Category: management

  • Heroes of Capitalism

    Heroes of Capitalism

    The few times I watch television these days is either when the footy’s on or the rare occasions that I surface from my interweb connected man cave and stumble into a room where someone has a TV running.

    And so it was tonight when I happened to wander out to witness a terrible airport “reality” show – this one being an unoriginal, third rate Australian effort where Tiger Airlines shows how it stuffs around and humiliates its passengers. In Australia, Channel Seven considers this to be prime-time TV “entertainment”.

    What was striking about the show was how Tiger Airlines’ check in staff humiliated a pensioner and her young son who hadn’t printed out their boarding passes.

    The “fee” for not carrying out a basic task which reasonable people would expect would be part of an airline’s service is $25 a head at Tiger Airlines – one could ask what the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s position is on excessive fees being used to pad airlines’, or banks’, profits but that would be asking too much of Canberra’s worlds best practice doughnut munchers.

    As result the poor lady was expected to front up with another $50 – money she didn’t have. So Tiger Airlines’ check in staff wouldn’t let her board and Channel Seven’s camera crew gleefully filmed her desperate tears and shocked son.

    Eventually a bystander took pity on her and gave her $60. At least someone in the terminal had some decency and compassion, qualities neither the Tiger Airlines staff or Channel Seven camera crew have in the tiniest way.

    No doubt somewhere in an anonymous glass tower some arsehole has a job as a manager at Tiger Airlines and has a KPI that includes how many poor mothers they can reduce to tears.

    When the arsehole Tiger Airlines manager gets its annual bonus for making the required number of victims passengers weep, it no doubt goes to lunch with the Channel Seven executives – another bunch of arseholes – to slap each others’ backs and tell themselves what great heroes of capitalism they are.

    The question that bugs me is when did it become acceptable to humiliate your customers? No doubt Tiger Airlines think it’s good publicity and Channel Seven think it is good entertainment.

    We live in interesting times when our business leaders think it isn’t good enough just to take customers’ money but that it’s also necessary to humiliate them as the managements of both Channel Seven and Tiger Airlines seem to be rewarded for doing.

    Fortunately in these corporatist days we still can vote with our wallets and turn off the muck we find offensive – that’s why decent people shouldn’t choose to fly Tiger Airlines or watch Channel Seven.

    Similar posts:

  • Ominious days for the omni-channel

    Ominious days for the omni-channel

    At the beginning of the year we heard much about Omni Channel strategies as it dawned on retailers like Harvey Norman, David Jones and Myer that this Internet thingummy they’d heard about wasn’t going away.

    When asked at the time what a ‘omni channel’ strategy was, Gerry Harvey admitted he’d had no idea what it was a week before it was announced while Myer CEO Bernie Brooks said late last years it was something about having electronic kiosks and free delivery.

    So it was interesting to hear the CEO of US cloud computing service Netsuite, Zack Nelson, talk about his company’s ‘omni channel strategy’ this week at a lunch in Sydney.

    On being asked what exactly Netsuite’s omni channel strategy was Zack let the cat out of the bag about the holy grail of the omni channel.

    “There are so many channels, there are no channels,” said Zack. “Omni-channel was the only word we could find.”

    So we can safely put the omni-channel myth to rest – the idea businesses can focus on one, two or three channels such as bricks and mortar, the web, iPhone apps or tablet computers was always flawed and risked locking companies into one or two technology platforms at a time when things are changing quickly and in unexpected ways.

    Netsuite’s response is to adopt ‘responsive design’ principles where sites adapt to the device being used rather than spend lots of money building apps for devices that might be redundant in the near future.

    This is true of business in general – we often forget the core role of our businesses, like the retailer’s mission is to get goods into the hands of eager consumers and TV stations or newspapers are ways of delivering advertising. Instead we fixate on the type of delivery vans we use, the background colour of our websites or which apps we are going to develop.

    For retailers there’s a far more fundamental problem which Micheal Hills of CoCo Republic described at the same lunch, “people boast about buying designer labels online at discount prices but still want to go to bricks and mortar stores.”

    That paradox is the sort of problem many businesses have to deal with which aren’t going to fixed by trendy buzzwords.

    In Netsuite’s defense their use of the word ‘omni-channel’ is about offering multiple currencies and languages in the one package rather than selling to customers on different platforms. They aren’t using it as a cover for failing to notice their markets have changed in the last decade.

    The main change in the market place is the good old fashion imperative of getting back to the basics of service and delivering value for money. The days of making money from finance packages or vendor rebates instead of looking after the customer are over.
    Some managers are yet to understand this and their companies won’t have the luxury of indulging in buzzwords over the next decade.

    Similar posts:

  • Every business is a cloud business

    Every business is a cloud business

    Every business is a cloud business claims Zach Nelson, the CEO of cloud Enterprise Resource Planning service Netsuite.

    In Zach’s view every business should be using cloud computing services and at a lunch in Sydney he illustrated this with companies ranging from agribusiness Elders through to furniture and design store CoCo Republic.

    A buzzword used by Zach and Netsuite is ‘omni-channel’ and this is something we’ve heard from local retailers in the past.

    Interestingly Netsuite’s definition of omni-channel is more as a catch-all phrase than a definition. “There are so many channels, there are really no channels,” says Zach. “Omni-channel was the only word we could find.”

    This doesn’t bode well for older retailers struggling with the idea of a website as part of their “omni-channel’ strategy, let alone tablets, smartphones or 85” smart TVs.

    The problem also faces businesses adopting cloud computing platforms with the related trend of Bring Your Own Device being in itself is an “omni-channel” medium where an employee could be using anything from a smartphone with a 7″ touchscreen through to a fully equipped PC workstation with a 27″ cinema display.

    How Netsuite deals with the plethora of channels is through responsive design strategy where their sites adapt to the various screen sizes their customers use. This is the opposite to the philosophy of building specific apps for each platform.

    We’re seeing other cloud companies struggle with this problem as well, Mark Zuckerberg recently described focusing on the open HTML 5 standard over dedicated iOS and Android apps as one of Facebook’s biggest mistakes while Salesforce founder Marc Benioff used the recent Dreamforce conference to confirm his company’s commitment to the web despite releasing an iOS application.

    Zach Nelson’s notion that every business is a cloud business is interesting and true, whenever business owners or managers say “no” asked it they use cloud computing they are genuinely shocked when its pointed out to them that almost every external internet service they use runs on the cloud.

    Slowly we’re seeing this being accepted by the business community as show by diverse companies adopting services like Netsuite, Salesforce and Xero.

    The big challenge for managers is in taking advantage of the processing power businesses find that cloud computing gives them.

    Similar posts:

  • Shifting to a better return

    Shifting to a better return

    As part of Deloitte’s Building the Lucky Country series, the consulting firm had a briefing last week from John Hagel, co-chairman of Deloitte’s Silicon Valley Centre for the Edge, to discuss how industries are responding to shifts in the workplace and their markets.

    John’s thesis is that businesses can be broadly split into into three groups; infrastructure, product innovation and customer relationship business which he covers in his Shift Index that looks at how industries are being affected by digital technologies.

    Infrastructure businesses are high volume, transactional services like call centres, logistics and utilities companies.

    The product innovators are those who develop new products, get them to market quickly and accelerating adoption of those goods.

    Customer relationship businesses focus on understanding their clients and using that knowledge to add value.

    Each of these business models require different mindsets and because most large companies try to do all three, they manage to do none well.

    One of the results of this is a lousy Return On Assets, which Hagel says have fallen in the United States to one-third of the levels of 1965 and he doesn’t see this improving as the ‘competitive intensity’ of US markets increases.

    A big feature of this decline in overall ROA is how the best performers have travelled compared to the laggards with the ‘winners’ barely maintaining their returns while the ‘losers’ are seeing their results declining dramatically.

    How Hagel sees the solution to this poor performance is through rewarding creative and passionate workers better.

    Firms have untapped opportunities to reverse their declining performance by embracing pull. To accomplish this, firms must develop and encourage passionate workers at every level of the organization.

    Additionally, companies must tap into knowledge flows and expand the use of powerful tools, such as social software to solve operational/product problems more efficiently and effectively as well as to discover emerging opportunities.

    If Hagel is right, it’s the businesses who want to micro-manage their workers while stifling innovation, initiative and creativity in their businesses who will be the great losers in this next decade as we move to the next phase of the ‘Big Shift’ where knowledge flows improve business performance.

    Starting the process of dealing with these shifts involves understand what the DNA of your business really is; if it is a transactional infrastructure business then management needs to acknowledge this and not kid itself about being in customer relationships.

    There are weakness in John Hagel’s proposition – one being that businesses can be easily pigeonholed into three categories.

    Apple is a good example of this where a company that is clearly product focused has also shown it can be customer orientated with the success of the Apple Stores.

    There’s also the question of why are there only three categories? In the breakdown the immediate thought is that there are businesses that don’t fit in any of these boxes. Legacy airlines or struggling motor manufacturers are good examples.

    Despite the criticism, John and the Center For The Edge have some good points about the future of business and it’s something we’ll explore more over the next few weeks.

    Similar posts:

  • Management by fear

    Management by fear

    The sad story of the passing of Bea, the Golden Retriever who died while in the care of United Airlines portrays a fundamental problem in many organisations’ managements – the rule of fear by middle managers.

    A telling part of Bea’s sad tale is how her owner Maggie Rizer was treated when she went to collect her two dogs from United,

    When we arrived in San Francisco to pick up our dogs we drove to the dark cargo terminal and on arrival in the hanger were told simply, “one of them is dead” by the emotionless worker who seemed more interested in his text messages.  It took thirty minutes for a supervisor to come to tell us, “it was the two year old.”  Subsequently we requested that our dog be returned to us and were told that she had been delivered to a local vet for an autopsy. Whatever thread of trust remained between us and United broke and we then insisted that she be returned to us for our own autopsy by our trusted veterinarian, Shann Ikezawa, DVM from Bishop Ranch Veterinary Center. Over the next two hours the supervisor’s lie unraveled as it became clear that Bea was right behind a closed door the whole time and he had been discussing how to handle the potential liability with his boss who had left and sticking to the divert and stall tactic that they had been taught. Eventually Bea was returned and we drove her to the vet at midnight.

    The ‘divert and stall’ tactic took over two hours for Maggie and her partner to get around.

    When I recently flew United I saw a similar attitude from the cabin crew, their lack of initiative and beaten attitude was noticeable. As I said in the post;

    Overall the cabin crew seem tired and beaten, while they aren’t rude or unpleasant one wonders if they have all received too many stern memos from management about being friendly to customers.

    Those stern memos have a corrosive effect on a business where every employee worries more about being sanctioned for breaking a rule or directive rather than helping customers.

    Eventually the entire organisation becomes risk adverse and focused on protecting staff, or management’s, interests rather than looking after those of customers, shareholders or taxpayers.

    Too many organisations are like this, where the staff are motivated by staying out of trouble rather than helping and adding value to their customers.

    Making staff fear you is one way to run a company, or a nation, but ultimately those who are scared of the leaders lose all initiative and the empire collapses because every decision has to be sent to head office as the minions are scared to do anything that will be bring the Imperial Displeasure down upon their hapless heads.

    From ancient Rome to the Soviet Union empires have fallen because of this, in today’s private sector companies that run on fear are ultimately doomed, including the ones who can tap into government subsidies to kick the can down the road. Even public sector agencies where this attitude reigns will change when the chill winds of austerity blow through their corridors.

    One staff member taking a little bit of initiative probably would have saved Bea the golden retriever. One supervisor taking responsibility and helping Maggie Rizer would have avoided the PR disaster United now have.

    In an economy that’s radically changing, inflexibility and slow decision making are possibly the worst possible traits an organisation can have. It’s time for dictatorial managers, along with control freak politicians and their public service directors, to let the reigns go on their staff.

    Similar posts: