Who trapped VMWare in the innovators dilemma …and how do they get out

A great post on techcrunch by Ben Kepes highlighted just how trapped by their business model incumbents can become.

Who trapped VMWare? To me the answer is 3 fold.

  • Bad buyers

IT departments within large organization – are, generally speaking, paying little more than lip-service to the growing calls of a new generation of technology

Buyers, traditionally the IT department are rewarded to maintain the status quo, particularly with Cloud computing – a form of outsourcing.  This response is due to cludge of drivers….Reliability demands – any change pretty much leads to outages, having kit means having a job, arrogance – we know better than you, and fear or comfort with a current technology set, there is also some pretty nefarious stuff that goes on.  People with specific technology skills have made a lifelong career in being the only person who can make an app work…

The problem with lagard IT, is it reinforces to vendors not to change, and in some instances they will actively come out and sell against the new paradigm (Oracle anyone?). HT to Simon Wardley on the above adoption cycle

Unfortunately this leaves gaps in the market for new entrants…and this leads to disruption.

  • Bad management

Listening blindly to your customer, using dated strategy or financial models to new situations or simply telling your bosses what they want to hear, not what they need to hear all lead to reinforcing the incumbent business model.  Listening to the customer, particularly the ones above creates a false sense of security.  Eventually even the IT dept will adopt the new, with cloud its because they will eventually end up at a financial disadvantage, and then you are stuffed… and in the mean time, your mid-level managers have been vetting out any ‘radical’ new business idea, so by the time you need them, well its too late.  If you look at your bench-strength and its full of MBA’s…you are screwed. They are indoctrinated with the same playbook as everyone else (there is no differentiation when its the same)…. instead you should look for outliers, rogue elements because they are the ones who will create something truely new

Senior management is also guilty of not being true stewards of their companies.

“CEO’s are doing the best they can under the circumstances, but there are units in their organization that need to be protected, prices that need to be supported, sacred cows that can’t be touched …….Which is great, unless your competition doesn’t agree. …. When you are competing against someone who doesn’t have to worry about an existing business, they will almost always defeat you.” Seth Godin

Taking a short term view, protecting the old… taking the overt or covert approach of ‘walking back slowly’ you are ceding the future market and opening yourself to disruption…. true leaders stand up, make hard calls and do the right thing for the company long term….

Apple CEO, Tablets will canabalise PC‘s

SAP has said the same, Amazon has done it.    Get the point, great companies bite the bullet

  • The sharemarket

The incessant demands of the sharemarket to protect or grow existing revenues is idiotic.  The analysts community can’t deal with new business lines … “hard to value that new thing, not used to it”.  Shares slide on news that companies are investing in non-core business.  You guys need to take a look at yourself,  the GFC (which I hold shareholders at least partially culpable) proved the point that incessant demands for more drives bad behavior… and then if you don’t like what the CEO is doing, you agitate to reinforce the status quo… numpties.

  • How can they get out?
  1. Start planning for the future – look for the areas that are commoditising and build an ecosystem on top of it.  Get a lot of developers to innovate on top of that (cos you DO NOT have the skills to build the new thing) and watch for the winners. Cloudfoundry looks like a winner to me
  2. Stop listening to your customers…. start WATCHING your non-customers. They are likely already using precursor’s of the thing that will be your death nell
  3. Get an innovation program in place – agree to the incremental risk and potentially spend (not always), and distribute your effort across core, adjacent and transformational innovations
  4. Get different people with different skills working on this different initiatives. Your rogue elements are probably already leading the way, just give them direction and focus
  5. Capture ideas from the source, and get them unvetted.  This is normally the front line helpdesk.
  6. Allocate resources to innovation, stay the course – its a long game,  and don’t compromise. If it is annoying people you are on the right track
  7. Get to grips with canabalisation, internally and externally. The alternative is extinction.
  8. Be prepared to fail, don’t encourage it but do not penalize it either.  When you do, get another group of smart folks to look at the remnants, dollars to doughnuts there is something there, maybe they can make it work

 

 

The Genius of Seth

I've been struggling a bit lately. Main issue is coming to terms with what I want to do with my life, and especially what i'm going to do in that 10 hour period of the day most people call 'work'.

To be honest its been stressing me out. So it was with a huge grin a lot of relief I read this post from Seth Godin. http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/12/predictions.html. 
Love that last bit, major lift for me. Thanks Seth

But just think about how impossible it is for you to predict what your life is going to be like in four or six years… being ready for anything is the only rational strategy. 

Does brand matter?

This might seem like a silly question, most marketers (which I am) will crawl over broken glass to tell you that its everything And to some extent it is. (Seth Godin’s post on Hunger is brilliant at describing JUST how powerful). But picture this. In a SaaS framework, especially where you are taking a utility service, does the brand REALLY matter?

I was reading the comments on Mary-Jo Foley’s post about sharepoint in the cloud and was struck by the intensity of the brand dislike coming through. Classic anti-Microsoft vitriol. But if I wanted I could find the same on Google, opensource products etc.

Given that any decision to move to a SaaS application should include the ability to extricate yourself and your data from that provider, does the brand thing even matter? Consider email as the example. Most would agree its a utility application, valuable but utility. If you get antsy with what you get from Google, move to Zoho. You get Antsy with Microsoft move to Zimbra. You get the picture.

In that world, does the brand actually mean anything? Do you know what brand of road you use? What about the tap water?  Does the provider’s brand mean the utility provided is any different from their competitors? What about if you bring your historical perceptions to the table in a SaaS world, does it make a difference? Really make a difference?  Why would you pay differing amounts? Would you fall for the marketing?