Archive for September, 2006

Hey Brother, Can You Tell The Future?

Friday, September 29th, 2006

It is interesting that there is a perennial hope that someone (typically someone else) will have a better idea of what the future brings than us. Well that is the central theme behind the new wave of social networks of oracles.

It takes several forms, a recent favorite being the all-business, Bizpredict, where you can predict (not so distant) future business events like iPod generation 45 or whether mySpace is going to outshine Yahoo in traffic. At Bizpredict you are playing with, well, play-money.

If you want to put your money where your mouth is then you need to go to the new casino of fortunetellers, HedgeStreet. Here you can bet (I mean hedge) on various future predictions like where the housing prices are going next week or if oil is going to dip below $55 again. All in good fun. Especially while you are ahead.

Th200609292

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Is There a Microsoft-Free Zone?

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

Nowadays I’m a complete Mac user, but having run a Windows security software business before I am always fascinated by the various strategic moves Microsoft makes. An article from EDS Fellow Randy Mears poses an interesting question that is relevant for many technology businesses large and small: What trends do you jump on and which do you ignore?

Given their practically unlimited resources, Microsoft has the means of hedging their bets in a massive scale and keep a finger in most technology pies from video downloads (MS Video), music (Zune) to social networking (Wallop). Or as Zoli mentioned, the also run blogging tool, the Windows Live Writer. They also have as many enterprise focused business ventures as they have consumer-oriented ones. In fact there is hardly any facet of the technology business that Microsoft does not enter.

It is a very different business model from other technology majors like IBM, SAP, Oracle that tend to keep closer to their core business without the broad line extensions typical of Microsoft.

Is it possible that Microsoft gave up on pursuing an innovation-based core competency strategy in pursuit of a GE-esque number 1 or 2 in every segment model? Now, GE does that very profitably while Microsoft’s excursions outside their core OS/application businesses into internet, media, gaming or web properties have not yielded shareholder return.

While many startups and experts worry about Microsoft’s adventures into all things technology, I think the real question is where Redmond wants to be. While they are too big for pure play, clear direction certainly would help investors better evaluate the stock and the customer base can also figure out what this vendor is really great for.

Th55S-2

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Why Business People (still) Speak Like Idiots

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

We are cognizant of the inherent synergies in our cooperative alliances….

Having sat through a 2-hour mind-numbing product presentation full of the latest buzz-words reminded me of the great book I read a while back titled "Why Business People Speak Like Idiots". In order to be part of both the watercooler and the boardroom inner crowd people use sentences they could not possibly explain even under duress. To help straight talk and reduce trance at the workplace - this book is a great guide. How can you find out your own Bull* Ratio? The authors collaborated with Deloitte Consulting to publish a free tool that would give your eloquent prose a Bull rating. Come on, go ahead and realize how much of this muck slipped into your vocabulary… Torero!!

Istock Th-51

Technorati Tags: bullshit, communication, leadership

A Demand-side view of Enterprise 2.0

Tuesday, September 26th, 2006

Istock Vsml

There are endless discussions of what would increase adoption of Web2.0 in the enterprise. And to this point we have not seen the kind of success (both customer adoption and financial exit) that MySpace and Facebook enjoys evolving enterprise space. But then again that is a supply-side view of the markets (meaning I built it why don’t they come?).

If we take a demand view the picture is more interesting and complicated. Two of the major elements of Enterprise 2.0 (depending on who you ask) is SOA and Social Networks/Collaboration. Neither of which is really new to the enterprise. Most companies we work with have an SOA roadmap with varying level of potential plans for the transformation of the user experience. But it is there. As far as collaboration goes - it is amazing what some IT shops do with Notes and some Web savvy…

Will an enterprise user be more pleasantly engaged with a mashed-up, Ajax-powered collaboration tool of late than a good old Lotus Notes hyperlinked environment juiced up with Websphere and Sametime? Probably. Will there be a massive jump in productivity, creativity and get-goingness? Doubtful.
And that is the rub in the green eyeshade-tinted world of Enterprise IT. The cubicle-bound technology innovator in a major company is faced with the following obstacles - that also severely limit the sales aspirations of the next Enterprise 2.0 startup:

  • 5% Innovation Budget - Many large IT shops spend 50-70% of their budgets on depreciation and operations (a.k.a keeping the lights on), 20-25% on application development, maintenance and the remaining sliver on potential R&D. And that covers everything from the Web front-end to the good old Cobol accounting system, the latest data harmonization or integration standard, mobile apps and (of course) journey into Web 2.0. Many times there is simply not enough IT bandwidth to get a real foothold beyond the tinkerers.
  • Breaking from the Pack - There are diminishing rewards for the adventuring technologist in an IT group for being a first mover. Careers are typically tied to core enterprise applications, traditional web properties, analytics and enterprise architecture work. The lone innovator needs the support of some powerful internal allies to launch an emerging solution project.
  • Push for Lean IT - Most large IT organizations still have not worked out the excesses of technology excuberance and the resulting proliferation of the technology and application portfolio. Many shops launched simplification, standardization, data harmonization initiatives to clean up the mess, get costs in line and free up money and people to tackle the next programs.
  • Investment justification - Most IT groups struggle with the justification of SOA and Collaboration investments and just classify them as strategic or infrastructure investments. This is a mistake. There are great studies of the value of collaboration and SOA from everyone from McKinsey to SAP and business arguments will pave a more predictable success for approval.

In a recent McKinsey study (subscription) the IT group of a Utility company spent over $4 Million a year in collaboration related personnel costs. Projecting this to all enterprise functions we are in the tens of millions in costs. The potential savings, more than any user experience improvement, will get enterprise adoption going.

The great news is that freed-up budgets will be looking for exactly the kind of value proposition Enterprise 2.0 offers. Better user experience, flexible applications, user-driven configuration, web-desktop integration. This can also be IT’s big comeback for better alignment with the business user.

Technorati Tags: , ,

The Anatomy of Enterprise Overhead Bloating

Tuesday, September 26th, 2006

Having spent my fair share in both the entrepreneurial and large enterprise world it always made me wonder why in big companies overhead gets out of hand. Before you start rolling your eyes consider this - in most areas of the enterprise scale provides leaner processes and organizations - larger companies have better negotiating power (efficient sourcing), better supply chain (lower overall cost of supply chain), lower transportation costs, more cost-efficient distribution and so on. But not in real overhead - the way we define it.

Our definition of Real Overhead is the following:

Real Overhead: The percentage of your workforce that does not interact with either the product or the customer

This is always a fascinating conversation with customers. In my last startup we had 2.6% of the workforce in this category. 97.4% was interacting with the product or the customer. I just worked with a Fortune 500 client where this ratio is around 25-35% (they can’t quite figure it out). In their case thousands of people do something else but what makes the company create value.

Picture 3-1Picture 2-5

I think the term overhead just covers up the essence of the problem which is actually simple.
Buffering for lack of information

So the big aha is actually quite obvious: organizations buffer for lack of information and the resulting ambiguity. Depending on the company it will be the most accessible form of resource which is usually

- commitment levels - this is my perennial favorite and a massive enterprise disease. Almost every group in a large organization plays with commitment levels. It means keeping more inventory than necessary, sandbagging sales forecasts to leave room for error and so on.

- capacity (machine or human) - this one is also obvious. We cannot plan for 90 or 100% utilization of any resource with downtime (machine) and time off (people). So most organization plan for a lot less and execute at an ever lower level.

- people - This is the Real Overhead because the easiest ambiguity buffer is people. Almost everywhere where information flow is a problem you will see hordes of analysts, controllers and also proliferation of spreadsheets and meetings. This is the most accessible measure of Real Overhead as stated above.

In any organization if the Real Overhead is above 15% there is a structural information problem.

The prescription is better information, of course, but that can come from a variety of approaches ranging from

  • simplified processes
  • enterprise integration
  • better analytics
  • better workflow

More importantly it is not always a technology solution.

Part of the advantage of a startup is that it has fewer products/services, fewer channels and therefore fewer ambiguities. So companies that simplify their product portfolio or channels or customer/supplier base typically see a reduction of Real Overhead. Also companies that move from an operating company to a holding company many times reduce their real overhead.

Unfortunately many large companies we dealt with do not even know exactly how many people work for them, let alone what they do all day. Nonetheless measuring RO is a always revealing for those taking that tentative first step…

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Replace Big “M” Marketing with Big “B” Marketing

Monday, September 25th, 2006

There is at least one great success story of a company finding global markets by the new age version of word of mouth: “Marketing Blogs”.
The wine company Stormhoek relies on blogging as its primary marketing channel. It is well networked and linked in blogosphere and has great endorsements as a result. Hard to sample the product remotely, but I already concur with one of their many promotional cartoons on their blog…

Non Wine

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Landgrab called .mobi

Monday, September 25th, 2006

Ok, this is that time of the year again when hordes of entrepreneurs, speculators or adventurers go and register their share of cola.mobi, frenchfries.mobi, isellstuff.mobi sites. Yes, the .mobi domain will be open next Tuesday. Landgrab is a very successful business model, like anything based on the temporary imbalance of supply and demand (remember the overnight condo-flipping wealth in Florida?).

There is definitely the core list of registered trademarks, brands and aspiring brands that will be registered. The good old (1999) Trademark Cyberpiracy Prevention Act took care of the resellers of pepsi.mobi but there is still a lot of room for sales.mobi and the like. So get up bright and early next Tuesday when the gates of registrars open. My vote is for dowereallyneedanotherdomain.mobi or for a more supportive view look here.

 Images Header Logo

Technorati Tags: , ,

Web 2.0 boom cycle

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

Following up on our earlier post, Paul Kedrosky’s analysis (see figure below) reminds us how far the venture investments have taken off in the Web 2.0 space. Any well observing reader recognizes chart patterns that seem to become vertical, so my comment is simply this: increasing liquidity (exits) are likely to follow after all that good money is looking for the next mySpace or Facebook-type exit. Then as David Bell and Peter Fader from Wharton pointed out we can relive the past boom sequence by seeing these ventures moving from web to mobile once more.

249480536 8E6F2A594F O

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Social Networking meet Ebay meet Second Life

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

Weblo is the latest addition to the billion dollar bonanza of social networking companies but with a very interesting twist. It has stacked in all the winning models of late. It is an auction site / marketplace , it is a social networking site and it also took tips from the virtual world, Second Life, that has spawned many very real millionaires.
So here it is. You can preregister and tip the competence/confidence equation in your favor. I think someone at the M&A group of Yahoo/Microsoft/News Corp/etc just sat up and took notice.

200609230926

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

YouTube, Facebook and Shift in Boom Cycles

Thursday, September 21st, 2006

It is always fascinating when we can actually see the shift in boom cycles and the reallocation of capital on a massive scale.
At the same time that real estate and commodities are (let’s just say) taking a good, long breather, Web 2.0 business are starting their wave of exists. Whether it is the 42% growth in valuation for Facebook in one year or the billion dollar deals for networks Facebook and youTube - we can comfortably say that market confirmed the shift in boom cycles.

Wherever the smart money moves, economies move. I know we cannot compare the 7.2 trillion dollar (net) real estate market to a couple of feeble web deals (a billion here and there and soon it adds up to real money), but I am sure Mark Zuckerberg growth index just outpaced the real estate index. Welcome the new new economy.

Boomcycles-1

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Business Model Strategies

Wednesday, September 20th, 2006

Alex Osterwalder has a fascinating site on business modeling. Building on various works from Marc Singer and John Hagel he broadens the components of the optimal business model to 9 components that are easily identified and managed.

More importantly using Osterwalder’s model we can start using traditional tools like benchmarking and stages of excellence models to assess how he business performs against its selected business model strategy. What I particularly like about the Hagel / Osterwalder model is that it lends itself well to businesses with multiple business model in multiple maturity stages.

Picture 2-4-2

Technorati Tags: , ,

How Companies Decline with Style…

Tuesday, September 19th, 2006

The interesting question about Microsoft latest entry into music and video is where it places the company’s business model.
Considering that the very diverse business models of Walmart and Microsoft now compete in the same space with Google and Apple we can conclude that we are in more of a mature or defensive lifecycle than an innovative lifecycle of these companies.
There are many winning business models and most companies in their lifecycle go through many of these models.
In our approach that links competitive business models to dominant life cycles of the organization the following stages exist:

  • Innovation Stage - business model differentiation that may include differentiation of product, channel, brand. In this stage the key metric is time to market and cash burn rate.
  • Growth Stage - the focus shifts to revenue growth and structured sales / marketing / channel driven business models. The focus and key metric is revenue growth.
  • Optimization Stage - is all about earnings maximization. In this stage any elements of the business model (products, divisions, channels, customers) can be eliminated in the process of earnings growth. The focus is increasingly short term and innovative or potentially high growth model elements get eliminated. The focus is earnings maximization.
  • Defensive Stage - is the phase where most elements of the company’s business model is under competitive pressure and the organization has to eliminate many parts of the model to defend the remaining core, which again may be tangible or intangible advantage. The key focus is back to maintaining profitability and optimizing cash flow.

So where does that place Microsoft? Most of us involved in technology would like to think that high tech companies are in a perpetual innovation stage but that is simply not true. This is the current landscape in our assessment

Innovation stage companies are for example YouTube, mySpace,
Growth stage is represented by Google, Salesforce, Apple’s media business
Optimization stage has companies like Microsoft
Defensive stage is dominant for firms like PC OEM manufacturers

Successful companies have multiple business models active in the organization and are able to shift resources to enable future growth. Companies even in a defensive stage may have successful business models brewing inside. Whether they have the ability to make the shift to the new model is the difference between a DEC and Apple.

Optimization and Defensive stage companies with an incubated innovation or growth stage business model:

General Motors with Saturn
Apple with media (iTunes)
Ebay with Skype

The question is where it places Microsoft and more importantly what are the real innovation stage business models at Microsoft.

Technorati Tags: , ,

The Way of the Geek and the Jock

Monday, September 18th, 2006

Over the years we have been experimenting with various models to simplify the analysis of the various paths to success.
We will have several articles on this topic but for now let us introduce the concept.

  • In this model there are two basic directions: improving competence and improving confidence.
  • There are no right or wrong ways just more or less effective strategies for reaching a point of success.
  • Success is defined here as the standard of achievement in a particular group, but success is a social construct not an individual one, meaning it is based on group perception and not the individual’s.
  • There are many journeys in the model, some moving forward some backwards in the attainment of the state called success.
  • You gain competence through an intellectual development process and you gain confidence through an interpersonal development process.
  • In this model you have to be both competent and have advanced interpersonal skills to be defined successful.

Many groups hold an idealized path to success shown below. The belief is that you progress equally in your compentence and confidence capacities and reach a successful state. You gain confidence by getting more competent and more competent through your interactions with broader interpersonal interactions.

Picture 2-2

While we will talk about various topics like burnout, Peter principle and others later, let me start with two fun introductions. This is something most people can relate to. The archetype of the GEEK and the JOCK.

  • The GEEK starts by developing competence and later either gains confidence through interpersonal skills and becomes successful or exits the race and continues an more isolated competence journey. This journey can be called toughening up.
  • The JOCK’s journey is the exact opposite by starting with developing social and interpersonal skills and either develops competence and becomes successful or exits the race. This journey can be called smartening up.

Picture 3 Picture 4

Technorati Tags: , ,

Who wants some winning business models?

Sunday, September 17th, 2006

We live in the era of business models wars and I though it would be interesting to look at who is searching for successful business models, entrepreneurial strategies and winning startup approaches. I did my fun analysis on Google Trends and while there were slight variations in the results Asia-Pacific region by far is the most active when it comes to these topics. 7 out of the top 10 searches typically come from Asian countries. Guess what are some searches that are most popular in the US now? Real estate crash and exit strategies. Our populace seems more interested in getting out of investments nowadays than getting into them…

Picture 2-1

Technorati Tags: , ,

Why CIOs are (still) not in the boardroom

Friday, September 15th, 2006

Interesting study from Christopher Koch is the fact that only 40% of CIOs report to the CEO and this number seems to stay constant over the years. It is not surprising in our line of work (Value Engineering) because our studies show that less than 50% of IT projects ever set out to achieve any business benefits and a fraction of those ever measure the value created for business.

There are great CIOs that are not only reporting to the CEO but are sitting on the board. I think ultimately this is really very simple.
If you are viewed as someone that constantly creates business value for the enterprise and help drive the business then you will be in the boardroom. If not, you are infrastructure cost and should be slowly but surely reduced as a drag on earnings.

Technorati Tags: ,

Verizon better than Microsoft in Software Development ?

Thursday, September 14th, 2006

Today’s article from the Journal makes you wonder what core competency is at Microsoft. Is it software development, innovation, platform, distribution? Fortunately Verizon may help them reduce that potential list by striking software development. As the Journal writes:

….during the two years the project has been in development [Verizon] became so frustrated with delays and technical glitches with Microsoft’s technology that it replaced some of Microsoft’s personnel and software with its own…

OK so the core maybe innovation. At least that is the promise of Zune taking on the iPod. You can always win a competitive battle with a couple of wasted billions especially if shareholders do not hold you accountable for returns.
Forbes writes:

The Xbox game console is hot, but its division has lost $4 billion in four years and isn’t yet in the black. The mobile-software division, also moneylosing, has just a sliver of the market for cell phone handsets. Microsoft Business Solutions, after acquiring Great Plains Software for $1.1 billion and Navision for $1.4 billion, is supposed to deliver $10 billion in sales by 2010. With its 6% growth rate, MBS will attain that goal in 43 years.

Like Xbox, Zune may take on Apple at 5-10 times the cost of their peer’s R&D budget and since Microsoft shareholders really do not seem to practice any governance over the questionable ROI on R&D spend, I would bet on Microsoft grabbing a good chunk of the market. The sad fact is that in their midlife crisis, Microsoft stocks are even outperformed by Utilities. Maybe the stock is now the new safe haven of orphans and widows… Maybe that is Microsoft’s new Core.

Msft Dju-2

Technorati Tags: ,

Information Technology to become Business Technology ?

Wednesday, September 13th, 2006

George Colony from Forrester recently suggested renaming IT to BT, Business Technology. I concur. In his words:

If you are the head of IT, you are no better than a glorified librarian, dispensing information. In contrast, if you are the head of BT, you are shoulder-to-shoulder with fellow executives who are running the operation. You're focused on improving process and finding new sources of revenue. You apply technology for business results, not as a way to create information of questionable value.

That's what Value Engineering is all about - helping IT folks make the transition and become business executives focused on operational performance and results. Also having the BT designation reminds all of us in the field of technology that technology is business, business is technology and that business is there to create value. We need to explain all our technology innovations in business terms and then - as they say - stand up and deliver. That would have technology back in the business clubs again. Even outside of technology businesses.

Technorati Tags: leadership, value creation

What it takes to win

Tuesday, September 12th, 2006

It is always interesting to watch how other succeed and discern the winning formula. Money magazine featured a couple of companies with great business models and had an ad-hoc myth busting exercise.

Myth 1: You’ve got to have incredible charisma
Myth 2: You must be able to see into the future
Myth 3: You’ve got to stick to your guns, no matter what
Myth 4: You need to take big risks
Myth 5: You need a burning desire to get rich.

It is almost never pure luck. It is almost always a great business model.

Technorati Tags: , , ,