Docx -surprise! another problem from microsoft word.

This has been a point of frustration recently for some time when uploading documents to Google documents. If you have word 2007 please save in 2003.

Does anyone have any other answers to the docx error when uploading to google docs?

Here are some links:
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2008/09/24/converting-docx-documents-to-doc/

Use of Emails and Blog

I have a suggestion about streamlining our communication with each other.
Currently we have 1) individual emails, 2) group email, and 3) blog. Quite frankly I am not sure those three communication vehicles provide equal value and sometimes it is not clear who created the message or posting.

I think that simply communicating through our personal Gmail email accounts will produce the same results. We can share documents/posts via Google Documents, use Google Calender to set up meetings & agendas, and be clear who created the communication.

Anyway, these are my thoughts. Please let me know what you think. I greatly appreciate your feedback.

Andre F.

Dengi Poll on Technology

As far as I understand we need to chose 1 technology and proceed to write a paragraph summary. It could take a while to chose that technology and also deciding who writes it. You all have my minutes from the meetings this afternoon. Please, after reading these notes and adding your own thoughts feel free to vote on which technology you want by creating a post to this blog. The poll should end by midnite tonight or tomorrow as the assignment is due on Friday.

Questions:
Who would like to offer to write the summary?
Would submitting this on Friday frou the Dengi Email address be a good idea?

Thanks everyone,
C C


AF: The goal is to gain educational value, so it does not really matter what we will choose to model. I think that the membrane technology is simpler than the hybrid computer one, and therefore propose the membrane technology.
I suggest to use a personal email and cc the rest of the team. This will ensure clear ownership of the project.
Once the team selects the technology I can draft the statement and maybe somebody else can independently review it. Let me know.

Regards,

Andre F.

New Minutes from License Meetings on Google Docs

Please find notes on Google docs and please modify if needed.

Thank you,
Claudia

New email

Team, please use christopher.w.mills@gmail.com instead of chris.w.mills@hotmail.com. thanks!

Reading Assignements for May 8 and 9th - Please Click on Image to see full text on assignments. Thanks!

Please know that "Dengi" means that we all have to read them. Not so much to collaborate but that we read them individually and then later discuss whether there can be collaboration.

Quicklooks Outline - Also uploaded to Google Docs

DENGI Technology Questions

For the purpose of answering Brett's questions?

How does our technology answer questions? Who cares?

For the hybrid computer:
- Video Game companies care.
- Entertainment industries care.
-Austin Energy cares.

For the desalination:
-Texas citizens care.
-Governments care.

Should we be getting their feedback in how care? Yes!

Should we be calling them and finding out? Yes!

Who knows people in the game industry? Water desalination plants? Austin Energy? Government? I think we all do.

FIRST - we can decide what how we want to approach them. Then we can approach our technologies.

Please post your ideas to this blog entry and let the group know.

If we can allocate our contacts into these categories we can allocate the work.

Thanks!
Claudia

Good ideas from Katey

uh hmm, so glad we decided NOT to do homework on Quicklooks over thelast three weeks....maybe start now?

we need to choose which tech to start with - 'membrane' or 'hybrid DA'?i propose we contact people from BOTH right off the bat and go withthe one that seems simplest (plan-wise) first.
'hybrid DA' has been in touch via email with claudia - they would liketo meet us ASAP and lunch time week days are best - possible thistuesday after 10am meeting and 11am tech transfer online chat? orwednesday?

'membrane': first, we need to contact OTC Office 512 471-2995address: 3925 w braker lane austin 78759 - i would like to visitoffice in person on monday. second, Max Green, the LicensingAssociate, 512 471-9054 is an associate of Dan's - Dan, would you callMax monday and see if he could meet with us soon? Third, InventorProfessor at UT is Benny Freeman, Chemical Engineering. Will ask OTCto advise on contacting Benny but i think he is a friend of a friendof mine....Fourth, I would like to contact Dr Dileep Agnihorti from 21Ventures to inquire about interest in whichever desalination nanopolymer 'membrane' they have just chosen to fund...i see this as aninteresting opportunity/excuse to practice discussing VC with VC!
anything else? thoughts? angles to pursue?

katey
hi andre! missed ya this weekend!

milestone chart

CONFERENCE CALLS
EVERY TUESDAY
10:00 AM
SKYPE or Andre's Key in - for people without laptops this will be a conference call.
Try to be on the phone or on your laptop for these meetings.

READING ASSIGNMENTS
DUE 4/24
Thursday 8 pm
Turn in summary to Dengi Google Docs
Dan Wimmer - Chapter 1-8 on Open Business Models,
Andre Harvard Business Review,
Claudia - Chapters 1-3 Innovator's Solution and Tech Transfer from China
Katey - The Innovator's Solution 3,5,6
Chris - System of Survival Chapter 1 and Commercializing New Technologies by Vijay Chapter 1

Systems of Survival is posted (7:39 CST 22nd)

Commercializing New Tech is posted (9:10 CST 22nd)

We'll still need help on the following readings:

Chapter 2 - Innovation, Enrepeneurship and Tech Change, pp 14-26

CR, P. Techology Management : Concepts and Applications Chapter 4,6

BB Marcure Judy, and Brett Cornwell. Assessing the Value and Markets for New Technology, Chapter 3

Feel free to add to this post which ones you guys can do,

Thanks!

Claudia

A few sites I like

I thought I should test out a post, so here are a few sites I (Chris) like:

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/
http://www.austinstartup.com/
http://stirr.net/
http://www.ted.com/

I'll have my share of the readings done shortly - somehow got off track.

Meeting Minutes from 4/12/2009, 10 AM

Andre, Claudia and Dan have agreed to nominate that 1 person to take ownership of the upcoming assignment and if work needs to be allocated to do so on the blog.
Andre said that taking ownership of a project would be recommended for all assignments, similar to the way we did it for the readings.

STC383 - Summary due 5/1/2009 - Which technology are we going to choose?
Should we bring in a new technology other than the ones we were given? Andre, Claudia and Dan discussed the benefits but the timeline to protect new technologies would be too risky. Through this discussion we agreed to stay with the original assignment.

Andre proposes to have our documents and articles on Google Documents .
The blog would be for discussions and store all summaries or technical papers on Google Docs.

So - from now on Google Docs use to store the summaries. The Dengi Blog use for discussion.
Andre - On June 18th we have the biggest deliverables . We have a Class on June 5th and 6th and Andre might come down for those classes. We can meet on Sunday with Andre work on the group project.

Claudia presented the initiative that Katey was making to contact the OTC for a technology and asked about what the group had in terms of feedback. That she was also close to posting the summary for her reading.

The quick looks summary will be discussed this weekend. Let's wait to contact OTC until we have a stronger underpinning of the analysis. Andre read Bret's email from the blog which stated "that we to know what we are doing" before going to OTC.

Dan recommends to check off the list of who wants to read what.

Andre and Dan feel free to modify minutes as they record them.

Dengi's feel free to post comments to initiate discussion anytime.
Thanks!
Claudia

Reading Summary. "Collaboration Rules" by Andre Fonarov

“Collaboration Rules” by P. Evans and B. Wolf
Summary by Andre Fonarov
April 20, 2009

The authors explored key principles and mechanisms behind highly productive and effective organization structures at Linux, an open-source software company with thousands of self-organized users and Toyota, a well-known automaker and a leader in quality, innovation and lean production. It was identified that despite apparent differences between a hacker- driven Linux community and clean-cut Toyota world of Japanese corporation, both communities share a number of common components that make them leaders in innovation and growth.

The following components of highly effective collaboration teams were identified in the article:
Principles:
A common work discipline driven by obsession, e.g. attention to small details, writing minimal code.
Raw information about problems and solutions is shared widely, frequently, and in small portions.
Project leaders act as connectors and lead by their own credibility.
Infrastructure:
A shared pool of knowledge.
Simple tools for moving knowledge around, e.g. emails and Listservs.
Benefits:
Rich semantic knowledge based on the knowledge pool available for further refinement by the whole community.
Modular teaming to expand and adapt quickly and with less risk.
Intrinsic motivation based on nonmonetary value, e.g. making something for the whole world.
High levels of trust as a result of constant scrutiny by others.
Driving down transactional costs. More time is spend on transactions than enforcing them.
Once the system gains a critical mass, it feeds itself.

In a summary, not markets, not hierarchies, but a combination of both provides an effective collaboration environment.

STC 383 Summaries Posted on Google Docs

Hi Everyone,

For your reading pleasure you can download the summaries as word docs from the link to the right here. Feel free to post your own if you can get them in. You can send an invite to collaborators to view these.

STC 383 - Transfer of Technology to China

Technology transfer to China - Summary by Claudia Chittim

This article reviewed the methods of knowledge transfer from American manufacturing firms (specifically in Canada) to manufacturing or supplying firms in China. There were 28 manufacturing firms included in this study. and several theories to knowledge transfer discussed.

Conclusion:
Tacit knowledge is mostly used to transfer knowledge from Canadian firms to Chinese firms. This leaves a larger margin of error in interpretation because it takes out the objective skills needed to transfer knowledge as one would with "Codification". So instead of exchanging blueprints, information is communicated face to face. Technology based firms are more complex than standard manufacturing and should have codification and also because products develop rapidly. There are clearly problems in the transfer of knowledge if Tacit knowledge is used in this process. Also noted is that R & D in China is also poorly coordinated between the supplier and the Canadian organizations for fear of "leaking secrets" from one Chinese company to the other but also because employees, engineers have a high turnover in R & D firms.

Remaining Summary on Google Docs.

Thanks!

Reading Summaries for STC 383

Daniel Wimmer's summary for chapters 1 and 2:

OPEN BUSINESS MODELS: AN OUTLINE OF CHAPTERS 1-2

*************I encourage you not to look carefully at the grammar, syntax or punctuation, as such are simply defects with my typing skills which I do not intend to correct at this stage of my life*************** we

Henry Chesbrough
This book was written by the author to promote the concept of “Open” business models versus the older concepts which have existed for sometime. The book seems to parallel an earlier management theory written by the same author “Open Innovation”
My take is that the corresponding editorials focus on a perceived concept that by extending one operation to wider visions will promote expansion of the hidden concepts owned by them or a patented property of a particular entity.

CHAPTER 1
This chapter introduces why an existing business should undertake a different view of how they are handling the trade technologies which are in part or wholly owned by them. Here, the author cites several examples of companies who either failed to expand their philosophies into modern methods and others who did so with success.
INTERMEDIATE MARKETS: This keystone address in what an upstream supplier of trade knowledge licenses and intellectual property “downstream” to a product developer.
THIS IS ONE METHOD OF “OPEN” MODELS……
The author illustrates how Hollywood now uses independent directors, actors writers etc to produce movies vs. the old days when a studio controlled all of the participants.
Inefficiencies in technology, here the author talks about how companies “upstream” have sold or partnered the development of technologies and their track record has not been good. Many surveys have shown that a small percentage of “upstream” transfer ever is brought to market.
THE SOCIAL COMPACT UNDERLYING IP PROTECTION
This part of the chapter deal with what society expects from an inventor by way of granting a termed patent right. KEY POINT: “Society offers a temporary monopoly and permitting riches in return (I suspect he forgot to say the return to society) to benefit society. His argument states that failing to do so is a social breath of contract.
CLOSED IP MANAGEMENT
This section grounds the author’s point that in “closed IP management” situations, there is little product development, hints again that expansion of the technologies is critical to development.
WHY OPEN UP NOW?
The author claims that the time has come for openness because of the high cost of R&D, development cost, creating a team to explore and facility expenses.
Among the other economic concerns are:
shorter life cycles of a patent ( competition or similar products)
R&D expenses

Minutes from 4/14/2009 - Topic- Reading Assignments for STC 383

Minutes from 4/14/2009 - Topic- Reading Assignments for STC 383

Katey, Claudia and Dan met on 4/14via Skype to discuss further research and how we can allocate our readings for STC383.1)Assigned STC383 Readings:Page 7 of the STC383 syllabus has a list of readings that are due. If we all take 1 reading that would help us get through the readings more efficiently. This is also what professor Meg Wilson recommended. When we are finished with our readings we ask each group member to summarize the readings into a paragraph in bullets or in whatever format is comfortable on this blog.

Please do so by creating a new posting and giving it the title for your reading.

Chris and Andre we tried to call you and would have loved to hear from you however given your hectic schedules we understand and we thought about which readings you all might find most useful.

Please have a look at the following assigned readings that are also found on page 7 of the STC383 syllabus:

-Chris please read the "Technology Management: Concepts and Applications readings."
-Dan please read the "Open Business Models, Chaptes 4-8"
-Katey please read the "Innovator's Solution Chapters, 3,5,6"
-Claudia please read the "Technology Transfer to China, pg 43-57"
-Andre please read the "Harvard Business Review Collaboration Rules."Reading summaries are due on the blog by Tuesday, April 21st on the blog. Again, these can be a 1 paragraph summary or a list of bullet points.

2) KTT Model Paragraph Summaries:One paragraph summary on on technology we chose that is due:Katey proposes to talk to with the professors first then when she gets feedback will collaborate with us to write the 1 paragraph summary.Claudia has offered to create a chart that will animate and basically look awesome. This is of course based on what the group decides.Dan, Katey, Andre, Claudia and Chris - will develop a blueprint of our concept that we will base the chart on.Dan, Claudia and Katey decided that the water de-salinization technology would be the one we would turn in on May 1st, 2009. Next group meeting:10 AM, Tuesday 4/21/2009 on Skype or conference call.

Guy Kawasaki - Reality Check - Chapter 9

"Make sure you have finished speaking before your audience has finished listening." Dorothy Sarnoff. (exerpt from Kawasaki's book "Reality Check")

This whole book is about getting the attention from VC funding. Guy Kawasaki really nails down the flaws of many business presentations that have gone in front of VC in the past oh say 20 years. Chapter 9 titled, "The 10/20/30 Rule of Pitching" may be useful for Dengis.

I would love to scan and setup an ability to get you copies of this chapter so I will try to do so.

If you think it's better to find a new or used or new copy of the book there is a link below. Not that we need more books, but this one keeps things simple and concise.

The 10/20/30 is:

-10 powerpoint slides

-20 minutes of presentation time
-30 no font smaller than 30 points

At the end of regurgitating several opening pitches in the past which ineveitably lead to failure (example: I've always wanted to be an entrepreneur..." to "My goal is to build a world class company"), he recommends the following opening line: "This is what my company does......"

There's a lot more to this book than I am giving credit for - chapters include:

Venture Capital Law

Business Plans

The Art of Board Meetings

The Art of Blogging

Art of Customer Care, and on and on.

Here's a link from Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Reality-Check-Outsmarting-Outmanaging-Outmarketing/dp/B0020MMBA8/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239486528&sr=8-1

What steps in reseach are next?

We are still waiting for a response from Brett on whether we can contact professionals yet.

Welcome Dengi Group!

Here is a blog that we can post discussions and research links to. I looked at many options and this may be a great way to centralize our information results and discussions.

The login for this blog should be in your email accounts.

I will be collecting previous discussions and posting these as they happen.

Please add onto this discussion as comments.

Minutes from meeting on 4_08_2009

4_08_2009: Dengi Group Minutes
Minutes from meeting:
1) Dan was asking which of the projects we need to do?
2) Andre answered: We do both at the same time and on both projects. Dan asked they mentioned Google and other research tools to use. To what extent do we need to embark on those tools?
Dan has started working on the chlorine resistant membrane. Googling, etc. It appeared that there was already a license on the technology and a VC fund has started to do this research. It was also a Austin Venture fund.
Andre - said his understanding was that quicklooks will provide the format and understanding for that technology. Response was to wait until we get the quicklooks technology before asking the professors about their work.
Andre has tried to look at the list on which are team assignments and which are not. In June there are several team projects. The biggest deliverable is on June 18th, 2009. The 2 projects are due on June 26th and the 29th. Andre will be in Columbia the first 2 weeks in June but the weekends he will be available.
Katey asked: Is the tech transfer the same as the quicklooks? Andre - yes.
Assign lead for quicklook number 1 and 2.
7/15 assign.
Katey asked to leave members with 1 thing in particular. Conduct 4 interviews. Chris and Andre said no.
We agreed to wait until we have the quicklooks format complete before we contact specialists in the field.
Andre suggested taking the lead on a technology summary that is due on May 1st.
First Team Assignment:
On May 1st there is a deliverable, on May 1st there is an accounting deliverable and on May 18th is another deliverable.
Claudia, Dan and Katey will collect feedback from professors on assignment details today. They will send group feedback to Dengi group today.
Conclusion: Claudia, Dan and Katey will do the following:
1) Send an email to Vicki to find out what is due in terms of the first group assignment. Should we wait for quicklooks before contacting professors?
2) Asking about the format for this group paragraph.
3) Also asking whether we can attend those business plan presentations at the LBJ school on that weekend of Moot Court competitions.
Water Filter
Dan asked about the viability of the water filter. Dan suggested that talking to people who have operated water plants may not be a good idea. Chris also brought up other applications that we should look into.