The 10 Most Important Skills You’ll Need To Work In 2020 ᔥ

The 10 Most Important Skills You’ll Need To Work In 2020 Save Post



I don’t know why I find this so surprising, but 2020 is only 6 years away. That may not seem like a long time, but our society is constantly and rapidly transforming due to societal change, technological progress and increasing global connectivity. So, in just six years a lot of things that we regard as quite usual may be borderline extinct in just 6 years.

One particularly worrying aspect of this is which skills will be required in the working world by 2020? Fortunately, Top 10 Online Colleges have compiled a list of 10 skills that may be crucial in the next decade. So, maybe it’s a good idea to start developing these skills:

  • Sense making
  • Social intelligence
  • Novel and adaptive thinking
  • Cross-cultural competency
  • Computational thinking
  • New media literacy
  • Transdisciplinary
  • Design mindset
  • Cognitive load management
  • Virtual collaboration

Link to Original:

Esta semana en el Panorama Retail ᔥILACAD


- Las ventas de Walmex crecen pero las aperturas caen en 2014   
- Súper del Norte inauguró una nueva tienda y alcanzó las 46 en México   
- La cadena Súper del Norte cerró el 2013 con 42 tiendas
- La cadena Súper Gutierrez concluyó el 2013 con 15 tiendas
- La cadena Súper Kompras cerró el 2013 con 26 tiendas
- La red San Francisco de Asís cerró el 2013 con 46 tiendas
- Supermercados Santa Fe concluyó el 2013 con 86 tiendas
- El Grupo Zorro Abarrotero cerró el 2013 con casi 50 tiendas

Aquí el vínculo al artículo completo:

Como hacer una gráfica en illustrator


Como hacer una gráfica en illustrator

Originally posted on InfoGUAM:

How to Make a Graph in Adobe Illustrator


Done graph

You can use the vector-based software normally reserved for designers and artists to make and edit charts.

Most of us create graphs with actual graphing software. Maybe it’s Microsoft Excel. Maybe it’sR. Whatever it is though it’s usually specialized for analysis. What if you want to make a graphic for a publication or a presentation that’s polished and fully customized? Adobe Illustrator gives you the control you need to do this. It’s not graphing software. It’s illustration software, but once you get the hang of things, Adobe Illustrator can be a valuable tool in your visualization arsenal.

In the rest of this post, I’ll go over the steps to make the above graph in Illustrator. I used the U.S. immigration data from our recent contest.

View original 735 more words

Google Ventures On 8 Shortcuts For Better, Faster Design Research. Via:


One thing is certain: I’m more productive now than when I first started. I’m not any smarter (just ask my co-workers). I’m not working more hours. So what’s my secret? Shortcuts. In the interest of helping you do more faster (and to compel you to share your own tricks), here are my favorite ways to cut corners, save time, and be more efficient when doing research.

1. Start at the end: What questions do you want to answer? 
Before you do any work on a research study, clarify what you want to get out of it. For example, would it be most useful to figure out:

  • Can new customers understand and figure out how to use the product?
  • What are customers’ existing workflow and pain points?
  • What are pros/cons of competitive products?
  • What are customers’ attitudes?
  • How satisfied are existing customers with the product?
  • How does new customers’ usage change over time?
  • Which design performs better?

When you know which answers you’re after, it’s quicker to choose the most efficient way to find them–by picking an appropriate research method (survey, A/B test, literature review, usability interviews, site visits, etc.), and the right segment of customers to study.

2. Get feedback from customers early and often
Even if your product’s trajectory is off by a little, you could miss your target by a lot. It’s always easier to correct course earlier before you’ve strayed too far. Try a design sprint. Or just try these tips to learn more from your conversations with your users.

3. Check whether someone else has already done your research for you
Whether you’re curious about how teens use mobile video, or trying to decide whether to rely on keyboard shortcuts, use these tips for lean market research to dig up the results from someone else’s hard work and expertise.

4. Don’t read the (whole) book
For many business books, you can get the main points without reading the whole book. Search the web for a summary, review, or talk by the author (on YouTube or TED). Try Googling “summary of [book title].” Plenty of free and paid sites offer summaries of business books, including, and

5. Make re-usable templates
To reduce time it takes to recruit research participants, use templates for recruiting questionnaires and various confirmation emails. (Check out the worksheets and templates that accompany the video of theresearch workshop I’ve taught to GV portfolio companies.)

6. Create (and use!) good checklists
See this summary of The Checklist Manifesto or watch this five-videominute summary of Gawande’s book. Effective checklists have specific tasks with time estimates. Here’s my checklist for planning a scrappy round of usability interviews.

7. Assemble your kit (and keep your bag packed)
Gather everything you need to conduct customer interviews so you won’t waste time tracking things down before every study. I keep a small tote and camera bag ready to go with:

  • Audio recorder (and/or Livescribe pen)
  • Extra batteries
  • Notepad and pens
  • Webcam
  • USB hub
  • Mouse
  • Keyboard
  • Ziggi USB document camera
  • Adapter for plugging my laptop into a larger monitor
  • Video camera
  • Watch or small digital clock
  • Breath mints

I don’t use all of these things for every interview (except the mints!), but organizing it beforehand saves me a lot of time and frustration.

8. Compress interviews into one day
Try to schedule interviews and field visits as close together as possible. (For example, I regularly conduct five 60-minute interviews in one day.) This may not sound like a shortcut, but it actually helps avoid hours of reviewing notes and videos to figure out and communicate research findings–after several interviews in a row, the patterns and findings are usually pretty obvious. And because teams are more likely to watch interviews batched in a single day, you won’t need to spend time explaining (or arguing about) the results. You can always create a written summary or more detailed analysis if necessary.

I hope these shortcuts help you get better research results with less effort. What shortcuts do you take? Tweet me at @GVDesignTeam or@mmargolis.

Corporate Acquisitions of Startups: Why Do They Fail?


Steve Blank’s guidance is a must for any entrepreneurial or startup person. A must.

Originally posted on Steve Blank:

For decades large companies have gone shopping in Silicon Valley for startups. Lately the pressure of continuous disruption has forced them to step up the pace.

More often than not the results of these acquisitions are disappointing.

What can companies learn from others’ failed efforts to integrate startups into large companies? The answer – there are two types of integration strategies, and they depend on where the startup is in its lifecycle.

The Innovation Portfolio
Most large companies manage three types of innovation: process innovation (making existing products incrementally better), continuous innovation (building on the strength of the company’s current business model but creating new elements) and disruptive innovation (creating products or services that did not exist before.)

Companies manage these three types of innovation with an innovation portfolio – they build innovation internally, they buy it or they partner with resources outside their company.

innovation portfolioFive Types of Innovation to Buy
If they decide to buy…

View original 1,122 more words

First Things First Manifesto 2000. Via Emigre

Various authors

This manifesto was first published in 1999 in Emigre 51.
We, the undersigned, are graphic designers, art directors and visual communicators who have been raised in a world in which the techniques and apparatus of advertising have persistently been presented to us as the most lucrative, effective and desirable use of our talents. Many design teachers and mentors promote this belief; the market rewards it; a tide of books and publications reinforces it.
Encouraged in this direction, designers then apply their skill and imagination to sell dog biscuits, designer coffee, diamonds, detergents, hair gel, cigarettes, credit cards, sneakers, butt toners, light beer and heavy-duty recreational vehicles. Commercial work has always paid the bills, but many graphic designers have now let it become, in large measure, what graphic designers do. This, in turn, is how the world perceives design. The profession’s time and energy is used up manufacturing demand for things that are inessential at best.
Many of us have grown increasingly uncomfortable with this view of design. Designers who devote their efforts primarily to advertising, marketing and brand development are supporting, and implicitly endorsing, a mental environment so saturated with commercial messages that it is changing the very way citizen-consumers speak, think, feel, respond and interact. To some extent we are all helping draft a reductive and immeasurably harmful code of public discourse.
There are pursuits more worthy of our problem-solving skills. Unprecedented environmental, social and cultural crises demand our attention. Many cultural interventions, social marketing campaigns, books, magazines, exhibitions, educational tools, television programs, films, charitable causes and other information design projects urgently require our expertise and help.
We propose a reversal of priorities in favor of more useful, lasting and democratic forms of communication – a mindshift away from product marketing and toward the exploration and production of a new kind of meaning. The scope of debate is shrinking; it must expand. Consumerism is running uncontested; it must be challenged by other perspectives expressed, in part, through the visual languages and resources of design.
In 1964, 22 visual communicators signed the original call for our skills to be put to worthwhile use. With the explosive growth of global commercial culture, their message has only grown more urgent. Today, we renew their manifesto in expectation that no more decades will pass before it is taken to heart.
Jonathan Barnbrook
Nick Bell
Andrew Blauvelt
Hans Bockting
Irma Boom
Sheila Levrant de Bretteville
Max Bruinsma
Sian Cook
Linda van Deursen
Chris Dixon
William Drenttel
Gert Dumbar
Simon Esterson
Vince Frost
Ken Garland
Milton Glaser
Jessica Helfand
Steven Heller
Andrew Howard
Tibor Kalman
Jeffery Keedy
Zuzana Licko
Ellen Lupton
Katherine McCoy
Armand Mevis
J. Abbott Miller
Rick Poynor
Lucienne Roberts
Erik Spiekermann
Jan van Toorn
Teal Triggs
Rudy VanderLans
Bob Wilkinson

I may add myself to this. Federico Hernandez-Ruiz

Here’s the link to the original post:

And a copy of the 164 manifesto written by Ken Garland along with 20 other artists.


Sarah Soule: Why Design Thinking Is an Effective Tool for Social Entrepreneurs | Via SBGS

Wednesday, October 30, 2013


A Stanford scholar discusses a collaborative, human-centered approach to solving some of the world’s most pressing problems.

Six years ago, a team of students at Stanford University used a problem-solving method called design thinking to develop a simple, portable device — a sort of sleeping bag for newborns — that so far has helped 22,000 low-birth-weight babies around the world stay warm.

The Embrace Baby Warmer, which includes a phase-change material that maintains its temperature for six hours after heating, is an amazing innovation. Had it not been for a crucial shift in the way the students were thinking, the warmer might never have existed. Their story is highlighted in Creative Confidence, the new book by IDEO founder and Stanford creator David Kelley and his brother Tom Kelley, IDEO partner, about unleashing creativity.

Rahul Panicker, Jane Chen, Linus Liang and Naganand Murty had been building a low-cost incubator for their class project. But fieldwork in Nepal, where they had a chance to speak with families, showed them that incubators wouldn’t do any good. Low-birth-weight babies often develop fatal hypothermia in homes, many of which lack electricity. The students turned to a different goal, which they wrote on a whiteboard in their workspace at the Stanford How might we create a baby-warming device that helps parents in remote villages give their dying infants a chance to survive?

The students approached this challenge from the perspective of design thinking, a concept popular in the corporate world for the past decade or more to develop products — think Apple’s iPod and Herman Miller’s Aeron chair — that is now also being used in the world of social innovation.

What is design thinking? It’s a method of problem solving that is fundamentally different from other ways of meeting challenges because it is human-centered. The Stanford students made a crucial shift by focusing not on their own needs but on those of the people who would be using the solution.

Here’s an example of the way design thinking might work to improve nutrition and alleviate hunger among the most needy people in the United States. The methodology begins with an explicit attempt to deeply understand the person or people for whom we are designing a solution. Design thinkers start with a “designer” — an executive, an entrepreneur, or any team member — observing, interviewing, and engaging with people who might feasibly use the solution. So, we might begin by sending teams to work in food pantries and soup kitchens, where we can readily observe the way these services are used, and the way users make choices about what they eat and what they take home. We would pay close attention not only to the things they say and do, but also to their emotions and body language.

Design thinking involves an explicit attempt to engage with both typical and atypical users, so we develop a deeper understanding of how our solution will touch many types of users. Depending on the location of a food pantry and the organization running it, the typical user may be a homeless man in his mid-40s. But we would want to talk to and observe the behavior of atypical users, such as single mothers, elderly widowers, or employed fathers, to keep their needs in mind, as well.

The methodology also involves generating a great number of possible solutions. Ideally, our team of designers, with different backgrounds and training, has developed a deep understanding of the users and the problem. This team collectively brainstorms to generate many solutions. Some might seem impossible; we put them on the table, anyway.

The ambitious goal is to produce a solution that captures the hearts and minds of everyone on the team and the users of the solution.

Design thinking also stresses the need to rapidly prototype the solution so that the designers can get feedback as quickly as possible. In the case of the food pantry, perhaps we notice how many people seem ashamed or embarrassed about being in need. We might use this observation to design a program in which users volunteer at the food pantry; the program would allow them access to the food, while preserving their sense of dignity. We would speedily try the program at the pantry.

Finally, design thinking requires testing of the prototype. Once we have received some quick feedback on our program, we would brainstorm again so that we can refine the prototype, or develop an entirely new one, and then seek more feedback. All along the way, we willingly throw our notions out the window and readjust our thinking again and again if our first ideas prove weak.

Design thinking can be a particularly valuable tool for social entrepreneurs. Sometimes, our passion is wasted on ideas that, for reasons that may never be entirely clear to any of us, wither away. The obstacles to adoption may be too high, the end user may not fully understand the solution, or the problem may have been wrongly framed in the first place. Design thinking offers a way to discover the right problem and a way to overcome the obstacles to adoption before the solution is final.

Solutions, whether they are products, services, processes or teams, that have come about through design thinking are more likely to be adopted quickly, because they have been created with the end users in mind. When it comes to social problems, time is of the essence. Take the case of the baby warmers: 20 million low-birth-weight babies are born every year; 450 die every hour.

Design thinking is not easy. It requires constant creativity and the willingness to adapt on the fly. Even people who have been practicing design thinking for years need the rigor of the process.

The human-centered focus, and the rigor and creativity required to maintain that focus over the entire course of the work, sets design thinking apart from other methods of problem solving. In the hands of social entrepreneurs, design thinking offers a better chance to solve the world’s most pressing problems.

Sarah A. Soule is the Morgridge Professor of Organizational Behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business. She is a member of the board of advisors to the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design (the Stanford Fellowship program and this spring will direct the Executive Program in Social Entrepreneurship, which will have a substantial design thinking component.

Sarah Soule
Link to original source: