icrosoft's announcement that it is buying Nokia's Devices and
Services unit shows it thinks that by acquiring the right technology, it
can regain its lost momentum. Sadly, the company is mistaken.
Microsoft's problem isn't that it has too little technology; it has too
much. And it has too many smart people whose talent is being wasted.
Instead
of expanding, it needs to be disbanding its divisions and dismantling
its bureaucracy. This will give its innovators the freedom to take risks
and do what they do best.
When IBM was struggling for
survival in the early 90s, Bill Gates advised its new CEO, Louis
Gerstner Jr., to dismantle the IBM empire and create a smaller and more
aggressive company. He wanted him to “strip away its unprofitable assets and concentrate on a narrow set of businesses”. Fortunately,
Gerstner didn’t listen to Gates. IBM was focused on a single market:
the enterprise. It was able to sell hardware, software, and services to a
customer base it knew; breaking up the company would have led to
disaster.
The medicine that Gates prescribed to IBM is what
Microsoft needs today. It is focused on too many conflicting
markets—enterprise, personal computing, mobile, and entertainment—and
doesn’t understand all of them. Each requires its own marketing
strategy, pricing structure, and array of products—which often conflict
with each other.
As Microsoft’s failures have shown, it is
fighting a losing battle. It has lost ground in practically every
emerging field, including mobile computing, music players, smartphones,
search, and social networking. Yes, it has had an odd success or two,
such as the Xbox, but these are just flukes.
To put it simply,
Microsoft has become a grumpy old giant, obsessed with defending its
ageing products.Buying more products won't help it--it will just create
indigestion.
I believe that the best path forward for Microsoft is
to break itself up into a number of stripped-down and aggressive
companies. These need to be free to compete with upstarts in Silicon
Valley and with each other. These micro-Microsofts need to have the
freedom to take risks and cannibalize the company’s core products.
Microsoft certainly has the talent to do this. But, sadly, it is being wasted.
For
two decades, Microsoft was the tech industry’s strongest talent magnet.
It hired the best of the best. Most of these geniuses haven’t left—yet.
My former students and friends who work at Microsoft tell me that they
are stifled by its bureaucracy, turf wars, and central planning. Big
ideas get quashed because they don’t fit into the corporate vision;
products with great potential are killed because they could threaten the
company’s core products.
Microsoft also has serious problems with its culture, as Kurt Eichenwald explained in Vanity Fair.
Its employee-ranking system, called “stack ranking”, brings out the
worse in its employees by causing them to constantly battle each other
for promotions, bonuses, and survival. Employees are rated on a bell
curve in each department, so if they happen to work with superstars,
they get graded poorly. Instead of working together and helping one
other, they work hard to make sure that their colleagues do not work
hard. And, with reviews being every six months, the focus is always on
the short term.
This is the opposite of the culture you find in
Silicon Valley startups—where employees work day and night to battle a
common enemy. They are motivated by the stock that the company gives
them—so everyone wins if the company does well. Microsoft no longer has
such a currency—its stock has remained flat for longer than a decade.
As I explained in my Washington Post column, the Windows 8 fiasco illustrates this reality and the problems that Microsoft faces.
Windows
RT, which is the version of Windows 8 that was designed for tablet
computers, has a beautiful user interface and functionality. It could
have given both Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android a run for their money.
But Microsoft wanted to protect its desktop operating system and Office
tools from oblivion as tablets overtake both laptops and desktops in
sales, so it bundled a version of Microsoft Office into RT and charged
resellers a price rumored
to be about $85 per device (the OEM price is a well-guarded secret).
This is more than what lower-end tablets will soon cost, and it competes
directly with Android — which Google gives away. To maintain
consistency with the desktop version of Windows 8, Microsoft added to it
the same tiled user interface that was designed for tablets with touch
screens. But most desktop computers and laptops don’t have touch
screens. Microsoft also removed the “start” button that people are used
to. So, both products failed to gain widespread market acceptance.
If
Microsoft had allowed its tablet operating system group to act
independently, they would probably have taken Google head-on by giving
RT away. They could have made money by charging for special features and
apps such as Office. They might also have committed heresy by selling
Google’s Office apps and other competitive products. RT could have
snatched Android’s market share and become the leading mobile platform.
Will
Microsoft figure all this out? I am not hopeful. It is presently
looking for a replacement for Steve Ballmer and it announced the Nokia
acquisition. Any new executive coming in will try to fortify his empire,
not disband it. Meanwhile, the PC market—which Microsoft is vigorously
defending—will continue to lose market share to tablets, which are
becoming cheaper and cheaper and adding cell phone functionality.
Windows RT and Surface tablets will slip into oblivion. The prices of
smart phones will also drop. And Microsoft will continue to miss out on
new market opportunities, because it needs to protect existing markets.
Sadly,
it is more likely than not that Microsoft will go the way of Kodak,
RIM, and Nokia—all of which tanked because they were busy protecting old
turf.
Note: I updated this post on 9/3 after learning of the Nokia acquisition.
You can find more of my articles on my website: www.wadhwa.com and follow me on twitter: @wadhwa
Image Credit: Shutterstock
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire
Remarque : Seul un membre de ce blog est autorisé à enregistrer un commentaire.