Archive for the ‘Microsoft’ Category

In IT, Bigger is NOT Necessarily Better

Wednesday, August 6th, 2008

In IT, small teams can get things done quicker

Way back in my young & foolish days I had the opportunity to work at a couple of startups. I came to them after having worked for very large firms such as Boeing, Siemens, and Alcatel. Needless to say the environment, attitude, and overall energy level at the startups was completely different from the large established firms.

One of my friends from those days, Charlie, has moved on and the startup that he’s working for can no longer really be called a startup: they’ve got 800 employees and have been around for almost 10 years now. Thanks to LinkedIn we’ve reconnected and we got to talking about the “good ‘ol days”. What caught my attention is that Charlie told me that he’s been put in charge of a project to rekindle the “startup spirit” within his company. When I asked him how he was going to go about doing that, he said that he had no good ideas.

Charlie’s firm is struggling with the same issue that Microsoft is just starting to deal with: how can a large firm with lots of resources learn to operate like a smaller, more nimble firm? Everyone realizes that Google, Facebook, Salesforce.com, etc. weren’t born inside of a large firm. Instead, they started life as a startup and because they had a great product and lots of employee energy, they got lucky and have become successful. Just about every large company would like to find a way to infuse itself with that kind of “startup energy” (a.k.a. innovation).

Janet Rae-Dupree
wrote a piece dealing with this topic for the New York Times awhile back. Some interesting observations came out of this article. The first is that just about everyone agrees that when it comes to IT and innovation, bigger is not always better. Specifically, smaller teams that are made up of staff from different departments seem to be able to move much quicker than larger traditional organizations. Specifically decisions get made much faster and so the entire team is able to move on to the next-next-next thing. I can hear collective HR and Legal departments gasping at the thought right now!

I almost hate to say it, but the TV show Survivor has proved this point. When forced to, people can work together to solve complex problems in unique ways. Yeah, yeah – there will always be backstabbing and alliances formed; however, when the team’s survival depends on its success this can overcome many of these personality issues.

As Charlie and I wrapped up our talk, I pointed out the Survivor analogy to him. He pushed back and said that he liked the small team idea but didn’t want to be kicking employees off of an island each week. I told that he didn’t need to do that, but what he could do is limit the resources available to a team (time, money, etc.) and tell them that they need to reach a milestone before one of their resources ran out. If they didn’t then the team would be disbanded. Everyone works better under startup-like pressures.

So what do you think? Was my advice to Charlie any good or did I send him down the wrong path? Can the best parts of a startup (innovation, sense of ownership) be replicated within a large company or is this a fool’s quest?

Tags: , , , ,

Can Microsoft Profit From Having Steve Ballmer Take Total Control?

Tuesday, July 8th, 2008

Steve Ballmer Now Runs Microsoft

The news is a bit old by now; however, it’s still a big deal that Steve Ballmer has finally taken full control of Microsoft now that Bill Gates has officially stepped down. I believe that Microsoft employs over 100,000 staff and so Steve has got his hands full trying to find a way (or ways) to once again make Microsoft more agile. Hopefully Steve will be able to sort out what path he wants the company to follow: strategy, quality, or innovation.

What would you do if you were in Steve’s IT shoes? Microsoft has a fundamental dilemma: are they one huge company (a la Wal-Mart) or are they a loosely connected set of business units (a la GE)? The key point to remember here is that Microsoft is neither a Wal-Mart nor a GE so whatever path they take, they will need to create their own unique structure.

In terms of major projects, the next release of the Windows operating system cannot happen quickly enough. No matter what you think of Vista, the public perception of it is that it is undesirable. Steve can put his best people on it and see if he can turn this perception around or he can simply quickly release the next version and consider Vista a horrible learning experience.

Next Microsoft still seems to be interested in getting into the mobile phone market. I’m not sure if this is simply a case of “We can do whatever Apple can do…” or if they really see it as a key pillar of their growth. No matter what, they need to put some creative talent onto this one. They’ve got a powerful lever in the Exchange email tool — if they can build on that, they could have a leg to stand on.

Finally, Steve has got to realize that the Internet is all about search. Right now it looks like he’s still maneuvering to get a piece of Yahoo’s search business. Perhaps what he really should be doing is looking further out and finding out where Google is NOT the dominate search engine and spend some of those Microsoft R&D dollars to attack Google from the outside instead of going head-to-head with them.

No matter what, Steve will be kept quite busy for the foreseeable future. Since I use products made by his company, I hope that he makes some good decisions. Buy or sell your Microsoft stock based on how you think he’s going to do!

Tags: , , ,