Future Outlook

In this section, we present our views on the future of the collaborative technology industry. We start with a discussion of the impact of network computers on this technology. We then present a discussion of the trends towards collaborative planning activities and how these technologues fit into that realm. Finally, we present a discussion of what we think the long-term future holds, as manifested by shared virtual worlds.

The Network Computer

The network computer, in all its different shapes and sizes, is a potentially important tool that can enable rapid and cost effective deployment of collaborative technologies within an organization. It can also be useful in deploying a network of cheap multimedia-capable terminals connected using a wireless network across an entire office or work area. It is from this perspective that we address the role an NC might play in an organization's collaborative technology deployment strategy.

We define the network computer in broad terms for the purpose of this discussion, based on a merging of the various opinions presented on the topic throughout the course. The network PC is any device which can be used to access a central repository of data which allows local processing of the data through the use of JAVA-enabled applets. The device may or may not have local storage, may be fat or thin, but must connect easily to the network. In the wireless context, it is a cheap, light, multimedia-capable terminal that does not consume high amounts of power. An example of this is the Berkeley Infopad, shown below.

An NC would require the following features in order to support collaborative work processes in our context:

Given our belief that there is a market for collaborative technologies even without ubiquitous adoption of the tools, however, we assumed that the broad network infrastructure required to support the grandest dreams of NC supporters was not a prerequisite for the successful integration of NCs as the computing device of choice for collaborative technologies. In other word, the NC concept could be applied within an organization to support collaborative strategies even if wider adoption and development of the network infrastructure did not occur. This statement does not suggest that such a network would be bad, clearly the greater the adoption of NCs the better, but only that it is not required. Even today, variants of the network computer are being used successfully without such a network.

Network computers can help speed the adoption of collaborative technologies only if they meet the promises of their promoters. Specifically, an NC must:

If these promises are met, collaborative technologies may be more widely adopted by organizations because of the reduced start-up costs required to equip people with NCs instead of PCs. The reduction in startup costs reduces the hurdle rate a company must clear in order to justify its investment, thus increasing the possibility that a collaborative implementation can be cost-justified.

In addition, the realized promise of mobility and nomadicity of the NC in a more ubiquitous networked environment would clearly increase the number of possible applications of collaborative technologies. The possibilities range from medical emergency teams equipped with these cheap terminals collaborating with expert doctors off-site, to numerous military applications, to applications on various factory floors around the world where manufacturing processes can be streamlined better.

Such an infrastructure, we project, would be developed through private, commercial channels. We believe that there is sufficient economic incentives in this area that government intervention is not required and in fact would be detrimental. Unlike the telecommunication industry in its beginnings, the advent of wireless communications and the continued penetration of cable operators has created a highly competitive environment.

However, even if the NC movement does not live up to its projected promise of deleivering cheap terminals that can replace the current PCs, we believe that the trends towards increasing collaborative technology in various environments will continue. While it may be slowed by the absence of an inexpensive alternative to multimedia PC investments, the existing value proposition is still great enough to support growth in the industry.

Collaborative Planning: The Heineken Experience

In each of the three case studies we presented, an organization was utilizing collaborative technologies to improve the quality and coordination of internal activities. We began with these cases because we believe they represent the best chance collaborative technologies have of getting into organizations. We believe organizations may embrace these tools as a way to improve internal collaboration, coordination, and training, but more must be done before they can consider them as tools for collaboration with customers and business partners.

There are three primary reasons for this:

Into this scenario steps Heineken. One of a handful of pioneering companies that are entering the brave, new world of inter-company collaboration, Heineken implemented a system called HOPS (Heineken Operational Planning System) to collaborate with its distributors. The system allows them to coordinate placing orders and generating demand forecasts through real-time interaction with their distributors The tools used are a computer, an intranet, an extranet (the Internet), a standard web browser, and American Software Inc.'s Supply Chain Planning collaborative forecasting and replenishment software suite.

While Heineken would not release the dollar amount spent on this effort, they claim that they will realize a positive return on their investment in less than a year. Through this effort Heineken was able to dramatically reduce inventory and procurement costs, reduce order lead times from 12 weeks down to 4 - 6 weeks, and as a result improve the quality and freshness of their product.

The bottom line: Heineken was able to better serve both their customers and their distributors and realize significant bottom-line improvement in the process.

As more and more companies recognize the tremendous benefits that can be leveraged through collaboration with vendors, suppliers, and customers, we expect a continued move towards this model of inter-organizational design. Of course, this shift will take time in light of the issues raised earlier and will not necessarily carry all collaborative technologies forward with it. Heineken, for example, does not currently use video as part of their real-time collaboration because of the poor quality and, perhaps more importantly, because they do not feel it ads value to the process they are performing.

Each company, at least during these early days, will need to evaluate their unique situation against the issues raised here and the opportunities presented them. In addition, they will have to work through the cultural changes and training that goes with a dramatic paradigm shift such as the shift to collaboration. But companies like Heineken clearly demonstrate that there is value to be gained in this area, and as long as there is value generating a need, companies will work to address their organizational issues and technology hardware and software companies will continue developing products to meet those needs.

Shared Virtual Worlds

With Heineken setting a good example of industrial organizations adopting collaborative technology for planning activities, we now turn our attention to how this technology might revolutionize the way people interact world-wide. People have quickly developed their interest in hanging out on the Internet through the World Wide Web, email, and Internet relay chat. Real-time collaborative technology can take this further by creating a shared virtual world, or more technically, through distributed virtual environments (DVE). Shared virtual worlds have the potential to inaugurate a new era of social computing by radically altering the way we work, learn, play, and interact with each other, by focusing on the previously ignored social aspects of computing.

In our vision, a shared virtual world contains many highly graphical, computer-generated environments ("worlds") populated by many geographically disperse people. These environments allow users to interact with other people or with artificial intelligent agents in real time. Each interaction group can accommodate thousands of users, making it possible to create crowded events such as a concert. Unlike current video conferencing system, DVE users can create and change the three-dimensional environment they are immersed in. In addition, users can move around and participate in different environments, constantly contributing new objects and structures to their shared world. Since this world is virtual, it can go beyond the imitation of reality to permit things that cannot exist in actuality. An example of what a shared virtual world tour screen may look like, click here.

While the enabling technologies for virtual shared world have advanced over years of research, there are still impediments that keep them from widespread acceptance. We now discuss these impediments and how they might be overcome:

Technology

Very few users can currently afford a fast enough computer to generate real-time audio and video of the virtual world. This obstacle is quickly being overcome. The advances in digital signal processing have brought very powerful graphic and sound cards. Combined with the ever-growing power of computer processors, high-quality audio and video will become more affordable for common users.

A key technological issue is the bandwidth limitation of today's wide-area networks. Compared to earlier applications, DVEs place more demand on the network to support a much larger number of people all over the world. This impediment will be slowly overcome as the network continues to be upgraded and expanded to support higher-incentive applications such as telecommuting and distance learning, and possibly Internet-based multi-player games.

Industrial Organization

While DVE research has been underway for over 20 years, it was done by two separate communities: the Internet camp and the Distributed Interactive Simulation camp. The Internet world developers focus on DVEs that can run on moderate computing and network hardware that most people own. The Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) world wants to develop simulators realistic enough for training the armed forces. Since these simulators often demand expensive custom hardware, large network bandwidths and low latencies. There is currently no standard to move objects and environments from one simulator to another.

To bring DVE closer to reality, we must be able to combine the efforts of both communities, leveraging the networking expertise of one and the graphics and user-interface expertise of the other. The DIS developers are trying to move beyond the military training realm into the commercial area. In the process, they must collaborate with the Internet developers to integrate the ability to scale up users with the ability to share contents on different systems.

Conclusions

Case Studies

Contents