Jen Chicosky

This is a great post, Jen. It resonates with my experience in Advertising where we begin every client relationship with research. In fact, it’s obvious the correlation between sales and campaign success to the amount of effective research done before. Because of this, I am always in the camp of having research precede all action. But after we launch a campaign (the build), we always track via analytics (the measure), and before the next year (or as needed mid-campaign) we apply those learnings to make changes. Great post!

Great Post Jen!

I definitely agree that we could be missing an opportunity to close the the Build-Measure-Learn feedback loop. Satya Nadella (CEO of Microsoft) pushed the company to operate more collaboratively in 2014. Under his leadership Microsoft has launched products such as Windows 10, Minecraft, Xbox360 and HoloLens. As an innovation safety valve, Nadella created revived the “Garage” concept. This was a space created for innovative staffers to create or tinker with projects that didn’t fit into specific Microsoft releases. In the garage, MS research teams could test, re-test, and discover — employing the The Build-Measure-Learn loop until a product was ready for either further collaboration or for another team to build that new tech into their projects. As MS is one of the world’s leading tech companies — I would venture to think they’re doing something right lol!

Great post, Jen. I think several companies and organizations are in a similar boat of figuring out how to build that feedback loop and make it effective. As I’ve mentioned our corporation uses Agile as well as Lean methods to look at continuous improvement, but I don’t think it’s holistic across the organization. I think a yearly or even biannual process of taking a step back and figuring out a process, project, etc. could be worthwhile, and maybe it could be as simple as that.

Jen – This is such an interesting article! Farmers must plan ahead and make strategic decisions moving forward especially since we will need to double the amount of food we currently produce. The way Cainthus works is so innovative and effective, but I am worried about the price and if small family-owned farms are able to afford; I don’t believe they can, especially not long-term. The farmers will also need to be motivated to learn how these technologies work and actually want to put them to use. This is a great investment opportunity and a very important industry to focus on sooner rather than later.

Jen — fascinating points! I’m not sure if disruption in farming and agriculture is a topic often discussed, so way to bring this into focus. Before I reached the end of your post and saw you mentioned this too, I was thinking about how farms usually stick to ingrained methods when it comes to keeping track of their crops and livestock. They are certainly a demographic who are very set in the ways they run their businesses because they know what they’ve been doing historically has worked well. With that being said, what type of value proposition would ultimately convince farm owners to want to invest in technology like this if they haven’t already?

This is certainly a very interesting topic (and scary since I’m a major movie buff, eh hem “interstellar”). I don’t recall the exact ratio, but something like;

The 100 bushels of grain used to feed 1 cow, will in turn feed 3 people. While that same 100 bushels of grain will feed 100 people.

It’s something like that but does illustrate the point as does your post. Not saying I will ever stop eating meat, but over the years, my family has reduced and leaned towards higher quality foods that you need less of as well as supporting local. I guess the next step is reducing our carbon footprint and growing our own food. Whew, we humans are so spoiled!

Jen – This is such an interesting article, especially working in the food industry myself. I never thought much of the tech industry disrupting the agriculture world. Scary to think how much work will need to be done to be able to feed everyone. I worry for small family run farms as well and their ability to afford such technology and staying up to date however it seems like technology such as Cainthus as necessary for the future of agriculture.

Jen,
I think the grants and opportunities to explore these careers in K-12 are outstanding. I would add that the accrediting bodies for higher education are one of the reasons why more students aren’t taking actual computer science courses in high school. The credentialing requirements of high school teachers to teach dual and concurrent enrollment courses in the field of computer science require a master’s degree or 18 graduate level hours in computer science. Add these requirements to the fact that high schools have a limited time to spend on various subjects and have to be picky. I would also add that looking at degrees in computer information systems and cyber-security which don’t necessarily require a master’s degree to teach would help broaden the opportunities in computer science and possible careers to meet the high demand of industry.
Jill

Jen! Thanks for posting! There seems to be a tug and pull when embracing disruptive innovation in the classroom. Unfortunately, is seems that that way disruption is rolled out may still still heavily depend on the school district or “zone”. In my son’s school (Abington School district in PA) — they seem to have the kids sitting in groups rather than rows. They do utilize technology, although limited to the older kids (My son is in Kindergarten).It may also depend on the school’s pedagogical disposition (e.g. private vs. public, vs. their philosophy on using tech in the classrooms). I agree with Arnett that learning can be improved and education more equitable, but to get there will take more money, training, and access. I wonder about our kids’ education future as well (as a nervous mom most of the time lol!) But I am hopeful, we will find the right balance. If not, it’s up to us Supermoms to help make it happen.