Winners and Losers from Shifts – Apple, Amazon, Microsoft

One of the biggest business news items this week was the launch of Apple's iPad for $499.  Although perhaps overlooked by many big companies, and several IT departments.  To some businesspeople, the iPad seems another consumer toy, thus not terribly noteworthy.  Some see it as a small-market share sort of oversized iPhone for mobile telephony/data use.  One executive commented to me this week "I don't understand why anyone cares, I don't own an iPhone and cannot imagine why I would ever want to download an app,"  He has a huge investment in Microsoft technology, has never used an iPhone or Palm Treo or even a Blackberry.  Hes' never seen an iPhone app, and was amazed when I told him 1 billion had been downloaded.  He's comfortable in his traditional IT solution, and doesn't see the importance of iPad.

But the iPad is another step demonstrating a big market shift is happening.  With Apple's announcement, Amazon announced that it's sales of Kindle are about twice what most analysts had expected – see "During Apple Week Google and Amazon try to Remind You They Exist" at Fast Company.  Further, it appears now that for every 10 books Amazon sells, it sells 6 Kindle books — a substantial number and indications of serious market change.  The iPad is half the price most people expected, and now rumors are Kindle's will drop to $100 as competition heats up.  It rapidly appears that while there is an emerging battle between Amazon and Apple, the biggest insight is that the market for BOTH is growing a whole lot faster than anyone expected.  As are iPhone sales.  These devices, and the technology solution embedded within them, are grabbing a lot of buyers, and quickly.  The sales, in units and dollars, are growing much faster than anticipated.  And new users are flocking toward this technology platform.

Thus, the iPad is likely to be a big winner for Amazon and Kindle – as well as Google.  It is expanding the application base, and use patterns, for mobile devices.  It is expanding the product breadth and price points.  Quite simply, it is helping people do new things they couldn't do before – especially when mobile – that they could not do before.  As a result, apps will grow and sales of both hardware and software will grow.  And early adopters will gain an advantage as they use this new technology to create advantages for their customers.  Apple and Amazon are both "winners" who are driving revenue and profit growth.

And Microsoft loses.  Microsoft has never changed its Success Formula.  Its Identity, Strategy and Tactics remain as they've been for three decades – to provide a one-stop near monopolistic, integrated (mainframe style – and certainly monolithic) solution.  As the market has been shifting, however, this has been less and less successful.

Chart-of-the-day-microsoft-stock-during-steve-ballmers-leadership
Source:  Silicon Alley Insider

As the chart shows, Microsoft's product strategies, product introductions, acquisitions and management changes have done nothing for growth – or valuation.  Microsoft keeps trying to do what made it great in the late 80s and early 90s.  But since then, the market has shifted dramatically and the sustaining innovations Microsoft has offered, while meeting customer requests for improvement, haven't really helped growth. 

The cost of this Lock-in has been horrific.

Chart-of-the-day-microsoft-operating-income
Source:  Silican Alley Insider

Microsoft has poured billions of dollars into a failed approach intended to Defend & Extend its Success Formula – but to no avail.  The market is going a different direction – toward cloud computing with its distributed data, extremely small apps at very low (disposable) prices, easy to use interfaces and greatly lower device cost.

Even as large and cash rich as Microsoft was in 2000, it cannot stop a market shift.  And even though this shift has been predictable, with competitors from the fringe like Google, Amazon and Apple bringing to market new products, Microsoft has chosen to try Defending & Extending its Success Formula rather than Disrupt and use White Space to develop new solutions.  What can we expect from Microsoft in the future?  Unfortunately, more of the same and most likely a dramatically deteriorating value.  When the market's shift to these thin devices with a different architecture becomes clear, the inability of System 7 and Bing to make any difference in Microsoft results will be clear.  And investors are likely to run for the proverbial hills – letting the stock price drop along with new users.  Microsoft will increasingly be dependent upon legacy applications and maintenance – markets with little/no growth.  Microsoft could soon be the next Unisys (remember that company?)

So, what is your company doing?  Are you moving forward with new apps which will grow your revenues and profits?  Are you looking for ways to use these devices, and the underlying mobile computing architectures, to offer your customers better solutions?  Are you bringing out new approaches that are potential game changers, bringing new customers to you and accelerating growth?  Or are you trying to Defend & Extend your old processes, approaches and products?  Are you planning a future that will be PC/laptop centric, and delivering traditional web pages?  Are you following the laggard, Microsoft, or are you Disrupting your business, and market, with White Space projects that will change market behaviors using these new technologies and positioning you as the market leader?  In 2015, will you look like Microsoft – frozen in place as the market shifts – or will you look more like Google, Amazon and Apple with new solutions that create excitement and new sales?

Have you tried a Kindle yet?  iPad?  iPhone?  Do you have any White Space wher
e you are trying these new things?  Have you Disrupted any of your organization and challenged them to apply this technology?  Exactly what are you waiting on?

Sacred cows – Google and Nexus One

So out of the blue I got called by a reporter asking me what I thought of Google posting an advertisement for the new Nexus One on its homepage.  It was an easy question – the Google homepage isn't sacrosanct.  Like everything, it needs to be used in a way that's most valuable for customers and suppliers.  Times change, and it should change.  So I answered that the Google home page wasn't a sacred cow, and it's smart for Google to try things

So OnlineMediaDaily.com quotes me on Thursday in "Google Runs Multimillion-dollar ad for Nexus One." 

  • "Has Google changed its stance on using the
    home page as a promotional platform? Adam Hartung, an analyst with
    Spark Partners, refers to Google's home page as a "sacred cow." The
    company has something that almost seems like a religious idol. This ad
    demonstrates that Google is willing to change that and "attack a sacred
    cow to step the company forward," he says. "And that's a very good sign
    for investors."

I didn't record myself, but it sounds like me.  Sacred cows get you into trouble.  You have to constantly test, try new things.

But the CEO of Burst Media didn't agree with me.  Picking up on my quote, in the HuffingtonPost.com "Google Should Not Give Up the Sanctity of Its Homepage" Mr. Coffin takes me to task for violating what he considers a sacred public trust.  He fears that anything added to the Google homepage creates cracks in Google's foundation putting the company at risk.

How does anyone in web marketing get so Locked-in?  It just goes to show that you don't have to be old, or a big company, or have a lot of money to be Locked-in to something.  Google's homepage isn't even a decade old.  Nor is Burst Media, an on-line marketing company, I don't think.  But here a reputation leader in on-line marketing is working, working hard actually, to defend a sacred cow"Sanctity" of a web page??? Give me a break.

Google has excelled, grown and made more money, because it has been willing to Disrupt its Success Formula and use White Space to test new things.  That's why it's become a household name – and in the process almost singlehandedly destroyed the newspaper industry.  And now is threatening to change how we do personal computing (with Chrome) and enterprise applications (with Google Wave) and even mobile computing (with Android and Nexus One).  Google should consider nothing sacred, because that's the kind of Lock-in which kills tech companies. Sun Microsystems was busy protecting its sanctity while the market shifted right out from under it

Lock-in is inevitable.  But winners – those who grow and make above average rates of return – learn how to manage Lock-in.  They are willing to Disrupt and use White Space.  Good for Google.  I would have expected nothing less!

   

Listen to Competitors Rather than Customers – Google, IBM, Tribune, Cisco

Leadership

Listen To Competitors–Not Customers

01.06.10, 03:10 PM EST

The accepted wisdom that the customer is king is all wrong.

That's the start to my latest Forbes column (Read here.)  Think about it.  What would Apple be if it had listened to its customers?  An out of business niche PC company by now.  What about Google?  A narrow search engine company – anyone remember Alta Vista or Ask Jeeves or the other early search engine companies?  No customer was telling Apple or Google to get into all the businesses they are in now – and making impressive rates of return while others languish.

But today Google launched Nexus One (read about it on Mobile Marketing Daily here) – a product the company developed by watching its competitors – Apple and Microsoft – rather than asking its customers.  In the last year "smartphones" went to 17% of the market – from only 7% in 2007 according to Forrester Research.  There's nothing any more "natural" about Google – ostensibly a search engine company – making smartphones (or even operating systems for phones like Android) than for GE to get into this business.  But Google did because it's paying attention to competitors, not what customers tell it to do. 

No customers told Google to develop a new browser – or operating system – which is what Chrome is about.  In fact, IT departments wanted Microsoft to develop a better operating system and largely never thought of Google in the space.  And no IT department asked Google to develop Google Wave – a new enterprise application which will connect users to their applications and data across the "cloud" allowing for more capability at a fraction of the cost.  But Google is watching competitors, and letting them tell Google where the market is heading.  Long before customers ask for these products, Google is entering the market with new solutions – the output of White Space that is disrupting existing markets.

Far too many companies spend too much time asking customers what to do.  In an earlier era, IBM almost went bankrupt by listening to customers tell them to abandon PCs and stay in the mainframe business —– but that's taking the thunder away from the Forbes article.  Give it a read, there's lots of good stuff about how people who listen to customers jam themselves up – and how smarter ones listen to competitors instead.  (Ford, Tribune Corporation, eBay, Cisco, Dell, Salesforce.com, CSC, EDS, PWC, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Silicon Graphics and HP.)

Google’s innovation continues

This week The Economist reviewed the innovation processes at Google.  In "Google's Corporate Culture – Creative Tension" the magazine overviews several recent innovations, and actions senior leaders are taking regarding innovation management.

While Mr. Anthony recently chastised Google for its "immature" innovation management in a Harvard Business School blog post, and somewhat The Economist does as well, for not producing more revenue from its innovations – nobody can refute that the company released yet 3 more very important innovations this week – an updated Chrome web brower, new software that allows viewing on-line newspapers in a more natural way (Fast Flip) and Google Wave for collaborative project development.  For most companies any one of these would be vaunted to market on piles of ad and PR sending.  Products less significant cause Microsoft to throw their Marketing/PR machine into overdrive.  But innovative launches are frequent enough at Google that you can completely miss some of them.  Even when they continue to change whole industries – like Google has been doing to newspaper publishers and continues.

The best line in the article says that senior Google leadership is very actively trying to counter "the conservatism that can set in as companies mature."  The good news is that even though it has 20,000 employees, Google is not "mature."  Thankfully, it remains in the Rapids of growth.  Size does not equal "maturity."  That word is more applicable to companies that begin truncating ideas and activities to optimize their existing business.  This is the direction Scott Anthony recently proposed on his HBS blog.  And it gets companies into serious trouble.

Instead, Google is working hard to keep ideas from being truncated by hierarchy or people who are focused on narrow opportunities.  Senior leaders are making themselves available to everyone in order to make sure ideas get attention – rather than vetted.  Through this they are giving permission for ideas to be developed, even when many in the company aren't supportive.  This top-level focus on granting permission to new ideas which are unconventional is a CRITICAL component of innovation success.  Second, they aren't relying on a priority process for funding (something Mr. Anthony recommends).  Instead they are making ample dollars available for ideas to push them to market quickly – and see if the innovation is accepted by the market or needs more work. 

By personally engaging at the top levels in this process, Mr. Schmidt and his team are being Disruptive.  They aren't allowing structural impediments like strategy formulation, hiring practices, tight IT systems, large historical investments or internal "experts" to Lock-in Google to its past.  This is demonstrably exceptional behavior that pushes Google into new markets and growth.  Then, by focusing on granting permission – even for things the "organization" may not initially support – and adding resources from outside normal resource allocation systems they are doing the 2 things necessary to keep White Space alive and thriving at Google.

Google has been growing, even in this very tough economy.  More importantly, it has not slowed down its releases of innovation on the marketplace that can generate future growth.  Mobile phones using its Android software are just now getting to market, and offer (along with other innovations) potentially very large revenue gains in new areas.  With smart phones and Kindle-like e-readers to outsell PCs in late 2010 Google is squarely positioned to be part of the "next wave" of personal digital productivity (along with Apple.)  And this can be explained by the company's willingness to remain Disruptive and push White Space projects — even with 20,000 employees.