IoT: Security Cameras

Just a few years ago, if you wanted security cameras for your home, you had to buy a separate surveillance system, with its own recording device, similar to a DVR, wire your house for the cameras, and then set it to record.  These days, you can buy a single camera, or multiple cameras, possibly a base station, and use your existing internet connection for 24x7 surveillance, near real-time alerts, and cloud-based storage.

I already subscribe to a third party security company with their own alarm and door sensors.  So to complement that, I purchased a Foscam FI9821W from Groupon a few years ago.  Admittedly, the setup wasn't very intuitive.  However, for $70 dollars, it allowed me to see inside my house while I am away.  It had night vision, and with an SD card, can record the video.  For a monthly fee, it can also store video on the cloud.

Netgear's Arlo camera series have been getting a lot of good reviews lately, so I decided to try an Arlo Q to add to network, and maybe monitor my garage.  The Arlo Q is a single camera that you connect directly via Wi-Fi to your router.  At $150, it is more than twice the price of the Foscam.  So what do you get for $150?

• It comes in a really nice package.
• Setup is a breeze.  It took me all of 5 minutes to get it up and running.  With the Foscam, you had to fiddle with your router to put a static IP address on your camera, and then open up a port to allow access from the internet.
• Basic cloud storage is free.  You just need to give your credit card.  (This part, I don't like as much.  If it's free, why do you need my credit card?)

I did have some issues initially, which I now discover is its limitation.  Because the garage is the farthest point from my Wi-Fi router, the Arlo can't broadcast live to the app.  It works for a while, but overnight, I am no longer able to see a live feed.  It can still alert you that there is motion or audio detected, but you won't be able to see it.  This issue has been discussed in the Arlo section of the Netgear Community.

This was a big issue for me, as the whole point was to get the motion and audio detection notification from the garage.  I suppose I could buy a range extender, but my computers and tablets work fine in the same location.  I switched the Foscam to the garage, and so far have found no issues.  The Foscam does have an external antenna which I suppose helps.  The problem is that it doesn't have motion detection alerts.

The other solution I found in the community was to buy the whole kit which had a base station.  They said the base station broadcasts the signal 10% stronger than the router.  I'm not sure I will spend much more for such a system, since I only need one camera, and the base kit comes with 4 cameras.

In the end, I did find that my device had a factory defect.  Amazon replaced it free of charge, and now the new device connects correctly and consistently to my router even if it is in the garage.

We are in the early innings of the truly smart and connected home.  A camera is just one piece of a complete smart security solution.  I recommend buying one to complement your existing security system, but I would wait until the technology and integration matures so that you have one system that connects your door locks, window sensors, garage door openers, and cameras together into one single security system, that then integrates into your smart home controller, which could be Alexa or Google.

Scoop: Great Idea...But Not for Me

Numerous articles have been written about traffic in the San Francisco Bay Area.  It is a complex problem with no single solution. Several companies are trying to solve that problem.  Uber is probably the most famous of them all.  Another company called Scoop is trying a different tactic.  You request a carpool either the night before or days in advance, Scoop matches you with other people in your area, and then you take a ride, or drive, to work with these other people.

Here are some great things about Scoop:

1. As a rider, you don't have to drive your car alone.  Save on gas, wear and tear, and a little bit of the environment.
2. As a rider, it may be cheaper than a car payment if commuting to work is all you are using your car for.   At 10 dollars a day, at 22 days a month, that's just 220!  Your company may also be subsidizing part of it, which makes it even cheaper.
3. As a driver, you can use the carpool lane, which, in theory, will get you there faster. 

 Now, for the bad part:

1. While the concept of saving a little bit makes sense, you are at the mercy of travel times of other commuters. 
2.  In theory, it is cheaper than leasing a car.  However, there are still times when you need to drive yourself to work.  Also, because Scoop is just starting out, there may not be enough drivers in my area.  There may be some days that Scoop can't find a ride for you.  So if you didn't have a car, you will be stuck paying for Uber, which is more expensive.
3. Using the carpool lane is great on 101 in the morning.  It does save you quite a bit of time.  But in the afternoon, you save at most 10 minutes on a 1 hour commute.  That's not a lot in the grand scheme of things.  Also, not all of the Bay Area's freeways have carpool lanes, so the advantage disappears on those roads.

I tried Scoop with the intent to get rid of my car and end my car lease payments.  Because I can't leave for work at the same time every day, relying on other commuters does not work for me.  I have a very flexible schedule.  Sometimes, I have calls at 6 in the morning, so being ready for a 6:30 to 7:30AM ride is not always feasible.  Luckily, I can take those calls from home and drive in later.  Conversely, you may not be able to leave early as Scoop may find a later commute time for you.

Because of reason #2, I cannot fully rely on Scoop to take me to work every day.   I looked at their map of Scoop participants, and in my neighborhood, there were only a handful.  I'm sure this is not an insurmountable challenge as they try to get more people to sign up.  (You can actually get a $20 credit if you sign up and use my code: CLIFF8Y4.)

But the deal breaker for me is that I actually enjoy my drive to and from work, even if there was traffic.  Sure I don't like sitting for too long, but I can always adjust my time so that it doesn't take too long.  I listen to podcasts on my commute, and that serves two purposes: I learn a bit more and it makes the commute more bearable.

For those who don't care for driving and only see it as a means to get from point A to point B, and always leave at roughly the same time every day, Scoop may work.  I may use Scoop from time to time, I may even sign up to be a driver, but I won't be a regular user.

What's in a Successful CRM Team?

A CRM Team is a cross-functional team that manages a CRM strategy and implementation.  A successful one is able to effectively develop and maintain a strategy that provides direction for long-term CRM goals, and implement, operate, and improve a CRM application.

Successful CRM Teams have a strong executive sponsor who believes in the power of CRM, relies on CRM, and touts its benefits.

The team also includes representatives from the user base, a core of user advocates that provide feedback, and use the tool to its fullest.  They can be used as references and models for best CRM practices by the rest of the user base.  These could be senior sales reps and managers, or senior customer care agents and their managers.

Part of the CRM Team would be the day-to-day operational support team that helps answer questions, troubleshoot problems, and also provide feedback.  This team can also manage reports & dashboards, administer users, views, lead assignment rules, territories, account teams, and other light administration tasks.

A Master Data Management Team has representation in the CRM Team, as a successful CRM implementation relies on good Master Data Management.  They provide guidance, best practices, as well as the administrative function of account cleansing.  They may employ tools that assist in  cleansing, standardizing and duplicate removal.  They also establish relationships between accounts.

Also represented in a successful CRM Team is Corporate Communications and Learning, or some flavor of such.  They keep up with changes so that the training material is always up-to-date.  They also can be a conduit for feedback, both for the training material and the CRM application itself.  Communication is key when making wholesale changes to CRM.  The team members know who to communicate to, when the appropriate times are, and tailors the message according to the audience.

At the core of the CRM Team is a group of Salesforce-certified personnel, a mix of business analysts and administrators, to technical roles like developers and architects.  They act as the second level of support after the operational support team.  They also build and maintain the application, provide new capabilities, technical solutions, and integration.  They take feedback from the user base, review processes and improve upon them through process changes and automation.  They help other teams who rely on CRM data, for example, the business intelligence and analytics team, or the processes downstream that rely on CRM, like order management and billing.

Successful CRM teams are by nature, cross-functional, from users in Marketing to Sales and Customer Care, to Operations, IT, maybe even HR.  A cross-functional CRM Team is one of the key ingredients of a successful CRM implementation.

Personal Backups: Storage is Cheap, Bandwidth is Not

Backups are important.  Most enterprises have redundant backup systems.  But even individuals and families need some form of backup system.   It need not be expensive, and I think I have a workable solution.

I remember getting my first x86 computer and saying 40MB of hard disk space was a lot.  Then the next one came with 130MB.  And then 250MB...  A 1GB hard drive was a big deal. These days, you could get a 4TB external hard drive from Costco for about $130.  Granted, these are spinning disks.  Some new computers come with flash storage, which are still expensive.  But overall, storage is very cheap.

You could even get free storage online.  Google, Amazon, Microsoft, to name a few, all provide free storage in some form or another.  There are some restrictions, for example, in file size, or total storage, or types of files.  But they can give these away because storage is so cheap.

The trouble with these online services is that bandwidth is not cheap.  I am paying for the highest available speed from my current provider, which is 45Mbps.  They have put a cap on my monthly internet usage.  It is at 600GB a month.  Luckily, I don't stream movies via Netflix, but I do watch YouTube occasionally, as well as Amazon.com Prime Video.  If I used online backups or moved to online file storage exclusively, I would easily use up my 600GB allocation.

And these free services are only for file storage.  You can pay for true online backup services for as low as four dollars a month for 50GB and around $30 for 1TB, and it grows from there.

For a home user like me with lots of music and photos, I would simply recommend starting with one external hard drive, preferably a powered one, for regular backups.  Both the latest Windows and Mac OS have backup software included, and should be easy to set up.

After a while, buy a second portable USB-powered hard drive that you can keep offsite.  Copy your important files, like photos and music and documents, into this drive, and then store it in the office or somewhere else outside of your home.  Bring it home periodically, say, every month, and refresh your copy.

If you want, you can have two portable hard drives that you can rotate, so at least if one goes bad, you still have the other.

So, for an initial outlay of $130, you can have a working backup system, and for another $100 or $200 down the road, you can have multiple backups that you can use to recover your entire computer or just the important files.

Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast

A quick Google search of this phrase will tell you it has military origins.

I first encountered this phrase when I attended a firearms safety course required to participate in shooting competitions.  The thought was that, we have all seen videos of professional shooters who draw their pistol and shoot at a target lightning fast.  But attempting to do so the first time is both dangerous and futile.

The general idea is to go slow first and build muscle memory.  Practice, safely of course, drawing your pistol from your holster slowly, pivoting your shooting hand towards the target slowly, pushing your pistol forward slowly while joining your weak hand to stabilize, and then acquire your sight picture.  I may be simplifying the steps, but the idea is to start slow, and over time, with repetition, your muscles will learn the move instinctively and you will be able to go faster and faster, and still be safe.

The next time I encountered this phrase was from an autocross driving instructor.  Similar to building muscle memory, approaching a corner in a car with a significantly large rear weight bias, beginners are best advised to brake early, before the turn, and be on the gas as you enter the turn.  This seems counter-intuitive, because in autocross or in any racing situation, you want to go as fast as possible.  But for a rear-engine car and a novice driver, this is the fastest approach.

So how does this all relate to the business at hand?

When we launch new processes along with new applications that replace old processes and old applications, one measure of success is how fast can we go back to normal transaction volume.  This is a valid measure.  However, it must be balanced with how well we are processing the transactions.

The new processes may be more rigorous and require more work upfront to get right.  We may reach normal transaction volumes, but if a large portion of transactions require rework, team morale and customer satisfaction will suffer.  There must be another metric for rework, or repeat transactions, and of course, as appropriate, customer satisfaction survey results.

The goal, of course, is to reduce the rework by taking the time to learn the new process, to go slow the first few times.  Give some time to build muscle memory, especially for new processes and policies.

If a company replaced their aging CRM application with Salesforce, ensure that reports and dashboards measure both transaction volume (Quote Count for example) and rework.   Let's say that to rework a quote, one must withdraw it by changing the status to Withdrawn, making changes, then submitting it again.  An administrator can create workflows that will flag or stamp the quote record with a date and time when these events happen.  He can then create reports and dashboards based off those time stamps.

The administrator can also add a required Reason field whenever a quote is withdrawn.  And then focus on the ones with the highest incidence.  And for those situations, it may be worth slowing down, learning to be smooth, in order to become fast.

The Method Matters

Volkswagen AG has been in the news lately, and not for a good reason.

I remember reading that their then-chairman, Ferdinand Piech, and their then-CEO, Martin Winterkorn, wanted Volkswagen to be the number one car maker by 2018.  As recently as June 2015, they were ready to declare victory.  By July, the news media was heralding their triumph.

And then came the news.  By most accounts, it sounded like a deliberate attempt over many years to circumvent CARB emissions testing.  Whether it is directly related to the goal to be the number one car maker or not, any fraudulent activity of this magnitude especially by a company so well known gives me pause.  Where did this culture of win-at-all-costs come from?

There is nothing wrong with wanting to win.  But the way to victory matters to some people.  It matters to me.

Back in elementary and high school, our math questions were graded on a scale of 1 to 5.  The answer must include the method or the calculation, and the result itself.  A perfect score meant both the method and the result are correct.  Get the answer wrong, but the method is close, you get some points.  If you just wrote the final number or equation without the method, you just get one point.

Even then, the method mattered.

Lance Armstrong was heavily celebrated as a cancer-beating Tour de France-winning cyclist until he finally admitted using performance-enhancing drugs when he was competing.  Yes, he did win 7 tours.  But all that didn't matter because in his quest to win, he employed questionable methods.

In Marshall Goldsmith's book, "What Got You Here Won't Get You There", he opens with a story of a top performer who is described as "not a team player."  People dislike working with him.  The CEO of that company told him that if this person wouldn't change, he would be out of the company in a year, even though he was a top performer.  How did he get there by not being a team player?

Many more examples can be cited on perceived "wins" but with a backstory filled with deception, coercion, cheating, and outright lies.  In companies, these may be isolated, in which case, people get fired, or it may be cultural, and the entire brand is tainted.  For me, personally, it is okay to "lose", as long as I don't lose my integrity.  And it is great to "win", a great thing to succeed, but the method how it was achieved matters equally.

Exploring Bandwidth Issues

I've had AT&T as my ISP since 2005.  First, it was DSL, and recently, their U-verse brand of service.  Based on the Wikipedia entry, it is either a fiber optic connection or DSL, depending on the area.  My U-verse plan advertises up to 18Mbps download speeds.

With the explosion of bandwidth-hogging apps like YouTube, Skype, even Facebook, and multiple devices sharing the same connection, I have become more conscious of the actual download speeds I am experiencing.  Even my 2 year old child starts complaining when the high-def video she is watching on TV via WiFi starts to freeze while the TV attempts to buffer more data.

AT&T recommends ookla.com to run speed tests from your computer.  They also prescribe using a wired connection (Ethernet) when running the test, as well as ensuring that no other devices are using the connection.  So with that, here are my results.  With a promised 18Mbps download speed, I am actually getting 22Mbps on a wired connection.  That's not bad.

However, as with most homes these days, devices aren't tethered to an Ethernet cable.  I use WiFi almost exclusively - 2 laptops, 3 tablets, a TV, a printer (although I doubt that needs to connect to the Internet).  So running the same test, except via WiFi, on the same computer, with all other devices blocked, I get this, 6.2Mbps.  That's less than a third of the original 22Mbps, or a third of the promised "up to 18Mbps."

I can understand some loss due to the need to go over the air vs. Ethernet, but that drop is too drastic.  A quick Google search tells me my problem is not unique.  There are several suggestions, like ensuring all the devices connecting are on 802.11g at least.  I double-checked the laptop I was using, and it is indeed capable of 802.11g, and with that device using the connection exclusively, 6.2Mbps is too low.  Finally, I was testing with a computer that was about a foot away from the wireless router, so signal degradation should not be a factor.

Another suggestion was to play around with the WiFi channels.  Apparently, if my neighbor was on the same channel, we will cause interference on each others' networks.  So switching my channel to another one, I ran another test, and I get 10.7Mbps - a good improvement, but not great.  

I then became curious as to whether the added WPA2 security decreased performance, so I turned off security and ran another test while on the same channel as earlier, and recorded 9.39Mbps download speed.  So maybe the security settings don't decrease performance.  Besides, turning off security is a bad idea, unless you really intend to share your WiFi with your neighbors.

So maybe it's time of day.  It is 5:03AM PDT, and my download speed is back to down to 6.43Mbps.  The earlier tests were done around 9PM Pacific.  Running the same test a few minutes later yields even worse results, at 2.3Mbps.  So maybe it's not my connection, the whole Internet is busy!  (Well technically it could be only the network around me that are busy.)

It's times like this that I wonder whether switching to Comcast will improve things.  But a quick Google search turns up similar complaints from Comcast users.  So maybe the whole world is hungry for bandwidth, which is why companies like Infinera and Juniper are setting the stage for really fast networks.

But back to my problem, I still need to find an explanation for the loss of bandwidth.  18Mbps speeds are achieved on 100Mbps Ethernet.  Why only 10Mbps on 54Mbps 802.11g wireless, even if it is the only device connected to the wifi router?  It might be time to go back to my Networking 101 class.