Comments for Strategy Land http://www.strategyland.com Richard Rumelt's Web Journal on Good and Bad Strategy in Business, Politics, and Economics Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:29:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 Comment on The Flash of Insight by Richard Rumelt http://www.strategyland.com/2011/the-flash-of-insight/#comment-147 Richard Rumelt Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:29:04 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1096#comment-147 Mike, you are certainly right that"thinking hard" isn't the answer. What we do know is that insight into which of many solutions is best comes from experience---that is, practice at recognizing patterns of factors and the ability to quickly eliminate unproductive alternatives. On the other hand, finding a novel solution to a problem seems to follow from attacking it over and over again, trying to see it from a variety of different perspectives and angles. Not "thinking hard" per se, but not just sleeping on it either. Of course each of us has different tricks and pathways to insight. My own tends to be trying to explain something to another person or even to an audience. Sometimes I find that the "solution" just pops out of my mouth while I am talking. Mike, you are certainly right that”thinking hard” isn’t the answer. What we do know is that insight into which of many solutions is best comes from experience—that is, practice at recognizing patterns of factors and the ability to quickly eliminate unproductive alternatives. On the other hand, finding a novel solution to a problem seems to follow from attacking it over and over again, trying to see it from a variety of different perspectives and angles. Not “thinking hard” per se, but not just sleeping on it either. Of course each of us has different tricks and pathways to insight. My own tends to be trying to explain something to another person or even to an audience. Sometimes I find that the “solution” just pops out of my mouth while I am talking.

]]> Comment on The Flash of Insight by Mike Lowery http://www.strategyland.com/2011/the-flash-of-insight/#comment-146 Mike Lowery Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:04:43 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1096#comment-146 I enjoyed this article a lot. however I'm not so sure thinking hard can often provide the answer. Thinking really hard to very clearly identify the problem yes. Then it's about doing the opposite and letting the connections do their thing. As Len Potts once said, if you tell a kid to think excessively hard they'll either have a hernia or pass wind. I loved that. His key was to think easy. He said that the best and most creative ideas came between 1/2 and 1 beer - or while asleep. So, think hard to identify and understand the problem then think easy. I'll be interested in how that fits into the science of not. I enjoyed this article a lot. however I’m not so sure thinking hard can often provide the answer. Thinking really hard to very clearly identify the problem yes. Then it’s about doing the opposite and letting the connections do their thing. As Len Potts once said, if you tell a kid to think excessively hard they’ll either have a hernia or pass wind. I loved that. His key was to think easy. He said that the best and most creative ideas came between 1/2 and 1 beer – or while asleep. So, think hard to identify and understand the problem then think easy. I’ll be interested in how that fits into the science of not.

]]> Comment on Apple and Steve Jobs by Trevor http://www.strategyland.com/2011/apple-and-steve-jobs/#comment-144 Trevor Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:57:07 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1285#comment-144 Today's announcement for the education sector for the provision of text books at $14.99 to students via the iBooks2 app on iPads simply extends Apple's new strategy - selling excellent integrated content, apps and devices. In this case they have stayed with one of their original markets - education and academia. Today’s announcement for the education sector for the provision of text books at $14.99 to students via the iBooks2 app on iPads simply extends Apple’s new strategy – selling excellent integrated content, apps and devices. In this case they have stayed with one of their original markets – education and academia.

]]> Comment on Apple and Steve Jobs by Trevor http://www.strategyland.com/2011/apple-and-steve-jobs/#comment-143 Trevor Mon, 02 Jan 2012 21:04:15 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1285#comment-143 No denying that Jobs was a master when it came to excellent design - his trademark over the past 25 years. However, the recent financial success did not come only from excellent product design. This time around it also came from selling content - music and apps/content - through an ecommerce cloud to the excellent devices. In the early days of Apple the mass market content was missing and excellent devices and proprietary software was simply not enough. So I would contend that Apple's recent strategy has been to create a mass-market content platform that is seamlessly integrated to and fully leverageso its "core business" - the design of excellent devices. It also is for this reason that its competitors are struggling to keep up. As competitors rapidly copy the device innovations it will interesting to see whether Apple can also maintain a content lead as its point of differentiation, and whether post-Jobs it becomes a second "core business". No denying that Jobs was a master when it came to excellent design – his trademark over the past 25 years. However, the recent financial success did not come only from excellent product design.

This time around it also came from selling content – music and apps/content – through an ecommerce cloud to the excellent devices. In the early days of Apple the mass market content was missing and excellent devices and proprietary software was simply not enough.

So I would contend that Apple’s recent strategy has been to create a mass-market content platform that is seamlessly integrated to and fully leverageso its “core business” – the design of excellent devices. It also is for this reason that its competitors are struggling to keep up. As competitors rapidly copy the device innovations it will interesting to see whether Apple can also maintain a content lead as its point of differentiation, and whether post-Jobs it becomes a second “core business”.

]]> Comment on Apple and Steve Jobs by Richard Rumelt http://www.strategyland.com/2011/apple-and-steve-jobs/#comment-142 Richard Rumelt Mon, 02 Jan 2012 06:20:33 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1285#comment-142 No two ways about it, he was not nice. One way to look at his focus on "taste" is that he served as Apple's internal customer. Everyone there had to satisfy him, not just the marketing department or a consumer research consultant. No two ways about it, he was not nice. One way to look at his focus on “taste” is that he served as Apple’s internal customer.
Everyone there had to satisfy him, not just the marketing department or a consumer research consultant.

]]> Comment on Apple and Steve Jobs by James Mann http://www.strategyland.com/2011/apple-and-steve-jobs/#comment-141 James Mann Mon, 02 Jan 2012 04:54:59 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1285#comment-141 Steve Jobs was focused on his tastes. The look and the feel has to suit him, but what was is input? What I have been able to read, Steve improved things, things that others had come up with. He was not an ideas man, but would present these to the world as his creations and that these are unlike anything else. The Apple computer was the only things that was "unlike anything else" at that time, but the iPhone came after mobile phones, the iPad came after the tablet. Steve just repackaged these and told the world they were totally new. Steve Jobs was a salesman, not technical and not truely creative. He was into himself and thought he knew it all. Well he missed the boat with IBM, Windows, GUI, LISA, NEXT. He built his fortune by standing on the shoulders of others. But like so many men that have made it, they try so hard to tell us that it was all their own doing. It is all fine and go to tell people you want the best from them, that we can change the world, but recogize their part in the results. Did Steve develop the hardware and software at Pixar -NO. He pushed people to do better and claimed the credit for himself. What ever Steve was into, the purpose was to be able to use it to get want he wanted. His life is dotted with people that tell the same story of a man uses people to get what he wants. Apple must now not try to emulate him, but deliver on the sales babble - deliver to the customer something that works, looks good and easy to use. This approach could be used with TV's, remote controls, Clocks, etc - just look at what is packed into a TV remote and ask yourself can everyone use this easily? So Apple has a wealth of future products. Steve Jobs was focused on his tastes. The look and the feel has to suit him, but what was is input? What I have been able to read, Steve improved things, things that others had come up with. He was not an ideas man, but would present these to the world as his creations and that these are unlike anything else. The Apple computer was the only things that was “unlike anything else” at that time, but the iPhone came after mobile phones, the iPad came after the tablet. Steve just repackaged these and told the world they were totally new. Steve Jobs was a salesman, not technical and not truely creative.

He was into himself and thought he knew it all. Well he missed the boat with IBM, Windows, GUI, LISA, NEXT. He built his fortune by standing on the shoulders of others. But like so many men that have made it, they try so hard to tell us that it was all their own doing.

It is all fine and go to tell people you want the best from them, that we can change the world, but recogize their part in the results. Did Steve develop the hardware and software at Pixar -NO. He pushed people to do better and claimed the credit for himself.

What ever Steve was into, the purpose was to be able to use it to get want he wanted. His life is dotted with people that tell the same story of a man uses people to get what he wants.

Apple must now not try to emulate him, but deliver on the sales babble – deliver to the customer something that works, looks good and easy to use. This approach could be used with TV’s, remote controls, Clocks, etc – just look at what is packed into a TV remote and ask yourself can everyone use this easily? So Apple has a wealth of future products.

]]> Comment on We Need to Rebuild the Internet by edubergeek http://www.strategyland.com/2011/rebuild-the-internet/#comment-140 edubergeek Sat, 10 Dec 2011 21:35:28 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1226#comment-140 In my <a href="http://edubergeek.blogspot.com/2011/12/threat-of-internet-anonymity.html" rel="nofollow">view</a>, the root cause of the Internet anonymity problem arises from the adoption of NAT in the 1990s to address the exhaustion of Internet (IPv4) addresses coupled with the inherent design assumption of trust by core Internet protocols such as DNS, ICMP, BGP and SMTP . The widespread use of NAT with IPv4 across the Internet today and resultant inability to identify the endpoints of a packet of data traversing the Internet with a person provides impunity for hackers and other cybercriminals. The new Internet addressing protocol known as IPv6 could potentially replace IPv4 and eliminate the need for NAT. Whether it will do so has more to do with socioeconomic barriers to change and leadership than the technology involved. - Curt Dodds In my view, the root cause of the Internet anonymity problem arises from the adoption of NAT in the 1990s to address the exhaustion of Internet (IPv4) addresses coupled with the inherent design assumption of trust by core Internet protocols such as DNS, ICMP, BGP and SMTP . The widespread use of NAT with IPv4 across the Internet today and resultant inability to identify the endpoints of a packet of data traversing the Internet with a person provides impunity for hackers and other cybercriminals. The new Internet addressing protocol known as IPv6 could potentially replace IPv4 and eliminate the need for NAT. Whether it will do so has more to do with socioeconomic barriers to change and leadership than the technology involved.

- Curt Dodds

]]> Comment on Is Management “About People?” by Sainul http://www.strategyland.com/2011/is-management-about-people/#comment-139 Sainul Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:14:36 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=859#comment-139 I agree with the Professor. Many people are still sticking to the legacy thought that management means "people management" and I think, unless we remove that fallacy, the motivation-factor will continue getting attention and resultant claps. People management is simply one aspect or may be even just an option for management discipline. The core of management is plan, do, check and action as holistic and to accomplish it, one needs to set right strategy, create right process, provide the right empowerment and enable the right tools. Gone are the days where manager was supposed to be like a foreman to get the most out from the labors. Thanks to Professor for such a different insights. I may be wrong in elaboration, would appreciate Professor's feedback too. I agree with the Professor. Many people are still sticking to the legacy thought that management means “people management” and I think, unless we remove that fallacy, the motivation-factor will continue getting attention and resultant claps. People management is simply one aspect or may be even just an option for management discipline. The core of management is plan, do, check and action as holistic and to accomplish it, one needs to set right strategy, create right process, provide the right empowerment and enable the right tools. Gone are the days where manager was supposed to be like a foreman to get the most out from the labors.
Thanks to Professor for such a different insights. I may be wrong in elaboration, would appreciate Professor’s feedback too.

]]> Comment on On Goals and Strategy by Greg Armstrong http://www.strategyland.com/2011/curtiss-wright/#comment-136 Greg Armstrong Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:14:43 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1038#comment-136 The points you make are immediately relevant not just to business, but also to the work aid agencies, and their partners, whether they are NGOs or national governments, try to do in clarifying their long term, mid term and short term results, using results-based management. In theory, agencies such as USAID, CIDA, DFID or the UN organizations use logic models, to test the relationships between development problems, changes or results intended to alleviate the problem, how to get there, and how to measure progress. But in practice, as I have found in working with them, they often do not test, or even agree upon assumptions in three important areas: a) Assumptions about the original problem, and its causes; b) Assumptions about change processes, or what reason they have to think that a given action is likely to lead to a change; and c) Assumptions about the situation, about what other actors will need to do, to increase the likelihood that an action will actually produce a change. Testing what assumptions partners have about these issues is important in developing a workable, realistic development project or programme - what I think you have described as strategic objectives that will "reflect an understanding of the forces at work and seek a balance between what is desired and what is possible". The points you make are immediately relevant not just to business, but also to the work aid agencies, and their partners, whether they are NGOs or national governments, try to do in clarifying their long term, mid term and short term results, using results-based management.

In theory, agencies such as USAID, CIDA, DFID or the UN organizations use logic models, to test the relationships between development problems, changes or results intended to alleviate the problem, how to get there, and how to measure progress. But in practice, as I have found in working with them, they often do not test, or even agree upon assumptions in three important areas:

a) Assumptions about the original problem, and its causes;
b) Assumptions about change processes, or what reason they have to think that a given action is likely to lead to a change; and
c) Assumptions about the situation, about what other actors will need to do, to increase the likelihood that an action will actually produce a change.

Testing what assumptions partners have about these issues is important in developing a workable, realistic development project or programme – what I think you have described as strategic objectives that will “reflect an understanding of the forces at work and seek a balance between what is desired and what is possible”.

]]> Comment on Apple and Steve Jobs by Sarchis Dolmanian aka Better Failling http://www.strategyland.com/2011/apple-and-steve-jobs/#comment-135 Sarchis Dolmanian aka Better Failling Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:24:42 +0000 http://www.strategyland.com/?p=1285#comment-135 This man had several major contributions: He helped develop small scale computing into what we have today – his first stint at Apple. He helped transform the way motion pictures are made today – Pixar. He helped transform the way modern computers “think” – NeXT And yet he is mostly renowned for how he managed the marketing of i-gadgets: i-pod, i-phone and i-pad. To me it is equally baffling how Apple's significant financial success came only after the marketing of ‘toys’ and didn't occur 25 years ago, when it was selling the best computers available at that time. This man had several major contributions:
He helped develop small scale computing into what we have today – his first stint at Apple.
He helped transform the way motion pictures are made today – Pixar.
He helped transform the way modern computers “think” – NeXT
And yet he is mostly renowned for how he managed the marketing of i-gadgets: i-pod, i-phone and i-pad.
To me it is equally baffling how Apple’s significant financial success came only after the marketing of ‘toys’ and didn’t occur 25 years ago, when it was selling the best computers available at that time.

]]>