A good business is actualy that one with a general strategy that usually intend to keep the objective focused and goals attainable at a time.There are some ways in which everyone look at his or her own business,and this perhaps determine the choices of any process of the business.

As  Enterprenuer,CEO, or managers of any business,there are some ways which you are automatic come into process with them,without to heed which position you have in your company,sice they are related to each other.The actions that determine the strenth of your strategies are as follows:

Production;wheather you are service or commodity based,you must set some general strategies of your production which favour creativity and development standards of service or commodity.You have to look at the strategy which are connected with rawmaterials and people resources with desirable knowldge.

Marketing;The general business strategies can be indepth fetched in selling and customer relationship since they include huge number of activities and processes in taking the product to customers.This should be associated with key persons,allowing creativity and information sharing friendly in a way that is  favorable.

Financials;one among the themes of doing business is maintaining the flow of money in and out of business.If the business will be making profits;that shall be a good chance to ensure another achives of the business interms of resources that can lead into the increase in the productions and market of the busines.

By reviewing the above parts of your business in relation to type of service or products as well as business environment,an enterprenuer will be able to take a summery of the strategy of his own business.Now the strategies can be documented in simple form to be excuted.Eventhough as business owners we have a lot of things to do,but strategy is an important tool to way the business success.The summary can be reviewed seasonaly,if some parts seen they are not workig good.

PS:We can now share comments on this methods and questions if posible.

An idled program for vehicles driven by fuel cells is gaining new impetus from new programs at the U.S. Department of EnergyIn its push for putting zero-emission cars on the road, the Department of Energy is launching new programs to study the infrastructure needed to run vehicles on hydrogen.

"Recently, there's a renewed focus on getting these technologies out on the road and into the hands of consumers," said Daniel Dedrick, hydrogen and fuel cell program manager at Sandia National Laboratories.

Last week, Sandia signed a five-year memorandum of understanding with private research firm SRI International to collaborate on testing alternative fuels like natural gas and hydrogen in vehicles, breaking ground on a new testing facility called the Center for Infrastructure Research and Innovation (CIRI).

Two weeks earlier, DOE announced a public-private program called H2USA aimed at getting government researchers to work with automakers to bring cheap hydrogen to the masses.

Though battery-electric cars have lately driven fuel cells out of the spotlight, some technical advances in these systems have drawn more attention from manufactures like Ford and General Motors. "We've reduced the costs of fuel cells by more than 80 percent in the past decade," said Sunita Satyapal, director of the fuel cell technologies office in the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office at DOE.

Much of the cost savings came from using less platinum, a precious metal catalyst that helps pull electrons off hydrogen gas to generate an electric current. Current fuel cell designs use one-fifth of the platinum needed in their predecessors.

How do you deliver hydrogen?
On the fuel side, the boom in cheap natural gas has lowered the cost of hydrogen. Methane, the major component of natural gas, can form hydrogen via a process called steam reforming. "With natural gas, hydrogen can be competitive with gasoline," Satyapal said.

Vehicles running on hydrogen have also proved durable, with DOE's test fleet logging 3.5 million miles on the road, collecting performance data to refine future designs.

That leaves infrastructure as the missing link. Unlike with an electric car, most people won't fill their fuel-cell-powered cars in their garages, and corner gas stations aren't likely to add hydrogen pumps anytime soon.

"Refueling stations are more costly to build and operate than you would like," Dedrick said. "A lot of the challenge has to do with the uncertainty in the performance of these systems."

With gasoline, engineers have more than a century of experience extracting, refining, transporting and burning it. Hydrogen is still largely uncharted territory, and without a body of knowledge to draw on, engineers often end up over-designing fuel stations with stronger storage tanks and faster pumps than they would actually need, Dedrick explained.

"It ends up adding costs to the deployed infrastructure," he said.

Getting competitive with gasoline
The CIRI facility, in California's Livermore Valley, aims to resolve these issues. Intended as a collaboration facility, CIRI will provide a suite of tools to researchers and automakers, including a hydrogen fueling station.

The site also hosts other clean energy laboratories, and Dedrick expects to create a miniature fuel cell ecosystem, studying questions from how to generate hydrogen from renewable energy to how to integrate fueling stations into the electric grid.

The goal is to bring down the price of individual fueling stations rather than counting on economies of scale to incrementally drive down costs. By partnering with private companies, DOE hopes to speed up the process of getting research and development out into the real world. "I think in general, this is exactly the type of activity that lends itself to a public-private partnership," Satyapal said.

-Scientific American

This article was written by Mickey M.President and CEO at MAYA Design, Inc.

As the pervasive computing era comes into focus (trillions of computing devices connected to each other and to us), it’s clear that connectivity has the potential to crystallize a world-changing transition in the economics at the base of the pyramid. The “base of the pyramid” (BoP)—sometimes called “the bottom billion” or “the next billion”—describes the more than 4 billion people around the world who live on less than $2.50 a day.

We have no shortage of agile, creative and smart people in the world. By definition the current generation of humans, even in the poorest of villages, represents the culmination of millions of years of survival of the fittest. We are here because we are survivors. But just as the lack of flowing water can drive a population to extinction, the lack of information flow in a population deprives us all of their precious brains and creative passions. We are literally sitting on a wellspring of innovation, and in an age of exponential, malignant complexity we can't afford to leave those innovators, that might have been born in a base of the pyramid village, to die of thirst.

However, connectivity alone, while necessary is not sufficient. Just as liquid flowing through a rocky, porous, inhospitable and arid landscape will soon evaporate and leave us with little more than the residue of its passing, connectivity without a higher-order capacity for emergence and scale won’t transform BoP communities.

So, what’s missing? Call it "Generativity." It’s a pattern of beautiful rather than malignant complexity and it’s most recognizable in nature.

Malignant complexity

Imagine that we give everyone a playing card and ask them to join the great flow of construction on our palace of cards. Each person painstakingly invests time and energy artfully placing their cards on the palace. It starts with two cards leaning against each other in a simple way. But soon things get more complex. Some people build round rooms, others build steeples… soon a grand cathedral rises from our construction site. We stand proud of the collective ability of our innovators. But the joy is fleeting. A breeze ruffles the edges, and soon a wind picks up. The palace crashes down around us in a cascade of destruction. While it became ever more complex in scale and design, a lurking danger reared its ugly head. It goes by the name of malignant complexity.

Now imagine a slightly different scenario. What if everyone were given a Lego piece? The flow of parts soon leads to a grand construction. This time arches and domes bubble up out of the creative crowd. Innovations follow on innovations. Someone notices that the Lego framework is really just based on a connector made of one or more bumps that fit into corresponding sockets. Soon people are inventing new kinds of Legos that can bridge gaps. Others make clear versions to shed light on the construction, still others make custom versions that look like people but still have a bump on the top of the head and sockets for feet. People make shingle Legos, others make snap on wheels and axles and soon an entire city with vehicles rises up out of the flow of people and blocks.

Both of these scenarios were about connectivity, and both fostered the flow of value and invention. But one of them was malignant and tended towards catastrophic failure, while the other was beautiful in its complexity.

Beautiful Complexity

That same kind of beautiful complexity can be seen in Nature, where we find atoms that make up molecules that make up cells that make up organs that make up systems that make up life on Earth. This is a generative pattern—of process rather than form. It’s the capacity of a framework or system to foster emergence by adhering to a set of simple rules (atoms make up molecules, sockets fit into plugs, etc.).

What we'll need is not only "connectivity for all" as a right to be a part of the information flow, but also a way to cultivate new value out of the information flow.

Emerging Design Centers

Imagine if an inventor in a small village was given access to a generative framework. First, we’d help them learn the literacy of human-centered innovation, that way the inventor can sharpen their idea with a focus on bubbling up unmet or unvoiced needs. Second, we’d supply them with a way to "rip" the real world into bits and give them “Internet of Everything” authoring tools" that embed economics directly into the fabric of every design. Helping inventors from anywhere and any economic basis find and reward value in the intellectual efforts they make will be critical. Third we’d give them connectivity and a worldwide community of billions of other people. And fourth—and this one can be done in steps starting by repurposing the existing abundance of smart phones and other connected devices that flood the shores—we refactor the building blocks of manufacturing and computing into basic components that compute, store, sense, connect, and assemble. All this combined with a way to source local materials and fabrication resources sets the stage for a sort of "Emerging Design Center"seedling that can be planted in the village. Further, if done right, it could be the beginning of an "information carbon cycle" that fuels the age of Trillions.

The inventor could solve a problem. It could be assembled from those bins of refactored computing “raw material.” Maybe the product or service is built out of some bamboo and twine, maybe some computation and storage, maybe some sort of package that is 3D printed out of sand from the desert.

Those raw materials may be information devices that are sometimes hardware sometimes software. Call them "infotrons." [Aside: isn't it odd that this far into the information age we still have no word for information devices that consume power and perform work?] Think of these infotrons as fungible (economics speak for interchangeable) so they might start out as software but if someone can make a better one out of hardware it can just be swapped out. They are named, just as other elementary particles are, and have the same emergent properties as neutrons, electrons, and protons that come together to make molecules.

Back to our villager. She could make her product in her village fab lab from local materials and spare infotrons. It might start out hand made, and as she grows her business she may build in some 4D assembly to streamline manufacturing. Then she could publish the recipe as part of a worldwide "internet of manufacturing" information commons. Think of it as a physical "app store" combined with an ever growing "how things work" encyclopedia.

If a villager on the other side of the planet needs a similar solution he can download the recipe, use the substitution matrix to figure out what local materials and infotrons can be used to fab it, and start selling it on the other side of the world. Because this is a generative system, the original inventor gets a small royalty for her work. If the derivative work gets used to build something more rich and complex, both the original inventor and the one who built on top of it share value. These might be fractions of a penny for bits of capability. But just about anything multiplied by a trillion turns into a big number. Let’s call that “T-commerce.” It wouldn't be surprising if a developed economy stumbles on this sort of innovation, done under extreme constraints by smart villagers, and turns it into a billion dollar line of business (see the bookReverse Innovation for examples of the promise of this approach).

Through connectivity coupled with a generative framework of atoms and bits, that original villager soon has investment capital to uplift her community.

While developing economies may not have much in the way of tangible produced and exportable goods in the classic sense, every person, every community, every country is awash in insights from their natural human resources. Now if we could just harness that energy to power the turbines of T-commerce...