Data changes paradigm

New technology enables collective thinking and acting in a transdisciplinary manner. Flexibility, networking, real-time information and utility, rather than possession, are impulses consumers learn in the virtual world of ICT and expect action in the physical one. The use of new technology can change the way people consume, produce and relate to each other. This development accelerates with the growing group of Generation Z who are used to curating information online at a rapid pace, sharing thoughts and observations on a variety of machines, topics and products.

New paradigm is “possession vs usage”.
I am of the generation where one thrived to possess things. A one to one relationship. My car. My book. My … whatever. The object is in my possession until the end of its live cycle and then it is my problem to dump it. This one-way-, or silo-mentality perfectly fits the sort of old-fashioned structures in city authorities. There is an administrative office for every segment. Collecting data within each silo. Providing segmented data in a one on one relation for passive use. City is the sender. Like in the Web 1-0. Uni-directional, in a one on one or one to many relationship. Fostering silo-mentality.

The principle of “usage” however expands the number of participants.  Transferred to cities this means information changes from single to multi purpose. And using an object or data only in a fragment of its live cycle. By making data accessible (e.g. open data) citizens even have the possibility to actively create value. Like in the Web 2.0 content is generated by users and city becomes the moderator. Multi-directional, in a many to many relationship. The prerequisite for collaboration.

From City 1.0 to Smart City 2.0

Cities are stuck in a Web 1.0 stage! Today city authorities struggle with their old-fashioned internal structures. The administrative processes need to see adaption that reflect state of the art technology and meet the expectations citizens are used to from their privat medial experience. Currently information is made available for passive use only. Municipalities must define conditions that allow connected society by e.g. providing open data, infrastructure and legislation. Only this way industry can rely on a framework that allows the set up of new business models and investments beyond election periods.

“Smart City“ resembles a Web 2.0 stage! McKinsey identified 5 city archetypes that vary in their degree of maturity and centralization. Depending on their state of maturity variances in CAGR and CAPEX are remar- kable. Consequently the key success factors for doing busi- ness with them vary significantly as well as the process and requirements to transform them from a “city” into a “smart city” (SC).

PIKE research characterizes SC as“… the integration of technology into a strategic approach to sustainability, citizen well-being and economic development. SC should be seen as a complex confluence of several existing markets, as well as the driver for new, emergent solutions that span several of these traditional domains.”

Looking at the current situation “Smart City” has not yet picked up. All stakeholders seem to be stuck in silo mentality and focus on pilots. Sustainable solutions and scale up is missing. The definition of key success factors will help technology providers as well as cities to move forward together. The way towards „City 2.0“ has just begun.