April 29, 2016
Losing Our Tech-osterone
But this technology vendor, a Fortune 100 company, couldn't figure out how to plug in their laptop for the demonstration.
The presenter is holding his plug from the computer and comparing it to the ports on the monitor and going, "Is it a male or is it a female?"
It's almost like he's going innie or outtie...
And he's repeating this over and over again as he keeps trying to plug in his cord to the various openings.
Everyone is sitting sort of uncomfortably at this point, and so I try to break the tension and say, "I didn't know we were going to be getting an anatomy lesson today."
Well, we got the guy some technical help--the government to the rescue--and before long, he figured out the males and the females and the presentation was on the screen.
The only problem, the title slide for his presentation had a misspelling for the product they were selling.
At this point, all I can say is, this is why American business is getting soft! ;-)
(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)
September 25, 2011
They're Not Playing Ketchup
Heinz, headquartered out of Pittsburgh PA, is ranked 232 in the Fortune 500 with $10.7B in sales, $864M in profits, and 35,000 employees. They have increased their revenue from emerging markets from 5% a few years ago to more than 20% today.
1) Applicability--Your products need to suit local culture. For example, while Ketchup sells in China, soy sauce is the primary condiment there, so in 2010, Heinz acquired Foodstar in China, a leading brand in soy sauce.
2) Availability--You need to sell in channels that are relevant to the local populace. For example, while in the U.S., we food shop predominantly in grocery stores, in other places like Indonesia, China, India, and Russia, much food shopping is done in open-air markets or corner groceries.
3) Affordability--You have to price yourself in the market. For example, in Indonesia, Heinz sells more affordable small packets of soy sauce for 3 cents a piece rather than large bottles, which would be mostly unaffordable and where people don't necessarily have refrigerators to hold them.
4) Affinity--You want local customers and employees to feel close with your brand. For example, Heinz relies mainly on local managers and mores for doing business, rather than trying to impose a western way on them.
Heinz has a solid strategy for doing business overseas, which includes "buy and build"--so that they acquire "solid brands with good local management that will get us into the right channels...then we can start selling other brands."
Heinz manages by being risk aware and not risk averse, diversifying across multiple markets, focusing on the long-term, and working hard to build relationships with the local officials and managers where they want to build businesses.
"Heinz is a 142-year old company that's had only five chairmen"--that's less than the number of CEO's that H-P has had in the last 6 years alone.
I can't help but wonder on the impact of Heinz's stability and laser-focus to their being able to develop a solid strategy, something that a mega-technology company like H-P has been struggling with for some time now.
If H-P were to adopt a type of Heinz strategy, then perhaps, they would come off a little more strategic and less flighty in their decisions to acquire and spin off business after business (i.e. PCs, TouchPads, WebOS, etc.), and change leadership as often as they do with seemingly little due diligence.
What is fascinating about H-P today is how far they have strayed front their roots of their founders Bill and Dave who had built an incredibly strong organizational culture that bred success for many years.
So at least in this case, is it consumer products or technology playing catch-up (Ketchup) now?
P.S. I sure hope H-P can get their tomatoes together. ;-)
(Source Photos: Heinz here and H-P here)
They're Not Playing Ketchup
April 25, 2008
Self-Determination and Enterprise Architecture
There is an age old question whether we make our own fate or whether it is predetermined.
For thousands of years, people have turned to prophets, fortune tellers, mystics, and star gazing to try and divine their futures. Yet, at the same time, we are taught that every child has the opportunity to become the President of the United States or an astronaut, or whatever their hearts desire; that laser-like focus, discipline, repetition and determination breeds success. Haven’t we always been taught to always try our best?
Surely, this is one of the irresolvable conflicts that philosophically can never be truly resolved: If the future is already predetermined, then how can we affect it? Further, if our actions can impact the future, then how the future be predetermined?
The way ahead is to work to influence our future, knowing full well that many things are indeed beyond our control.
From an organization perspective, there are no guarantees for the future, so we must take the reins of change, plan and manage it: one way we do this is through enterprise architecture.
In Fortune Magazine, 5 May 2008, in an article entitled, “The Secret of Enduring Greatness,” it states that “the best corporate leaders never point out the window to blame external conditions; they look in the mirror and say, ‘We are responsible for the results.’”
The future of our organizations are not static and so our leadership cannot rest on its laurels, rather we must continually plan for and execute innovation and transformation.
If we look at the largest corporations in America, the Fortune 500, we see that companies rise and fall to/from prominence with almost unbelievable speed. Here are some examples:
- “The vast majority of those on the list 50 years ago are nowhere to be found on the current list” (only 71 of the original 500 companies from 1955 are still on the list today).
- “Nearly 2000 companies have appeared on the list since its inception.”
- “Some of the most powerful companies on today’s list—businesses like Intel, Microsoft, Apple, Dell, and Google” didn’t even exist in 1955 and conversely, “some of the most celebrated companies in history no longer even appear on the 500, having fallen from great to good to gone.”
So if the tides start to turn down for a company, what are they to do—simply accept their fate, and perish like so many of those that came before them or do they fight to survive, knowing full well that they may not or will likely not succeed?
I say we fight to survive—we plan and execute change—we transform, and we live to fight another day.
“Just because a company stumbles—or gets smacked upside the head by an unexpected event or a new challenge—does not mean that it must continue to decline. Companies do not fall primarily because of what the world does to them or because of how the world changes around them; they fall first and foremost because of what they do to themselves.”
One example is IBM that stumbled in the late 1980’s in relying on what was becoming commoditized hardware, but transformed themselves in the early 1990’s to a software and services juggernaut. Similarly, Apple transformed from a niche computer manufacturer to a consumer electronics dynamo with their innovations such as the iPod and iPhone.
Essentially it comes down to the ability of the organization to manage change and complexity (as John Zachman stated) to adapt and transform, and we do this through enterprise architecture
Self-Determination and Enterprise Architecture