AffectiveAction

Because business has the heart to succeed

Menu

  • Home
  • Blog
  • General Management
  • Marketing
  • People Management
  • Innovation
  • Guest Bloggers
  • About
  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Recent Posts

    • Renewable Fuel for a Brilliant Life
    • How to Manage Women: Tips #2 and 3
    • How to Manage Women Tip # 1
    • Compassionate Capitalism
    • Stop That Focus Group!
    • To really change people’s behavior: Use the right word.
    • Is This the Coolest Company Ever?
  • Archive

  • Tags

    Affective Action B2B business business model career development career management cause marketing collaborate commercialization Conflict corporate responsibility customer networks demand generation Design Duarte Communications early sales Ecomagination effective communication Empathy employee engagement employee retention GE generative green marketing high performance high touch/low cost hiring HR human resources innovation innovative thinking Institute for the Future investment Jeff Immelt leadership lead generation management managing women market development marketing marketing automation marketing metrics motivation negotiate nurturing prospects outperform passion personalized marketing philanthropy philosophy philosophy and business Presentations product introductions project management project portfolio analysis project selection prospecting regulatory expansion results sales Santa Clara University social-media social entrepreneur social venture Social Venture incubator Strategy sustainability TEDx Presidio the buying process the customer view The Onion time to market time to ramp use case venture program
    • RSS - Posts
    • RSS - Comments
  • Subscribe in a reader

Browsing Tags project selection

Hewlett Packard

December 2, 2012 · by Taia Ergueta

greenhouse150cropThe nth self-inflicted injury (Autonomy) flings Hewlett-Packard into recovery mode once again.  I feel pained each time one of these poor decisions comes to light and takes its toll.  I loved that company.  You would have loved it too.  It was not just another business entity, it was one of the great institutions of Western Civilization.  David Packard and Bill Hewlett created a management system that was absolutely the best system for turning human capital into societal contribution.  Part of the evidence of this is that that system worked worldwide and across industries.

I speak of Hewlett Packard in the past tense not because I think they are doomed but because the company that now bears the name is a completely different company from the one I knew. I left HP in 1999 to join the spin-off, Agilent Technologies.  So I don’t pretend to know anything about the current situation there.  But I do know that the original HP’s formula for greatness is too important to allow it to be discredited by association with the current mess and too valuable to be forgotten.  There is so much to share with you about the very accessible magic of the HP that grew at a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 23% for over 50 years. Today I think I will just share a story  and a summary description of the magic.

When I Realized Something Was Very Wrong

In the mid 1990’s the late Lew Platt was CEO of HP.  He and his CFO understandably worried that it would be increasingly difficult for HP to keep up the phenomenal record of 23% CAGR from 1942 to 1995.  In 1995 the company reached $31.5 B in annual revenues.  To grow even 15% in a year meant that the company would need to find $4.7B in new revenue.  So they asked the Corporate Development group to identify strategies that other companies had used to created growth.  I got the assignment.  It was a great project.  Since the General Managers of the businesses units were already thinking continuously about how to grow those existing businesses, I put particular emphasis on how companies got into new businesses.

I presented the findings to the executive team.  There was good discussion and questions.  Close to the end, one executive spoke assertively, saying in essence:  “This is all very interesting, but things are going pretty well.  Things have gone pretty well for us without doing any of those things, so maybe that means that we don’t need to do them.”  Though stated as a hypothesis, it was a conclusion.  The interesting thing is that he was wrong on two counts:

  1. First:  The company HAD done those things. Bill (Hewlett) and Dave (Packard) were intuitively new venture investors. The entered new businesses when the company did not NEED to do so.  They went into countries (like China in ) when  there was “no” market there yet.
  2. Second:  Financially things were going fine but that cadre of professional managers were focused on being careful stewards of their large businesses, not on creating high value new businesses. This paucity of internally generated growth encouraged later CEOs to plunge into a series of unfortunate acquisitions.

What Was Astoundingly Right Before So Much Went Wrong

I share this with you now because notwithstanding the many mistakes of the current HP, the important message of this post is that the key success factors of the original HP apply today.  Here is my summary of the HP success formula:

  • Beakers 4_3Products that made a big unique contribution
  • A system that built and unlocked human potential better than any other
  • Executives that used informed intuition to make bold moves that they then made successful
  • A commitment to customer success
  • Financial discipline

This formula does not seem to have been applied at the company with the HP name for some time but none of us should make the same mistake.

The original HP version of those elements create virtuous cycles of high expectation and high performance.  Those cycles, in turn create their own fuel of profit and goodwill.

More specifics on this in future posts.

For a personal discussion of how to apply the HP formula contact me.

Share this:

  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
Like Loading...

Fast Company on Big Ideas

November 17, 2012 · by Taia Ergueta

In the November issue of Fast Company you’ll find “Why, with so many businesses thinking small, the World Needs Big Ideas”.  I love big ideas and, as a manager, often saw proof of the Goethe quote:

“Dream no small dreams for they have no power to move the hearts of men.”

Big idea projects also raise fascinating challenges for entrepreneurs and business people.

First, a few examples of inspiring Big Ideas sited in the Fast Company article:

  • Sage Bionetworks:   Accelerate biomedical discoveries by creating a system for open sourcing biomedical research data — thereby giving researchers access to thousands of times more data than they could collect on their own.
  • Waste Enterprisers: Turning human waste in to biofuel, solving huge widespread cost, environmental, time and dignity issues.
  • Terrapower: Unlimited safe energy from depleted uranium.

Read More →

Share this:

  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
Like Loading...

Is Your Plan Bold Enough to be Safe?

June 24, 2012 · by Taia Ergueta

Careers and companies rise and fall based on being right about how much innovation to take on at any given time.  Reach too far and you risk ridicule, delays in time to market, and slow market development.  Not surprisingly, it often seemed safer to stick to the middle ground:  Investments in product enhancements or business extension for which there is strong supporting data.  But today, you shun the lunatic fringe at your own peril.  A small leap may not put you on firm ground.

 (The view straight down from High Bridge over Eagle Creek in the Columbia River Gorge)

A Case and Lessons Learned

I recently attended an EMBS talk on the latest scanning, parametrics, and 3-D printing developments.  The speaker was Scott Summit.  His company, Bespoke Innovations makes functionally and esthetically personalized prosthetic leg coverings.  For the coverings to achieve their first objective – restoring visual symmetry to the wearer’s body – they need an accurate digital scan of the person’s body.  What he recounted about the recent history of body scanning technology is a warning to all of us in any industry:

  • Approximately 3 years ago, to get a body scan he needed to take the customer to a lab that had a 1M machine and would provide scans at $800/scan.
  • Shortly thereafter, there were hand-held devices that cost $40,000 to $60,000 a piece and were very tricky to use.
  • Scott’s company developed their own scanner but it was soon overtaken in price/performance by…
  • A scanner that Microsoft developed. Shortly after that product became available…
  • Autodesk announced that anyone could download their 123D Catch software product for free. This enables anyone with a digital camera to take photos that the software then stitches together to create a 3-D model. For free.

Just hearing about this drop — from $1M to $0 in approximately 3 years —  is dizzying.  Can you imagine how each of those obviated product providers felt?  There are Five Stages of Grief, and I have seen Four Stages of Losing this kind of competitive fight:

  1. Denial:  “It’s a much less powerful product. “ “We only see them in Germany.”  “Our customers will never accept that.”
  2. More Enhancement:  “We will have better [fill in the blank: Specs? Bathrooms? You Tube videos?]”
  3. Capitulation:  “We have other more strategic businesses on which to focus”
  4. Rationalization:  “Sheila never invested enough in it.”  “Joe wasn’t the right person to lead it.”

The lessons that people take away from competitive failures are not always right.  Maybe there were other issues, but maybe the real lesson is this:  “We lost by playing it safe.  We did not target a big enough change; as a result, our investments went toward enhancements while others produced a much bigger leap in value for customers.”

There are definitely still situations that call for investments in minimally or moderately innovative projects.  But my point is that there are fewer of them now than before.  At the current pace of change and competition, many medium-impact projects simply do not make sense:  They will be rendered irrelevant soon or even before they are out the gate.

Implications:  How to Win in This Environment

  1. Become the voice, in your head and in your company, for the “Is it bold enough to be safe?” investment criterion.
  2. Become expert in  the techniques for evaluating bold ideas.  For every bold idea that is wildly successful there are 17 that turn out to be just wild.  More on this in future posts.
  3. Become expert in the techniques for implementing bold ideas in ways that manage risk.  More on this in future posts.

Input Welcome

Have you changed your project selection to match a faster pace of change?

How have you mitigated the higher risk associated with bigger leaps in contribution?

Share this:

  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
Like Loading...
  • Blog at WordPress.com.
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • AffectiveAction
    • Join 41 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • AffectiveAction
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d