Category Archives: Management

Observations on managing of technology companies

Keiretsu Whole Products

Posted on by

An auto insurance company can make you feel loved. A recent event caused me to interact with my insurance company (Geico) to have some minor repair work performed. Geico does many things right, from well architected web site that deliver simple yet effective customer support, to claims agents who are fast and efficient, to non-offensive lizard spokesanimals. One element of their success is delivering a whole product on the ground by forming keiretsus with other companies. In this instance, I arrived at the designated body shop knowing that Geico had set my appointment and arranged for a free rental car. What I discovered is that Geico identifies service providers and helps to manage their cooperation for Geico customers. Body shop are selected to assure great service and quality work and the car rental company (in this case Enterprise) is selected for the same reasons. Enterprise is given a desk at … Continue reading →

Operational Marketing

Posted on by

Lying on the floor while talking to my insurance company shows why marketing must be involved with operations. In the past week I did business with a bedding retailer, which indirectly led to filing an insurance claim on my car. The bedding company’s operations were a disaster – they got precisely 0% of our order correct, causing my wife and I to camp on surplus mattresses placed on the bedroom floor, checking The Sleep Guide’s mattress protectors tips. Their late-arriving truck hogged the street, causing a passing vehicle to clip my side-view mirror. Unlike the bedding retailer, the insurance company (Geico) executed perfectly, from a well-designed web claims form to nearly instant claims analysis, body shop appointments rental car reservations and more. The contrast is stark. The bedding company experience after the sale (and to a lesser degree, during the sale) was a study in manufacturing customer frustration. The salesmen … Continue reading →

Complex Customers

Posted on by

Executive assistants have veto power over multi-million dollar software sales. Complex selling involves a lot of complexity, none more complex than having to deal with many different stakeholders with very different motivations. Once two or more people collaborate on a purchase decision, they raise questions, voice objections, derail progress and drag-out your sales cycle until the Second Coming. Sometimes the lowest caste can kill a sales single handedly. IT techies are the worst in many respects – having been one in a former career, I can attest to their ultimate veto power. Tell an avid Windows admin that you want to install a Linux infrastructure and you’ll meet a wall that howitzers couldn’t knock over. Techies know nothing happens without their expert participation, and they gladly use their veto power to guard their empires. Marketing and sales need to manage the sales cycle, engaging stakeholders at points in time when … Continue reading →

Marketing Fail

Posted on by

Marketing jobs have the shelf life of milk. In the tech industry, marketing people move around a lot. Unlike code cutters, their skills can be well used up to the limits of their experience, then they see little incremental improvement from their activities. Seeing the end of a good run, they look for other companies – smaller in size, with new products, or just something exciting. Other times they get fired. Marketing can fail. What confounds many in management is which part of marketing failed and why. Marketing is both strategy and execution, and are typically carried-out by different people or teams. When sales are slow, management wants to know why and occasionally even marketing cannot (or will not) clearly identify what is not working. Obfuscating marketing malfunctions has become more difficult in the digital age because we can measure what is and is not succeeding, at least at the … Continue reading →

Desirable Innovations

Posted on by

Innovation occurs at the intersection of the possible and desirable. (you better quote me when you repeat that) While filtering a thread concerning Apple and the missing Steve Jobs decade, the subject of innovation erupted. Though an incomplete assessment, it seems plain enough that one man can (and did) guide the innovative soul of an enterprise. Though some people like to anoint Jobs as the patron saint of innovation, he simply saw what was desirable and beautiful, and what was technically possible. He then bred the two. Minor innovation occurs daily here in Silicon Valley. People who twiddle bits and assemble breadboards, and who carry on conversations with customers, continually find and build innovations of the lesser variety. Small improvements in what people do and how they do it constantly reduce business overhead, ease production, or make consumer gizmos more usable. Yet minor innovations are the product of very specific … Continue reading →

CMO Data Woe

Posted on by

Marketing has met IT, and thus far they are on speaking terms, though nothing lasts forever. I was party to a discussion in which CMOs disclosed what is most vexing to them, and the answer in a walnut shell is data. The promise of digitally tracking leads, automating prospect management throughout the pipeline, big data with supplemental data, and laser sharp analytics is not coming true for most. Truth be told, many are not yet at the starting line. Data, like iron ore, is eventually useful but mining and refining it is dirty work. The problems at this stage of marketing evolution are many, and they provide good check lists and warning signs for CMOs with a hankering to engage IT (who will make many of these items painfully clear). Not everything is digital: Though much of a customer’s buying behavior can be digitally mapped, much cannot. Your brand, non-digital … Continue reading →

Apple Brand Polishing

Posted on by

Apple is now the most valuable brand on the planet, with Google growing faster and likely to overtake them. Poor old Coca Cola has dropped to third while these upstarts reign. Interbrand recurrently measures the strength of various global brands. They recently released their latest report that knocked Coke off its thirteen year perch at number one. As the chart shows, Google began their assent in 2009 and Apple followed in 2011, all riding the wave of a highly wired and wireless global society. You may drink Coke, Pepsi or bottled water, but everybody sips while searching Google on their iPhones. Interbrand’s analysis is not the old school, completely financial estimate of customer good will that expresses a brand’s cumulative equity. If we used that measure, Coke would still command the lead with Coke $12B in customer good will, Google would have $10B worth, and Apple would trail with a … Continue reading →