The Fork In The Road

Beyond Virtualization – What Comes Next

While cloud computing continues to be widely discussed, its cousin virtualization continues to be strong and growing as well. According to a 2012 Kaspersky Lab survey:

• 69% of US companies are in the process of implementing or have implemented server virtualization
• 46% plan to implement a virtual desktop infrastructure
• 51% plan data storage virtualization 

Although these are strong numbers, virtualization as we know it today is just the latest step in the evolutionary march.

While some people believe their needs to be a cloud versus virtualization decision, others are arguing that virtualization is cloud. VMware makes this argument and to a degree its correct. Virtualization is at least private cloud and in some cases, could be more. In fact, a strong argument can be made that virtualization has fueled infrastructure cloud adoption.

Many new developments are already here and their adoption is growing like a snowball rolling down a mountain. Three trends – Security, Cross-platform availability, BYOD - are quickly switching from nice-to-haves to must-haves.

Let’s face it.  Although security is always on the requirement list for any technology, there are assumed limitations that have been accepted as “the best we can do.” This will not do. Security must be baked into all virtualization or cloud-based offerings. We can’t continue to expect enterprise companies to purchase their security from yet another company. Layering another technology on top of what is already being used is a clunky solution that should be temporary. Every new technology MUST sufficiently address security.

Originally, the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) trend was addressed when senior management wanted the freedom to use whatever device they chose or when the engineering and creative teams might be on different systems than the rest of the company. Today, BYOD is a must for a global, mobile workforce. When implemented well, it addresses the need for superior and flexible security, support, collaboration and cross-platform usage.

Speaking of cross-platform, 2013 is the year it becomes a must-have. Business users are running out of patience with applications that don’t operate on multiple platforms or have vastly different experiences depending on the platform.  If as marketing budgets seem to suggest, 2013 is the year mobile marketing takes off, it must also be the year cross-platform become ubiquitous. Although there’s still confusion in some organizations if apps and mobile are the same thing, as the mobile experience becomes more tailored and apps become more sophisticated, it’ll become more clear how these differ.

Tools and applications that don’t operate cross-platform will begin to see declining new sales and limited adoption. Soon after, they’ll be on the list of soon-to-be-obsolete technologies. It isn’t enough to roll out tools for one platform and then a second or third a month down the road. The patience we’ve had for startups’ development roadmaps is waning. When it's an established company that's saying the "it's on the roadmap" line, it's even more unforgivable.

Forget about what will be developed in 2013 or 2014. What’s exciting are the adoption rates that will push enterprises and businesses overall to a new way of operating.

Related articles

Is BYOD Cost Effective for Small Businesses?

Embracing BYOD means understanding cloud and application security

How to Spot a Failed Company Before It Launches

I love that I regularly get to talk with new companies.  I learn so much and always leave with a better understanding of current and future market trends.  What’s also interesting are the statements that raise red flags which have become consistent over the years.  There are several clichés that signal a company is heading in the wrong direction based on what their executives say.  The most obvious is:  Our company will be the next FILL IN BLANK.  

When I started in business, CEOs pitched me by saying they would be the next Microsoft, then it was Yahoo, then it was Amazon, then it was eBay, then it was Google.  You get the picture. If a company is trying to be the next big thing but focuses on existing market leaders, they’re destined to be left in the dust.  By the time said young company raises funds, fully builds its product and enters the market, the large company it was aspiring to be has already moved on.

In the last few years, it’s not the young entrepreneurs who are making these aspirational claims.  It’s executives in their 50s and 60s who seem to be more likely to chase after someone else’s success.  Age of course doesn’t mean someone would know better, but it feels like they should.  

We have a running joke in my home that I shouldn’t be allowed to listen to my friends’ good ideas.  Too many of them have been good on the surface, but light on market research and competitive analysis.  If a company is being founded purely to chase an existing company’s current offering, it’s likely to fail.  

New companies must not strive to be more of what already exists, either in offering or size.  Entrepreneurs don’t need to be the smartest people in the room, but it helps to be the most imaginative. 

Talking Square with Small Businesses

I spent this weekend in Portland, OR.  Saturday was a lovely, sunny day and we walked everywhere.  Besides taking in the city’s amenities, it gave me a chance to speak with local small business owners, particularly food truck owners.  What could be better than eating my breakfast and lunch out of a truck and getting to ask a few business-related questions in the process.  My topic of the day: Square.

For those of you unfamiliar with Square, it is a mobile payment service designed primarily for small businesses.  Its founder is Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter.  I read about the company in May 2010, but first encountered it live at a tournament later that year, when the official tee-shirt vendor used it to process credit cards.  I had seen him earlier in 2010 and it was clear his new payment system was worked better than his previous one.  He showed me the square that plugged into his phone and said it he just got it but it was working well.  

I love new technology, particularly technology that actually fixes or improves and has the potential to make real revenue – in other words disruptive technologies.  My initial interaction regarding Square almost two years ago put the company on my radar.

Flash forward to my trip to Portland this past weekend and my Square-related questions there.  The first people I spoke with were at Sonny Bowl located SW 3^rd and Washington.  When I ask what they thought of Square, the answer sounded like an ad:

• It was incredibly convenient.
• It was so much cheaper and easier than what was quoted by their bank.
• It isn’t has bulky as what the bank processing would have required.
• If it ever runs slow, they turn off the phone and turn it back on, then it works like a charm.

I assumed from this response, most of the city’s more than 200 food trucks must be using Square.  I even imagined a “Sponsored-by Square” sign on the busiest truck lots.  Interestingly, that doesn’t seem to be the case.  My limited, unscientific survey showed that about half accepted credit cards – mostly via Square – and the other half were cash only.

I spoke with Flo of Flogene’s Home Cookin’, at SW 9^th and Adler.  Her food truck has been open a year and business has been booming.  Her business is cash only and she hasn’t seen a need to begin accepting credit cards.  In fact, she said they have a credit card machine from the bank, but only receive one request to use a credit card about every three months.  Arguably, the large “cash only” sign and the abundance of ATMs around the site could be the reason for the low requests for credit card payments.  Flo puts it simply, “We haven’t seen a need. If we thought we would lose business by not accepting credit cards, we would start.  So far, we don’t have a need.”

The third person with whom I spoke about credit cards was a cab driver.  He actually did accept them, but it was so old school that even though my credit card was swiped, he still needed to use a manual credit card imprint machine with carbon copies.  He complained about the slow process and occasional dropped connections with his cab company’s credit card processor.  I don’t work for Square, but it was the one time during the trip where I felt like I could have been an ambassador for the company.  I stepped out of the cab saying to my husband: why would the company use such an antiquated system, when the driver has a smartphone right there and could be running the payments so much easier?

The next 12-18 months should be interesting for Square.  A year ago, Kleiner Perkins led its $100 million series C round.  The company continues to grow.  I’m looking forward to seeing the product and business developments sure to come soon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Creative or Analytical? - It’s the Wrong Question

I’ve been waiting a few weeks to figure out how I can politely address what may seem like a pet peeve. I’ve finally decided to not be so sensitive and accept that some people will see themselves in the blog post and will need to accept they are less than experts when it comes to marketing.

Wow. What a buildup for what seems to be a simple question: Are you creative or analytical?  As I’ve moved into senior global marketing roles, I’ve been asked this repeatedly. Usually by CEOs who I assume are intelligent in aspects of business.  I’ve always been polite, in part because it’s usually been in the middle of a job interview when this question is asked.  Now it’s time for me to share what’s behind my very polite smile: What an incredibly stupid question!

Yes, there are people in the marketing discipline who lean heavily toward creativity or analytics. However, do you really want to hire one of these people to head your marketing efforts?

Marketing executives, especially in high growth companies, must have a penchant and passion for both.  Only working through a “playbook” of marketing tactics neglects great opportunities to engage prospects.  For companies with a technology without widespread awareness or adoption, working through a series of marketing tactics because you think that’s how marketing is done, may ensure your solution is never seen by the most qualified prospects or that it’ll take a lot more money to get on their radar.

At the same time, I hate, hate , HATE, “gee whiz marketing.” These are super-cool marketing efforts done solely for the purpose of looking super-cool.  Marketing must be done for a purpose.  Sometimes this is lead gen, sometimes it’s awareness, sometimes it’s positioning for a liquidity event.  One of my earliest professional memories was promoting the Clay Court Championship in Pittsburgh, PA.  Our budget was just above USD$ZERO for an event spanning several days and a client willing to try something for the sake of drawing attention to it.  What I came up with was a celebrity charity tournament to be held on the first day of the event.  In Pittsburgh, “celebrities” were mostly media personalities, or in other words, TV  news anchors.  As planned, the celebrities that were invited to participate came with camera crews to show how the stations were supporting the community.  Each then ran it on the evening news.  The result was a measureable increase in attendance both from the previous day and also in comparison to previous years. 

Marketing must be a mix of creative new ideas and previous efforts with a proven track record. Both need forecasted results and ROI, and just as important, thorough measurement during and afterward. The measurement also needs to be the right measurement. For example, measuring lead generation on incoming leads is only a portion of what should be happening.  Ultimately, lead generation should be graded on how many leads reach the opportunity stage and the percentage of projected revenue in those opportunities.  It is also a mistake to assume public relations’ and analyst relations’ efforts cannot be measured.  There is always a way to measure. It takes someone who is creative and analytical to develop a metrics that fits the discipline and the company.

So, I ask again: Would you really want to hire someone who doesn’t have a passion for creative marketing to discover new ways to reach prospects, develop solutions and position your brand AND the analytics to continue to improve your (M)ROI?

 

Where Founders Should Go After They’re Done Founding

It is rare to find a founder who is visionary and can grow a $1+ Billion organization. For every Jeff Bezos, there are 100s of founders who create very good concepts and then allow their companies to miss their true potential because they don’t know how to move beyond being the founder, CEO and company rudder.

The best founders know whether they are the right leader for the next stage, when it’s time to have someone replace them, or even leave the organization. The second best version is the founder who has trusted advisors who can provide this outside guidance.

For the founder who chooses to leave the company they helped create, their next step depends in part on what brought them to become founders in the first place. For some people, it is as if they have no choice but to create over and over again. For others, founding their first company was based on happenstance. For example, Engine Yard received the funding that put it on the path it’s on today because VCs noticed other companies were using it to build their technology. Wildfire Interactive was created after its founders experienced the painful process of trying to create promotions for Facebook.

Three options are available outside the initial company:

1)   Move into a technical or business role in a related business sector. Yahoo and Google have been known to hire former founders. A large technology company could be a good fit because the founder’s technical skills married with the personality characteristics required to develop and launch a company (determination, organization and confidence) makes these people more likely than their peers to prove themselves and move up quickly.

2)   If the VC who funded the initial company sees potential in the founder’s skills and creativity, an entrepreneur in residence position may be offered. This gives the entrepreneur the opportunity to assist other startup companies by providing insight and subject matter expertise. This also gives the entrepreneur in residence a needed break in which they can cultivate their next idea.

3)   An often-overlooked option is moving into academia. It’s unfortunate that this isn’t considered more. Just as some founders have an abundance of determination, organizational skills and confidence, others are much more interested in the process of creating and perfecting new things. These people will be more focused on details than the big picture. The same characteristic that makes it hard for them to decide what is the best business approach and stick with it makes these people good academics because they want to examine and reexamine every possibility multiple times.

For founders for whom it is not appropriate to remain in any role at their company, what comes next could be uncertain and an ego blow. Two important things to keep in mind: (1) whether you are currently in charge or not, the prosperity of the company you founded is bigger than you and it comes first; second, you can find success beyond one company.