The journey to the singularity
The journey to the singularity
It has now been 8 years since my last published article about Industry 4.0. Join me now on the human journey towards singularity — people's complete technological dependence on technology.
Further links:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/journey-singularity-fabio-iannone-uh9we
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/industry-40-my-point-view-fabio-iannone/
“DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OR DIGITIZATION RESULTS IN “UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING,” THE FULLY CONNECTED WORLD. THERE IS SINGULARITY IN IT, I.E. THE TOTAL TECHNOLOGICAL DEPENDENCE OF HUMANS ON TECHNOLOGY. [1]”
Slowly towards digital
Everyone is talking about digital transformation. Not just for a few months, but for years, these words have been used again and again to describe something that is apparently intended to fundamentally change the world.
A group of researchers judged the overview in the area of digital transformation, freely translated from English, as follows:
“First of all, digital transformation can be cynically viewed as a management fashion or as the rebirth of past change initiatives made possible by IT with a new outfit. The change made possible by IT reappeared a few years ago as part of the business process management movement. As interest in business process management seems to be dwindling, a new buzzword is emerging to arouse renewed interest from managers, consultants, and software companies. On the other hand, enthusiasts could argue that digital transformation includes novel elements that deserve appropriate attention and present interesting challenges for future research. In particular, the results show that managers should adapt their business strategy to digital reality by integrating new technologies into their business models, which increases the importance of process and operational management. [2]”
Attempts to define the term in specialist literature sounded a lot like marketing promises in the past, such as the definition by Dominic M. Mazzone, who freely translates from English:
“Digital transformation is the targeted and continuous digital evolution of a company, business model, idea process, or methodology, both strategically and tactically. [3]”
Thomas Hess, who also differentiates the term from digitization, narrows down the term more technically:
“Digitalization describes the introduction of new solutions based on digital technologies. In English, people speak of digitization — easy to confuse with digitization; the latter describes the transfer of information from an analog form of storage to a digital form of storage and thus a very specific form of digitization. The concept of digital transformation goes one step further. This term places greater emphasis on the change brought about by digital technologies. It accentuates the introduction of a technical solution (e.g. a new sales management concept), but also emphasizes the driving role of new digital technologies. [4]”
Other approaches speak of a degree of maturity. Note: This term is also used ambivalently. On the one hand, there are approaches that use the term “Digital Maturity Model” to measure and visualize the status quo of digital transformation in companies, and on the other hand, there are approaches which, under the term “digital maturity,” mean continuous development in the form of a flexible and digital maturation process without a defined end, in which the company adapts to new technological opportunities over and over again, also known as “permanent beta” [5].
A pioneer in the area of the “Digital Maturity Model” is the Faculty of Business Informatics at the University of St. Gallen with its Matura Index: A questionnaire that divides answers from representatives from various companies into nine dimensions and makes the results comparable. Companies can thus classify their self-assessed and relative level of maturity between the results of other companies. The graduation model per se does not provide any assistance as to what digital transformation is. If we know that the bottom-up dimensions — from data collected by the University of St. Gallen — were developed with existing models, literature analysis and expert interviews and validated in a focus group, we find a certain general usefulness [6].
Gerald C. Kane's attempt to define “Digital Maturity” in more detail about change management applies better to the context of this blog article because it has a longer range:
“The orientation of an organization's people, culture, structure, and tasks to effectively compete by taking advantage of opportunities made possible by technological infrastructure both within and outside the organization. [7]”
In addition, the organizational congruence theory of David A. Nadler and Michael L. Tushman on which he is based must be included in order to develop a greater understanding of the thought pattern (translated from English):”
Under the same conditions; the greater the overall degree of congruence or agreement between the various components, the higher will be the level of organizational effectiveness in which actual organizational results at individual, group and organizational levels are similar to the expected results as defined by the strategy. [8]”
Paradoxically, management consultant Ralf E. Strauss, who specializes in marketing, sales, service and digitalization, provides a more far-reaching definition, who describes digital transformation as an ongoing process of change based on digital technologies, which affects society and, in economic terms, companies in particular [9].
The author of this blog article comes to the conclusion that all published attempts to narrow down the term “digital transformation” mentioned up to this point are correct and useful at their core, yet do not have the multifaceted nature that such a term frequently mentioned - from different perspectives, at different points of time and with a wide variety of backgrounds - in media, in the world of work and in everyday life with the much-cited potential to change the world should actually have. Don't misunderstand the author of this blog article: For most organizations in the market, it makes sense to increase efficiency where benefits are highest and applicability is closest. In the capitalist world in which we live, this is usually an attempt to increase sales of its products in order to increase the corresponding performance indicators such as turnover, EBIT, etc. or a ratio ratio to profitability. However, the definition should not be limited to this, but should be valid much more generally so that functions other than sales, marketing or information technology in the company are also addressed. The author of this blog article has been working on these considerations about digital transformation for a long time. He has acquired his own perspective on digital transformation, which is used in this blog article to make digital transformation tangible. In order to understand them, we must first understand which journey we are on: We are on a journey to a fully connected world. A world in which every object constantly communicates with any other object. People are enriched with technology and what people perceive is enriched by technology. For example, a chip could be implanted that could imitate the functions of a telephone and be implanted directly in the ear canal. Or a contact lens can be used, which displays navigation data directly into the field of vision. Marc Weiser wrote about this as early as 1991: “The most profound technologies are the ones that disappear. They weave themselves into everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it. [10]”
Pervasive to ubiquitous, next stop?
Experts call this full networking “ubiquitous computing.” The precursor to this is “pervasive computing,” in which certain technologies are already permeating everyday life but continuous full networking is not yet available. A navigation system in a car is one such example, which is not always available to consumers while driving in a vehicle, but not always outside of it. According to the author of this blog article, the ultimate form of a fully connected world lies in people's dependence on technology. In a distant future, it may be possible that people's consciousnesses are secured by technology before they die and transferred to another host, such as a clone of themselves. This thesis may seem somewhat far-fetched, but genius and madness are popularly close together, although experts regard this as a “relic of the 19th century” [11]. Nevertheless, NASA predicted as early as 1993 that humanity would be able to create superior intelligence for humans within thirty years; shortly thereafter, it would be wiped out [12] and called this state singularity. Elon Musk sees things more positively and tries to reinforce his dependence on technology with visions that appear to be far ahead of time what the world — or even another — will look like. He conjures that humanity will become a “multi-planetary” species [13] and wants to make the flight to Mars affordable for almost everyone [14]. Like a North Star, this vision shines in his company SpaceX. Here, too, the dependence on technology is clearly visible. In this blog article, we talk about singularity as exactly this dependence of humans on technology. In addition, as we continue our work and to narrow down the term “digital transformation,” we note that our North Star is the belief in “ubiquitous computing,” i.e. faith in the coming fully connected world. We also equate the terms “digital transformation” and “digitization.” We also assume that after reaching the singularity, efficiency will increase even more, as humans have made their lives completely dependent and will therefore be much more willing to accept further technology, for example in the form of implants in the body, which then form a cybernetic organism.
DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OR DIGITIZATION RESULTS IN “UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING,” THE FULLY CONNECTED WORLD. THERE IS SINGULARITY IN IT, I.E. THE TOTAL TECHNOLOGICAL DEPENDENCE OF HUMANS ON TECHNOLOGY. [15]
And here we go...
The rest is almost self-evident: Under capitalism, companies will continue to try to increase profits on their way to a fully connected world. In order to increase profits, as already mentioned, most companies will try to increase sales as a first step. This is a continuous process and due to the corona crisis, even the smallest village shops understand how important it is today to use an eCommerce platform on which customers can also be received outside of shop opening hours, so that they can order orders and reservations there for germ-free collection or even home delivery.
Admittedly, this example is a very trivial form of “digital transformation” on the journey to singularity. Companies that were founded with a digital business model and generate profits beyond shop opening hours, for example with subscriptions that regularly generate income. Netflix and Spotify can be mentioned here as innovative examples, and Apple has also recently followed suit with its various subscriptions. Platform operators such as Uber or Facebook go one step further. They only provide the digital basis for business models and generate their income in the form of transactions made via the platform or display suitable advertising in the content of users on the platform. Uber is described as one of the pioneers of platforms because, without owning a single vehicle, they have revolutionized the taxi ride market. But what is the difference between innovation and revolution in terms of the market?
The author of this blog article partly draws on a definition from the past. It used the following formula for innovation [16]: Innovation = Idea + Invention + Diffusion [17], i.e. a true innovation only results from the formula when the idea really becomes a product, a service or a process that is successful in the market. This step is called diffusion. The more a product, service or process hits the market, the more intensive the diffusion becomes. From the diffusion level at which the product, service or process also turns foreign industries, industries or business models upside down or can even make them obsolete, diffusion becomes a disruption and innovation a revolution. A suitable definition of a revolution can therefore be derived as follows: “Revolution = Idea + Invention + Disruption” [18].
It is difficult to estimate in advance whether market penetration will develop into diffusion or disruption, as it depends on various factors and framework conditions. If we take a look behind the scenes at one of the biggest technology giants, we still find a clue. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt writes that for Google, innovation means “new, surprising and extremely useful” [19]. In particular, the author of this blog article would like to continue using the usefulness that Google highlights in his definition, as he is convinced that the usefulness is closely linked to the purpose of the company and management, but more about that in the following chapters. At this point, the usefulness for the level of market penetration should be explained as responsible. Since a product, service or process always solves a problem, the degree of usefulness, i.e. the benefit generated by solving the problem, is also decisive for market penetration and ultimately determines whether an innovation or revolution develops in the market. This fact is also used outside the market as part of this blog article.
WHETHER AN INNOVATION OR REVOLUTION DEVELOPS DEPENDS ON THE DEGREE OF USEFULNESS OF A PRODUCT, SERVICE OR PROCESS.
For this, we assume that the framework conditions for different products, services or processes are the same. This thoroughly theoretical approach can also be used in practice in some cases. However, in practice, market penetration cannot necessarily be derived in equal proportion to the usefulness of the products, services or processes, as it is diluted by different factors, such as different marketing budgets. Since we only act on the market indirectly as part of this blog article and work with a focus on and around the IT infrastructure, we assume that the innovation must be new and extremely useful, but not necessarily surprising. Instead, it cannot be surprising if the innovation is a logical further development of something existing.
IN THIS BLOG ARTICLE, WE DEFINE INNOVATION AS NEW AND EXTREMELY USEFUL. [21]
But how do we measure usefulness when the areas that our work deals with are not market-oriented, i.e. act as so-called cost or service centers [22]? As part of this blog article, the answer is: With efficiency. Here, too, the author of this blog article uses an earlier definition. It stated that, according to literature, the definition of economic efficiency can be visualized as follows [23]:
Profitability: The ratio of input to output; for example, the resources needed to cut trees (ultimate costs) and the number of trees cut down (within a specific time frame).
Effectiveness: The relationship between output and its impact; for example, the number of trees cut down (within a specific time frame) and their respective market value (revenue from sales).
efficiency: The relationship between economic viability and effectiveness; for example, you can cut trees with either 100 nail files or 100 chainsaws. The output, i.e. the number of trees cut in the same period of time, will be significantly different, so the same applies to the respective market value and the income generated by the group of felled trees.
In the digital world, where input and output have always been the constant of operations, efficiency can be summarized even more easily:
EFFICIENCY IS THE RATIO OF INPUT AND OUTPUT DURING AND UNTIL A GOAL IS ACHIEVED. [24]
The ultimate goal
Up to this point, digital transformation doesn't seem to be anything new. But why does this buzzword seem to be constantly present for a few years? The reason for this is the increased and further increasing opportunities arising from the increase in technology performance (in particular performance in the form of computing power, storage capacity and transfer speed) with the simultaneous fall in costs. These induced — let's call them — catalysts include cloud computing, high-speed mobile networks, artificial intelligence, virtual and enriched reality, robotics, 3D printing or, in the future, nano-implants, genetic engineering or cybernetic organisms. They make it possible to open up new, surprising and extremely useful areas of application. If we are in a market-oriented context, it is usually digital business models that result from this; in a market-independent context, there are opportunities to increase efficiency, i.e. to achieve the same or higher output with less use of resources. In traditionally established and managed companies, digitization was often equated with the IT department. Organizationally, this was affiliated with the finance department, for example, and there it was regarded as a cost factor that had to be kept low. This led to the fact that IT departments were busy with themselves in order to often only deliver minimal requirements for an employee workplace and were not involved in directly value-adding projects, i.e. they acted as cost centers. In this blog article, the author reinforces this paradigm shift, which digital transformation brings to thought structures. The prerequisite for this is that people believe in digital transformation.
Admittedly a very unscientific thesis for a blog article with so many references, but: Is it not the case that projects are very likely to fail without the necessary support from stakeholders and the necessary commitment from employees? Their behavior is decisive, as can also be proven by experience in project management [25].
We remember the beginning of this chapter and the scope of digital transformation: The journey to total connectivity. So if people's behavior is decisive for the success of the project and it is precisely these people who drive the journey just mentioned forward with their faith, then it can be concluded that people are the most important components of digital transformation. The author is not alone in realizing this, so Gerald C. Kane dedicated an entire book to this topic with the title: “The Technology Fallacy: How People Are the Real Key to Digital Transformation” [26]. There, he goes one step further and writes that the success factor depends on how quickly people adapt to changing technology.
The author of this blog article is aware that not everyone wants to achieve a state of complete dependence on technology. However, we expect that the entrepreneurial and personal benefits of such a dependency will be so high that it will still develop over time. Companies can only remain competitive if they join in. Topics such as IT security, digital ethics, digital responsibility, data protection and privacy will become eminently significant in the same period.
PEOPLE ARE THE BIGGEST SUCCESS FACTOR OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION. [27]
The author also draws on the past to define digital transformation. In it, the author describes digital transformation as follows: “The continuous and logical implementation and continuation of entrepreneurial striving for better efficiency through the use of digital technology.” [28]
As part of this blog article, the author of this blog article eliminates the word “digital” because technology already implies the digital component. He also adds the word up-to-date before the word technology to underline that efficiency improvement should be driven forward with current technology so as not to maintain a competitive disadvantage.
As already mentioned, digital transformation is also a journey to singularity. It therefore results in: “The continuous and logical implementation and continuation of entrepreneurial striving for better efficiency with the use of current technology down to singularity,” which we can therefore make tangible by changing efficiency. Since the entire human race is on this journey, all sectors and industries are also affected in an entrepreneurial sense. What is described in this section can be summarized as shown in the following figure [29]:
External sources
[1] Marc Weiser; 1991; The Computer for the 21st Century - Scientific American; pages 94 - 104
[2] João Reis, Marlene Amorim, Nuno Melão & Patrícia Matos; 2018; Digital Transformation: A Literature Review and Guidelines for Future Research - Springer International Publishing; page 419
[3] Dominic M. Mazzone; 2014, Digital or Death: Digital Transformation - The Only Choice for Business to Survive, Smash, and Conquer
[4] Thomas Hess; 2019; Strategically Managing Digital Transformation - From Random Hit to Systematic Approach
[5] Prof. Dr. Thorsten Petry; Digital maturity as the key to successful transformation; changement magazine
[6] Prof. Dr. Andrea Back; 2016; Digital Maturity & Transformation Study - about the Digital Maturity Model; https://iwi.unisg.ch/wp-content/uploads/digitalmaturitymodel_download_v2.0-1.pdf
[7] Gerald C. Kane, Anh Nguyen Phillips, Jonathan R. Copulsky and Garth R. Andrus; 2019; The Technology Fallacy - How People Are the Real Key to Digital Transformation; The MIT Press
[8] D. Nadler and Michael Tushman; 1980; A Model for Diagnosing Organizational Behavior; Organizational Dynamics 9
[9] Ralf E. Strauss; 2019; Digital Transformation: Strategy, Design and Implementation in Business Practice; Schäffer-Pöschel
[10] Marc Weiser; 1991; The Computer for the 21st Century - Scientific American; page 94
[11] Tanja G. Baudson; 2008; MIND magazine 63; https://orbilu.uni.lu/bitstream/10993/33973/1/mindmag63-tgb.pdf
[12] Verner Vinge; 1993; NASA Lewis Research Center, Vision 21; https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19940022856/downloads/19940022856.pdf
[13, 14] Elon Musk; 2017; Making Humans a Multi-Planetary Species; New Space
[17] Tobias Müller-Prothmann, Nora Dörr; 2014; Innovation Management - Strategies, Methods and Tools for Systematic Innovation Processes; Carl Hanser Verlag
[19] Eric Schmidt; 2014; How Google Works; New York Publishing
[22] Christian Schawe, Fabian Billing; 2018; Top 100 Management Tools; Springer Gabler
[23] Peter Eichhorn, Joachim Merk; 2016; The Principle of Efficiency; Springer Fachmedien
[25] Georg Kraus, Reinhold Westermann; 2014; project management with system; Springer Gabler
[26] Gerald C. Kane; 2019; The Technology Fallacy; The MIT Press
Own sources
[16, 18, 28] Fabio Iannone (author of this article); 2017
[15, 20, 21, 24, 27, 29] Fabio Iannone (author of this article); 2020
