Spotting Disruptive Technology - Timing is Everything!

In the first post in this mini series on Disruptive Technology I discussed why we need to expect the unexpected - in a nutshell most of us spend our working days involved in our daily routine trying to plan develop and market our product. Meanwhile, whilst we aren't looking or dreaming in other directions there are groups of people who have dedicated themselves to doing something completely different and destroying our product and our market. It's nothing personal - its just (to paraphrase) - all is fair in love, war and technology development. Its been happening for a long time - think of the canal owners who suddenly had a new competitor with a new bigger faster technology called the railway. Or carriage makers just before Mercedes, Benz and friends came along.

In this second post we will discuss the timing impact and various key questions that are really just questions of timing and product timing decisions.

So we have made firm resolutions and have spotted some disruptive technology lurking somewhere away on the horizon - what's next?

Unfortunately, spotting these potential disruptions is only the tip of the iceberg, it is all to easy to be drawn in by the hype and buzz around these new areas. Firstly, curiosity is a strong human trait (and it is generally well developed in Product Team Members), the buzz can be more exciting than our regular work and in big organisations it can seem to be a way to stand out from the crowd (guru).

On the other hand, it seems that everybody is doing this. Remember, there are people out there who earn their salary creating this impression. Without being too cynical, the technology hype pays their bills.

For those of us who played team sports as kids remember how everybody used to chase the ball - didn't matter if you were defence or attack you ran after the ball. Later on we developed more discipline and strategy and stopped chasing the ball and started to play the game. That is one of the challenges of disruptive technology - to figure out when to chase and how to play the game.

So in analysing Disruptive Technology we must then exercise our judgement on the probability that the technologies will mature, that they will impact our area, and finally the hardest question of all - when? What is the relevant time frame?

Getting these factors wrong can ruin a perfectly good business or product strategy no less than ignoring or not spotting the technology. By way of example in the Telecom space around 2005 everybody was buzzing about IMS and how it was going to change the Telecom industry as we knew it. There were almost daily announcements of new products, initiatives and commitments. It seemed that overnight all our calls would be IMS based.

Looking back the objectives of were valid, the overall impact of IMS and IMS like technologies has been profound and are on going - but from a telecom's industry perspective "the reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated" (Mark Twain). In summation without getting into a theological argument (IMS believers vs. IMS non believers) by 2011 we can say that IMS is not yet main stream and whilst it has impacted many businesses it has not (yet) fulfilled its hype of 2005.

Clearly, companies that assumed that IMS was the next best and greatest thing made the wrong call. Whether this was to develop new technology products based on IMS or to build consumer and business services over IMS they are probably somewhat disappointed. Equally so you could have made the decision to stop investing in current development (to favour IMS) and missed out on a lot of opportunities in the last 5 years or so.

The point of this post is not to analyse IMS in depth, but to use it as an example (from our own industry) of the dangers of incorrectly analysing the impact and the timing of the impact on a product space. Many companies made the wrong judgement call.

Looking back the single most important error was probably the lack of business case to justify such a large risk and technology change. (A reminder to always use business fundamentals.) There was huge hype and like the example of team sports earlier, everybody was chasing the IMS ball. There were only a few brave solitary voices in the wilderness calling out with a different message.

Overall IMS is a good example of a disruptive technology that many spotted, but very few managed to answer the key questions of the probability that the technology would mature, its impact on their industry and most critically on when it would impact. Ultimately, all these questions become a question of timing - when will it happen?

The product teams involved had to set their product requirements, make their product decisions and position their product based on their assumptions about the impact of this disruptive technology. Many errors were made.

Clearly it is key to our product and business strategy that we actively seek and successfully spot disruptive technologies. However, we also need to be able to stand back from the hype and think strategically and coldly analyse the likely impact and timing of the new technology.

The final posts of this series will discuss some practical ideas for systematically discovering and analysing new technologies.

Spotting Disruptive Technology - Why It Matters

This is the first part of a mini-series on how to identify, analyse and react to disruptive technology. On this article we discuss why we need to be constantly looking for disruptive technologies.


As a PM one of the hardest things is to keep an eye on disruptive technologies and their likely impact on our product lines. In many cases it is nearly impossible to find time just to keep up to date on developments in our own field. Like in any other job we are focused on the daily routine and immediate needs of our product and on its internal and external customers. It is hard to find time to look beyond the immediate and work out what is happening out there in the big wide world.

Yet identifying disruptive technology is one of our most critical tasks – to bring a trivial yet valid example; there were probably teams of PM all working diligently on the latest features of typewriters such as electric, quieter, better ink ribbons whilst over at IBM, Microsoft and Apple they were busy working on mass produced PCs with word processors. There are numerous examples of major disruptive technologies appearing from no where and killing an industry dead almost overnight – DVD and videos – digital and film cameras.

However, identifying disruptive technologies is actually a difficult task, for several reasons -

1. It requires a substantial on going investment in general reading and research – something that we will all normally put off until next week when things are quieter.
   
2. It is often very difficult to identify where the challenge is coming from; in many cases the threat comes from out of market and not from our traditional competition. Did the typewriter teams keep an eye on the emerging computing market? Did Nokia spot what Apple were planning? Apple were a new player in Nokia's market, yet managed to blend their existing product capabilities with some new technology and a Palm Pilot concept and Nokia are still licking their wounds several years later.
   
3. The speed of development – all too often by the time you have heard of the threat it is (almost) too late.

Unfortunately, without have constant focus on disruption, we will always be surprised. Our natural focus is on incremental features and customer requests. This is often the case even when planning the Next Generation magical market leading product. We will become focused on meeting our product and time objectives and forget to understand what is going on outside our company.

To be fair, not all disruptive technologies will stop an industry in its tracks, but, by definition they will substantially change the way we could or should do business. If we spot them early enough they could be a substantial differentiator in our favour; on the other hand if we spot them too late .....

So one of the key tasks for any successful PM is to dedicate part of their working time to reading around – focus on your own industry (your customers and competitors) and segment but also look around you at other areas what's happening in other industries and let your imagination run wild about the possible impacts and changes.


Of course expecting the unexpected is hard and predicting the unpredictable is much harder than that – but we need to do so. It is hard to conduct a strategic product review or to make intelligent product decisions without understanding the bigger picture and looking at the potential impact of disruptive technologies.


In the next blog we will look at ways of finding the information that we need, the dangers of trying to figure out the timing and how to promote discussion within the organisation. We will also discuss some formal methodologies that we developed to analyse the impact of these technologies on our business.

Product Management - The Longest Race - Part 2

In a recent blog (here) I discussed the product management and marketing lessons that could be learnt from the recent Nike 10K night race in Tel Aviv. I discussed the event planning (impressive and complex) and the event objectives (which were probably significantly more than just a fun run).

In this blog I will discuss some of the results of the event.

As a runner I can say I had an amazing time, and that on the whole this was an impressively run event.

However, the main question is what did Nike think? What KPI's did they set in advance for the event (number of runners? low number of problems? set up/clean up time? News minutes? Facebook group members?) Were their targets met? More importantly were the targets the correct ones or were they chasing the wrong things - were they were focused on their own issues and not on being customer centric?

During the course of the race itself there were other aspects of product management in action. Every once in a while there were music and water stations, we can consider them to be product features, helping the customers to enjoy the experience more, to engage with them - what will make them happy customers that will come back next year and recommend to their friends?

On the assumption that they plan to run a similar event next year, how, are they acquiring data and how are they planning to review and improve?

On the subject of next year we can consider product extension; will they feel the need to enhance the offering - perhaps by offering a shorter or longer version or by diversifying into a cycle race or triathlon? Perhaps there is a market for more than one event a year?

There were strict rules, we were all supposed to wear the official race shirt and run the course in an orderly manner. There were a few people who ran but I guess hadn't registered, and so ran in their own shirts and there were a few who wanted to stand-out and so ran in other shirts (last year's race etc) - on the whole this caused no problems to the runners. However, we can certainly view them in the context that the product was excellent, but, that it wasn't perfect - it was fit for purpose. Of course, since we mostly followed the rules, then we were complying with a certain standard, specification or protocol.

The race had a strict delivery schedule - it had to be ready on time and it had to work adequately well on the night. So part of the secret here is in team work and execution. The PM&M can have designed the perfect race, but if his project team didn't get the water in the runner's hands or publish the results then the product experience would have been irrevocably tarnished in the eyes of many of the customers.

So in conclusion I had a good run that evening and I believe that the experience was shared by the vast majority of the runners; I suspect that Nike felt that it was a success, but, that they have some points to improve or change in the next year. Overall this was a fine example of the craft of product management and marketing.

More importantly, I hope that by looking at an event that is outside of our day to day we can see the implications of strong product management leadership on all aspects of product design, management and marketing in general.

Creating a Product Road Map

“Follow the yellow brick road” - this is the instruction that Dorothy got in order to get to Emerald City.

Product managers are responsible for building the product’s yellow brick road – the Product Road Map.

The road map generally should normally be planned for a 3 year period at a high level and for 18 months in a more detailed manner.

Probably the most important starting point for the road map process is the outcome of the strategic business process of the company. This is a critically important process performed periodically (often annually) by the senior management of the company together with the marketing team and actually drives the entire company. When we start to create or update the road map the last version of the strategic process is a major input.

Often this will be replaced or supplemented by a product strategic process where we systematically look at all aspects of the product and the market and set key business objectives within the overall corporate strategic framework.

The road map process starts with information collection which should include the following:

• Market trends
• Regulatory trends
• Technology directions
• Competitive analysis
• Customer requirements and suggestions

In the next step we need to analyze what is the likely impact of each item on the product and what we can or should be do in order to give the best response to the probable impact. The best way is to create a product requirements matrix with all the needed activities, new features, platform changes, etc. and then to prioritize this list.

Having done that, we need to figure out what is required in the development of each element in the matrix. We must get the rough effort estimation and / or the budget needed. Now we have the information needed in order to make decisions and to create a road map release plan, if possible for a 3 year period, but not less than 18 months.

Needless to mention that during all the process described here we need to drive internal collaboration and buy in by involving and getting the opinions of many other groups from within the organization for example marketing, R&D, sales, operations and so on.

This is a cyclic process, since we need to do it again at least once or twice a year and adjust the road map if needed.

The decision whether to let our customers be involved in the road map or more precisely to what extent they should be involved is not an easy one. See this article for some of our thoughts in this area. Generally we need to make the product ready for market, but at the same time, we need to be careful not to let the road map drift in the direction of one or two (big) customers, but, is not in line with the general market direction.

We should be very careful when externalize the road map document since it is has some legal status as a kind of contract and as such we need to enter all the needed legal and financial disclosures.

Hopefully this road map will lead us to Emerald City.

In subsequent blogs we will look at ways to share the roadmap internally and externally, getting internal buy in and some of the methods available to do competitive analysis and technology reviews.

The Craft of Product Management & Marketing

The Product Management & Marketing (PM&M) profession presents significant challenges to its practitioners. The main challenge of our profession is: making good product decisions in an environment of uncertainty to drive long term sales, profitability and competitive positioning.

There are many methods and best practices that one can learn and use in the challenging world of PM&M, in order to to help. Occasionally there might be some fortunate PM&Ms facing projects where all the parameters are available, obvious and accurate, for most of us most of the time this is not the case.

Once we are over the decision making challenge, we have to face the organization and manage the “internal marketing” of the decisions within the various functions in the company. The PM&M has to coordinate and collaborate with almost all internal organizations – Sales, Marketing, Operations, Delivery, Support, Legal and R&D. To be able to do all this cooperation the PM&M has to build matrix management skills, but more than this relay on excellent human relationship capabilities.

Finally… after we have managed to make the decision and get buy in within the company, then we reach the critical stage (& our original objective) – going to the market and meeting our customers. In my view, the PM&M must face the customers. This is the way to “feel” and learn the market, find out what the customers are looking for, what are the advantages and disadvantages for our product and how to make it a winner with clear differentiation. Close engagement with the customers is essential to enable the right decision making. However, meeting customers successfully isn’t always an easy task, and the PM&M needs to have the human and technical capabilities to interact with the customers, to present the product and to face the challenges the customers present.

The Customer is King – But are they Always Right?

The customer is the king – they buy our product. We also know that the customer is always right. However, sadly they are not always right or at least not completely right; especially if (fortunately) there are many different customers with different needs. After we have engaged with the customer we will often be left with a conflict – do we meet the customer’s requirements or do we take them into account yet specify other product goals? Generally we are time limited and resource restricted and so our decisions will be (to a large extent) between mutually exclusive options.

As in many situations in life, there is the “easy way out”. When making decisions the PM&M can rely on what the customers demand. It will make everybody happy; internally in the organization no one can argue with the logic of satisfying the requirements coming from customers and the sales people will be delighted to go to the customers and tell them that all their requests are fulfilled. The customers will be delighted to get their exact requirements and to have their views influence the product. But, the “easy way” is not necessarily the “right way”, the popular decision will give the PM&M a friendlier environment in the short run, but will it be justified by the business performance in the long run? Did we sacrifice the future of the product for the comfort of making easy decisions? One of the classic PM&M dilemmas or minefields is letting one or a few key customers dictate the product design. Our responsibility is to make the best product decision in an environment of uncertainty and we need our customers to buy our product, but, we also need to ensure that one or two key accounts do not set the product back in terms of its wider market acceptability.

The PM&M is usually at the eye of the storm. The customers have their requests and crisis, the sales people demand that we satisfy our customers and also give the sales people some new exciting things to sell and to meet their quotas, the operations and support are complaining on the product capabilities and R&D is always short on resources. There are methods and tools that help sort things out in this chaos, but often there are no easy or even obviously right answers. The “craft of PM&M” is to be able to observe the surroundings, analyze the conflicting information, to assess the situation and in the end make the right product decisions that will maximize long term sales, profitability and competitive positioning.

Product Management & Marketing - The Longest Race

A few weeks ago, I was fortunate enough to run the 4th Annual Nike Tel Aviv 10K night run. Now 10K isn't the longest distance in the world, but it is long enough to enjoy the atmosphere (amazing) and to reflect on many different things whilst running.

Sad to say perhaps, but, whilst pounding the streets I managed a few thoughts on product management.

Organising a run with over 15K runners is a real task - coordination with the city, the police, bands, official running shirts, refreshments, web site for registration and results - clearly a massive project & clearly some top class organisers were behind this event.

However, there were many product lessons to be learnt. The race organisers claimed that the other Nike night runs in Europe have been abandoned this year and that our race was the sole survivor. So clearly we see that there was some effective market segmentation and strong brand/product recognition in the local market.

On the subject of brand recognition Nike (not normally slow in these areas) let the competition steal a trick on them - guess which company managed to get its posters on lots of billboards along the route? (So a clue then - Adidas) - so some poor promotion & competitive positioning here.

One of the main questions that we should consider is what is the product and what is the Key Value Proposition that they were promoting? Trivially, this was a race, but probably that isn't really the intention of the organisers; it was probably more along the lines of

to produce a mass street happening in an important city; promoting an active good time to sporty people who are likely to identify with our brand. The aim is also to attract people who previously would not have taken part in an event like this to participate.

This emphasis makes for a completely different plan driving them towards providing bands and music along the route, promotion on Facebook even the choice of the date - 10.10.10.

The local product management obviously worked hard at getting buy in from stakeholders - both in house (Nike management) and outbound keeping the city interested despite this was no longer a global effort. Not to mention trying to maintain product momentum in keeping the customers (we runners) very happy.

I guess we will never know, but it would be interesting to find out - if with all the cross branding (water, yogurts and granola bars) & other cross product promotion (Nike stores) what were the financial objectives of the event? Did the race actually make a profit - not that this is necessarily the objective. It would be acceptable to under-take a loss making activity in the right context. It would also be interesting to know (given this was a unique event this year) whether there was a process of strategic review of alternatives.

So much for the planning and product development, in the next post I will discuss some of the results (product, not my personal time) and suggest some possible conclusions.