"Scrutinizing Gartner's hype cycle approach". AI winter, in referring to periods of disillusionment with artificial intelligence.Perhaps more telling would be to formulate a system model with solutions conforming to observable behavior.Īn analysis of Gartner Hype Cycles since 2000 shows that few technologies actually travel through an identifiable hype cycle, and that in practice most of the important technologies adopted since 2000 were not identified early in their adoption cycles. This appears to be a very simplified impulse response of an elastic system representable by a differential equation.No action perspective is offered to move technology to a next phase.The user does not want to be disappointed, so should they stay away from technology in the Trough of Disillusionment? The terms are misleading in the sense that one gets the wrong idea what they can use a technology for.With the (subjective) terms disillusionment, enlightenment and expectations it cannot be described objectively or clearly where technology now really is.The cycle is not scientific in nature, and there is no data or analysis that would justify the cycle.Specific disadvantages when compared to, for example, technology readiness level are: A related criticism is that the "cycle" has no real benefits to the development or marketing of new technologies and merely comments on pre-existing trends. It seems to assume that a business' performance is tied to the hype cycle, whereas this may actually have more to do with the way a company devises its branding strategy. Another is that it is limited in its application, as it prioritizes economic considerations in decision-making processes. There have been numerous criticisms of the hype cycle, prominent among which are that it is not a cycle, that the outcome does not depend on the nature of the technology itself, that it is not scientific in nature, and that it does not reflect changes over time in the speed at which technology develops. Desmond Roger Laurence, in the field of clinical pharmacology, described a similar process in drug development in the seventies. A longer-term historical perspective on such cycles can be found in the research of the economist Carlota Perez. Analyses of the Internet in the 1990s featured large amounts of hype, and that created "debunking" responses. Hype (in the more general media sense of the term "hype" ) plays a large part in the adoption of new media. The term "hype cycle" and each of the associated phases are now used more broadly in the marketing of new technologies. If the technology has more than a niche market then it will continue to grow. The technology's broad market applicability and relevance are clearly paying off.
Criteria for assessing provider viability are more clearly defined. More enterprises fund pilots conservative companies remain cautious.
Second- and third-generation products appear from technology providers. More instances of how the technology can benefit the enterprise start to crystallize and become more widely understood. Investment continues only if the surviving providers improve their products to the satisfaction of early adopters.
Producers of the technology shake out or fail. Interest wanes as experiments and implementations fail to deliver. Often no usable products exist and commercial viability is unproven.Įarly publicity produces a number of success stories-often accompanied by scores of failures. Early proof-of-concept stories and media interest trigger significant publicity. Each hype cycle drills down into the five key phases of a technology's life cycle.Ī potential technology breakthrough kicks things off.
0 kommentar(er)
