Avoiding premature standardisation: balancing innovation and conformity OntoCommons 2nd Global Workshop 13th to 16th June, Oslo, Norway Chris Partridge, Chief Ontologist, BORO Solutions – University of Westminster Structure Three sections: Motivation (Context) The problem with premature standardisation Balancing innovation and conformity 2 Motivation (Context) Currently work in a niche area: ontologies for operational system semantic interoperability – integration think integrating enterprise SAP and Maximo operationally have been working here for a while (since late 1980s) not many (any?) other people working here Believe that: there are opportunities for architectural (radical and disruptive) innovation in this and other ontology areas at this stage, the approach in my area needs to be agile that premature standardisation could stifle the innovation Want to suggest that: there is a need to balance the conformity (of standards) with the agility needed to produce innovation the balancing involves recognising when to standardise, so, recognising when there is premature standardisation it is not yet time to standardise in my area 3 Ontology: Two frameworks 4 a formal formalization process: a scalable way to systematically improve semantic maturity data collect collect collect increasing semantic maturity reuse reuse Foundational ontology a foundational ontology Two mutually supporting frameworks The two frameworks validate and inform each other top-down BORO foundational ontology guides the bottom-up framework bottom-up bCLEARer framework validates the whole model 5 BORO FO - top-down framework bCLEARer - bottom-up framework An operational semantic interoperability test System A System A System B System B System A System A System B System B In an interoperability ecosystem, the costs of intra- and inter-operability are roughly comparable, If they are not comparable, this encourages silos only intra-operability inter-operability machines talking to other machines machines talking to themselves 6 The problem with premature standardisation 7 An expert (ChatGPT4.0) speaks Question: what are the issues surrounding premature standardisation? Premature standardization refers to the adoption of a certain technology, process, or protocol as a standard before it has been thoroughly vetted, evaluated, or proven to be superior to other alternatives. This is particularly common in fast-paced industries such as technology and software development. Several issues surround this concept: Innovation Stifling: Once a standard is set, it can discourage further innovation and experimentation with other potential alternatives. Premature standardization may limit the diversity of approaches to a problem, even when the standardized solution is not optimal. Compatibility Issues: When a premature standard is set, later technological developments might not be compatible with it, causing integration problems. For instance, if a software protocol is standardized prematurely, newer, more efficient protocols might have trouble interacting with it, leading to difficulties in integration and interoperability. Lock-in Effect: It can lead to a situation where everyone is locked into a standard that may not be the best. This could mean continuing to use a less efficient technology or process simply because it's too expensive or complicated to switch to a different standard later. Short-term Focus: The pressure to standardize can lead to a short-term focus, neglecting the possible long-term consequences. The long-term effects of early standardization might include an inability to adapt to changes, decreased productivity, or increased costs. Resource Misallocation: Significant resources may be wasted on promoting and adopting a standard that later proves to be inferior. This can include not only financial resources but also time and effort. Uneven Market Dominance: If a particular company's technology or protocol becomes a standard prematurely, it could potentially lead to that company gaining an unfair competitive advantage, thereby stifling competition and potentially leading to a monopoly or oligopoly. To mitigate these issues, it's crucial to ensure a rigorous process is in place for evaluating and adopting new standards, involving thorough testing, peer review, and an opportunity for feedback from all stakeholders. 8 Another expert (PERPLEXITY) speaks Question: How can premature standardization impact the development of new technologies? Premature standardization can impact the development of new technologies in several ways, as shown in the search results: Stifling innovation: Premature standardization can stifle creativity and innovation by discouraging support for people's need to find new solutions to new problems Failure of standardization efforts: Anticipatory standardization can fail when the creators of the specification are not correct in their belief that the problem they are trying to solve will be solved in the way they anticipate Limited skills: Managers may standardize prematurely because standardizing is the only real skill they possess, especially true of programmers Balancing standardization and innovation: Finding and maintaining the correct balance between standardization and innovation is critical during times of organizational change. Timing: The ideal time to standardize is when the technology is understood, and technological interest needs to be waning. But if political interest in a standard becomes too large, the various parties have too much at stake in their own vested interest to be flexible enough to accommodate the unified view that a standard requires Impact on innovation: Open standardization processes allow standards to reflect user needs and therefore promote the diffusion of new products by early adopters. Finally, standards can have a positive impact on innovation. Overall, premature standardization can impact the development of new technologies by stifling innovation, failing standardization efforts, limiting skills, and affecting the balance between standardization and innovation. It is important to find the correct balance between standardization and innovation and to consider the timing of standardization efforts. 9 First expert (ChatGPT4.0) speaks again Question: what are the benefits of standardisation? Standardization, whether applied to products, services, or processes, has a number of benefits. These include: Quality Assurance: Standardization ensures that all products or services meet a certain level of quality, safety, and interoperability. This means consumers can have confidence in the products they buy, and businesses can trust the components or services they use. Reduced Costs: By adhering to standards, businesses can often reduce costs. This can happen because standardization often involves the elimination of redundancy and waste, and it allows for economies of scale in production. Facilitation of Communication: Standards often serve as a common language, enabling clear communication between different sectors, organizations, or countries. This can be particularly important in global trade, where different countries may have different regulations and practices. Innovation and Technological Progress: Standards can provide a platform for innovation, by setting a baseline that innovators can build on. For example, the standardization of internet protocols enabled the rapid growth and innovation of the World Wide Web. … Interoperability: Standards ensure that different products can work together. For instance, standards ensure that you can use any brand of headphones with any brand of smartphone, or any brand of bulb with any brand of lamp. Ease of Trade: International standards help facilitate global trade by ensuring that products meet the expectations and requirements of foreign markets, eliminating the need for re-testing or re-certification in each new country. Enhancing Competition: By providing a level playing field, standardization can prevent monopolies and promote competition, leading to better products and services and lower prices for consumers. Efficiency: Standardizing processes can result in more efficient operations, as everyone knows what methods and procedures to follow. This can help to prevent errors and rework, saving time and resources. Bear in mind, however, that while standardization can offer many benefits, it's not always the right approach . Too much standardization can stifle creativity and innovation , and it may not always be appropriate or desirable to have a single solution for every situation. As with many things, it's a matter of finding the right balance . 10 What to note There are (serious) issues with premature standardisation Innovation is identified as a major issue: “stifling innovation” “tension between standardization and innovation” An aside: ad hominem argument: “Premature standardization as a result of limited skills: Managers may standardize prematurely because standardizing is the only real skill they possess , especially true of programmers” Managing/balancing conformity and innovation “ Timing: The ideal time to standardize is when the technology is understood, and technological interest needs to be waning.” “standardization … , it's not always the right approach. … As with many things, it's a matter of finding the right balance ” 11 Local premature standardisation in IT systems Phenomenon commonplace locally in IT systems regularly experienced and managed by practitioners Practitioners’ views PrematureStandardization “ PrematureStandardization is closely related to PrematureGeneralization , because standards, to be applied, have to be somewhat general. If it's too soon to generalize, it's definitely too soon to standardize, owing to this relationship between the two. Many managers (especially the junior ones) have a tendency to want to standardize as soon as they see a pattern. Sometimes managers attempt to build a development organization on pre-conceived standards. There are repercussions at the human level from PrematureStandardization . Attempting to standardize in areas where people are attempting to invent will impact the invention process.” https://wiki.c2.com/?PrematureStandardization Innovation, Premature Standardization and Caveat Emptor But the cruel reality is that real standards come at the end of a technology's innovation period, not the beginning. By the time a real standard shows up the technology isn't new or inventive. This is inherent to the process. Standards come after a technology is fully understood. Premature standardization results in badly constructed, difficult to use, non interoperable, non portable messes. But so long as the word 'standard' can be said next to these toxic spills, at least with a more or less straight face, customers will lap it up. https://www.goland.org/innovationandstandards/ Note the comment about the temptation to standardise Of course, there are differences between the local and global 12 Balancing innovation and conformity 13 Balancing considerations Characterising standardisation (evolutionarily) recapitulation (in evolution) standardisation as changing direction Positioning standardisation of technology relative to when deploying the technology – the ‘event’ relative to level of market diffusion in context of digital journey 14 Recapitulation: standardisation as changing direction (assumes effective standardisation) Recapitulation theory development of the individual recapitulates the evolution of the phylum is useful pattern in the context of (Lamarckian) cultural evolution For an established cultural trait: “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” (Ernst Haeckel) the trait has evolved for the phylum - cultural practice is stable this evolution is recapitulated in the individual - cultural (horizontal) transmission For an innovating cultural trait: “phylogeny recapitulates ontogeny” the trait is evolving in the individual(s) – community( ies ) cultural practice is evolving effective cultural (horizontal) transmission needs to evolve 15 Positioning standardisation – ex-ante or ex-post Latin tags: ex-ante == “before the event” ex-post == “after the event” In the context of standards ex-ante standardization ensures early benefits of compatibility while the standard chosen could be a 'wrong' one since the decision is made without precise information about the actual values of potential technologies ex-post standardization relies on the market mechanism to achieve de facto standardization after experimentation. The advantage of this approach is that the standardization decision can be based on better information about qualities. The cost is the transient loss of compatibility benefit in the experimentation stage Choi, Jay Pil . 1996. ‘Standardization and Experimentation: Ex Ante vs. Ex Post Standardization Broadly speaking, this distinguishes between a rationalist and an empiricist approach Rationalist approach is more prone to premature standardisation it assume we (humans) know enough about the technology to design a good standard 16 Level of market diffusion – marking the ex-post event time Early majority 34% Late majority 34% Laggards 16% 2.5% Innovators Early adopters 13.5% Rogers, Everett (1962) Diffusion of Innovations Geoffrey A. Moore (1991) Crossing the Chasm --- a kind of ex-post approach the chasm 17 Raises questions: what is the market? what are the technologies deployed across the market? View: evolutionary digitalisation journey Evolutionary view of the scope of the digitalisation journey the ‘phylum’ of interest ‘(symbolic) information’ plainly, this involves cultural evolution this evolution is the digitalisation journey 18 {5C22544A-7EE6-4342-B048-85BDC9FD1C3A} pre-oral oral literate brain storage YES YES YES processing YES YES YES external storage NO NO YES processing NO NO NO communication brain-brain NO YES YES brain-external NO NO YES external-external NO NO NO Historical digitisation journey legend disruption 19 evolution classification mapping the evolutionary stages onto the classifications brings out the boundaries that mark the classical disruptions {5C22544A-7EE6-4342-B048-85BDC9FD1C3A} text data writing printing processing sharing brain storage YES YES YES YES processing YES YES YES YES external storage YES YES YES YES ? processing NO NO YES YES ? communication brain-brain YES YES YES YES brain-external YES YES YES YES ? external-external NO NO NO YES ? Adding (computing) data to the framework literate computerate we map computing/data disruptions below: we are only starting the shift to sharing, so this leaves open interesting questions about how wide the impact of the data sharing disruption – the transition to computerate – will be legend disruption 20 Mapping stations on the digitalisation journey onto diffusion levels 21 Early adopters 13.5% Early majority 34% Late majority 34% Laggards 16% 2.5% Innovators ontologies for interoperability ontologies for reasoning digitised paper paper-based information digitalisation journey stations databases Stations here are rough and illustrative Summary Premature standardisation is a recognised issue with well-known problems Recognised need to balance standardisation and innovation, and avoid premature standardisation Bases for balancing: ex-ante versus ex-post rational versus empirical market diffusion levels mapping digital journey onto market diffusion Later stages of the digital journey are pre-standardisation 22 23