In my many years as an analyst, I've learned to listen to those faint, intuitive thoughts that pop into my head about new technologies. They may not be rational, and they may not be entirely analytical, but they are often right. You might call it "gut" -- and in my dual jobs of CEO and analyst, it's been quite useful...
Yes, the iPad signals the future of software, but one simple question is nagging at me:
It won't go in your media room at home -- you've already got a big screen in that room.
It's not going to go on your desktop at work -- you've got a company computer there.
It's not going to live in your office at home -- that's where your home computer lives.
Will it go in your backpack? I carry my Kindle and my laptop in mine. So will I pull out the Kindle (10 ounces) and replace it with an iPad (24 ounces)? No -- I'm not adding another pound for my aching back to carry around...
Kitchen? Not a place where you'd watch a movie. Bedroom? Yes, you'd read a book there, but you'd rarely check stock quotes or search for coffee shops.
The iPad signals a fundamental change in software -- and you, as CEO, should know about it.
You're going to hear a lot of conflicting babble about what Apple's new device means. Most of the talk will be about iPad's impact on the media world...death of The New York Times, blah, blah, the future of movies and books, blah, blah, will Verizon offer their network, blah, blah. You may be tempted to tune it all out.
Don't. Because the iPad has meaning for you and your business.
Your company runs on software. Whether it's the word processor you use to write memos, or your factory's supply chain software, or your customer Web site, your company wouldn't last for 17 minutes without the stuff.
iPad signals the future of software. There are two old software models. The first is where the software runs on your laptop -- this is the Microsoft model embodied by Office. The second is the software as a service/cloud model with the software running on a server somewhere out on the Internet -- this is the Google and Salesforce.com model. I'm simplifying, but in the former, the software runs on a local device. In the latter, the software sits out on the network.
iPad (and the iPhone before it) elegantly combines the two models. Software on a powerful device seamlessly (that's the key word) cooperates with services available out on the network.
At the Forrester Marketing Forum this year (I hope to see you there), I am giving a talk on "The Social CEO." I'll be analysing the state of the art (what pioneering CEOs are doing), assessing which social technologies should and should not be used by business leaders, and summarizing what CEOs and their companies can expect to gain from social.
But all of this may be getting ahead of a fundamental question: Should CEOs be social? Or should they stay behind the scenes and let their CMO take the lead? If the CEO is not social, will the company suffer?
I'd love to get your thoughts. Even better would be any stories you may have about a CEO that uses social to drive the goals of his or her company. If they're unique, I'll use your quote in my speech at the Forum and give you a well-deserved shout out...
If you're a typical CEO, you're probably wondering what the hell all of these social technologies like Twitter are useful for. A question I get from a lot of leaders is: "How can we use social to make money?" Actually, the more frequent question is: "Why do these social things have such stupid names?"
Many CEOs only encounter the downside of social -- the disparaging YouTube video or the irrational Twitter attack on the company's brand or products. I've got personal experience here -- Forrester was recently the subject of a small Twitter tantrum based on inaccurate information. So it's easy to understand the skepticism and the questioning.
Trust me though -- social networks contain utility that your company will use to get ahead. I'll be posting some examples in the near future.
But for the moment, let's stay focused on one specific way that you will use social to make money -- something I call Social Sigma. While Six Sigma is a discipline for improving products through better process, Social Sigma is about improving products through social feedback. It's about using social networks as a means for customers (and potential customers) to continually critique, analyze, and offer suggestions about your products. It's a powerful tool for continually increasing the value of what you make.
This was my ninth visit to the World Economic Forum – the global cocktail party/speechathon that brings together a unique mix of CEOs, government leaders, artists, scientists, philanthropists, regulators, and non-profits in Davos Switzerland. Or, as one reporter noted, it was a meeting of the people who have screwed up the world in the last two years.
Here are my quick personal observations. Please excuse the length of this post -- the volume of interesting facts overwhelmed my editing sensibilities.
1) Compared with the gloom of last year, members were far more optimistic and positive about the economy. Most executives I spoke with said that their business began to turn in Q3 and Q4 of 2009 and that their prospects for 2010 were brightening. That said, economists continually highlighted the fragility of the recovery. The head of the IMF said that the discontinuation of stimulus packages will cause the recovery to sputter. He also said that it may take between five and seven years for some countries to return to “normalcy,” whatever that is.
Next week I will make my annual trek to Davos for the World Economic Forum. I will be tweeting during the week and I will post my findings from the event on this blog -- most likely the week after.
I always go to Davos with a simple survey question that I ask everyone I meet with. Last year the question was: "When will the recession end?" The answers ranged widely, but averaged to April, 2010 (in retrospect, too gloomy).
For this year I'm considering: "What is your number one priority for the next two years?" But that feels way too vanilla.
So if you could ask a worldwide group of CEOs, political leaders, artists, philanthropists, entrepreneurs, academics, and media leaders one question, what would it be? I'd love to get your ideas.
In case you didn't see it, check out the excellent interview with Gordon Bethune, ex-CEO of Continental Airlines, in last Sunday's New York Times. I'm not sure why such an apparently high-performing leader would be attracted to the perennially low-performing airline business, but Bethune successfully lead Continental from 1994 to 2004.
For me, Bethune embodies what Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, called "level five leaders" -- CEOs who are self-effacing, quiet but aggressive, always ready to "share the stage" with their employees. These are traits that will be at a premium as companies (particularly financial services firms) re-build trust with their customers, employees, and society at large, post-recession.
Here are the things I liked in 2009. I thought they might spark ideas for Christmas presents, or guide others to useful resources. A note about all of this. What I’ve written below are the opinions of one person (me) and do not in any way reflect the research, conclusions, analysis, or survey work of Forrester.
Here's my list:
1) The Breville Toaster. If Apple designed a toaster, this would be it. Intuitive, easy to use, dependable, smart. Perfect appliance for a nerd like me.
2) The Amazon Kindle. I’ve got two of them, both Kindle 2s. I love them for five reasons: 1) I can get my newspapers in seconds when I travel, 2) I can read on a plane while I eat my bad airline food – it is small enough to fit on my table along with my food tray, 3) I’ve got all my books with me all the time – keeping my underling and notes at my fingertips, 4) My reading time has increased, and 5) My backpack is lighter. Yes, I miss the feel and texture of my books, but the Kindle's advantages outweigh tradition.
4) Amazing business cycle graphic from the New York Times. Being in the research business I’m always looking for simple but powerful ways to reveal complex data. This graphic was excellent on paper, but even more thought-provoking in its interactive form. The conclusions were sobering -- showing that this recession is comparatively severe compared with down turns of the last 30 years. Stunning.
I don't know about you, but I am developing a major inferiority complex as I contemplate the achievements of Steve Jobs. In a decade that has been punishing and humbling for most CEOs, Steve has conjured victory after victory from the whole cloth of his vision, imagination, and singular focus on excellence. I am in complete agreement with Fortune Magazine's assessment that he is the "CEO of the Decade." -- I was already taking note back in 2004.
When confronted with a problem, a new favorite question of CEOs is: "What would Steve do?"
Don't get me wrong -- there will be many useful lessons from the Steve Jobs/Apple repertoire -- I expect a few great books will take on the task of revealing them. So I'll leave that to others. But let's ask another question -- what shouldn't we learn from Steve Jobs?
1) His lessons don't work in business to business environments. Apple innovates for consumers who do not have complex systems problems and who don't talk back. Steve likes to do it his way without interference or meddling. His strategy breaks down when he has to cooperate with others or make compromises for customers, or develop products that must fit into a wider, systemic world. You'll see evidence of this as Apple tries to negotiate with a widening set of independently-minded wireless service providers.
Quickly: If you are a CEO in the media industry, you must move your company through three stages.
Content: I was shocked when I heard that Conde Nast was shuttering Gourmet Magazine after 68 years of operation. Gourmet had 900,000 subscribers, with total readership of approximately six million. Yes, advertising revenue was off 30%, but clearly Gourmet was a brand and franchise that was destined to morph into an Internet beehive of content, social sharing of travel and food tips, community, and close affinity. And they were on their way with 8,000 Facebook friends, 22,000 followers for editor Ruth Reichl on Twittter, and a YouTube channel. Gourmet could have and should have become the upscale Grand Dame sister of Epicurious.com, Conde Nast's successful recipe site. Why didn't the company get this?
Because much of Conde Nast is stuck in media meltdown.