Group items tagged

Technology Congestion is a not a recent phenomenon but the urgency around Digital Innovation and Digital Transformation has brought it front and center. Technology Congestion is a point in the Digital Journey where multiple technology initiatives, executed in parallel become entangled with each in a state where none of the initiatives, hampered by inter dependencies, prioritization, and cost, is able to complete, make progress and deliver business value. Modern Experiences Require Multiple Technologies Building a consumer driven, customer centric experience that truly delights and moves business KPIs requires several technologies to come together in almost a magical experience. This means that not on boarding and deploying multiple technologies is not an option or possibility. Enterprises have to build competencies in multiple technologies (and they have multiple strategic options to do so) and this can be a daunting task. Managing Technology Dependencies Often, an app-centric methodology requires a complete focus on the user and customer's experience. Delivering that experience can requires technologies that leverage each other or are inter-dependent on each other. Inter-dependencies can be sequential i.e. Technology A is required to be installed and operational before Technology B can be initialized. Inter-dependencies can also be matrixed i.e. a service X might require service Y to be complete and Service Y requires Technology B. Inter-dependencies can also be circular where System M feeds information into System N and System N, in turn, provides feedback to enable System M to iterate and improve. Innovation To A Screeching Halt Technology congestion can stall innovation. Sorting out dependencies can delay innovation and new product development and cause the enterprise to become anti-app-centric. The net impact is lost time and energy in technology installation and deployment with less than ideal focus and attention on customer value and user experience.

A lot has been said about agility and the need for enterprises looking to innovate and disrupt to build agility. Agility, at the same time, also gets confused with the process of scrum. Small and large teams get enamored with the idea of scrum and mistake the process with the state of being agile. This is often more detrimental to the enterprise and can often create more process and not enough real agility. What is Agility Agility is the efficiency with which an enterprise executes and delivers on its objectives and goals. Agility is the ability to react to changes in goals, feedback from customers and shifts in strategy. Agility, from the outside, looks like a predictable stream of value delivered by the enterprise that matches and exceeds the needs of the customer. Organizational agility requires agility at multiple levels within the enterprise to drive the insights that can channel and align the efforts of the entire organization by leveraging data and information to make quick and informed decisions. Business Agility Business and customer-facing employees need to achieve "Business Agility". This is the ability of these employees to react to business critical in real time if needed and have access to the latest information at any decision point. Business Agility enables users to reduce the latency or lag between a need in the market or of the customers and when they are able to service the need. Decision Agility Analysts and data scientists creating the insights to drive decisions require "Decision Agility" i.e the ability to easily discover, leverage and use data for analytics and insights through any and multiple tools and channels. Analysts and data scientists need to produce insights that reduce the time and effort required to convert data into information and insights that are required to drive key decisions and actions. Development Agility Application developers and data engineers need the ability to easily generate, collect, access and deli

Confined Space Entry Permits - Safety Guidelines Hidden In The Cracks Dangerous, confined spaces are the stuff of horror films and cringe-worthy moments on screen, and there's a reason. Depictions of people trapped in a confined space not only play on a natural human tendency toward claustrophobia, but they also reflect a very real danger in the workplace. As such, OSHA has implemented a system of "confined space entry permits," hoping to help increase worker awareness and avoid common types of injury and death associated with working in a confined space. In this blog post, we'll cover everything from the definition of a confined space, to the details of a fully developed entry permit system. What Is A Confined Space? While the question may seem elementary, OSHA does adhere to strict definitions for confined spaces; this is important to know as a safety professional, as you'll need to be aware of which spaces require you to adhere to OSHA protocol and which don't. Basically, a confined space has to be a place that's large enough for a person to work and perform their job within, but is not intended for long term occupancy by workers. The third and final criteria is that the space has limited means of entry and exit. In short, the space is a place that someone can fit and work in for a limited time, but which impairs mobility and might be difficult to enter and, more importantly, exit quickly. What Is A Confined Space Entry Permit? Sometimes, confined spaces have additional potential risks and hazards that go above and beyond just their shape and size. In these cases, OSHA requires that permits are filed before a worker enters the space. Here are OSHA's additional criteria that indicate the necessity of a permit: The space contains or could contain a hazardous atmosphere The space is comprised of or contains a material that could engulf a worker who enters. The space has any kind of "internal configuration" that might present an additiona

Transforming into a tech company has become top of mind for executives in all major industries. It is clear that modern technology will fundamentally alter what and how business is done in every domain, sector, and industry. This has led to a call to arms in every enterprise to understand how they can transform into a tech company. The Tech Company Magic Tech companies have fine-tuned the art of bring new digital products and services to the market, quickly, efficiently and effectively and understanding customer feedback to iterate and improve. This capability makes them incredibly agile and leads to faster experimentation that is cheaper and involves less risk. In turn, this enables them to bring new capabilities to the market and even if all do not succeed or get traction, a few do and that drives innovation, customer satisfaction, and growth. From the outside, tech companies appear to be massive juggernauts that are unstoppable and able to crush everything in their path. The 'Non-Tech' Technology has been leveraged in every sector and industry, however, it has almost always been treated as a means to an end, something that is required but never the real value driver for the customer. This has led to the typical organizational structure in enterprises into "Business", "Operations" and "Information Technology". The "Business" arm generates value for customers, the "Operations" team carries out the requirements of the Business team and the "Information Technology" team provides the systems (databases, network and compute) required to "keep the lights on" for the Operations and Business Teams" This structure served enterprises well in the last decades as customers did not have an alternative to directly working with the enterprise and this fortified the value supply chain and also established a hierarchy of sorts within the enterprise where the business looked down upon operations who looked down upon technology. The purpose of

Blockchain are certain to disrupt almost all industries fundamentally. Though there are technical issues, the idea of utilizing a blockchain to prove ownership, to prevent double spending and to establish trust and transactions in an otherwise trust-deficient world, is gaining excitement and acceptance. More and more enterprises are getting curious about the blockchain and are willing to start investing in learning, prototyping, and building on top of the blockchain technology. Starting out with the blockchain requires investment in a building the domain expertise, establishing the identity, establishing the infrastructure and deciding the blockchain that the enterprise wants to work with. Among these decisions is the question: Should the enterprise choose a public blockchain or a private blockchain. Both have advantages and disadvantages and the question can often come down to what are the short term goals and potential applications that the enterprise wants to build on the blockchain. Public BlockChains The default option when considering blockchains is the public blockchain. This is the blockchain that is truly decentralized, leverageable for any type of transaction and in the case of the Ethereum blockchain, offers SmartContract authoring capability that makes the blockchain very attractive for building contracts that reflect the needs of the real world. However, for an enterprise deciding between public or private contracts, there are some considerations that require attention. Speed and Scalability Public blockchains tend to be slower as they are limited by the number of transactions that can be verified every second and confirmed every 10 minutes. There are several efforts underway to make blockchains faster and more scalable however those will take time to get implemented. Speed and scalability will continue to be an issue and contracts and applications that require instant or near real time execution will suffer from this lack of speed and scale. Se

Modern, RESTful APIs are not considered standard, table stakes and expected out of any new project, effort, application, system, service or product. It has become so normal to talk about developer interfaces, developer adoption, application development and innovation in the same breath as APIs that a distinct effort to build APIs for a new product or service seems out of place and abnormal. APIs are the defacto standard of app development. So where do we go from here? We believe that APIs are about to enter the second growth spurt. APIs will evolve from not just interfaces and integration enablers into the rockets that propel enterprises towards innovation and market dominance. Here are three key trajectories that will lead the next API evolution and revolution. Innovation - Starts, and Ends with APIs All modern technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, ChatBots, Analytics, BlockChain etc. begin and end their stories with APIs. APIs are what enables the communication between front-end user interfaces and the backend technology services. All new machine learning capabilities offered out of the big four tech companies have seen the light of day through APIs. Intent & Sentiment extraction, Topics, Categories, Summarization, Image Recognition, Entity Extraction etc. are all capabilities powered by Machine Learning, Natural Language Processing that is ultimately being delivered as APIs to application developers. Similarly, ChatBots are typically designed to get the user entered text, use an intent API to determine intent and then use a service API to respond to the user conversationally or with a service. Clouds - Multi-Cloud, Hybrid Cloud As the big three cloud providers grow their market share and attempt to attract attention, increasingly, enterprises need to think about how they minimize their risk by building in the flexibility to switch their cloud provider if and when they need. In addition, hybrid architectures or a cloud migration

Enterprises have to constantly decide, at every step in their digital journey, should they build or buy. This question often is posed as a critical, do or die decision and the answer varies on a case by case basis. Building can be expensive, take longer but offers future proofing and more dependability whereas buying offers a faster time to market, less risk and accountability forced through contractual terms. However, a key point often overlooked is the cost of integration. Integration can be required at multiple levels. Vendor Applications Vendor applications typically require a two-way connection between the enterprise systems and the vendor application. The application requires incoming data and information from somewhere in the enterprise technology stack and an output stream of information back into the enterprise at one or more points in the stack or workflow. Vendor Platforms Vendor provided platforms typically have similar integration requirements as Vendor applications requiring an incoming data & information connection and an outgoing information connection into the enterprise process, workflow, platform or product. Application-To-Application Application to Application integrations where an application needs to be connected to another application to either provide data or signals to enable the downstream application to create value can be seemingly deceptive. Application-To-Application integration costs can grow at O(n^2) as potentially, worst case, each application could be connected with every other application. Enterprise Stack Fragmentation The problem of integration is exacerbated by the fragmentation of the enterprise at the organization level. This problem is also known as "Shadow IT" is driven by superficially differing needs of multiple lines of businesses in an enterprise. Shadow IT typically leads to multiple instances of similar technology stacks that cause data, compute and information to be silo'd. Stack fragmentation and its

The GHS and You - 5 Big Changes April 10, 2014 by Tony Ferraro If your workplace handles chemicals, particularly as the initial producer or as a distributor to clients, it's time to familiarize yourself with the global harmonization system (GHS) of classification and labeling chemicals, or the GHS, for short. What is the GHS? The GHS, first proposed to the United Nations in 1992, is an attempt at bringing some uniformity to the chemical labeling procedures of the developed world. Member nations, based upon their own time-frames, signed on to promise to convert to the GHS method of labeling chemical substances by a certain date. The idea was and still remains to make international business and production easier by having chemical labeling procedures that wouldn't slow down import and export, and would be easy for everyone involved to understand. This also greatly reduces transport costs as materials aren't having to be re-labeled or re-inspected as they cross borders. Last, but certainly not least, the GHS protects workers by ensuring the risks of handling any given material are clearly stated in an easy to understand manner from the beginning. According the UN's publishing of a GHS guide, the following are succinct statements of the GHS' most important goals: Defining health, physical and environmental hazards of chemicals: Creating classification processes that use available data on chemicals for comparison with the defined hazard criteria; and Communicating hazard information, as well as protective measures, on labels and Safety Data Sheets (SDS). OSHA.gov - GHS What does this mean for me? In the United States, the time-frame for adoption is staggered over several stages. On March 2012, the final rule for how workplaces should adopt their policies was published, and employees were required to be trained on these new procedures by December 1, 2013. Interestingly enough, the adoption of the standard by product manufacturers is not required until Ju

The cutting edge platforms for today will be the commoditized platforms of tomorrow. As the technology matures and evolves, the previous generation of technology becomes easier to build and deploy enabling a rush of vendors to capitalize on it by making it accessible to the largest possible customer base. This puts enterprises in the nontechnology sectors in an awkward position. Often not ready to consume the latest and greatest technology due to parts of their stack unable to leverage new technology and requiring upgrade to and deployment of the stepping stone technology, these enterprises have to choose between vendor lock-in in a multi-year software and service contract or risk building and implementing a version of the older technology in-house. Business Drivers of Infrastructure-as-a-Service The biggest risk in building technology platforms in-house is the risk of commoditization. The argument played out with the debate over internal vs. public clouds. Initially, enterprises were hesitant to leverage public clouds with several of them opting to build internal, private clouds. Building a cloud is hard. Operating and maintaining a cloud is even harder. Ensuring that the cloud is running on and leveraging the best in class technology requires dedication to the cause. This is often missing in non-technology enterprises by design given they are driven by different and separate business drivers and considerations. A cloud service provider is motivated to ensure the best in class service and technology because that drives revenue for them. An enterprise whose main business is not offering cloud or software services will not be motivated by the same drivers and thus there will be an inherent difference in their approach and success with building and delivering an internal cloud. Business Drivers for Platform-as-a-Service The same argument (public vs private clouds) applies to platforms. Building the best in class platforms that offer the ability to develop cuttin

Enterprises across the board have a lot of untapped potential in their data. The data is not only relevant and useful within the enterprise but can be a valuable source of insights for the enterprise partners and customers. In some cases, the value of this data can be high that partners and customers are willing to pay extra to get access to this information at a certain fidelity, freshness or scope. Enterprises that do not have a clear and coherent monetization strategy are leaving money on the table. In addition, they stand to lose customers to competitors who gain the first movers advantage by addressing this market need. The Value of Data The first step in determining a monetization strategy is an audit of the enterprise data assets and a determination of the customers who are interesting and willing to pay a premium for access to this data. The Value of Data is proportional to the following: Freshness The more "fresh" a dataset is higher its value typically. This is because there is an advantage in the early visibility provided by first access to new information. 'Freshness' is defined the latency between the creation of data and the delivery of the data to the consumer. Consumers of data will pay a premium for fresh data if it fits into their decision and action strategy. Fidelity Higher the "fidelity" of data i.e. how much detail a particular data point carries also increases the value of the data in the eyes of the data consumer. Higher fidelity data offers more information and detail enabling the consumer to design highly valuable analysis that leverages the additional details offering a deeper insight into the situation at the present or historically. Raw The more "raw" a data set, higher its value as it can support a much larger set of analysis scenarios that a processed data set could support. Data sets that are aggregated, sampled, filtered or transformed can have a lower value as they can severely limit the type of analysis. Raw

One of the most common misconceptions out there is the belief that technology equates innovation. Innovation is the creation of new value through a better solution for a problem that either does a better job in solving the problem or does so in a manner that the solution is accessible in a larger set of circumstances by a larger number of people. On the other hand, technology is simply the tooling that holds the promise of new solutions but by itself, is meaningless. Enterprises can become enamored by the promise and hype about technology and go down long, complex journeys, invest millions in upgrading technology and still come out empty on the other side because they built technology for technology's sake. Even in well intention boards and C-suite, industry peer pressure and hype around technologies can force action that ultimately leads to massive investments in people, software, technology, and vendors but does not yield the ROI promised by the technology. Leadership The problem can be accentuated when not enough due diligence is done on the applicability of the technology to the enterprise given the current state i.e. the point in time when the technology is being introduced, the customer's propensity to accept the technology-driven solution i.e. are the users ready to embrace, adopt, learn and utilize new solutions and burning problems that necessitate the adoption of new technology to better solve the problem. When the timing of new technology introduction is gotten wrong, it almost always fails to deliver on its promised ROI. Leaders need to rise above the hype and peer pressure and ensure that they understand, first and foremost, the burning problems that plague their customers or make the bedrock of their future strategy. Next, leaders need to ensure and validate that the technology in mind can actually be used to solve the problem through rapid prototyping and minimal investment. Once customer feedback on the prototype has been validated, then only

One of the key milestones on the Digital Journey starting with a Digital Strategy, Digital Transformation and then sustaining on Digital Innovation is the point where the enterprise reaches a point of data maturity powered by a single, organization wide, consistent version of the truth including the state of the customers and the state of the business and the state of the employees. This point is critical as it becomes the launchpad for several, forward looking initiatives including Artificial Intelligence, ChatBots, Blockchain etc. "Complete" A Complete version of the truth ensures that the following criteria is met: Entity Pivot The key entities that need to be tracked to generate a complete, comprehensive version of the truth are the following Employee Employees, regardless of customer facing or not, need to be understood including where they excel vs. struggle and where their struggle impact the customer experience. Key information about employees that should be tracked is what the employees are working on, how productive they are and how often they introduce delay and errors in business processes. Business Business visibility requires that the enterprise be able to track key metrics such as customer lifetime value, customer attribution, customer acquisition cost and customer satisfaction. In addition, the stage of the customer ranging from prospect to commit to paying customer to abandoned needs to be tracked. In addition, the customer's quality of service and experience needs to be tracked and understood. Customer The most critical of the three is the understanding of the customer. Customer KPIs have a direct impact on and are completely impacted by the Business and Employee KPIs. It is extremely important to understand how customers are searching for, discovering, learning, understanding, using and continuing to use the product and services delivered by the enterprise. In addition, it is important to understand what capabilities drive what kin

Lean systems are meant for producing the best products and services with little or no wastage of various kinds of resources. Lean supply chain management purports to create a well designed supply chain management system where all the resources are effectively utilized. The people, processes, technologies and suppliers will be optimized at the beginning of the implementation and it will be an ongoing process. The best of the best features will be implemented and there will be no room for waste. Lean supply chain helps companies deliver high quality products quickly and efficiently. What is expected from lean supply chain management? In fact, lean supply chain management is a new way of thinking to understand the supplier networks. It is required to have cooperation with various suppliers and should be able to balance it with the competition present in the market. There is a great deviation between lean supply chain management and traditional methods. There will be less number of structures in lean model whereas they are more in traditional systems. Most of the lean supply chain management principles are derived from the basic lean principles. How companies will be benefited by the lean implementation? By implementing lean methods in a systematic way, companies will be benefited to the greatest possible extent. The winning business strategy realizes the importance of the relation between the supply chain management and the overall financial status of the company. By streamlining the supply chain management with all the other core aspects of the company, the business will emerge into a profitable enterprise and will be able to deliver cutting edge solutions. Strategy for lean supply chain management In order to implement the lean supply chain management in an effective manner, it is required to build the core infrastructure and should be collaborated internally and should be executed externally as well. The next step would be the selection of the right kind of

The control of important documents in today's workplace continues to be a struggle despite the incorporation of the ISO 9001:2000 requirements. To clarify document control, it can be described as ensuring that current documents are first approved by qualified personnel and then distributed to the areas or places where they are actually used and that old or redundant information is then removed. What does the ISO 9001:2000 have to say about document control? Well, the very first sentence of the section labeled 4.2.3 states that "All documents required by the quality management system shall be controlled." If this is clearly laid out by the ISO standards why does it continue to be a struggle for some businesses? Many business professionals find themselves asking "Does this document need to be controlled?" And the answer is yes if it meets the specific criteria of involving product requirements, controlling processes, provide verification or the testing of products, collect data for decision-making, or relate to any requirement of the ISO 9001:2000.

Your facility probably has many written safety procedures-hazard communication or emergency response, for example-but do you have a comprehensive health and safety management system (HSMS)? OSHA mandates many kinds of safety plans, but there is no federal mandate regarding a health and safety system that covers all other safety plans (though some states do require one). This system governs how safety works in your facility and gets everyone involved. If OSHA doesn't require an HSMS system in your state, then why bother implementing one? While a safety system does require a lot of work, the benefits are numerous. Not only will employee morale improve, the number and severity of injuries will be reduced and production may actually increase. Safety, it turns out, is good for business. OSHA also recognizes businesses that have used effective HSMS to achieve lower-than-average injury and illness rates through their Voluntary Protection Programs. Data suggests companies that have developed these kinds of safety systems have seen positive results. According to OSHA: "Companies in OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program, VPP, all of whom have implemented comprehensive safety and health management systems, experience lost workday incidence rates that are 60% to 80% lower than their industry counterparts. They also experience reduced absenteeism and turnover, improved productivity, and lower Workers' Compensation costs. Safety and health management works and adds to the company's bottom line profits." Getting a health and safety system started at your workplace takes a lot of legwork, so let's take a look at how to begin and how to get everyone from management to employees on the work floor involved. Management Leadership Business-Meeting-1 For a health and safety system to be effective, it can't just be left entirely up to a safety manager. Management needs to set the tone for the program and demonstrate their commitment to it by providing necessary polic

Much has and needs to be said about an enterprise's AI strategy. Artificial Intelligence or AI is considered a fundamentally disruptive technology similar to the steam engine, electricity etc, a technology that will be pervasive and absolute in its impact on the world and its inhabitants. The ability to find hidden patterns to predict the future or detect a behavior has massive implications across the world, in every industry, sector, and domain. When faced with this realization, enterprise's can find themselves stuck, paralyzed and unsure about how to proceed. The field of AI is decades old already and the early success stories have been practicing AI for multiple years already with the tech industry leading the way. How can an enterprise that has no experience and competency in this area let alone lead the technology or even leverage it appropriately to drive business value? When developing the AI strategy, two ideas are paramount. First, this a fundamentally disruptive technology and the enterprise will need to establish it as a core competency for the foreseeable future. Not doing so will not be an option. Second, a long-term plan to success is superseded by the need to drive quick wins and small successes not only to build confidence but use real-world experience to develop and hone that skill. The Short-Term AI Strategy The short-term AI strategy should focus on driving immediate business value through enhanced customer experiences that leverage any field of AI be it machine learning, deep learning, natural language processing etc. Driving the usage and deployment of AI in front of an end user making them smarter, productive and better informed can pay rich dividends by not only helping the enterprise can real-world experience, but it can also give a perception boost to the company as being innovative and cutting edge. However, most importantly, this can highlight and promote the success and potential of AI in the enterprise and encourage a snowball eff

One of the biggest hurdles to Digital Transformation and Digital Innovation is the organization's inertia and tendency to optimize for self-preservation. Self-preservation can exist in the enterprise at the individual, team, divisional or the organizational level and can have a devastating impact on the organization's ability to innovate and grow. Self-preservation is not a new phenomenon however, it is more deadly for an enterprise now than ever. This is because the speed of technology change has increased geometrically. In the past, self-preservation would automatically get corrected as the technology was generally learned and adopted slowly with enough time for the enterprise to become aware of the change and implement it. However, the rate of technology change has magnified tremendously and the enterprises no longer have the luxury to take their time with the change. Inaction risks getting left behind and other competitors who leverage and change faster stand to capture the largest market shares and customer mind share. Self preservation is the tendency of the enterprise to ignore, undermine or postpone the adoption and integration of new technology in the enterprise to avoid a change in the status quo across technology, products, services and most importantly, day to day operations and organizational structure. Self-preservation can lead to what is termed as "politics" in an org, it can stifle innovation and innovative individuals & teams and it can favor business driver stagnation over risk taking. 5 Signs of Self-Preservation The following are signs of self-preservation Highlighting the Journey of Innovation as Failure Adversarial teams and individuals within an enterprise who are interested in self-preservation often go out of their way to highlight the tough, risky journey of true innovation as a failure citing the cost and the time being taken to address the real problems in a truly innovative manner. While the individuals and teams trying to

One of the top reasons for digital innovation and transformation failures can be summarized as the enterprise trying to reinvent the wheel. This is the tendency of the enterprise to attempt to create technology, platforms, and applications that have already been implemented, scaled, optimized and almost perfected. This tendency almost always ends up a failed one as it does not create any net new value for the enterprise but comes with a massive opportunity cost as the enterprise spends crucial resources on reinventing the wheel than innovating for the customer. How The Wheel Is Reinvented Nontechnology enterprises can get trapped in a reinvent state where they conclude that homegrown technology is the only path towards customer and business value. This in itself is not entirely false however the type of enterprise and their decision-making process along with the capabilities they have in house have a very large impact on the success of the strategy.eRaaadada Reinventing the wheel happens when a non-tech enterprise discovers a technology trend towards much later in the hype cycle almost towards the end when the technology is hitting the mass market and decides to recreate or reinvent its own version of the technology. This is often done with the assumption that with some investment, the enterprise can have a home grown version of technology or platform that is designed specifically for its needs and is thus a better fit. However, enterprises assume that the state of the technology will remain constant and while they are attempting to home grow a version that can match the current state of the art. In reality, the state of the art shifts and the enterprise is not able to bridge the gap. Who Reinvents The Wheel Typically, technology teams often decide to go down the path of reinvention when they are allowed to make technology upgrade or technology creation decisions without business KPIs and cost constraints i.e. clear success criteria with fixed cost and clear ti

Fire extinguisher Maintenance Fire extinguisher servicing or maintenance is required annually as per British Standard BS BS5306:Part 3:2009. This is carried out to ensure that the extinguishers are safe and will always function in the event of a fire. Independent Fire Services will always carry out maintenance to BS5306:Part 3:2017. Ensure your fire extinguishers are supplied and maintained to the highest standards by always using a third party accredited company such as Independent Fire Services Ltd which is accredited with BAFE (British Approvals for Fire Equipment). To gain this accreditation the company had achieve ISO 9001. Our engineers must do extinguisher maintenance re-fresher training every three years and also have an external audit within the same time frame. Fire Extinguisher Supply Independent Fire Services supply extinguishers of the highest standard. All of our fire extinguishers are supplied to BS EN3 standards and are BAFE approved and carry a five year guarantee if maintained by us. The range of fire extinguishers we offer includes: . Water extinguishers . CO2 extinguishers . Foam extinguishers . Powder extinguishers . Wet chemical extinguishers . Specialty Extinguishers Fire Safety Training Current UK legislation requires employers to provide training in the actions to be taken in the event of fire. We can help you meet this requirement by providing a range of comprehensive fire training courses, that include: Basic Fire Safety Fire Safety Awareness Fire WardensMarshall Training Train The Trainer Ensure you comply with government legislation and read more about our fire training courses. Dry Riser Testing and Maintenance In buildings which have Dry Risers these must comply with British Standard BS9990:2015. The annual testing and maintenance of Dry Risers is the responsibility of the property owners or managing agents. British Standard 9990:2015 recommends that the system is visually inspect

It's not too late to jump on to the Blockchains trend. We often hear from customers whether it is too late to get behind blockchain. The number of startups in this space is growing rapidly and the number of large ISVs and SIs providing blockchain capability and expertise is also increasing. However, the market and the technology space for blockchains is far from saturated, settled or stable. Here are three reasons why now is a good time to get into blockchains Early Mover Advantage Blockchains are bound to disrupt fundamentally how business is done. By enabling trust in an otherwise trust-deficient environment, blockchains enable transactions between two or more enterprises who otherwise might not know about each other. Blockchains offer solutions to several common problems faced by the enterprise such as Digital Identity, Secure Data Storage, Secure Data Sharing, Distributed Ledger, Distributed Databases etc. Blockchains are based on strong cryptographic standards based in mathematics, cryptography, and encryption. Building blockchains as a core competency requires a deep understanding of the mathematics behind it and an internal process for deploying, managing and developing on top of the blockchain. Early mover advantage can be generated by taking small steps in this area and targeting simpler scenarios initially. Nascent Technology It is going to take another few iterations of the blockchain technology before it can truly be enterprise-ready. There is a lot of ongoing work to make blockchains more secure, scalable and performant. Innovations are constantly being made and added to the core blockchain technology that is constantly increasing the type and complexity of applications that it can support. As the technology matures, enterprises can be well suited and ready to leverage the advancements by building a core competency in not only the blockchain technology but by becoming a member of the blockchain community, standards and keeping up to date with th