Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Levy: In the Plex (Google )

Tiedätkö mistä sanasta Google tulee. Se on luku, jota seuraa 100 nollaa. Eli järjettömän iso luku.

Miksi lukea tämä kirja?

1)     Brin ja Page ovat enemmän keksijöitä kuin liikemiehiä. Ja tämä ei ole mikään ”one trick pony”-tarina.

2)     Opit miten hyödyntää koneoppimista ja kehittää tekoälypalveluita.

3)     Yritysostojen merkitys Googlen maailmanvalloitukseen – Analytics, YouTube, DoubleClick, AdSense.

4)     Sotahuone.

Googlen hakutuote

Hakutuotteen perusominaisuudet ovat:

1. Crawling,

2. indeksointi,

3. relevanssi ja

4. hakutulosten nopeus.

Google on hyvä osoitus, että koskaan ei ole liian myöhäistä. Google ei ollut ensimmäinen yritys hakukonemarkkinoilla, mutta heidän keksintönsä oli miten webin strukturoimaton sisältöä pitää järjestää, jotta tiedon löydettävyys paranee. Kilpailijoiden pääasiallinen liikeidea oli saada käyttäjä pysymään hakutulosten äärellä mahdollisimman pitkään, jotta mainosmyynti olisi maksimaalista.

Google löysi hakukoneen käyttäjille arvoa jostain sellaisesta mistä muut eivät sitä etsineet. Teknisesti he loivat nopean tiedon löydettävyyden. Keksintö perustui hyvin yksinkertaiseen havaintoon miten tieto saadaan jäsennettyä. Yksinkertaisesti he vain rakensivat kaiken linkkien eli siteerausten määrän päälle. Toiseksi he pyrkivät indeksoimaan sekä tallentamaan kaiken tiedon omille servereille, jotta se olisi nopeasti saatavilla. Kolmanneksi he ryhtyivät ennustamaan, että mitkä asiasanat ovat yhteydessä toisiin sanoihin ja mitä asiasanoja käyttäjät todennäköisesti kirjoittaisivat hakuja tehdessään.

Mikä on Googlen kasvukaava?

Alkuun Googlen kasvukaava näytti perustuvan nopeuteen sekä parempiin hakutuloksiin kilpailijoihin verrattuna. Nopeus on säilynyt Googlen ensisijaisena vaatimuksena, mutta aikaa myöten kasvukaava muuttui. Ensin ajattelin, että Googlen kasvukaava olisi nopeus + tarkkuus + koneoppiminen, mutta niistä puuttuu synergia mikä on kasvukaavan peruslähtökohta. Toiseksi ajattelin, että kasvukaava on kerätä + indeksoida + ennustaa, mutta ne ovat prosesseja. Kirjan lopussa hahmotin, että Googlen kasvukaava on:

Enemmän hakuja + enemmän käyttäjiä + enemmän dataa = nopeammat hakutulokset (ultimate machine learning)

Omalla tavallaan Googlen kasvukaava muistuttaa täydellisesti toteutettua Jim Collinsin Flywheel-konseptia.

Liiketoiminta

Google on ensisijassa tuoteyhtiö, joka keskittyy palveluihin. Kirjassa korostetaan käyttäjäkeskeisyyttä, mutta kaikki tarinat ja toimenpiteet pyörivät keksintöjen sekä tuoteideoiden varassa. Googlen kilpailuetu perustuu pitkäkestoiseen innovointiin – esimerkiksi aikainen panostaminen verkkosivujen indeksointiin tai Gmailin tuomaan massiiviseen käyttäjien tiedon hyödyntämiseen yhdistettynä koneoppimiseen. Googlella on enemmän dataa kuin millään muulla organisaatiolla. Datan avulla Google pystyy opettamaan järjestelmiään mitä tietoa käyttäjät tarvitsevat.

Etupainotteisuus on näkynyt esimerkiksi:

– Google palkkasi ensimmäisen henkilön johtamaan koneoppimista jo vuonna 2001.

– Gmail-palvelu tuli markkinoille jo vuonna 2004.

–  Lanseerasivat puheohjattuja palveluita oppiakseen miten ihmiset puhuvat jo vuonna 2005.

Tähän päivään mennessä Googlella on ollut melkein kaksi vuosikymmentä aikaa kehittää näitä palveluita. Se jos mikään tuottaa kilpailuetua ja positioi heidät vahvasti tulevaisuuteen.

Jos et maksa tuotteesta, niin olet itse tuote jota myydään….

Kaiken edellisen jälkeen on selvää, että Googlen palvelut eivät koskaan tule maksamaan mitään, koska ilmaisuuden sekä käyttäjien vapaehtoisuuden kautta heidän kassavirtansa saa jatkuvasti ilmaista raaka-ainetta hakupalveluiden tuotantoon. Puhe-, teksti- ja web-sisällöt ovat heille käytössä ilman erillistä veloitusta. Ja koska me käyttäjät emme maksa mitään, niin me olemme tuote jota myydään.

Googlen yrityskaupat ovat tähdänneet Googlen omien tuotteiden kehittämiseen. He eivät samalla tavalla pyrkinet ostamaan kilpailijoita pois markkinoilta kuin esimerkiksi Facebook. Yritysostojen merkitys on Googlen maailmanvalloitukseen ollut tärkeä. Ilman niitä ei olisi Analyticsiä, AdSenseä, Voice, Androidia yms. Tosin YouTube ja DoubleClick ovat säilyneet itsellisinä tuotteina.

Yhtäläisyydet Amazonin ja Facebookin kanssa

Googlella on paljon yhtäläisyyksiä Amazonin ja Facebookin kanssa:

– Koskaan ei ole liian myöhäistä.

o  Mikään kolmesta ei ollut ensimmäinen, joka yritti kaupallistaa hakukonetta, verkkokauppaa tai sosiaalista mediaa.

– Lukujen kautta johdettua liiketoimintaa.

o  Kaikki yritykset pystyivät osoittamaan elinkelpoisuutensa lukujen kautta.

– Perustajat ovat säilyttäneet valtansa

o  Vaikka rahoitus on perustunut sijoittajien riskinottoon, niin jopa despoottimaiset perustajat pitävät kiinni vallastaan.

Yksi mielenkiintoisimmista kirjan tarinoista on, että Jeff Bezos kuului ryhmään, joka enismmäisenä rahoitti miljoonalla dollarilla Sergei Brinin ja Larry Pagen tuoteideaa.

Googlen strategia 

Sitä ei ollut samalla tavalla kuin Facebookin ja Amazonin kehityskertomuksissa. Mutta Googlen tuotestrategiaa esitellään kirjassa paljon ja erityisesti siitä päättävä ryhmä näytti olevan paljon vartijana. Yksittäisenä havaintona on, että Page pelkäsi Nikola Teslan kohtaloa – kuolla köyhänä keksijänä. Ehkä se ajoi vimmatusti heitä kaupallistamaan Googlea.

Googlen muut tuotteet

Kaikilla niillä tuntuu olevan yhtäläisyytenä data. Ja Googlen kyky kerätä sekä jalostaa dataa:

– Gmail on Googlen toiseksi paras keksintö, koska kaikki sähköpostit koneluetaan ja niistä saadaan kasvatettua lisää indeksoitavaa tietoa.

– Aikaisen vaiheen investoinnit koneoppimiseen ja tekoälyyn sekä 1-800-GOOG-411 puheohjatuihin palveluihin.

– Androidin kanssa Googlella kävi suorastaan mieletön munkki, koska Brin eikä Page arvostaneet mobiliteettia.

– Käännöskoneen kehittäminen alkoi jo v. 2001.

– Mainosmyynnissä CPM-hinnoittelumallin (cost per mille) kannibalisointi CPA-mallilla (cost per action) erittäin aikaisessa vaiheessa. Tosin on hyvä muistaa, että Googlella on loputon inventaario verrattuna esim. mediayhtiöihin, joten CPM-mallilla ei ole tarvetta.

Vastaavasti Googlella on ollut myös isoja epäonnistumisia. He eivät onnistuneet lokalisoimaan palvelujaan Manner-Kiinaan. Google Books oli hieno aloite saada kaikki kirjat digitoitua sekä niiden tiedot hakukoneiden käyttöön, mutta hanke epäonnistui. Eikä sosiaalinen media ole vielä auennut Googlella liiketoiminnaksi.

Henkilöstö ja sen rekrytointi

– Google-kirjassa käytetään paljon aikaa rekrytointien ja henkilöstövalintoprosessien esitelemiseen. Kirjan perusteella vaikuttaa siltä, että googlelle pääsee töihin vain kovien kriteerien kautta.

– Kuuluisa 20% työajasta omien projektien kehittämiseen.

– Ja miksi kukaan haluaisi esimiehen? ”To learn…. “Do you want to be managed?” As Campbell would later recall, “Everyone said yeah.” Page wanted to know why. They told him they wanted somebody to learn from.”

Suomi mainittu

– Franz Och: “By not requiring native speakers, Google was free to provide translations to the most obscure language pairs. “You can always translate French to English or English to Spanish, but where else can you translate Hindi to Danish or Finnish or Norwegian?”

– Google had been concerned when Nokia bought Navteq for $8.1 billion in 2007 

Kuusi sanaa

“Know more, spend more.” (Wesley Chan)

P.S. Tiesitkö, että CIA:lla on oma venture capital-yksikkö.

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Levy: Facebook – The Inside Story

Miksi lukea tämä kirja?

1)     Opit miksi koskaan ei ole liian myöhäistä.

2)     Strategia on kuin suoraan oppikirjasta.

3)     Mobiilin totaalinen väärinymmärtäminen.

4)     Yhtäläisyydet Amazonin kanssa.

5)     Kirjassa on sofistikoitunutta teknopornoilua.

Kirjan varsinainen kasvutarina on miten Zuckerberg ja kumppanit kaupallistivat sosiaalisen median.

Puuduttavaa oli lukea kuinka FB oli erilaisten pahojen asioiden kohteena (vaalit, murhat livelähetyksissä, yksityissyyskysymykset). Ja ilman, että heillä oli hajuakaan niistä. Ehkä?

Pidin kirjasta, vaikka siinä oli 592 sivua. Kaikki yli 200 sivuiset kirjat pitäisi kieltää…;-)

Koskaan ei ole liian myöhäistä keksiä uutta sosiaalisen median palvelua

Tiedätkö kuka on Andrew Weinreich? Hän on “social networking”-patentin isä. Weinreich siis keksi nykymuotoisen sosiaalisen median, mutta myi yhtiönsä joulukuussa 1999.

Kirjan pääviesti on lohduttava tieto meille kaikille on, että koskaan ei ole liian myöhäistä. Kun FB tuli markkinoille, niin sosiaalisen median palveluille oli jo tarjontaa ja kilpailua. MySpace, Friendster, LinkedIn jne. Monilla yliopistoilla oli jo omat facebookinsa ja Zuckerbergin palvelu oli yksi muiden joukossa. Hän koodasi palvelunsa sellaiseksi, että moni halusi käydä siellä. Zuckerberg aloitti suosionsa pienestä.

Facebook ei keksinyt sosiaalista mediaa, joten kaikki voi muuttua. Keskeinen oppi on, että aina voit tehdä parempaa ja kasvaa Facebookia isommaksi.

Palvelun idea oli saada ihmiset käymään saitilla useammin ja viettämään siellä enemmän aikaa. Alunperin FB sai riskirahaa, koska se pystyi osoittamaan käyttäjilleen niin mielenkiintoista sisältöä, että he palaavat useammin kuin kilpailijoiden palveluihin. FB:n käyttäjät vierailivat saitilla joka päivä, kun taas kilpailijoiden saitilla kävi päivittäin vain 15% käyttäjistä.

Bisnesmalli oli saada ihmiset klikkailemaan bannereita. Tapa toimia oli tehdä kokeiluja ja oppia koko ajan niistä. Virheiden ja onnistumisten kautta FB on pystynyt parantamaan pitoaan asiakkaista. Se on eräänlainen retention-työkalu.

Facebookin strategia on kuin suoraan oppikirjasta.

Facebook muuttui nopeasti ostokohteesta ostajaksi. Alkuun Facebook oli ostokohde Yahoolle, mutta pian Facebook ryhtyi Yahooksi kun Twitter ilmaantui kilpailijaksi.

FB:n strategia ei eroa muista korporaatioista:

1. He ostavat kilpailijoita – Instagram (1 mrd USD, WhatsApp 19 mrd USD, Oculus 2 mrd USD) ja tekee niistä franchise-yhtiöitä.

2. Ostokohteille tarjotaan synergioita (konesalipalvelut, AI-osaaminen jne) ja täydellistä itsenäisyyttä.

3. Perustajien lähdettyä pois, niin FB:n mainosliiketoiminta integroidaan osaksi franchise-yhiöitä.

4. Synnytetään maailman kustannustehokkain tapa tehdä kohdennettua mainontaa.

Strategiaa toteutettiin päämäärätietoisella organisoitumisella. Growth-tiimi on ollut jo 2000-luvulta alkaen FB:n käytössä. Vasta nyt nähdään, että perinteisissä yhtiöissä aletaan organisoitumaan Growth-aktiviteettien taakse, jossa yhdistetään myynti, kokeilut ja markkinointi.

Facebook meinasi myöhästyä mobiilista

Facebookin herääminen mobiiliin tapahtui erittäin myöhään – vasta vuonna 2012. Zuckerberg ei tajunnut mobiilin merkitystä eikä myöskään paradigman muutosta webistä mobiiliin: ”Done is NOT better than perfect”…. One lesson Zuckerberg had to relearn was the cost of a mistake. “Done is better than perfect” doesn’t work so well when your version 1 keeps crashing and you have to wait for Apple’s approval process to push out your bug fix.”

Kirjassa on sofistikoitunutta teknopornoilua.

Mitä FB:n algoritmi on yksinkertaisimmillaan?

”The News Feed algorithm was called EdgeRank. It depended on three main factors: Affinity, Weight, and Time Decay.

1. Affinity was measured by how close you were to the person making a post; something by your brother or your best friend would get a high score.

2. Weight was determined by a formula that predicted how likely you were to engage with a post, based on your interests and previous behavior.

3. Time Decay dealt with how recent the post was—newer ones were prioritized.”

Pidin kirjasta myös, koska siinä käsiteltiin mm. PHP:n ja HTML5:n ominaisuuksia: ”HTML5 promised a solution: write once, run on many systems. It especially appealed to some newly hired engineers on the mobile team who had come from Google, which was a hotbed of believers in the open-web philosophy that HTML5 embodied. The Growth team loved the HTML5 approach.”

Like-napin synty…. “THE FIRST STIRRINGS of the Like button came in July 2007, when News Feed was less than a year old. Code-named Props, it was an attempt to give users a way to approvingly tag stories on their feeds. Leah Pearlman, a designer on the team, had gotten the idea after a friend of hers suggested a “bomb” button to single out posts.”

Aikaisen koneoppimisen ja tekoälyosaamisen kehittäisen rinnallan toinen merkille pantava piirre FB:ssä oli sen organisoituminen. Zuckerberg vastasi tuotteesta. Sheryl Sandberg vastasi liiketoiminnasta.

FB on keksinyt itsensä kokeilujen kautta – eri tapoja ja teknologioita. Ensin apps, sitten html5 ja sitten taas apps…. Uusi mobiilistrategia….

Yhtäläisyydet Amazonin kanssa

Mark Zuckerbergistä rakennetaan kirjassa näkemystä, että hän on syvämietteinen ajattelija. Kirjaa lukiessa hänestä muotoutuu ajatus, että hän on hyvä koodaaja sekä tuotejohtaja. Sekä FB-konsernin rakentaja. Tulokset puhuvat puolestaan – Zuckerberg on erinomaisesti työssään onnistunut toimitusjohtaja.

Jeff Bezos ja Zuckerbergilla on paljon yhteistä. Bezosin ja Zuckerbergin ero oli kuin Web 1.0. ja Web 2.0. Web 1.0. oli palveluiden internet kuten sähköpostit, uutissivustot, pankit ja verkokaupat. Web 2.0. oli Internet-of-People – siis sosiaalinen media. Web 1.0:ssa perustajat keksivät liikeidean ja tekivät sen käyttäjille. Web 2.0:ssa käyttäjät keksivät liikeidean ja perustajat tekivät sen ihmisille. Eli Bezos on Web 1.0. oli Internet-of-Services. Zuckergberg on Web 2.0. oli Internet-of-People.

FB:llä on yritysostojen kohdalla sama taktiikka kuin Amazonilla. Esim. Twitteristä: “Five hundred million dollars,” said Williams, citing a figure at least twice as high as Twitter’s valuation at the time. “That’s a big number,” said Zuckerberg. He didn’t give a lower counteroffer. He did do something disturbing. While Zuckerberg didn’t say it in so many words, what he did say had the Twitter executives convinced that if they didn’t sell, he would copy their features into Facebook. They had guessed he would do this anyway, but it was chilling to hear it.

Muitakin yhtäläisyyksiä Amazonin ja FB:n välillä löytyy kuin pelkästään perustajat. Tuoteominaisuudet olivat kaikki kaikessa. Esim. vuonna 2006 lanseerattu News Feed on niinkuin Marketplace Amazonille. 2007 FB pyrki automatisoimaan kaiken mahdollisen kuten Amazon (ovat varmaan tänä päivänä jo tosi pitkällä). Like-nappi on kuin Amazonin suosittelukone.

Ja sitten:

–         FB:n kasvukaava oli engagement. Amazonin inventaario tai long tail.

–         FB halusi luoda ominaisuuksia, jotka pitivät silkmäparien määrän saitilla maksimaalisen, jotta niitä voisi myydä impressio-inventaariona. Amazon halusi tarjota edullista ja nopeasti.

–         FB ja Amazon käyttivät dominanttia asemaansa pakottaakseen ostokohteet myymään itsensä. Tai ainakin yrittivät uhkailla sillä. FB yritti uhkailla Twitteriä ja Snapchattia. Amazon yritti ja onnistui Zappoksen ja Diapers.com:in kanssa.

Mikä on Facbookin kasvukaava?

Kasvukaava…. “Facebook that’s always been very straightforward is, we create experiences that are highly engaging, the business model is ads, and so the more engaging, the more ads, right?”

Facebookin kasvukaava on paljon impressioita + paljon silmäpareja = lisää mainoksia

Lopuksi – opiksi – ojennukseksi

Kirjaa lukiessa heräsin vasta huomaamaan, että kannustaako FB ja IG olemaan epäaito ja Snapissa saat olla oma rähjäinen minäsi…. ”“We really felt like that needed to be done in a respectful way,” says Spiegel. Meaning: not like Facebook, which he felt encouraged people to be inauthentic versions of themselves, a red-carpet distortion of their true, fun, goofy personalities.””

Suomi mainittu: Zuckerberg kävi Helsingissä vuonna 2008. Ja yksi FB:n perustajista fanitti sekä vietti paljon aikaa IRC:ssä.

Haluatko päästä Piilaakson kultapoikakerhoon? Piilaakson unelmakandidaatit täyttävät seuraavat kriteerit:

1. Stanford (tutkinto),

2. ex-Googler ja

3. hiljainen intensiivisyys.

Kuusi sanaa: Mea culpa

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Stone: The Everything Store – Jeff Bezos and the Age of Amazon

Miksi lukea tämä kirja?

1)     Opit miten menestyä Amazonin kanssa.

2)     Mikä on Amazonin kasvukaava

3)     Pääset sisäistämään Hamel&Prahaladin, Jim Collinsin ja Clayton Christensenin oppeja.

4)     Hyvä historiikki maailman suurimpaan kansantalouteen – Internet.

Opit miten menestyä Amazonin kanssa.

Ensimmäinen ja ehdottomasti hyödyllisintä on, että ymmärrät kuinka menestyt Amazonin kanssa. Kirjassa selvitetään melko yksityiskohtaisesti kuinka se toimii:

–         Yritysostokohteiden kanssa.

–         Kilpailijoiden kanssa.

–         Alihankkijoiden kanssa.

–         Marketplace-myyjien kanssa.

–         Henkilöstön kanssa.

Niitä yhdistävä tekijä on frugality eli säästäväisyys. Kaikesta säästetään ja näennäisesti ainoa tarkoitus on tarjota asiakkaille halvempia hintoja. Yritysostokohteet pakotetaan hyväksymään Amazonin tarjous aloittamalla hintasota (Zappos ja Diapers). Kilpailijoiden näköalattomuutta hyödynettiin houkkuttelemassa ne ulkoistamaan verkkokauppansa Amazonille (Walmart & Target). Alihankkijoita kiristettiin antamaan halvempia sisäänostohintoja laittamalla sen tuotteet heikommalle näkyvyydelle. Martketplace-myyjien myyntidatan avulla päätetiin, että mikä tuote/segmentti kannattaa ottaa haltuun. Henkilöstö ei kylpenyt minkäänlaisessa ”employee experience”-kuplassa.

Jännittävästi silti samaan aikaan Bezosin omaisuuden ja kiinteistöjen määrä, yksityislentokoneen omistus ja muut hankkeet kasvavat siinä sivussa. Kirja ei ole yksiselitteinen Bezosin sädekehän kiiloitustarina, vaan enemmänkin siiloitustarina. Kirja kategorisoi hänet samaan siiloon kuin Intellin Andy Groven, Bill Gatesin tai Steve Jobsin. Kapitalismin oppeja noudattaen Amazonista on kasvanut Internetin menestyksekkäimpiä yhtiöitä.  

Mikä on Amazonin kasvukaava?

Kirjan alkuperäinen tavoite on kertoa Sam Waltonin kaltainen yrittäjätarina. Eikä se epäonnistu siinä. Mutta minulle ei selvinnyt kirjan luettuani mikä teki Amazonista aikanaan menestystarinan. Amazonin yrityshistorian takana on monta onnistunutta tekijää. Varmaan Bezosin rooli on niistä pitkäkestoisin, mutta teknologian, muutoksen sekä kasvupolkujen takana on jotain.

Koska on pakko tiivistää niin sanotaan, että Amazonin kasvukaava = A + Z. Bezosin unelma oli tehdä Amazonista kaiken kauppa. Alkuun se oli myydä kaikki kirjat a:sta z:n, mutta aikaa myötä haave kasvoi kasvamistaan ja A + Z laajeni kaikkiin kategorioihin. Ja siinä on onnistuttu. Tarkemmin jos halutaan ilmaista niin nykytilan kasvukaava on toimitukset (one day delivery) + loputon varasto tavaroita (long tail) + talon sisäinen teknologiaosaaminen.

Pääset sisäistämään Hamel&Prahaladin, Jim Collinsin ja Clayton Christensenin oppeja.

Kun luin kirjaa, niin se tulisi selväksi, että Amazon on täydellinen yhtiö Hamel&Prahaladin ”Competing for the Future”-testiin:

1)     Does it have a huge contribution to customer perceived value? KYLLÄ, koska se tarjoaa halvimmat hinnat.

2)     Is it competitively unique? KYLLÄ, koska se pyrkii hankkimaan määräävän markkina-aseman.

3)     Can it extend from a product to the entire market? KYLLÄ, koska aikoo myydä kaikkea A:sta Z:n.

Miksi? Koska Hamel&Prahalad ovat fiksoituneet ydinosaamiseen. Se on heidän mukaan kilpailuedun lähde, joka koostuu taitojen ja teknologioiden muodostamasta tiivistä kokonaisuudesta. Tästä seuraavasta voidaan väitellä, mutta mikä on Amazonin ydinosaaminen? Internet. #ydinosaaminen

Jim Collinsin oppeja hyödynnettiin Bezosin toimesta kun hän halusi uudelleenmääritellä Amazonin liiketoimintamallin. Bezosin johtoryhmä hyödynsi Collinsin Flywheel-konseptia. “You’ve got to decide what you’re great at,” marssitti Collins johtoryhmätyöskentelyä tutkimaan mikä on Amazonin “flywheel” tai “self-reinforcing loop”. Johtoryhmän lopputulos oli “Lower prices led to more customer visits”. #bisneslogiikka

Kolmanneksi eikä vähäisin olivat Clayton Christensen opit ”The Innovator’s Dilemma”-kirjasta. Hänen mukaansa “great companies fail not because they want to avoid disruptive change but because they are reluctant to embrace promising new markets that might undermine their traditional businesses and that do not appear to satisfy their short-term growth requirements. The companies that solved the innovator’s dilemma, set up autonomous organizations charged with building new and independent businesses around the disruptive technology.” #kannibalisoi

Tiivistetysti voidaan sanoa, että Amazon sai ydinosaamisesta 1) kilpailuedun lähteen, 2) halpenevien sisäänosto- sekä ulosmyyntihintojen tuomaa bisneslogiikkaa ja 3) kehittämällä jatkuvasti uusia markkinoita.

Hyvä historiikki maailman suurimpaan kansantalouteen – Internet.

Kaikki Internet-ajan suuruudet seikkailevat kirjan sivuilla. Alkaen Webvanista päätyen Netflixiin. Kirja on valmistunut 2013, joten siihen astiseen Interweb-liiketoiminnan kehityshistoriaan tämä on erinomainen opus. Ainoa hiuksia nostattava yksityiskohta on kuinka kaikki muut maanosat nähdään pelkkinä vasallivaltiona. Mutta niitähän ne ovat, koska USA on Internetin kotimaa.

Lopuksi – opiksi – ojennukseksi: ” Where is the future? It can be found from the intersection of changes.” (Hamel & Prahalad)

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Snowden – Pysyvästi merkitty

🔵 Tätä kirjaa lukiessa tulee digihiki. 


✅ Kirjan keskeinen viesti on, että valtiot ja yritykset ovat tunkeneet itsensä ihmisten väliin. Tunkeutumalla ne ovat ottaneet ihmiset haltuun.


✅ Toiseksi yritykset haluavat rahastaa tai valtiot riistää webin käyttäjiä. Anonyymiä webin vapautta haikaileva Snowden on oikeassa siinä, että 90-luvun netin itsesensuuri ei syntynyt regulaatiolla. Se syntyi ihmisten halusta toimia oikein. Sellainen itsesensuuri ehkäisee kaivautumisen some-poteroihimme ja mahdollistaa vapaaehtoisen mielipiteiden muuttamisen.


✅ Snowden aloittaa tarinansa kertomalla miten hänen web-kohtalonsa alkoi Nintendolla ja Compag Pressariolla. Hänen tarina on tyypillinen toisen sukupolven IT-ammattilaiselle, jossa laitteilla ja puhelinmodeemilla on ollut iso merkitys. Tarina päättyy siihen kuinka hän joutuu Moskovassa liikkuessa turvautumaan valeasuihin. Näiden tarinoiden välissä Snowden kertoo jännitystarinan kuinka hän paljasti Yhdysvaltojen hallinnon massavalvonnan.


✅ Arvatenkin Snowden arvostaa hakkerointia, koska se on hänen mielestään tasa-arvoista ja koska sillä testataan ”järjestelmän” oikeudenmukaisuutta. 


🇫🇮 Viimeinen eikä vähäisin huomio kirjasta on, että Suomi mainittu! Snowden fanittaa oululaislähtöistä IRC-palvelua.


⛔️ Ensimmäiset 150 sivua olisi hyvin voin jättää lukematta, koska niiden aikana hän perustelee miksi hänestä tuli maailman kuuluisin whistleblower. 

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

O’Reilly: WTF? What’s the Future and Why It’s Up to Us

🔵 Miksi lukisit 448 sivua? 

  • Paras syy on, että ymmärrät kuinka pienestä liiketoiminnasta Internet-palveluissa on vielä kyse. 
  • Toiseksi paras syy on, että pääset miettimään minkälaiseksi muodostuu työelämä? 

✅ Julkisuudessa on esitetty näkökulmia, että Internet-liiketoiminta on menneen talven lumia ja nyt on aika keskittyä johonkin muuhun. 

  • Todellisuudessa Internetin osuus BKT:sta on vasta 5 % kehittyneissä maissa. Siis 95 % BKT:sta on vielä Internet-liiketoiminnan ulkopuolella. Kasvun mahdollisuuksia on ja paljon.

✅ Työelämän muutos ei ole välttämättä sitä mitä julkisuudessa esitetään. O’Reilly käyttää Lyftiä ja Uberia paljon esimerkkinä kuvastaessaan muutosta:

  • Ensimmäinen muutos on, että algoritmit ovat korvanneet keskijohdon. Miksi? “Apps can do now what managers used to do.” 
  • Toinen on, että alustatalousyhtiöt eivät pelkästään polje palkkoja, vaan ne maksavat parhaille taksikuskeille enemmän – tulevaisuudessa. Miksi? ”Even if there are enough drivers, the quality of drivers deeply influences the customer experience.”
  • Kolmas – em. yhtiöt joutuvat kilpailemaan hyvästä työvoimasta aivan kuten kivijalkaliiketoiminnassa. Miksi? “Uber and Lyft will be engaged in as fierce a contest to attract and keep drivers as they are to attract and keep customers today.”

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Siukonen & Neittaanmäki: Mitä tulisi tietää tekoälystä

🔵 Tavoitteletko kilpailuetua tekoälystä? Jos kyllä, niin tämä kirja on voittajan valinta. 
✅ Siukkosen ja Neittaanmäen kirja on laajin suomenkielinen opas aiheeseen. Saat ajankohtaisen katsauksen tekoälyyn, sen soveltamiskohteisiin ja eri toimijoiden rooleihin. 
✅ Kirjaa lukiessa yltiöoptimismi liittyen tekoälyyn karisee, koska paljastuu että käsissämme ei ole mitään tarunhohtoista tekniikkaa. Vielä? 

✅ Tekoäly on luonnollisen älykkyyden vastakohta ja se on tietokoneen toimintojen jatke. Tekoälyn kehityksen tilaa helpottaa ymmärtämään seuraavat kolme lähtökohtaa. 

  1. Parhaillaan tavoitteena on, että tekoälyllä pystytään jäljittelemään hiiren aivojen toimintaa. Ennuste on, että ihmisaivoja pystytään jäljittelemään korkeintaan vasta 2040-luvulla.
  2. Tekoäly jakautuu heikkoon ja vahvaan. Heikkoa tekoälyä edustavat esimerkiksi hakukoneet ja roskapostinsuodatin. Vahvassa tekoälyssä voidaan jäljitellä ihmisen aivotoimintaa.
  3. Tekoäly oppii datan kautta. Datan laatu ja määrä ovat lopputuloksen kannalta keskeisessä roolissa. Ilman, että on massoittain dataa tekoäly ei pysty toimimaan eikä oppimaan.

 ⛔️ Kirja on hengästyttävä listaus tekoälytietoa. Välillä lukija toivoo, että sitä olisi vähemmän. Toisin ilman laajaa tietosisältö kirja ei olisi lukemisen arvoinen.

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Cusumano: Business of Platforms

🔵 Muistatko miten Keltaisten sivujen liiketoimintamalli syntyi? 


✅ Kirjan keskeinen oppi on – menestyvän alustan pitää yhdistää kysyntä ja tarjonta, luoda verkostovaikutus ja ratkaista muna-kana -ongelma. Verkostovaikutus on liiketoiminnan onnistumisen kannalta keskeisessä roolissa.


✅ Alustatalousliiketoimintamalleja on kahdenlaisia – innovaatio (iTunes) ja transaktio (Google haku) 


✅ Innovaatioalustat ovat tuottavia, koska: 1. Ihmiset ovat valmiit maksamaan alustapalvelusta (Spotify). 2. Se saa osan kumppaneiden myynnistä (AirBnB).


✅ Innovaatioalustan neljä virhettä – hinnoittelu, luottamuspula, ylimielisyys kilpailijoihin ja liian myöhäinen markkinoille tulo.


✅ Transaktioalustat ovat tuottavia, koska: 

1. Yhdistävät kysynnän ja tarjonnan (matchmaking). 

2. Alentaa kustannuksia (reducing friction).

3. Täydentävät palvelut (complementary).

4. Täydentävät teknologiat (technology sales). 

5. Mainonta.


✅ Tulevaisuuden kilpailu siirtyy kahteen segmenttiin. 

1. Älykaiuttimet. <= KEHITÄ OMA ÄÄNISOVELLUS.

2. Kuljetuspalvelut.  => PERUSTA YRITYS, JONKA ALUSTAPALVELU TARVITSEE.


⛔️ Tiedettiinkö me jo kaikki tämä? Meh.


P.S. Keltaisten sivujen liiketoimintamalli oli, että annettiin puhelinluettelo ilmaiseksi kuluttajille ja yritykset maksoivat näkyvyydestä. Samanlaiseen verkostovaikutukseen alustatalousyhtiöt pyrkivät.

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Scott Kupor: Secrets of Sand Hill Road – Venture Capital and How to Get It

About the book

Scott Kupor’s book is very Finnish book. Straight talk, no bells and whistles. Only plain, understandable talk about setting up a growth company.

Three facts why we should care about venture capital:

–      “Venture-backed companies now spend 44 percent of the entire R&D budget for American public companies.

–      According to a 2015 study by Ilya Strebulaev of Stanford University and Will Gornall of the University of British Columbia, 42 percent of all US company IPOs since 1974 were venture backed.

–      Not only are there not enough startups, but the ones that do exist aren’t nearly wide-ranging enough to build the kinds of companies our present and future call for.”

–      Bonus track… “Possibly for the first time in history, we’re talent-constrained instead of capital-constrained. How much does it cost to start a business today? It’s cheaper than ever and that way less riskier….”

“The cardinal sins of venture capital is getting the category right (meaning that you correctly anticipated that a big company could be built in a particular space) but getting the company wrong (meaning that you picked the wrong horse to back).”

What are the key learnings?

Kupor wrote the book, because he wanted to inform “you as an entrepreneur need to think about when choosing your venture partner. This will help all entrepreneurs navigate the maze of venture investors and decipher their behavior.”

Key learnings of the book:

–      Product first, company second. If the venture has identified a customer need, then the company has solid ground.

–      Market, market, market. What matters is the the markets where the venture will be operating.

–      Incentives of a General Partner in a VC. Also the motives of the VC must be taken into consideration.

“This book is about helping you to ask the right questions about one of the most important life events for entrepreneurs—your startup and your career—so that you can make an informed decision about how best to proceed. Why? Understand why VCs do the things that they do. In other words, know your partner before you get married.

But something has changed. “About $ 36 billion went into new startups in 1999. Limited partners committed about $ 33 billion in funding in 2017.”

“Startups were also getting to an IPO faster than ever during the dot-com bubble. On average, it was taking companies about four years from founding to go public.”

“Beginning in the early 2000s, though, there were a few significant transformations in the startup ecosystem that would change things in the entrepreneurs’ favor.

–      “First, the amount of capital required to start a company began to decline; this continues in earnest even today.

–      The second material transformation in the startup ecosystem was the advent of an incubator known as Y Combinator (or YC for short). Cohorts of entrepreneurs joined a “YC batch,” working in an open office space together and going through a series of tutorials and mentorship sessions over a three-month period to see what might come out the other end. Rather, the import of YC, I believe, is that it has educated a whole range of entrepreneurs on the process of starting a company, of which raising capital from VCs is an integral part. That is, YC cracked open the “black box” that was the VC industry, illuminating to entrepreneurs the process of startup company formation and capital raising. Well-known success stories such as Airbnb, Coinbase, Instacart, Dropbox, and Stripe.

–      VCs would need to provide something more than simply capital, for that was becoming a commodity. As a result, the “something more” that Marc and Ben decided to build Andreessen Horowitz around was a network of people and institutions that could improve the prospects for founding product CEOs to become world-class CEOs.”

Scott has a sarcastic sense of humor, but in a nice way… “There are other institutions that are in fact the source of “start-up” capital for most new businesses; they’re called banks.”

“The old adage “garbage in, garbage out” is particularly apt for early-stage venture investing. There simply aren’t enough financial metrics to meaningfully model future potential returns for a business that just doesn’t exist beyond the PowerPoint slides the entrepreneur has put together.”

Second key learning…. “There are qualitative and high-level quantitative heuristics that VCs use to evaluate the prospects for an investment. And they generally fall into three categories: people, product, and market.”

1. People and Team

“Many VCs delve deeply into the backgrounds of the founders for clues about their effectiveness in executing this particular idea.

The fundamental assumption here is that ideas are not proprietary. In fact, VCs assume the opposite—if an idea turns out to be a good one, assume there will be many other founders and companies that are created to pursue this idea.

How do you evaluate a founding team? Different VCs of course do things differently, but there are a few common areas of investigation.

–      “First, what is the unique skill set, background, or experience that led this founding team to pursue this idea? My partners use the concept of a “product-first company” versus a “company-first company.” The product-first company really speaks to the organic nature of company formation. Product-market fit speaks to a product being so attractive to customers in the marketplace that they recognize the problem it was intended to solve and feel compelled to purchase the product. Consumer “delight” and repeat purchasing are the classic hallmarks of product-market fit. Airbnb has this, as do Instacart, Pinterest, Lyft, Facebook, and Instagram, among others.

–      Founder evaluation for VCs is founder-market fit. As a corollary to the product-first company, founder-market fit speaks to the unique characteristics of this founding team to pursue the instant opportunity. Perhaps the founder has a unique educational background best suited to the opportunity.

–      The third big area of team investigation for VCs focuses on the founder’s leadership abilities. “

“Execution ultimately matters, and execution derives from a team’s members being able to work in concert with one another toward a clearly articulated vision.”

2. Product

“Will this product solve a fundamental need in the market (whether or not that need is known currently to customers) such that customers will pay real money to purchase it?”

“Only through iterative testing with real customers will the company get the feedback needed to build a truly breakthrough product.”

“Simply put, it’s hard to get people to adopt new technologies”.

“They need to be ten times better or ten times cheaper than current best in class to compel companies and consumers to adopt.”

Vitamin vs. aspirin…. “Ben Horowitz uses the difference between a vitamin and an aspirin to articulate this point. Vitamins are nice to have; they offer some potential health benefits, but you probably don’t interrupt your commute when you are halfway to the office to return home for the vitamin you neglected to take before you left the house. It also takes a very, very long time to know if your vitamins are even working for you. If you have a headache, though, you’ll do just about anything to get an aspirin! They solve your problem and they are fast acting. Similarly, products that often have massive advantages over the status quo are aspirins; VCs want to fund aspirins.”

3. Market Size

“Market” is the third leg of the stool that VCs use to evaluate early-stage investment opportunities. It turns out that what matters most to VCs is the ultimate size of the market opportunity a founder is going after. If the adage in real estate is “Location, location, location,” the saying in venture capital goes “Market size, market size, market size.” Big markets are good; small markets are bad.

Cardinals sins:

–      “Getting the category right but the company wrong.

–      Getting the company right but the market wrong, that is, investing in a company that turns out to be a nice, profitable business, with a great team and a great product, but in a market that just isn’t that big.

–      What’s not okay is to fail to invest in a company that becomes the next Facebook. Remember, you can’t risk-averse your way to success in this business.”

“The truism that VCs must invest in big-market opportunities. Andy Rachleff, a founder of Benchmark Capital, has said that companies can succeed in great markets even with mediocre teams but that great teams will always lose to a bad market.”

“Market size estimation is easiest when a new product is positioned as a direct substitute for an existing product.“

Great stories…. “There is a story that Queen Isabella of Spain was the first true VC. She “backed” an entrepreneur (Christopher Columbus) with capital (money, ships, supplies, crew) to do something that most people at the time thought was insane and certain to fail (a voyage) in exchange for a portion of the to-be-earned profits of the voyage that, while probabilistically unlikely, had an asymmetric payoff compared to her at-risk capital.”

Even greater stories…. “Fewer than fifty years later, in 1878, J. P. Morgan would act as “venture capitalist” to Thomas Edison, financing the Edison General Electric Company and becoming its first evangelist/ beta tester by having Edison wire Morgan’s New York City home. Rumor has it that not only did Morgan’s house almost burn down from some of the early wiring mishaps, but his neighbors also threatened him as a result of the loud noise emanating from the generators required to sustain the illumination.”

Yale uses what’s called a “smoothing model” to determine the amount of money it contributes each year to the university’s budget:

–      Venture capital—Yale has a 16 percent allocation to our good old venture capital category.

“Choosing a firm to work with, it’s reasonable to ask where the firm is in the life cycle of that particular fund. Funds tend to be ten years in life and often can get extended for a few years beyond that.”

Remember to…. “Best thing you can do if you are thinking about starting a company is to invest in a real “clean room” in which to develop your foundational intellectual property.”

Hint…. “The founders put in place an employee option pool equal to 15 percent of the company. (I somewhat arbitrarily picked 15 percent, but this does tend to be the standard size of an initial employee option pool in a startup.)”

Raising Money from a VC and right time to raise capital is when the capital is available. Three very important lessons:

–      First, employees do often judge the success of the business at least in part on the external measure of valuation in a financing round.

–      Second, even if that valuation looks great in the absolute sense (or in the relative sense, compared with your previous round of financing), employees are likely to compare it to other companies that have raised money recently, in many cases independent of whether those companies are relevant benchmarks.

–      Third, never underestimate the value of always maintaining momentum in the business, one measure of which may be a successful financing round.

“Angel or seed investors are often an important source of referrals for VCs. It helps that they are upstream from the VCs in that they are typically investing at an earlier stage in the company’s development than might a traditional VC.”

“Angel and seed investors have a direct interest in seeing the companies in which they have invested raise additional (and usually bigger) capital downstream from VCs, and the VCs are interested in a curated pipeline of interesting opportunities in which to invest.

About pitching:

Pitch Essential #1: Market Sizing

“Your job as an entrepreneur is to fit yourself into that market and explain what macro trends are evolving in that market that create an opportunity for you to own it.”

Pitch Essential #2: Team

“Execution is what sets the winners apart from the pretenders.”

“True storytelling is a remarkable talent in so many endeavors, but particularly in a startup, where you have so little actual proof of success in the early years on which people can base their decision to join the company. Great CEOs find a way to paint a vision for the opportunity that simply makes people want to be a part of the company-building process. These same skills will help you land your first (and future) VC financing partners.”

Pitch Essential #3: Product

“Your product plan comes next in pitching the business opportunity. We mentioned earlier that no VC expects you to be clairvoyant about the precise needs of the market, but they are evaluating the process by which you came to your initial product plan.”

“Walk them through your thought process and demonstrate that you have strong beliefs, weakly held.”

Pitch Essential #4: Go-to-Market

“The go-to-market section is often the most underdeveloped section of the pitch for an early-stage company. That is, how will you acquire customers, and does the business model support customer acquisition profitably? Many entrepreneurs make the mistake of skipping over this at the early stage because the current funding round is not likely to get them meaningfully into market. But it’s important to include this in your pitch, even if just at a high level, as it is foundational to the long-run viability of the business. Are you planning to build a direct, outside sales force, and can the average selling price of your product support this go-to-market? Or are you planning to acquire customers through brand marketing or other online forms of acquisition? If so, how do you think about the costs of such activities relative to the lifetime value of a customer? You don’t need to have robust financial models at this stage of your company’s development, but you ought to have a framework that gives a VC enough fodder to understand your thinking around customer acquisition.”

“One side note on the context of adaptability: A hallmark of startup companies is that they often “pivot”—this is a euphemistic way of saying that the original product, go-to-market, etc., didn’t quite work in the way you expected, so you decide to change that aspect of the business and try again. Some pivots can be minor adjustments, while others might be wholesale changes of direction.”

–      “First, VCs understand that, despite the best intentions, most businesses go through some set of pivots along the way, whether small tweaks or almost complete restarts. So, as you pitch, you are not expected to be clairvoyant, nor do VCs expect that everything you say in the pitch will materialize as you have forecast.

–      Second, though—and this is really important—you do need to demonstrate to the VCs that you are the master of the domain you are proposing to attack and that you have thought about every important detail of your business in a way that shows depth of preparation and conviction.”

Pitch Essential #5: Planning for the Next Round of Fund-Raising

“You should clearly articulate the milestones you intend to accomplish with the money you are raising at this round. Remember that a VC is likely projecting ahead to the next round of financing to gauge the level of market risk she is taking by funding you at this stage. Are you raising enough money to accomplish the milestones you set out such that the next investor will be willing to invest new money at a substantially higher valuation than the current round? “Substantially higher” is very market dependent, but in general you want to aim toward a valuation that is roughly double your prior round. That momentum will be well received by both your current investors and your employees.”

“Remember that most VCs are building a portfolio of companies as part of a fund, and thus they are looking for some level of diversification across a number of investments. Thus, while they may be investing $ 10 million in your current round and reserving some additional dollars to support future rounds of financing, they are not assuming that they will be the only investor throughout your company’s life cycle. This is why VCs care about the achievability of the milestones you are laying out; in most cases, they don’t want to be, or can’t afford to be, the only capital provider at the next round of financing, so they are trying to estimate the risk of you (and them) getting stranded at the next round. If all else fails and you forget everything we just talked about in the heat of the moment, remember to go back to first principles: How do I convince a VC that my business has a chance to be one of those outsize winners that can make her look like a hero in front of her LPs?”

Manage your board

“The role of the board is not to run the company or dictate the strategy, in particular the product strategy; that is the job of the CEO.”

“More generally, a big part of your job as CEO is to manage the board. That might sound odd in that managing typically applies to your direct reports—whom you have the ability to hire or fire—whereas you serve at the pleasure of the board.”

“There are several things you can do with your board to help manage them indirectly.

–      First, set the right expectations up front about what you want from your board members. Many CEOs like to do regular one-on-one meetings with board members to ensure that they have time outside of the board meeting to share information and receive feedback. In addition, do you expect them to help you identify future members of the executive team, interview candidates for executive roles, open their Rolodexes to identify sales prospects, etc.? This goes without saying, but you should also set expectations about how you intend to run the board meetings—e.g., do you expect people to have read the deck beforehand and plan to use the meeting largely as a discussion of open questions?

–      Second, get agreement among your board members as to how they will provide you feedback. Some boards ask a single member to consolidate feedback from all the others and deliver it one-on-one to the CEO. Others may have an executive session with just the board and the CEO at the end of each meeting to provide group feedback. There is no required mode of operation, but you should both make clear your interest in hearing the feedback and agree on the best avenue.

–      Third, make sure that you and your board agree on engagement outside of a board meeting with members of your executive team. Good board members will make sure that you know if a member of the exec team has reached out to them to meet, and provide appropriate feedback to you as the CEO if critical questions are being raised. Bad board members will interfere with your relationships with your direct reports and likely raise concerns among your team about your viability as the CEO.

–      Finally, you need to orchestrate the board meeting itself and the agenda. This doesn’t mean not sharing bad news or being selective in your disclosure of important information to the board, but it does mean figuring out what topics are worthy of board discussion and not spending time on topics that are appropriately delegated to you as the day-to-day manager of the organization. Sitting down with your board members at the outset to solicit their feedback on what they would like to see as part of the board agenda is a great way to avoid missing the mark during the board meeting.

IPO: “Putting aside the reasons why more companies are choosing not to go public, let’s focus for a second on why companies do in fact go public.

–      Raising capital

–      Branding

–      Liquidity

–      Customer credibility

–      M& A currency”

“Ironically (or maybe not), at the same time that it has become cheaper to start a company, it has become more expensive for companies to win.”

“The bad news is that winning those markets requires a lot of capital to simultaneously capture each one. And with this change has come two important financing trends.”

–      First, many of the traditional venture capital firms have increased their fund sizes to be able not only to fund startups in the very early stages, but also to be a source of growth capital throughout their life cycles.

–      Second, as companies have elected to stay private longer, more nontraditional sources of growth capital have entered the financing market.”

How should we change according to the book?

“What Might Be the End of Venture Capital as We Know It?

–      Crowdfunding is one alternative

–      Initial coin offerings (or ICOs) for digital tokens is another potential candidate to replace venture capital.”

“These funding sources ultimately represent two sides of the same coin—each is a way to democratize access to capital beyond the more centralized venture ecosystem that exists today.”

What should I personally do?

”Make New Mistakes” i.e. Learn faster and learn new things.

Summary

The book in six words – “Wearing both a belt and suspenders is a good way to make sure your pants stay up” ….. and….. “So let’s eat our broccoli together.”

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Collins & Hansen: How Mighty Fall

About the book

For great many companies the Internet is the beginning of the fall. I hope this book helps us to stay focused and no to fall.

What are the key learnings?

“What should we do if we find ourselves falling? It turns out that much of the answer lies in adhering to highly disciplined management practices.”

Key learnings of the book are:

–      Use highly disciplined management practices to avoid the fall.

–      Learn to recognize the five stages of fall.

Jim Collins and Morten Hansen have identified the five stages of decline. Understanding and recognizing the five stages of decline helps leaders to reduce the chances of falling. Or as Collins and Hansen says

“Tumbling from iconic to irrelevant. Decline can be avoided. The seeds of decline can be detected early.”

“Bank of America gained a reputation as one of the best managed corporations in America. An article in the January 1980 issue of Harvard Business Review opened with a simple summary: “The Bank of America is perhaps best known for its size—it is the world’s largest bank, with nearly 1,100 branches, operations in more than 100 countries, and total assets of about $ 100 billion. In the opinion of many close observers, an equally notable achievement is its quality of management . . .” 

The Five Stages of Decline are:

1) HUBRIS BORN OF SUCCESS.

2) UNDISCIPLINED PURSUIT OF MORE.

3) DENIAL OF RISK AND PERIL.

4) GRASPING FOR SALVATION.

5) CAPITULATION TO IRRELEVANCE OR DEATH. 

Eleven cases that met rigorous rise-and-fall criteria at some point in their history: 

1.   A& P 

2.   Addressograph 

3.   Ames Department Stores 

4.   Bank of America (before it was acquired by NationsBank) 

5.   Circuit City 

6.   Hewlett-Packard (HP) 

7.   Merck 

8.   Motorola 

9.   Rubbermaid 

10. Scott Paper 

11. Zenith

Principal effort of Collins and Hansen was on the two-part question: 

⁃ What happened leading up to the point at which decline became visible and

⁃ What did the company do once it began to fall?

They studied “historical eras of performance to understand the underlying dynamics that correlate with building greatness (or losing it).”

Anna Karenina. It reads, “All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”

Five stages

STAGE 1: HUBRIS BORN OF SUCCESS.

Arrogance is a symptom of decline.

“Stage 1 kicks in when people become arrogant, regarding success virtually as an entitlement, and they lose sight of the true underlying factors that created success in the first place.” 

“When the rhetoric of success (“We’re successful because we do these specific things”) replaces penetrating understanding and insight (“We’re successful because we understand why we do these specific things and under what conditions they would no longer work”), decline will very likely follow.”

STAGE 2: UNDISCIPLINED PURSUIT OF MORE.

Set-up for the fall.

More scale, more growth, more acclaim, more of whatever those in power see as “success.”

“Companies in Stage 2 stray from the disciplined creativity that led them to greatness in the first place, making undisciplined leaps into areas where they cannot be great or growing faster than they can achieve with excellence, or both. When an organization grows beyond its ability to fill its key seats with the right people, it has set itself up for a fall. Although complacency and resistance to change remain dangers to any successful enterprise, overreaching better captures how the mighty fall.”

STAGE 3: DENIAL OF RISK AND PERIL.

Denial kicks in.

“As companies move into Stage 3, internal warning signs begin to mount, yet external results remain strong enough to “explain away” disturbing data or to suggest that the difficulties are “temporary” or “cyclic” or “not that bad,” and “nothing is fundamentally wrong.” In Stage 3, leaders discount negative data, amplify positive data, and put a positive spin on ambiguous data. Those in power start to blame external factors for setbacks rather than accept responsibility.”

STAGE 4: GRASPING FOR SALVATION.

The decline becomes visible.

“The cumulative peril and/ or risks-gone-bad of Stage 3 assert themselves, throwing the enterprise into a sharp decline visible to all.

The critical question is, “How does its leadership respond?”

“By lurching for a quick salvation or by getting back to the disciplines that brought about greatness in the first place? Those who grasp for salvation have fallen into Stage 4. Common “saviors” include a charismatic visionary leader, a bold but untested strategy, a radical transformation, a dramatic cultural revolution, a hoped-for blockbuster product, a “game changing” acquisition, or any number of other silver-bullet solutions. Initial results from taking dramatic action may appear positive, but they do not last.”

STAGE 5: CAPITULATION TO IRRELEVANCE OR DEATH. 

This stage is a point of no return or a roadmap of decline.

“The longer a company remains in Stage 4, repeatedly grasping for silver bullets, the more likely it will spiral downward. In Stage 5, accumulated setbacks and expensive false starts erode financial strength and individual spirit to such an extent that leaders abandon all hope of building a great future. In some cases, their leaders just sell out; in other cases, the institution atrophies into utter insignificance, and in the most extreme cases, the enterprise simply dies outright.”

“It is possible to skip a stage, although our research suggests that companies are likely to move through them in sequence. Some companies move quickly through the stages, while others languish for years, or even decades. Zenith, for example, took three decades to move through all five stages, whereas Rubbermaid fell from the end of Stage 2 all the way to Stage 5 in just five years.”

“One of the keys to sustained performance lies in understanding how greatness can be lost. Second, I ultimately see this as a work of well-founded hope.”

“Yet our research indicates that organizational decline is largely self-inflicted, and recovery largely within our own control.”

Stage 1: Hubris Born of Success

“Amongst the eighteen visionary companies we studied at that time, Motorola received some of the highest scores on dimensions such as

0. adherence to core values, 

0. willingness to experiment, 

0. management continuity, and 

0. mechanisms of self-improvement.”

“Hubris is defined as excessive pride that brings down a hero, or alternatively (to paraphrase classics professor J. Rufus Fears), outrageous arrogance that inflicts suffering upon the innocent.”

Fail to improve your primary flywheel

“A cycle of arrogant neglect that goes like this:

1. You build a successful flywheel. 

2. You succumb to the notion that new opportunities will sustain your success better than your primary flywheel, either because you face an impending threat or because you find other opportunities more exciting (or perhaps you’re just bored). 

3. You divert your creative attention to new adventures and fail to improve your primary flywheel as if your life depended on it. 

4. The new ventures fail outright, siphon off your best creative energy, or take longer to succeed than expected. 

5. You turn your creative attention back to your primary flywheel only to find it wobbling and losing momentum.”

Stay true to your business….

“It’s like being an artist. Picasso didn’t renew himself by abandoning painting and sculpture to become a novelist or a banker.”

Are you knowing or learning person?

To be a knowing person (“I already know everything about why this works, and let me tell you”) differs fundamentally from being a learning person. The “knowing people” can set companies on the path to decline in two ways. First, they can become dogmatic about their specific practices (“We know we’re successful because we do these specific things, and we see no reason to question them”) as we saw with A& P. Second, they can overreach, moving into sectors or growing to a scale at which the original success factors no longer apply.

• SUCCESS ENTITLEMENT, ARROGANCE: Success is viewed as “deserved,” rather than fortuitous, fleeting, or even hard earned in the face of daunting odds; people begin to believe that success will continue almost no matter what the organization decides to do, or not to do. 

• NEGLECT OF A PRIMARY FLYWHEEL: Distracted by extraneous threats, adventures, and opportunities, leaders neglect a primary flywheel, failing to renew it with the same creative intensity that made it great in the first place. 

• “WHAT” REPLACES “WHY”: The rhetoric of success (“ We’re successful because we do these specific things”) replaces understanding and insight (“ We’re successful because we understand why we do these specific things and under what conditions they would no longer work”). 

• DECLINE IN LEARNING ORIENTATION: Leaders lose the inquisitiveness and learning orientation that mark those truly great individuals who, no matter how successful they become, maintain a learning curve as steep as when they first began their careers. 

• DISCOUNTING THE ROLE OF LUCK: Instead of acknowledging that luck and fortuitous events might have played a helpful role, people begin to presume that success is due entirely to the superior qualities of the enterprise and its leadership.

Stage 2: Undisciplined Pursuit of More

“This provokes a question: Why do we instinctively point to complacency and lack of innovation as a dominant pattern of decline, despite evidence to the contrary?”

“First, those who build great companies have drive and passion and intensity and an incurable itch for progress somewhere in their DNA to begin with; if we studied companies that never excelled, those that fell from so-so to bad, we might see a different pattern.”

“Second, perhaps people want to attribute the fall of others to a character flaw they don’t see in themselves rather than face the frightening possibility that they might be just as vulnerable.”

OBSESSED WITH GROWTH 

“In his 1995 annual letter to shareholders, Merck’s chairman and CEO Ray Gilmartin delineated the company’s #1 business objective: being a top-tier growth company.”

“To be clear, the problems of Stage 2 stem not from growth per se, but from the undisciplined pursuit of more.”

“Packard’s Law states that no company can consistently grow revenues faster than its ability to get enough of the right people to implement that growth and still become a great company.”

What are the key seats in your organization?

“If I were to pick one marker above all others to use as a warning sign, it would be a declining proportion of key seats filled with the right people. Twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year, you should be able to answer the following questions: What are the key seats in your organization?”

“One notable distinction between wrong people and right people is that the former see themselves as having “jobs,” while the latter see themselves as having responsibilities.”

“We observed each of the following modes of turmoil in at least one of the fallen companies:

• A domineering leader fails to develop strong successors (or drives strong successors away) and thereby creates a leadership vacuum when he or she steps away.

• An able executive dies or departs unexpectedly, with no strong replacement to step smoothly into the role.

• Strong successor candidates turn down the opportunity to become CEO.

• Strong successor candidates unexpectedly leave the company.

• The board of directors is acrimoniously divided on the designation of a leader, creating an adversarial “we” and “they” dynamic at the top.

• Leaders stay in power as long as they can and then pass the company to leaders who are late in their careers and assume a caretaker role.

• Monarchy-style family dynamics favor family members over nonfamily members, regardless of who would be the best leader.

• The board brings in a leader from the outside who doesn’t fit the core values, and the leader is ejected by the culture like a virus.

• The company chronically fails at getting CEO selection right.”

Confusing big with great

MARKERS FOR STAGE 2

• UNSUSTAINABLE QUEST FOR GROWTH, CONFUSING BIG WITH GREAT: Success creates pressure for more growth, setting up a vicious cycle of expectations; this strains people, the culture, and systems to the breaking point; unable to deliver consistent tactical excellence, the institution frays at the edges.

• UNDISCIPLINED DISCONTINUOUS LEAPS: The enterprise makes dramatic moves that fail at least one of the following three tests: 1. Do they ignite passion and fit with the company’s core values? 2. Can the organization be the best in the world at these activities or in these arenas? 3. Will these activities help drive the organization’s economic or resource engine?

• DECLINING PROPORTION OF RIGHT PEOPLE IN KEY SEATS: There is a declining proportion of right people in key seats, because of losing the right people and/ or growing beyond the organization’s ability to get enough people to execute on that growth with excellence (e.g., breaking Packard’s Law).

• EASY CASH ERODES COST DISCIPLINE: The organization responds to increasing costs by increasing prices and revenues rather than increasing discipline.

• BUREAUCRACY SUBVERTS DISCIPLINE: A system of bureaucratic rules subverts the ethic of freedom and responsibility that marks a culture of discipline; people increasingly think in terms of jobs rather than responsibilities.

• PROBLEMATIC SUCCESSION OF POWER: The organization experiences leadership-transition difficulties, be they in the form of poor succession planning, failure to groom excellent leaders from within, political turmoil, bad luck, or an unwise selection of successors.

• PERSONAL INTERESTS PLACED ABOVE ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS: People in power allocate more for themselves or their constituents—more money, more privileges, more fame, more of the spoils of success—seeking to capitalize as much as possible in the short term, rather than investing primarily in building for greatness decades into the future.

Stage 3: Denial of Risk and Peril

“Why great companies experiment with a lot of little things that might not pan out in the end.”

For businesses, our analysis suggests that any deterioration in

–      gross margins,

–      current ratio, or

–      debt-to-equity ratio indicates an impending storm.

Our financial analyses revealed that all eleven fallen companies showed a negative trend in at least one of these three variables as they moved toward Stage 4.”

“Yet we found little evidence of significant management concern and certainly not the productive paranoia they should have had about these trends. Customer loyalty and stakeholder engagement also deserve attention.” 

Blame other people or external factors

“One common behavior of late Stage 3 (and that often carries well into Stage 4) is when those in power blame other people or external factors—or otherwise explain away the data—rather than confront the frightening reality that the enterprise may be in serious trouble.”

“Reorganizations and restructurings can create a false sense that you’re actually doing something productive.”

“We have no evidence from our research that any one structure is ideal in all situations, and no form of reorganization can make risk and peril melt away.”

MARKERS FOR STAGE 3

• AMPLIFY THE POSITIVE, DISCOUNT THE NEGATIVE: There is a tendency to discount or explain away negative data rather than presume that something is wrong with the company; leaders highlight and amplify external praise and publicity.

• BIG BETS AND BOLD GOALS WITHOUT EMPIRICAL VALIDATION: Leaders set audacious goals and/ or make big bets that aren’t based on accumulated experience, or worse, that fly in the face of the facts.

• INCURRING HUGE DOWNSIDE RISK BASED ON AMBIGUOUS DATA: When faced with ambiguous data and decisions that have a potentially severe or catastrophic downside, leaders take a positive view of the data and run the risk of blowing a hole “below the waterline.”

• EROSION OF HEALTHY TEAM DYNAMICS: There is a marked decline in the quality and amount of dialogue and debate; there is a shift toward either consensus or dictatorial management rather than a process of argument and disagreement followed by unified commitment to execute decisions.

• EXTERNALIZING BLAME: Rather than accept full responsibility for setbacks and failures, leaders point to external factors or other people to affix blame.

• OBSESSIVE REORGANIZATIONS: Rather than confront the brutal realities, the enterprise chronically reorganizes; people are increasingly preoccupied with internal politics rather than external conditions.

• IMPERIOUS DETACHMENT: Those in power become more imperious and detached; symbols and perks of executive-class status amplify detachment; plush new office buildings may disconnect executives from daily life.

Stage 4: Grasping for Salvation

Silver bullets

“Stage 4 begins when an organization reacts to a downturn by lurching for a silver bullet. This can take a wide range of possible forms, such as betting big on an unproven technology, pinning hopes on an untested strategy, relying upon the success of a splashy new product, seeking a “game changing” acquisition, gambling on an image makeover, hiring consultants who promise salvation, seeking a savior CEO, expounding the rhetoric of “revolution,” or in its very late stages, grasping for a financial rescue or buyout.”

Mannaryyni-strategia

“The key point is that they go for a quick, big solution or bold stroke to jump-start a recovery, rather than embark on the more pedestrian, arduous process of rebuilding long-term momentum.”

“Our research across multiple studies (Good to Great, Built to Last, How the Mighty Fall, and our ongoing research into what it takes to prevail in turbulent environments) shows a distinct negative correlation between building great companies and going outside for a CEO. Eight of the eleven fallen companies in this analysis went for an outside CEO during their era of decline, whereas only one of the success contrasts went outside during the eras of comparison.”

“And in our previous research, over 90 percent of the CEOs that led companies from good to great came from inside; meanwhile, over two-thirds of the comparison companies in that study hired a CEO from the outside yet failed to make a comparable leap.”

Jumping from one false salvation to another

“Louis V. Gerstner from IBM understood that whether you’re brought in from the outside or come from the inside, you have to halt the cycle of grasping and cease jumping from one false salvation to another, from silver bullet to silver bullet, from dashed hope to new hope, only to have hopes dashed yet again.”

“The remarkable thing about Gerstner is that he did not accept that frame, a powerful lesson for all leaders, whether coming from within or without.”

“If you want to reverse decline, be rigorous about what not to do.”

MARKERS FOR STAGE 4

“• A SERIES OF SILVER BULLETS: There is a tendency to make dramatic, big moves, such as a “game changing” acquisition or a discontinuous leap into a new strategy or an exciting innovation, in an attempt to quickly catalyze a breakthrough—and then to do it again and again, lurching about from program to program, goal to goal, strategy to strategy, in a pattern of chronic inconsistency.

• GRASPING FOR A LEADER-AS-SAVIOR: The board responds to threats and setbacks by searching for a charismatic leader and/ or outside savior.

• PANIC AND HASTE: Instead of being calm, deliberate, and disciplined, people exhibit hasty, reactive behavior, bordering on panic.

• RADICAL CHANGE AND “REVOLUTION” WITH FANFARE: The language of “revolution” and “radical” change characterizes the new era: New programs! New cultures! New strategies! Leaders engage in hoopla, spending a lot of energy trying to align and “motivate” people, engaging in buzzwords and taglines.

• HYPE PRECEDES RESULTS: Instead of setting expectations low—underscoring the duration and difficulty of the turnaround—leaders hype their visions; they “sell the future” to compensate for the lack of current results, initiating a pattern of overpromising and underdelivering.

• INITIAL UPSWING FOLLOWED BY DISAPPOINTMENTS: There is an initial burst of positive results, but they do not last; dashed hope follows dashed hope; the organization achieves no buildup, no cumulative momentum.

• CONFUSION AND CYNICISM: People cannot easily articulate what the organization stands for; core values have eroded to the point of irrelevance; the organization has become “just another place to work,” a place to get a paycheck; people lose faith in their ability to triumph and prevail. Instead of passionately believing in the organization’s core values and purpose, people become distrustful, regarding visions and values as little more than PR and rhetoric.

• CHRONIC RESTRUCTURING AND EROSION OF FINANCIAL STRENGTH: Each failed initiative drains resources; cash flow and financial liquidity begin to decline; the organization undergoes multiple restructurings; options narrow and strategic decisions are increasingly dictated by circumstance.”

Stage 5: Capitulation to Irrelevance or Death

CASH! “Never forget,” Lazier would say. “You pay your bills with cash. You can be profitable and bankrupt.”

“But organizations do not die from lack of earnings. They die from lack of cash.”

We found two basic versions of Stage 5. 

0. In the first version, those in power come to believe that capitulation offers a better overall outcome than continuing to fight. 

0. In the second version, those in power continue the struggle, but they run out of options, and the enterprise either dies outright or shrinks into utter irrelevance compared to its previous grandeur.

Fallen from great to terrible

“Recall the Gerstner philosophy: the right leaders feel a sense of urgency in good times and bad, whether facing threat or opportunity, no matter what.”

“Burning platform: The right people will drive improvement, whether standing on a burning platform or not.”

“The path to recovery lies first and foremost in returning to sound management practices and rigorous strategic thinking.”

“It never hurts to review the classics, including Drucker, Porter, Deming, and Peters/ Waterman.”

“If you’ve fallen into decline, get back to solid management disciplines—now! And if you’re still strong, be vigilant for early markers of decline.”

“Be willing to change tactics, but never give up your core purpose.”

How should we change according to the book?

Go back to Good-To-Great Framework:

DISCIPLINED PEOPLE

STAGE 1: DISCIPLINED PEOPLE LEVEL 5 LEADERSHIP: Level 5 leaders are ambitious first and foremost for the cause, the organization, the work—not themselves—and they have the fierce resolve to do whatever it takes to make good on that ambition. A Level 5 leader displays a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will.

FIRST WHO, THEN WHAT: Those who build great organizations make sure they have the right people on the bus, the wrong people off the bus, and the right people in the key seats before they figure out where to drive the bus. They always think first about “who” and then about what. 

BRUTAL FACTS

STAGE 2: DISCIPLINED THOUGHT CONFRONT THE BRUTAL FACTS—THE STOCKDALE PARADOX: Retain unwavering faith that you can and will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties, and at the same time have the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.

THE HEDGEHOG CONCEPT: Greatness comes about by a series of good decisions consistent with a simple, coherent concept—a “hedgehog concept.” The hedgehog concept is an operating model that reflects understanding of three intersecting circles: what you can be the best in the world at, what you are deeply passionate about, and what best drives your economic or resource engine. 

ACTION CULTURE

STAGE 3: DISCIPLINED ACTION CULTURE OF DISCIPLINE: Disciplined people who engage in disciplined thought and who take disciplined action—operating with freedom within a framework of responsibilities: this is the cornerstone of a culture that creates greatness. People do not have jobs; they have responsibilities.

THE FLYWHEEL: There is no single defining action, no grand program, no one killer innovation, no solitary lucky break, no miracle moment. Rather, the process resembles relentlessly pushing a giant heavy flywheel, turn upon turn, building momentum until a point of breakthrough, and beyond. 

CLOCK BUILDING

STAGE 4: BUILDING GREATNESS TO LAST CLOCK BUILDING, NOT TIME TELLING: Truly great organizations prosper through multiple generations of leaders, the exact opposite of being built around a single great leader, great idea, or specific program. Leaders in great organizations build catalytic mechanisms to stimulate progress and do not depend upon having a charismatic personality to get things done; indeed, many have had a “charisma bypass.”

PRESERVE THE CORE/ STIMULATE PROGRESS: Enduring great organizations are characterized by a fundamental duality. On the one hand, they have a set of timeless core values and core reason for being that remain constant over long periods of time. On the other hand, they have a relentless drive for change and progress—a creative compulsion that often manifests in BHAGs (Big Hairy Audacious Goals). Great organizations keep clear the difference between their core values (which never change) and operating strategies and cultural practices (which endlessly adapt to a changing world).

What should I personally do?

Three things:

–      Internet might be the root cause for companies starting to fall

–      Try to pinpoint ”How Mighty Fall”-companies and analyse why they have fallen from great to terrible.

–      And invest in companies that are on their way from good to great.

Summary

The book in six words – “Effective teaching: don’t try to come up with the right answers; focus on coming up with good questions.” (Bill Lazier)….. “There are more ways to fall than to become great.”

Kategoriat
Uncategorized

Chris Smith: The Conversion Code

About the book

The Conversion code book is something that you don’t see every day. The learnings of the book are valuable although the cases and evidence is mostly coming from experience of Chris Smith. “The Conversion Code is your guide to getting an ROI, ASAP. It’s a proven step-by-step blueprint to increasing leads and sales, immediately.” He shares a lot of his insights on sales and how he personally has used different tools.

What are the key learnings?

“Albert Mehrabian’s 7-38-55 Percent Rule and the science behind how humans communicate”:

–      55 % body language.

–      38 % tone of voice.

–      7 % words.

And if Mehrabian’s rule is for IRL (in-real-life) sales so Chris Smith’s rule of thumbs are for online sales.

Key learnings are:

–      Design is king, not content.

–      Landing Pages Are the New Black

–      “The more content I have created, the more cash I have collected. Period.”

–      Lead generation by adding “lead magnets”

–      Speed + Tenacity + Script = Highest Conversion Rate Possible

–      Emails That Work

Is content king or design?

“Participants discussed their first impressions of a website. There were two factors that led them to reject or mistrust a website quickly. The overwhelming majority of comments related to the design of the website.

Ninety-four percent cited design and only 6 percent cited content in relation to “the number of times a factor was mentioned as a percentage of the total number of comments about rejection.” So maybe content isn’t king after all.…

If you are going to capture and convert quality Internet leads, you need to gain their trust.”

So in a sense design is king.

Landing Pages Are the New Black

“They have only ONE purpose. In 2003, the IT department at Microsoft invented landing pages in response to poor online sales of their flagship business product, Office.

Keep in mind that even if you have no design or technical skill whatsoever, there are some very cool companies like LeadPages, Instapage, or Unbounce that let you build inexpensive (or free) landing pages in just a few easy clicks. Be sure to search their existing themes by keyword like “real estate” to find pre-built, industry-centric designs. Even SumoMe (which I mentioned earlier as a suite of great website plug-ins) built something called WelcomeMat, which is basically a landing page that sits on top of a blog post or the page of your website someone is on (pushing the content “below the fold”).”

“Here are the nine key elements Kissmetrics identified that make a perfect landing page (with my take on each):

1.   Headline: Make it clear, concise, and “coupled.”

2.   Subheadline: With the subheadline, we simply want to continue them down the path the headline started them on

3.   Description: Make sure you triple-check all grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

4.   Testimonial: The goal here is to establish trust quickly.

5.   Call to action: When the visitor is ready, your call to action must be obvious, easy to find, the right color, and contain the right copy.

6.   Clickable button(s): A conversion button should stand out and be near/ below the call to action, either accompanying the message or reiterating it word for word.

7.   Remove links

8.   Image or video

9.   Stay above the fold

Writing the Perfect Blog Post

The more content I have created, the more cash I have collected. Period. “The Anatomy of a Perfect Blog Post.”:

–      Headline

–      Storytelling Hook

–      Fewer Characters per Line at First

–      Featured Image

–      The 1,500 + Word Sweet Spot

”What is a lead magnet? Basically, it is something so valuable that someone would give up their name, phone number, and email address to access it.

Retargeting

Retargeter provides seven best practices for running retargeting campaigns:

1. Don’t overbear or underbear.

2. Make sure your ads are well branded.

3. Understand your view-through window.

4. Have an incredible network.

5. Optimize your conversion funnel.

6. Target an actionable audience.

7. Segment your active audience.

Speed + Tenacity + Script = Highest Conversion Rate Possible

In fact, you have a 100x better chance of turning a lead into a conversion in the first five minutes than you do after just 30 minutes.

The ideal time to call leads in order to convert them is between 8 and 10 a.m. and 4 and 6 p.m. Calling on Wednesday and Thursday gives you the best chance at reaching someone.

How should we change according to the book?

Not to write blogs that are longer than 2000 word.

What should I personally do?

Check FB Messenger!

Summary

The book in six words – “Albert Mehrabian’s 7-38-55 Percent Rule”