business advice | Paul Wallbank - Communications Professional

Fashion’s move to digital commerce

The fashion and retail industries are undergoing radical change as ‘digital commerce’ takes hold according to Dasault Systemes’ Susan Olivier.

How does 3D design change the fashion industry? Susan Olivier of Dassault Systemes sees ‘digital commerce’ driving fundamental changes to fashion and retail businesses.

For slower retailers and fashion houses, this move to digital commerce threatens their very existence.

‘Digital commerce’ is more than just e-commerce in the view of Olivier, Vice President of Consumer Goods and Retail of the French 3D design software house, it’s a bringing together of technologies that alter the relationship between customers, retailers and designers along with the manufacturing and logistics companies that bring the products to market.

Retail’s two big challenges

Olivier sees the two biggest challenges to the retail industry as being the 2009 downturn of the global economy and the rise of the connected consumer.

The downturn forced manufacturers and retailers to examine their supply chains, product design and manufacturing to squeeze out inefficiencies along with understanding consumer sentiment better.

Designing for inner beauty

“They found they could work differently with suppliers, how do I design for cost?” Asks Olivier, “how do I work on designing for what we call for ‘inner beauty’ and maybe change the inner design to take out costs without hurting performance or visual performance?” Olivier asked.

“Those brands who survived are those who learned to do both things very well – work better with consumers and work better with their supplier base.”

Who has the power?

“Consumers on the other hand found ‘we have the power’ coming out of the down global economy,” says Olivier. “When consumers buy on price then brand loyalty gets strained.”

The connected consumer also adds further risks for retailers as customers are now better informed than ever before.

“If retailers aren’t careful, she knows more about the product than the poor staff on the floor does and she knows which stores have it in inventory than the poor staff on the floor does.”

Bringing together the digital continuum

One of Olivier’s areas of expertise is in Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) – planning the design, manufacturing, marketing and retirement of various products.

A notable feature of modern the modern consumer goods industry is the compressed life cycle of products, “it used to be a life cycle was 18 months,” says Olivier. “The goal was to get it below 12 months, for many brands it’s now 12 weeks.”

A scenario Olivier gives is the design process where a rapid virtual prototype can be shared across manufacturers, store managers and focus group.

“I can create models in 3D and look at different options,” says Olivier. “How’s the outsoul of this shoe going to perform with this upper? Is it comfortable if I make changes? I might send a sample to a 3D printer before I make the mould.”

“I can share it with my visual display teams and my store managers and I can share it before I commit to production and get feedback from my stores and I can share it with my consumer focus groups. ”

“Now I have the power to do that weeks or months in advance before having to put the knife to the goods.” States Olivier, “that’s a completely different way of connecting the way companies think about product, bring it to life and bring it to market.”

“Those are the kinds of things we’re enabling when I talk about bringing together the different points of the digital continuum.”

“Now I’m in store I want to take the same images to educate my sales staff. I want them to take a tablet device and show the consumer what is in inventory, not just in this store, and I can have it shipped to their home within 24 hours.”

“So that’s why I’m saying ‘digital commerce’,” says Olivier. “It could be online, it could be a kiosk in the store, it could be an iPad the sales assistant has in front of them.”

Susan Olivier’s digital commerce model is the present day reality of retail – today’s merchant has to be across consumers’ sentiment along with working closely with suppliers to get products to get products to the customer quickly. The old ways of selling goods, particularly fashion, are over.

Navigating the future of accounting and business with the cloud

Cloud computing is changing the accounting profession and many other businesses with it says Steph Hinds of Growthwise accounting

Steph Hinds of Newcastle accounting firm Growthwise is one of the new breed of business advisers using cloud and mobile technologies to change her profession.

At the recent Sydney Xero Conference I had the opportunity to speak to her about some of the ways her business is changing.

The interview with Steph as part of the Decoding the New Economy YouTube channel covers how the accounting profession is changing, what industries are being the most affected and where she sees the growth opportunities for her businesses.

Like many other professional services industries, the big change Steph sees is how accounting is moving from being based upon client transactions to requiring much deeper relationships with clients.

“The transactional model has been commodified completely,” says Steph. ” I started as a trainee accountant and we had those big ledger books and I was coding things and I’d go through cheque butts to enter them into the system.”

“Now all of that work is done for you.”

Like Xero founder and CEO Rod Drury, Steph doesn’t see this change as being generation based with older accountants adopting technologies as quickly as their younger counterparts.

However legacy systems do hobble existing businesses with both Xero and Growthwise finding 40% of their clients are new, startup businesses.

“We’re finding a lot of new businesses are starting up now,” says Steph. “it is so easy to setup in business, we’ve advised a lot of accountants that rather than spending five hundred thousand dollars to buy into a practice, you can spend ten thousand dollars on licenses and a laptop and all of a sudden you’re really in business.”

Changing the building industry

Steph sees the opportunities being in retail, hospitality and trades where being are struggling with paperwork and need fast responses in a customer driven market. The building trades are one of the big areas Steph sees for growth.

“Guys not having to drive to the office to get their instructions and their things for the day, not having to drop off timesheets, getting paid on the spot and billing on the spot.”

“We see traditionally see trades, particularly in the building industry as having cashflow issues and people go bust,” says Steph. “I think this is a huge opportunity to change things.”

Having information is at managers’ and proprietors’ fingertips is one of the benefits of cloud services and Steph also sees the app ecosystem, providing plugins like mobile job management are very powerful.

“The big data angle, for benchmarking – we have real time access to our clients’ data and how they are doing against industry benchmarks and being able to help clients,” says Steph.

Steph Hinds and Growthwise are examples of how the business world undergoing a dramatic change as the information and systems that were once only available to big business can now be accessed by anyone.

The real digital divide lies between the business who are prepared to grab the opportunities and those who are happy doing things the way they’re done today.

Bernie Brookes’ Blues – the inability of managers to learn from failure

Business leaders need to accept and learn from failure if their organisations are to survive.

One of the notable aspects of modern corporations is the inability of executives to identify failure.

A good example of this is the Australian department store industry. Like most Aussie industries it’s dominated by two major players, Myer and David Jones, both of whom have struggled with the realities of modern retailing.

David Jones is notable for deciding the web was too much hard work in 2001 while Myer’s management whines about sales taxes despite struggling with antiquated point of sales systems and an inadequate online presence that still lags its international competitors.

This week illustrates both companies’ state of executive denial, yesterday Myer’s CEO Bernie Brookes blamed falling profits and escalating costs on the GST and labour rates – the idea that management should take some of the blame for increased overheads didn’t seem to occur to Bernie.

One telling comment of Brookes’ are his comments about productivity and global competitiveness.

“The sector would benefit from reform to help drive productivity and become more competitive in an increasingly global marketplace,” said Brookes.

Brookes’ comment illustrates just how the Australian corporate sector has flubbed the transition to operating in a high cost economy.

At the same time Bernie Brooks was bemoaning the state of the world, David Jones CEO Paul Zahra was opening a new small format store and – like all champions of free enterprise – blamed the government for slow sales.

David Jones’ new store is interesting in itself, notably this comment in the Sydney Morning Herald story;

Mr Zahra said the store had been especially catered to the wealthy demographics of the Malvern area with a focus on high margin items.

“Higher margin categories are what we have focused on and low margin categories are available in store but in the online system so we can get it shipped directly to people’s homes.

“And we get a better gross profit per square metre as a result.”

Welcome to the Twenty-First Century, Mr Zahra.

Both Zahra and Brookes’ statements show they learn nothing from failure, indeed they don’t even seem to acknowledge they have failed.

It’s understandable in modern corporate life not to acknowledge failure, in the alpha-male environment of the executive suite admitting failure is a form of professional suicide.

However not learning from mistakes is a recipe for making more errors – “those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”

And that’s exactly what the hapless Myer and David Jones shareholders are condemned to, as are all the other businesses whose management doesn’t see its failures.

Death of a typewriter repairer

The tale of two shops shows how change threatens to overwhelm many small businesses.

Despite owing his longevity to cheap scotch and strong tobacco, the US’ oldest typewriter repairman passed away two weeks ago. The fate of his shop is one that many other small businesses will share.

Manson Whitlock of New Haven, Connecticut had run his typewriter shop from the early 1930s until shortly before his death. Needless to say, he didn’t like computers.

“I don’t even know what a computer is,” Mr. Whitlock told The Yale Daily News, the student paper, in 2010. “I’ve heard about them a lot, but I don’t own one, and I don’t want one to own me.”

While Manson’s shop had six staff at its peak, in recent years he ran the operation on his own and the business died with him.

Many Baby Boomer business owners face the same fate as Manson Whitlock as their businesses decline in the face of changing technology and shifting change.

Some of the boomers will suffer because they are undercapitalised and, as the next generation of entrepreneurs can’t afford to buy these existing business, most of those will work way wall past the date they planned to retireme.

A good example of this is a radio shop near my office which has been run by an old gentleman for many years. When I went into it in 1997 for something – I forget what – the proprietor was almost shocked to see a customer and he couldn’t help me.

It wasn’t surprising as it was rare to see a customer and the none of the stock behind the cluttered counter seemed to date beyond 1980.

The only reason the shop survived was because the proprietor owned the premises as there’s no way the place could have paid the modern rents with the non-existent turnover.

A few weeks ago the shop closed. I don’t know whether the owner retired or passed away, but the business closed with him.

Both the Neutral Bay electrical shop and the New Haven typewriter repairer show how businesses can be left behind by technology.

While both stores had plenty of time to react during the rise of computers during the 1980s and 90s, their proprietors chose not to and by the 2000s it was too late.

Today, technology and business is changing even faster and there’s many more big and small enterprises that risk being left behind by change.

It’s not only the changing market place that risks the future of these business, the failure to invest in things as simple as modern Point of Sale systems or even a basic website will leave many exposed.

The time to invest in new systems and products is now and if you can’t invest in the future, then it’s time to get out.

Why do executives see romance in the startup culture?

Many managers think startups are romantic – could it be because of the corporate lives they lead?

One of the fascinating phenomenons of the modern era is how corporate managers have appropriated the startup culture.

At the announcement of the Australian Centre for Broadband Innovation’s Apps For Broadband prizes, Foxtel’s CIO Robyn Elliot described her experience of working in a startup.

“Foxtel was once in the category of startup itself,” said Elliot at the start of her speech.

Apples and Oranges

Comparing Foxtel to a scrabbling startup in the modern sense is bizarre given the company was a well funded joint venture between News Limited and Telstra – the company being a good example of modern Australian crony corporatism rather than a risky undertaking by daring entrepreneurs.

This conceit about startups isn’t unusual among corporate executives, in the early days of Australia’s National Broadband Network it was quite common to hear NBNCo managers talk about their startup ethos – this from a company backed by around 30 billion dollars of government funding.

At one stage I interviewed for a job at NBNCo and I struggled not to start giggling when the “startup ethos of the organisation” was earnestly emphasised to me several times during the meeting.

Not surprisingly the job went to an ex-telco staffer, as did most of the team’s roles. No doubt their corporate experience was far more suited to the company’s ‘startup ethos’ than that of actually having worked in four startups. Giggling in the interview probably didn’t help either.

The romantic dreams of executives

Given most corporate staffers would curl into the fetal position and weep after two weeks of working in a real startup, why do executives indulge in the conceit that their business is ‘just like a startup’?

The answer could lie in “The Consequences to the Banks of the Collapse in Money Values” written by John Maynard Keynes in 1931.

A sound banker, alas, is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional and orthodox way along with his fellows, so that no one can really blame him. It is necessarily part of the business of a banker to maintain appearances, and to confess a conventional respectability, which is more than human. Life-long practices of this kind make them the most romantic and the least realistic of men.

So it is for the modern corporate executive who has spent their working lives fighting for the corner office having met their KPIs and spending years cultivating their network of like minded managers.

After two decades spent writing stern memos on the use of paper clips and climbing the corporate ladder, it must be tempting for a middle aged executive to look at those funky youngsters getting billion dollar payouts after a couple of years grabbing three hours sleep a night among the pizza boxes under the desk and get pangs of what might have been…..

A harmless startup fantasy

In some many ways the executive startup fantasy is touching and largely harmless, even if it does attract sniggers and giggles from the unwashed and underpaid who’ve actually been there.

The real risk is when a senior executive tries to shoehorn a Silicon Valley startup culture into an organisation.

While most large companies could do with some of the hunger and flexibility found in smaller businesses, there’s many ways that could go terribly wrong – particularly when driven by a starry eyed romantic manager.

For most executives though, the dreams of being in a startup will remain a fantasy – and that’s probably best for everybody.

A startup’s journey – what businesses can and can’t learn from Silicon Valley

There’s a lot small business can learn from the tales of Silicon Valley startups, but not every lesson applies.

Tech Crunch has a fascinating story on the journey of failed startup, Los Angeles based Flowtab that hoped to create an bar tab smartphone app.

In many ways Flowtab is a story of our bubble economy times – a cheap, easily built service that addresses what is, at best, a minor first world problem.

Flowtab failed when it turned out solving that problem was a lot harder than just writing an app, which is something often overlooked in the current startup hype.

However had the timing of Flowtab’s founders been a bit luckier they could have hit the jackpot.

Dave Winer describes the herd mentality of venture capital investors and had the hot trend of the time been bar ordering apps then the Flowtab team could have been one of the beneficiaries of the Silicon Valley business model.

Along with being a historical insight into today’s investment mania, Flowtab’s story is an illustration of how a new business needs to pivot when the original idea turns out not to be as compelling as the founders first thought.

Even when a business does a pivot, it’s not guaranteed the company will survive, but that’s part of the risks in starting a new enterprise, particularly when it’s undercapitalised as Flowtab was.

There’s many lessons from Flowtab’s failure, but not all of them apply to every business.

Coffee machines, the Big Blue W and the barriers to new technology

All new technologies involve a learning curve and sometimes people don’t have time to gain that knowledge.

Last week my wife bought a new coffee maker, an impressive, all singing and dancing device that’s a vast improvement on the decade old machine it replaces.

Despite drinking three or four cups of coffee a day, for three days after the new machine arrived I didn’t make one long black or cappuccino. The reason was I didn’t have time to figure out how to use it or the high tech coffee grinder that it came it.

Being time poor is one of the greatest barriers in adopting new technologies as business owners, managers and staff often don’t have the time to learn another way of doing things.

The coffee machine reminded me of something I learned with a business I was involved in the early 2000s. We were trying to sell Linux systems into small and medium businesses.

We had some success selling into small service businesses like real estate agents and event managers where the owners could see the benefits of open source software and, in many cases, had a deep suspicion or resentment towards Microsoft’s almost monopoly on small business software.

Despite the success in selling the systems, the business though came undone because many of the clients’ staff members refused to use the Linux machines, as one lady put it to our frustrated tech “I want to click on the Big Blue W when I want to type a letter.”

That Big Blue W was Microsoft Word and no amount of cajoling could convince the lady to use any of the open source alternatives — she knew what worked in Word and she had neither the time or inclination to learn any thing different.

Eventually that customer gave up trying to convince their staff to use non-Microsoft systems and the computers were reformatted with Windows, Office and all the other standard small business applications installed.

This happened at almost every customer’s office and eventually the business folded.

For those of us involved in the business the lesson was clear, that time poor users who are content with their existing way of working need a compelling reason to switch to a new service.

In many ways this is the problem for legacy businesses — the sunk costs of software are more than just the purchase price, there’s the time and effort in migrating away from existing products and training staff.

When we’re selling new technologies, be it cloud computing services, linux desktops or fancy new coffee machines, we have to understand those costs and the fears of users or customers who’ve become accustomed to an established way of doing things.

In the eyes of many workers new ways of doing business are scary, challenging and often turn out to be more complex and expensive than the salesperson promised. In an age where marketers tend to over promise, that’s an understandable view.

For those selling the new products, the key is to make them as easy to use and migrate across to. The less friction when making a change means the easier it is to adopt a new technology.

Dealing with the corporate digital divide

Does the real digital divide really exist in the business world between old businesses and new organisations?

It’s fashionable when talking about the ways different generations use computers to split users into two groups – the digital natives and digital immigrants.

Born after 1990, digital natives are believed to have an intuitive understanding of digital technologies born from never having known a world without computers.

Digital immigrants on the other hand are from an era where computers were not common outside big corporations and government departments, so most people born before 1990 had to learn to use computers.

like many similar demographic divides, the line between digital immigrants and natives is contentious and probably more unhelpful than useful.

A fascinating question though is whether corporations can be digital natives and immigrants.

One of the challenges for older corporations, the corporate digital immigrants, are the legacy business systems that have their roots in the pre-digital era. A good example of this is United Airlines which struggles under inflexible management and old aircraft which can’t provide the levels of service and reliability expected by modern customers.

A similar problem faces retailers who’ve haven’t invested in modern logistics, point of sale and online commerce systems – these businesses simply cannot compete with those who have up to date technology.

Part of this problem comes from the difficulties in upgrading both technology and management systems in complex organisations, it’s not an easy task and the cost of failure is high so it’s understandable that many businesses don’t attempt it.

In the meantime there’s the corporate digital immigrants, the more recently founded businesses that aren’t weighed down by legacy management and technology.

The problem for the legacy businesses is the digitally native companies are able to take advantage of cheap and powerful tools that older organisations struggle to integrate into their operations.

So the digital native-immigrant divide could be actually a business problem rather than one of how different generations discovered computers.

Collecting tolls on the information superhighway

The failure of Melbourne IT’s management proves that clipping tickets on the internet is not always the path to riches.

The news that internet services company Melbourne IT is looking at cutting management costs and returning cash to shareholders in the face of declining revenues doesn’t come as any surprise to observers of the firm.

In many ways Melbourne IT is a historic relic, one of the last examples of the late 1990s dot com boom where management from those heady days survived unscathed by the realities of the 21st Century.

Melbourne IT story illustrates the poor management and flaw investment strategies of the big dot com float and also illustrates the risk of under-investing in key areas, as anyone using the site or the services of its Web Central subsidiary will understand.

Both companies feature clunky sites and extremely poor customer service. For resellers and customers using the Web Central command center, the experience and technology is straight out of the late 1990s.

While overseas businesses like Rackspace, GoDaddy and Bluehost innovated and invested in their platforms, Web Central and Melbourne IT sat back and how expected their dominant position would guarantee them profits.

Much of that management complacency was born out the founding of Melbourne IT when it was spun off from the University of Melbourne to exploit the then monopoly the university’s computer faculty had on granting Australia commercial domains.

In 1998, as the dot com boom was entering its most heated phase, Melbourne IT was floated and immediately attracted anger and allegations of wrong doing – none of which was proved – as the stock debuted on the stock market at four times its listing prices which generated huge profits for the insiders who were fortunate to get shares allocated before the sale.

Melbourne IT’s huge stock valuation was based on the belief the company would exploit its dominance of the critical domain market – it was similar to other technology floats of dominant players at the time such as accounting giant MYOB in 1999 and Telstra’s spin off of its small business Commander operation the following year.

All of these stock market floats proved to be disastrous as each company’s management showed they were incapable of exploiting their privileged market positions.

Of the three, Melbourne IT’s management survived longest partly because of the riches expected to flow into the company’s coffers through Top Level Domain sales as gullible government agencies and corporates being driven by a Fear Of Missing Out overpay for new online addresses.

Now it appears ICANN’s top level domain river of gold isn’t going to flow, partly due to arrogance and management incompetence in that organisation, so Melbourne IT is now going to have to cull its executive ranks.

Steadily, both Melbourne IT and Web Central have gone from being dominant to irrelevant and provide a good case study of how poor management and complacency can squander a dominant market position.

The failure of Melbourne IT’s management proves that clipping tickets on the internet is not always the path to riches, particularly when you don’t invest or innovate.

Coping with Generation LuXurY

Starwood Hotel’s Phil McAveety describes how tech will help hotel understand a new generation of customers.

Speaking at the recent ADMA Global Summit in Sydney, Starwood Hotel’s Phil McAveety described Generation LuXury – the changing hospitality expectations of Gen X and Ys.

McAveety sees the new generation of travellers as being more diverse, younger, female and increasingly from emerging economies making them very different from the middle aged Caucasian male from Europe or North America which seems to be the focus of most of the hospitality industry.

The lessons from McAveety’s presentation weren’t just for hotels, much of his message applies as to almost every other business sector.

3D printing featured heavily, with McAveetry seeing the technology as delivering the personalised experiences demanded by Generation LuXurY, as an example he cited a concierge being able to create a pair of running shoes for a guest in exactly the size and style required for a guest.

Big Data played a role too with McAveety illustrating how hotel managers used to watch for important, valued guests with hidden windows letting them see who was checking into their establishment, a role that’s now carried out by Big Data and social media.

McAveety though had a warning about social media in the risks of giving away business intelligence and intellectual property to the services.

The big risk though is in technology itself – that hotels treat it as an end in itself instead of tools to deliver better experiences to guests.

“It’s not about tech,” warns McAveety. “If so, we are going to lose.”

That’s a lesson all industries need to heed, that technology is a means to the end of delivering better products to customers. Understanding what Generation LuXurY perceive as a better product is one of those uses for tech.

A question of incentives at Microsoft and Apple

Incentives create a company culture as we see within Microsoft, Apple and Amazon

Ben Thompson on his Stratechery blog speculates what Apple would be like were Steve Ballmer running the company.

Thompson makes an excellent point – that Ballmer has been very good in building a company driven by incentives like salaries, bonuses and titles. It describes Microsoft very well and highlights the companies strengths and weaknesses.

Were Ballmer to run Apple, Thompson concludes, it would be a far more profitable company than it is today but it would be fading into irrelevance just as Microsoft is.

That makes sense as Microsoft under Ballmer has been able to profit from the dominant market position it built up in the late 1990s, but the company has struggled against innovative competitors or the big market shifts following the arrival of smartphones and tablet computers.

Where Thompson is on more shaky territory is citing Amazon as another example of where profit is less important than innovation;

Amazon famously makes minimal profits; Microsoft made more money last year than Amazon has made ever, yet Amazon too is far more relevant in the consumer market today than is Microsoft.

Amazon may well be more relevant to the consumer market today than Microsoft, but that’s largely on the back of a business model built on shareholders subsiding customers – something that Apple has never done.

It may well be that when investors get sick of propping Amazon up, the company’s business model will have to change. Should Amazon have a Microsoft like dominance of the online retail or cloud computing markets then customers might be in for a nasty dose of sticker shock as profits are maximised.

Ultimately incentives are what shapes a company’s culture – whether the incentives are built around stack ranking, commissions or currying favour with the founder, they will determine how the business behaves.

On running late

Is chronic lateness a trait shared by the entire tech industry?

Business Insider’s unathorised biography of Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer is both enlightening and scary while giving some insight into the psyche of the tech industry.

Nicholas Carlson’s story tells the warts and all tale to date of a gifted, focused and difficult to work with lady who’s been given the opportunity to lead one of the Dot Com era’s great successes back into relevance. It’s a very good read.

Two things jump out in the story; Mayer’s desire to surround herself with talented people and her chronic lateness.

When asked why she decided to work at a scrappy startup called Google, which see saw as only having a two percent chance of success, Mayer tells her ‘Laura Beckman story’ of her school friend who chose to spend a season on the bench of her school varsity volleyball team rather than play in the juniors.

Just as Laura became a better volleyball player by training with the best team, Mayer figured she’d learn so much more from the smart folk at Google. It was a bet that paid off spectacularly.

Chronic lateness is something else Mayer picked up from Google. Anyone whose dealt with the company is used to spending time sitting around their funky reception areas or meeting rooms waiting for a way behind schedule Googler.

To be fair to Google, chronic lateness is a trait common in the tech industry – it’s a sector that struggles with the concept of sticking to a schedule.

One of the worst examples I came across was at IBM where I arrived quarter of an hour before a conference was due to start. There was no-one there.

At the appointed time, a couple of people wandered in. Twenty minutes later I was about to leave when the organiser showed up, “no problem – a few people are running late,” he said.

The conference kicked off 45 minutes late to a full room. As people casually strolled in I realised that starting nearly an hour late was normal.

It would drive me nuts. Which is one reason among many that I’ll never get a job working with Marissa Mayer, Google or IBM.

A few weeks ago, I had to explain the chronic lateness of techies to an event organiser who was planning on using a technical speaker for closing keynote.

“Don’t do it,” I begged and went on to describe how they were likely to take 45 minutes to deliver a twenty minute locknote – assuming they showed up on time.

The event organiser decided to look for a motivational speaker instead.

Recently I had exactly this situation with a telco executive who managed to blow through their alloted twenty minutes, a ten minute Q&A and the closing thanks.

After two days the audience was gasping for a beer and keeping them from the bar for nearly an hour past the scheduled finish time on a Friday afternoon was a cruel and unusual punishment.

This was by no means the first time I’d encountered a telco executive running chronically over time having even seen one dragged from the stage by an MC when it became apparent their 15 minute presentation was going to take at least an hour.

It’s something I personally can’t understand as time is our greatest, and most precious, asset and wasting other people’s is a sign of arrogance and disrespect.

Whether Marissa Mayer can deliver returns to Yahoo!’s long suffering investors and board members remains to be seen, one hopes they haven’t set a timetable for those results.