the grid edge.* (01:45:03) Technology Development vs. Deployment: The imbalance between resources allocated to technology development and deployment.* (01:46:06) Solid-State Power Electronics: Potential impact of solid-state power electronics on grid infrastructure.* (01:47:24) Energy Market Evolution: The slow evolution of the energy market and the role of capitalism in driving change.* (01:48:38) Solving Energy Problems: Identifying and addressing the primary constraints in the energy market.* (01:50:15) Transformer and Power Electronics: Discussion on transformers, power electronics, and their role in future energy systems.* (01:50:59) DC Microgrids and EV Charging: Potential benefits of DC microgrids and advancements in EV charging technology.* (01:51:34) Capital and Risk Management: Matching capital with the risk profile of solar assets and the importance of certainty in asset performance.* (02:00:39) Revisiting Past Technologies: Reflection on past technological advancements and their relevance today.* (02:01:25) Deployment Focus: Emphasis on the importance of focusing on the deployment of existing technologies.* (02:12:35) CSP 2.0 for Data Centers: Exploration of CSP 2.0 technology for providing clean power to AI data centers.* (02:14:36) Opinions on Emerging Technologies: Mixed views on the potential success of emerging energy technologies like CSP 2.0.* (02:11:57) Solar and AI Data Centers: Discussion on the announcement of a new project for AI data centers using solar thermal energy. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.dertaskforce.com/subscribe

Dive into the world of digital entrepreneurship with Jeff Dwoskin, founder of Stampede Social, on our latest episode of "Invest In Yourself: the Digital Entrepreneur Podcast." Host Phil Better explores Jeff's revolutionary approach to enhancing online engagement through innovative tools that capture and analyze social media interactions. Discover how Jeff's journey began in the late 1990s and evolved to create cutting-edge technology that sets Stampede Social apart from the competition. Learn about their unique URL tracking, advanced AI packages, and tailor-made campaigns that are transforming how creators interact with their audience on platforms like Instagram and Twitter. In this episode, Jeff shares valuable insights on leveraging user comments for content creation and offers a special 50% discount promo code exclusively for our listeners. Whether you're a podcaster, influencer, or aspiring digital mogul, you'll find actionable tips on boosting your digital presence and sustaining engagement. Phil expresses his admiration for Stampede Social's capabilities, particularly in comparison to other market tools, emphasizing the system's effectiveness in maintaining long-term audience engagement. Don't miss out on learning how confidence and self-belief can propel you to digital success. Tune in for an enlightening conversation full of pro tips, laughs about never retiring, and an insider's peek into the future of digital entrepreneurship with Jeff Dwoskin on "Invest In Yourself: the Digital Entrepreneur Podcast."

Episode Summary: In episode 177 of the Aerospace Advantage, Hypersonic Ascendancy: Regaining America's Edge, John "Slick" Baum chats with Dr. Michael Brown, the Principal Scientist of the High-Speed Systems Division at Air Force Research Laboratory, and Mark Rettig, Vice President and General Manager for Business and Technology Development at GE Aerospace's Edison Works about what the Air Force and industry are doing to help realize this crucial capability at an operational level. The U.S. spent the 1960s as the undisputed hypersonic leader, with the famed X-15 executing 199 successful flights, many over five times the speed of sound at the edge of space. This conversation begins with members of the Mitchell Institute team visiting the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's legendary X-15 up close, discussing the program's significance, and then exploring how this competitive advantage faded over subsequent decades. Now, America faces fierce adversary competition in the hypersonic realm, and our defense community must respond. We turn to AFRL's Dr. Michael Brown and GE's Mark Rettig to better understand how the government and industry are striving to realize the necessary innovations to field this capability at an operational level. We also discuss how and why hypersonic technology will impact tomorrow's battlespace.  This is an incredible conversation with key leaders who are pioneering the future. Credits: Host: Douglas Birkey, Executive Director, The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies Producer: Shane Thin Executive Producer: Douglas Birkey Guest: Doug Birkey, Executive Director, The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies Guest: Heather Penney, Senior Fellow, The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies Guest: Dr. Michael Brown, Principal Scientist, High-Speed Systems Division, Air Force Research Laboratory Guest: Mark Rettig, Vice President and General Manager for Business and Technology Development, Edison Works Division, GE Aerospace Links: Subscribe to our Youtube Channel: https://bit.ly/3GbA5Of Website: https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/MitchellStudies Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Mitchell.Institute.Aerospace LinkedIn: https://bit.ly/3nzBisb Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mitchellstudies/ #MitchellStudies #AerospaceAdvantage #hypersonic #technology Thank you for your continued support!

In this episode, Stewart Alsop is in conversation with Adam Cohn (linkedin and twitter), the CEO of Deepin, focusing on the open-source AI project, Adios. They discuss the importance and history of open source, particularly in relation to AI, emphasizing the role of collaboration and knowledge sharing in advancing technology. Adam details his project of an open-source AI wearable device, and its implications for technology and data privacy. They also touch on the role of AI in software and coding, the definition and future of autonomous agents, and the various models of open-source AI. Timestamps 00:02 Introduction and Guest Presentation 00:54 Exploring Open Source and Its History 02:23 Understanding the Role of Linux in the Digital Age 02:59 The Intersection of Open Source and Personal Computing 04:29 Deep Dive into Linux and Unix 06:20 The Security Aspects of Open Source 08:31 Exploring the Business Model of Open Source 10:23 The Future of AI and Open Source 10:29 Discussion on Mistral and Open Source 18:29 The Importance of Open Source in Wearable Technology 22:03 Building an Open Source Wearable 25:00 Exploring the Potential of Bluetooth Technology 25:47 The Intricacies of Voice Cancellation Technology 26:17 Discussing the Hardware and Software Aspects of the Company 27:17 The Role of Open Source in Technology Development 27:30 The Challenges of Implementing Technology in Argentina 28:09 The Intersection of Hardware and Software in Product Development 28:55 The Importance of Aesthetics in Wearable Technology 29:38 The Potential Risks of Manufacturing in China 30:01 The Power of Open Source in Ensuring Transparency 30:36 Highlighting Key Figures in the Open Source AI Community 32:05 The Philosophy Behind Open Source and Its Impact on Democracy 42:20 The Future of Autonomous Agents in AI 47:18 The Role of Coding in the Age of AI Key Insights Open Source as a Foundation of Technology and Innovation: Adam Cohen stresses the importance of open source, highlighting its historical roots intertwined with the development of computing and the broader scientific revolution. Open source, by sharing knowledge, code, and documentation, has advanced the digital age, with Linux emerging as a pivotal force in the server domain, despite the commercial success of proprietary systems like Windows and MacOS. Linux's Dominance and Security in the Digital Landscape: The discussion underlines Linux's significant role in powering the internet, serving as the underlying technology for most servers. Cohen argues that Linux's open-source nature contributes to its enhanced security compared to proprietary systems, allowing for broader collaboration and scrutiny in its development. The Business Model of Open Source: Cohen dispels the myth that open source equates to non-profitability, explaining how companies can thrive by adopting an open core model. This approach allows for the core product to be open-source, with monetization coming from additional services or managed solutions, as seen with GitLab and Redis. Open Source in AI and the Debate Around Accessibility: The conversation shifts to the complexities of open-source AI, touching on Mistral's approach of releasing some models openly while reserving others for commercial use. Cohen expresses support for a model where older versions become open source as new iterations are developed, fostering a balance between innovation and accessibility. The Personal AI Wearable Project: Adam Cohen introduces his project of developing an open-source, AI-powered wearable device. He emphasizes the importance of user control over data, foreseeing a future where personal AI devices, intimately integrated into our lives, require transparent and user-driven data management to prevent potential misuse. The Implications of Closed-Source Wearables: Cohen raises concerns about the potential dangers of closed-source wearables, which could lead to invasive data collection and privacy breaches. His advocacy for open-source development in this domain is rooted in the belief that users should have absolute control and understanding of how their data is used and stored. The Role of Community and Ethics in Open Source: The discussion concludes with a broader reflection on the ethos of the open-source community. Cohen argues that open source is not just about technology development but also about fostering a democratic, inclusive, and ethical approach to innovation, ensuring that advancements are made transparently and with community input to avoid the pitfalls of centralized control and potential misuse of technology.

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/east-asian-studies

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network.

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

Since the mid-2000s, the Chinese state has increasingly shifted away from labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing to a process of socioeconomic development centered on science and technology. In The Gilded Cage: Technology, Development, and State Capitalism in China (Princeton University Press, 2023) Ya-Wen Lei traces the contours of this techno-developmental regime and its resulting form of techno-state capitalism, telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed—for better and worse—by China's rapid rise to economic and technological dominance.  Drawing on groundbreaking fieldwork and a wealth of in-depth interviews with managers, business owners, workers, software engineers, and local government officials, Lei describes the vastly unequal values assigned to economic sectors deemed “high-end” versus “low-end,” and the massive expansion of technical and legal instruments used to measure and control workers and capital. She shows how China's rise has been uniquely shaped by its time-compressed development, the complex relationship between the nation's authoritarian state and its increasingly powerful but unruly tech companies, and an ideology that fuses nationalism with high modernism, technological fetishism, and meritocracy. Some have compared China's extraordinary transformation to America's Gilded Age. This provocative book reveals how it is more like a gilded cage, one in which the Chinese state and tech capital are producing rising inequality and new forms of social exclusion. Ya-Wen Lei is professor of sociology at Harvard University, where she is affiliated with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. Caleb Zakarin is Editor at the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

In this episode of ATP, Saurabh Todi and Shambhavi Naik discuss the state of research and development funding in India, what ails it and what can be done to improve the situation. Do check out Takshashila's public policy courses: https://school.takshashila.org.in/courses We are @‌IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram. https://twitter.com/IVMPodcasts https://www.instagram.com/ivmpodcasts/?hl=en https://www.facebook.com/ivmpodcasts/ You can check out our website at https://shows.ivmpodcasts.com/featured Follow the show across platforms: Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, JioSaavn, Gaana, Amazon Music Do share the word with your fSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Our future in space is going to be radically different with the implementation of space solar power.  According to John Mankins, space solar power is an energy application that's going to happen in the coming decade(s); the only question is, who will build it? John Mankins has made his case. It's a case for space solar power. John's more than qualified to make this case, too. He's a leading international expert in the field of space solar power, the author of the book, "The Case for Space Solar Power,” and John worked at NASA for 25 years. While at NASA, he led NASA's studies of space solar power, and conducted advanced concepts studies, and managed R&D projects for exploration and development.  On this episode of Casual Space, John explains how space solar power is not only doable, it's affordable, and it can be a part of our not-so-distant future.   The Case for Space Solar Power book available here: https://www.amazon.com/John-Mankins-Space-Solar-Power/dp/B00N4IXV06/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=  More about John Mankins John C. Mankins, President of Artemis Innovation Management Solutions LLC is an internationally recognized leader in space systems and technology innovation, and as a highly effective manager of large-scale technology R&D programs. Mr. Mankins' 25-year career at NASA and CalTech's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) ranged from flight projects and space mission operations, to systems level innovation and advanced technology research & development management. He is also well known as an innovator in R&D management.  For example, building on the original NASA ‘technology readiness level' (TRL) scale for technology assessment (defined first with 6 or 7 levels in the 1970s), he extended the scale to flight systems and operations in the late 1980s (TRLs 8 and 9), published the first detailed definitions of the TRLs in 1995, and promoted the use of the scale by the US Department of Defense in the late 1990s. Before leaving NASA, Mr. Mankins was the manager of Exploration Systems Research and Technology within the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate with responsibility for an $800M annual budget, involving more than 100 individual projects and over 3,000 personnel. For 10 years, he was the manager of Advanced Concepts Studies at NASA, and the lead for critical studies of space solar power, highly reusable space transportation, affordable human exploration approaches, and other topics. He was the creator or co-creator of numerous novel concepts, including the ‘MagLifter' electromagnetic launch assist system, the Internet-based NASA ‘Virtual Research Center' the ‘Solar Clipper' interplanetary transport vehicle, the ‘SunTower' space solar power system, the ‘Hybrid Propellant Module' for in-space refueling, the ‘HabBot' mobile planetary outpost architecture, the Advanced Technology Life cycle Analysis System (ATLAS), and others. In recognition of his accomplishments, he has received numerous awards and honors, including the prestigious NASA Exceptional Technology Achievement Medal (of which he was the first recipient). He holds undergraduate (Harvey Mudd College) and graduate (UCLA) degrees in Physics and an MBA in Public Policy Analysis (The Drucker School at Claremont Graduate University). Mr. Mankins is a member of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) and Chair of the Academy Commission III (Space Systems and Technology Development); and a member of the International Astronautical Federation (IAF), the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), and the Sigma Xi Research Society. Mr. Mankins is an accomplished communicator, including political, programmatic, technical and lay audiences. He has authored or co-authored more than 80 published papers, reports and other technical documents, and has testified before Congress on several occasions, and has been consulted on R&D management and space issues with organizations in the U.S. and internationally.  

  In this tutorial, we discuss Technology developments topic Ideas, Grammar, Vocabulary and Sample Answers. We look at: Model IELTS Essay about Technology Developments. Useful vocabulary to describe the pros and cons of Technology Development. Sample Questions and Model Answers about Technology Developments.   Join many other students who have achieved IELTS success with our online course or get […] The post Technology Developments: Topic Ideas, Grammar, Vocabulary and Sample Answers appeared first on IELTS Podcast.

Brian Romano Dr. Brian Romano has over 25 years of experience in industrial automation. As Director of Technology Development at Arthur G. Russell, he oversees control systems engineering projects across the manufacturing sector. Brian holds five college degrees, including a BS in computer engineering, an MS in applied computer science, an MBA, and a PhD...

Jennifer Ives is the Co-Founder & CEO at Wateringhole.ai, a predictive, forward-looking, and adaptive AI strategy consulting firm. In this episode Jennifer and KJ discuss the importance of curiosity and grit for disruptive innovation and the potential of AI in revenue generation.   Key Takeaways: Why businesses need to shift the conversation around AI to include revenue generation How to implement AI strategy for business revenue growth The importance of human assistance in AI projects Three types of AI every business owner should know and how to use them Quote of the Show (39:00): “Get curious about AI and see how it fits into your everyday life. Do not be a spectator in this AI evolution, be a participator." – Jennifer Ives   Join our Anti-PR newsletter where we're keeping a watchful and clever eye on PR trends, PR fails, and interesting news in tech so you don't have to. You're welcome.   Want PR that actually matters? Get 30 minutes of expert advice in a fast-paced, zero-nonsense session from Karla Jo Helms, a veteran Crisis PR and Anti-PR Strategist who knows how to tell your story in the best possible light and get the exposure you need to disrupt your industry. Click here to book your call: https://info.jotopr.com/free-anti-pr-eval   Ways to connect with Jennifer Ives: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenniferives1/ Company Website: https://wateringhole.ai/  Company LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/watering-hole-ai/       How to get more Disruption/Interruption:  Amazon Music - https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/eccda84d-4d5b-4c52-ba54-7fd8af3cbe87/disruption-interruption Apple Podcast - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/disruption-interruption/id1581985755 Google Play - https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cub21ueWNvbnRlbnQuY29tL2QvcGxheWxpc3QvODE5NjRmY2EtYTQ5OC00NTAyLThjZjktYWI3YzAwMmRiZTM2LzNiZTZiNzJhLWEzODItNDhhNS04MDc5LWFmYTAwMTI2M2FiNi9kZDYzMGE4Mi04ZGI4LTQyMGUtOGNmYi1hZmEwMDEyNjNhZDkvcG9kY2FzdC5yc3M= Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/6yGSwcSp8J354awJkCmJlDSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Bill Bellows and host Andrew Stotz talk about resource management in a non-traditional sense. Bill explains how managing the variation and integration in your product or service is just as important as increasing consistency and removing waste.  TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. The topic for today is episode nine, Resource Management. Bill, take it away.   0:00:28.9 Bill Bellows: Thank you, Andrew. And thanks for our audience and thanks for joining in again. So we're picking up following episode nine, which was, I called it the Paradigms of Variation. It was, I think the title on the podcast may be a little bit different, but what we've been building up to from the beginning is, parallel tracks. But one aspect that I've been trying to bring forward is this idea of variation in the white beads. We talked about the white bead experiment and the idea that the red beads are not caused by the workers, they're caused by the system.   0:01:13.5 BB: And then what if we got to the point that there were no more red beads? Yes, we can make the red beads faster, we can make the red beads cheaper, but could we make, I'm sorry, we can make the white beads faster. We can make the white beads cheaper with the elimination of the red beads, but if we're dealing with nothing but white beads that are cheaper and made faster, can we improve the quality of the beads? And what I found is, when I press on people, they'll say, "Yes, everything can be improved. Everything can be improved. When I press, press, press, they'll say faster. They'll say cheaper. I said, "Yeah, we said that." I said, "But can they be better?"   0:01:53.4 BB: Is that what Dr. Deming's trying to say with continuous improvement that we stop it a 100% white beads? Or can we go further? And I find people get stuck. And I think it's very easy to get stuck, because that's the world we live in of good parts and bad parts. We focus on the bad to make them good. And what do they do when they're good? Well, they met requirements. But what's missing is this key word called variation. And yes, there's variation in the red beads and Dr. Deming would plot that on a control chart. But Dr. Deming also discovered in, definitely in 1960, from Dr. Taguchi who he met a few years earlier, this notion of variation in the white beads and that the, so I talked earlier also about question number one and quality management.   0:02:44.0 BB: Does this quality characteristic meet requirements? There's only two answers, remember Andrew, yes or no. But then question number two is how many ways are there to meet requirements? And I'd say there's an infinite number if you take into account, how many decimal places you can go. And that, the idea that you can have anywhere from the absolute minimum to the absolute maximum of the requirements is there's all those places be in between. That's called variation. And does it matter where you are within spec? Within spec? And again, by spec I mean specification. You've met the requirements for the activity. And so what we did in episode nine, I'm sorry, episode eight is look at what I call the Two Distribution exercise. And you may have caught me saying there are four suppliers.   0:03:41.7 BB: And at the end I said, forget about the four. There's actually two. I've done it with four, I've done it with two but the important thing is when I show people a number of distributions within requirements, and one of them will be, we'll go from the minimum to the maximum with near zero and frequency at either end to then high in the middle. And I'll say, "The middle is the ideal value." And then I'll say, let's say you also have a really narrow distribution consuming, and I said, last time, 10% of the variation, what I meant to say, and I said at least once, is 10% of the tolerance that, so you're using a very small portion of the tolerance, but you're far away from the ideal value.   0:04:27.0 BB: You're shifted to the right. And so when I give people the choice of buying from one of those two suppliers under the idealized situation, you may recall, Andrew, of same price, same schedule, everything's guaranteed to meet requirements. We've got histograms, we've got control charts. The processes are in control with all those, what Ackoff would call idealized situations. Make it really, really simple. Do I go with the wide one centered on the ideal value or the narrow one over to the right? And time again, people take the really narrow one, which we said was about, why do you like the really narrow one? Because they're more consistent. Then I explained that that's precision. And that's the most popular answer. And I'm reminded of that every time I use the exercise. Within the last few days, I've used it again.   0:05:19.6 BB: And that narrow one gets people's attention. What I find really fascinating is if the goal is to meet requirements, then why is the answer not, I'll take either one of them, which was one of the choices. You could take the wide one in the middle that covers the entire, or the narrow one. Why does it matter? Why not say in the world of meeting requirements, what's the driver behind the narrow one? Why don't people say it doesn't matter anymore? And I think because there's something about variation and consistency. I was talking with somebody the other day and they said, "Being consistent is, that's everything in terms of quality." And I said, "Not quite. Not quite." What... And this will become the focus of a later episode, that you could, ideally you could put the variation where you want it to be along the ideal and end up with improved what?   0:06:18.4 BB: The answer is improved integration. Because the very simple model we use in organizations is that if the parts are good, whether it's two parts, three parts, four parts, number of parts going together, you have to have at least two. And I say if the parts are good, then they fit. That's the model. If the parts are good, then they fit, then is there anything wrong with that model? And people are like, "No, that's the model we use." If the parts are good, then they fit. Now, if you're developing an airplane or a rocket engine, you've got a wing and a fuselage, then you've got all the parts to make the wing, all the parts to make the fuselage, all the parts that do these separate components, you could say the same thing for a play. You have all the elements of the first act, all the elements of the second act, and then you put them together for the entire play. So the point is that what I'm talking about is that integration is not black and white.   [overlapping conversation]   0:07:23.2 AS: What... Just... Can you define integration just so we can make sure we understand it?   0:07:27.5 BB: Yeah. Integration is when I'm going to put the cap onto the bottle of water. That's integration. The cap is good, the bottle is good. Now I'm trying to put the cap, which is good, and the bottle, which is good, and I'm trying to put the cap onto the bottle.   0:07:46.0 AS: Okay.   0:07:46.5 BB: Yeah. That's integration. Or I'm trying to put the, I'm trying to put two parts of something together. I'm trying to put the cap on top of the pen. What I love about water bottles as a prop is wherever I'm presenting, someone in your room will have a water bottle. And I'll say, can I use this as a prop? Sure. And I say, if all the requirements for the cap are met, what do we say about the cap? It's good. And if all the requirements for the bottle are met, what do we say about the bottle? It's good. Then I'll say, see what we're doing? We're managing parts in isolation. We're saying the cap is good, the body is good. Then I say, why don't we focus on how well the cap mates with the bottle? And I had a co-worker once said, well, if the cap is good and the bottle is good, then won't it fit. Fit as in absolute fit, right?   0:08:39.7 BB: Not relative fit ‘cause remember in early episodes we talked about black and white thinking versus shades of gray thinking. Good versus bad is black and white. Fit is black and white. It fits or it doesn't. What I'm talking about Andrew, is the idea that there's variation in good and the variation in good cap, and the variation in the good bottle show up when I go to put the cap onto the bottle. Because if the, if the outer diameter of the bottle is on the high side and the cap, inner diameter is on the low side, then I'm gonna have trouble putting the cap onto the bottle, ‘cause one's too small, one's too large. Boom. And, so what I'm trying to imply, [chuckle] not what I'm trying to imply. What I'm stating is fit is not absolute.  It's relative. Integration, which is about fit, is relative. And I don't, did we talk Andrew about a hundred percent…?   0:09:41.1 AS: Wait a minute. You gotta say that again. I didn't catch that. I know many of our listeners are a little faster than me. But say that again about relative versus...   0:09:56.6 BB: Okay, so what I'm saying is the fundamental model we're using is if the cap is good of the water bottle and the bottle is good, then the cap will fit onto the bottle. It'll fit when you go to...   0:10:05.7 AS: Yep.   0:10:07.8 BB: Put the, put it on it fits just like that. What I'm talking about…   0:10:12.1 AS: And when you say fit, are you using that as a general term in a system or are you just talking specifically about the cap?   0:10:17.8 BB: No, no, I'm really, I'm glad you brought this up. What the suggestion is that fit, there's only one degree of fit. It goes together you know with a, technically what we're talking about is how much torque is required to screw it on, how much force is required. And so fit is about how much force is required to screw it on. And the implication behind them being good and fit is that they always fit the same. So the model is that parts that are good fit together the same way each time. And that's not the case. So there's a... And I, one of my first exposures to this was reading a book by David Kearns and I mentioned this, I don't know which episode. And I said that Frank Pipp, an assembly plant manager at this Ford factory had his assembly team routinely buy competitor's cars and put them together.   0:11:19.4 BB: Because at the Ford plant, most of the time when they're putting parts together, they needed rubber mallets to bang them together because they didn't quite fit. And, so they needed help. And the help was the hammers to bang them together and out. Every now and then two parts went together without a hammer. That means fit is easy as opposed to hammers, which means fit is difficult. So imagine you've got everything between I can put them together, with little effort at all to I need a hammer to bang them together. That's degrees of fit, which I'm saying Andrew is degrees of integration.   0:12:00.4 AS: Okay.   0:12:01.2 BB: And, so the point I was trying to, what got me excited about Taguchi's work and then really excited when I saw Dr. Deming realizing it, is that when I came across this a hundred percent snap fit Toyota pickup truck story account, I thought, well, holy cow. And I found in listening to these podcasts that I use a expression quite a bit.   0:12:24.1 AS: Holy cow cow, holy spicoli.   0:12:26.3 BB: Holy... Holy cow, Andrew [laughter] But what was cool is this Ford plant has discovered that Toyota, where I know Dr. Deming had some influence, but some influence, okay, what influence? that's a whole ‘nother topic, but I know Taguchi had an influence there. So I'm looking at that with my understanding of variation and thinking, that's incredible. And brought that awareness to my coworkers at Rocketdyne. And we developed, with, I provided the education, they provided the hands-on go make it work. They developed hardware that went together beautifully. And why is this important, Andrew? And this is one of the things we got to in the end of the last podcast is if you would like your customers to have products that go together easily if they're assembling it or going together means that it, this product fits well with how they use it.   0:13:22.7 BB: That the car starts each time or the stopwatch, whatever they're using, works really well, which means there's degrees of performance. That's what excites me about the idea that if we can pay attention to the variation, we can either have designs that require hammers to assemble or we can design them to go together well. And, and all of this is to say that's what prompted me to get people excited by the paradigms of variation to get them to better understand that a mindset of meeting requirements is different from a mindset of precision, which is different from a mindset of accuracy. And what I've just repeated is Paradigm A is meet requirements. Get the darts somewhere on the dartboard. Meet requirements be anywhere within the requirements. Paradigm B is this idea that we're striving for consistency, incredible uniformity, otherwise known as, as precision.   0:14:30.7 BB: And, and there may be a place for that. But what Dr. Taguchi's talking about is different than that, that's precision is Paradigm B. Paradigm C is trying to be close to target. So that's taken the distribution, which is precise, and then finding a way to adjust it to be on the bullseye. And what does that gain us, Andrew? That, well, first of all, I would say when we're working at home looking for, working on the recipe, trying to get exactly one cup of flour, exactly 350 degrees, exactly one hour in the oven.  As we pay attention to how close we are to those values, chances are we're gonna end up with an incredible product. And that's, we're trusting that the person who developed the recipe has done that.   0:15:23.2 BB: But so whether it is woodworking or working on any project, it could be making things out of cloth where you're, you're putting together some outfit out of cloth that my father used to do for my sister when he was in the textile business. That is about the idea that things come together well is about accuracy in improving integration. And that's what I find the Deming philosophy offers an understanding of what does it take to inspire an organization where, where it takes the people working on their different elements, not to meet the requirements any way they choose, but to meet requirements in a - ready Andrew - synchronous way. So you and I are on the soccer pitch, and it's not about your position, it's about my position and your position on defense that we're trying to win the World Cup.   0:16:25.2 AS: Yeah.   0:16:26.4 BB: And so all of that is about the Paradigms of Variation. Go ahead, Andrew. You were gonna say.   0:16:29.0 AS: You referenced sports and I was just thinking about how easily we work together in team activities, team sports that are just, clearly great teams are the ones that integrate each individual's doing their own personal work and they're doing training and they're improving themselves, and then they're practicing together. How do we bring this together into an integrated system that then wins?   0:16:54.9 BB: That's right. And so when you say bring together, that's what integration is. It's bring together, right? And we're looking, we we're screened a bunch of candidates on the phone, now we bring them in for face-to-face interviews. What are we looking for? Why isn't it enough that they meet the requirements that are on the website? We wanna know which of these potential employees is the best fit with our team, whether it's to play first base, or play senior researcher. Are they a fit? They may be very consistent in what they do, but is that consistency...I mean, they have to be, their consistency has to mesh what we want. So they may be consistently tardy, they may be consistently dominating the meeting, but what we want them to do is fit into the meeting.   0:17:50.0 AS: And the other thing that I always think about when I hear you talking about this stuff is, I think about when I was younger, when Lexus came out, if you remember Lexus, when they first...   0:18:01.8 BB: Absolutely.   0:18:02.5 AS: Launched...   0:18:02.5 BB: Oh yeah.   0:18:03.7 AS: Their great video or the great advertising was stacked up champagne glasses...   0:18:09.5 BB: Yes, yes.   0:18:11.6 AS: Onto the hood of this car. And then they lifted the wheels off the ground and then, or not off the ground, but like they had a roller that they were rolling it on, and then they revved that car up to as fast as it could possibly go, and those glasses did not fall. And you know the only way you can get that is by improving not only each individual part, but how those parts work together with the end result being less vibration, less friction.   0:18:39.9 BB: Yes.   0:18:41.1 AS: All of those things.   0:18:42.0 BB: Yes. Exactly.   0:18:42.5 AS: And you couldn't do it by just improving one part.   0:18:45.6 BB: That's right. And that's a great example because together you've got minimum vibration. That's not an accident. That's they have figured out how those things come together to have an incredible product, which is consistently, it works consistently. But the consistency, there's nothing wrong with consistency. Consistency is not the issue. But it, the issue is is the consistency we're talking about striving for precision or accuracy. So a car that consistently doesn't start is consistent, but that's not helpful. I want a car that consistently starts, right? I wanna be consistent around... I want you to bring your consistency in concert with others' consistency where those consistencies matter, you know? And if we don't need you to be consistent, then that's okay. Then we save money by having lack of consistency because why have consistency if you don't need it? But all of that's about...   0:19:50.6 AS: It's hard. It's hard. Consistency is hard and fit is hard.   0:19:55.4 BB: Yes. And, and, and, to build upon what you just said, consistency is about managing variation as a system. And so, another thing I wanna point out, and I got some comments from some friends about, you know, the last podcast.  The Paradigms of Variation are about the paradigms of white bead variation. So, so, Paradigm A is we've got variation within the requirements and, and is that okay? Is it enough to have variation in requirement? It doesn't matter where we are? That's Paradigm A. Paradigm B is precision. We're consistent, but we're not around the ideal. That's accuracy. And then paradigm D is....and I was searching for the word, the expression Dr. Taguchi used. He calls that Technology Development, that we're developing an advanced technology for use in... And I, the example I used last time is, let's say we're fac…we're developing a new way of making tubes for plumbers to use.   0:21:07.6 BB: And I said in the beginning let's say we just have one inch outer diameter tubes, and that's Paradigm C because everything we make is one inch outer diameter tubes. And then somebody comes along in our research labs and comes up with a novel way to make tubes of different sizes. That's variety. So they can make them down to quarter of an inch, half an inch outer diameter. And then what we're doing with what Paradigm D is about is developing the technology that allows us to be really accurate around all these different values. That's what Dr. Taguchi calls Technology Development. I called it Paradigm D, he called it Technology Development. And in the world of sports, we talk about sports. That's the ability of the soccer player to kick the ball, or I should say a football player. [laughter] To put the ball anywhere in the net during at any time. Whether it's...   0:22:03.6 AS: That's within spec.   0:22:05.4 BB: Yeah, it's so the goalkeeper goes one way and they can hit any point in there. Because if you come up and the goalkeeper knows, oh, here comes Andrew, Andrew's gonna go to the lower left 'cause that's all he knows how to do. But you don't think I know that as your opposing goalkeeper. I know Andrew, Andrew's gonna fake, but I know what Andrew's gonna do. So the Paradigm D is in sports is the ability to move the ball around. If you're the pitcher, if you're the tennis player, and that's how you become a professional athlete, is that ability to move it around. That's Paradigm D. So, years ago, and this, I was developing this and sharing this, refining it with co-workers.   0:22:44.4 BB: And I was at a Deming Institute conference. True story, in Washington DC with Tim Higgins, a co-worker, and got a call from a really good friend, Jim. So Jim calls up and Jim was in this professional development program within Boeing doing a lot of travel. Every time he called, he was somewhere different in the country doing some really cool stuff in this incredible program to develop next generation leaders. And he definitely fit the mold. So he calls me up and he says, so he says, Dr. Bellows, have you discovered Paradigm E yet?   [laughter]   0:23:17.9 BB: I said, Jim, there is no E. He said, yeah, there's letter A, there's letter B, there's letter C, there's letter D. Oh, so there's also E. I said, Jim, A meets requirements, B is consistency anywhere, C is being on target, D is being on any target. I said, there's nowhere else to go. I said that we've run out. He said, we haven't run out of letters. [laughter] So I said, so he pushed on me and I pushed back. He pushed on me. We literally pushed on each other because I kept saying, Jim, you're you... Let's find another topic. No, no, no, no. I wanna hear about Paradigm E. And then it dawned on me, and I can remember it like it happened yesterday.   0:23:58.8 BB: And every time I have lunch with him, I say, Jim, I give him a big hug because I could not explain with the Paradigms of Variation, why would I pick up a nail in the parking lot, right? Why would I pick up a piece of glass in a parking lot? '‘Cause I viewed that as minimizing loss to society, that if I pick up the nail, prevent the flat tire, pick up the piece of glass, prevent the flat tire. I am, to quote Dr. Taguchi, "minimizing loss to society." But I don't know how to put that into his loss function, which is a subject of an of a future episode. And the idea of the loss function is there's an ideal value somewhere within the requirements. And the closer we are to the ideal value, the better the integration, and therefore the easier the effort.   0:24:55.2 BB: And, so now I'm stuck trying to say, so Jim's poking me, and I'm thinking, I'm stuck trying to explain everything through Dr. Taguchi's loss function, which is looking at the impact of variation relative to meeting requirements. And it dawns on me, and what Jim is saying is, I'm stuck in the world of variation. And, so when he mentioned...as, as he pushed and pushed and pushed, and it dawned on me that there's another whole world called managing, not... There's managing resources. I'm sorry, managing variation is Paradigms A, B, C, and D. What Jim got me to do that he called Paradigm E, and later we called it Resource Management, he realizes variation is a resource. Variation is a result of how we define our processes. There's managing cost.   0:25:52.3 BB: What is the cost of what we're doing? How much time is required? So, I look at resources as all the things we have in our organization from people to equipment to software to hardware and tools and techniques. Those are all resources. And picking up a piece of glass in the parking lot is a way of managing resources to improve the system, just as being on target is a way to improve how resources are managed. I started, I just jumped back and thought, holy cow, it's bigger than variation. And I think Dr. Deming really had this in mind. It's not just about variation, it's about the system includes variation, but it also has resources. Again, people, time, ideas, money. How do we use our money? That's a resource.   0:26:39.4 BB: Are we using, 'cause the other thing that was bugging me was are we using our money to improve things that are good? No, we're using our money and our time and our resources to focus on what is bad to make it good. And so that's what started off as Paradigm E then became Resource Management. So that's the genesis for Paradigm E. Managing resources is, should I get a college education, right? Should I exercise? How often should I go to the doctor, right? How often should I go shopping for groceries? Should I go shopping every day on my way home or should I go once a week? Those are resource management questions. Should I have a garden in my backyard? Should I buy the groceries? What's a better use of my time when I'm running errands?   0:27:33.2 BB: So on Saturday morning, I'm gonna run out and I'm gonna pick up the dry cleaning, go to the drug store, go to the veterinarian, pick up something for the cats. Do I do each of those randomly, come home and I say, what do I do next? Or Andrew, do I line up the errands and figure out what time the store opens? When do the lines occur? What time does traffic start to pick up? Am I making right-hand turns or left-hand turns? And I find what I do is I'm trying to figure out how do I get all these things done as fast as possible? And that directs my route. What I'm I doing, Andrew? I'm managing resources.   0:28:11.7 AS: And you remind me of the book I'm reading right now, Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson.   0:28:16.8 BB: Yes, I listened to it, it's fantastic.   0:28:18.9 AS: Yeah, and there's just these times that Steve Jobs would just go into an absolute focus into some minute detail that all the people around were thinking that, and rightly so in some cases, that he was wasting resources, the resource of time. But there was another component that I think they couldn't see maybe was the passion that he was conveying to people around them that this matters.   0:28:48.0 BB: Yes, well, I don't know if this story shows up on that book, but that book was a fantastic read, oh I just loved it. Do you know the subject of Walter Isaacson's next biography? I don't know when it's due, but the very next auto, biography that Walter Isaacson is doing, take a guess who it is?   0:29:07.7 AS: No idea.   0:29:08.4 BB: Elon Musk.   0:29:10.9 AS: Oh, great.   0:29:12.7 BB: Yeah, yeah. So I think Fortune Magazine had an article that Jobs, well, first of all, let's go back, let's say 15, 20 years when I would go into work with others and we'd turn on our computers and then go get a cup of coffee. You know what I'm talking about, Andrew? You know where I'm coming from?   0:29:35.4 AS: I remember that very well.   0:29:37.8 BB: And why are we going to get our coffee, Andrew?   0:29:41.1 AS: Man, it takes minutes to boot up.   0:29:43.1 BB: Yes, so because we're going to go, we gotta turn on the computer and it's going to take minutes, five, 10 minutes. And for those of you that are, I mean, really, now we're so used to turning on the iPhone and it comes right up. Yeah if you shut off the iPhone, it may take 30 seconds to turn on, but you start your computer and it, from scratch and it's within 30 seconds, your computer's up and running. No, what we're talking about, Andrew, is you go into the office, turn on the computer, go get a cup of coffee, talk with some friends, you come back in 10 minutes, your computer's up.   0:30:18.9 BB: So Jobs supposedly went to people that were working on that boot-up system and told them that if we could shave a few seconds off of the boot-up time, multiplied by the million or so users around the world, we can save society big numbers. And the person that went off and did this, or the team that went off and did it, went way beyond what he was talking about, but he's the one, he Andrew, saw that as a loss. All right, so when you're banging things together at the Ford plant and I come in on day one and, Andrew, what are you doing? You're like, and you're banging things together. I said, "Andrew, why are you doing that?" And you say, "Bill, this is how we assemble cars here." I said, "Andrew, look at those calluses on your hand." You're thinking, "Bill, you'll get used to it, but this is how we put things together." In the world of automobiles, this is how you do it, Bill." And I think, "Geez, I don't think it needs to be done that way." And what's fundamental here is, and again, the whole idea of the loss function, the integration loss function, we'll look at in a future episode, but what I want to point out here, Andrew, is if I believe you that banging it together with hammers is as good as it gets, then there is no loss.   0:31:51.6 BB: Meaning that as soon as I say that's as good as it gets and I stop, then I'm saying that this is how we do things here. But if I come in and look at that with an understanding of Taguchi's work and how to manage variation as a system or manage resources as a system, I have the capacity to look at that and say, as Jobs did, and say, "I think it can be better." And the difference between what it is and what it could be is loss. But as long as I look at what we do and say, "That's it, let's stop right here." Then what I'm saying is... What I'm acknowledging is that, that's okay. And so what I was looking for within Rocketdyne and got the president of the company to agree to this is finding some people that I was mentoring for several years and their role was to go around the organization and look for loss.   0:32:54.8 BB: And, loss is the ability…Ready Andrew, to look at what is in terms of integration and wonder what could be. And then look at the components and then ask, "Can we change the variation of the components to improve integration?" And of course, the big question is, is it worth the effort? But it's having the vision that the integration and I think that's a great example. The integration is all that time we're spending waiting is not only is it lost, but that's integration time. [laughter] Bingo. So, the next thing I wanna point out before we close is... So this conversation with my friend Jim got me out of being stuck on the loss function and then stepping back and saying that's... There's... It's a global thing. It's all about managing resources, which also means it's more than quality. It's not managing quality, it's managing resources.   0:33:51.8 BB: And if we improve how we manage resources, quality goes up, integration improves, all these things improve. Well, the next thing I wanna point out is, I started thinking in terms of a model that says, how do we allocate our resources? Again, resources are time, energy, equipment, software, ideas. How are we using them? And the first model I had in mind was, are we applying... Are we allocating the resources proactively or reactively? Are we applying the resources to go to the doctor for annual checkups just to see how we're doing. We're going to the dentist for an annual checkup. Are we having somebody come by and look at our plumbing system and getting a feeling for how is it running? Are we taking the car in for routine things. Or are we reactive? We call the plumber when it breaks, we go to the doctor when we're sick. We bring the car in when it's broken. And, so what I started focusing on is what is our preference? How are the resources being allocated?   0:34:55.6 BB: And, without a doubt, what I found is the majority of the resources, time, energy, equipment are being used reactively. Focusing on things that are broken, not good. And, and I would go into big production meetings and say, "How much time are we... How much time do you ladies and gentlemen spend every day discussing parts which are good that arrive on time?" And, no matter where I went, the answer was “little to none.” And, so what I found is the resources were being used reactively, reactively. Now, let me also throw in that if the company's doing research and developing, developing next generation products, that is proactive use of resources. But what I also found is for the products that are in production, rarely did anybody ever come to me for something in production and say, "This could be better."   0:35:52.0 AS: Mm-hmm.   0:35:53.1 BB: That's rare. So the other dimension of this model. So the first dimension... I was just... In fact... It wasn't till I discovered Taguchi, Deming's work that got me to realize this is focusing on things that are broken is the norm. It wasn't just where I work. I started to see that pattern play out elsewhere. Well, the other axis of this resource management model, so the vertical axis is... Are the resources being applied proactively or reactively? So that's let's say the vertical axis going up. Top versus bottom. The horizontal axis are, is are the resources mine or are they ours? Is it my equipment, my people, my department? Or is it ours, Andrew? And so on the horizontal axis, the left hand side is the resources are mine, my department, my, my, my... And the other side of the horizontal axis is ours.   0:36:53.1 BB: And so in this two dimensional model, the vertical axis is, are the resources applied proactively, that's the top. Reactively, that's the bottom. If you think of a two by two matrix, the top row is proactive, the bottom row is reactive. And then when it comes to columns, so the left hand column is the resources are mine. The right hand column is the resources are ours. So we've got a two by two matrix. And I say to people, so given your understanding of Red Pen and Blue Pen companies, me and we organizations, last straw, all straw. I say, according to that matrix, how do you see resources managed in a Red Pen Company, a non-Deming company? And people will say the lower left quadrant, which is what, which is my resources applied reactively. Right?   0:37:43.4 AS: Yep.   0:37:44.9 BB: And then I'll say, "Okay." [laughter] And the name for that is... And it took a while to come up with a name and you're gonna love this. We started calling that at Rocketdyne, Reflexive Resource Management. Reflexive Resource Management. Because a wise man, born in Iowa in 1900, Andrew [laughter], by the name of W. Edwards Deming, once said, pulling your hand off of a hot stove requires no thought. It's all reflex action. When I saw him and that, I don't know where it was, I said, but I know he said that. And I thought, that's it. It's all reflexes. There's no thought involved. Why are we reactive? Because! I mean, why would I be proactive? I mean, why would I work? So when I started realizing is there's no thought involved in being reactive in a Red Pen Company. It's just that's what we do. So then the question is, well, how are resources managed in a Blue Pen Company? A We Organization, a Deming organization. And, what people will say is the upper right quadrant, which is proactive ours, the resources are ours.   0:38:56.1 BB: We're gonna be proactive. And wherever I go, that's people's answers. And I say, you, are you ready? And okay, what? I say, the entire right hand side is a Deming organization. What does that mean? It means I'm smart enough to know when to be proactive, and I'm smart enough to know when to be reactive. I choose, I choose to replace the light bulb when it goes out, it's a choice. Or I choose to replace the battery in the smoke alarm when it goes out. I, being reactive in a Deming organization is a choice. Being proactive is a choice. And so the right hand side, it's about choice. And it took some time to figure this out. What do we call that? What do we call this? So we call it the left hand side, the left lower left quadrant, Reflexive Resource Management. So it took a while to find out what's the adjective for the right hand side.   0:39:55.6 BB: And I come up with an adjective, find out that it's an acronym used by somebody for something else. No, can't use that. Try it again. Try it again. Try it again. Try it again. Try it again. It took about an hour to, at least an hour and finally came up with a term used by the Bureau of Land Management in the late 1800s. And it, and it's, it was known as Purposeful Resource Management. And I thought, bingo! One is nobody's got a trademark on it, [laughter] And so we started calling the deliberate use of resources to be deliberately proactive, or we choose to be proactive, or we choose to be reactive. We started calling that purposeful, thoughtful resource management.   0:40:45.5 AS: Yeah, that choice. It made me think about there's a lot of things in business that you just, your choice is to be reactive. When that breaks, we're gonna fix that because it's not so critical, whereas we cannot have a situation where we're reacting to this particular process. Like, think about my coffee business as an example. We cannot be reactive to downtime on the roasting machines. Well, we're not just waiting for that. We're doing preventive maintenance. We've got stocks.   0:41:17.7 BB: That's right.   0:41:18.5 AS: Stock of parts. We've got, so we make a deliberate effort and resource allocation to make sure we never in that situation, but there's other parts. Let's say we have a few grinders and something like that, we'll fix those when they break. [laughter]   0:41:35.0 BB: Yeah. Well, I've shared this with a woman who, the hairstylist I go to. My kids used to go there and I've been going there ever since. And she is awesome. Just awesome. So I, these are the things I discussed with her, all kinds of things. And so I have a photograph of her, Andrew, holding a hairdryer in her hair salon. And the hair salon is called Kids Cuts because a good part of her business is kids. And then people like me bring the kids in there and next thing you know, I'm a customer, too. Well, so I'm explaining this to me and she says, "Bill, every 6 months I get rid of all the hair dryers". I said, why? She says, "I cannot afford to burn somebody's hair". And so, so I've got a photo of her holding it, so she doesn't monitor how it's performing.   0:42:24.1 BB: She just knows 6 months, get rid of it now. You know, does she donate it? I don't know where it goes. And I don't wanna get into recycling, but she deliberately, she's not gonna burn somebody's hair.   0:42:35.0 AS: Right.   0:42:38.1 BB: Alright. And, what else? Oh, but you and I talked earlier in one of the episodes, this idea of choice, that instead of following the domain that says you can't have inventory, we gotta have blah, blah, blah, you realize this? No, we can choose to have inventory, or we can choose not to have inventory. And so what we're talking about in resource management is, which gets into all those things we talked about earlier, is it's about choices. And so I would say to people, I've got a slide, then I say, it's like you get to the end of the road and you turn right and turning right is being reactive.   0:43:21.3 BB: And I say, Andrew, I've been patterning you, and you get to the end of the road and you turn right, you're always reactive. Why do you turn right? And you say, "Bill, there's only a right-hand turn". And I said, "No, Andrew, there's a left-hand turn, but you can't see it. It's in your blind spot". So the right hand turn is to focus on what's bad, to make it good, what Ackoff would also call managing actions. And that's the road that's well traveled, [laughter], the road less traveled is the left-hand turn, which is to be proactive, again, when it makes sense. I'm not saying being proactive all the time, I'm saying there's a place for it. Consider being proactive, consider being reactive.   0:44:04.0 AS: So, on that note, I think we ought to leave. Why don't you leave the listeners and the viewers with a concise statement of what you want them to take away from this discussion. We went through a lot of different things, but if you wanna bring it down to something clear and concise, how would you describe that?   0:44:24.5 BB: I'd say the, um…I'd like, I'd encourage our listeners, viewers, students of the Deming philosophy, those new to it, to expand their appreciation of quality management and realize that to managing resources period. And the better we manage our resources in our organization, knowing when to collect data, when not to collect data, when to meet requirements, when to be on target with minimum variation, when having lots of variation. Should we be proactive or re…. These are all choices. And they're, and I think the better we understand those choices about how we manage variation as a system in concert, I think the better the performance of the organization and improving productivity, improving quality, improving profit. So I think all those things we're striving for come from a better understanding of how to manage resources. And so instead of just being narrowly focused on the quality dimension, I think if we step back and realize that that's one aspect of how an organization operates.   0:45:42.4 AS: Bill, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to Deming.org to continue your journey. If you want to keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn. This is your host, Andrew Stotz. And I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, "People are entitled to Joy in work."

Meet our GuestSiddharth 'Sid' BoseSid Bose is a Partner at Ice Miller and the chair of Ice Miller's Technology, Privacy and Cyber Risk Practice. As an attorney with an information systems and security background, Sid counsels clients on various cybersecurity, privacy, and compliance issues, that range from building up foundational programs, to data breach and incident response counseling, to handling complex legal and regulatory matters. Sid is also an adjunct professor at the Indiana University, Maurer School of Law. Sid teaches at the IU Cybersecurity Clinic on risk management and preparedness in pressing local, national, and global initiatives.Reading ResourcesFederal Bureau of Investigation [Public Service Announcement] - Malicious Actors Manipulating Photos and Videos to Create Explicit Content and Sextortion Schemes - LINKReuters - Tech experts see rising threat of GenAI deepfakes, FBI warns of "generative adversarial networks" - LINKFintech - Ai in the crosshairs: FBI's stark warning of emerging threats from hackers - LINK-Generative Artificial Intelligence has allowed users to quickly create content that is helping them complete tasks more quickly and efficiently. But it doesn't take too deep a dive to determine that AI can also be used in ways that could harm a company or an executive. In this edition of “Can You Hear Me?”, co-hosts Rob Johnson and Eileen Rochford welcome tech and cyber risk attorney Sid Bose from Ice Miller to discuss “Generative AI Threats to Brands and Leaders.”

“In the lab, we like to say that our mycelium is a bit capricious; it has its own temper,” says Maud Ohler, Vice President of Technology Development at MycoWorks and fermentation scientist. Maud's work with mycelium traces back to about 15 years ago when she first heard the word mycelium in a biology class focused on tree/root symbiosis and mycorrhizae, the symbiotic association between roots and fungus. She now finds herself working intimately with mycelium in the MycoWorks tech dev lab on a daily basis. Listen to this episode to hear about Maud's career in fermentation and biology, the challenges of scaling up our technology, Fine Mycelium™, and the vast opportunity behind mycelium as a material for the future.  In this episode:2:20 - Hearing mycelium for the first time in biology class4:00 - The versatility and unique properties of mycelium5:45 - What makes the Reishi strain unique9:20 - Universe in a tray15:40 - Challenges of scaling at the South Carolina plant18:00 - The mycelium industry in 10 years20:30 - Durability in relation to sustainabilityMycoWorks Talks is a space to feed your wonder and curiosity for a new class of materials. Xevi Gallego, our VP of Brand & Marketing, hosts talks with people in the MycoWorks universe, taking you on a behind-the-scenes journey of unfiltered conversations about our product, technology, our incredible team, and much more. 

About James Bond: James Bond, One of America's leading Marketing & Behavioral Management Specialists, helps businesses with 5-50 employees scale their business by simplifying their management and marketing. James has more than 22 years of experience as both consultant and company insider at more than 133 U.S. companies, from smaller regional firms to divisions of several Fortune 500 companies, including Kal Kan, Amgen, Litton, Kraft Foods, Abbott Laboratories, Dannon Yogurt, Timex, Tenet Healthcare and others. James is a specialist at market introductions and managing execution of complex, strategic business initiatives in Marketing, Operations, Business Structure, Technology Development, Sales Force Structure, Sales Management, Distribution Channels Development, inter-departmental alignment, and post-merger integration. Check out the latest episode of our Conversational Selling podcast to learn more about James.  In this episode, Nancy and James discuss the following:The etymology of the term brain glue.Mirroring effect and the incredible power of questions in conversation.The neuroscience behind brain glue.The physiological influence of humor on the human brain.Application of brain glue by U.S. presidents, civil rights activists, comedians, and even moms.Political phrases and when to use them.How a book title change can change a life.Laughter is the best medicine.Key Takeaways:  The most powerful human engagement tool that exists is questioning.You can't be too serious, and it lightens up the nature of the conversation and the meeting.Political phrases do not make sense, but they grab your attention; they stick to the brain.Logic can help, but you must be triggering the emotional sides of the brain, or people will not buy from you!If you can get the judge to laugh and if you can get the jury to laugh at you, they suddenly want you to win."Brain glue focuses on two basic areas. There are many, but there are two basic areas. Redintegration, which is the brain's need for completion, is one of them. And then asymmetry, which is when you could present something that is not balanced." – JAMES " By the way, humor is very important. The brain sends chemicals throughout the body. And so, we have something called cortisol, which is the fear and flight drug that goes through our body. So, if somebody scares you or anger you, you get cortisol through your bloodstream. Well, cortisol stays in your bloodstream for up to 36 hours, making you highly resistant to buying anything or agreeing to something you wouldn't agree to. So, if you go in trying to sell somebody, and they're really angry because, I don't know, their client did something, or their wife or husband did something or whatever else, it's very hard to get them to say, "Yes," and agree to buy your product or service. And the reason is that cortisol is basically a "getaway from me drug" going through your body. But Oxytocin is triggered; Oxytocin is the antidote to cortisol, and it's triggered when you tell a joke. Or you do something fascinating, but usually jokes really work well." – JAMES "Absolutely, our body wants to smile, and we want to laugh. I mean, life is too short. And so, when to smile and we want to laugh. And so, when you're working with clients, it helps you, and I know depression is a big thing these days, okay? Well, you got to force yourself to laugh. There was an editor of a major New York magazine, and the doctors told him he has like three months to live. And so, he decided he was going to start laughing. He's going to force himself to laugh every single day. He's going to come up with jokes and everything. He's going to watch movies that are funny. He's just going to laugh every day. And suddenly he lived, I think, for like nine years after that." – JAMES Connect with James Bond:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jamesibond/Growth Management Ventures, LLC: http://www.gmventuresllc.com/Try Our Proven, 3-Step System, Guaranteeing Accountability and Transparency that Drives RESULTS by clicking on this link: https://oneofakindsales.com/call-center-in-a-box/  Connect with Nancy Calabrese: Twitter: https://twitter.com/oneofakindsalesFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/One-Of-A-Kind-Sales-304978633264832/Website: https://oneofakindsales.comPhone: 908-879-2911LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ncalabrese/Email: leads@oneofakindsales.com

In this episode of the ChinaPower Podcast, we are joined by Dr. Edward Parker to discuss China's advancement in quantum technologies. Dr. Parker explains that China is emerging as a leader in quantum technology and has underscored it as a “strategic priority.” Dr. Parker also reveals that China is heavily invested in quantum communications, whereas the U.S. is more focused on quantum computing and quantum sensing. In the context of U.S.-China competition going forward, Dr. Parker notes that broad export controls on quantum technologies run a risk of slowing down scientific progress.   Dr. Edward Parker is a physical scientist at the RAND Corporation. He is broadly interested in the societal impact of disruptive technologies, and his current research focuses on emerging quantum technologies, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity. He has served as a peer reviewer for the physics journals Quantum Science and Technology, the European Journal of Physics, and Physica A. Dr. Parker's recent report on emerging quantum technologies can be found online here.  

Welcome back to yet another episode of the Conscious Podcast and today Ian welcomes Shelli Brunswick in the episode. Shelli starts by a brief introduction of what she does and how it all began. Shelli then talks more about her organization, the space foundation and what their mission is. Shelli and Ian then talk more about in which areas the biggest growth can be observed and maybe where the future is heading towards. Shelli then talks more about diversity and how the organization is trying to promote that. Shelli then comments on which places or geographical areas she sees the biggest growth in interest about space. Shelli and Ian then talk about all the amazing innovations in technology and how we got there. Shelli then ends the video by inviting people to check out her mission and their organization. Parts 0:00 – Guest Intro 2:52 – Space Foundation 7:46 – Areas of Interest 13:31 – Diversity 17:50 – Subscribe! 18:16 – Growth 26:38 – Technology Development 34:20 – Guest Outro About Shelli Brunswick: Shelli Brunswick, COO of Space Foundation, brings a broad perspective and and deep vision of the global space ecosystem – from a distinguished career as a space acquisition and program management leader and congressional liaison for the U.S. Air Force to her current role overseeing Space Foundation's three primary divisions: Center for Innovation and Education, Symposium 365, and Global Alliance. Know more about Shelli Brunswick here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shellibrunswick/ https://shelli-brunswick.com/ ///////// Download chapter 1 free: https://www.petermanfirm.com/conscious-design-chapter-1-free-download/ ///////// Want to be a guest? Visit: https://bit.ly/3BetCkf ///////// Want to work with us?

This episode is the first in an intermittent series on majoring in the various academic fields (broadly speaking). My hope is to help you understand more of what is involved in various areas of study, how these fields relate to the Christian faith, and practical advice as you major in this area. My guest for each episode in this series will be someone with many years experience in the field, as well as a robust faith in Christ, and has learned to flourish both academically and spiritually in this field of study. We begin today with a focus on majors in the hard sciences. My guest in this episode is Dr. Bob Kaita, emeritus Senior Physicist at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, where he has conducted nuclear fusion energy research for nearly four decades. Bob has also been the thesis advisor for students who have pursued careers in government and industry as well as academia, mentoring students through their studies in plasma physics. He is a fellow of the American Physics Society, and a recipient of the Kaul Prize for Excellence in Plasma Physics Research and Technology Development for pioneering work in components for fusion devices. Bob is also a fellow and past president of the American Scientific Affiliation, one of the largest organization of Christians in science and engineering. In this podcast we discuss: How Bob first got interested in a career in the sciences How Bob's coming to faith in Christ in high school connected with his love of science The role Bob's parents played in helping his pursue a career in science A scientist who followed God's call that serves as a role model for Bob Career opportunities open to those with degrees in the sciences The importance of having a servant's heart as a scientist Signs you may be called to be a scientist How Bob's faith helped him in his studies of physics, rather than be a hindrance Some areas of overlap between faith and physics How Bob thinks about areas of alleged conflict between science and faith The centrality of one's worldview in interpreting scientific data The exciting future for research in the sciences The grounding of a Christian's worth as a scientist The valuable role of humility and spiritual formation in the life of a Christian scientist Books and professional societies that help connect faith and science The importance of understanding the relationship between science and the philosophy of science Doing science vs. faith-science integration Why there are so many Christians in the hard sciences The role of imagination in the practice of science The importance of being a good writer as a scientist Why scientists need to understand truth from other disciplines, and vice-versa Limitations of science that believers should be aware of Balancing “follow the science” with complete and blind faith in science The new “priesthood” of scientists, and the resulting backlash against science A final word of encouragement to budding scientists Resources mentioned during our conversation and later suggested by Bob: The American Scientific Affiliation Walter R. Hearn, Being a Christian in Science Other InterVarsity Press books on faith and science P. Moreland and Garrett DeWeese, Philosophy Made Slightly Less Difficult: A Beginner's Guide to Life's Big Questions Robert Wuthnow, The Struggle for America's Soul: Evangelicals, Liberals, & Secularism Hannah Eagleson (ed.), Science and Faith: Student Questions Explored Elaine Howard Ecklund, Why Science and Faith Need Each Other: Eight Shared Values that Move Us Beyond Fear Textbook: The Crossroads of Science and Faith: Astronomy Through a Christian Worldview Textbook: The Crossroads of Science and Faith: An Introduction to the Science & Faith Dialogue

If you're uncertain about what i4.0 is, what it means for manufacturers and how you can leverage i4.0 technology to improve your outcomes, you're going to want to listen to this episode.   Brian Romano, Director of Technology Development at Arthur G. Russell (AGR) talks to Ari about i4.0 technology. Then they dive into how AGR is leveraging the i4.0 systems built into their machines (sensors, data collection and analytics) to provide a remote support program to their customers.   This support program has become more important due to the workforce shortage - AGR is filling in for its customers to help them with their vital machine maintenance.     Brian also talks to Ari about bringing the younger generation into manufacturing and what companies like AGR are doing to support schools and programs. Marketing a manufacturing career is so important!     Brian Romano, Arthur G. Russell Company Company Website: https://www.arthurgrussell.com/ Company LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/arthur-g--russell-co-inc-/ Company YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcFRuaaTjIUIFv-UD_g5GYg Company Twitter: https://twitter.com/agrussell_usa Brian's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-romano-as-bs-ms-mba/   Ari Santiago, CEO, CompassMSP Company Website: https://compassmsp.com/ Company Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MadeinAmericaPodcast Company LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/made-in-america-podcast-with-ari Company YouTube:  https://youtube.com/c/MadeinAmericaPodcastwithAri Ari's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/asantiago104/   Podcast produced by Miceli Productions: https://miceliproductions.com/   Brian and Ari discuss: Industry 4.0 Predictive analytics IIoT (Industrial Internet of Things Machine data Workforce shortage solutions Automation

In this new episode of the Boundaryless Conversation Podcast, Mark van Rijmenam examines the hype cycle surrounding AI and the perceived decline of interest in the Metaverse. He argues that these emerging technologies are not mutually exclusive and that the Metaverse still has significant potential for development with the application of AI.   Dr Mark van Rijmenam is an international keynote speaker, author and entrepreneur. He is a leading future tech strategist who thinks about how technology changes organizations, society and the metaverse. Globally recognised speaker and expert on disruptive innovation and how we can benefit from emerging technologies such as big data, blockchain, AI and VR/AR, Mark wrote “Step into the Metaverse: How the Immersive Internet Will Unlock a Trillion-Dollar Social Economy”, detailing what the open metaverse is and how organizations and consumers can benefit from the immersive internet. Mark stresses the importance for organizations to develop digital capabilities (which he refers to as “DNA”), to stay ahead of technology trends and avoid getting caught up in hype cycles. We also discuss the challenge of developing responsible and ethical technology, with suggestions for oversight boards and regulatory requirements to ensure alignment with ethical values.   Key highlights 

Welcome to The Voice of Retail podcast. My name is Michael LeBlanc, and I am your host, I believe in the power of storytelling to bring the retail industry to life. I'll bring insights, perspectives and experiences from some of the retail industry's most innovative and influential voices each week. This podcast is produced in conjunction with Retail Council of Canada.Welcome to a special RCC Retail HR conference bonus episode. These bonus episodes will introduce you to a few retail thought leaders and change-makers speaking at Canada's only conference for retail human resources professionals, April 20 at International Centre, Mississauga - a packed full-day of discussion and learning on today's most pressing issues. In this episode, Tanja Fratangeli, Chief People Officer at IKEA Group, shares her background, what she'll be talking about on the stage, and two-starts, one-stop advice for retailers. About TanjaI am a Senior Human Resources Leader who develops company-wide strategies to align human capital with business initiatives. I am a curious partner who utilizes a strong business acumen to identify priorities and develop and deliver innovative solutions. I am recognized as a visionary leader with proven success in leading organizational change, including start-ups, expansion projects, multiple restructurings and acquisitions/mergers. I have successfully mentored and coached management staff to develop into top tier talent. I am a results-oriented strategic leader with exemplary implementation and project management skills.Goal: To secure a lead role in Human Resources that leverages my 18 years of diversified experience. I bring value-added services by successfully partnering with senior management to achieve the organization's strategic objectives and goals through effective human resources managementSpecialties: Leading Change, Business Transformation, Start-Up, Organizational Design & Development, Talent Management, Human Resources Management, Leadership Development, Mergers & Acquisitions, Program Development, Technology Development, Project Management About Michael Michael is the Founder & President of M.E. LeBlanc & Company Inc. and a Senior Advisor to Retail Council of Canada and the Bank of Canada as part of his advisory and consulting practice. He brings 25+ years of brand/retail/marketing & eCommerce leadership experience with Levi's, Black & Decker, Hudson's Bay, Today's Shopping Choice and Pandora Jewellery.   Michael has been on the front lines of retail industry change for his entire career. He has delivered keynotes, hosted fire-side discussions with C-level executives and participated worldwide in thought leadership panels. ReThink Retail has added Michael to their prestigious Top Global Retail Influencers list for 2023 for the third year in a row. Michael is also the president of Maven Media, producing a network of leading trade podcasts, including Canada's top retail industry podcast, The Voice of Retail. He produces and co-hosts Remarkable Retail with best-selling author Steve Dennis, now ranked one of the top retail podcasts in the world. Based in San Francisco, Global eCommerce Leaders podcast explores global cross-border issues and opportunities for eCommerce brands and retailers. Last but not least, Michael is the producer and host of the "Last Request Barbeque" channel on YouTube, where he cooks meals to die for - and collaborates with top brands as a food and product influencer across North America.

We're excited to welcome back to the podcast Maria Roat, founder of MA Roat Consulting and former U.S. Deputy Federal Chief Information Officer. For our discussion we double click into the cyber workforce gap and how to attract diverse skillsets to the industry, introducing STEM earlier in education, understanding how to nurture non-traditional learners and the awesome experience veterans bring to supporting the cyber mission. She also shares insights from her decades of experience as an IT leader on the criticality of taking risks, being comfortable with the uncomfortable, and the power of mentors. We had so much to talk about we made this a two-part episode! Maria Roat, former U.S. Deputy Federal CIO Maria Roat is currently retired from federal service after more than 40 years in the industry. She started her own consulting firm called MA Roat Consulting LLC, which takes up most of her time. However, she is also on the Board of Directors for On Mission IT, AFCEA Bethesda, and Aquia Inc. She also works closely with VETSports Inc. as a member of the Board of Directors. Maria Roat served as the Deputy Federal Chief Information Officer for two years after starting the role in May 2020 with over 35 years of professional experience in information technology. Previously, Ms. Roat served as the Small Business Administration Chief Information Officer October 2016 – May 2020 where she led SBA's digital transformation to a more proactive and innovative enterprise services organization responsive to the business technology needs of SBA program offices and small businesses & entrepreneurs across the United States. Ms. Roat also served more than two years as the U.S. Department of Transportation Chief Technology Officer and was responsible for establishing and leading DOTs technical vision and strategic direction, driving innovation and planning for technology growth supporting internal and external facing mission activities. Additionally, she served 10 years at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) joining in June 2004 and serving in a number of capacities including Federal Risk Management and Authorization Program (FedRAMP) Director, FEMA Deputy CIO, Chief of Staff for the DHS CIO, USCIS Chief Information Security Officer and CIO Chief of Staff, and Deputy Director, Technology Development, for TSA's Secure Flight Program. Prior to joining DHS in 2004, Ms. Roat was in the private sector for 5 years deploying and managing global enterprise network management systems, as well as running Network and Security Operations Centers. Ms. Roat is a graduate of the University of Maryland (UMUC), Harvard Business School Executive Education Program for Leadership Development, and the Navy Senior Enlisted Academy. For links and resources discussed in this episode, please visit our show notes at https://www.forcepoint.com/govpodcast/e226

We are excited to welcome back to the podcast Maria Roat, founder of MA Roat Consulting and former U.S. Deputy Federal Chief Information Officer. For our discussion we double click into the cyber workforce gap and how to attract diverse skillsets to the industry, introducing STEM earlier in education, understanding how to nurture non-traditional learners and the awesome experience veterans bring to supporting the cyber mission. She also shares insights from her decades of experience as an IT leader on the criticality of taking risks, being comfortable with the uncomfortable, and the power of mentors. We had so much to talk about we made this a two-part episode! Maria Roat, former U.S. Deputy Federal CIO Maria Roat is currently retired from federal service after more than 40 years in the industry. She started her own consulting firm called MA Roat Consulting LLC, which takes up most of her time. However, she is also on the Board of Directors for On Mission IT, AFCEA Bethesda, and Aquia Inc. She also works closely with VETSports Inc. as a member of the Board of Directors. Maria Roat served as the Deputy Federal Chief Information Officer for two years after starting the role in May 2020 with over 35 years of professional experience in information technology. Previously, Ms. Roat served as the Small Business Administration Chief Information Officer October 2016 – May 2020 where she led SBA's digital transformation to a more proactive and innovative enterprise services organization responsive to the business technology needs of SBA program offices and small businesses & entrepreneurs across the United States. Ms. Roat also served more than two years as the U.S. Department of Transportation Chief Technology Officer and was responsible for establishing and leading DOTs technical vision and strategic direction, driving innovation and planning for technology growth supporting internal and external facing mission activities. Additionally, she served 10 years at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) joining in June 2004 and serving in a number of capacities including Federal Risk Management and Authorization Program (FedRAMP) Director, FEMA Deputy CIO, Chief of Staff for the DHS CIO, USCIS Chief Information Security Officer and CIO Chief of Staff, and Deputy Director, Technology Development, for TSA's Secure Flight Program. Prior to joining DHS in 2004, Ms. Roat was in the private sector for 5 years deploying and managing global enterprise network management systems, as well as running Network and Security Operations Centers. Ms. Roat is a graduate of the University of Maryland (UMUC), Harvard Business School Executive Education Program for Leadership Development, and the Navy Senior Enlisted Academy. For links and resources discussed in this episode, please visit our show notes at https://www.forcepoint.com/govpodcast/e225

Our state's research universities are continuously discovering new technologies that are making their way into the commercial marketplace. Our next guest's company licensed research from Clemson and has used it to develop a new process that could improve the efficiency of diagnostic tests such as biopsies. It also won them the most recent Technology Development award from Innovision. Mike Switzer interviews Terri Bruce, founder and CEO of Victory ExoFibres in Central, SC.

Natalie Zeituny is a reality cosmologist and consciousness architect, clairvoyant, energy healer, mystic, generator of ensoulment and international speaker. She is dedicated to innovative applications of reality models that facilitate personal, social, and planetary transformation. As an information systems architect in 2002 she founded NZ Consulting, a management-consulting firm that has successfully advised corporations such as Apple, Yahoo and Safeway on how to meet corporate goals with technology solutions. As the founder of the Conscious Business Center, she is currently engaged in the creation of consciousness research ventures around the world. She will be interviewed by Gerald Harris, chair of the Technology & Society Member-led Forum. They will cover her life story as well as her ideas about helping technologists direct their efforts toward the use and commercialization of technology for the enhancement of human potential and benefits for all of mankind. MLF ORGANIZER Gerald Anthony Harris SPEAKERS Natalie Zeituny Author, Ensoulment, Discover Your Soul's DNA and Ensoulment, The Future of Reality In Conversation with Gerald Anthony Harris Chair, Technology & Society Member-led Forum, The Commonwealth Club of California In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we are currently hosting all of our live programming via YouTube live stream. This program was recorded via video conference on February 8th, 2023 by the Commonwealth Club of California. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How does the government workforce need to adapt to this era of technology development? Can the judicial system keep pace with technology? What is the role of academia and national laboratories in technology development? Will we ever see economic collaboration with China? Join Dr. Arun Seraphin and this week's guest, Dr. Daniel Gerstein, for a conversation on the U.S. science and technology enterprise, his recent book titled Tech Wars: Transforming U.S. Technology Development, the connection between economics and national security, a potential new role for the Department of Commerce, and more.

In this quick episode I discuss some of the technologies the US military is investing, why small businesses are prime for these contracts and a bit about teh history of US military contracts and how they have been responsible for some of the worlds greatest technologies! https://www.dodcontract.com

Joining the podcast this week is Maria Roat, who has had an impressive career in both government and the private sector for more than 35 years. She shares insights from her time in government, among the many roles she held included Deputy Federal CIO and Small Business Administration CIO, and the opportunities she helped identify to change the system from the inside out. She shares perspective on operating the government as a very large enterprise and the challenges that come with managing single year budgets for multi-year programs. Creativity is key to success and Maria talks about the many new and innovative initiatives and programs activated during her tenure to advance the government's technology infrastructure including the CIO Council and revitalization of the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC). We also delve into the impact in embracing diversity of thought and the criticality of challenging others to think differently and results it can deliver. Side note, we have book recommendation from this episode as well! It is “Start with Why” by Simon Sinek. Maria Roat, former Deputy Federal CIO Maria Roat served as the Deputy Federal Chief Information Officer for two years bringing 35+ years of professional experience in information technology. Ms. Roat served as the Small Business Administration Chief Information Officer October 2016 – May 2020 where she led SBA's digital transformation to a more proactive and innovative enterprise services organization responsive to the business technology needs of SBA program offices and small businesses & entrepreneurs across the United States. Ms. Roat served more than 2 years as the U.S. Department of Transportation Chief Technology Officer and was responsible for establishing and leading DOTs technical vision and strategic direction, driving innovation and planning for technology growth supporting internal and external facing mission activities. Ms. Roat served 10 years at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) joining in June 2004 and serving in a number of capacities including Federal Risk Management and Authorization Program (FedRAMP) Director, FEMA Deputy CIO, Chief of Staff for the DHS CIO, USCIS Chief Information Security Officer and CIO Chief of Staff, and Deputy Director, Technology Development, for TSA's Secure Flight Program. Prior to joining DHS in 2004, Ms. Roat was in the private sector for 5 years deploying and managing global enterprise network management systems, as well as running Network and Security Operations Centers. Ms. Roat is a graduate of the University of Maryland (UMUC), Harvard Business School Executive Education Program for Leadership Development, and the Navy Senior Enlisted Academy. For links and resources discussed in this episode, please visit our show notes at https://www.forcepoint.com/govpodcast/e209

CEO of GreenPal Episode page with video, transcript, and more My guest for Episode #184 of the My Favorite Mistake podcast is Bryan Clayton. He is the Co-Founder and CEO of GreenPal, an online marketplace that connects homeowners with local lawn care professionals. GreenPal has been called the “Uber for lawn care” by Entrepreneur magazine and has over 300,000 active users completing thousands of transactions per day. Before starting GreenPal, 10 years ago, Bryan Clayton founded Peachtree Inc., one of the largest landscaping companies in the state of Tennessee, growing it to over 150 people and $10 million a year in annual revenue before it was acquired in 2013. Bryan‘s interest and expertise are related to entrepreneurism, small business growth, marketing, and bootstrapping businesses from zero revenue to profitability and exit. In this episode, Bryan tells his favorite mistake story about outsourcing the development of an app, thinking all he had to do was the marketing. What went wrong and how did he discover the mistake? What did he learn and what did he learn about mistakes, leadership, and culture in an organization more broadly? We also talk about questions and topics including: Where did you get the idea to outsource? When did you first start discovering that it was a mistake? Using “Lean Startup” principles? What was your Minimum Viable Product? What's your mindset on mistakes that happen in the company now? From a culture standpoint, what did you learn from the first company that you applied to the second? “You get the company culture that you deserve as a leader” “I made every mistake you could make” – felt victimized “Took me a long time to self reflect about the mistakes I made.” Do you ask for feedback from employees about the culture? Mistakes people make when hiring a lawn care company? --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/favorite-mistake/support

A People Platform Promoting Positive Change for the Profession Bob Habian, AIA is an entrepreneur and an architect, or perhaps more accurately described as a “puzzle builder and licensed problem solver”. His career path includes chapters of conventional and unconventional work, with extensive experience in traditional architectural practice, building product manufacturing, and technology development. You’ll […] The post EA469: Bob Habian – A People Platform Promoting Positive Change for the Profession appeared first on EntreArchitect // Small Firm Entrepreneur Architects.

“The fundamental problem of humanity is that we have paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and God-like technology.” — E. O. Wilson.More than ever, we need the wisdom to match the power of our God-like technology. Yet, technology is both eroding our ability to make sense of the world, and increasing the complexity of the issues we face. The gap between our sense-making ability and issue complexity is what we call the “wisdom gap." How do we develop the wisdom we need to responsibly steward our God-like technology?This week on Your Undivided Attention, we're introducing one way Center for Humane Technology is attempting to close the wisdom gap —through our new online course, Foundations of Humane Technology. In this bonus episode, Tristan Harris describes the wisdom gap we're attempting to close, and our Co-Founder and Executive Director Randima Fernando talks about the course itself.Sign up for the free course: https://www.humanetech.com/courseRECOMMENDED YUA EPISODESA Problem Well-Stated Is Half-Solved with Daniel Schmachtenberger: https://www.humanetech.com/podcast/a-problem-well-stated-is-half-solvedA Conversation with Facebook Whistleblower Frances Haugen: https://www.humanetech.com/podcast/42-a-conversation-with-facebook-whistleblower-frances-haugenHere's Our Plan And We Don't Know with Tristan Harris, Aza Raskin, and Stephanie Lepp: https://www.humanetech.com/podcast/46-heres-our-plan-and-we-dont-knowYour Undivided Attention is produced by the Center for Humane Technology. Follow us on Twitter: @HumaneTech_