Archive for the 'Google' Category

Yahoo to build the third ecosystem

March 21, 2013

Mobile approaches are the core of ecosystem thinking in today’s digital communication. There are three different approach patterns:

  1. Present winners try to survive (Apple, Samsung, Google)
  2. Our braggart loser is swaggering (Microsoft-Nokia, Motorola-Google, Sony…)
  3. Totally new actor coming to revolutionize the business (Lenovo, Yahoo, Iliad, Fujitsu, Ericsson).

But what are Yahoo’s chances out there?

Picture “Our straight-faced coeval Batwoman, Marissa. Marissa Mayer is the only noble and charming person of the Internet era. She fights for the greater good and better world. View houseofgeekery and J.H. Williams.

Yahoo CEO’s, Marissa Mayer’s, strategy is sharp in its ostensible disharmony. But she knows more than we: Yahoo has a very successful future. But how? This is the order of command:

1. Personnel

Luckily Marissa has started her GRO program at Yahoo. The same would have saved Nokia from Microsoft’s bootcamp. Did anyone read “How to Rescue Nokia“ on the palindromic day 1102-2011 (11th of Feb 2011)?

Marissa’s actions have certain specific goals and reasons.

  • Remote employees don’t need any luxury to stay at home or in cafés “to create a new Yahoo”. Working together means commitment means 10-15 hours per day means quicker results. Yahoo:Remote employees are unefficient.”
  • Today’s old school is a mixture of hipster logic and arrogant stupidity working with Apple products. Like creativity would pop up from Apple gadgetry! No, best companies don’t fool with hard work.
  • Yahoo needs to get rid of 30 % of present staff and replace them with 500 talented persons only (like Risku’s GRO Program at Nokia). The only possible procedure is Marissa’s “Paperwork”. It means that the recruitment process is up and running and most of the bimbos “are occupied”. So two moron groups are eliminated. Now we have time to combine three ongoing flows: Get Rid Of GRO + Talent Screening TAS + Nomination into Programs NIPGRO+TAS+NIP is a formula which ensures quickest simultaneous method to slim and refresh Yahoo.

2. Business focus

Yahoo’s business focus has been built during the “Mosaic and Floppy Disk Era” of the Internet. In search and advertisement businesses there is nothing for Yahoo anymore. Marissa knows it and she is a brisk wind for the future:

  • Yahoo has beenThe Portal Porn Shop” (weight on words Web Portal and its PixelPorn). Now it tries “personalization across content and ads PACA”. Marissa knows that under those magic words there are no business opportunities for Yahoo. Therefore the PACA strategy is just to bluff competitors and the media (Marissa bluffing the media). The real business opportunities are in TAIC-SIMO model leadership and InterestMachineTM products. Also new search abstractions kill the algorithm-snotty-boy (ASB) cross-matrix stalker searches
  • Marissa has something bigger to come: She wants 1) leadership position in Ecosystems, 2) to define and own next generation Devices and UI, and 3) she wants a new Search paradigm. The idea is that you don’t need to own the business, you have to lead it. Ownership follows.

3. Ecosystem

Winner-takes-it-all is a strategy: The winner defines the game and its rules. The winner changes the game and scores. The winner eates and swallowes or swallowes and digests. To be eaten and swallowed. That’s ecosystem (Ecosystem is not a good place for e.g. Nokia). What is TAIC-SIMO and Yahoo together:

  • TAIC-SIMO is more than an ecosystem
  • TAIC-SIMO is practice and engineering, not depiction like “ecosystem”. Ecosystem is talk and supposition.
  • TAIC-SIMO is very functional: today Apple, Google and Amazon have profitable businesses according to the model, Microsoft tries to get on the track with Nokia-Yammer-Skype
  • Yahoo can be the TAIC-SIMO player which takes 30% of Apple’s and Google´s businesses and kills Microsoft’s intentions.

4. Devices & UI

Communication machine regeneration cycle is 10 years. The last big things happened 1997 and 2007. We got first Nokia’s and then Apple’s change maker phones. Year 2017 is the next moment and Yahoo is there:

  • Nokia’s model 2110i (year 1997) and Apple’s iPhone (2007) have been revolutionary. The 2110i UI still lives in Nokia’s S40 Asha models and iPhone is still the most profitable smartphone.
  • 2017 is watershed for new devices and UIs. Chart “Reality-Knowledge-Media Device Evolution” shows how hard it is for Microsoft (Nokia), Apple and Google to keep up with the evolution (MS-Nokia the drunk or sober bovine, Apple the degenerated jogger, Google the long necked propellerhead). The rainmaker is the InterestMachine™ consortium.

Year 2017 is very realistic to launch InterestMachine™ One. Why are Apple, Google and Samsung not (NOT) working with such ideas? Well, Nokia just launched a back cover for Lumia 620, Apple is copying their iPhone 4 to create iPhone 5 and iPhone 5S, Samsung is copying their Galaxy II to get the III and IIII, IIIII, IIIIII and IIIIIII. Mobile device business has saturated and stupefied. Its time to change the rules.

As you see, the industry has reached the paradise and highest level is to copy oneself or make back covers. If I worked with Marissa I would propose negotiations with Sony to combine TAIC-SIMO and InterestMachine™. Yahoo and Sony are sharing the same fate in business success, therefore they fit together. Year 2017 is both near and far enough to arrange all TAIC-SIMOInterestMachine™ components perhaps with Fujitsu. Unfortunately one of the great companies, Ericsson, is on their arrogance path. Ericsson could be the first telecommunications network company to handle TAIC-SIMO and it could be the fourth member of the winner team. Maybe Ericsson wants to restructure their own business before Huawei does it?!

5. Search

Search is definitely one of the most important phenomena of the Internet but also of Yahoo. It is very funny that Google can’t see what’s next in search! They are just fine-tuning algorithms and sewing Web badges on people’s inner garments to mark them. Future search is approaching the next abstraction and the pattern is triple logarithmic, or even more:

  • Search has to be dynamic and based on a new abstraction of data. This means that today’s data and its descriptions through code and screens just saturated into “Clouds” and “User Experience”
  • The New Search is MIST+AR+AI+VR+IOP+4D (Hidden in chart) … (contact Risku to know more)
  • Future search does not stalk, delude, profile, advertise, mark or nose around. Here Google and Bing-Microsoft inevitably fail.

Reasons for Marissa’s present leadership & communication model:

  • She is totally alone at Yahoo without any relevant talents and leaders in-house (a GRO + Paperwork is really needed)
  • Plan B to come: Yahoo to become TAIC-SIMO + InterestMachineTM + Search rebel
  • Yahoo needs a Consortium to cooperate with. Marissa needs companies from TAIC-SIMO reservoirs (Sony, Fujitsu and Ericsson are my favorites)
  • Yahoo needs dog-kennel-management to oust old farts, wannabe “leaders” and mediocre “engineers” and “designers
  • Recruitment campaign: Marissa needs trusted visionaries and practical talents, a team of 5-9 person each one NOT from the pompous Web-Tech-Media ex-C-level pitiful moron wasteland.

Yahoo is credible enough to restructure its own business and revolutionize the Search, the Web and respective devices. Marissa Mayer is the Batwoman of future interests who can pull together people and companies for next generation interests and lead the vision, design and practices.

Juhani Risku, the InterestMachine man.

P.S. Facebook is the “Who company“, Google is the “What company“, Nokia wants to be the “Where company“. Yahoo from its “Y” is the “Why company“. Why is the most important question to ask and answer. That’s where Yahoo is coming to be.

JRi

P.P.S. This is not funny: If Nokia wants to be the “Where company” fate is sometimes so ferocious. In the lap of the gods some day soon we have to ask “Where is Nokia?” I have done so much work to keep Nokia independent and strong so why not just try to become a normal company?

JRis

Ecosystems – Apple, Google, Microsoft

February 19, 2012

Ecosystem in the Internet, media, screen and communication businesses

The idea of ecosystem in the Intenet, media, technology and mobile industry is normally understood as a closed input-output model of devices, services, content and respective parties, companies, suppliers, creators and consumers. One clear example of this well working one-company-band is Apple. Apple has created one very closed, controlled and profitable system with stable input-output model . In Apple’s ecosystem model output is divided into parts e.g. monetary profits of Apple, application developers, content and media creators and providers. All those parties also gain reputaion and Brand advantages through Apple’s ecosystem.

Chart TAIC-SIMO model. The real Internet, media and mobile communication Ecosystem consists of all companies acting on same line of business or on part of it. Typically the companies are struggling to get best resources from a limited professional reservoir. North Korea might be a closed business and operational environment, a closed ecosystem with loyal and committed people only for one master of the house. When Nokia is talking about their “own ecosystem”  they probably want too reach North Korea’s independence.

Where is Nokia in the Ecosystem space?

Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture

Chart “Nokia was swallowed into Microsoft’s embrace. Microsoft is the boss when leading the third horse. Microsoft “bought” Nokia and Navteq for $US zero (0), Skype for 8.5 $ Billion, Yahoo for XXX $.

Ecosystem in case Nokia. In organizational change year 2004 Nokia established ES (Enterprise Solutions), M (Multimedia), BI (Business Infrastructure) beside NRC (Nokia Research Center) and NET (Nokia Networks). This structure followed Juhani Risku’s model „Mobile Arena” from year 2002 which was an internal base for new business model combining Nokia’s existing assets like mobile phone and mobile network manufacturing. Since 2004 Nokia had very wide and innovative ecosystem thinking in strategies and corporate presentations for investors, analysts and journalists. This coherent mobile technology and media thinking was created some years earlier than Apple’s strategy of all-embracing ecosystem which was mainly built on top of iPhone after year 2007.

There are two different ways to think ecosystem: a limited and functional one-company-system, and an industry wide ecosystem where all companies, actors and consumers form one complex and ever changing and dynamic structure. Today 2012 Apple is still very close to its own ecosystem but Nokia, Samsung, ZTE and other companies are sharing the resources and markets of the industry wide open ecosystem.

To survive and rule one’s ecosystem happens through systemic products, services and content. Systemic means creation, management and governance of integrated and seamlessly functional input-output of a complex and dynamic business or industry (IKEA, Apple, Google). Mainly companies act as one party in a larger systemic branch (Samsung, Intel, any OEM company, any component manufacturer).

In media, technology, Internet and operator businesses the ideal systemic model is TAIC-SIMO model (Risku 2011). Apple has based its business successfully on this model, Google is acting with the same model but with different emphasis in details. Companies like Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook are trying to enter wider business footprint through TAIC-SIMO model by building consortiums (Microsoft-Nokia-Skype-Yahoo) or trying to penetrate to adjacent businesses (Amazon to tablets, Facebook to phones).

TAIC-SIMO model has been successfully run by strong visionary leaders like Steve Jobs at Apple, Sergey Brin and Larry Page at Google and Jeff Bezos at Amazon. Notice that there are no exiting successful examples of TAIC-SIMO model executed by mature corporations with externally hired leaders.

Microsoft entering TAIC-SIMO ecosystem

Microsoft’s attempt with Nokia, Skype and Yahoo is a trial to combine several billion dollar corporations to march towards one common direction. Challenges are extremely demanding: Microsoft has nothing to lose, Nokia may die out if Windows Phone fails, Yahoo has no future without Microsoft’s funding and Skype may survive when it reaches critical mass of 500 million users (Q3 2009). Microsoft’s consortium is astonishingly unbalanced and tangled in their separate strategies, capabilities and future business prospects.

Microsoft itself is extremely unbalanced in leading TAIC-SIMO type of business: Microsoft has 1) Windows OS, 2) Office package, 3) Bing search,  4) IT consulting and software for companies and 5) Xbox game station. Like MeeGo + OpenOfficeOrg + HotBot + Oracle/Accenture + Nintendo (MOHOAN) collective executive board leading the most diverse and complex systemic business in somewhat decent way! Microsoft’s product and services portfolio is fragmented into 80 % of software plus 20 % of games (yes, the kiddy thing!). Now they got phones, phone calls and another search weakling to wrestle with. Into the bargain the whole group is probably the modern version of Soviet leadership model. It just doesn’t work in business.

Apple can easily survive with its own mainly walled ecosystem of media content, mobile services, consumers and developers, earning huge profits. By the same time Nokia is a small part of an open and ever changing and complex ecosystem which is comparable to ecosystems in the nature: somebody is on top of the food chain, Darwinian laws matter, your company is an enemy to the others and it may be eaten or killed, your fellow creatures may betray you. Also internally the fittest leader who survives is not often the smartest and most diligent but a fruit of business nepotism.

In an open ecosystem company leaders may cause collapses never knowing what happened. This is one of the main reasons for Nokia’s free fall in smartphone and mobile media businesses: from year 2004 there were not a single person in the Board of Directors and Executive Board who would have been competent, visionary and leader in the Internet, media and mobile experience and mobile communication business areas. The Board members and top management even had no education, experience or track record in the new business environment. Apple’s and Google’s persons in charge had this all and therefore they succeeded.

Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office, spermatozoon + zygote structure. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture  Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office, spermatozoon + zygote structure + red line. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture   Microsoft ecosystem: Nokia-Yahoo-Skype-Bing-Xbox-Office, spermatozoon + zygote structure + red line + fade. Juhani Risku Ivalo architect architecture

Three Charts “Nokia swallowed into Microsoft’s embrace. Three visualizations of Microsoft’s zygote, inseminated by Nokia, Skype and Yahoo. This impregnation is an initial arrival for Microsoft to Screen and Access businesses. Microsoft consortium is missing Media and Operator dimensions of TAIC-SIMO model.

Chart 1: Basic MS group, Chart 2: Nokia’s position, Chart 3: Nokia’s position clearly.

When Nokia’s CEO Stephen Elop says that Nokia is the third horse in the war of ecosystems (in mobile communication) he does not recognize that Nokia has only one small screen when competitors have five different ones (phone, tablet, laptop, PC, TV), Microsoft offers only the UI User Interface and Bing search engine, Yahoo does not yet add any value and Skype does not fly yet. At the same time Apple and Google dominate their own ecosystems and the open common ecosystem overwhelmingly. There might be space for a third and fourth player but probably only in the open ecosystem where all actors already have found their places.

For Nokia and Microsoft it is a zero-sum game where you have to win consumers, developers and media content providers on your side with sublime and compelling systemic solution which is way better than the existing ones. A new company may have some details in the systemic solution better than the competitors have but how to convince consumers to switch from their satisfying or good service to a version 1.0 solution. One extreme factor for staying with your present host is the lock-in effect of device UI, brand, data storage, contextual and usability habits and personal contacts.

Good example of differences in ecosystem thinking through application developers:

  • Apple has very committed and loyal developers to create applications, games and content for AppStore. There are obvious reasons for this: Apple has easy coding language, good SW support for application creation, monetary process to pocket the gains, “Apple atmosphere and hype”, good marketing of applications. Apple also has a very loyal user tribe. They love Apple’s products and services and Apple Culture. All those factors support loyalty and commitment and make Apple its own ecosystem definer. Very rarely you can tempt developers to competitors´ side. Here the ecosystem is somewhat closed.
  • Nokia has bad history through Forum Nokia FN and C++ language in caring about developers. C++ is extremely difficult coding language,  FN gave only technical support to struggle with C++, FN did not support developers´ businesses, FN was arrogant enough not to listen to developers´ needs, FN was led by very incompetent person (Ms. Lee Epting) during the change making years 2003-08 when competitors attacked. Now when Nokia (or Microsoft) comes too late to application markets it has to fight to captivate developers´ minds.
  • Unfortunately the ecosystem is open. Nokia and Microsoft do not have an own ecosystem but they are a small part of a wider global ecosystem where we already have strong partners like Apple and Google with AppStore, iTunes, Android Store etc. Apple and Google can easily dominate at the expense of Nokia/Microsoft and they are way ahead in engaging developers. Nokia/Microsoft may never manage to create so strong bond with developers that it could be called ecosystem. Conclusion: Nokia/Microsoft is part of global ecosystem where Apple and Google are controlling the markets. To the detriment of Nokia/Microsoft in an ecosystem you may be killed, eaten or enslaved. Nokia/Microsoft is at the bottom of present food chain.
  • Microsoft is the host of Microsoft-Yahoo-Skype-Nokia group. Yahoo, Skype and Nokia are enslaved by their own business success to Microsoft’s ecosystem. From Microsoft’s perpective Nokia doesn’t offer satisfactory portfolio of screens to display access, media, content and services on the Internet.

As a result I think the main reason for Microsoft to swallow Nokia was the early emanation from late 1990’s: Psion Software EPOC became Symbian and then Nokia CEO Jorma Ollila said that Nokia is never going to let Microsoft conquer the mobile Operating System as they had done with the PC by Windows. This may be the reason why Microsoft allows even big losses and prolonged hanging on loose gallows.

So, there is one ecosystem. There is one developer community which endlessly seeks for better opportunities, there is one very disloyal customer who takes better products and solutions whenever they find them. In Soviet Union there was one closed ecosystem. It’s gone.

21nd Feb 2012,  Juhani Risku, Helsinki Finland