http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/wiresandlights/index.php/australian-it/comments/technology_isnt_strategy/
Who needs a blog, when you can get trained journalists to pick the best bits from multiple posts on this mailing list :) On Oct 25, 12:05 pm, "Elias Bizannes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Great words Gents. > A few thoughts to add > - "Technology should never drive strategy". At my firm (PwC) this was > hammered into me when I rolled out a technology in my capacity as an > intrapreneur. At first I questioned why these hardened innovators in > management watching over me would say this. And in part, I have come to > accept it because it's like building something because it's the latest, > prettiest thing. (That's wrong.) > > But I think something can be said about that the other way, and that is > marrying it up with the other discussion we had, about evolving your > product[1]. As you will read in a post I wrote [2], I'm convinced of the > power of the unexpected. You need to drop a technology onto a userbase, and > let them experiment an evolve. Give them the potential to do something - > things you never thought they needed - and watch them take to it. Technology > can help drive innovation through (accidental) imagination, which in turn > can drive strategy. > > I suppose I wish to add to the wisdom that technology should not drive > strategy, that you should build technology that is flexible - as the users > will evolve it and help you modify your strategy. Think of Twitters text box > or a wiki's free text to add macros - the freedom for the user to write what > they want enables them to create new uses of the technology. For example, > users putting @ turned twitter from a presence/status type technology to a > new form of communication. > > - Margin. This is a great point. That's exacty how my firm operates - we > monitor margin on projects, and get evaluated on that. The way to think of > margin, is how much additional cash do you get to contribute to the bottom > line. > > So say you sell widgets for $100; they cost $49 in variable costs. > Therefore, you now have $51 that you can contribute to your overheads - > things that indirectly help the production of the widgets (like management > costs, rent to house the engineers, etc). When you evaluate your customers > and perform a Customer Profitability Analysis, you should be ranking your > customers in priority on who generates the better margin. This is how we > make decisions about what clients we take on - we might make $500k more on a > big name client, but we might choose against it because it will mean a > reduced margin, eating up our resources & talent for potentially better > margin jobs. Similarly, when you are building features for your service, > prioritise them to suit the customers that generate the most margin for you. > For most startups, that simply means revenue, but once you get off the > start-up blocks and into growth mode, you need to start getting picky > because we all have finite resources...and once again, all economics is is > the study about the efficient allocation of resources :) > > [1]http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/browse_thread/... > > [2] > <http://liako.biz/2007/12/search-email-and-wikis-are-the-catalyst-for-...>http://liako.biz/2007/12/search-email-and-wikis-are-the-catalyst-for-... > > > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Mark Neely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Nick, > > > Good to see you popping your head up again! > > > I just finished an interesting project working with a client to review + > > revise their online B2B + B2C strategy. In putting together the final > > documentation, I had to crystalise a lot of meetings, discussions + > > thinking > > into (too) few pages, but that process generated some gems, which I wanted > > to share here (I'll be blogging about them shortly). > > > Gem 1. To establish and maintain distinctive strategic positioning, a > > company must start with the right goal: superior long-term return on > > investment. It is not about having the best technology, or the most > > creative > > or innovative employees, the hottest idea or the most users. These > > attributes represent only part of the bigger picture of what is required to > > successfully compete. > > > As Nick points out, generating revenue (a very uncomplicated and 'hard' > > metric for demonstrating ROI) is a key requirement. But revenue is also > > only > > part of the picture. The true measure is margin. Chasing revenue for the > > sake of revenue can be extremely detrimental (I call it the 'myth of market > > share'). What really matters is how much of that revenue represents profit > > (i.e. nett of fixed and variable costs). > > > Gem 2. There are lots of different viewpoints when it comes to describing > > what strategy is, and how it is developed (any day now I am waiting to see > > the latest guru lob a book into the New York Times best-seller list on how > > to develop strategy using chicken entrails...). But, at its simplest, > > strategy boils down to this: strategy is the process of taking informed > > action to achieve a specific vision or overarching objective for a business > > enterprise. > > > Gem 3. Technology isn't strategy. Technology cannot, in and of itself, > > generate sustainable competitive advantage (it is too easily imitated). > > Technology is *only* an enabler of strategy. It can, however, be used to > > generate unique insight into the different types (segments) of consumers > > for > > your product/service, and what those segments want from your products or > > services. > > > Gem 4. The value a company creates is measured by the amount purchasers are > > willing to pay for a product/service. A business is profitable if the value > > it creates exceeds the cost of producing the product or performing the > > service. The key to extracting a premium price (i.e. higher margin) is > > maximising the perceived value of its product/service in the eyes of > > purchasers (i.e. implementing technology-driven customer insight around > > what > > your customers 'value' most in your product/service). > > > Food for discussion, I hope. > > > Regards, > > > Mark > > > ----- > > Mark Neely > > Master Strategist > > Infolution Pty Ltd > > 'Beyond Strategy. Leading Change' > > > e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > m: +61 (0)412 0417 29 > > skype: mark.neely > > > Read my blogs -->www.infolution.com.au > > www.neelyready.com > > Connect on LinkedIn -->www.linkedin.com/in/markneely > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of nickgonios > > Sent: Friday, 24 October 2008 6:57 AM > > To: Silicon Beach Australia > > Subject: [SiliconBeach] Revenues, revenues, revenues > > > To all my fellow Silicon Beachers > > > I have been sitting on the sidelines for far too long listening to all > > these > > great conversations on this vibrant Aussie group. > > > It's about time I got on share my thoughts, opinions, etc but I have been > > too busy working hard (very hard) to manage 3eep's business activities few > > the last few months. There have been a lot of interesting topics and > > related debates about some of the more expected items to be discussed on a > > group of this nature. One that has not really been covered has been the > > fundamental premise around revenue generation. > > > In these changing times, revenue generation (for those ventures that are > > EBIT driven plays vs infrastructure) its paramount that you are clearly > > focused on understanding how you are REALLY going to generate revenues. > > You > > should not be waiting to just build a great product, build an audience or > > community and then consider how revenues play a role in your venture but > > should be making revenues an integral part of how your product or service > > is > > going to add value to a small focused group of your target market. Too > > many > > people I have seen have been treating this area of their business on the > > side and believe they will deal with it at the appropriate time. From an > > investors' perspective, the sooner you can demonstrate a microcosm of > > audience/community usage and some form of financial value is exchanged to > > both this group and your venture as a "closed loop" the better! > > > In today's market and conditions, I am strongly recommending this to all > > entrepreneurs that I speak with. For some this is not a natural ability > > because they are either web development, designers, product oriented and > > selling (or understanding how to commercialise) their venture comes second > > or left to those "commercial/bus dev guys" that they plan to hire later. > > Sorry but a big no no for me. > > > Put simply, demonstrate a "microcosm of commercial value" and your are on > > the 1st step of business success! > > > Nick Gonios > > 3eep > > -- > Elias Bizanneshttp://liako.biz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Silicon Beach Australia" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
