Welcome to the Service Science worldwide community!

Join discussions  in order to build understanding of concepts in service science.  Here is our curriculum guide.

Cambridge Service Alliance

 Service Science and Service Researchers

Follow Wendy (@wendywolfie) on Twitter

Follow Jim (@JimSpohrer) on Twitter

  About this site & registering.

Click here to access IBM’s University Community and SSME repository.


Some speculations – a timeline 2015, 2025, 2035, 2055

In 2015, CSIG (Cognitive Systems Institute Group) has the mission of cognitive assistants for all occupations in smart service systems.  Early days for sure.  An AI Magazine article in the works will explore this more.

I also like this blog post by my IBM Watson/Almaden colleague Rama Akkiraju: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/looking-evolution-service-composition-from-soa-rama-akkiraju

By 2025, may be possible to instantly ingest textbooks to create Q-A systems.

By 2035, we all may be symbiotic with our cognitive mediators to help manage complexity in DIKW-rich environments (data-information-knowledge-wisdom).

The term “cognitive mediators” includes the concepts of cognitive (a) tools/components, (b) assistants/clerks, (c) collaborators, (d) coaches.

By 2055, the importance of rapid rebuilding from scratch with the right building blocks, as well as the responsible use of knowledge may be a priority.

This presentation surveys some of this timeline: http://www.slideshare.net/spohrer/spohrer-icer-20150810-v1

Systems Thinking and T-shaped Professionals

Here is a good introductory presentation on Systems Thinking:

Here is a short blog post connecting Systems Thinking to T-shapes:

For more advanced, I post all my presentation to http://www.slideshare.net/spohrer, where they are public and downloadable.

For example, three presentations you could download and extract slides from:

A big selection of T-shaped slides: http://www.slideshare.net/spohrer/t-shape-perspectives-20150819-v2

A keynote from Systems Sciences conference:  http://www.slideshare.net/spohrer/isss-service-science-reframing-skeleton-and-progress-20120717-v3

A recent, Empowering Makers in the Cognitive Era: http://www.slideshare.net/spohrer/spohrer-icer-20150810-v1

The classic book in Systems Thinking is by Weinberg:   http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-General-Systems-Thinking-Anniversary/dp/0932633498

The approach I take to Systems Thinking is to think about rapidly rebuilding systems from scratch, with better building blocks and more knowledge each generation – also known as a service science perspective on systems thinking.  The ability to rapidly rebuild is important for resilience and to address the “knowledge burden” of society, where knowledge exponentially increases year over year.

More practically – here is a nice blog post by IBM Watson DE Rama Akkiraju: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/looking-evolution-service-composition-from-soa-rama-akkiraju

ISSIP Student Challenge: What should a service innovation professional know?

ISSIP.org – What Should A Service Innovation Professional Know in 2015?

Steve Kwan (SJSU), Yassi Moghaddam (ISSIP), Jim Spohrer (IBM) met on Friday August 14, 2015 at the SJSU office Bunker Hill Drive, Santa Clara to develop a draft ISSIP Self-Assessment for Service Innovation Professionals. This document is the output from that meeting.

The motivating questions were:

What should a service innovation professional know?

Can we design a draft self-assessment for service innovation professionals?

Can this evolve into an annual student team project competition?

How can the self-assessment and body-of-knowledge be improved each year?


Meeting goals:

(1) Create an assignment that can be given to student teams to create new and improved self-assessments each year.

(2) People should be able to take a self-assessment and complete it in less than fifteen (15) minutes.

(3) The service innovation assessment should have three parts (a) vocabulary and concepts, (2) methods and frameworks, (c) challenges and opportunities.

(4) Student teams should create five objective questions, two subjective questions, and one open ended question for each section – so a total of eight (8) questions per section. Therefore, the full assessment should include twenty-four (24) questions in total – with an average of 30 seconds to answer each question. If the subjective and open ended questions prove to take too much time, template paragraphs can be used with fill-in the blanks, with hints revealing items that can be used to fill in a blank.

(5) Student teams can compete each year to submit a revised assessment, and the winning assessments would be posted to the ISSIP website: Assessment 2015, Assessment 2016, Assessment 2017, etc. – changing each year, reflecting the evolution of the body-of-knowledge, topical cases referenced in questions, and better/more compelling items.

(6) Faculty teaching students about service science and other service innovation related courses or degree programs, can challenge the students to take the ISSIP Assessment and run a competition in their class for teams to create new and improved assessments.

(7) To accompany the assessment, a body-of-knowledge document will include references to academic articles, business articles, and news stories related to items in the assessment. The body-of-knowledge will just be a short paragraph and diagram with a reference pointer to specific vocabulary and concepts, methods and frameworks, as well as opportunities and challenges. Less is more.

(8) This document can be given to student teams for them to create ISSIP Self-Assessment 2015 and ISSIP BOK (Body-of-knowledge) 2015. Their documents can be submitted to ISSIP for review, and a possible prize for the top submissions (both assessment and body-of-knowledge). Awards are based on the quality of the revised/updated Self-Assessment, Body-Of-Knowledge, and the number and quality of assessment responses and analysis (how many people took the new self-assessment quiz).

(9) The next step is to “reverse engineer” the assessment below, to begin to define the concepts and references for the body-of-knowledge/book-of-knowledge.


Initial draft of assessment by section

Each person (taking turns) worked on a part of the assessment. Each person created a section draft, presented it, and got some feedback on the questions. This is the initial compilation of all those initial drafts.

Vocabulary and Concepts

Objective 1: Which of the following are valid definitions of service

Objective 2: Which of the following are services

Objective 3: Which of the following are stakeholders in a metropolitan bus service system?

Objective 4: In the following which is the correct description of difference between goods dominant logic and service dominant logic?

Objective 5: Which of the following methods are used to describe customer service journeys.

Objective 6: Which one of the following is a definition of “Service”?

Objective 7: Which one of the following is a definition of “innovation”?

Objective 8: Which one of the following is a definition of “Service Innovation”?

Objective 9: Which one of the following are Operand resources?

Objective 10: Which one of the following are Operant resources?

Objective 11: Which one of the following describes Value?

Objective 12: Which one of the following describes Value Co-Creation?

Subjective 1: How can services provide value to the customer?

Subjective 2: What are the legal boundaries of value propositions for services?

Subjective 3: Describe how service qualities can be measured.

Subjective 4: Describe the differences between the front stage and back stage of a servicescape.

Subjective 5: Describe what is a Service System?

Subjective 6: Describe whether data is Operand or operant resource and why?

Open ended 1: Construct a value proposition that can be used by a provider (X) to compete for customer (Y)

Open ended 2: What is Service Dominant logic?


Methods and Frameworks

Objective 1: Which of the following are important service innovation methods: (1) service blueprint, (2) service innovation triangle, (3) business design canvas, (4) all of the above.

Objective 2: Which of the following are important service innovation related frameworks: (1) service-dominant logic, (2) service science, (3) viable systems approach, (4) all of the above.

Objective 3: True/False: There are many alternative approaches to service design.

Objective 4: True/False: Multiple stakeholder perspective must be considered when exploring alternative value propositions in a new service design.

Objective 5: True/False: There is a single best service innovation method for every business or societal challenge.

Objective 6: Service Blueprinting is best used for: <choices + all of the above>

Objective 7: Which one of the following demonstrates a business model based on value co-creation? <choices + all of the above>

Objective 8: Ecosystem of innovation – Which one the following businesses have built innovative ecosystems? <choices + all of the above>

Objective 9: Which one of these is an example of ethnographic interviewing? <choices + all of the above>

Objective 10: Divergent thinking is part of which one of the processes below? <choices + all of the above>

Objective 11: Which one of the following methods helps is important in Service Design? <choices + all of the above>

Subjective 1: Describe the strengths and limitations of service blueprinting.

Subjective 2: Describe the most important service innovation in the last ten years and which service innovation method could have been used to generate it.

Subjective 3: Describe systems modeling from a service innovation perspective.

Subjective 4: Describe data analytics for services (customer assessment of service quality) from a service innovation perspective.

Subjective 5: Describe what is Open innovation, and 3 examples of business that have open innovation platform.

Open ended 1: What are the most important state of the art methods and frameworks that service innovation professional should know today.


Challenges and Opportunities

Objective 1:  Which of the following are important current challenges of today’s service innovation professionals:  (1) how to improve service quality while decreasing service operation costs, (2) how to create an improve platform that allows more customer co-creation of value, (3) all of the above

Objective 2: Which of the following are important future opportunities for today’s service innovation professionals: (1) how to use cognitive systems to improve the creativity and productivity of employees and customers? (2) how to create more T-shaped employees and customers, (3) all of the above

Objective 3: True/False:  Jeremiah’s Owyang’s website is a top source of information about the collaborative economy.

Objective 4: True/False: Technology innovation is a major disruptor of traditional service businesses.

Objective 5: True/False: Government policy is a major knob for accelerating or decelerating the amount of service innovation in regions.

Subjective 1:  Describe the public policy challenges associated with a collaborative economy startup (e.g., Uber).

Subjective 2: Describe the organizational change challenges associated with the servitization of a specific manufacturing company (e.g. Taiwan Semiconductor).

Subjective 3: What are some of the reasons that the health care is so expensive in the US?

Subjective 4: What can service innovation professionals in health care do to help reduce costs in the US?

Subjective 5: How can service quality be maintained when service providers subcontracts by cost arbitrage?

Subjective 6: What are some of the challenges in providing service to a multi-cultural customer base?

Subjective 7: What are some of the challenges of the so-called sharing economy (esp. skills and trust)?

Subjective 8: What are some of the challenges of non-market-based service systems?

Open ended 1: What are the most important current challenges and future opportunities facing service innovation professional today?

Open ended 2: In the course of week list the types of service offerings you depended on. Compare the list today to the list ten years ago. Twenty years ago.


Body of Knowledge

Includes for each item, definition URL reference(s), plus types and ideally positive and negative examples:

Service, Healthcare, Manufacturing, Innovation, Technology Innovation, Business Model Innovation, Social Innovation, Service Innovation, Top Service Innovation in History, Value, Value Co-Creation, Stakeholders of a service system, Service-Dominant Logic, Goods-Dominant Logic, Customer service journey, Operand resource, Operant resource, Service System, Customer, Provider, Value Proposition, Legal Boundary, Measures, Service Quality, Productivity, Cost, Servicescape, Front stage, Back stage, Resources, People, Technology, Organizations, Information/Data, Service Innovation Methods, Service Blueprinting, Service Innovation Triangle, Business Model Canvas, Service Design, Ethnography, Ethnographic Interviews, Systems Modeling, Systems Thinking, Design Thinking, Service Thinking, Data Analytics, Customer Modeling, Open Innovation, Servitization, Service Innovation Frameworks, Service Dominant Logic, Service Science, Viable Systems Approach, Stakeholders, Challenge, Business Challenge, Societal Challenge, Business Model, Ecosystem, Innovation Ecosystem, Divergent Thinking, Method Strengths and Weaknesses,  Platform, Service Operations, Costs, Productivity, Compliance, Learning, Run-Transform-Innovate, Cognitive Systems, Collaborative Economy, Sharing Economy, Peer-to-peer Economy, Customers, Employees, T-shaped Professionals, Entrepreneurial Researchers, Government, Public Policy, Organizational Change, Arbitrage, Multi-culture Factors, Human Factors, Skills, Trust, Market-based Service Systems, Non-Market-based Service Systems, Human-Centered Service Systems


Concluding Remarks

 This draft will be augmented with a body-of-knowledge document with references. This is the reverse engineering next stage of this work.



Service-dominant logic website: http://sdlogic.net/

Jeremiah Owyang’s Collaborative Economy website: http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/

Service Thinking website: http://groupcvc.com/

ISSIP website: http://www.issip.org

B2B Startup Opportunities Abound!

Smart service systems provide some great opportunities for B2B startups over the next decade – much as  e-commerce websites were hot in the 1990’s….

Here are the URLs that elaborate, for startup businesses to supply cognitive assistants to other businesses (B2B):



Here is a short paragraph version describing some of IBM’s efforts:

IBM has been developing cognitive assistants for occupations such as oncologist, biochemical engineer, and even to chefs at Bon Apetit magazine experimental kitchens.   IBM makes access to IBM Cloud Bluemix and Watson Cognitive Services on Bluemix available at no charge to faculty and students around the world for education and research purposes to explore the development of cognitive assistant for all occupations.  IBM provides a limited number of competitively awarded faculty awards for aligned grant proposals, as well as a limited number of internship and PhD Fellowships to highly qualified doctoral students working in this area of developing cognitive assistants for all occupations.  Businesses are customers for cognitive assistants for all occupations to boost the creativity and productivity of their workers, increasing revenue and profit per employee measures.  This creates enormous opportunities for startups interested in creating B2B offerings – since there are nearly 1000 occupations described in O*NET online, with many sub-tasks, and multiple language opportunities, each an opportunity for cognitive systems B2B offerings from startups across all industry sectors.  Government are funding the development of cognitive assistants in key areas to both boost GDP of regions, as well as to improve social service offerings to the most disadvantaged and socially or economically challenged members of their societies.  IBM Global Entrepreneur Program and Smart Camp programs have been established to encourage IBM-aligned startups in the B2B space.

It would be great if other investors could match $ for $ on each industry invested dollar to hire and train doctoral students in this important area for the future of business and society.  The startup potential to deliver 1000 occupations (times) 10 main sub-tasks (times) 200 major languages globally (US firms selling globally or to language subpopulations in the US businesses) = 2 million possible B2B startups!   There has got to be a “gusher” somewhere in those 2 million possibilities.

The locations are marked where it is possible for “startups to drill for oil” and the entrepreneurial research faculty and students can even get no-cost access to the “rigging to drill experimental education and research wells” – as well as a limited number of faculty awards, internships, and PhD Fellowships.  Anything other investors (government, foundation, angels, VCs, etc.)  can do to accelerate this and amplify the investment could have a huge impact on startups that boost worker productivity and creativity on a new Moore’s law for occupations improvement.  This is what Doug Engelbart helped envision with augmentation theory – see slide #2 in this deck.

Also, cognitive assistants (AKA intelligent personal assistants) are of interest to a growing number of companies – each month a new company is added to the list here in the first paragraph of this article in Wikipedia:


If you want to help the next generation of entrepreneurial researchers/T-shaped professionals, then this is a territory full of B2B startup “gushers” just waiting to be drilled!!!

Societal Design Challenge

Regarding a design challenge to redesign society, first read….

(1) Sic Itur Ad Astra – by Andrew J. Galambos (design of a society with no coercion – total freedom)

(2) Unto This Last – by John Ruskin (Gandhi read this, and it triggered his new path)

“Unto This Last had a very important impact on Gandhi’s philosophy.”

(3) Conceptual Foundations of Multidisciplinary Thinking – by Stephen J Kline (philosophers have failed us, but here is what they might have done)

My sense is that we need people to have the ability to rapidly rebuild society from scratch – and individuals have to know and do this – as a prerequisite to be a “mature member of society” – I think we need cognitive assistants to do this.  So rapidly rebuilding to the point where people get a 3D printer, kinematic machines, and rebuild a cognitive assistant.  How rapidly could all of science be redeveloped if you knew what to measure, and how to build measurement instruments?  This is what a cognitive assistant can be training wheels for, and help get us to rebuild cognitive assistants more and more rapidly…..   see this: http://service-science.info/archives/2189

I have not figured our an intelligent way to express the above material, so it is an emotional intuition….  someday I hope to have a rigorous story to tell.

Besides rebuilding technology infrastructure, these people need ideas for rapidly rebuilding societal decision-architectures/institutions/governance/governments and rule systems….

(4) Federalist Papers

(5) Meta-Rules and Chartered Cities

(6) Jefferson – Agrarian Policy

(7) The Unbounded Mind: Breaking the Chains of Traditional Business Thinking, by Ian I. Mitroff and  Harold A. Linstone

Distributed intelligence and governance are co-dependent.  Augmented local intelligence can demonstrate itself by rapidly rebuilding itself from scratch.

From a service science perspective, the evolving ecology of nested, networked service system entities, with capabilities, constraints, rights, and responsibilities – should be able to rapidly rebuild itself from scratch while doing many distributed experiments to extend itself (progress).

(8) Non-Zero: The Logic of Human Destiny – by Robert Wright

“Interactions among individual genes, or cells, or animals, among interest groups, or nations, or corporations, can be viewed through the lenses of game theory. What follows is a survey of human history, and of organic history, with those lenses in place. My hope is to illuminate a kind of force – the non-zero-sum dynamic – that has crucially shaped the unfolding of life on earth so far…  In short, both organic and human history involve the playing of every-more-numerous, ever-larger, and ever-more-elaborate non-zero-sum games. It is the accumulation of these games – game upon game upon game – that constitutes the growth of biological and social complexity…” (Wright 2000, Pp. 5-7)

The non-zero sum force is more than value co-creation, it is value co-creation plus capability co-elevation in the contact of the capability to rapidly rebuild from scratch.

Service is the “non-zero-sum force” …

Service system entities/resource integrators are what exhibit the “non-zero-sum force.”

(9) Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged From Matter – Terrence Deacon

(10) Bob Sutton’s warning…. be careful what you wish for….
“The Dark Side of Scaling Up: Will You Want to Live in What You Build?”

BTW Ruskin -> Ghandi…

“Five great intellectual professions, relating to daily necessities of life, have hitherto existed — three exist necessarily, in every civilised nation:

The Soldier’s profession is to defend it.
The Pastor’s to teach it.
The Physician’s to keep it in health.
The lawyer’s to enforce justice in it.
The Merchant’s to provide for it.

And the duty of all these men is, on due occasion, to die for it.

“On due occasion,” namely: –

The Soldier, rather than leave his post in battle.
The Physician, rather than leave his post in plague.
The Pastor, rather than teach Falsehood.
The lawyer, rather than countenance Injustice.
The Merchant— what is his “due occasion” of death?

It is the main question for the merchant, as for all of us. For, truly, the man who does not know when to die, does not know how to live.”

And also Ruskin wrote…

“For wealth, instead of depending merely on a “have,” is thus seen to depend on a “can.””

Hence my fascination with:

(11) “The knowing-doing gap” – by Pfeffer and Sutton

Again, from a service science perspective, the four types of resources are – people, technology, organizations, and information.    People and technology are physical.   People and organizations have rights and responsibilities.   The capability to rapidly rebuild society from scratch seems like a responsibility/duty to me.   This is an emotional intuition.   However, I would like to make it a logic argument someday.   And I aspire to have the knowledge and put it into practice – knowing and doing.   Unlikely I will succeed. Oh well.  Dream big.

Is there a university on the planet that could rapidly rebuild societal infrastructure from scratch?   The Munich Germany Science Museum tries to show the knowledge required to rapidly rebuild society from scratch.  Wouldn’t it be great if a university graduated students who had that experience?

My ideal society is one in which each individual demonstrates the ability to rapidly rebuild society from scratch.   This is a responsibility – a duty to self and others – that once demonstrated suggests the person appreciates the essential past, as well as is ready to push forward and make new progress.  As part of the evolving ecology of nested, networked service system entities, it also provides an answer to what is education.

The paradox of course – is that in the old days some people actually had this knowledge and demonstrated it… See Alone In The Wilderness – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYJKd0rkKss – granted the level was lower than all of societal infrastructure of today.  Today we suffer from the knowledge burden – so much knowledge some say education and innovation is getting harder – http://www.nber.org/papers/w11360 – rapidly rebuilding societal infrastructure provides a speedier path for re-deriving all of knowledge.  And sets the stage for the 6 R’s of learning – http://service-science.info/archives/2096

Smart Service System Challenge for Artificial Intelligence (AI) Doctoral Students

At top universities today with Computer Science (CS)/Artificial Intelligence (AI) programs, roughly 1 in 10 CS PhD-candidate students are doing AI-related work (machine learning, robotics, natural language processing, etc.).

So in the US, if there are about 50K CS graduate students in the US, about 5K are likely doing AI-related work.

That is a lot of talent.
The CSIG mission (http://cognitive-science.org) is to align some of this talent with the development of cognitive assistants for nearly 1000 occupations in smart service systems to boost creativity and productivity of workers.   Intelligent personal assistants and employee decision support systems (cognitive assistants) are already a focus for over a dozen Forbes Global 2000 companies, as well as an equal or greater number of startups — and with a next generation of these types of cognitive assistants, regions may be able to boost GDP per capita, and companies may be able to boost revenue per employee.  Of course, these efforts ultimately require building innovation capacity for re-designing teamwork in complex cyber-physical-social systems (aka co-creation processes in service systems) – hence the need to focus on smart service system teamwork redesign for many occupations across industries.

A number of researchers have started tracks at several key conferences exploring the development of smart service systems like these, and March 21-22 at the National Academies, these topics will also be discussed in sessions at the next T-Summit (http://tsummit.org).




Conferences – Creating T-shaped Adaptive Makers of Smart Service Systems                                                               

July 7-9 San Jose – ICServ2015 – 4 keynotes, 60 papers

July 9-12 San Jose – Frontiers in Service – 6 keynotes, 90 papers

July 26-30 Las Vegas AHFE HSSE – 1 keynote, 1000+ papers

Jan 5-8 Hawaii HICSS – 2 keynotes, 500+ papers

Nov 12-14 Washington DC – AAAI Fall Symposium

March 21-22, 2016 Washington DC – T-Summit


IESS 1.6 – Exploring Service Science

IESS 2016 – The 7th International Conference on Exploring Service Science

May 25-27, 2016, Bucharest, Romania

Dear Colleagues,

It is our pleasure to invite you to participate in the 7th International
Conference on Exploring Service Science – IESS 2016, organized by the
University Politehnica of Bucharest and the Research Centre in Robotics
and CIM on May 25-27, 2016.

The Conference will bring together academic and practitioners from service
industry and their worldwide partners in a collegial and stimulating
environment. According to its tradition, IESS 1.6 will cover major areas
of R&D and education related to Service Science and service innovation,
including new research trends such as: society development due to
services, environment contribution to the co-exploration and co-creation
of multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional and multi-national services,
the role of services in the integration of the new possibilities powered
by IT, development of generic models for the process of service

Papers are solicited on topics related to one or several topics of the
following list, but not limited to. Contributions should be grounded in
one or several contexts, and be open to multi-disciplinary approaches.

– Service exploration processes
– Business transformation through Service Science
– New service business models
– Modelling of the service consumer needs
– Modelling of business services requirements
– Service information & process modelling
– Service design methodologies and patterns
– Service co-design environments, tools
– Requirements oriented towards services
– IT-based service engineering
– Modelling and design of IT-enabled service systems
– Service delivery systems
– Product-service systems
– Service innovation and strategy
– Sustainability in services
– Governance of service systems
– Service System networks
– Education for service innovation

All accepted and presented papers will be published in the Springer Series
“Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing”, abstracted/indexed in
CPCI (ISI) Proceedings, SCOPUS, DBLP, EI, Google Scholar and Springerlink.

Selected papers accepted by IESS 2016 will be published in a special issue
of INFORMS Service Science journal.

Full paper submission: December 21, 2015 Notification of acceptance:
January 11, 2016 Final paper submission: February 15, 2016

All IESS 2016 papers must be submitted in electronic format (pdf format)
via EasyChair conference management system:
https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=iess16. The material submitted for
presentation at the workshop must be original, not published or being
considered elsewhere. The working language is English. Papers should not
exceed 5,000 words, recommended length is 10 to 14 pages. The papers
should be formatted in the Springer Book template for “Lecture Notes in
Business Information Processing” according to the instructions available
in the conference website on the “Instructions for authors” item (on the
left side).

Full registration (one fee/paper): 400 EUR (early) / 450 EUR (late) Ph.D.
Students: 250 EUR (early) / 300 EUR (late) Accompanying persons: 125 EUR
(early) / 175 EUR (late)

Iulia Voinescu (RO)
Tel: +40/21 402 93 14
Fax: +40/21 317 09 12

E-mail: iess16@cimr.pub.ro
Web: www.iess16.cimr.pub.ro

Sincerely yours,
Theodor Borangiu (RO), IESS 2016 Conference Chair
Monica Dragoicea (RO), IESS 2016 Program Chair
Henriqueta Novoa (PT), IESS 2016 Program Chair

service science, some publication options for ISSIPers

These are some good publications options for ISSIPers

(a) HICSS paper – abstracts due June 15th – Haluk Demirkan co-chair (haluk@uw.edu)

(b) ISSIP BEP books – short 90 pages – Haluk Demirkan, co-collection editor  (haluk@uw.edu)

(c) Journal of Service Science – Paul Maglio, editor (pmaglio@ucmerced.edu)

(d) Journal of Service Research – Mary Jo Bitner, editor (maryjo.bitner@asu.edu)

Join an ISSIP SIG to find opportunities to contribute to whitepapers and other publications under development.

HBR June 2015 – The Rise of Cognitive Systems in the Enterprise

HBR June 2015

Enjoy reading!

Beyond Automation
by Thomas H. Davenport and Julia Kirby

The Great Decoupling: An Interview with Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee

When Your Boss Wears Metal Pants
by Walter Frick

The Self-Tuning Enterprise
by Martin Reeves, Ming Zeng, Amin Venjara

Doug Engelbart’s Augment Vision (and other 1940-1970 early pioneers)

Cognitive Systems Institute Group (CSIG)
Mission: Cognitive assistants for all occupations in smart service systems