Tag: management

Michael Dell’s struggle to transform his business

The Rationale for a Private Dell states some stark truths about the PC manufacturing industry and global management in general

Michael Dell continues to press on with his buy out bid for the computer manufacturing giant he created with a presentation to shareholders stating his case why Dell Computers would have a better future as a private company.

Dell’s assertion is the company has to move from being a PC manufacturer to a Enterprise Solutions and Services business (ESS) as computer manufacturing margins collapse in the face of a changing market and more nimble, low cost, competitors.

What’s telling in Dell’s presentation is just how fast these changes have happened, here’s some key bullet points from the slide deck.

  • Dell’s transformation from a PC-focused business to an Enterprise Solutions and Services (ESS) -focused business is critical to its future success, especially as the PC market is changing faster than anticipated.
  • The transition to the “New Dell” is highly dependent on challenged “Core Dell”performance.
  • The speed of transformation is critical, yet “Core Dell” operating income is declining faster than the growth of “New Dell” operating income.
  • Dell’s rate of transformation is being outpaced by the rapid market shift to cloud.

The market is shifting quickly against Dell’s core PC manufacturing and sales business and the company’s founder is under no illusions just how serious the problem is.

Should Michael Dell succeed, the challenge in transforming his business is going to be immense – Dell Computing was one of the 1990s businesses that reinvented both the PC industry and the vast, precise logistics chain that supports it.

It was PC companies like Dell and Gateway who showed the dot com industry how to deliver goods quickly and profitably to customers around the world. Businesses like Amazon built their models upon the sophisticated logistics systems and relationships the computer manufacturers created.

A lesson though for all of those companies that followed Dell and Gateway is that those supply chains may turn around and bite you in the future, as Michael says in his presentation;

Within the PC market, Dell faces increasingly aggressive competition from low cost competitors around the world and shifts in product demand to segments where Dell has historically been weaker.

Those low cost competitors were many of Dell’s suppliers as over time the company’s Chinese manufacturers, Filipino call centres and Malaysian assemblers have developed the management skills to compete with the US retailers rather than just be their contractors.

Something that’s being missed in the debate about globalisation at present is that its not just low value work that can be done offshore – increasingly sales, marketing and legal are moving offshore along with programmers and engineers. Now the same thing is happening with management.

The same thing is also happening with corporations as Asian giants like Samsung, Huawei, Wipro and others displace US and European incumbents.

Dell Computing has been a much a victim of that move as it has been of the decline in the PC market which means its more than one battle Michael Dell has to fight.

It may well be that Dell can survive, but we shouldn’t underestimate just how great the challenge is as the company faces major changes to its markets and the global economy.

Similar posts:

Are Australians becoming apathetic towards retail?

Have Aussies given up on retailers?

This morning IBM launched their Retail Therapy report where they looked at the state of online shopping around the world.

One interesting aspect to the report is that Australians seem to have become indifferent to stores with 60% of the 2000 respondents claiming they were ‘apathetic’ towards their choice of retailers.

At least this is an improvement on the 2011 report where 46% of those survey said they were ‘antagonistic’, this year that proportion is a mere 5%.

So, have we gone from hating our retailers to simply not caring any more? The answers should be focusing the minds of Australian CEOs if they are hoping for consumers to reopen their wallets.

Image of a bored girl by ChristieM through sxc.hu

Similar posts:

Fire and be dammed, the poor management at tech companies

Quick firing firing of employees who make mistakes shows a weakness in the management of many tech companies.

Microsoft manager Adam Orth has joined the ranks of those fired after some poorly thought out comments found their way onto the Reddit discussion boards. The firing of Orth illustrates a weakness in the management of tech firms.

Orth’s firing follows the “forked dongle” affair where two developers lost their jobs over sexist comments at an industry conference.

What’s notable in all these firings is how Playhaven, SendGrid and Microsoft’s management all summarily fired their employees for what at worse could be described as a ‘lapse of judgement’.

One of the conceits of modern management is that risk can be eliminated, the mark of a poor manager is to act quickly to get rid of anything that could potentially be a risk.

These tech companies are good illustrations of this – neither Adam Orth, Adria Richards or the Playhaven developer deserved to lose their jobs over this, all it required was an apology and commitment to be more careful about what they post on the public internet in future.

All of us, including the sensitive and incompetent firing managers, have something on the internet that could embarrass us or our employers. In an era where people are quick to take offense, it’s easy for something taken out of context to spin out of control.

That’s a risk beyond the control of middle managers at software companies.

Hiding from risks or attempting to purge them is not the way to run an organisation. Strong, good managers can do better than that.

Management manual image by Ulrik through SXC.hu

Similar posts:

Corporate palaces and the new Ceasars

An opulent corporate headquarters is often the indicator that management’s mind is on things other than customer service or shareholder’s return.

One of the key traits of managerialism is executives spending vast quantities of shareholders’ money on opulent corporate headquarters, is Apple the latest company to succumb to this disease?

Building a new headquarters is fun for managers. One company I worked for in the early 1990s was debilitated for months as executives spent most of their time moving walls, rearranging desk positions and changing lift designs to reflect their status as grand visionaries.

For the company gripped with delusions of management grandeur a flashy head office is the must have accessory. It’s the corporate equivalent of the Skyscraper Index and is almost as good a predictor that a change in fortunes is imminent.

Apple’s new headquarters is nothing if not impressive. Bloomberg Newsweek reports the building which, at two thirds the size of the Pentagon, will house 12,000 employees is currently estimated at costing five billion dollars, sixty percent over the original budget.

The plans call for unprecedented 40-foot, floor-to-ceiling panes of concave glass from Germany. Before the Cupertino council, Jobs noted, “there isn’t a straight piece of glass on the whole building?…?and as you know if you build things, this isn’t the cheapest way to build them.”

With over a $120 billion in cash, Apple can certainly afford to spend five or ten billion on new digs despite the grumbling of shareholders who have had to settle for a stingy 2.4% dividend from their shares.

The big question though for Apple shareholders though is whether a project like this indicates a company that has peaked with management more intent on building monuments to itself or its genuinely visionary founder rather than deliver returns to owners or products to customers.

On the latter point, there’s no evidence of Apple losing their way with their products yet, but it’s something worth watching in case management becomes distracted with their building project.

For the company I worked for, the distracted managers all vanished one day when the main shareholder of the Thai-Singaporean joint venture discovered they’d been fiddling the books. They probably needed to pay for the office fit out.

Similar posts:

Too many presidents spoil the enterprise computing broth

Oracle has an interesting management problem as revenues stagnate.

Last week Oracle, the world’s third largest software vendor, had an eight percent drop in its stock price  after the company missed earning estimates.

Part of the research for are article I’m writing on the company involved digging into the organisational structure of the company and interestingly it has a pair of ‘co-presidents’ – Mark Hurd and Safra Katz.

Safra is the Chief Financial Officer who has a pretty powerful CV and seems well qualified for the job of controlling the finances of a $150 billion dollar company.

Mark on the other hand is my favourite IT executive, his tenure at HP is a case study in the entitlement culture of modern managerialism and no small reason for that company’s present day problems.

The analyst briefing (free subscription might be required) following Oracle’s disappointing reports betrays a little bit of tension between the two. First Safra;

We’re not at all pleased with our revenue growth this quarter. So it didn’t help that our quarter ended on the same day as the sequester deadline. What we really saw is the lack of urgency we sometimes see in the sales force as Q3 deals fall into Q4.

Since we’ve been adding literally thousands of new sales reps around the world, the problem was largely sales execution, especially with the new reps, as they ran out of runway in Q3.

It seems there’s a touch of ‘dog ate my homework’ in mentioning the US political sequester, but the message is clear – “what we really saw is the lack of urgency we sometimes see in the sales force.”

These are IT sales people we are talking about, ‘a lack of urgency’ is an insult to a group of people who have been known to work 120 hour weeks and sell their grandmothers if it means getting a fat commission.

Mark is in the poo. We quickly learn why when it’s his turn to speak,

We’ve added over 4,000 people to the Oracle sales force in the last 18 months. We’ve significantly expanded our customer coverage. We’ve seen material growth in our pipeline. But Q3 [conversion rates] were below what we expected, while our actual win rate went up.

An investor would hope there’s material growth in the sales pipeline when you’ve added 4,000 salespeople to your workforce.

In Oracle’s case though revenues have fallen .8% for the year and are only up 2% over the time Mark’s added all those go-getting Willy Lomans to the company’s payroll.

The interesting thing with Oracle’s figures is the company has spent nearly $400 million on restructuring costs over the last year, has hired over 4,000 new sales people and yet total operating costs, and margins, have barely moved in that time.

Which indicates somebody in Oracle is bearing the costs of Mark’s hiring spree.

During Hurd’s tenure at HP, he was notorious for penny pinching and cutting worker’s benefits. While staff were finding they were stuck in economy for international business meetings, Mark himself was staying at some of Europe’s best hotels and showing off his bank account to attractive employees.

Hopefully history isn’t repeating itself.

Probably the most perplexing thing with Oracle today are Mark’s and Safra’s roles of c0-Presidents. What on Earth are those roles?

Most telling with the co-Presidents is that they aren’t really in charge – if Larry Ellison, the CEO and founder, wakes up one morning and decides either Safra or Mark have to go then they’ll be out of the company well before lunchtime.

Along with carparking spots, inflated executive job titles are good indicator an organisation’s management is focusing on it’s perks, benefits and privileges rather than delivering for customers and shareholders.

Perhaps Oracle’s analysts and common stock holders should be focusing more on management’s behaviour more than the details of the company’s sales performance.

Similar posts:

Walmart pays for cutting staff

Cutting staff numbers is costing Walmart dearly as customers desert the retailer for better stocked competitors.

Along with the carpark test, a lack of customer service is one of the best indicators that a company has lost its way.

Unattended reception desks, closed cash registers and deserted delivery docks are reliable indicators management has focused on short term staff savings which will ultimately cost the business dearly.

Walmart is the latest example of this with Bloomberg Businessweek reporting that US shoppers are deserting the chain because shelves are empty and stores don’t have enough staff.

The claim stock is piling up out the back of stores is particularly concerning, the just in time inventory management of modern retail chains means there’s little room for error as outlets don’t have a lot of space whil the cash flow of the business and its suppliers is based on getting goods quickly into the hands of eager consumers.

Some of Walmart’s pain will be spread among suppliers as the store’s contracts will push undoubtedly some of the costs of rejected deliveries back onto logistics companies, effectively creating problems through the entire supply chain.

No doubt there’s plenty of angry suppliers and truck drivers who are grumbling about lost time and payments on Walmart contracts. That won’t be good news for the company’s buyers when contracts come up for negotiation.

Even though Walmart’s management can throw some of their problems over the fence, the fundamental issue of losing customers can’t be missed.

Walmart’s isn’t the only retailer who’s fallen for the short term fix of cutting store staff to give a quick profit boost as department stores and big box outlets around the world struggle with the damaging effects of not being able to serve customers.

That Walmart, one of the industry’s global leaders, would make such a mis-step shows the pressures on managements as economies deleverage and credit wary consumers decide that don’t need more junk in their homes.

Cutting costs isn’t going to address those bigger trends, it’s going to take original thinking and management commitment to adding real value to customers.

Service is just the start of a long process of refocusing the retail empires.

Image of Albany Walmart courtesy of UpstateNYer through Wikimedia

Similar posts:

Recruiting big data

Software company Evolv is an example of how businesses can use big data

One of the predictions for 2020 is that decade’s business successes will be those who use big data well.

A good example of a big data tool is recruitment software Evolv that helps businesses predict not only the best person to hire but also who is likely to leave the organisation.

For employee retention, Evolv looks at a range of variables which can include anything from gas prices and social media usage to local unemployment rates then pulls these together to predict which staff are most likely to leave.

“It’s hard to understand why it’s radically predictive, but it’s radically predictive,” Venture Beat quotes Jim Meyerle, Evolv’s cofounder.

There are some downsides in such software though – as some of the comments to the VentureBeat story point out – a blind faith in an alogrithm can destroy company morale and much more.

Recruiters as an industry haven’t a good track record in using data well, while they’ve had candidate databases for two decades and stories abound of poor use of keyword searches carried out by lazy or incompetent headhunters. The same is now happening with agencies trawling LinkedIn for candidates.

Using these tools and data correctly going to separate successful recruitment agencies and HR departments from the also-rans.

It’s the same in most businesses – the tools are available and knowing them how to use them properly will be a key skill for this decade.

Job classifieds image courtesy of Markinpool through SXC.HU

Similar posts: