In a conversation with Prisila, Correspondent, Asia Business Outlook, Harry shares his views on the biggest challenges facing the adoption and growth of Web3 now. During the conversation he also discussed how to develop a strategic revenue strategy.

What do you believe will be the biggest use cases for Web3 in the next 5-10 years?

When block chain technology was first introduced, many people were skeptical and did not fully understand its potential. However, as the number of successful block chain projects grew, people began to recognize its value and potential impact. Similarly, Web3 is currently a rising trend, but I believe it will quickly become more widespread in the near future.

In the next 5-10 years, we can expect Web3 to be widely adopted for decentralized finance (DeFi) applications, DeFi social networks, and decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs). These applications have the potential to transform traditional financial systems, enhance user privacy and security, and provide greater access to financial services. However, as with any emerging technology, we can also expect to see new and innovative Web3 use cases in the near future.

What advice would you give to businesses looking to adopt Web3 technologies?

My advice to businesses looking to adopt Web3 technologies would be to first gain a thorough understanding of the technology and its potential use cases. They should also carefully evaluate their business needs and determine how Web3 technologies can enhance their operations and improve competitive advantages. And the other piece of advice is to start small. Instead of trying to implement Web3 technologies on a large scale, businesses should start with smaller, pilot projects to test the technology and identify any potential challenges or issues.

Building a strong network of peers, mentors, and advisors is crucial. This can keep you informed of new opportunities in the industry, and help you connect with potential partners and customers.

In your opinion, what are the biggest challenges facing the adoption and growth of Web3 now?

From my perspective, I believe the main challenges hindering the adoption and growth of Web3 are the lack of awareness and understanding among businesses, as well as the complexity of the technology itself. Many businesses may not see the immediate benefits of adopting Web3 technologies and may be hesitant to invest in something they don't fully understand. Additionally, the technology is still in its early stages and requires specialized knowledge and expertise to implement and manage effectively. As such, it is important for businesses to educate themselves on Web3 and work with experienced partners to navigate the complex landscape of this emerging technology.

Do you feel there is an approach or technique to success in this role? What advice do you have for aspiring leaders in this position who are looking to take advantage of new opportunities?

As a Chief Revenue Officer (CRO) of an IT/Blockchain company, I have some advice for leaders and managers in similar positions. Firstly, even if you are not a technical expert, it's important to keep up with tech trends and develop your technical skills. Having a basic understanding of the tools and platforms used in the industry will help you effectively communicate with your team and make informed decisions about technology investments.

Secondly, focus on developing strong leadership skills, such as communication, delegation, and problem-solving. Knowing how to select suitable team members for different positions will help them to develop optimally.

Finally, building a strong network of peers, mentors, and advisors is crucial. This can keep you informed of new opportunities in the industry, and help you connect with potential partners and customers. Networking is vital in the technology industry and can help you to stay ahead of the curve.

"Having a basic understanding of the tools and platforms used in the industry will help you effectively communicate with your team and make informed decisions about technology investments."

Tell me about how you utilize key performance indicators (KPIs) and other metrics to assess and improve performance in your job, as well as how you develop a strategic revenue strategy. Please describe your procedure.

For me, a highly effective way to track and manage a company's growth is through regular market research and setting Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) based on quarterly market growth. For instance, at SotaTek, the marketing department conducts research quarterly to identify potential markets for development such as Asia, the US, Europe, etc. Based on the level of demand and growth of each region, the sales director then sets KPIs such as the number of leads per month for sales and decides which services to prioritize. This enables us to track our progress and make data-driven decisions in developing a strategic revenue strategy.

Additionally, we develop a strategic revenue strategy by aligning our business objectives with market trends & customer needs and regularly reviewing & adjusting our strategy based on performance metrics and feedback from our customers and stakeholders.

Here is the original post:

Exploring the Possibilities of Web3: A New Era of Decentralization - Asia Business Outlook

Thiruvananthapuram: The Transport Department has decided to divide the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) into three independent corporations in a bid to make the services more efficient, profitable, and reliable.

As per the trifurcation plan to be implemented in June, four or five districts will form the jurisdictional area of each corporation with each of them getting a new name. The state has altogether 14 districts.

The administrative responsibilities of the three corporations will be entrusted to Kerala Administrative Service (KAS) officers who will join the service in June. They will have the liberty to introduce reforms to turn the corporation profitable.

The individual corporations will decide all the matters, including the transfer and salary of the employees. Transfers will be given only within the jurisdictional area of each corporation. Assets like buses and depots will be divided up among the three corporations.

It is not easy to decide the services from the Chief Office in Thiruvananthapuram by taking into account the exact needs of the local areas in each district. People should not be made to wait for getting a response to their grievances from Thiruvananthapuram. The planned decentralisation will help in making the services more efficient and ensure better travel facilities. The process of dividing the KSRTC into three corporations will be completed soon," stated Transport Minister Antony Raju.

Even though the KSRTC was divided into four zones earlier to ensure better operation of the services, they will cease to exist once the corporations are formed.

Long-distance services will not function under the new corporations but will continue to be run by the 2021-founded K-SWIFT transport company.

TN modelThe corporations will be formed on the lines of the model in Tamil Nadu which has eight road transport corporations. A team under the Transport Secretary had visited Chennai twice to study the functioning of the public transport system in Tamil Nadu.

Likely to impact unionsWith the division of the KSRTC, the strength of the employees organisations is expected to weaken. Recognised trade unions will be formed in each of the corporations by conducting a referendum.

Here is the original post:

Kerala to hive off KSRTC into three distinct entities in big decentralization push - Onmanorama

As pharmaceutical companies navigate a rapidly changing and challenging landscape, leaders make continuous trade-offs as to what decisions and activities are driven from the headquarters, and what is left to the autonomy of local organisations. Eelco Rustenburg, Florian van Santen and Koen Harbers from BlinkLane Consulting outline how adopting cross-industry best practices can help pharma companies strike the right balance.

Historically, pharma companies provide relatively much autonomy to their organizational units in respective countries. In part, this follows from a strong growth-through-acquisition strategy. But it is also by design: decentralization allows for a better understanding of local markets, including specific rules and regulations for commercial engagement.

However, in recent years the downside of the decentralization model has also received much attention. As the need for innovation in all aspects of business increases from R&D to marketing investments grow substantially. The notion is that smaller markets are less able to keep up with the pace of change without the explicit support from global functions.

This is true for complex drug development naturally, but equally so for digital technology. Digital tech trends include the application of data-driven drug development, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and an increasingly complex marketing tool stack to personalize the message to customers and patients. Against this backdrop, many pharma companies are opting to increasingly centralize their organizations.

Yet as the level of centralization increases, so too does the risk of increasing decision-making latency the time it takes to reach a decision in response to a business change. Which in turn substantially hampers agility.

Therefore, pharma companies need to face the challenge: how to align all the individual stakes and priorities of local and regional affiliates? Or put differently: how to leverage the benefits of scale that central organizations bring whilst avoiding the risk of inertia from being pulled in every direction?

This challenge is not new pharma companies can learn from enterprises in other sectors that have taken on this challenge before. A large part of the answer can be found in three pillars: optimizing development speed, embracing agility across, and creating goal transparency and alignment.

While this might seem like an obvious pillar, in practice we see that organizations typically only give focus to an individual element: IT. True speed requires the whole organization to think and act differently.

A Swiss-based media company realized it had no shortage of ideas, but only a fraction made it to implementation and even these happy few suffered from long lead times. Rethinking the collaboration structure and process led to cross-functional teams, combining profiles from marketing, communication, web development and more.

Within three months of adopting the new way of working, project delivery (a campaign, a promotional article, a landing page) went up significantly.

Market circumstances change. At the same time, pharmaceutical companies serve multiple markets globally, and have to deal with an equal number of regulatory bodies. The result: complex governance and decision-making.

No amount of development capacity operating at maximum conceivable speed will ever be able to satisfy all affiliate needs all the time all at once. Enter the challenge of prioritization for global capabilities. Many multinationals that have grown from a central hub (e.g. airlines), have followed a productization strategy. Product [Management / Marketing / Strategy] has the authority and capabilities to make reasoned decisions in relative isolation.

In pharma companies, due to the nature of their products and market segments they serve, local knowledge is vital for the success of any new product or campaign launch. And that only supports the decentralized nature pharma companies already enjoy due to a history of acquisitions. But the dynamics in large, decentralized conglomerates is very different. As a result, decision making is a far more delicate matter.

Again, pharma can draw lessons from other conglomerates. Take a French-based multinational as an example. With 9 acquisitions in the last 5 years to a total of 20 in its history, it faces similar challenges of product, data and technology-portfolio alignment. They recently realized their project-portfolio governance did little to create a realistic and holistic view of priorities.

Their journey now emphasizes transparency at the global portfolio level and continuous prioritization over smaller pieces Minimum Viable Products of the initiative roadmap. It will allow them to shorten the feedback loop to all regional participants, earn their trust and remain agile.

Amplifying this agile portfolio governance for global capabilities is the emergence of local portfolio governance offshoots. Supported by a central team of experts, local and regional offices are adopting the same decision-making framework. From a local perspective, this strengthens their argumentation to the global team. But it also allows them to safely separate initiatives that do not need global support from the ones that do creating a two-track portfolio at the local or region level.

The role of the global team does not need to stop there. A parallel can be made with B2B tech companies. A European technology provider has a dominant position in travel tech, counting many of the major airlines as their customers. To serve their customers they rely for a large part on central product teams. But from a customers point of view, this is only a part of their total development capacity.

Often, they have their own teams that need to integrate with the companys products. They are not only interested in prioritizing all different customer requests for their own backlog in a manner that is explainable. They also promote and facilitate in-depth knowledge sharing across their customer base on topics that does not directly concern them yet.

They know that such conversations will lead to more uniform airline technology roadmaps which supports the reuse of their capabilities. Providing such a knowledge platform also makes them aware of what is happening, and where future global demand will be. Though different in context, similar principles in dynamics apply to global and regional teams in decentralized organizations.

A well-functioning portfolio management system allows for relatively quick comparison of a set of initiatives against a known set of value indicators. But that presumes we all have the same goal in mind. Which for large organization is rarely the case. To really reap the benefits of a central resource hub unhindered by the inherent increase in decision-making complexity, pillars 1 and 2 need to be accompanied by pillar 3.

A German tech conglomerate builds, markets and sells amongst others energy grid software globally. For all organizational functions and sites to work together and prioritize ideas effectively, they make sure each of them has the same set of objectives in mind. Top-level objectives are shared and form the basis for department goals.

Key results a system of outcome-oriented measurements provide the necessary clarity and focus: without these strategies risk becoming a container for everything, hollow words, or both. Conversations around these OKRs ensure high-level alignment and allow management teams to examine the inherent trade-offs between them. As such they also serve as a cheap litmus test: little acceptance signals the organization hasnt bought into such plans just yet.

Regular review cycles typically the quarter between leadership ensures also these objectives move along with reality. With an outcome-based objectives mechanism in place, global functions can always bring tense conversations back to the impact initiatives have on them. And working from a shared context is also the best guarantee that the discussions you do have, are really the ones in pursuit of selecting the best ideas to fit a shared agenda.

The global functions in pharma companies can benefit a lot from this level of alignment with their affiliates.

In the decentralized organizational setup common among pharma companies, strongly centralized change programs are highly scrutinized. The prevailing thought appears to be that the benefits of decentralization (local accountability, customization to context) also apply to organizational change. We would argue this to be a fallacy in the highly connected areas of technology-supported business functions.

Indeed, adaptation to local context is necessary. But where alignment between organizations is expected, working from common principles, a common heartbeat and a common language is a must.

Second, bottom-up changes in the way of working, however promising, just dont scale to its full potential without strong leadership support. Such support goes beyond sponsorship. In all cases outlined, leaders have actively encouraged their units, aligned with their peers, and convinced their superiors to offer the means as well as the freedom to experiment. They managed to build a coalition and sought the necessary expertise internal and external.

A Dutch public transport organization sought to radically transform their organization, merging Commercial with IT for all related business functions. A complex transformation breaking through silos and hierarchy, the transformation itself is set up as a program. The Director Commercial and IT was directly responsible for the success of the transformation.

The program worked with a smaller dedicated transformation team augmented with part-time change leads and ambassadors spread out over the Commercial and IT organizations functions. In this way, the organization kept track of the success of and lessons learned from the transformation to cross-functional teams in all areas whilst giving them autonomy to fit the changes to purpose as needed.

Over the past years, BlinkLane Consulting has applied the discussed transformation approach at many other clients like Air France KLM, Amadeus IT Group, and high-tech giant ASML.

Continue reading here:

Organizing decision-making in pharma: centralized versus decentralized? - Consultancy.eu

Although cryptos are risky assets, they are profitable investments if the right ones are chosen. Despite their volatility, they can gain investors and users high returns in the short and long term.

With the constant launch of new tokens, diversifying ones crypto portfolio with profitable tokens has become an uphill task. However, tokens such as Uwerx, REN (REN), and TRON (TRX) have been tipped to benefit holders, and here is why.

REN (REN) is a decentralized, open-source protocol that enables blockchains interoperability. REN (REN) aims to bring assets and cryptos like Zcash and Bitcoin (BTC) to blockchains like Ethereum. This will facilitate their participation in a multi-DeFi ecosystem.

Also, REN (REN) aims to build an ecosystem that preserves users and data privacy. To achieve this, the protocol integrates the interoperability, dark pool, and zero-knowledge layers.

RENs (REN) core component is the RenVM which brings Bitcoin (BTC) to DeFi and enables the creation of ERC-20 tokens. The tokens are used to represent cryptos in a ratio of 1:1. Through this tokenized representation, RenVM paves the way for liquidity from these assets.

REN (REN) has piqued investors interest due to its multichain structure, and the protocol has made advancements to ensure a secure ecosystem. Last year, REN (REN) announced its upgrade to REN 2.0. This follows the collapse of Alameda Research, which acquired REN in 2021.

TRON (TRX) is a decentralized platform that aims to further decentralization on the internet by integrating blockchain technology and dApps. TRON (TRX) integrates the algorithm called Proof-of-Stake (PoS). This allows users to stake their tokens and earn rewards. They also become part of its decentralized autonomous organization (DAO).

TRONs (TRX) high throughput, scalability, and reliability have made it one of the fastest-growing blockchains. These features also enable speedy transactions within seconds.

TRON (TRX) also benefits content creators by paying them for creating content and entertaining their audience and followers.

More recently, Telegram activated the wallet function for USDT-TRON, also called TRC20. This enables users to send and receive Tether stablecoin, which will only be supported on the TRON (TRX) network.

The tremendous growth of the gig economy over the past few years indicates that freelancing has come to stay. However, innovative technologies are needed to improve the industry; this is where we believe Uwerx will come in.

Uwerx will be a global freelancing platform transforming the gig economy by integrating blockchain technology. This will bring about secure and transparent transactions, protection of intellectual property rights, and decentralization.

Uwerx intends to reduce service fees. It will charge a 1% transaction fee, an amount that is four times less than the 20% charged by other platforms like Fiverr and 10% at Upwork. Also, Uwerx will incorporate other unique features such as incentivization, built-in resolution tools, and personalized matching.

Uwerxs token, WERX, will be utility-driven and used not only as a payment token but as an added security. With the ongoing presale, Uwerx will release 300,000,000 WERX tokens trading at $0.005. We are convinced this price will quickly increase due to the WERX value, and crypto experts believe the token will be trading at $3 in 2024.

Due to market volatility and an increase in rug pull, the team behind Uwerx decided to renounce smart contract ownership of the project when taxes reduce to zero. They will also lock their liquidity for 25 years immediately after the presale. This is to assure investors that their funds are safe. The team further tightened security measures by undergoing two audits from InterFi Network and SolidProof.

This shows that Uwerx has a clear vision of revolutionizing the gig economy. Its unique features will attract investors who will greatly benefit from this project.

The presale is the ideal scope to leverage the opportunities Uwerx offers by purchasing the WERX token at a lower price. To learn more about Uwerx and the presale, follow the links below:

Website: https://www.uwerx.network

Presale: http://invest.uwerx.network

Telegram: https://t.me/uwerx_network

Twitter: https://twitter.com/uwerx_network

View original post here:

Must Read: Looking To Get Big Returns On Your Investments? Get ... - Analytics Insight

The Ethereum network underwent the successful Shapella hard fork on April 12, allowing validators to withdraw their long-staked Ether (ETH) from the Beacon Chain after three years. In the first week of withdrawals, more than a million ETH was unstaked by validators.

However, from the second week onward, the number of ETH staked was higher than that of ETH withdrawn, indicating that validators are re-staking most of their ETH back into mining pools.

Staking is temporarily locking tokens on a network that uses a proof-of-stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. In a PoS network like Ethereum, users who wish to support the blockchain by validating new transactions and adding new blocks must stake a certain amount of cryptocurrency. In return, they receive rewards.

Staking ensures that a blockchain is only updated with valid data and transactions. Participants wanting to increase their chances of validating new transactions offer to stake large amounts of cryptocurrency as insurance.

Ether being re-staked is a big positive for the Ethereum network, but its future in the United States remains uncertain. Ethereum staking is getting tricky for many U.S.-based validators as staking service providers, particularly centralized exchanges, are fighting a regulatory battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

In February, Kraken crypto exchange settled with the SEC for $30 million and closed its staking services for U.S clients. The SEC claimed that the service qualified as a security and that Kraken must obtain the necessary license to operate.

Kraken withdrew its validator nodes for U.S. clients just a day before the Shapella upgrade to comply with SEC orders. The shutdown triggered an industry-wide debate on the future of staking services in the United States. Coinbase one of the first crypto exchanges to go public in the U.S. also provides staking services and is trying to force the SEC to answer a petition it filed regarding guidance for cryptocurrencies.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong claimed that the SECs efforts to curtail staking service providers would prohibit retail staking in the United States. This might force many crypto platforms and staking service providers to move to offshore locations. At a time when the SEC is proactive in its enforcement action against crypto-staking services, the future of ETH staking looks shaky in the United States.

Magazine:Whatever happened to EOS? Community shoots for unlikely comeback

Stephenie Lord Eisert, senior director of law enforcement at crypto intelligence firm Merkel Science, told Cointelegraph that cryptocurrencies are a global entity. Thus, a clampdown by one particular jurisdiction would only force service providers to move elsewhere.

The proposed ban on crypto staking will not protect investors from fraud or scams. Instead, it will create a regulatory void that will be exploited by bad actors. Rather than banning centralized staking providers, regulators should focus on addressing the lack of guidance around both centralized and decentralized staking options, she said.

The U.S. is home to the majority of node operators on the Ethereum blockchain. Of the 9,849 active nodes, 5,214 are in the U.S., followed by 1,679 in Germany and 277 in Japan. The latest data from Etherscan indicates that node operators in the U.S. declined by 20% in the past week.

William Kraus, a partner at FisherBroyles law firm, told Cointelegraph that the SECs enforcement against Kraken shows the commissions position on staking-as-a-service.

He added that this could prompt U.S. providers to respond in several ways, with some eliminating the service altogether, while others might implement changes to how they provide the service or publicly describe it. Some providers might decide not to change anything. However, the settlement has lessened ambiguity about staking, and providers must carefully consider the SECs position going forward, he said, adding:

Danny Talwar, head of tax at Koinly, told Cointelegraph that centralized staking providers account for almost a quarter of all staked ETH, with Coinbase (11.4%), Kraken (6.9%), and Binance (5.2%) leading the way.

Talwar said that if the SEC moves on with its enforcement action, staking service providers will be forced to look outside the U.S. to offer their services.

If offshore exchanges with no Know Your Customer or Anti-Money Laundering compliance end up being major beneficiaries of the SEC cracking down on regulated, domestic, centralized exchanges, consumer protection may be the least likely outcome, he said.

While U.S. regulators are clamping down on staking services, crypto proponents are trying to convince regulators that high-yield lending interests offered by centralized entities and staking rewards on the Ethereum blockchain are not the same.

Staking crypto on a blockchain like Ethereum contributes to daily transaction verification. Thus, Ethereum staking differs from lending rewards like those offered by BlockFi and Celsius.

On the other hand, the SEC is looking to brand all kinds of staking services under a standard banner, Konstantin Boyko-Romanovsky, CEO of staking service provider Allnodes, told Cointelegraph.

Boyko-Romanovsky said prohibiting centralized exchanges from offering staking services would further enhance decentralization. He also noted that the governments approach might stifle adoption as many newcomers to crypto in the U.S. rely on centralized entities such as Coinbase for staking services.

He noted that staking pools might become more popular among retail stakers, explaining:

He added that those interested in staking will likely find alternative means. The focus of the regulatory bodies should be on creating precise and clear definitions for new and innovative concepts, such as staking. It would likely benefit customers more than attempting to force crypto instruments into existing fiat currency molds, he said.

Recent:What the Gensler hearing means for US crypto regulation and policy

The troubles of centralized staking services might work in favor of decentralized staking services and staking pools. After Krakens withdrawal of U.S-based validator nodes, most of these validators moved to Lido Finance, a decentralized staking pool service provider.

While it may help decentralization, the SECs stance on crypto staking could mean trouble for U.S.-based service providers. However, it remains to be seen whether firms like Coinbase uproot and move abroad, abandon significant market share in the domestic market, or make efforts to comply with SEC guidance and U.S. securities laws.

See original here:

SEC crackdown on crypto staking in the US could boost decentralization - Cointelegraph