Can't resist this one from Wharton - on Microsoft

Entitled 'Microsoft's Multiple Challenges' the argument goes like this:

(1) Microsoft's size can be a handicap. Updates take ages, new products even longer. Google is nimbler, for example
(2) there's "brain drain" and Microsoft's ability to develop a new generation of leaders is questionable, especially when it's harder to offer the 'ground floor' opportunities of the past.

It makes me wonder if Wharton isn't thinking of IBM rather than Microsoft, but there you go. However they also don't count Microsoft out - yet. Size may overwhelm nimbleness if the right moves are made. Whilst the sharemarket may temporarily punish the MS stockprice for it's supposed 'fearing what the competition could do', in the longer run MS's vast bank balance will fund many skirmishes against the likes of Google and Sony.

I tend to agree. MS is fighting on several fronts but are so far hardly bleeding. They have even moved more quickly than Sony in the game console market and taken the upper hand for now. Sure, Google is a threat in many ways but whilst Google innovates tremendously (and threatens to do so widely, as in WiFi, geographic info systems and AdWords) it does not have the breadth - yet - to meet MS head on in most markets. As a search engine with AdWords revenue stream, sure, Google wins. But that's just one key play. MS's real threat may lie with the Open Document format rather than with just web search. Whilst Google chews at the edges, OpenDoc threatens to erode the value of the proprietary formats that tie us so neatly to MS's revenue stream.

Forbes on Google

Let's face it, Google has entrenched itself. Why is that? When it first came to my notice - I guess around 1999? - they were just a cute name with a reputation for good search results. That reputation was a cult, underground groundswell much like that which had driven Altavista to be the previous search tool of choice - or arguably Yahoo!? Google entered the fray with a new idea - results based on the popularity of links to each site. That seemed to work, and they grew. They also innovated with AdWords and derived income from searches in a new way. The rest is history. Yahoo! also has a cute name, revenue and massive success - but Google, despite arriving later, has innovated in a way that has kept it ahead.

Forbes now asks,'Can anybody overtake Google?'. Well of course anything can happen.

Forbes suggests that both Microsoft and Yahoo! plan to claw back more ground by improving the ad-selling platform that surrounds their search engine. The idea: Offer advertisers a better way to target their ad campaigns. They also suggest that improved search results will back that up. It seems possible. Comparable or better search results plus a revenue stream drawn to a 'better' ad-selling platform may crack the nut that is Google. But is it enough to just match Google?

Unless it can be made more compelling for the searcher, by introducing an entirely new paradigm, by staggeringly improving the result relevance or by introducing some side benefit that draws repeated traffic - why change habits? In fact the web is full of examples of 'fads' but Google has transcended a fad. It may be different. However if it's not so different after all then it could simply tire and we'll all move on. It's a website and the web is pretty frictionless, even with all the toolbars hooking in....

I know I'd change pretty quickly and easily but doubt I'd go to either MS or Yahoo! I'd look for the cool tool from somewhere new and obscure ;-)

Corporate culture change analysis

The purpose of this report is to identify, assess and plan for the primary Human Resource management issues pertaining to the employees of Spiel Corporation in Antarctica. The assessed issues are to be prioritised and the most salient selected for deeper investigation. To that end a wide-ranging environmental scan has been conducted, the content of which includes trend and incremental data over the previous 5 years, plus relevant projected trends and scenarios covering a further 5 years. Cogent issues have been considered in light of such identified trends and futures scenarios. Whilst many issues were revealed, one in particular has been selected out. The issue of Corporate Culture “drift” has been chosen for more detailed analysis, as much for its particular nature and scope as well as its potential to distract and disrupt the organisation in question. Read more....

My opinions only

As always, my timely reminder that these posts represent my opinions only. If I quote someone else I attribute. If I recommend a web site it's because I use it myself. If an advert appears it's because I affiliate with Google and others similar in nature and usually means nothing more than that... the Internet is a wild and untamed place folks, so please tread warily. My opinions are just that and do not constitute advice or legal opinion of any sort.

All original material is copyright 2006 by myself, too. Other than that, please take advantage of the site, just remember to ask first or attribute fragments in the normal, polite way.

Wharton on oil prices

The good, the bad and the ugly on world oil prices. A detailed piece by Wharton. They touch upon market forces affecting the move to alternative fuels far more than any concern over the environment. I guess we need loads more extinctions, cyclones and droughts before the use of carbon-based fuel is as powerfully moderated by logic and reason as by the almighty dollar.

Forbes slant on why hybrids are not selling like hotcakes

Well they aren't hotcakes, for starters!

In short, hybrids make sense in many ways but their ROI is weak. It takes around 3-4 years to recover the higher cost via the small ongoing fuel saving, depending upon how much driving you do. They are also a 'safe' buy in that they still use the fuel you buy at gas stations (as against some alternative home brew, cold fusion or risky hydrogen). They aren't such a leap of faith for consumers. They are also 'feel-good' purchases, which is great. On the other hand car makers are at a loss to know how to market 'em because they are premium products offering savings at the low-end. This is an inversion of the case for most cars. Usually good fuel economy is aligned with the 'cheap' end of the market. Premium cars are at the high end of fuel economy - in the 'who cares about the petrol' category. The result? All up, sales are growing but from a very low base.

My take? They offer little advantage at the low end. I'd take a smaller car with the same or even better fuel economy anytime. Why would I want a Prius when I can have a Getz? I guess if I thought I needed something exactly that size maybe I'd consider it, but it's a market segment that's price driven, so you have to really want a car that size and really believe you are making a difference on climate change. Which of course is a delusion.

I've said it before, but here goes. You buy a car and it's already consumed somewhere between 40 and 60% of it's 'carbon quota'. The numbers vary with size and complexity, number of miles driven, total life-span of the car but the point is that fuel use is only one factor. Unless your new car's steel and aluminium was smelted with hydro or nuclear power it's likely as not come out of a coal-fired oven. Then there's all the petro-chemical plastics that go into a car...plus the shipping of parts and the finished good to you by ship and truck. The math is not as simple as 'oh, hybrids are better because they save fuel relative to a petrol car the same size'.


Anyway, read the Forbes article here.

Drucker - Mintzberg - Younameit

Whilst I'm in the mood to share links, how about:
1. Leader to Leader - the Drucker foundation - a bit heavy at times but really good for research. Perhaps not essential for a daily read but a good site to check from time to time
2. BNET's Leadership and Strategy newsletter is an excellent source, with many other business related newsletters (including HR and Marketing) available from the main BNET site. The HR newsletter is also good. Subscribing is a good, and free, option
3. Forbes is a good read at times but the countless animated adverts drive me mad!

Happy reading and researching!

Another recommendation: MBA Depot

Another useful site for those researching for their MBA or other business degrees: MBA Depot. Take a look. It's worth subscribing to the newsletter.

Interesting reading from McKinsey's

The McKinsey group publish both free and 'premium' material - very useful source reports for MBA assignments and interesting reading in any case, it's worth subscribing to the Quarterly.

There's value in HR

We suspect it's true and we want it to be true. But sometimes it's not obvious exactly what the return is from best of breed HRM. We may as well go back to Personnel departments if it's not true! Here's a study that quantifies the stock market value of HRM. Study by Watson Wyatt and the Human Resource Planning Society, reported via Workforce.com.

TheSpiel

TheSpiel is about passing on what I know about business, especially focused on what I learned in achieving my MBA. It's also about sustainability. Too often we work in isolation and focus only on what's in front of us... climate change is but one example. If we as a group of individuals don't look after the the consequences of our actions - do a bit of prediction and then modify our behaviour - then we will have learned nothing from teh past and will pass on a tragic mess to our children. Do it once, do it right; and if you get it wrong, clean it up.