Category Archives: General

WAC push with Tizen

Posted on by
Reply
The launch of Tizen (collecting the remains of MeeGo and LiMo) explicitely mentions the Wholesale Applications Community (WAC) APIs as one element of the solution. The other one mentioned was HTML5.
Could this give WAC another push besides the Apple, Amazon, Android application stores and ecosystems ?
I’m still very skeptical concerning the WAC approach, considering all the other telco consortium / standardization attempts in the past. The main backers of WAC in Asia NTT Docomo, SK Telecom obviously have a very specific market environment to adopt this.

Windows Phone chief Andy Lees: “Customer want choice” – Not too much!

Posted on by
Reply
Interesting interview with Windows Phone chief Andy Lees in the Seattle Times.
“Q: Do you think the iPhone 4S (running on iOS 5) gives you an opening? Do you think they missed an opportunity there?
A: Yes I do. I think, from an end user’s experience on the software, there’s a lot of interesting reviews written comparing us to iOS 5 and the amount that we’ve got done in 11 months — so some people (are) making comparisons of pace.
Perhaps the biggest comparisons people are making is our people-centricity. The more capabilities we add into our phone, the more delightful it becomes to use because you seem to have more at your fingertips without this clutter and confusion of the other platforms.
From a pure hardware perspective, I was surprised they’re not giving the consumer more choice. People want a variety of different things.”

 

Well the “jam” experiment (actually article called “Choice is Demotivating”) by Sheena Iyengar has proven that customer actually buy more with fewer choices.
This is very much about the fundamental understanding of customers and designing the right experience that Apple is so far ahead of the rest of the players in the mobile environment. More is not always better, actually rarely when it comes to choices.

7 criteria for innovative products

Posted on by
Reply

Out of the Gijs van Wulfen’s “20 Tips for Ideation Excellence” I especially likes #7:

7. Great ideas for innovative new products or services fit 7 criteria. Use them actively in your project: 1. Very appealing to customers. 2. It stands out in the market. 3. It has great potential for extra turnover. 4. It has adequate profit potential. 5. It fits management’s personal goals. 6. It is (somehow) considered quickly feasible. 7. It creates its own internal support.

Disruptive Change in Management

Posted on by
Reply

Here is another idea related to the summer issue of M/I/S/C published by Idea Couture. In article by Dr. Julian Birkinshaw, the Deputy Dean of London Business School about “The Future of Management: Is it deja vu all over again?” he claims that besides all the expectations and different management theories and styles there has been no real change in management.

“… the vast majority of management work – by which I mean how we motivate people, make decisions, set objectives and allocate resources – seems almost impervious to change.”

So here are 3 thoughts related to it:

#1: what would be disruptive ?
If the assumption is that there has not been much change – what would be a disruptive innovation in management following Clayton Christensen‘s “Innovator’s Dilemma” approach. This obviously requires to look at management as a technology and as Clayton points out if you, i.e. the disruptive, are not significantly better the incumbant will win.

Following the original assumption above obviously there has not been anything “better” in the past years.

But following further on Clayton Christensen’s analysis how could the disruption look like?The better might play out initially in an underserved small market with less stringent performance requirements. It might offer a very specific advantage, e.g. agility, less overhead to create a competitive advantage as a basis to grow from.

#2: where have all the approaches gone ?
There has been a long list of new approaches and here is the latest promise for change in management: “Radical Management” by Steve Denning. I picked this because in a recent blog he is referring to Apple as a key user of Radical Management.

And then this relates to this comment on DaringFireball on HP’s split of the WebOS business and assigning hardware and software to different units within the organization. There might be still differences and improvements in management after all.

#3 could it be here already ?
I’m currently (re-) reading Jason Fried’s and David Heinemeier Hansson’s book “Rework”. And besides sounding really like “Radical Management” it shows a very different approach to managing besides quarterly results, organisational hierarchies and big budgets.

So maybe here is the disruptive approach for the future of management.

3 Learnings (and interesting question): “What if Steve Jobs was a telco CEO?”

Posted on by
Reply
What can telecommunication CEOs learn from Steve Jobs. Interesting question discussed at TM forum, based on an initial discussion on TelecomAsia.

It has some good points in terms that Steve Jobs as the CEO of a telco operator could have made the history turn out differently regarding smartphones and mobile data services.

However, I believe that the focus on content selling is driven more by the current assumption that this is the business saviour for operators rather than being the key success story of Steve Jobs and Apple.

Apple’s business is in selling hardware. Content (music, video, apps) contributes only a small portion of their business. So in order to learn from Steve Jobs you have to take a different angle.

Here are my 3 key lessons for the telco industry:
#1: design insanely great products that stand out- telco products look the same almost around the globe, nothing really stands out
- focus on customer experience not on technology
- sweat out the details
- simplicity

#2: get your hands dirty with optimizing the business backend
Steve Jobs and now-CEO Tim Cook managed to turn Apple into the most profitable device manufacture by rigorous focus on logistics / business processes / supplier management. This is the invisible or at least mostly ignored part of the Apple success story.

#3: focus on the overall the experience
for customers and partner (read application developers).
- help the customer and make them feel treated well (retail stores, genius bars, migration services)
- don’t make them feel you just want to sell more
- no 10 pages of small print in product offerings
- support developers with a complete development environment, not just the APIs

And at the end just again getting back to the de-mystification of the innovation genius of Steve Jobs.

Social CRM – what is it ?

Posted on by
Reply

Interesting attempt on the definition of social CRM (and the evolution to get to it) by Oliver Blanchard at the BrandBuilder Blog:

[Social] CRM is a business function supported by a system and technologies whose aims are to improve a company’s ability to derive insights into customer needs and behaviors by adding to their transaction data the lifestyle data they share online.

From my perspective it covers well the aspect of adding the outside social information to the existing inside view of CRM.

However, In the age of Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and all other social media, I think there is also the aspect of adding the social network capabilities to the CRM part, i.e. let your followers and friends do part of your customer relationship, especially the promotion and brand building part of it. Some others would probably also call it Word-of-Mouth-Marketing.

This obviously also depends on what should be considered under CRM and then you can think about externalizing some of the functions. For me key business functions of CRM are Customer Care, Complaint Management, Bonus and Loyalty Programs, Promotional Campaign Management and there is probably an official definition somewhere.

And to add to this ReadWriteEnterprise just summarized the latest from Gartner on Social CRM.

Two stages of simplicity

Posted on by
Reply

Simplicity and Zen-like elegance has been attributed as the key success factor of many products currently.

Just coming out of a conversation about GUI design I realized that the push for simplicity has 2 challenges or stages. The first is to simplify, i.e. leave out or at least hide rarely used functionality or components.
This in itself can be demanding especially for product engineers who believe in the importance and consequently immediate visibility of each and every feature of the product.

But the more challenging part is actually to do this in a way so that users immediately “feel” the added value of the product. This requires to reflect customer expectations and standard use cases in a very natural way.

We will see this coming even more not only for physical products, but also for processes and customer interaction.

[Update: And here is some insight from Harvard Business Review into the Apple way of achieving this.]

[Update: And the interesting view of Don Norman on Google's simplicity]