So somebody was asking me the other day, “What’s the deal with these large tech companies? As soon as they get to a certain age and/or size, they all seem to go into ‘crisis’ mode…“
My reply was, well, when you think about it, these large companies are in most ways very fortunate. They have lots of money, lots of smart people working for them, lots of combined knowledge, and lots of material capital to build other stuff with.
i.e. The have lots of capital– human, financial, intellectual, technical etc etc.
But they will also have a lot of baggage. Lots and lots of different entrenched positions to defend. Thousands of them.
So they way I see it, their problem isn’t “material”. Their problem is CULTURAL.
It’s not the sum of their parts that is the problem; it’s the way human beings relate with each other, interact with each other, that is causing the problem.
i.e. Often with tech companies, we wrongly blame the problems on the tech itself. As with all things commercial, it’s the people that matter.
[UPDATE:] One of my favorite marketing writers, my friend, Mark Earls left a comment below:
Great post, mate. And spot on.
I find it striking that all the different kinds of managers I meet in all kinds of different sectors still prefer to describe and draw their businesses as if they were a machine or some technical thing at least; how they prefer technical sounding strategies and definitions of their challenges (“the business planning process” etc) to the honest acceptance that the reason why all businesses are tricky beasts is that they’re built on, with and by humans.
Of course, it’d be easier if businesses were more like machines but they’re not. And if strategies were like mechanical (i.e. human-lite) things — borne of a robo-mind and implemented by an army of replicants, maybe.
The sad truth remains that everything in business is about people, their interactions with each other and the ideas and assumptions that shape those interactions.
I’m not sure it’s just the tech business that suffer this way: finance, manufacturing, airlines and — god bless, em — government agencies are just as delusional about this stuff.
Go get ‘em!
The New Republic
Len Schlesinger
Seth Godin
Brian Clark
“As with all things commercial, it’s the people that matter.“
Maintaining the corporate culture as an organization grows is incredibly difficult. Google has done it. Apple and Microsoft have, too.
Compaq lost it and was forced to sell out to HP, who had lost it years before.
So culture doesn’t track well to success?
Companies certainly do end up having internal conflicts, whether they’re related to the vision of its products/services or jsut personality conflicts. Often times, these companies neither have the wherewithall to deal with them – i.e., channeling these conflicts to the company’s advantage. Experienced executives and managers are able to help collapse these deviating visions into a unifying whole. I see Google as a prime example. Google encourages different thinking and creative projects and then is able to fit these projects into holes that appear to – sometimes not so seemlessly – make its ultimate mission unique and successful. That is certainly not to say that some of the company’s resources – especially human intellect and human beings – completely mash into a unified whole. People leave. They must be allowed to do so without recrimination. Companies often let differences fester without addressing them when signs are apparent. Most times, it’s too late.
None of this is new as Robert Townsend’s “Up the Organization: How to Stop the Corporation from Stifling People and Strangling Profits” proves. The book was first published more than 35 years ago. Some individuals and corporations “get it” and some don’t. It seems like it’s almost like a rite of passage. Oh, and it’s not just tech companies.
Mike, I agree, it’s nothing new.
But what’s far more interesting to me is, the things one can do to combat it…
“Often with tech companies, we wrongly blame the problems on the tech itself.“
There is a much more generalized problem here. It’s not just tech companies. Technology is responsible for lots of stuff — good and bad, but too often in modern business it gets more blame for the bad than is really due. I assert that most all “technology” failures in business are really “culture” failings. ERP implementation, software development projects, web site design, etc. Technology is an easy scape goat.
Great cartoon, BTW.
–Matt
Matt: Maybe because tech solutions too often are implemented in order to solve problems that are in essence cultural.
A business that doesn’t communicate well all to often implement some kind of software or tech, when a good solution would be to just talk to the customer.
I think the need and desire for a quality corporate culture has to be something that’s entrenched in your management and often’ isn’t.
I’ve been lucky to work at a company that’s run like a family. I realize that it’s something that will be harder to maintain as the company grows. I hope and pray that they won’t let things change… that it will stay a priority.
Great post, mate. And spot on.
I find it striking that all the different kinds of managers I meet in all kinds of different sectors still prefer to describe and draw their businesses as if they were a machine or some technical thing at least; how they prefer technical sounding strategies and definitions of their challenges (“the business planning process” etc) to the honest acceptance that the reason why all businesses are tricky beasts is that they’re built on, with and by humans.
Of course, it’d be easier if businesses were more like machines but they’re not. And if strategies were like mechanical (i.e. human-lite) things — borne of a robo-mind and implemented by an army of replicants, maybe.
The sad truth remains that everything in business is about people, their interactions with each other and the ideas and assumptions that shape those interactions.
I’m not sure it’s just the tech business that suffer this way: finance, manufacturing, airlines and — god bless, em — government agencies are just as delusional about this stuff.
Go get ‘em!
Justin: Families can be dysfunctional, too.
Mark: Hmmm. The “company as machine” analogy may seem even more apt to tech company managers, many of whom got their start as engineers. (A group not noted for their people skills.)