Another point of view on America’s Slow Acceptance of Technology

I’m just catching up on my reading and caught an article in the May issue of the IPI’s Parking Professional. Good ole Charlie Munn was holding forth on America being slow to adopt technology. Now, with that, I agree. Folks who travel will know that other countries adopt new technology quickly, from smart cards to cell phones, from ATM’s to WIFI technology, we are usually years behind.

My disagreement comes with the reasons listed by the many experts Charlie quotes in the article. Most have to do with how companies decide on technology (group think vs single decision maker), American’s difficulty with change, fear of change in decision makers,,,,

I was struck that a couple of obvious reasons didn’t make it past the editor.

First — scale. America is huge. You could put all of the UK inside of California. There are literally thousands of banks in the US, only about a dozen in the UK.  When making technology and interface decisions, the UK has a meeting of 12 people, the US must get 1000 to agree. This issue goes on in virtually every industry.

Second — cost of labor.  Labor costs have historically been very inexpensive here in the US as compared with Europe. They looked to invest in Pay on Foot equipment because it saved on labor. Its only been in the past decade that labor costs in the US have risen to the point that it makes economic sense to put in automatic equipment.  This is true of ATMS, Gas Stations, and grocery stores.

Third – infrastructure — The phone system simply doesn’t work in Europe. Never has. So they were quick to adopt cellular technology to replace a crumbling system. People embraced cell phones but they were expensive to use so ever popular and cheap "texting" replaced many calls.  This use of text messages led quickly to the use of phones for other purposes than "just calling."  Competition has made cell calling inexpensive here in the US. The use of phones for text messages, payment means and other purposes is only just catching on (if you are over 18 years old). Once again, economics was one of the driving forces.

Fourth — Distance. Simply put — if you make it in India, and you want to sell it here, and your nearest office is Mumbai, I’m skeptical. Long support lines aren’t fun. When a company tries to promote a technology from afar, no matter how well it works, experience tells me that frankly it will be a few years before the support structure is in place. Its great to make something work 50 miles from the factory. Try again when you are 10,000 miles away.

A comment on "Pilot programs." The article seems frustrated with cities and universities that run "pilot programs" to see what kind of product works and what doesn’t. It seems to believe that technology is "settled" and that customers should just buy based on the experience of others.

I beg to differ.  Pay and Display, for instance, is not a settled technology. In fact, many think its a bridge technology, that is filling in until something better comes along (Pay by cell, perhaps). The question goes to should one buy Pay and Display or Pay by Space — there are good arguments for either. How well does it work? There are perhaps 10 vendors of P and D/S equipment and I can give names of five customers of each that love them, and five of each that hate them. Settled technology?  Balderdash.

Once again there is scale to consider. New York or Chicago or Denver or Seattle or San Francisco or Houston or Los Angeles (all of whom ran ‘pilot programs’ ) had a lot resting on the decision. Million of dollars of hardware and software and a long commitment.  These are decisions that can’t be taken lightly. One small mistake and it could cost big money, and jobs.

"Where is it already working?"  This seemed to be a big concern of those quoted in the article — IE Americans don’t want to be the ones to lead the way. Someone else has to be the beta site. Once again, these people haven’t brought a new technology anywhere. Twenty five years ago I brought a new technology to Britain and we had to literally give it away to a couple of sites to prove it worked.  That’s just part of marketing, and good practice on the part of consumers who have been burned by "new technology" before.

This caution doesn’t seem unique to America to me.

This is so much fun and easy.  I tell people all the time its much easier to criticize than it is to create. However I do think that from time to time poor old technology starved Americans need a bit of support.

JVH