A new source of energy: our body

Well, this could open a whole new range of devices...

Survey shows huge potential for Belgian web-startups

The Institute for Future Insights and internet website Bloovi recently organized a survey with 61 Belgian web-startups. The survey results show a huge potential for these companies, that are expecting a turnover growth of more than 700% in the next 2 years, and could add up to 10,000 new full-time positions in Belgium.

The 'executive summary' is freely available for everyone here under, the full report can be purchased at www.belgianwebstartups.be.

How the internet will transform governments

This is quite thought-provoking, and will require some concentration in order to fully grasp what Clay Shirky is saying in the TED-talk here under. Basically, Clay argues that society -and more specifically the relationship between governments and citizens- can be better organized through an open, distributed model, rather than the 'command and control' model that is currently in place.

Take the open source movement as an example, with the source code Linux as its showcase. The code has been written by thousands of anonymous contributors, without any central co-ordination or guiding rules. Its chaotic, but thanks to the unique signature that is provided with each contribution, a certain logic or system can be attached to each contribution, and ultimately lead to something robust and use-able.

And now apply the same logic to how society is organized, like -for instance- how law is being written. Couldn't this be done with the help of thousands of anonymous contributors? Welcome in the true meaning of 'open government'...

4 ways to use long-term trend assessments to ensure your future success

4 ways to use long term trend assessments for your business from Frederic De Meyer

Why vertical farming is such a good idea

Glad to have stumbled on Dickson Despommier's blog - an authority with regard of Vertical Farming. His main argument in favor of vertical farming is that it would diminish the food price volatility we will likely face due to he changing climate, though vertical farming definitely holds other advantages as well.

(from his blog:) "Dare I remind us all that climate change issues will continue confound and disrupt this already seriously flawed system of outdoor food production. What a different world this would be if we could produce most of what we needed year round in vertical farms located inside cities. I know this sounds a bit preachy, but I think the concept of the vertical farm is the only viable option we have to a long-term solution to the world food crisis. Why, I'll bet we could even work out a way to produce animal feed this way, too."

His blog is already packed with loads of valuable info, but for a short overview of his main thoughts see the two video's below:

4 ways to spot long-term trends

Since so many people asked, hereby some thought about how to spot long-term trends...

4 ways to spot long term trends from Frederic De Meyer

What every business can learn from young entrepreneurs

For my second book I took a look at a number of young entrepreneurs - what they are made of, what trends are they working on, etc. In this presentation I discuss what I learned from them and how these learnings could (and should) be applied to traditional businesses as well (in order to attract and retain young innovative talent). Of course it's better to have the narratives along, so don't hesitate to get in touch if you'd want this presented 'live' at one of your events...

What every business can learn from young entrepreneurs (publ) from Frederic De Meyer

Corporate Shared Value as a capitalist act?

Do corporations have a social responsibility? In a time where a Wallmart has the same number of employees then there are citizens in the capital of Europe, one could easily argue that they do. Some companies are as big in terms of revenue as some European countries (a comparison that is a bit flawed, I admit).

But why should they take social responsibility? In capitalistic terms, companies exist to make profit, not to 'do good'. According to Michael Porter in the interview here under, they should do so as a capitalist reflex. Fair enough, some forms of social responsibilities can lead to tremendous -and profitable- innovations. Furthermore, the scale at which multinational firms operate can enable small, local initiatives to be leveraged globally, and profitably.

In short, according to Porter, if we want to make companies behave in a more responsible way, we should show them where the profit is -or they should find out themselves. No sense of 'moral duty' in our capitalistic system. It's a bit a sore thought, according to me. There should be other reasons for companies to have a social consciousness... Risk aversion, image building, raising attractiveness to younger employees, ... OK, indirectly these relate to maximizing profits as well, but they're surely softer arguments to 'do good', and I see plenty of evidence for these motivations in the companies I work with... Perhaps it's even the capitalist logic itself that is slightly changing, but perhaps that's wishful thinking...

A brilliant case for personalized medicines

Most of current medicines don't work, simply because they're not adapted to your specific DNA. With the declining cost of profiling your genome, however, drugs in the future will be tailor-made to your specific needs. According to Mehmet Oz, this would enable us to treat diseases like Alzheimer well in advance.

But perhaps the most striking statement is that we shouldn't expect the health care sector, nor the government, to make this happen. This revolution should be made from within our homes...

A fascinating discussion:

Are big corporations loosing their appeal for young innovative talents?

I recently published my second book, a study of young Flemish entrepreneurs and what every business can learn from them. For obvious reasons the book will only appear in Dutch. As a futurist, I was particularly interested in what these young entrepreneurs had in common. After all, these youngsters will partially define how the business environment will look like five to ten years from now (‘if you want to know the future, look at your children’, remember?).

Did they have the same education? Nope. Did they have their parents as role models of entrepreneurship? Nope. Did they have some particular experience abroad? Nope.

Then I checked their professional experience, and it’s there that I found something quite remarkable.

Let me start with the couple of more experienced entrepreneurs that advised me while writing the book. What you see on the graph beneath is the number of years they spent as full-time employee, as entrepreneur or as a mixture of both, starting from the end of their studies:

This picture shouldn’t be too surprising. The ‘older’ generation of entrepreneurs started by building an experience of 8-12 years in a traditional company, and then have a radical break for one reason or another, to become full-time entrepreneurs.

Let’s compare this with the younger generation of entrepreneurs that I cover in the book. Strangely enough, I had to make a distinction between those that are older than 30 years, and those younger. Let’s start with those that are older than 30:

What we see is that these youngsters start with their own initiative much earlier than the more experienced entrepreneurs, but they do this in combination with a ‘traditional’ job of some kind. Perhaps they start to have a family and for that they’re more risk-averse.

But how different is this from the entrepreneurs younger than 30!

These youngsters start immediately with their own thing. Sometimes in combination with a ‘traditional’ job, which they leave very soon in order to build their own company!

There’s plenty of explanations to this, of course: entry-level for web startups is lower than ever; virtually everyone has access to the global market nowadays; there’s plenty of programs to stimulate entrepreneurship at high-school, etc.

An extra wildcard from my side, based on all the discussions I had with these young entrepreneurs: working within a big established firm has lost a bit of its sex appeal. There’s no glory anymore in building a career in a traditional company.

This obviously poses a serious threat to traditional companies. I’m not saying every youngster will build his startup instead of joining a company. What I’m saying is that the most brilliant ones, the most innovative ones, will not hesitate to do so –at least not as long as their older peers did. Mix this with the changing needs and wishes of Generation Y employees, and upcoming talent gap which we start to experience in some areas already, and you start to have a sense of the magnitude of the challenge.

There’s plenty of things companies can do in order to counter this trend. The most important one is to (re)introduce a spirit of entrepreneurship in the company. It’s easier said than done, so stay tuned on this blog for some advise on this.

(oh, and for my Flemish-speaking readers, the book is now available at my publisher Die Keure)

The problem with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

There's a lot of debate on whether CCS is a valuable instrument to counter climate change. In my eyes, it could on the short term, but on the other hand: if the only answer we 'intelligent' beings can give to a problem is to store it under the ground, I would start to doubt our 'intelligence'.

It could however solve the issue in short term. Too bad the investments in CCS plant appeared to have stopped everywhere except in Norway, due to the 'high cost' of these solutions -after all we're in a crisis. Guess the 'high cost' doesn't factor in the costs of a declining environment...

36 Rules of social media

Even if social media is just at the verge & will undoubtedly be subject to many, many changes in the next decades, it's still worthy to learn how to cope with it today... Here's the best overview I've found so far on what to do (and not to do) with social media:

Source: dr4ward.com via DR4WARD on Pinterest

The dirty secrets of clean energy and the future of environmentalism

I must admit it: I am a techno-optimist with regards of climate change issues. Or at least I was, before reading ‘Green Illusions’ by Ozzy Zehner. In the first half of the book, Ozzy breaks down any argument that ‘green’ energy technologies could help to save the planet…

Solar? Inefficient, dirty in making, dirty in cleaning (of which it needs a lot in the best locations: deserts), dirtier still at the end of life.
Wind? Unpredictable, bound to a limited number of (remote) locations, generates loads of CO2 in the production process.
Biofuels? Pollutes water, and ethanol is quite dirty and non-renewable.
Clean Coal? A hoax! Hydropower? A cause for geopolitical tensions. Geothermal? Causes earthquakes.

It’s not that Ozzy is in denial of the challenges ahead, quite the contrary. But he arguments that producing more energy, even if it’s alternative and green(er), brings us nowhere: “Alternative energy production expands energy supply, placing downwards pressure on prices, which spurs demand, entrenches energy-intensive modes of living’. Ultimately, green energy drives demand for dirty energy.

Makes sense, which is probably why in California energy providers earn more money the less their customer spend energy! The motivation might not be to save the planet, but this kind of decoupling brings us a far way nevertheless…

In the second part of the book Ozzy offers his views on what else can make our future more sustainable, convincingly arguing that environmentalists should focus on such issues rather than on so-called ‘green’ energies.

Some are a bit surprising, for instance when he makes a strong case for the support of women rights, which through multiple effects would benefit a greener future. Some are quite rational: both the challenges and the solutions lie in an different conception and management of our cities. Some got me laughing: making cities more bicycle-friendly is something most European towns already heavily invested in. Some of the remarks and ideas in the book are clearly meant for an American audience.

I love books that shake preconceived assumptions. This one is certainly doing that, and offers some valuable ideas on how to think differently. ‘The only clean energy is: less energy’!



Check out my previous book reviews:

• "The shift" Lynda Gratton
• "The future of work" Thomas Malone
• "Making globalization work" Joseph Stiglitz
• "2030 -Technologies that will change the world" Van Santen, Khoe, Vermeer
• "What Technology wants" David Kelly
• "Crowdsourcing" Jeff Howe
• "The next big thing" William Higham
• "Future Files" Richard Watson
• "Future savvy" Adam Gordon
• "Futurewise" Patrick Dixon
• "Ecological intelligence" Daniel Goleman

How companies can benefit from the growth of cities in emerging markets

In a fascinating report by McKinsey&Company, they advice global companies to refocus their attention to cities rather than (emerging) countries. The growing cities in emerging are creating specific opportunities for all sorts of industries. Some examples, like water provision in Mumbai or babyfood and diapers in Dar Es Alaam, are provided in the slideshow.

Makes sense, but what intrigued me most were the statistics behind this conclusion:

• by 2025, half of global economic growth will come from 440 cities in emerging markets;
• by 2025, 440 emerging market cities will have more households with incomes of $20.000 or above than will the cities in developed economies;
• the contribution of the cities to economic growth of the country will vary from 94% (in China) to 70% in sub-saharan Africa (by comparison, it will be 64% in Europe;
• and last but not least, only 20% of executives are making location decisions at city level... 

Plenty of opportunities ahead... Read more or download the report here.

'Intrapreneurs', a new function in corporate life?

Is it just a a new buzz, or is there something more fundamental going on? Fact is that the use of the term ‘intrapreneur’ has grown rapidly past two years. You know: employees whose mission it is to create little start-ups within established companies – or at least use start-up techniques to implement new ideas within their companies.

However, the skepticism with which intrapreneurs are received by ‘true’ entrepreneurs makes some sense. Their biggest arguments:

• True entrepreneurs take true financials risks. In comparison, salaried intrapreneurs are bathing in luxurious security. 
• True entrepreneurs built their start-ups themselves, stone by stone. Intrapreneurs can rely on the services of their company for virtually all overhead tasks. 
• >True entrepreneurs are driven by their passion, their mission. Since the work of intrapreneurs will ultimately benefit their employer, their drive would be much less.

All valid arguments. But let’s say you’re 28. You have a couple of years of experience in the corporate world, but you’re eager to build your own thing. Develop your own idea from a to z. Take full responsibility for the problems that might arise. Solve them all by yourself. Fight to survive, but ultimately reap the full and juicy fruit of the success that will inevitably come.

On the other side: you have one or two kids that are still in an expensive daycare. You just built the house of your dream –with an expensive mortgage. You enjoy having two or three weeks of holiday to discover exotic places. You have some hobbies that are not necessarily expensive, but that require some investments.

So you have the choice: either you (1) repress your entrepreneurial dreams, work hard from 9 to 5 and try to have a fulfilling life next to it (that’s so generation babyboomer), or (2) you try to combine things and test your ideas in your free hours, or even within your company (that’s so genX), or (3) you take the risk and chase your dream (that’s so… ehm…).

Is there a middle way? Well, yes: become an intrapreneur. Let’s be honest, this is just a fresh term for something that exists since modern corporations were born. Any innovative project that was launched and managed by an employee could be seen as an act of intrapreneurship. Nevertheless, it diserves a term on its own, especially now given the vital importance of innovation in corporate life nowadays. In a time where new business models redesign complete markets you’d better be pro-active and redesign it yourself. And therefore you need… yes: intrapreneurs.

How companies should adapt their culture to reap the benefits of social media

What is the true impact of the emergence of social media on companies? The question might sound trivial nowadays. Aren’t virtually all companies –at least the public ones- ‘present’ on social media, in one form or another? They probably are. But are they getting the maximum out of this ‘presence’? In other words: do they use social media as a strategic tool rather than a tactical one?

In his latest book, Steven Van Belleghem calls companies making strategic use of social media the ‘Conversation companies’. Rarely has a business author chosen a better word to express his idea: successfully using social media means leading conversations with whomever is talking about you, it’s about re-actively AND pro-actively engaging with your audience. Companies all too often limit their social media presence to sending company updates (hoping that nobody will reply) or (if they’re a little more sophisticated) replying to complaints and negative comments.

These companies are dealing with a massive amount of what Steven calls ‘unused conversation potential’. Use this potential fully, and you’ll reap the benefits of loyal fans of your brands.

The caveat? You’ll need to have a very close look at your company’s culture, and most probably adapt it. That’s easier said than done, but it’s not impossible. Steven’s book ‘the conversation company’ provides a concrete –and feasible- roadmap on how to do this. With a massive amount of case studies to make his point(s).

How strange however that Steven first wrote a book about ‘The Conversation Manager’ before writing ‘The conversation company’: I can’t imagine any company appointing a conversation manager before they turned into a conversation company. Nevertheless, Steven’s message is pressing: companies that don’t take these conversations seriously face the risk of being left behind. Perhaps for good.

A crucial read !

The future of shopping

A preview of the (near) future customer experience, according to BlackBerry... what's striking is that online tools are being integrated into the 'real life' experience, they don't replace it...

Is the 'Bring your own device' trend viable for businesses?

It almost sounds like a good deal for everyone: bring your own devices (BYOD) to work for professional reasons. For employers obviously this reduces some costs (but increases some risks at the same time), while employees would be able to work with the devices that they are familiar with -and that are often much more
performant than the devices they receive from their employer (never believed the latter argument until I started working on my own...).

But is it real? According to research company IDC, currently 41% of the devices used at work are owned by the employees, and this will rise to 55% by 2015. I guess the smart phones take a lion share of that. More intriguing is the idea to use personal apps for professional use (or, at least, have the employer let you choose which apps you want to use).

One step closer to the virtual company... but do you think that's a good thing?

3 megatrends infographic: personal productivity, speed and the clash between tech and real world

Very insightful infograph by Launchcapital - who unfortunately don't have a Facebook or Twitter share functionality, so I'll have to share it this way... all credit goes to them, however, this is nicely thought-provoking stuff - although limited to 3 areas:

• personal productivity
• the clash between tech and real world
• the impact of speed

A holistic approach to global sustainability

Interesting perspective at the World Economic Forum's idea lab. The argument of Johan Rockstrom is that the earth's sustainability level is now in a 'danger zone', but the solution to it can only be holistic, involving many other areas than just global warming or the ozon layer... and, according to Johan, it can be done even with an open economy.

Everything is connected, and hence the solution to the sustainability challenge can only be found through the willingness of global leaders...

Not sure if this last thought makes me optimistic though...