Month: August 2013

Microsoft could get a needed makeover with a new CEO

GearmarkLeave a comment

I decided to continue reading the article series about Balmer departing Microsoft and its hopes for the future. I like that the article is based on what insiders think and their candidness about Microsoft is really like; it's a voyeuristic peek inside the Empire.

If Microsoft decided to do most of what is on the list, that would be awesome. It's a company with some great talent that unfortunately gets lost in a mix of bureaucracy and restrictive business ideology with dashes of a lack of original vision and "me too" thinking.

I stick to my guns about the Microsoft OS. The days of a huge, overactive OS managing and running applications on a PC is fading away. Maybe it's needed for large servers – but not for individual use. There will be more and more online apps that will make the concept of a Personal Computer seem limited. Personal Home servers with files (including movies, music, etc.) accessed by any home device is almost a necessity; cloud storage is a minimum requirement as you move from location to location, device to device, working with distributed teams; storing information on your own device is emerging as just plain weird because you can't access those files from your phone, computer, tablet, etc. and you can't share them with other people. Businesses have been moving towards this sharing model as well over the past few years – storing files on a server and using corporate Intranets or Sharepoints so anyone can access it from any device. The technology needs to mirror how people work – we don't work alone in a cubicle anymore. It's all teamwork.

With that said, Microsoft really need to make MSOffice available on all platforms and devices. Microsoft is paranoid sometimes and it's just silly. For the longest time, they didn't really innovate Office for the Mac because it is a competing platform. That's old thinking. In today's business world, we know that it benefits you to make your product available across platforms. The world is getting smaller and smaller and it's all about sharing and partnerships – even with your competition. How paranoid can you be to believe that offering Office on an iPad will cannibalize your sales? People are buying tablets anyway. If they don't buy your tablet, they could still be a customer of your products. It's like restaurants that don't let you BYOB. You are still eating there, so what does it matter that you aren't drinking there? Isn't $25/person better than $0/person because the person wanted to have a particular wine?

I found this article on Ars Technica which proposes that Microsoft has been a little cutting edge. It's an interesting perspective. The article claims that Microsoft's challenge is merging consumer and business technology. That's true at some level. However, many of the technologies raised in the article are frankly, me-too competitive responses to what's in the market. It's not innovation. Office 365 is a response to the market – it should have happened years and years ago. Microsoft SQL database was a response to Oracle – and they got market share by originally offering it for free to get people on it. Lync is a chat tool like AIM, YahooIM, and Hotmail chat. It's another technology response. I could continue.

Microsoft needs a vision beyond doing "me-too" technology, responding to the market a little too late, and make a difference. It needs to change its market position from being so self-contained and paranoid and see technology as something people don't need to "marry" to use it – they use Microsoft, Apple, Google, HP, Samsung, IBM – you get the picture. It's a BYO world – not a one-stop-shop world, with multiple platforms and apps, where people are using what they perceive as the best on various platforms. The concept of Windows on a PC is dying. They need to go on a retreat and get a fresh perspective. Ok, they need a makeover.

Microsoft could get a needed makeover with a new CEO

Ahhh Microsoft – Maybe there is hope for you yet…..

GearmarkLeave a comment

With Balmer going out, maybe Microsoft will recover and make a bang. There may be hope (like with Leila of Star Wars to overtake the Empire)! 

I read this artcile about the demise of Microsoft. And yes – they consistently missed the technology direction the world was going towards – even beyond what the article points out. They initially missed the Internet and if I remember right, Billy Gates poo-poo'd it as a trend. They have been laggards all along – except with X Box. X Box was and is a true innovation. It shows there are some real talented technologists and designers there.

But back to the business and the history….

Long long ago, in the dawn of the public Internet, it was predicted that all a computer/device would need is a browser and all apps would work from it for a fee, like a rental. The world of dumb terminals would be resurrected, but with a better GUI, higher usability and more functionality. Google has managed to achieve this vision with Chrome; Microsoft is still chugging along with a bloated OS and crazy interface design that has set the standard for computer usage by default (their partnership model with PC manufacturers made it the ONLY way to work and sadly, their only way to make money). The benefit was the birth of smaller chips and the rise of Intel, but that only made way for these mobile devices (tablet, phone, and who knows what else). And with the death of the PC and rise of the mobile devices, Microsoft is in quite a pickle.

Now, Windows 8 isn't half bad. It's kinda nice actually, and fun to use on an Envy with the touch screen and keyboard. It's like the setup I always wanted – if your mouse is acting funky, just hit the screen. However, Windows still needs a device rather than a just a browser like the Chromebook (which has the opposite problem and needs a touch screen, but I digress). 

I can't wait to read the remainder of the article tomorrow to see how Microsoft can save itself. I think getting away from MBAs trying to be technology guys is a start. And getting away from Basic derivatives. And seeing the future of computing being integrated in daily life. And seeing beyond profit coming from highly structured partnerships. I think you get the picture….

Ahhh Microsoft – Maybe there is hope for you yet…..

Improv and Agile – Part 2: Teamwork makes the experience

GearmarkLeave a comment

Agile is about teamwork – as is a live music belly dance performance. There is distributed ownership and responsibility and in both cases, the teams work together to create great experiences for customers/users. So here are more fun comparisons…

 

In Egypt, the top dancers have their own band. Yes, the band works for the dancer – the dancer orchestrates the show, chooses the music, and leads the band.

However, when you aren't as well known and don't have a budget (or if you are traveling without your band), you come to a club or restaurant to dance and the band comes to jam. The band and dancer are colleagues and everyone collaborates on the performance. The band doesn't question the dancer's technique or choice of movements, but the band may think a different song than what the dancer requests will make for a better performance choice and is just better suited for the dancer. The audience participates by showing approval and disapproval. The performance is a group effort and experience – its not just about the dancer.

This is more true with a drum solo. Great live drum solos aren't about just a great dancer and drummer; it's about how the drummer and dancer interact with each other and the audience. It's about trust – the dancer trusts that the drummer is going to make her look good. And the drummer trusts that the dancer is going to respond just right to what he does. And both watch the audience and try to give them a memorable experience.

If we look at an Agile project, it's quite similar in that developers aren't under the "control" of a UX person. They are peers working together to create a final product. A developer may have a technical reason why one UX approach is better than another. And like the band playing a different song for the dancer, the UX professional may think that the developers are telling him what to do, but actually, they are recommending a better approach for the product. It's about the collaboration.

 

True collaboration isn't about ownership; its about knowing your role and what you are expected to contribute to a project. 

 

Dancing to recorded music is a little like Waterfall 

When a dancer performs to recorded music, the music is secondary; the band who played the music is in the background – literally. The music is experienced through a device and the dancer is the star. The dancer knows that version of the song and is able to control what the experience should be. The dancer needs to only build a relationship with the audience. There is no collaboration (and no "magic").

The same is true with UX. If the development team is independent and executes "orders", then the relationship between UX and development is strained. One is dictating to the other what to do and basically, dictating a result. Everyone owns their own area, but there is no communication about which approach is better or worse. Everyone is working in their bubbles, executing according to a plan defined without knowing the implications of all decisions (or months earlier when market conditions were different).

 

The Audience/Users really, really really want to like you

Any audience wants to like you and your performance. People go out and want to have a good time – they aren't going out to be critical and mean. They want to enjoy the evening. For someone not to like your performance, you almost have to earn that. I have seen ok and outstanding performances, and if you ask the people you went with what they thought of either one, most times they will say both were great. There may be some critique, but generally, people are pretty pleased no matter what they see. Why? Because people like to like other people (just do a Google search on being liked – there are dozens of articles about how to be liked. Facebook is a great example of people wanting to like other people – how many people do you like that you barely know?). Most people are fairly positive and they want to like the restaurant they are eating at, the people who are there, and again, have a great time.

Users are the same way. They want to like your site or application. They really do. Of course there are people who are haters; they are everywhere. Those are the same people who watch a performance on Youtube and feel the need to make a negative comment rather than just click to another video. Generally, people want to like a site and will use it even with imperfections. And if people like the product – it's all good.

I worked on an online print site that had a number of usability challenges. Everyone in the company knew it, the customers knew it, but people still bought from the company because it produced great product. The company wanted to fix their issues and as part of the research, I called a few customers and got their feedback. In all cases, the customers found ways to work around the site's ineffectiveness and inefficiencies to make their purchase. They loved the product and wanted to love the company so much that they were willing to work around challenges to make it work. It was incredible to see (and these workarounds gave us incredible insight into how to fix the site).

I've also witnessed usability tests with a product that had a well-liked concept. And these test participants really tried to make the site work as expected and are almost sad when it doesn't do what they want. In usability tests they want to help you – not just because they are getting paid – but partly because if they are part of your brand – they are a cheerleader (see my article on how getting customer feedback involves customers).

Of all of the team members to create an experience, the audience is probably the easiest to win over. They are there to enjoy the experience and are willing to be led; the dancer/band or UX/developers need to create the experience and need that relationship to create something memorable. 

 

Teamwork and collaboration is key to getting any project done – and everyone needs to understand their role and what they are contributing.  Even the audience. But without everyone contributing, you don't have an experience. If you don't have an audience or users – you have a few people hanging out to jam (or create a site or app). It's about coming together to create an experience that brings joy to everyone participating. The audience/users want to like what you are doing; and if the dancer/band or UX/developer like working together, then they will create something unique and fun. That's what's great about Agile – it's about people coming together and bringing their best to make their best. Working in Agile is technical live entertainment – it's a jam session to create art.

 

 

Improv and Agile – Part 2: Teamwork makes the experience