The early 90s saw the emergence of mechanical engineers in building automobiles, followed by civil engineers in the 90s who built the vast infrastructure to support the growing economy, followed by electrical engineers who brought out the telephones and TVs, with computer science/electronics engineers who gave us the computers and then the communication networks in the late 90s. The last decade saw the slow down of innovation in engineering (semiconductor, computers, communications) but saw the emergence a new breed of design engineers who had the capability of using the underlying technologies to build products for the consumers.
Let us look into some of the companies who succeeded in the last decade with an emphasis on the value/differentiation they brought to the marketplace. Apple is the first company that comes to mind. They were not the first ones to bring out a MP3 player, they were not the first ones to bring out a smart phone and they were not the first ones to bring out a tablet. However, they were the first ones to design a complete system (hardware, software and services) that caught the attention of the consumers. iPOD's clean mechanical design (just enough buttons to play music)along with emphasis on ease of use made it the killer product of the last decade. The credit to the success of the products from Apple handily goes to the creative minds of designers who used the fundamental engineering infrastructure to build a product that connected with the masses.
How about most of the internet companies such as Facebook, Yahoo, Zynga, e-Bay and Amazon? There was no engineering marvel at any of those companies. These were a bunch of entrepreneurs who used the existing infrastructure (high speed computers and high speed communications) to connect people all over the world. Although, engineers built those products, the design engineers/user interface designers crafted the product with a look and feel that connected with the masses. There is no doubt in my mind that the designers made the last decade. Is this just the beginning of a ride for arts majors?
I definitely think so. I don't see any fundamental break through technology for the next decade. Anything that can be smaller will be made smaller. Anything that can go wireless will go wireless. Anything that can go faster will go faster. However, the geniuses who can figure out a method to connect the masses and relate with the masses will make companies succeed over the next decade. Education that will promote creativity (design, language) will be needed to build break through companies. Engineers with creative mindset or creative geniuses in any background will find tons of opportunities this next decade. It's definitely the time for arts and design in the high tech world.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Sunday, August 8, 2010
What the expense reports say about the values of the employee
Most of you may already have heard about the troubles Mark Hurd, ex-CEO of the venerable Hewlett Packard got into recently. Hurd was fired by the board because he violated the company’s business standards in relation to his dealings with the contractor. He reportedly fudged expense reports for meals he had with the contractor. Hurd also allegedly helped the woman get paid for work she didn't do. Let us not speculate the entire set of events behind the line of fire. On face value, the company fired one of the best performing CEOs in the technology industry for 'fudging expense reports' as it had to with the values of the leader in question. "The facts that drove the decision for the company had to with integrity, had to do with credibility, had to do with honesty," said HP general counsel Michael Holston. Kudos to HP if they indeed value their values and culture so much.
For a CEO such as Mark Hurd, who made over $24 Million in 2009, what are the reasons to fudge expense reports for a total under $20,000 over 3 years? In this case, one can only speculate that he fudged to 'not expose' his relationship with the woman in play. However, I have known of a few CEOs over my 20 years in the industry, who used to manipulate expense reports just to save a few dollars for lunch when they earn over $300,000 per year. Why?
I remember a quotation from Russian historian Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn meant in his Nobel address, “One word of truth”: “If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being and who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart.” One's position depends completely on the moral compass inside oneself. The moral compass is one that is typically set very early on in one's life by parents or other influencers. Like any other 80/20 rule, I am sure that there are 10% of us who are morally impeccable, another 10% who are completely off track and the rest 80% who are mostly right but tend to falter once in a while. The largest group tends to justify their deeds by waiving their moral codes for 'once'. However, being humans, it almost never stops with once especially when one is not caught. It is responsible for us to recognize our misdirection from our set of moral codes and correct them before it leads to a disaster for the smallest of the transgressions.
What can companies learn about the core values of the employees from fudging expense reports and what should companies do with such employees? Value systems and cultures of companies are mostly effected from the top. When the leaders of companies who manage employees respect and display the value system, it sets a good example for the rest of the organization to follow. When leaders transgress, the rest of the employees take it as an 'option' to justify their actions away from their moral codes. Therefore, it is important for the company to emphasize the value system and identify, educate and correct the transgressors immediately. The small transgressions eventually lead to bigger ones that could put the entire company in a dismal light. When leaders in the companies flaunt their lack of respect of company values consistently, it is mandatory for the organization to use the situation to teach the rest of the company on the purpose and importance of values of the company. I am very sure that the rest of Hewlett Packard got a lesson on the importance of values and ethics in the company. Thanks, Mark Hurd.
For a CEO such as Mark Hurd, who made over $24 Million in 2009, what are the reasons to fudge expense reports for a total under $20,000 over 3 years? In this case, one can only speculate that he fudged to 'not expose' his relationship with the woman in play. However, I have known of a few CEOs over my 20 years in the industry, who used to manipulate expense reports just to save a few dollars for lunch when they earn over $300,000 per year. Why?
I remember a quotation from Russian historian Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn meant in his Nobel address, “One word of truth”: “If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being and who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart.” One's position depends completely on the moral compass inside oneself. The moral compass is one that is typically set very early on in one's life by parents or other influencers. Like any other 80/20 rule, I am sure that there are 10% of us who are morally impeccable, another 10% who are completely off track and the rest 80% who are mostly right but tend to falter once in a while. The largest group tends to justify their deeds by waiving their moral codes for 'once'. However, being humans, it almost never stops with once especially when one is not caught. It is responsible for us to recognize our misdirection from our set of moral codes and correct them before it leads to a disaster for the smallest of the transgressions.
What can companies learn about the core values of the employees from fudging expense reports and what should companies do with such employees? Value systems and cultures of companies are mostly effected from the top. When the leaders of companies who manage employees respect and display the value system, it sets a good example for the rest of the organization to follow. When leaders transgress, the rest of the employees take it as an 'option' to justify their actions away from their moral codes. Therefore, it is important for the company to emphasize the value system and identify, educate and correct the transgressors immediately. The small transgressions eventually lead to bigger ones that could put the entire company in a dismal light. When leaders in the companies flaunt their lack of respect of company values consistently, it is mandatory for the organization to use the situation to teach the rest of the company on the purpose and importance of values of the company. I am very sure that the rest of Hewlett Packard got a lesson on the importance of values and ethics in the company. Thanks, Mark Hurd.
Monday, July 19, 2010
The short life of the marketing chief; guts, glory and blood shed
"Stroll through the C-suite at many companies, and it's an easy bet which executive is a dead man (or woman) walking: the chief marketing officer. CMOs have lasted 26 months on average these days, says recruiter Spencer Stuart, vs. 44 months for CEOs. CMOs at Chico's (CHS), Home Depot (HD), MySpace (NWS), and Rite Aid (RAD) all left their posts after short tenures" said Business Week a few years ago. WHY? Why is it that the chief marketing guy is at the cross hairs too often? Having been in leading marketing roles of high technology companies, I have seen my share of guts, glory and blood shed in the job.
Fundamentally, marketing a product or a company requires understanding the customers and a gut on the direction of the market. A marketing chief of any company is often required to present a detailed and convincing business case showing potential revenues and profits for 5 years from start of production or sometimes 5 years from start of program. Nonetheless, in a market and a customer base where end consumer needs & wants are altered every year or even every few months, it is absolutely impossible to defend a return on investment (ROI) for the next 5 years. With shifting sands underneath, no one, in all honesty, has a clue about the next year. Even worse, in a semiconductor company, where the design cycle of the product takes over 2 years and $20 Million, there is no way for a marketing guy to even alter the features and functions of a product once the product is deep in the design process and the success is determined a few more years later when the customer is in production. In such markets with a long design cycle, long customer engagement cycles and lack of options to test the waters on a regular basis during development process, there is a high likelihood of the product not meeting the exact needs/requirements of the future market.
Since most people in a company tend to have an opinion on the direction of the company or a product, the marketing chief whose job it is to define a strategy for the unknowns in the future has every person around him/her second guessing them and looking over their shoulders. Few have any opinions on their counterparts in finance, operations or engineering. In addition, with most marketing strategies including branding being a long term process, it is only a matter of time for the financial markets looking for quarterly and monthly improvements to lay the blame on the chief marketer.
In my short experience of 20 years in the high technology industry, it is definitely better to be the CEO, CFO, CIO or any other CXO except CMO unless the CEO has been in a chief marketing role to understand the complications involved or has the guts to shield CMO from short term complaints from everyone around them in the interest of the long term future of the company. Believe me, every marketing chief requires lots of guts to serve in a position with little glory and lots of blood shed. Now, tell me why anyone would seek a leading marketing job? Genuine interest to change the world? This ain't a job for the faint hearted for sure.
Fundamentally, marketing a product or a company requires understanding the customers and a gut on the direction of the market. A marketing chief of any company is often required to present a detailed and convincing business case showing potential revenues and profits for 5 years from start of production or sometimes 5 years from start of program. Nonetheless, in a market and a customer base where end consumer needs & wants are altered every year or even every few months, it is absolutely impossible to defend a return on investment (ROI) for the next 5 years. With shifting sands underneath, no one, in all honesty, has a clue about the next year. Even worse, in a semiconductor company, where the design cycle of the product takes over 2 years and $20 Million, there is no way for a marketing guy to even alter the features and functions of a product once the product is deep in the design process and the success is determined a few more years later when the customer is in production. In such markets with a long design cycle, long customer engagement cycles and lack of options to test the waters on a regular basis during development process, there is a high likelihood of the product not meeting the exact needs/requirements of the future market.
Since most people in a company tend to have an opinion on the direction of the company or a product, the marketing chief whose job it is to define a strategy for the unknowns in the future has every person around him/her second guessing them and looking over their shoulders. Few have any opinions on their counterparts in finance, operations or engineering. In addition, with most marketing strategies including branding being a long term process, it is only a matter of time for the financial markets looking for quarterly and monthly improvements to lay the blame on the chief marketer.
In my short experience of 20 years in the high technology industry, it is definitely better to be the CEO, CFO, CIO or any other CXO except CMO unless the CEO has been in a chief marketing role to understand the complications involved or has the guts to shield CMO from short term complaints from everyone around them in the interest of the long term future of the company. Believe me, every marketing chief requires lots of guts to serve in a position with little glory and lots of blood shed. Now, tell me why anyone would seek a leading marketing job? Genuine interest to change the world? This ain't a job for the faint hearted for sure.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Sprinter vs. Marathoner; Who do you choose?
Samuel Kamau Wanjiru from Kenya broke the Olympic record during 2008 Summer Olympics with a 2hr 6 min run of the 26 miles while at the same time Usain Bolt from Jamaica broke both 100m and 200m sprints with 9.69s and 19.30s. Both Usain and Samuel are phenomenal athletes of their generation and are revered in their own runs. However, can Usain be half as good as Samuel in running a marathon race or will Samuel give Usain a run for his money in short distance runs? Everyone of you probably will guess it right. Usain CANNOT be the best marathon runner and Samuel CANNOT be the best sprinter. Why? Researchers have proven that some are built to be sprinters while others are built to be marathoners and then there are others in between. This is pretty much true in our professional environment as well. There are employees who perform their best in short bursts of projects while there are some who can slog consistently through long projects.
Every team requires both sprinters and long distance runners. We need employees that bring in tons of creative energy to work on either short term projects or get a long term project going. However, we absolutely need consistent long term performers to take on the project to the very end. Let me give specific examples of job functions that have shown clear tendencies towards sprinter or marathoner. Sales and marketing folks typically have sprinter like qualities. They need tons of energy to break into a customer or into a market and need that energy to energize the rest of the team behind them. Project managers on the other hand tend to have marathoner like qualities as they have to drive a project over the long term. In Industries such as semiconductors, most design projects take over 2 years to production and therefore require marathoners who can strive to the end.
It is the interest of the company and everyone of its managers to keep their eyes open to see the sprinter or marathoner among everyone its team members. This innate ability to perform with maximum efficiency in short bursts versus perform with consistency over the long term should not only be recognized but also utilized the improve the efficiency of management of team's resources in any company. If you are a sprinter or a marathoner, accept it and look for job functions that fit it with your innate characteristics to maximize your chances for success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)