With Shirlaws reminding me that one of the enduring roles of the CEO being to coach (and not play), I am keen to learn as much as I can about this increasingly important part of my role in the company.

In my 20 years of professional experience, I’ve gained a fair exposure to a wide range of aspects of the competitive electricity market – and have some clear ideas about the needs of our broad range of clients, and how we can delight them with the software we develop.

The role of “coach”, however, is not something in which I have gained extensive experience.  Hence I’m keen to (and need to) learn as much as I can.

Nothing else to say now – just want to keep a record of this post for future reference.

Given where our bus is headed, we have a keen interest in building on this base to make ourselves much stickier in future – in the above ways, and more

1)  Binary Review

It’s for this reason that this book was of great interest to me…

The Book	What we thought
“Made to Stick - Why some ideas Survive and others Die” by Chip Heath and Dan Heath	… and it did not disappoint

.

2)   Why did they write the book?

The book starts with the (tall) tale about a friend of a friend who knows someone who had a drink with a stranger at the bar and woke up in a bath full of ice, minus two harvested kidneys.

The authors (two brothers) talk (from p10) about their mutual interest in determining why some ideas stick (and persist and propagate) whilst others fade away.

They reference Malcolm Gladwell’s book “The Tipping Point” as an inspiration for them to distil their understandings into a coherent thesis, which this book is.  They note (as Josh did his post) that Malcolm’s book provided three main steps in the sequence:
Part 1 was the need to get the right people
Part 3 was the need for the right context
Part 2 was the “stickiness factor” – which became the subject of this book.

3)   The SUCCESs checklist:

The authors claim (p247 in my copy) that “the SUCCESs checklist, then, is an ideal tool for dealing with communication problems”.

I’d strongly recommend that you read the book yourself to understand the full context – here is a teaser (and a memory-jogger for me, in future):

(a)  Simple

The key here is to understand that “Simple” means that the message must be both, simultaneously:
i.  Aligned to the core of the meaning; and
ii.  Compact

---

(b)  Unexpected

The two key principles:
i.  Surprise gets our attention
ii.  Interest keeps our attention

It is logical (though surprisingly not common sense) that the two must go hand-in-hand for the message to be effective.  Otherwise we revert to the glory days of the dotCOM boom, with people in various animal suits paraded the highways to attract attention to who-can-remember-what service.

---

(c)  Concrete

The authors pose the question “how do we ensure that our audience understands and remembers our message” (assuming we have their attention – above)?

By being concrete, they say!

We need to get rid of TLAs and industry jargon – and speak in plain english, with respect to tangible objects (not intangible concepts).

The authors describe this as finding “the universal language” (p115).

From our point of view, this is what our business revolves around – making the electricity market understandable – and we do this reasonably well, at least to the stage where we a large number of clients.  However, we certainly aren’t at the stage where we’re making the electricity market understandable to the mums and dads at home, yet.

---

(d)  Credible

For our message to endure, the message has to be believable and the audience has to agree.

I can’t find a way to sum up this chapter in a single sentence or paragraph – you’ll just have to read it yourself.

They do make this very interesting point (p143), which I agree with:

Statistics are rarely meaningful in and of themselves.  Statistics will, and should, almost always be used to illustrate a relationship.  It’s more important for people to remember the relationship than the number.

This is the challenge we face in the software we seek to develop – we seek to provide our clients the means to easily identify, and communicate, these relationships (rather than just represent a series of numbers on a page) – with some products we’ve done this pretty well, with others we still have some ways to go.

---

(e)  Emotional

For our message to endure, the audience has to care.

Again, read the whole chapter to gain the full context.  I would just like to highlight 3 separate points for my ease of future reference:

i.  When it comes to hearts, follow Mother Teresa, who apparently said (p165) “If I look at the mass, I will never act.  If I look at the one, I will”

ii.  The authors imply that thinking about statistics shifts people to a more analytical frame of mind – and hence they are less likely to think emotionally.  This, then, is the continuation of the issue noted above under “Credible”.

iii.  The authors reference (p177) such marketing gurus as John Caples as people who started advertising on the path to appealing to (or exploiting, depending on your perspective) people’s emotions.

We’ve read John Caples’ book “Tested Advertising Methods” (amongst a number of others in that domain as one more step in our pursuit of ongoing improvement) but have not had time to post about it.

---

(f)  Story

For our idea to stick, the audience has to be able to act.

The authors note that stories (e.g. parables, etc) have proved effective over centuries as the means by which to inspire people to act, by ensuring that they become active listeners as the story is recounted.

The authors include some excellent discussion (from p224) about how our challenge is more to spot good stories than to create them.

The authors list 3 basic types of plot:
i.  A challenge plot (e.g. David –vs- Goliath)
ii.  A connection plot (e.g. the good Samaritan)
iii.  A creativity plot (e.g. the authors did not mention it, but I would throw in the story of Apollo 13 here)
and the authors note that the type of story used needs to fit the context in which it is required.

---

4)   The Easy Reference Guide

For our own internal reference in future, I’ll note here that the Easy Reference Guide (which begins on page 253) provides an excellent list of memory joggers that will be useful to those who have read the whole book.

Some issues don’t have much relevance to where we’re at, but this one had a few interesting articles.
1)  On this post, I’d like to comment on “Never read another Resume” by Jason Fried, co-founder of 37 Signals, specifically as it relates to us.
2) Perhaps I’ll also find time to post about the others at a later date …

Repeat visitors of this blog will understand how we’re investing quite a bit of time and effort, of late, in upgrading our capabilities – we’ve brought in a couple coaches (to bridge our skills gaps, short-term) and have started recruiting in a number of key people (starting with the software development team).

This article was relevant to these efforts.

1)  Our Capability Upgrade

A couple of months ago I appointed Derrick Hill as our new “General Manager for Discerning, Developing and Delivering what the Customers Wants (Needs)” as the first step in this process.

(a)  We also welcomed Eamon Hetherton back to the company, after a few years away – during which he gained some international software development experience in a range of different companies.

(b)  We’ve also bid farewell to a couple of people who’ve worked with us during the consolidation phase that the company has worked through these past few years.

(c)  We’re currently in the midst of a recruitment process for 1 (or maybe 2) Senior .NET Developer(s) to become an integral part of our team, focused on tackling the opportunities & challenges  ahead of us:

This is as an opportunity for a pragmatic, keen and capable person to join us at the start of our journey, as we:
i.   commence our process of re-engineering our product framework; and
ii.  continue our transition to a pragmatically applied, Agile software development methodology.
Both these changes will set us up for the next decade of growth.

I’ll post more about these continuing changes, when I have a bit more time.

---

2)  Thoughts triggered by Jason Fried

Obviously, you can read what Jason has to say in his article.  I’d just like to draw out a few points that were particularly relevant for me, given where we are currently at.

(a)  Hire to alleviate pain, not for pleasure

This dichotomy is not as significant for us as it seems to be for Jason.

We know that there is plenty of opportunity to which we could apply more software developers – our customers have let us know (sometimes all too clearly) that this is the case.  You could say that we feel our share of pain!

Our recruitment approach is moreso based on what are two core factors:

(i)  Can we attract the right candidates?

With the ambitious goal we have set for ourselves, our focus very much needs to be centered on getting the “right people on the bus” – perhaps moreso than I have been in the past.

What’s “right” for us?

Every organisation is different, I know.  We’re just different in our own way – we’re in the process of rebuilding our team, with a specific focus on starting with people who can drive us in the next stage of our growth.

Yet, just like any company which has been around for 10 years, we have our share of legacy issues (including code) which need to be managed & rejuvenated.

Hence, the people we’re looking for need to be pragmatic, keen, and capable – and able to overlook the fact that our corporate website is not reflective of what we do, and our company name is just awful (they are just two of the things we need to change)!

(ii)  What are we comfortable affording?

One of the upsides of being self-funding is that we’re not beholden to external Angels, VCs and the like, who might not share our Vision, our Mission, and our Core Values.

On the flip-side, this means that we only re-invest current revenues in the growth of our capabilities.

Hence, whilst there might be enough market opportunity for us to employ many more software developers, we’re starting with 1 (or perhaps 2) more as that is what our bootstrapping methodology will provide for, at presemt.

Hence, whilst we might have the pain to warrant additional people, we’ll only be putting them on when we can attract the right people, and when our cash flow from current sales provides.

---

(b)  Have you already tried the job yourself?

I understand the logic of what Jason says here:

How do you know if you really need someone? A good rule of thumb is this: Have you already tried to do the job yourself? If you haven’t done the job, you don’t really understand the job. Without that fundamental understanding, it’s hard to judge what constitutes a job well done.

Wherever possible, I understand why this holds value.

However, sometimes (at least for me) it’s not so cut-and-dried.

For instance, in recruiting Derrick into our team, I knew I was after someone who had capabilities way beyond my own very modest capabilities as a pseudo “Chief Software Engineer”.

Whilst I might be a General Dogsbody, I am certainly not an expert on everything – I believe that this would be the same for pretty much all company founders.

However, it does leave the issue posed by Jason as one to be addressed – as I don’t have 20 years of experience in software engineering, I’m not one who can assess the details of how Derrick does his job.

What’s more important to me, however is results (so long as the role is congruent with our core values).  Hence, to me, the job title says it all:  General Manager for Discerning, Developing and Delivering the Software our Customers Want (Need).

The flip side of this, of course, is that (as our software team begins to take shape – e.g. with Derrick and Eamon onboard) we’re in a much better position to assess if the capabilities of other candidates for the software team are the capabilities we most need at this present point in time.

It will be a similar process, later in the year, when I commence the recruitment process for our GM of Sales & Marketing.

I have other areas to focus on, at present, but will create a similarly descriptive position title for this person before advertising – perhaps “General Manager for Finding, and Keeping Customers Happy”?

---

(c)  Ignore CVs and look at the Cover Letters

I think I understand the context of the comment – yes, CVs are decidedly the applicant’s “best foot forward”, and it’s almost expected that they might have had some help in preparing the CV.

The letter, on the other hand, does provide some indication of the applicants keenness for our particular position (and, in some cases, ability to string two sentences together).

In the recruitment process for the GM DDD WCW position, I asked Derrick (and the others) to pitch for the job – with the flip side being that I was very open about where the company is at (warts and all) and invested many days into the process.  The ultimate objective was to find the best match.

I’m happy with the results achieved – though I understand that such an approach won’t be appropriate for every position to be filled in future.

One of my purposes of being quite prolific (perhaps verbose?) in posts on this blog is to enable all potential applicants to self-select onto our bus – if it is aligned with their view of the world, and way of working.  Certainly, no-one should be turning up for work on their first day to find it any surprise!

---

(d)  All questions aren’t equal

Jason talks about liking “why?” questions and disliking “how?” questions.

I don’t think we can be as cut-and-dried.  What I am interested in is seeing, in an interview, that people:

(i)  Have a healthy dose of curiosity – particularly in us, and our market;

(ii)  Demonstrate their keenness in having done their research beforehand (e.g. through this blog, as noted above) to eliminate any questions that might have been easily answered prior;

(iii)  Have a unique (or at least innovative) way of viewing the world, and our place in it.

---

(e)  Try before you buy?

Jason says:

We also try to test-drive people before hiring them full time. We give designers a one-week design project to see how they approach the problem. We pay them $1,500 for their work.

Derrick has already developed a paper-based test that applicants complete in the process of an interview.

This tells us something about an applicants ability – but the longer the time we have with a candidate, the better our view will be.  Hence, Jason’s idea holds some interest.

Of course, this has to be balanced with the practical realities that:

(i)   Most capable candidates will already have current commitments, which preclude any longer-period test arrangements.

(ii)  From a company point of view, there needs to be something meaningful that we can get the candidate to do to establish their capability, and yet deliver value to the company.

A case in point here was with Eamon – back in 2002, we brought him in initially on a 10-week “trial” to develop the first version of ez2viewOntario, just after the market opened.  This worked for us, and it worked for him (we even secured our first client there!) – though it’s unlikely such a synchronicity will be present, all the time.

---

3)  The underlying assumption in Jason’s article

As noted above, the underlying presumption in Jason’s entire article is that the company has an effectively endless stream of excellent candidates that it can turn on-or-off at will.

Whilst this might be the case for 37 Signals, which has established a reputation (and a fan base) for itself, it’s not the case for us presently.

As noted above, we’re a company with a poor choice of name and with a company profile that’s not that great – whilst some of our products might be well-known in the electricity industry, we’re relatively unknown in the software space.

Hence, whatever lessons are prescribed in this article (and to which I generally prescribe) need to be balanced with other aspects of the practical realities of where we’re currently at.

As a bootstrapped company, we’re going to work through several iterations of our growth in capability (incorporating both step-change, like now, and more gradual improvements):
1)  some people will stay with us through several of these stages of growth (and grow with us), whilst others will be with us only through one particular stage.
2)  my preference would be that people stay with us the whole way through – however I know that I need to be realistic in this respect.

Whatever is the case for you, you will have formed some kind of impression about our company, and the type of B2B software services we provide.

As such, we’d like you to tell us what you think of us, as this will help us to continue to develop and enhance the services we provide – now into our 2nd decade of service.

1)   Our questionnaire
quick and easy (under 5-minutes)

Because of our timetable for how we’ll be incorporating your responses, we’ll be keeping this survey open only until Friday next week, 18th June.

The questionnaire we have prepared for you will be online at the following address:

5-Minute Questionnaire

You can choose whether to identify yourself in your survey response, or not - we’re keen to hear from you, either way.

Thank-you, in advance, for helping us to serve you better!

---

2)   About the questions we’re asking
…and why it’s important we hear from you

The concept of “Positioning” means slightly different things to different people.

Those who’ve read a little on the blog will have noted that we’ve been pondering this for a number of years – initially in relation to our ongoing process of finding a new name for the company, but more recently to do with broader aspects of mapping out where the company is headed.

At a high level, it’s all about how you view us - as a (current or potential) client, partner, investor, or employee - or maybe a combination of some of these.

What are the first words, feelings or thoughts that jump into your head when you think about us, or our products?

It’s important that we understand this, in order that we have a clear picture of our starting point for the journey ahead.

It’s especially important that we gain a broad cross-section of views, in order that we can confirm we have a realistic view (i.e. not rose-coloured) of our starting point.  Hence, please don’t be shy in telling us how you feel - whether you love us or hate us, or are somewhere in-between.

This simple Questionnaire has been prepared in order that you can input into our picture.

---

3)   Why we’re asking these questions now?
after our first decade, and into our second …

As you may be aware, in February this year we passed our 10 year anniversary.

We’ve been serving a growing (and diverse) range of clients in the Australian National Electricity Market since 2000 (and in Ontario since 2002).

This has been challenging at times, but we’ve mostly had fun!

(a) How we’ve arrived at our current point

The following is a précis of the company history, outlining how we’ve arrived at the current point in our journey.

i.  Early Years

In our early years of operations, we were delighted to be able to develop a number of innovative software products, including, but not limited to:
(a) Our display of current trading in the NEM - NEM-Watch (since 2000)
(b) Our historical analysis package for the NEM - NEM-Review (since 2001 – now finalising the release of v6)
(c) Our display of current trading in Ontario’s market - ez2viewOntario (since 2002).
(d) deSide ® as a tool to facilitate demand-side response amongst industrial energy users in the NEM (since 2004 – soon to finalise the release of v3).

In the early days we also had a go at a number of other products that did not do as well – all part of the process of iterating towards a business model that the market wants, as discussed by people such as Steve Blank.

---

ii.  More Recent Years

In the more recent years, our focus shifted to be more about consolidation, with few new products released, but version upgrades delivered for those above, and others.

---

iii.  The past 12 months

We also take some pride from what we’ve achieved over the past 10 years – we have more than 100 corporate clients (across 4 continents) who use our software to sharpen their understanding of the electricity market.

However, we know we’ve been far from perfect.  Given that Relentless Improvement is one of our core values, we have certainly disappointed ourselves at times.

Over the past 12 months (as time has permitted) we have used the occasion of our 10 Year Anniversary to map our our Vision and Mission for the next decade of our operations.

We have done this (with the help of a couple external coaches) in a process which I initially termed as an “autopsy” – but which could have been more correctly termed a “retrospective”, given the currency of that term in the Agile software development process (which we have been progressively adopting as standard).

---

(b) The Future we’re striving to create

We’re committed to “punching above our weight” to make the electricity market understandable, through an expanding range of innovative software products.  I’ve already posted about our Mission here.

I’ve also posted about some ambitious goals we have set for ourselves over the coming decade.

We’re excited by the prospects for the future.

However, we know it is essential we have a clear view of where we are currently at, in order that we can also have a clear view of the magnitude of the challenge facing us.

We have also recognised the importance of getting the right people “on the bus” (from Good to Great) as a prerequisite for us to be able to deliver on these objectives.  Hence:

(i)   we have been investing considerable time in the upgrading of our software development capability, starting with our GM for DDD WCW.

(ii)  in a couple of months, I will be initiating a similar process in the recruitment of a GM for Sales & Marketing.

---

We look forward to continuing this process of progressively enhancing the service we deliver to you, as we continue into our 2nd decade of operations.

Your input into our Questionnaire will most definitely help us with this.

Thanks once again (in advance) for any insights you can share with us.

Hence, it was with interest that I rocked up to today’s Brisbane session of the “Thought Leaders” breakfast series held by the AIM.

Perhaps I’m not too quick on the uptake, but it was not until the breakfast had started that I realised I had been lured into a session that was part real information, and part infomercial for a consulting/coaching firm that runs by the name of (you guessed it…) Thought Leaders.

Today our presenter was Darren Hill, on of their mentors.

The 90 minutes of my time, and the few dollars it cost was an investment that proved worthwhile today – not least of which because the topic of the morning’s session was about “Positioning”.

A.  Nine Competencies of Thought Leadership

To put this session into context, the AIM (in Brisbane) is running nine different sessions about different aspects of thought leadership, along the following lines:

Session 1 = Uniqueness
Session 2 = Expertise
Session 3 = Foresight
Session 4 = Positioning (today’s session)
Session 5 = Perspective (or comprehension)
Session 6 = Communication
Session 7 = Pitching
Session 8 = Execution
Session 9 = Enrolment (or commitment)

However, it’s not clear to me which event will be on which day in the future (I think two have already been held, and unfortunately I missed those).

---

B.  Another definition of Positioning

Using slightly different language, Darren defines “Positioning” as reputation (for an individual, for a company, or for whatever thing it is that is being positioned).

He uses this term with respect to his concept of a “reputation economy”, which sounds similar to the concepts advanced in “The Speed of Trust”.

---

C.  Three Ways to Influence Reputation

With a focus on reputation, Darren states that there are only three main ways in which to enhance our reputation.

1)  Give Away Value

Darren mentions that this has become the quickest way for new businesses (or people) to establish a valued reputation in the marketplace.

Discussion shifted to the consideration of how new economies have emerged based on the delivery of such products as Freeware.

What can we give away to our clients (and potential clients) for free?

We offer free trials of all of our software, and provide (when we have the time) some commentary about the NEM on our WattClarity ® blog.  What else can we do?

---

2)  Be Consistent

Darren noted that inconsistency is the easiest way to ruin a reputation.

How can we be more consistent?

This is a double-edged sword for us.  Once they reach final release, our software is consistent in delivering value to clients – with particular focus on clarity, convenience and cost-effectiveness.

However, our software development process has been disappointing in more recent years – which is why I have recently recruited Derrick Hill as our General Manager for DDD WCW.

---

3)  Originality is King

In my view, this is similar to the view espoused by Al Ries and Jack Trout that a company needs to be first into the customer’s mind, or perhaps second.

How can we be more original?

When we look at our products (such as NEM-Watch, NEM-Review and deSide®), each of them has been an original offering in the marketplace, in their own ways.

However (related to facet #2 above) we have not done all that we could have to build on this originality, and this is something we need to redress for the future.

---

D.  A few books recommended

Finally, Darren recommended a few other books - hence I walked out of the session with a few others to be added to our growing library.

Stay tuned for more reviews on this blog, when we have the time…

---

1)  Binary Review

This one is a pretty easy read, with good insights (and many anecdotes).

The Book	What we thought
“Positioning – the battle for your mind” by Al Ries & Jack Trout	Very topical for us

.

2)   What does “Positioning” mean?

Depending who you talk to, each person will have their own slightly different slant on the way “marketing” has evolved over the course of the past 60 years or so.  There will be many commonalities, though the semantics will vary.

The authors provide the following frame of reference:

(a)  The product age (1950s)

The authors state (p27) that:

“Back in the fifties, advertising was in the product era.  In a lot of ways, these were the good old days when the ‘better mousetrap’ and some money to promote it were all you needed.”

In particular, the authors note that this was the era of the “Unique Selling Proposition” (USP).

---

(b)  The image age (1960s)

The authors state (p28) that:

“The next phase was the image era.  Successful companies count that reputation, or image, was more important in selling a product than any specific product feature.

The architect of the era was David Ogilvy” (whose book “Confessions of an Advertising Man” is one of several I am reading concurrently).

---

(c)  The positioning age (1980s)

When this book was first published (1981), the authors noted:

“Today it has become obvious that advertising is entering a new era.  An era where creativity is no longer the key to success.”

In the book, the authors cite an article they wrote in the November 1971 issue of “Industrial Marketing” magazine as the real catalyst for the age – though:
1)  Here Al Ries cites an earlier article he wrote in 1969; and
2)  It appears that others cite the earlier date.
From my point of view, I really don’t care what the date was.

Background to understanding the positioning era is that it has arisen because of multiple explosions:
1)  A rapid escalation of the number of products available for purchase; and
2)  A rapid escalation in the volume (and “sophistication”) of the marketing communications being provided for all of these.

As such, the authors state (p7) that:

“The only defence a person has in our over-communicated society is an over-simplified mind”

At its core, positioning is about simplification of message.  The authors put it another way (p29):

“In the positioning era, its not enough to invest or discover something.  It may not even be necessary.  You must, however, be the first to get into the prospect’s mind”

In a similar vein, people like Jay Abraham have talked about this with titles such as the “Strategy of Pre-Eminence”.

Implicit in the book is that their are two facets to the positioning exercise:
1)  The product has to be positioned as #1 (see below) within a given category;
2)  The category has to be something that customers actually care about – or can be convinced to care about (what’s the point in being #1 in Antarctic refrigeration services?)

---

(d)  What’s next?

Though it obviously could not have been the subject of this book (given it was first published in 1981) the commentariat has begun suggesting that the next age will be the “Distribution Age”.

Given the success of “Long Tail” businesses of Amazon and Google, there is certainly evidence that could be read (by some) to imply that this might be the case – however that’s not the topic of this post.

---

3)   What Positioning means for us:

In my mind, having a clear positioning (for the company, or for a particular product) makes decision making easier:

1)  Internally, it makes it much easier to determine what we should, or should not be focused on, each day (i.e. positioning is about defining “what’s core”, in the terminology of Geoffrey Moore).

2)  Externally, it works the same way – if a potential customer is aligned with the positioning of a product (or a company) it makes a purchasing decision easier (the converse is also true, and is just as valuable, as it saves the customer’s time in completing a detailed assessment of your fit for their purpose if your positioning is not aligned with their needs).

4)   Selected lessons from the authors

For our own future reference across various people in the company, I have chosen a few points to summarise.  These may not be the most important lessons for you!

Lesson 1 = “Imprinting” is important

The authors note (p22) that imprinting:

“… is the term animal biologists use to describe the first encounter between a newborn animal and its natural mother”

In the book, the authors hold that this is a key determinant of the success of a particular product.

---

Lesson 2 = First (or second) or out!

There are two key points made by the authors (chapter 4) in this respect:

1)  Firstly, the authors note that each individual has “little ladders in your head” that are used to store relative rankings of things.

2)  Secondly, “you see what you expect to see” – hence for the product ranked 1st in that ladder, the perception of what is seen will reinforce that positioning.

This is the power of incumbency – however it is important to realise that this is incumbency in the client’s mind, and maybe not in terms of (current) “facts”.  The authors imply that perception turns into reality, as customers collectively act on their perceptions.

This approach culminated in the famous edict of Jack Welch that GE would be 1st or 2nd in any market category, or they would exit.

Lesson 2A = First is Best

The authors hold that this is a key determinant of the success of a particular product.

They do not state that it will guarantee success, but they do imply that it becomes infinitely harder if one is not first.

---

Lesson 2B = Second can Still Work

The authors cite the AVIS campaign (“We try harder”) as an example of where being #2 in a category can be a reasonable (if still not ideal) position to compete from.

A key in this proposition is that the #2 competitor can gain from contrasting (and hence attaching) themselves to the #1 company in that category.  In the words of the authors (p45):

“Positioning has nothing to do with whether you mention a competitor or not.  It has to do with considering competitive strengths and weaknesses before you launch a marketing campaign”

---

Lesson 2C = Create a new category, if Third (or below)

The underlying lesson in the book is that, if you can’t be the #1 (or, at a pinch, #2) in a category, create your own distinct category.

For instance, if you can’t be the first pilot to fly across the Atlantic (Charles Lindbergh), be the first female pilot to fly across the Atlantic (Amelia Earhart).  In this way, you will enhance your “stickiness” in the prospect’s mind.

---

Lesson 3 = Your position dictates your strategy

Should be obvious, really:

Lesson 3A = If you are a Leader

In the original text (1981), the authors strongly advocate that you should not feel the need to promote a “we’re #1” message – and state that doing so would just imply (to the customer) some sense of insecurity on your part.

In the updated notes (2001) the authors accept that such promotion might be necessary in a market of growing size – but state that it should be done with modesty.

“The real thing” by Coca-Cola is the classic case in point stated here.

---

Lesson 3A = If you are a Follower…

… don’t compete “head-to-head”

The authors devote a chapter (#5) to this.  They term it “you can’t get there from here”.

In our limited (10 year) history to date, in a narrow vertical market, we have already made choices like this – not to compete head-to-head with the incumbent “number 1”.

A different variation (that of “repositioning the competition”) is dealt with in chapter 8.

---

Lesson 4 = House of Brands

Perhaps it is my own personal preference, but the authors seem to strongly support a principle (such in Proctor & Gamble) of employing a brand specific to each category of service (in their case, Ivory is soap, Tide is detergent, Cascade is dishwashing etc…).

---

Lesson 5 = Look for the hole in the client’s mind

The authors devote a chapter (#7) to this principle.

This has been the subject of many books (such as the vaunted “Blue Ocean Strategy”, which covered both positioning a product, but also actually developing & delivering it).

---

Lesson 6 = The power of a Name

The authors devote a chapter (#9) to this.

Given that we acknowledge our current company name is worse than poor, and needs changing, this chapter (in particular) will be worth several of us reading, to ensure the best input.

Certainly we will be hunting for a low-syllable name – and definitely no acronyms (the subject of chapter 10).

---

Lesson 7 = Don’t Line-Extend

Short-term gain but major long term pain (chapters 11, 12 and 13).  Enough said!

p158 provides 5 useful pointers for when (according to the authors) it is ok to use a house brand:
1)  Small volume
2)  (Already) crowded field
3)  Small-budget
4)  Commodity, not breakthrough
5)  Items sold by sales reps.

---

Lesson 8 = A company should stand for something

According to the authors (chapter 14), the company needs to be a leader in something:
1)  Product leader
2)  Business leader
3)  Industry leader.

Are we a product leader (because of NEM-Watch, ez2view and deSide, for instance) or are we an industry leader – or a bit of both?

---

Lesson 9 = Start with where you are

The first step in a positioning exercise is to understand where the prospect currently positions us – NOT where we want to be (that comes later).

---

General Manager for Discerning, Developing and Delivering
What the Customer Wants

it is hard not to be curious.  In particular, I’d never had a job title that needed an acronym before - “GM 3D WCW” has a sort of geeky attractiveness about it, so I had to come and have a look.

So, after having spent quite some time with Paul and the others here at Global-Roam - including the opportunity to “pitch” for the role, I came to the conclusion that this was a job that I could enjoy in a company where I could make a real difference. Thankfully Paul agreed, so here I am… I’ve always believed that recruitment decisions are some of the most important ones you make in a business, so the care and attention that Paul gave to this process was certainly one of the things that attracted me to the company.

After operating for ten years it seems to me that Global-Roam has built itself a solid customer base through some innovative products, and the challenge is now to grow this business dramatically over the next ten years.

There are a number of practical things we are going to have to do in the short term to set ourselves up for growth.

We have had some staff changes lately with Adam and Stephen moving onto other opportunities and so (re)building the development team is a priority for me at the moment. We are fortunate to have Eamon Hetherton rejoin the company after a few years travelling around the world and gaining experience in other development organizations, and we are currently advertising for another Senior Software Engineer. Obviously this person will be a key individual in our three member software development team and so we are being fairly careful about who we appoint to this role. So if you are a highly skilled .NET developer who can make things happen and would like to be involved in everything from strategic architectural decisions to putting out the bins…then give me a call.

Another thing we are doing at the moment is reflecting on where the product set is up to, and building a roadmap for where we want to take the products over the next year or two. As a first step we have been taking a tour around the country visiting quite a number of customers. In the last couple of months I’ve managed to see first-hand how the applications are used – this has been an fascinating experience because the products are deployed in environments that range from high-tech trading rooms in the high-rise offices of electricity generation companies to the (often equally high-tech) shop-floors in manufacturing plants like cement factories, paper mills, and steel mills.

The product roadmaps will guide us as we start to make some decisions about the technical approaches that will take over the next few years. As with all successful software products, our applications are carrying a reasonable amount of legacy at the moment and we will be planning how to refresh existing technologies and enable the rapid development of existing and new products. Certainly there’s room for the use of some of the newer technologies that Microsoft has introduced in recent years, and we will be turning these to our advantage.

As with all businesses, we have to keep the plane flying while we are looking towards the future, and so we are currently completing releases of NEM-Review and deSide that have been in progress for a little while now.  NEM-Review is in the final stages of testing, and deSide is in the final couple of weeks of development before it enters a final test cycle. We are going to use agile software development practices as the foundation of our software development process, and so we have started using elements of SCRUM including backlog management, planning meetings, 2 week iterations, demonstrations, and retrospectives. It usually takes a few iterations to get these simple practices embedded in the team, and between staff turnover and travel we still have a little way to go to make this routine, but I’m confident that will happen over the coming months. One of the key elements of agile methods is continuous improvement and so we’ll adopt that approach by incrementally introducing better practices and techniques as the opportunities present themselves.

If you are interested in my career highlights you can read a little about my background on Linkedin here http://au.linkedin.com/in/derrickhill45, and if you are interested in our Senior Software Engineer role please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

]]> http://blog.global-roam.com/index.php/2010/05/gm-post/feed/ http://blog.global-roam.com/index.php/2010/04/wanted-generalists/ http://blog.global-roam.com/index.php/2010/04/wanted-generalists/#comments Wed, 21 Apr 2010 11:59:30 +0000 Paul McArdle http://blog.global-roam.com/?p=1515 As noted previously, we have recently appointed our General Manager for Discerning, Developing and Delivering what the Customer Wants.

As part of the process of getting our new GM up to speed in understanding who our customers are (and what keeps them awake at night), we are investing significantly in touring around Australia to meet with a diverse sample of our clients.  Others will be talked to via phone, Skype or WebEx – whilst we hope to visit clients in other countries later in the year.

On the plane out of Brisbane yesterday afternoon, I had the chance to read this article “Specialise yourself right out of a job” from the AFR.

A.   Growing our Team

The article was very topical, given that we will be continuing to look to upgrade our team over the remaining months in 2010, and then into the future.

In particular, we will be looking for:

1)  Another senior .NET developer:

(a) One of the developers who was with us in the early days and was instrumental in putting some of our key products together, but whom has been overseas for a number of years will be starting back with us in a couple weeks.  More about this later …

(b)  In addition, we will be on the look-out for another senior .NET developer to add to our development team.

2)  Also a little later this year we will be looking to recruit our General Manager for Sales & Marketing:

(a)  This person might be called something like a General Manager for Solving Customer’s Problems, reflecting their focus (whether it involves our current product mix or not).

(b)  The recruitment of this person will be the first step in our implementation of a Sales & Marketing team.

As a company, we have arrived at an intriguing point in our development:

1)  We have passed our 10th anniversary, and have established a proven business model in the software we develop and deliver, but at the same time

2)  We have the mindset of a start-up, given the opportunities & challenges we see ahead of us, and our vision for our future.

Given our position, all the key people we will be adding to our team in the next 18 months or so will need to have a generalist mindset.

.

---

B.   What the Article has to say about Generalists

In the article, the author highlights the risk of people specialising too much – in that it is possible that their area of speciality might be automated or reduced in importance by technology advances.

The author quotes Kevin Wheeler (who is speaking at the “Australasian Talent Conference” on May 25) as noting that:

“He is beginning to detect an interest in generalist workers – the type who may come to a job with a specific skill, such as accountancy, but can turn their hands to other tasks as well, such as human resources, strategy or IT”

The article continues:

“But to get to this point, there has to be a change in mindset:

1)  Workers have to be willing and enthusiastic about pitching in to areas outside of their training – and

2)  It also requires they let go of some of the ownership of their area of expertise.”

For us in particular (as a company that needs to foster an innovative environment) the following note from the article is the key point:

“… when it comes to fostering creativity and innovation, getting input from people outside that area of expertise can produce the kind of surprising and unexpected connections that produce breakthrough ideas”

In my view, having generalist workers filling key roles within the company will be one of the most effective ways of facilitating some of the 5 discovery skills of innovation (e.g. association & networking)

.

---

C.   Why we need the Generalists

Our development team is only small – which is why we need all of our developers (at least at this stage) to have experience in, and the keenness to deliver over, all end-to-end aspects of the software development & delivery process (including design, coding, testing and customer support).

In the sales and marketing team we will be recruiting, we will also be needing people able and willing to contribute at both ends of the continuum:
1)  Database-driven sales to our “long tail” clients
2)  One-on-one clients to our “short head” clients.

How will we find these generalists?

The article concludes with this passage:

“Identifying good generalist types will require a different recruitment approach.

We will need to find people who demonstrate in their lives generalist characteristics…. It is a lot about attitude.”

In my view, all of our key hires will have a demonstrated history of two things – a generalist attitude, and an ability to deliver real results!

.

---

D.   Final Word

For those readers who have seen a copy of my business card, or my email signature, this is why I am known as “General Dogsbody”.

.

---

Since that time, our business has been evolving fairly rapidly – with a fair number of changes already completed (and a number still to go) in order to ensure that we really can deliver on our primary core value of “Customers First!”.

When I have a bit more time, I will post in more detail about some of the other developments that have been completed, or are still in progress – in this post I just wanted to ensure you were aware that last Monday (22nd March) we were delighted to have someone start with us as our new General Manager for Discerning, Developing and Delivering the Software our Customers Want.

The title is a bit of a mouthful, so he will shorten it in most cases – but he will certainly be specifically focused on delighting our growing customer base with the software we develop.

I will let him introduce himself in his own time, so stay tuned for more …

The following Friday (March 12th) we continued this process – to talk about our 2nd Core Value – that being a Relentless Drive^{(see note)} to learn more, to improve and grow as people – and hence to deliver ever-increasing value to our customers.

A.  Where we are at

Our first brainstorming session was a very productive one which yielded a number of good ideas about how we could instil a more customer-centric culture within the company – including these preliminary ideas listed here for employees only.

1)  A less productive session

In contrast, my feeling was that this second session was disappointing, with less of specific value generated in the discussions.

Instead, the brainstorming was at a higher level, with less detail of what “Relentless Improvement” means to us.

---

2)  Because we’re not yet fully aligned?

My sense is that this is one aspect of our Core Values that is not yet as “core” as we need it to be.

Recall Shirlaws talk about 5 levels of knowledge/wisdom – something truly becomes a core value when we understand it at the deepest level (i.e. when it becomes embedded in our subconscious, and we do it without thinking – it becomes a natural part of our being).

With respect to self-improvement, therefore, it will truly be a core value when we are in a position where we constantly have a considered focus for what aspects of ourselves (and our business) we are striving to improve currently.  This focus will change over time, and be prioritised by a combination of business needs and where we want to head, as individuals.

For instance, I have explained (offline) that we can (and should) be comfortable holding the following two points of view simultaneously in our conscious:
1)  We should feel some sense in Accomplishment, looking back on the many ways we have improved the company since Autopsy 1, however
2)  We should not be Satisfied with our efforts, as we have a long way to go still ahead of us.

This is one of many paradoxes that we need to be able to accept.

---

3)  Hence this post is a little different

Hence, the notes below are more unilateral than was the case in the previous post – more of a case of me providing some more indication of where the bus is headed.

---

.

B.  Starting with “Why?”

The following chart clearly illustrates the scale of our challenge.

This chart has been derived from this post about where our bus is headed (in terms of how much we want to grow our client base to 2020).

Even just looking at 2010-11, this reveals the size of the challenge for us.

---

In reality, it is only the start of our ambitions – but we need to walk before we can try to run.

This comment is made in response to conversations I have had with several people over LinkedIn, whereby they have correctly pointed out that the target above is Ambitious (certainly so), but hardly Audacious (as intended to be read by Jim Collins in “Built to Last”).

---

It is obvious that the level of thinking that got us to 2010 is not going to get us where we want to be in 2020.

To deliver on our vision, we need to do a number of things concurrently, including:

1)  Get some key people on the bus

We’re in the process of doing this, starting with our General Manager for Discerning, Developing and Delivering What the Customer Wants (Needs).

These new people will be recruited for our bus in order to augment our thinking capability and broaden our experience base.

It will continue as quickly as is prudent, into the future.

---

2)  Cultivating an Internal Drive for Active Self-Improvement

As a company, we will provide whatever support we can to our people, as they upskill themselves in a variety of different domains relevant to our business – including:
(a)  Understanding the electricity market
(b)  Ascertaining customer needs
(c)  Innovation – both incremental and discontinuous
(d)  Software architecture and technologies
(e)  Agile software development
(f)  Internet, and other database-driven, marketing methods
(g)  Business management and leadership

However, the drive to improve oneself must primarily be driven internally.   Our focus on this will never stop.

---

3)  Up-Skilling Everyone

This starts with me (as this is where the buck stops).  I recognise, and accept, that I have been the ultimate source of much of the disappointment in previous years.

As part of our Autopsy 2 process, we have brought in a number of coaches who have been working with a number of us to ensure we can all deliver a massive increase in value.

This process will continue well into the future.

C.  Our Realisation

The following is our starting point for ongoing improvement.

1)  We’re far-from-what-we-need-to-be

The chart above is a clear illustration of this.

Adding this post to the blog will raise awareness (both internally and externally) of this fact – though a couple (thankfully not too many) of the clients we have disappointed in the past couple of years already know this, very clearly.

As noted before, we have started the process of assessing the gap between where we are, and where we want to be:
(a)  Our Autopsy 1 day kicked this off in mid 2009;
(b)  We followed with a more intensive Autopsy 2 process.
(c)  Adam has explained how we have started more formal practices of sprint retrospectives within software development projects.

These types of autopsies & retrospectives will continue into the future…

---

2)  We don’t know everything…

… and we won’t pretend that we do, either.

Where we currently sit, we still don’t even fully know what we don’t know (a bit Rumsfeld-esque perhaps?).

However, we have at least made a start in identifying areas in which we need to focus our initial attentions.  Two such aspects are:

(a)  The implementation of Agile (to upgrade our software development processes).

(b)  A major improvement in my capability as a Leader (though I have a long way to go, yet).

To deliver on these improvements, we have begun adopting, and will continue to press through with, the following approaches:

(a)  Life-Long-Learning

Part of the disappointment that we have delivered over the past 10 years has stemmed from the fact that we have not learned as quickly as we needed to do.

Now that we have a target clear in our minds, we will ensure that everyone who is on our bus has a real commitment to driving themselves to be the best they possibly can be.

---

(b)  Multiple Venues, Forums, and Teachers

We will continue to use any of the varied means at our disposal to learn, such as the following:
1)  Books (we have an expanding library, but have read less than half of what is there – and reviewed online even fewer of these);
2)  Courses;
3)  Online or offline events,
4)  Coaches,
5)  Oracles,
6)  Tokens at the bottom of the cereal packets …

Seriously, though, we won’t just stick at any single favourite method of learning – we must continue exploring all the methods available to gain whatever advantages we can.

---

3)  Our Focus on Improvement

Learning will only be the first step in the transformation of our company.   To deliver any value to clients, we have to actually do something with all the knowledge we’re acquiring!

(a)  Continuous, Incremental Innovation

This is not about bet-the-company, stepwise improvements.

It’s about making sure we come to work focused on going home at the end of each day with pride in knowing that we have improved at doing something just a little bit better (each and every day).

Our Friday meetings need to become regular showcases of ways in which we have improved (as individuals, and as a company) each week.

---

(b)  Occasional, Discontinuous Innovation

Yes, we will need some of these, too.

However they will more occur as the natural side-effect of a focus on the above, rather than as a single-minded search for “the next big thing”.

---

(c)  Must be Internally-Driven

It’s nice to get a pat on the back occasionally (from our clients, from our shareholders, boss, co-workers, external peers, or significant others).

However the reality is that this does not happen often.

Yes – I know that (as a coach) I need to be doing this more often. It is one thing I am consciously trying to improve on.

Fundamentally, our drive to improve must be internally driven (i.e. part of our intrinsic motivation) not driven by external factors (extrinsic motivation) – see this post about a Daniel Pink presentation that focuses on the relative values of the two.

---

4)  Focus Improvements on what matters most

I have previously posted about this presentation by Geoffrey Moore (of the Chasm fame).

With reference to our aspirational core value of “Relentless Improvement”, Geoffrey makes a number of telling points.  I have included two of the most important here:

(a)  Alignment

Geoffrey talks about the “vector maths problem” that would arise if we just promoted a culture of innovation without providing a context around which to focus our efforts.

In simpler terms, we end up with chaos!

To reduce the amount that this happens for us (2008 was pretty chaotic!) much of my focus over the past couple of months (both online and offline) has been clarifying such questions as:
i.  Why we exist (i.e. our Mission)
ii.  Where we are headed (i.e. our Vision)
iii.  What we are going to do to get there (i.e. our Strategy)
iv.  The manner in which we are going to do these things (i.e. Culture, including Core Values).

As I have noted before, if I build the right team on the bus, and provide the answers to the key questions (e.g. what’s “core” for us) then alignment should be much less an issue for us.

Hence this will have us all pulling in the same direction, whilst still allowing people to be largely self-managed.

---

(b)  Focus Our Energy on Differentiation

We need to be very clear (with each job in JIRA, with each broader initiative we’re undertaking) whether we are neutralising (low effort), driving for efficiency (low effort), or trying to differentiate (high effort):

It’s important to note that the decision of “what is core?” is not made at the level of an individual product, or by an individual Product Manager.

Making this type of decision is one that will dictate the future direction of the company, and hence is a decision made by the Leadership Team – though sessions like Beer O’clock will allow everyone in the company to be involved.

Our “CRM on steroids” is a case in point, for instance:

Is this something we need just to facilitate sales, or is it going to be a core competitive advantage that will enable us to achieve our vision of a major increase in client numbers with only a small increase in staff numbers.

More about that one later!

It’s a bit like our transition to Agile.  To put it another way:

i.  Our “Individuals and interactions” will need to be a competitive difference – our Processes and Tools need to just be “good enough”.

ii.  Our “Working software” will be a competitive difference – our Documentation just needs to be “good enough”

iii.  Our “Customer collaboration” needs to be a competitive difference (hence it’s Core Value #1) – our contract negotiation just needs to be “good enough”

iv.  Our ability to “Respond to change” needs to be a competitive difference – our Planning, and Adherence to a Plan, needs to be just “good enough”

Makes sense?

---

5)  Exhausted Yet?

You’re not meant to be!

I have used the term “Relentless Improvement” deliberately as the term “continuous improvement” has become much used and abused (since at least the 1980’s).

Andy Grove wrote about this in “Only the Paranoid Survive” and Jim Collins called this “good enough never is” in “Built to Last”.

Don’t be exhausted!  We’re looking for those people to whom this challenge is invigorating.

Of course if does not mean that we, as individuals, won’t have our bad days occasionally – what it will mean is that we, as a company, will grow and structure ourselves such that we continue to deliver improvements for the customer, day in and day out (even if someone has a bad hair day).