Clay Christensen: How Will You Measure Your Life?

A tribute to Clayton Christensen, the Harvard professor who introduced "disruption" in his 1997 book The Innovator's Dilemma, which, in turn, led The Economist to term him "the most influential management thinker of his time." 

Even more influential for some would be his 2012 co-authored book How Will You Measure Your Life?. [try here].

Christensen passed away in Boston on Jan 23, 2020.

Read More

Gartner: 10 Changes in the Nature of Work in Next 10 Years

"ORGANIZATIONS WILL NEED TO PLAN for increasingly chaotic environments that are out of their direct control, and adaptation must involve adjusting to all 10 of the trends (listed below)", observers Gartner fellow and VP, Tom Austin.

In a report published earlier this year titled "Watchlist: Continuing Changes in the Nature of Work, 2010-2020", Gartner says that organizations will need to determine which of the 10 key changes in the nature of work will affect them the most, and consider whether radically different technology models will be required to address them.

The other key message that emerges out of the report's overall analysis says:

Work will become less routine, characterized by increased volatility, hyper-connectedness, 'swarming' and by 2015, 40 percent or more of an organization's work will be "non-routine," up from 25 percent in 2010.

Later next month, Tom Austin is scheduled to speak in London on these trends:

1. De-routinization of Work: Non-routine skills are those we cannot automate. The report argues that the core value that people add is not in the processes that can be automated, but in non-routine processes, uniquely human, analytical or interactive contributions that result in words such as discovery, innovation, teaming, leading, selling and learning.
2. Work Swarms: A kind of work pattern involving a flurry of collective activity by anyone who is available and who could add value, is defined as Work Swarms. The report indicates two phenomena within the collective and apparently unstructured activity: One is that Swarms form quickly, attacking a problem or opportunity and then quickly dissipating. And secondly, Swarming is an agile response to an observed increase in ad-hoc action requirements, as ad-hoc activities continue to displace structured, bureaucratic situations.
3. Weak Links: Members of a Work Swarm may not 'know' each other in the classical sense, or even have a strong or moderate reference. There relationship remains largely temporary, and the report labels it as Weak links. They are indirect indicators which partially rely on the confidence others have in their knowledge of people. Social Networking comes into play at personal as well as professional level that would contribute to Work Swarms.
4. Working with the Collective: "the Collective" are external forces, mainly disparate groups of people tied together by common interests, that are not controlled by the organization but who could impact the success-rate of the organization. Their potential for influence is very high. The report suggests that smart and powerful business executives who live within the business ecosystem which they can not control, will do the market research and come up with ways to work with "the collective" to wield influence in their organizations for their benefit.
5. Work Sketch-ups: Most non-routine processes that could not be automated will also be highly informal and non-standard. The process models for most non-routine processes will remain simple "sketch-ups" which are created on the fly. The practice will evolve over time to be able to identify meaningful patterns of these processes and structure them.
6. Spontaneous Work: Spontaneity implies more than reactive activity. The report says that as in Work Swarms, spontaneous and proactive activities would also emerge, forming its own patterns such as seeking out new opportunities and creating new designs and models. 

7. Simulation and Experimentation: Interface with virtual environment will increase many fold, where technologies such as 3D interfacing with data (akin to the Spielberg film Minority Report) will replace spreadsheets and traditional number crunching. The contents of the simulated environment will be assembled by agent technologies that determine what materials go together based on watching people work with this content.
8. Pattern Sensitivity: This is Gartner's forward looking management strategy approach called "pattern-based strategy". The report argues that the business world is becoming more volatile, with far less visibility into the future than ever before. Organizations will have to create focus groups to identify divergent emerging patterns, to evaluate those patterns, and to develop various scenarios showing how the disruption might play out.
9. Hyper-connected: Organization have complex inter-relationship of networks, with multiple overlaps for a single function. For instance, an IT support function might work well in delivering a service while working in dedicated and isolation mode, but in shared and complex environment with multiple overlaps, networks, and stakeholder, the same dedicated resources may largely under-perform and underachieve, resulting into additional work. The report calls this Hyper-connectedness, and argues that it will lead to a push for more work to occur in both formal and informal relationships across enterprise boundaries, and that has implications for how people work and how IT supports or augments that work.
10. My Place: There will be job roles which are always on-duty. For them, the traditional segregation of personal, professional, social and family matters, along with organization subjects, will disappear. They will work in virtual Work Swarm environment, all the time, across time zones and organizations, and with participants who barely know each other. But the employee will still have a "place" where they work, called "My Place".

• See also:
• Go here for the report on Gartner website (User login required)
• Go here for details on the upcoming summit in Spetember '10 in London where Tom Austin will be presenting these trends.

Read More

HBR: Paths to Power by Jeff Pfeffer

"Power is the organization’s last dirty secret." ~ Rosabeth Moss Kanter

POWER IS REQUIRED IF ONE WANTS TO GET ANYTHING DONE in any large organization. Unfortunately, Power doesn’t just fall into one’s lap: one will have to go after it and learn how to use it. Stanford University professor for Organizational Development, Prof. Jeffery Pfeffer, argues that being uncomfortable with Power Dynamics has cost career promotions (and sometimes, the job) to many talented people from premier organizations and institutes including Harvard and Sloan. Pfeffer offers a primer on why power matters, how to get it, and how to use it to advance your organization's agenda - and thus, in turn, how to furthering your career, not just incidentally.

Powerful people prevail by using various techniques when push comes to shove. With examples from real-life and historical accounts from corporate and national political scenarios Pfeffer illustrates many of these techniques. (Interestingly, Pfeffer analyses Lalit Modi's ascent to great power from the world's wealthiest sporting body to the world cricket arena as one of the case studies.)

In his brilliant article titled "Power Play" in the latest issue of HBR magazine Pfeffer discusses the following basic idea. The article headline reads: "Acquiring real clout—the kind that helps you get stuff done—requires bare-knuckle strategies." Written more as a survival guide for any new 'idea' to progress, Pfeffer identifies personal barriers that the leader has to overcome. The article explains 11-point exercise towards the Paths of Power, acknowledging all along that it is not the ideal world that the techniques apply to, but rather it is for the real world that one deals with, and which is much less 'ideal' and just than all of us may want it to be.

The basic idea of the article is this:

Any new strategy worth implementing has some controversy surrounding it and someone with counteragenda fighting it. When push comes to shove, you need more than logic to carry the day. You need power.

Learning to wield power effectively begins with understanding the resources you control. Money is not the only one. Whatever you have - a valuable network, access to information - can be meted out or denied to gain leverage.

You can also push past obstacles through sheer relentlessness. You should avoid wasting political capital on side issues and dispense with opponents in ways that allow them to save face.

You may find such power plays and the politicians behind them unsavory - and they can be. But you'll have to get over your qualms if you want to bring about meaningful change.

Pfeffer identifies three main barriers that can make you 'your own worst enemy' unless you learn how to get over them and embrace the power you need.
1) The Belief That the World Is a Just Place: Believing in a just world makes people less powerful in two important ways. First, it limits their willingness to learn from all situations and all people, even those they don’t like or respect. Second, it anesthetizes them to the need to proactively build a power-base.

2) The Leadership Literature: The teaching on leadership is filled with prescriptions that reflect how people wish those in positions of power behaved. There is no doubt that the world would be a much better place if people were always authentic, modest, truthful, and concerned about others, instead of simply pursuing their own aims. But wishing that’s how people behaved won’t make it so.

3) Your Delicate Self-esteem: If people intentionally do things that could diminish their performance, they can view disappointing outcomes as not reflective of their true abilities. For instance, told that a test is highly diagnostic of intellectual ability, some people will choose not to study the relevant material or to practice, thereby decreasing their performance but at the same time providing an excuse that doesn’t implicate their natural ability. Similarly, if people don’t actively seek power, the fact that they don’t obtain it doesn’t have to be seen as a personal failure.

In the article, Pfeffer argues that Power is 'exercised' using some of the following techniques:

1. Mete out resources.
2. Shape behavior through rewards and punishments.
3. Advance on multiple fronts.
4. Make the first move.
5. Co-opt antagonists.
6. Remove rivals—nicely, if possible.
7. Don’t draw unnecessary fire.
8. Use the personal touch.
9. Persist.
10. Make important relationships work—no matter what
11. Make the vision compelling.

So, welcome to the real world. It may not be the world we want, but it’s the world we have!

See also:

• Go here for the HBR article page. And here for the HBR IdeaCast podcast page for Jeffery Pfeffer's interview - Telling The Truth About Power.
• Go here for Jeffery Pfeffer's official page at Stanford University.

Read More

Steve Jobs' Presentation Skills Reflects Why Apple is Apple

"This changes everything. Again"

AFTER THE WORLD'S LARGEST PRODUCT LAUNCH EVENT YET, on July 16 Steve Jobs did the press conference following the recent keynote for the world's largest IT organization that Jobs staged for the eleventh year running after his return in '99 to the (then struggling) company he originally co-founded in '76 as Apple Computers Inc.

Over the last two and an half years since the launch of the first iPhone, the competition has grown (and perished) in the smartphone product space. The information hungry, instantaneously reacting, viral population of Social Media 'journalism' was increasingly demanding of this Silicon Valley veteran from 1, Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA, USA.

Apparently, Apple's latest offering of iPhone 4 smartphone with services from AT&T ran into media highlighted issues of a certain "loop antenna" problem where the device was dropping calls if the user happened to hold the device in a certain manner. (Rather interestingly, the same device did not seem to have any such issues in geographies other than the US. where media and service provider coverage were different.)

Jobs presentation at this press release to address the 'issues' was very effective, and some of the key attributes of his presentation skills have been captured below:

Have a laser-sharp focus on audience expectation: "relevancy" runs the highest among people noting, tweeting and blogging in real time during the key presentation events.

Give the audience a pleasant surprise by always having something new: content of the presentation has to be novel or newsworthy. There is no use regurgitating previous press releases or old news.

Forget bullet points - perfect your slide design: design slides with images instead of text, with crisp lines which is not only short and quotable, but even if it's taken out of the context of his presentation, it still makes sense.

Repetitions and consistency: take time to summarize the points, even if they are many. Build intended-redundancy to the presentations that helps drive home the central message.

Evangelize! draw the audience to join the ‘cause’, the main theme of the presentation. If required pitch in the competition with Us-vs-Them scenarios.

Image credits and more: Engadget

Read More

Best Performing CEO's and Why MBA's Are Paid Higher

A HARVARD TEAM OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT consultants did a sampling of nearly 14 years covering 2000 Chief Executives of global companies listed by S&P. The sampling and tests were fairly exhaustive and unique, and presented a vivid picture of the Executive boardrooms that saw many major global economic events including the Y2K IT burst, Oil-price surge and dive, and 2007 economic down-turn, among others. Though the headline making "attribute" of the published list came out highlighting that the first three of top 5 best performing executives in the world do not have a formal degree in management. Three of the top five are connected to IT industry, and the other two are from petroleum and energy sector. Broadly, four out of 10 successful leaders in IT and six out 10 in energy sector do not possess such formal b-school education.

Overall, there are less than 30% of the top 50 listed chief executives having any formal management degree. The top 5 have total industry experience of about 30 years. And there doesn’t seem to be any trend suggesting that having an MBA correlates with (or compensates for) lesser industry experience.

Basis the media coverage of this HBR story, I did a small poll among peers of taking their opinions on the study, and one common question that I had for all was – what is the "special" expectation from a management grad from top management institutes. After all, this skill-set does command a certain premium over compensation and designation in the job market. Interestingly, alumni of these institutes could provide but a very sketchy and rather tentative reply. Whereas responses from non-MBA managers and professionals were found to be more thought-through.

As a personal point-of-view within the premise of making of an effective leader, the three key specialities in order of their importance that must be expected from these executive (management grads from primer institutes) are:

1. The ability to influence the work parameters
2. The ability to survive in and surpass non-conducive, and at times hostile, situations
3. The ability of effective and dynamic role-play and role-changes

Ability to Influence: Given the set of rules and roles, constraints and commitments, goals and objectives, the problem definition is analyzed. The ability to influence these problem statement parameters (and success thereof) is the value-add that the executive can bring to the table. Negotiators are high-influencers and negotiators are a sort after folks similar to these executives. This should not imply however that all executives should be negotiators; it is important though that most of the activities in addressing the problem definition would involve various levels of negotiations by the executive. It is also important to become an influencer before becoming a decision-maker.

Survive and surpass: The ability to survive in and surpass non-conducive and hostile situations directly correlates with the executive’s ability to stand-up and face challenges and adversities. Simply put, it is the attitude of the executive of not giving up and keep trying, and keep trying different things. (The expectation also arises from the fact that the executive has already surpassed trying conditions of cracking the entrance exams of premier institutes, and then has survived the onslaught of a tough curriculum.) The condition is the training. And the expectation is to have that training extended to the live working environment for the benefit of the project at hand.

Dynamic Role-play and "Seasoning": The top spot of the hierarchy is a summarization of all the roles beneath. A hands-on leader has a clear advantage over a theoretical one in practical situations. Organizations, by design or by default, provide opportunities of taking on various roles in varied capacities. "Seasoning" or Role Maturity is a parameter by which role change is judged, initiated and calibrated. It is also a very effective personal assessment tool by which the executive can identify personal strengths and work on weaker areas. While on one hand this ability is personality driven (where certain individuals may pursue a specific vertical growth is a defined area), versatility indeed is what separates successful top-spot holders from the rest.

• See also:
• Related article: NRN-Percepts of Being a Respectable Leader.
• Go here for the article at (new) HBR website.
• Go here for why Steve Ballmer of Microsoft might have missed any mention at all in the list.

Read More

Change, Catch Words of Consulting II

Continuing from the previous post, following are a few more Catch Words of Consulting:

Q x A = E : Quality of Solution x Acceptance = Effectiveness of Change. Q is good most of the time. The Key differentiator is Acceptance and Adaptability for a successful Change management.

Passive Resistance: is nodding the head, but not actually going to participate in change; civil disobedience of a personal kind; dragging the feet with a smile.

Planning vs Plans: D. Eisenhower once said, "In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable." Planing is so important that PMBOK devotes the largest of its five process groups entirely on planning.

• See also:
• Related post: Change, and Catch Words of Consulting I

Read More

Change, and Catch Words of Consulting I

"CHANGE IS THAT BIG FAT PINK ELEPHANT that drunkenly roams around this large organization, stamping on people, without anyone having any idea what to do about it." This is how the elderly consultant illustrated in his concluding report to the senior management of [an organization] that was undergoing post-Outsourcing blues. (Do notice elephant as a hidden reference to India as the low-cost location.)

It indeed was a significant experience to participate in a professional forum in Australia with such Consulting veterans and alumni of the global consulting 'Big 5' sharing their vivid experiences.

Read More

"The Beautiful Mind" Turns 80

"The special commodity or medium that we call money has a long and interesting history. And since we are so dependent on our use of it and so much controlled and motivated by the wish to have more of it or not to lose what we have we may become irrational in thinking about it and fail to be able to reason about it as if about a technology, such as radio, to be used more or less efficiently..." -- John F. Nash, lecture at CII in Mumbai, Feb 2007

IF THE WORLD IS CONSIDERED A "CLOSED SYSTEM", deeming it a Zero-sum game, Nash Equilibrium could certainly offer a different meaning to the notion of money, and thus, to the word richness or net-worth and the world economy.

[Today, June 13, John F. Nash, Jr. turns 80. A humble tribute to the 1994 Nobel Laureate legend.]

Arguably, the Nash equilibrium is the single game theoretic solution concept that is most frequently applied in economics. In terms of strategy and planning, the equilibrium could be simplified as:

"For any finite, non-cooperative game of two players or more, no player can improve his/her pay-off by unilaterally changing the strategy..."

[Above: Actor Russell Crowe in his Oscar winning portrayal of John Nash in the 2001 Hollywood film A Beautiful Mind.]

• See also:
• Go here for Nash's personal home page at Princeton.
• Go here at Investopedia for the investment perspective of the theory.
• Photo courtesy: Prof. Lynne Butler.

Read More

Warne Lifts Maiden IPL

A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO I was sitting over the fence of 80% and 20% of the opinion makers reacting to the possibility of success of the IPL business model. 80% were the sceptics and believed that as it happened with ICL (Indian Cricket League – Chaired by Kapil Dev and sponsored by Zee Entertainment), IPL would find very few takers – perhaps only the useless of the useless lot would devote time to this remix masala version of the gentlemen’s game. To my mind, both these Indian T20 “cricetainment” versions were not at par: ICL was but a “zee thing”, where as the Premier League had the mind, money and muscle backing of BCCI – an important element that could make it swing and bounce.

[Above: Team Jaipur after winning the maiden IPL. 1 June 2008. Source: http://ipl.indiatimes.com]

It appears that this compressed format of the game may not have gone down too well with all quarters of the cricket, especially the British media and "empirical" standards. Lord Archer, for example, has been quoted saying during his hugely successful India tour last month that Twenty20 is entertainment and not a cricket. Lord Archer may offer a dead defensive bat, and silly mid-on and Shane go up in appeal to Billy nonetheless, the whole of the stadium also erupts in asking the same question. That essentially is the appeal of the game. Spectacle.

Twenty20 is not going anywhere, and while the possessives (or the hypocrites like Ponting who, after getting a hefty pay-cheque for just a couple of appearance at IPL, goes back to leading the test squad and condemns the T20 format), cling to the ‘real’ word for Cricket, the economics are hugely against them. Fundamentally, I tend to agree that the game is played for the honour and patriotism, and that motive is now being played now purely for money. And the players are like hired "mercenaries" in certain cases. But sport, as much as it may be for the spirit, is also about entertainment, and while the contemporary youth is on a fast track for almost everything in his life, let T20 be a door for him to enter and sustain interest in Test Cricket. Let the format have best of both the worlds of English Premier League Football and American Baseball. While visiting the US I found it very difficult to convince my American boss that there could be a game that goes on for five days. Worst still, people go and watch it! Now I have something for him to relate to with his favourite Baseball team - LA Dodgers. (And then, there surely were some American cheerleaders around.) Let’s say that a Test match is like a grand five-course unlimited dinner, compared to which an ODI is like a limited lunch, and so T20 is but a quick snack or a breakfast. Having said that, the likelihood of T20 eating into the limited format of the game (ODI) is pretty strong – a brunch, if you like. (Did you hear also or is it only me that they are thinking of renaming BCCI? The new name got to be BCCCI - Beware of Cricket Crazy Countrymen of India.)
[Right: Washington Redskins cheering for IPL in Bangalore. Apparently, Bangalore Royal Challengers had "Bangalored" that job to the US.]

I suppose it was Geoffrey Boycott who, while commenting during India's tour to England, first put forth the point that ODI is a Batsman’s game, for all the rules are against the bowlers regarding what they could do, and more importantly, what they can’t. The situation just got worse, and we have Twenty20 where the bowler is to be slogged. Or that’s what the initial impression was. It turns out, such is not the case, for all the important games did a turn-around mid-course because of some very clever bowling – be it Mumbai Indian’s ouster from the IPL because of a sad last over finish, or be it “Balaji – the weak-link” for Chennai Super Kings whose rather stupid last over did them in and they lost the trophy. (It was a rather modest Dhoni, with his first-time-on-TV huddle of his team on the ground before getting into the dressing room after the defeat in the finals, that he said it was a team effort, win or loose, and there was no one single event or player to be singled out or blamed for. A leadership quality that better not be lost on the likes of the "legendary" Tendulkar who, rather curtly, passed the buck of loosing out of IPL to the Sri Lankan Dilhara Fernando who bowled that last over.)

BCCCI - Beware of Cricket Crazy Countrymen of India...

Warne’s squad was considered an underdog on the ground that they didn’t have any star player (and where of the cheapest bidding of the eight during the auction). Somehow, I disagreed with that statement. Rather I considered Jaipur team a real good value-for-money for the bid-winners. Warne is no less than a legend in his own right, and when you have the captain of the South African team also as your opener, you surely have a side to reckon with. If at all someone would want to consider them as starting underdogs, the reason has to be that the total squad didn't had the best of the commercial value at the bidding time. And then again it was the error of judgement on the bidder's part then anything else (one more indication to this effect is that Anil Ambani is rumoured to have backed out of Royal's bidding at the very last moment for Ahmedabad, and the team was won by Jaipur). The real important part, however, was the captaincy by a leg spinner: IMHO successful spinners are born tacticians; shrewd and deceptive in their strategy and their main weapon. This may not be the case with the fast-bowlers who depend on their physical strength for pace more than anything else. Warne’s so-called "role-based approach" to the game might have given him the first IPL success, but it would be extremely difficult for him to repeat it in the comings seasons, and I am almost certain that he is also aware of it.

Some Trivia and Not-so-trivia about the IPL - maiden season:

• The broadcast rights for IPL for India were sold at USD 1bn.
  
• Before the tournament began, even 90% of India was unaware of a Cement brand called Super Kings. Wikipedia had no mention of India Cements Ltd. In 45 days, Super Kings goes on to become a globally known name and brand, and like N. Srinivasan, CEO, puts it, every penny invested in the franchise by them is worth it - No other branding strategy could have delivered within the given time-frame.
• Delhi Daredevils had the best ROI with their Feroz Shah Kotla ground turning in nearly Rs. 90 to 100 million in gate collections. They are the first franchise to break-even and go profitable.
• For Shah Rukh Khan, it was a double loss: first, Kolkata lost out, and then the TPR of IPL ate heavily into his newly launched game-show "Panchvi Pass". He is surely praying for the revival of both.
• Vijay Mallya remained at the receiving end as Royal Challenge as a brand also goes down with his IPL team, and Blender's Pride (Seagram) takes over the #1 spot in sales - almost after a decade.

Read More

Business Development, Pre-sales, Sales and the 'Arrow-head'

HAVING BEEN TRAINED FOR CULTIVATING 'GROWTH' AND evaluated for a few appraisal cycles by now for tasks that were marked under a title called 'Business Development' (or something that either sounds or seems similar), the debate on the subject by a certain groups of 'experienced' personnel almost immediately drew my attention.

And it becomes interesting when, with all due respect, the so-called experts, having built their careers in the relevant fields, seemed rather confused between the functioning and mandate of 'Business Development' and 'Sales' functions. Before taking a dig on that, respectfully, here is my version of the 'classical' definition (or differentiation) of the two:

"Business Development is a bunch of activities of today, based on your strategic vision of your product/service framework, that the Sales people would be selling tomorrow."

Well, this definition might neither be universal nor be entirely technically accurate. However, it does give a certain level of clarity (when some of the rather experienced folks are contributing to the confusion). To me, these two functions are neither the 'same' nor 'interchangeable', but are distinct. And by the virtue of that clarity one can perhaps define both the functions more accurately and also appreciate their imperatives.

So, what we are saying here is - today's Business Development initiatives could (should) potentially translate into sales targets of tomorrow - in other words: Sales follows Business Development. And thus, what we call pre-sales will have to fit between the two where it would have a sort of a 'vetting' role for the tasks trickling down from BD for the Sales to be made. It perhaps is a different matter that all of these three functions may not exist independently for a given organization, but could be merged among each others (pre-sales may be merged with BD, or BD may be made to co-exists in the same basket as of Sales. And that perhaps is the very reason where the confusion about the distinction is arising from).

[Above: The 'Arrow-head' components: a) the Sales function as the cutting-edge, b) the Business Development (BD) function, the main-body, that gives the aerodynamic shape and (thus) 'direction' to the arrow, and c) the Pre-sales function that embeds the Arrow-head to the stem (delivery streams).]

My personal exposure to these "cutting-edge" functions has been in terms of IT systems services, products, and delivery (where I have had the opportunity to performed all the roles except for direct-sales). In terms of the required skill-sets and experience for each of these functions: a BD professional might have to have a more strategic (and, if I may add, visionary) inclination on top of pure selling skills. A pre-sales professional, at the same time, may have to have a more Risk-oriented outlook (the correct Risk-appetite measure, as well as Risk-averse functioning) and the mandate to have Risk-mitigation embedded within the Sale that is going to be made. This is also the position where the 'Analysis' bit could play its role. And connect the "arrow-head" to the structural strength of the stem (delivery streams) which provides for the momentum for the 'travel' (i.e. growth).

Further, this also helps give the logical alignment of each of these functions vis-a-vis the leadership roles in a typical organization. The BD function should ideally be with the top executive leadership (CEO/COO); the Sales function should report into BD; and the pre-sales should be closely knit with delivery/operations and having a dotted-line reporting to the executive leadership.

Go here for the interesting 'confusion' that I referred to at the beginning (you may would want to skip the vanity of the thread at the start and move over to the answers).

Read More

Mind, the Gap - addendum I - Psychology

In an interesting parallel with the 'Mind Gap' concept, here is a quote from the strategy by a marketing guru to the modern successful IT enterprises, advising the CEO's of the interplay between psychology and economy in making of an effective marketing strategy and selling their systems:

"... the strategy is to focus market development efforts on the end-user community [who you want to use your system], not on the technical community. Specifically you want to enlist the support of the economic buyer, the line executive or manager in the end-user organization who has the profit-and-loss responsibility for the given function your product serves... [Psychologically] you should not expect to secure primary sponsorship from the IT professionals... [A new product and a paradigm shift] is not in the interest of the IT department. It means extra work for them, and it exposes their mission-critical systems to additional risks... [Psychologically] it would not have been in the interest of the end users who report to the economic buyer. From their point of view, the old paradigm is more familiar and secure. In the short term, with the learning curve required to come up to speed on the new one, they are actually going to be less effective. So they may resist you as well. It is only the economic buyer, who has to pay the ongoing cost of the status quo but can no longer afford to do so, who can be counted on to be unequivocally supportive of the change..."

As it happens elsewhere, so is in this example, that the strategy has the psychology and economy components in a direct interplay. Towards the end of the quote it also gives the hint that it is not simply restricted to marketing strategy, but is equally found in change management as well.

Read More