Grayson Brulte

Grayson Brulte

@gbrulte | @gbrulte

Grayson Brulte is an Innovation Strategist and Co-Founder of Brulte & Company.

In addition, he is the Host of The Road To Autonomy Podcast and Host of the SAE International Tomorrow Today Podcast.

He formerly served as the Co-Chair of the City of Beverly Hills Mayor's Autonomous Vehicle Task Force and was an active member of the city’s Smart City / Technology Committee which advises the Beverly Hills City Council on technology. In 2015, the City of Beverly Hills was chosen by Google as one of America’s digital capitals.

Along with his Beverly Hills guidance, Grayson was appointed a Global Health Economics Fellow at The University of Vermont College of Medicine.

From Autonomous Vehicles to politics, to the future of entertainment and more, Grayson has written articles about innovation, technology, and strategy for Continental’s 2025AD, General Electric Reports, the MIT Sloan Executive Education [email protected] Blog, RealClear Future, Futurism, VentureBeat and The Washington Times among others.

His written opinions and insights have been used by organizations such as the Consumer Electronics Association in presentations to the Federal Trade Commission.

Grayson has spoken in front of numerous audiences, including the FLDOT’s Florida Automated Vehicles Summit, New York International Auto Show, Princeton SmartDrivingCars, Consumer Telematics Show, XII Metropolis World Congress, TU-Automotive Detroit and Autonomous Vehicles Silicon Valley.

His comments have appeared in numerous publications, including The Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, The International Business Times, The Telegraph, Automotive News, Axios, Bloomberg, Forbes and The Hollywood Reporter.

For speaking engagements, editorials and media enquiries please email [email protected].

The Future of Voting

As smartphones become smarter and citizens become more keenly aware of security, we could envision a society in which citizens would have a frictionless voting experience without having to drive to a polling place.

Sir Richard Branson recently penned an interesting blog post about the future of voting and how citizens one day might be able to vote on the internet. The internet of today is not the future of online voting. Instead the future of online voting rests in the developments of mobile and wearable technologies.

As smartphones become smarter and citizens become more keenly aware of security, we could envision a society in which citizens would have a frictionless voting experience without having to drive to a polling place. Taking time off from work, getting gas and driving to a polling place creates friction which does not entice your average younger citizen to want to vote. What if that younger citizen could download an app and vote?

What if that same citizen could talk to their smartwatch and tell the app how to they want to vote? This would be a frictionless experience that would be engaging to younger voters. Voting would be a simple task that could possibly encourage younger citizens to get involved in politics.

The big downside to a voting platform such as the one described above would be privacy, as the Government would have to verify your device against a database to ensure you are a legal citizen over the legal voting age. Would citizens allow the Government to verify their device in exchange for being able to vote using a smartwatch and smartphone?

While we might not have the answers today, we do agree with Sir Richard Branson that there are many benefits to online voting.

There could be many benefits to voting online, not least the opportunity to engage more young people with politics. I was speaking to my friend Vladas Lasas, who is running for President in Lithuania, and he pointed out how the tech-savvy youth of his country (and the wider world) are the “sleeping giants” of politics. They feel disconnected from politics and the action of going to vote is not appealing. – Sir Richard Branson

While the current state of voting today is not a frictionless experience, this could be changed by allowing online voting through a smartphone or smartwatch. Would you wave some privacy rights to be able to vote with your smartphone or smartwatch?

The Future of Voting is an article written by Brulte & Company Co-Founder Grayson Brulte.

Political Innovation: Developing an Innovative Political Organization

When you think of the term innovation, you probably do not associate it with politics. This is due at least in part to the historical reluctance of politicians and campaign managers to take uncertain risks that could have a negative impact on the outcome of an election or term.

Instead, it is companies in the private sector such as Apple and Google that are disrupting their industries with new, innovative products and services. And, even older, more established companies such as Porsche and Walmart are redefining their industries with updated product lines and innovative business models.

These private sector companies have successfully developed cultures that are always learning and striving for perfection. Apple has Jony Ive, who is always pushing the envelope of what is possible, and Google has Google X, its secret lab focused on solving big problems.

So where is the Jony Ive and Google X of politics?

I believe that if political organizations adopted the mindset of these above-mentioned private sector companies and moved away from the tried and true strategies of non-geotargeted direct mailers and blanketed TV ads, their candidate would win more elections. While America has already seen the power of these more targeted strategies in President Obama’s campaign wins, as explored in the June, 2013 New York Times Magazine article “Data You Can Believe In,” conventional strategies for the most part remain uncontested, and true innovation has yet to hatch.

Innovation in Politics: Rewrite the Playbook and Change the Organizational Model

Being an innovator in politics would mean rewriting the playbook and building a political organization that is always learning and experimenting with new technologies and strategies. This organizational model should be the model which all future political organizations use to develop political campaign strategies.

Political candidates, campaign managers, and political consultants should consider the following when developing an innovative political organization:

1. Recruit problem-solving individuals who have multidisciplinary backgrounds and who have the ability and bandwidth to focus on the bigger picture: changing the way politicians approach politics.

2. Take more calculated risks. While some of these risks will fail, others will succeed. When Porsche preemptively decided to get ahead of the SUV trend by introducing the Cayenne in 2002, they were taking a huge risk. But the Cayenne now accounts for more than half the company’s global sales.

3. Consumers demand customer service from private sector companies, and they expect immediate responses to their inquiries. The same will be true of voters. As more homes come online, politicians will be able to host virtual, two-way interactive town halls in voters’ homes and gather real-time feedback on their policies. While this might not become a reality for the 2016 presidential election, it is a very real possibility for the 2020 presidential election, especially if the much-rumored Apple TV is realized.

4. Politics need innovation labs focused on changing the way politicians win elections. A lab should be run as a fully independent arm of a political organization—away from campaign headquarters, to avoid the echo-chamber effect. Political operatives would be able to focus on the long-term picture of winning multiple elections, not just one. In the retail industry, companies such as Nordstrom, Walmart, Target, and Kohl’s have each established innovation labs to figure out the future of retailing. As a result, for example, Walmart has had great success in developing mobile apps that allow their customers to shop when, where, and how they want to.

5. Politicians need to stay in front of their message. On-demand political news channels would allow the politician unprecedented access to voter’s living rooms. Platforms such as xBox Live, which currently has 48 million members, and Google’s Chromecast would be great places to start.

The traditional ways of connecting and interacting with voters will dramatically change over the next 10 years. Will political organizations willingly adapt to trends in the private sector or will they continue not to innovate because that is the status quo?

Political Innovation: Developing an Innovative Political Organization is an article written by Brulte & Company Co-Founder Grayson Brulte that was originally published on The MIT Sloan Executive Education [email protected]™ Blog.

Innovations in Politics: On Demand Media

The absence of the introduction of innovation in our political election system should raise serious questions about why we are not adopting and embracing new technology that could be both be cost efficient and justified in achieving a common goal.

It has never been more critical and apparent that leading figures in the political arena should be more accessible and mindful of new methods and strategies that could enhance the overall voter experience.

Innovation in politics is near non-existent and it shouldn’t be since voters are more connected than ever. Why is innovation non-existent in politics? The answer is rather simple, many political operatives do not want to up-end their lucrative businesses as new technologies would indubitably eat into their profit margins. This is clearly demonstrated as the keyword “Political Innovation” is only searched on average 20 times a month on Google in the United States.

This is the same problem that destroyed the record business. Digital music sales cannibalized CD sales when industry executives were unwilling to embrace new technologies. The big difference between the music industry and politics is that there will always be a need for politicians to represent their constituents.

Political operatives know this very well. While it is up for debate, the one defining fact is that most political operatives are not innovators. For the most part they are not willing to roll up their sleeves and try something that might disrupt their current business model.

How many individuals do you know who watch TV without skipping ads on a regular basis? Out of those handful of individuals who do watch TV and do not skip ads, how many are not technologically savvy and do not own a DVR? Do those same individuals still receive the majority of their bills and correspondences through the mail?

Now ask yourself, is this individual an early adopter of technology? More than likely they are not. Early adopters who are registered to vote do not spend time watching countless hours watching live broadcast TV and patiently waiting for correspondences in the mail. These early adopters are living in a real-time society with access to pretty much anything they want on demand.

Why do political operatives continue advise continue to their clients to spend the majority of their campaign funds on TV and print mailer ads? Because it is what they know and if they lose the race, they can justify this to the candidate because this strategy has won political races in the past.

While this formula has worked before, it will not continue to work in the future. The future of reaching voters is more hyper-targeted than ever. Politicians need to learn how to become real-time publishers of content.

Instead of spending millions of dollars on a TV ad buy, why not call Microsoft to explore innovative ways to target and reach potential new voters via the xBox Live platform which has 48 million members and growing? Or perhaps even call Samsung to learn about developing an app for their Smart TV platform?

If exploring strategic relationships seems like an overwhelming task, politicians could follow in Chris Christie’s footsteps by creating a series of YouTube videos to promote their message. But why stop there when a politician could “Plus It” as Walt Disney famously said? To Plus It, political campaigns could purchase a GoPro Hero 3+ for $399.99 that would allow them to shoot 4k videos and upload 1080p high-resolution video YouTube.

Voters could then watch those crystal clear videos on their TVs via Google’s Chromecast from any device that either has Chrome installed or the YouTube App. The early adopter demographic of voters consumes content on demand, not at a pre-subscribed viewing time.

While a politician might not see a great ROI when they first start experimenting with new technologies and platforms, they will be building a long-term relationship with the voter. These new technologies will allow the politician unprecedented access to both new and current voters.

With the upcoming 2016 Presidential Election will Republican candidates reach out to the Romney team to inquire about what technologies worked and what lessons they learned from implementing new technologies?

Will those same team members share their honest unfiltered thoughts regarding which technologies and strategies worked and failed and why? Or will the Democrats continue to out innovate the Republicans by embracing new technologies and continuing to build a highly-scalable mobile ground game powered in part by SalesForce?

As technology evolves and voter habits change, innovation will allow politicians to stay in front of the message and connect directly with the voters. With the upcoming 2016 Presidential Election will we learn if old habits die hard and if new innovative technologies such as streaming video on xBox Live or developing an app for a Smart TV will become a reality?

xBox Live, Chromecast and Smart TV apps will enable politicians to get ahead of the message and connect directly with new voters in an interactive way like never before.

Innovations in Politics: On Demand Media is an article written by Brulte & Company Co-Founder Grayson Brulte.

In-Flight Innovation

Would you like in-flight Wi-Fi on your next flight? It will cost you a premium in addition to any movies or food that you might purchase on board.

If you are traveling on a plane that offers Gogo, and you would like to connect to the internet, it will cost you $14 for a daily pass, and a monthly pass for a airline you frequent will cost you $39.95, according to Gogo’s “Buy Before You Fly” service pricing chart. Forget to buy access before you fly? That will cost you extra. Should it? I don’t think so.

Airlines are not innovating and enhancing the in-flight entertainment experience. Instead, they are falling back on their existing model of adding new fees and raising existing fees for services. Fees do not create value—they create customer service headaches.

It is time for an airline to become an industry leader and to cannibalize their existing in-flight entertainment offerings. The first step should be an all-encompassing in-flight entertainment package that creates value for their paying passengers by offering a great experience. Whether traveling on business or for pleasure, passengers will gravitate toward an airline that is offering them value.

Perhaps Harry Sloan and Jeff Sagansk of Global Eagle Entertainment will be the innovators who will change in-flight entertainment. They are already starting to innovate by providing the technology that powers DISH’s free live TV programming on Southwest Airlines. Passengers can watch live TV using their smartphones, tablets or laptops for free as long as the promotion is active. But why stop there when it could be complimentary all the time?

Imagine a complimentary in-flight Wi-Fi service that would allow you to stream HBO GO and Netflix on your next flight? Or starting a movie on your iPad and continuing to watch from where you last left off on the screen behind the seat? What about an in-flight entertainment system that would allow you to load your favorite movies, games, and music before you even stepped foot on the plane?

Now imagine if all of this were complimentary.

In-flight experiences like this will happen when an airline steps up and says we want to be a leader and an innovator. We want to create value for our passengers and change the way you fly. This is the future of commercial in-flight entertainment. The only question is which airlines are willing to fundamentally rethink their existing in-flight business model to create value for passengers?

According to Gogo, only about 6% of fliers used their in-flight Wi-Fi service in the first quarter of 2013. With only a 6% adoption rate, the market is demonstrating that there is little to no demand for paid in-flight Wi-Fi at their current prices and restrictions in tandem with a substandard internet connection.

Will Richard Branson be the innovator who looks at the numbers and notices that less than 16% of passengers aboard Virgin America flights pay for in-flight Wi-Fi, according to The Wall Street Journal? Will he build on Virgin’s heritage of risk-taking by cannibalizing an existing revenue stream to create value for Virgin America passengers?

The innovations suggested above would allow airlines to slightly increase the average fare, as consumers would be more focused on value-added services rather than strictly upon the price. Alternatively, the airlines could sell non-invasive in-flight advertising to make up for the lost revenue. At the current prices, in-flight Wi-Fi is primarily appealing to the frequent business traveler; that would change if an airline offered complimentary in-flight Wi-Fi.

“I would be more inclined to fly an airline which offered complimentary Wi-Fi and a bespoke in-flight experience,” said Jeanne Caputo, VP of Sales and Industry Relations for MTC Limousine & Corporate Coach, a global transportation company based in Bedford Hills, NY.

Airline executives: it is time to start innovating and creating value for your passengers. Frequent Flier programs and updated airport lounges are no longer innovative. Innovating is disrupting and sometimes cannibalizing an existing business model in order to grow the business and create value. Passengers are full of great ideas—sometimes you just have to listen.

Would you fly a particular airline if they offered complimentary in-flight Wi-Fi and offered an in-flight entertainment experience tailored to you? Please share your thoughts.

In-Flight Innovation is an article written by Brulte & Company Co-Founder Grayson Brulte that was originally published on The MIT Sloan Executive Education [email protected]™ Blog.

Let Children Play, Explore and Dream

Let Children Play, Explore and Dream is an opinion letter written by Brulte & Company Co-Founder Grayson Brulte that was published in the Wednesday, August 14, 2013 edition of The Financial Times.

Sir, Emma Jacobs’ article on New York’s kindergartens (“The serious side of child’s play”, August 9) is a vivid reminder of what is wrong with today’s educational system.

Instead of forcing children to grow up and test well at such a young age, we should be focused on the child’s long-term growth potential. When children are forced to grow up too soon and participate in regimented testing at three years of age, they lose their ability to play, to explore and to dream.

In my humble opinion, play is the best thing for a child’s growth and future success. Parents need to grasp and understand the importance of play in a young child’s life and how it will allow them to grow up to become the unique person that they want to be.

Play allows a child to explore, experiment and innovate. Will today’s parents raise tomorrow’s innovators or will they continue to force them to grow up too young?

Grayson Brulte, Co-Founder & President, Brulte & Company, Beverly Hills, CA, US

Let Children Play, Explore and Dream

This letter was in in response to The Serious Side of Child’s Play article written by Emma Jacobs in The Financial Times