Business - Written by Don Tapscott on Sunday, November 25, 2007 18:40 - 5 Comments

Don Tapscott
Nothing has changed under the sun?

I was on a panel discussion in Helsinki last week where we were asked to explain the three big things a company should do to succeed these days.  The person before me (a well known author and pundit) offered up the following: 

1. avoid  risk 

2. hire the best people 

3. focus on your customers

After presenting this list, he concluded that “nothing has changed under the sun.” While I had done a fair bit of work to prepare my own list, I found myself quickly discarding my notes to disagree with each of these directly. While it may sound hard to disagree with “focus on your customers”, stay with me and you’ll understand why in a second.

1. Avoid risk?  Sure there are many new causes of potential loss and companies need good risk management.  But from my research companies can avoid suffering loss by being more transparent, by opening up, by sharing their intellectual property and intentionally showing (controlled) vulnerability.  That’s what Rob McEwan did with Goldcorp – publishing his geological data and inviting the world to scrutinize it — and he increased the value of his company by an order of magnitude.  If he was driven by a mantra of “avoiding risk” he would have shut the company down.


2. Hire the best people?  Because of the new web, Ideagoras, peer production, open platforms and the other models we discuss in Wikinomics – the uniquely qualified minds to do things for your company may be outside your boundaries.  Don’t just hire talent!  The world is your HR department.  50% of all P&G’s innovations now come from outside the company.  In fact, right now I’m working on a logo like the “Intel Inside” brand, but it will be “Talent Outside” – just to get the message about what’s going on across.

3. Focus on Customers.  Wrong.  This is so old school – do good market research, have good focus groups, treat customers well, build great products and services, give great support, be customer centric. Because of the new web we can go beyond focusing on customers to engaging them in deep and ongoing ways. Consumers can become Prosumers – co-innovating value. Firms can co-create thrilling experiences with customers. It’s possible to think of customers as part of your business web.  In fact, now that I think about it, I’ll create another variant of the “Intel Inside” logo.  It’ll say “Customers Inside.”

I like this mindset, and at minimum it gets people thinking about new ways to run their business -  Talent outside, customers inside, and think differently about what is a real risk to your companies success… because a whole lot of things have changed under the sun, and it’s just getting started.  



5 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Marko Rautakoura
Nov 26, 2007 7:55

Hello. I happened to be sitting in the audience at Helsinki. Thanks for a very inspiring presentation.

I’d like to comment on your angle of view on this subject. You contradict “the well known author and pundit”, lets not reveal the name, by basically saying that open your eyes every thing is changing.

I agree with you, but I also agree with the “emotional” way of looking at the F.U.T.U.R.E and the changes it brings, like the “well known person” presented in his opening speech for the seminar.

So someware in the middle could be

‘Avoid risk’, if you don’t have a good understanding of the factors involved (web 2.0)

‘Hire the best people’, to give you insight on the risk and manage your “talent out side”

‘Focus on Customers’ as R&D managers and sales force – advocates.

Since every lecture has a strong opinion and point of view on the future. Our tough task as managers is to pick the signals and trends and just live it.

PS. Being able to comment the seminar directly to a speaker from the “back row” after one weekend, that’s web 2.0!

Kevin PIerre
Nov 26, 2007 10:57

Don,

I agree with your position and take some of the “middle” ground approach Marko speaks of.

All in all, I think companies cannot afford recognizing that risk is part of the DNA in our competitive marketplace. This would be managed by taking some form of intelligent risks, which involves getting up to speed on the market place and how things are being achieved on the web. The rate in which innovation occurs, and the fact that it can be achieved by anyone who is connected to the web, automatically involves a degree of risk for firms.

Therefore, it’s in companies’ best interest to understand what risk they will be facing and obtain the best information to mitigate negative impact as best as possible, which may, from time to time, require doing things in an open fashion as your book suggest.

Thank you, again, it was a great and compelling read.

Collab@work » Blog Archive » Hire the Best Talent?
Nov 27, 2007 0:26

[...] that “hire the best talent” would come quite early on your list. And so it did to this panel discussion in Helsinki, where Wikinomics’ Don Tapscott was… well, a [...]

Romuald
Nov 27, 2007 0:37

Don’t just hire talent! That certainly changes from what we’re hearing from all Talent Management Vendors (disclosure: I am part of this crowd too).

When looking closer though, these two perspectives are not that far from each other.

1. Talent Management vs. Employee Management

Talent Management Vendors (TMV) initial aim was at managing internal talent (or in the process of becoming internal – or already internal but in the process of becoming talent). But as the market evolves (as Don describes in his blog and book), so does talent management. Few (if any?) TMV have already developed features for supporting external talent, but that will still fit their model at manging talent. It’s just that talent management will have a broader definition then.

2. Talent management vs. non-Talent

One aspect of the “Don’t just hire talent” that Don did not developed in his post but that he mentions in his book is that you don’t need only talent to generate innovation. Innovation comes with collaboration. In his book, Don mentions a case where the GeekSquad at BestBuy won a prestigious design award. Did they win because of a talented designer? Nope. They won because they all collaborated to this piece of hardware. Were they all talented? With all due respect, I suspect the team was similar to most teams: 20% so-called A players, 60% so-called B players, and 20% disengaged players. OK. Let’s say that Best Buy is very good at hiring and developing talent and let’s put this at 30-60-10. That still makes a majority of non-talented employees.

SystematicHR also had a post recently on that topic (with my comment here) [emphasis mine]:

While it’s possible that a small number of individuals might generate the largest amount of innovations within an organization, those innovations are usually going to be the result of many conversations and minute refinements over a long period of time.

Many conversations with many people. Including non-talented people (whatever that means)

Let me get things straight: Talent does matter!! I am not suggesting that all the hype around talent is only hype.

Just: Don’t just hire talent

Don Tapscott
Nov 27, 2007 1:29

Marko, thanks for the thoughtful comment. As for who made these statements, Patrick Dixon would probably appreciate me letting everyone know he made these comments. He’s a thoughtful person but I must confess the “nothing has changed under the sun” comment provoked me into having the debate.

And Kevin, yes, ths issue of risk is complicated. Ya know, it’s important enough that I’ll write a separate blog post on it. Stay tuned.

Leave a Reply

Comment

Browse Content

Business - Feb 7, 2010 22:25 - 0 Comments

Marketing on the cheap thanks to spontaneous (mainstream) internet culture

More In Business


Entertainment - Jan 28, 2010 11:38 - 0 Comments

CL!CK – LEGO’s Fun Social Product Development Platform

More In Entertainment


Society - Feb 4, 2010 16:47 - 0 Comments

Innovating the 21st-century university

More In Society