Smart appliances in network. Concept for Internet of Things.

Reassessing the Internet of Things

The first companies to master the Internet of Things will lock in significant advantages and be far ahead of competitors.

Martin Neil Baily | Brookings Institution

James Manyinka | McKinsey Global Institute

Martin Neil Baily

Martin Neil Baily

Businesses were buying tens of millions of computers every year, and Microsoft had just gone public, netting Bill Gates his first billion.

And yet, in what came to be known as the productivity paradox, national statistics showed that not only was productivity growth not accelerating; it was actually slowing down.

“You can see the computer age everywhere,” quipped Solow, “but in the productivity statistics.”

James Manyika

James Manyika

Today, we seem to be at a similar historical moment with a new innovation: the much-hyped Internet of Things – the linking of machines and objects to digital networks.

Sensors, tags, and other connected gadgets mean that the physical world can now be digitized, monitored, measured, and optimized. As with computers before, the possibilities seem endless, the predictions have been extravagant – and the data have yet to show a surge in productivity.

[Also on Longitudes: Technologies that will Change the World by 2020]

The Productivity Paradox 

A year ago, research firm Gartner put the Internet of Things at the peak of its Hype Cycle of emerging technologies.

Pullquote share icon. Share

Sensors, tags and other connected gadgets mean that the physical world can now be digitized, monitored, measured and optimized.

As more doubts about the Internet of Things productivity revolution are voiced, it is useful to recall what happened when Solow and Roach identified the original computer productivity paradox.

For starters, it is important to note that business leaders largely ignored the productivity paradox, insisting that they were seeing improvements in the quality and speed of operations and decision-making.

Investment in information and communications technology continued to grow, even in the absence of macroeconomic proof of its returns. That turned out to be the right response.

By the late 1990s, the economists Erik Brynjolfsson and Lorin Hitt had disproved the productivity paradox, uncovering problems in the way service-sector productivity was measured and, more important, noting that there was generally a long lag between technology investments and productivity gains.

Our own research at the time found a large jump in productivity in the late 1990s, driven largely by efficiencies made possible by earlier investments in information technology. These gains were visible in several sectors, including retail, wholesale trade, financial services, and the computer industry itself.

The greatest productivity improvements were not the result of information technology on its own, but by its combination with process changes and organizational and managerial innovations.

Our latest research, The Internet of Things: Mapping the Value Beyond the Hype, indicates that a similar cycle could repeat itself.

We predict that as the Internet of Things transforms factories, homes, and cities, it will yield greater economic value than even the hype suggests.

By 2025, according to our estimates, the economic impact will reach $3.9-$11.1 trillion per year, equivalent to roughly 11% of world GDP.

In the meantime, however, we are likely to see another productivity paradox; the gains from changes in the way businesses operate will take time to be detected at the macroeconomic level.

[Also on Longitudes: The Connected Business of the Future]

Productivity Hurdles

Pullquote share icon. Share

As the Internet of Things transforms factories, homes and cities, it will yield greater economic value than the hype suggests.

One major factor likely to delay the productivity payoff will be the need to achieve interoperability.

Sensors on cars can deliver immediate gains by monitoring the engine, cutting maintenance costs, and extending the life of the vehicle.

But even greater gains can be made by connecting the sensors to traffic monitoring systems, thereby cutting travel time for thousands of motorists, saving energy, and reducing pollution.

However, this will first require auto manufacturers, transit operators, and engineers to collaborate on traffic-management technologies and protocols.

Indeed, we estimate that 40% of the potential economic value of the Internet of Things will depend on interoperability.

Yet some of the basic building blocks for interoperability are still missing. Two-thirds of the things that could be connected do not use standard Internet Protocol networks.

Other barriers standing in the way of capturing the full potential of the Internet of Things include the need for privacy and security protections and long investment cycles in areas such as infrastructure, where it could take many years to retrofit legacy assets.

The cybersecurity challenges are particularly vexing, as the Internet of Things increases the opportunities for attack and amplifies the consequences of any breach.

But, as in the 1980s, the biggest hurdles for achieving the full potential of the new technology will be organizational.

Some of the productivity gains from the Internet of Things will result from the use of data to guide changes in processes and develop new business models.

Today, little of the data being collected by the Internet of Things is being used, and it is being applied only in basic ways – detecting anomalies in the performance of machines, for example.

It could be a while before such data are routinely used to optimize processes, make predictions, or inform decision-making – the uses that lead to efficiencies and innovations. But it will happen.

And, just as with the adoption of information technology, the first companies to master the Internet of Things are likely to lock in significant advantages, putting them far ahead of competitors by the time the significance of the change is obvious to everyone. goldbrown2

This article first appeared on Project Syndicate.

616fab7cf35207a21e1a2a96561e3e22.square
Martin Neil Baily is Bernard L. Schwartz Chair in Economic Policy Development at the Brookings Institution.

Click the RSS icon to subscribe to future articles by this author. RSS Feed

Picture1
James Manyinka is a non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, is a director of McKinsey and the McKinsey Global Institute.

Click the RSS icon to subscribe to future articles by this author. RSS Feed

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s