4. June 2008 by Rick Abbott.

I just finished reading the book “Beyond Band of Brothers - The War Memoirs of Major Dick Winters”, and wanted to share Dick’s list of ten leadership principles.  I’m a big fan of military stories, and have read the book and have seen the mini-series “Band of Brothers” multiple times.  There are examples of each of these principals throughout the story, but this is the first time I’ve seen them listed in one place.   Everyone can benefit from becoming a better leader, both in your professional and personal lives.

1. Strive to be a leader of character, competence, and courage.
2. Lead from the front.  Say, “Follow Me!” and then lead the way.
3. Stay in top physical shape- physical stamina is the root of mental toughness.
4. Develop your team.  If you know your people, are fair in setting realistic goals and expectations, and lead by example, you will develop teamwork.
5. Delegate responsibility to your subordinates and let them do their jobs.  You can’t do a good job if you don’t have a chance to use your imagination or your creativity.
6. Anticipate problems and prepare to overcome obstacles.  Don’t wait until you get to the top of the ridge and then make up your mind.
7. Remain humble.  Don’t worry about who receives the credit.  Never let power or authority go to your head.
8. take a moment of self-reflection.  Look at yourself in the mirror every night and ask yourself if you did your best.
9. True satisfaction comes from getting the job done.  The key to a successful leader is to earn respect-not because of rank or position, but because you are a leader of character.
10. Hang Tough!-Never, ever, give up.

Posted in Personal, Technical Focus, Business Focus | No Comments »

4. June 2008 by Rick Abbott.

Corporate Performance Management (CPM) and Business Performance Management (BPM) have gained significant visibility in the past 5 years.  Although there are purists that would argue these are different, I’m lumping them together because from an consumer perspective I don’t think there are appreciable differences.  Dashboards have also gotten a lot of press recently, and often gets lumped into the CPM discussion.  But I see dashboards as an implementation option within a larger CPM initiative.

So what is CPM/BPM?  Essentially, it’s using metrics and KPIs to measure and improve the business.  A successful CPM solution must be driven from the executive ranks down through the business to technology.  It’s DOA if it starts in IT, and has little chance when germinating within a particular business unit such as Finance.  The reason for this is simple: the goal of CPM is to improve the business by taking measurements at various levels (starting at the top), setting thresholds, and managing to exceptions.   Now I don’t necessarily agree with this approach to running a business, particularly if this is presented as the silver bullet.  This approach often fosters a very reactive culture within the business, but coupled with executive direction and sponsorship, and properly defined non-punitive measures, CPM can provide significant visibility into the operations of the organization.

That being said, I can’t stress enough the importance of not driving this from the IT side of the house.  Particularly insidious is the temptation to follow vendor claims of implementing a CPM solution (usually just a tricked out dashboard).  If the executive suite doesn’t buy in and drive this, the technical solution is a moot point.

Posted in Industry Buzzwords, Business Focus | 1 Comment »

26. May 2008 by Rick Abbott.

I was once a firm believer of the SVT concept, and I still believe in the fundamental principals.  But it’s not as cut and dried as people make it out to be.

On it’s face, a SVT seems to be a noble goal.  Who doesn’t support the truth, right?  The problem is, who defines what the truth really is, and in this case “the truth” maybe different depending on your audience.  I’ll give you a simplistic example: who is your customer, where are they located, and how valuable are they to your company? If you’re in sales, the customer is the one who made the decision to buy your company’s product and pays the bill.  If you’re in engineering or customer support, the customer is the person using your product and is requesting service enhancements or technical support.  That’s the easy part, determining the value of the customer is more difficult, and involves a number of variables that may or may not apply depending on where you sit within the organization.

These are certainly not insurmountable issues by any stretch, but they underscore the nuance required in getting to the “truth”.

Posted in Industry Buzzwords, Business Focus | No Comments »

13. May 2008 by Rick Abbott.

For the majority of data management initiatives I’ve seen that have failed to meet expectations, most of have resulted from a lack of strategic planning.  I’m not talking about big picture strategic planning akin to a McKinsey or Bain effort.  The strategy effort I’m talking about involves surveying the business to determine if, where, and how to deploy a data solution, then setting the parameters that will guide the technical implementation (assuming the decision is made to go forward).  My sense is that this step is skipped for one of two reasons:

1. Management isn’t aware of this step in the process
2. The perception of a “strategy process”, particularly within IT, is of a costly, long drawn out affair that produces zero value while killing numerous trees

Both of these issues can be overcome via education.  The most powerful message is that a data centric strategy does not need to take months nor cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.  For most small to midsized businesses, and even for business units of larger corporations, the strategic direction can be formulated with one working session between business and IT representatives, with follow ups via e-mail and conference call/web meeting.  The most important decision, go/no-go, should be obvious to all participants at the conclusion of the working session based on the opportunities identified and the readiness of both business and technical groups to take on an initiative of this magnitude.  Assuming the decision is to go forward, the project team should have the data required to formulate a business plan and roadmap, which can be refined and finalized without the need for another time consuming all-hands meeting.

For more details download my white paper (Data Integration Strategy).

Posted in Technical Focus, Business Focus | 1 Comment »

12. May 2008 by Rick Abbott.

I ended Part 1with the excerpt stating that CEOs and other senior management need to take an active role in defining the analytical and data warehouse strategy for their companies.  I thought this was an important statement in that I’ve never read a business book that has advocated that level of intimacy between the executive ranks and data management initiatives.  But it underscores the importance the authors give to analytics in driving innovation.

In the first post, I talked about the key elements of the “House of Innovation”, including the importance of flexible business processes that connect N=1 and R=G.  The key concept here is that it’s not enough for a company to define their business processes - they need to determine how their processes will change to satisfy the demands of N=1.  And the key driver to this change is real-time analytical capabilities.  According to the authors, it’s not enough to implement the current approach of collecting data periodically in a large repository to be analyzed at a later date.  Analytics need to be embedded within the business processes, providing insight to managers as they make decisions on what and how to produce, and how to align resources.

From a technical perspective, this is equivalent to business activity monitoring (BAM), which has been around for 8+ years (that I know of).  It involves putting sensors and other monitoring devices (both hardware and software) into machines and applications, and feeding that information flow directly into decision support systems used by line managers.  The authors also touch on the need to pull together (in a batch process) disparate data to form a 360 degree customer view.  This forms the framework for integrating and understanding the real-time information flow. 

The problem I have with all of this is that the authors make two large and broad assumptions - that data quality is not a problem, and integrating data into a repository is relatively easy.  One the one hand I understand their not wanting to get into a technical discussion around cleansing and integrating data.  But in the majority of large companies, this is the number 1 technical issue (I’m conveniently lumping these two issues together, even though they’re two separate steps).  So in assuming away these two issues, they’re removing a prime contributor to both effort and risk associated with implementing.

All in all, I enjoyed reading the book, and gained a new perspective on the importance of data management in driving business innovation. Although I have issues with the implementation aspects of their theories, I agree with the business side of their argument.  And of course it was nice to get some props from the business world for the importance of analytics in driving business innovation.

Bottom line - this is a must read book for anyone in the data management arena (e.g., BI, DW, data integration).

Posted in Technical Focus, Business Focus | 1 Comment »

8. May 2008 by Rick Abbott.

I just finished reading the book, and wanted to provide my thoughts in general (in this post) and on the analytics theme that runs throughout the book (in a subsequent posting).  The authors are C.K. Prahalad and M.S. Krishnan, both professors at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan.

The authors present the “House of Innovation” as the framework to support their views on innovation.  The “house” has the following components:

1. The foundation is the “technical architecture of the firm”
2. The two pillars, “Personalize co-created experiences” (N=1) and “Global access to resouces and talent” (R=G)
   • N=1 states that companies should be co-creating products and services with their customers that reflect the individual tastes of each customer.
   • R=G states that no company has all the in-house resources to provide N=1. Therefore companies need to gain access to a diverse set of resources that can be assembled quickly to meet variable work loads.
3. The roof is the “Social architecture of the firm”
4. The glue that holds everything together, and the real focus of the book, is the “flexible and resillient business processes and focused analytics”

First we’ll discuss the two pillars, then touch on the business processes.  The analytics piece I’ll leave for another post.

The concept of N=1 as presented in this book is not the same as mass customization (e.g., Dell), but refers to true co-creation of a unique product or service in conjunction with each customer.  The authors give several examples in the book, the most compelling (to me anyway) being ICICI Prudential, an Indian insurance company.  ICICI is testing an insurance product where they adjust premiums for diabetic patients on a frequent basis (every 2-4 weeks) based on test results and compliance with doctor recommendations formulated from the test results.  The benefits to the company and patients are obvious: risk is determined at an individual patent level and premiums are set accordingly.  The company gains increased visibility into the risk within their insurance portfolio, and the customers who follow the diet and medication recommendations benefit from not only reduced premiums but from (presumably) better overall health.  The authors also bring up the question “Is this an insurance or health product?”  The answer in my mind is both - moving to N=1 allows the company to leverage existing capabilities to generate new revenue streams.  However, this example highlights the potential roadblock to N=1, namely that it requires significantly more personal information.  Given the current backlash around lost and stolen personal data, this could be as much of a hurdle to N=1 as the organizational, process, and technology challenges, which are significant.

R=G is all about finding the right resources, both internal and external to the company.  The authors make it clear this is not limited to outsourcing, although this should be a piece of the puzzle.  They stress the need to leverage all forms of external resources, including traditional avenues such as outsourcing and partnerships, but also individuals with critical skill sets.  One example is a bank in India organizing groups of village women to manage micro-loans to the local inhabitants.  The key take away here, as stated by the authors, is “the focus is on access to resources, not ownership of resources”.  I think the primary impediment to implementing this model today is getting the corporate management team to come to terms with the associated loss of control.

The concept of N=1 and R=G are not ground breaking in their own right, as there are numerous examples of both in play today.  I think the most novel and potentially benefical ideas in the book are on business processes and analytics.

The most important concept presented in the book is that business processes should be fluid in order to orchestrate adjustments to both N=1 and R=G, with real-time analytics serving as the GPS.  The authors make it clear that this has nothing to do with the ’80s re-engineering that attempted to streamline business processes for efficiency.  They also stress that it’s not enough to determine what your business processes are today.  You need to put in place the capability, via social and technical architectures, to change the business processes on the fly.  Going forward, the adaptable business process (and associated analytics) will be the most important asset for a company.

I’ll leave you with this quote from the book, as a teaser for my next post on analytics:

“CEOs and line managers cannot delegate strategic decisions on the business applications, analytic capabilities, and data warehousing.  It is the business applications and the analytics engine that form the backbone of the business process architecture.” (pg 240)

Posted in Business Focus | 1 Comment »

23. April 2008 by Rick Abbott.

I read an interesting story in the Washington Post business section today, discussing the use of “microtargeting” in the current presidential election.  The author received input from a guy name Colin Shearer who works for SPSS.  They described the process of identifying “small but crucial groups of voters who might be won over to a given side…”.  This sounds similar to what corporations have been doing (or trying to do) for years, by targeting small groups or even individuals with tailored product or service offerings.  It would be interesting to know how effective this tactic has been in the current primaries, particularly the Democratic run-off.

I’m not sure that putting sophisticated marketing analytic tools in the hands of politicians (or more accurately in the hands of their campaign managers) is a good thing.  As the article points out, this capability increases the likelihood of deception since they presumably know much more about the target audience and can target associated hot buttons.  But I suppose as consumers we’ve all grown accustomed to the daily marketing barrage, and hopefully can see through these attempts.  After all, the stakes are significantly higher than the risk of purchasing the wrong shampoo.

Posted in Business Focus | No Comments »

17. April 2008 by Rick Abbott.

What is a 360° View of the Customer, and why is it important?  First we’ll talk about the benefits of painting a complete picture of your customer, and then we’ll talk about how to go about making this happen.

The benefits of a customer centric approach can be organized along the lines of customer acquisition and expansion, customer retention, and operational efficiency. 

Customer acquisition and expansion are generally the domain of marketing and sales working in tandem.  The benefits to marketing revolve primarily around the ability to segment customers into groups to allow them to tailor their messages.  Using information such as current products and services, past purchase history, financial and other attributes, marketing can target the most profitable customers and even exclude customers that are likely to be unprofitable.  Sales is generally more interested in having all the information for a single customer at their finger tips.  This helps them plan out their sales calls, pull together proposals and bids, and respond to customer inquiries.

Customer retention should be a joint effort between customer service, marketing, and sales.  But it often falls into the lap of customer service, who like sales is usually most interested in having all information for a particular customer.  They primarily use this in a reactive mode, while fielding calls from customers wanting to change service or resolve a problem.  However, one of the primary benefits to a complete customer view is the ability to be proactive by linking events to a particular customer, and even tailoring the level of response based on the status level of the customer (e.g., Gold level customers get priority).

Operational efficiency is usually the purview of the finance group, although all functional areas are impacted, particularly when budget cutting time rolls around.  Finance is most interested in profitability and other monetary metrics around the customer, usually at a segment level or across the entire customer base.  This information can be used to drive business expansion plans, advise marketing and sales on high value customer segments, and provide management insights into the overall health of the business via trending.

The technical solution revolves around the key data elements that make up your customer profile, such as contact information, transaction, financial, and interaction data.  There are a number of tools (e.g., Siperian Hub) available today that are marketed under the category of “Customer Data Integration”.  These tools provide a common data model, data cleansing, integration, change management and other related capabilities.  You can also use more general purpose tools such as Enterprise Information Integration (EII) or Extract, Transform, and Load (ETL) tools to integrate the data, either virtually or explicitly.  But be careful of the vendor promise to deliver this on a platter.  The critical effort will be determining the high-value benefits and engaging the business in crafting the solution.

For a more detailed discussion on this subject, download my white paper 360 Degree Customer View. 

Posted in Business Focus | 1 Comment »