<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for ResearchTalk</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt</link>
	<description>DATA-DRIVEN INSPIRATION</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:27:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on How Stuff Spreads by How stuff spreads &#171; Tipping Points</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/27/how-stuff-spreads/comment-page-1/#comment-15046</link>
		<dc:creator>How stuff spreads &#171; Tipping Points</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:27:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=802#comment-15046</guid>
		<description>[...] talks part of the series can be found here: http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/27/how-stuff-spreads/ Tagged: metaphor, science, social network, social trend Posted in: Culture, Metaphor, Tipping [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] talks part of the series can be found here: <a href="http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/27/how-stuff-spreads/" rel="nofollow">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/27/how-stuff-spreads/</a> Tagged: metaphor, science, social network, social trend Posted in: Culture, Metaphor, Tipping [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What would you like to see an invention for? by ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/25/what-would-you-like-to-see-an-invention-for/comment-page-1/#comment-14972</link>
		<dc:creator>ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 22:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=763#comment-14972</guid>
		<description>Or BBC&#039;s Genius :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or BBC&#8217;s Genius <img src='http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Can Crowds Out-analyse Researchers? by Crowdsourcing data analysis &#124; Kathrin Maass</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/10/05/can-crowds-out-analyse-researchers/comment-page-1/#comment-14967</link>
		<dc:creator>Crowdsourcing data analysis &#124; Kathrin Maass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 19:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=774#comment-14967</guid>
		<description>[...]  Bestimmte Rechte vorbehalten von hddod Notes:Research Talk (2010), Can Crwods Out-Analyse Researchers &#8617;       If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!            [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  Bestimmte Rechte vorbehalten von hddod Notes:Research Talk (2010), Can Crwods Out-Analyse Researchers &#8617;       If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!            [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What would you like to see an invention for? by Simon</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/25/what-would-you-like-to-see-an-invention-for/comment-page-1/#comment-14965</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 23:18:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=763#comment-14965</guid>
		<description>This has Dragon&#039;s Den written all over it</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This has Dragon&#8217;s Den written all over it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Stuff Spreads by How stuff spreads &#124; Kathrin Maass</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/09/27/how-stuff-spreads/comment-page-1/#comment-14918</link>
		<dc:creator>How stuff spreads &#124; Kathrin Maass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=802#comment-14918</guid>
		<description>[...] Reserachtalk.        If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!            [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Reserachtalk.        If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!            [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Daniel Pink &#8211; Drive &#8211; The Animation by Kate Nasser, The People-Skills Coach</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/04/08/daniel-pink-drive-the-animation/comment-page-1/#comment-14744</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate Nasser, The People-Skills Coach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=614#comment-14744</guid>
		<description>Dear Dan,
I have found your work intriguing for quite a few years. This post on motivation and rewards **is transformational in many ways.  You have presented data that businesses may not know, given examples of how that data is supported in real life beyond the statistics, and inferred the potential for our economy and yes, the future of the world.

A great deal of my work is with customer care, customer service, call centers, and technical support service centers. The people in those jobs are stifled by their employers with too much procedure and brand control that has them  reading scripts and detaching from the customer instead of using their intelligence, natural caring, and sense of purpose to connect and help the customer.  Would love to see the &quot;24 hour autonomy&quot; once a month idea you talk about hear applied to service centers to see the results!

Thanks for your very valuable post.  I will RT this on Twitter to continue to spread the word (as have others) and look forward to your future posts on related topics.

Kate Nasser, The People-Skills Coach</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Dan,<br />
I have found your work intriguing for quite a few years. This post on motivation and rewards **is transformational in many ways.  You have presented data that businesses may not know, given examples of how that data is supported in real life beyond the statistics, and inferred the potential for our economy and yes, the future of the world.</p>
<p>A great deal of my work is with customer care, customer service, call centers, and technical support service centers. The people in those jobs are stifled by their employers with too much procedure and brand control that has them  reading scripts and detaching from the customer instead of using their intelligence, natural caring, and sense of purpose to connect and help the customer.  Would love to see the &#8220;24 hour autonomy&#8221; once a month idea you talk about hear applied to service centers to see the results!</p>
<p>Thanks for your very valuable post.  I will RT this on Twitter to continue to spread the word (as have others) and look forward to your future posts on related topics.</p>
<p>Kate Nasser, The People-Skills Coach</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Stakeholder Research goes Social by Media Hub &#187; John Griffiths Show</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/04/01/stakeholder-research-goes-social/comment-page-1/#comment-14593</link>
		<dc:creator>Media Hub &#187; John Griffiths Show</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:26:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=554#comment-14593</guid>
		<description>[...] Read more and listen to the podcast [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Read more and listen to the podcast [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mobile Research Conference 2010 (1/2) by There&#8217;s a Better Way to Create a Good Customer Experience - ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/03/16/mobile-research-conference-2010-p11/comment-page-1/#comment-13934</link>
		<dc:creator>There&#8217;s a Better Way to Create a Good Customer Experience - ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 15:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=452#comment-13934</guid>
		<description>[...] blog more with some things that caught our eye. But first, in what&#8217;s becoming a tradition, here&#8217;s a wrap-up chat with three fellow delegates in which we talk highlights, learnings, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] blog more with some things that caught our eye. But first, in what&#8217;s becoming a tradition, here&#8217;s a wrap-up chat with three fellow delegates in which we talk highlights, learnings, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ARF Re:think &#8216;10: The Science of Predicting Virality by ARF Re:Think &#8216;10: Welcome to the Future - ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/03/26/arf-rethink-10-the-science-of-predicting-virality/comment-page-1/#comment-13086</link>
		<dc:creator>ARF Re:Think &#8216;10: Welcome to the Future - ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:45:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=543#comment-13086</guid>
		<description>[...] Conquest Research&#8217;s David Penn on his new tool for predicting the virality of communications Listen here [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Conquest Research&#8217;s David Penn on his new tool for predicting the virality of communications Listen here [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ARF Re:think ‘10: Chief of Culture by ARF Re:Think &#8216;10: Welcome to the Future - ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/03/26/arf-rethink-%e2%80%9810-chief-of-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-13085</link>
		<dc:creator>ARF Re:Think &#8216;10: Welcome to the Future - ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=538#comment-13085</guid>
		<description>[...] Anthropologist Grant McCracken on why companies can&#8217;t afford to continue without a Chief Culture Officer Listen here [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Anthropologist Grant McCracken on why companies can&#8217;t afford to continue without a Chief Culture Officer Listen here [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ARF Re:think &#8216;10: Blended Media by ARF Re:Think &#8216;10: Welcome to the Future - ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/03/26/arf-rethink-10-blended-media/comment-page-1/#comment-13084</link>
		<dc:creator>ARF Re:Think &#8216;10: Welcome to the Future - ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:50:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=532#comment-13084</guid>
		<description>[...] Nielsen&#8217;s Pete Blackshaw on a new algorithm for measuring &#8216;blended media&#8217; (paid + earned media) Listen here [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nielsen&#8217;s Pete Blackshaw on a new algorithm for measuring &#8216;blended media&#8217; (paid + earned media) Listen here [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mobile Research Conference 2010 (1/2) by Mobile Research Conference 2010 (2/2) - ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/03/16/mobile-research-conference-2010-p11/comment-page-1/#comment-13001</link>
		<dc:creator>Mobile Research Conference 2010 (2/2) - ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=452#comment-13001</guid>
		<description>[...] here for the introductory [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] here for the introductory [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on NOT The Andy Griffiths Show by mike cooke</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2010/03/02/not-the-andy-griffiths-show/comment-page-1/#comment-12879</link>
		<dc:creator>mike cooke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=424#comment-12879</guid>
		<description>Nice one guys. good luck with this enterprise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice one guys. good luck with this enterprise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Was I wrong about quallies? by Simon Riley</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/11/11/was-i-wrong-about-quallies/comment-page-1/#comment-12515</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Riley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:42:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=415#comment-12515</guid>
		<description>Hmm, you say &quot;... a company that infuses deep and rich qualitative understanding into a scale business ... would be the ultimate research company. And it’s the ambition of a number of companies I know of. None of which do any significant level of traditional qual.&quot;
Ipsos, where I work in the UK qual team Ipsos MORI Hothouse, has a huge global qual business and has done for a long time. A lot of this involves working collaboratively with quant colleagues and indeed other professionals like design agencies. And we have hybrid qual-quant techniques coming out of our ears.
My view is that there has been a paradigm shift within the wider culture towards recognition and use of qualitative &#039;whole brain&#039; ways of thinking and away from pure reliance on &#039;rational&#039;, &#039;left brain&#039; approaches. Why wouldn&#039;t you take account of all available evidence before making a decision?  Clients are more wise to this than some &#039;traditional&#039; quant people (though hopefully there aren&#039;t many of those in Ipsos these days!). 
But I agree that qual people may lack ambition to build big companies. We&#039;re just not those kind of people. Happy to discuss why if anyone&#039;s interested!
Simon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm, you say &#8220;&#8230; a company that infuses deep and rich qualitative understanding into a scale business &#8230; would be the ultimate research company. And it’s the ambition of a number of companies I know of. None of which do any significant level of traditional qual.&#8221;<br />
Ipsos, where I work in the UK qual team Ipsos MORI Hothouse, has a huge global qual business and has done for a long time. A lot of this involves working collaboratively with quant colleagues and indeed other professionals like design agencies. And we have hybrid qual-quant techniques coming out of our ears.<br />
My view is that there has been a paradigm shift within the wider culture towards recognition and use of qualitative &#8216;whole brain&#8217; ways of thinking and away from pure reliance on &#8216;rational&#8217;, &#8216;left brain&#8217; approaches. Why wouldn&#8217;t you take account of all available evidence before making a decision?  Clients are more wise to this than some &#8216;traditional&#8217; quant people (though hopefully there aren&#8217;t many of those in Ipsos these days!).<br />
But I agree that qual people may lack ambition to build big companies. We&#8217;re just not those kind of people. Happy to discuss why if anyone&#8217;s interested!<br />
Simon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ray Kurzweil: Mr Prescient by mike</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/10/02/ray-kurzweil-mr-precient/comment-page-1/#comment-12404</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2010 03:57:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=385#comment-12404</guid>
		<description>Dear Sir,

We owe you great deal for your exc. work and contribution
to the mankind.  
How I wish there are more people like you in this world.

I sincerely appreciate your contribution to this world.

Sincerely,

mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Sir,</p>
<p>We owe you great deal for your exc. work and contribution<br />
to the mankind.<br />
How I wish there are more people like you in this world.</p>
<p>I sincerely appreciate your contribution to this world.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Was I wrong about quallies? by Ray Poynter</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/11/11/was-i-wrong-about-quallies/comment-page-1/#comment-12263</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Poynter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:04:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=415#comment-12263</guid>
		<description>Hi Surinder
I think one of the key points is about scale. Communities are beginning to show already they have scale, take a look at the revenues and the growth.

My definition of qual (something I am still working on) is roughly
a) if it is a process that when two trained practictioners use the same technique, with the same tools and assumptions produce the same answers, then it is quant - i.e. it derives its value from the data
b) If a is not true, but it is based on a proper methodology and approach, it is qual, the result is based on the data and the interpretation of the researcher
c) if it is not a) or b) it is meta physics and should be put to one side.

Quant can be scaled up, the people can be replaced with other trained individuals.

Qual is harder to scale because the best people can leave and form a new company. If you look at the history of great qual companies (The Research Business and Leapfrog for example) this is how they started.

The fact that there are no billion dollar qual companies is a function of qual, not of quallies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Surinder<br />
I think one of the key points is about scale. Communities are beginning to show already they have scale, take a look at the revenues and the growth.</p>
<p>My definition of qual (something I am still working on) is roughly<br />
a) if it is a process that when two trained practictioners use the same technique, with the same tools and assumptions produce the same answers, then it is quant &#8211; i.e. it derives its value from the data<br />
b) If a is not true, but it is based on a proper methodology and approach, it is qual, the result is based on the data and the interpretation of the researcher<br />
c) if it is not a) or b) it is meta physics and should be put to one side.</p>
<p>Quant can be scaled up, the people can be replaced with other trained individuals.</p>
<p>Qual is harder to scale because the best people can leave and form a new company. If you look at the history of great qual companies (The Research Business and Leapfrog for example) this is how they started.</p>
<p>The fact that there are no billion dollar qual companies is a function of qual, not of quallies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Faris Yakob: Be Nice or Leave! by On the up &#171; Monkey Logic</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/07/06/faris-yakob-be-nice-or-leave/comment-page-1/#comment-12253</link>
		<dc:creator>On the up &#171; Monkey Logic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:36:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=260#comment-12253</guid>
		<description>[...] saw a very interesting video today. You can see it here: http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/07/06/faris-yakob-be-nice-or-leave/. Faris Yakob, on the odd chance that you&#8217;re reading this, I love your hair. Also, thank you. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] saw a very interesting video today. You can see it here: <a href="http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/07/06/faris-yakob-be-nice-or-leave/" rel="nofollow">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/07/06/faris-yakob-be-nice-or-leave/</a>. Faris Yakob, on the odd chance that you&#8217;re reading this, I love your hair. Also, thank you. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Was I wrong about quallies? by ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/11/11/was-i-wrong-about-quallies/comment-page-1/#comment-12215</link>
		<dc:creator>ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=415#comment-12215</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Dan :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Dan <img src='http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Was I wrong about quallies? by Dan O'Donoghue</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/11/11/was-i-wrong-about-quallies/comment-page-1/#comment-12214</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan O'Donoghue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:52:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=415#comment-12214</guid>
		<description>Hi Surinder,

I think that you are more than correct. Quallies are either entirely based on the central importance of their own brain or trying to build systems based on &#039;client service&#039; which are essentially &#039;client flattery&#039;. Neither of these are going to lead to growth although the &#039;client flattery&#039; model is growing fast.

Best,

Dan
(Worldwide Strategic Planning Director, Publicis)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Surinder,</p>
<p>I think that you are more than correct. Quallies are either entirely based on the central importance of their own brain or trying to build systems based on &#8216;client service&#8217; which are essentially &#8216;client flattery&#8217;. Neither of these are going to lead to growth although the &#8216;client flattery&#8217; model is growing fast.</p>
<p>Best,</p>
<p>Dan<br />
(Worldwide Strategic Planning Director, Publicis)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Was I wrong about quallies? by ResearchTalk</title>
		<link>http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/2009/11/11/was-i-wrong-about-quallies/comment-page-1/#comment-12212</link>
		<dc:creator>ResearchTalk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.researchtalk.co.uk/rt/?p=415#comment-12212</guid>
		<description>Hey Steve,

Good points, as usual.

I haven&#039;t really got my head around communities. And I say that because I haven&#039;t seen evidence that they can scale through technology. And that&#039;s what I&#039;m keen on - using technology, rather than people, to scale these operations. Digital is on the fast track of evolution, not analogue.

And don&#039;t get me wrong, I&#039;m not saying the quant. industry has it right. In fact it&#039;s because there&#039;s so much scope for improvement, and increasing recognition of this, that folks there seem increasingly motivated to experiment. I don&#039;t see the same compelling mindset among quallies. Spring/MESH are among the exceptions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Steve,</p>
<p>Good points, as usual.</p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t really got my head around communities. And I say that because I haven&#8217;t seen evidence that they can scale through technology. And that&#8217;s what I&#8217;m keen on &#8211; using technology, rather than people, to scale these operations. Digital is on the fast track of evolution, not analogue.</p>
<p>And don&#8217;t get me wrong, I&#8217;m not saying the quant. industry has it right. In fact it&#8217;s because there&#8217;s so much scope for improvement, and increasing recognition of this, that folks there seem increasingly motivated to experiment. I don&#8217;t see the same compelling mindset among quallies. Spring/MESH are among the exceptions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

