UC4 is in a great position to rapidly accelerate through an opportunity to lead a new, important, valuable IT category. A growth investor (versus a value investor) will clearly benefit the company. UC4 created its leadership opportunity by making smart, time-tested moves. These moves are highly repeatable, and offer lessons to all.

1. Move: UC4 aggregated a number of automation tasks onto one unified IT automation platform. UC4 even named the single platform, ONE Automation.
   Lesson: Category leadership always comes from a single, unified platform not from a loose collection of point tools. This holds true for all major software categories, and is even true in other industries.
2. Move: UC4 needed to lead a category important enough to be seen as strategic. IT Process Automation is that category. UC4 built the business case to prove that automating processes is more effective than automating tasks. Chasing tasks, argued UC4, is about efficiency whereas driving process automation across the board is a way to create top and bottom line value.
   Lesson: Category development is key if you can pull it off. Categories happen through the combination of efforts by industry leaders and analysts. In every case you need to be the thought leader for the category. You need to be seen as the company that has it figured it out. You need to be seen as the trusted guide.
3. Move: UC4 used it customers to help communicate to the influential analysts so they would a) see the strategic value of UC4 in IT process automation, and b) understand that UC4 has functionality leadership that can translate into market leadership. Indeed, UC4 achieved leadership status according to the top analyst firms and reports.
   Lesson: Analysts are incredibly influential – especially in IT. You have the power to help them see (and feel) the value of the space and your role in its development. This requires time and effort, but it’s well worth it.
4. Move: UC4 challenged the status quo and those who represent it, namely the largest system management companies in the distributed computing space. As UC4’s CMO likes to say “It’s UC4 vs. the Big 4”. By naming ‘the enemy’ clearly, the debate and choice becomes clearer. By using provocative statements such as “ONE Automation” and “OpsDev not DevOps” UC4 makes its anchor points and differentiation central to the debate or choice. UC4’s CMO inherited a good, but not great tagline, Rethink Automation. ‘Rethinking’ anything is a challenging action but the tagline lacked both context and identity. So, the tagline was modified to Rethink IT Automation with the reason(s) in front of it such as “Cloud. Rethink IT Automation”. The four major trends affecting IT are the reasons to rethink: Cloud, Big Data, IT as a Service, and DevOps. A unified process automation platform is UC4’s answer to helping IT effectively manage through its transition from distributed architectures to virtual and cloud architectures.
   Lesson: Challenger brands have to be clear and provocative in relation to what and whom they’re challenging and why. In so doing, challenger brands also must be compelling in how they convey why their solutions are smarter and better.
5. Move: UC4 had very little name recognition especially among strategic decision makers in IT operations. It was easy for the unknown UC4 to be seen as a risk relative to the Big 4. UC4 understood it needed to rapidly get its name known within the context of its challenger positioning. So, it used the simple device of putting its name in all communications off of the reference:
   This theme is creatively brought to life with sunglasses, whiteboards, posters, see-through business cards, videos, and hologram-like reveals. As a flexible but consistent creative platform it reinforces UC4’s identity, which awareness-wise is UC4’s biggest challenge and opportunity.Lesson: Brand recognition is critical. Working it into the essence of a challenger brand and creative campaign is rare, but really cool.

Disclosure: UC4 has been a client of 21Weeks since 2011.

Thomas Butta

Much is written about value. Even more is said about it. Value just might be the most overused word in business today.

At the organization level, we hear about customer value, shareholder value, and enterprise value. At the department level, Product Management wants its products to be perceived as good value not high cost. Sales wants to sell from value rather than feature/functions. And, Marketing is measured on the value of leads and brand equity.

Even support departments like Finance, IT and HR strive for value. Finance wants positive returns of value for capital deployed. IT must demonstrate value to its business unit customers. And, HR strives for a culture that recognizes the value of individuals.

If value is so important, why is there a dearth of proven ways to create and capture value in a given market space? A clear path to value would seem to be critical at a time when competitive differentiation is short-lived and the rate of change has accelerated.

My experience shows there is little content out there to help an enterprise know how to truly identify and realize top and/or bottom line value in their market. Which is enormously frustrating to client-side executives looking for clarity amidst the noise created by multitudes of companies touting their particular solution sets.

Wouldn’t it be nice to be shown the way to value rather than sold solutions? Wouldn’t it be nice to have a roadmap from a trusted advisor to guide your way to value — especially in a market that’s undergoing rapid change? You bet it would.

So what is there to do? Rise above the noise. Stop selling your stuff, and start making sense of the madness. Become a thought leader for your industry. Develop a value roadmap that shows the way to create and capture value in your market space. It works. I’ve helped architect a number of value roadmaps for companies in emerging or changing industries like PLM (product lifecycle management), Customer Experience Management, Digital Media, and Scientific R&D, among others.

What does a value roadmap look like? It’s a map that shows discrete routes to value along with specific advice on capabilities needed to capitalize on the journey. On the one hand you delineate the opportunities to create value. On the other you provide advice on the people, process, and technology needed to capture value. Simply put, a value roadmap shows where to go, how to go, and what’s needed to maximize value.

A road to value is organized by the following connected route and competencies:

More specifically, a value roadmap is comprised in the following ways:

–  Two measures of value. One is growth. The other is cost savings

–  Seven or eight discrete value opportunities. These are proven opportunities to create either top line growth or bottom line cost savings. One or two of the value opportunities might create both top and bottom line value

–  Two to four executing strategies for each value opportunity. These are the strategic imperatives that bring the value opportunities to life

–  Four to six business initiatives aligned to each strategy. These are the activities taking place deep inside an organization. Business initiatives are typically where most conversations start

–  Three sets of competencies in the form of people skills, process/workflow, and technology infrastructure needed to fully realize each value opportunity

Beyond the structure, it’s critical to know what a value roadmap is and isn’t.

A value roadmap is an overarching view of an industry for the benefit of everyone in that industry. As such, it is imperative to present a complete view of the capabilities and credentials needed.

A value roadmap is not a subset of just what your organization might be able to provide when it comes to knowledge transfer, process support or technology. The capabilities needed to fully leverage each value opportunity must be all encompassing.

Again, a value roadmap is an industry-leading effort. It is thought leadership at its best. And, unlike most thought leadership, a value roadmap is highly functional because it is actionable and real.

A value roadmap has clear and immediate benefits to any company operating in your market space. But, it also represents a significant opportunity for the company that publishes it and leverages it. Look for more on that in my next post, The Road to Value, part 2.

Note: If you like this post, you might want to check out another of my posts called Noise. It’s an example of how a value roadmap shifted an entire industry and helped position the company that brought it to market as that industry’s leader.

Thomas Butta

If we were honest, we’d probably conclude that while the idea of making resolutions is relevant, our execution falls far short time and again. Why is that?

I believe we do short shrift to the process of making resolutions because we don’t see it for what it really is—vitally important. The process of determining our most meaningful hopes for the New Year is no different than making an annual plan. Companies do it. Why don’t individuals? For all the talk of You, Inc. and you as a brand, we do a really poor job of attending to something so fundamentally important.

Here are some guidelines to instill purpose into this year’s resolution process.

1. Positioning. This is your foundation. Positioning is the platform upon which everything is based—your goals, your plans, and your brand. Remember, positioning isn’t just about what you are. Perhaps more importantly, positioning is about who you’re not. And that’s a lot harder to determine.
2. Core Beliefs. Surely you have fundamental beliefs. What are they? Do you have an overarching point of view? Can you articulate it? Is it relevant to those with whom you choose to interact?
3. Network. What type of people and organizations are you for? Are there others like them who would expand your network of influencers?
4. Goals. What do you aspire to do? What motivates you? Are your goals big enough or are they too easily attainable? Do your goals inspire you? How about others? Who can help you achieve your goals? Do they know?
5. Impediments. What’s in the way of you achieving your goals? Are they truly roadblocks or simply things that need to be handled?
6. Early Wins. What can you do in the next few weeks to build momentum? Every plan needs to operate on two levels—the longer-term strategic level and the shorter term tactical one. Put energy behind both.
7. Measures. How do you know your plan is working? What are the measures that will tell you and others that you’re making progress? How often should you check? Inspecting and acting on things too closely too often risks losing perspective. Be sure to look, but don’t obsess about it.

Do you resolve to do things differently this year? Do you resolve to do something really important? Can you be as bold as Sting who sang, “I resolve to call her up a thousand times a day to ask her if she’ll marry me some old fashioned way”? Now that’s inspiring and memorable.

Writers Note: This post is about what’s possible for those of you facing an opportunity to accelerate your organization to a higher level of value. It showcases a company that had the courage to challenge the status quo and heavy-duty competition. The story is longer than normal, but it’s a compelling case study that needs room to unfold.

Did you catch the news of IBM’s latest software acquisition a few weeks ago? Business as usual for Big Blue? Certainly. But, who and what is Platform Computing? Click here to find out.

We had the same questions in late 2009 when 21 Weeks was retained by Platform Computing, Inc. to help position and package Platform as a credible enterprise software player in cloud and big data against behemoths like IBM, HP, EMC and VMware.

For 17 years, Platform Computing was a well-respected leader in the niche field of high-performance computing (also known as technical computing). Its clients were companies who relied on large, mission-critical applications, like models used in financial services, discrete manufacturing, and oil & gas. Platform not only helped such companies maximize application run time, but Platform helped them optimize infrastructure costs as well. Before cloud, such infrastructure configurations were known as clusters or grids.

Platform was successful because its software had at its core a highly intelligent algorithm that optimized the balance between effectiveness and efficiency, run-time and cost, performance and capacity. The smart algorithm enabled Platform to achieve levels of optimization that far exceed other software companies. And because Platform’s open architecture worked equally well on any operating system or infrastructure configuration,  it helped its clients avoid vendor lock-in, the unspoken cost of doing business with the dominant players.

That was all well and good, but Platform’s year-over-year growth slowed considerably by 2009 as its niche market of high performance computing matured. So, Platform plotted its  move to the much larger and faster-growing enterprise software markets for cloud and big data. Platform’s expertise and experience were a good fit, and the markets provided the opportunity for geometric growth.

That was the plan, but the move came with significant risk. Platform would be expanding outside its big fish/small pond comfort zone to arguably the hottest segments of enterprise computing — markets dominated by iconic brands and enormous companies with marketing departments larger than the whole of Platform.

How did Platform transform from a relatively unknown company to become a credible player in the enterprise software markets for cloud and big data?

How did Platform achieve year-over-year double-digit growth?

How did this niche company from Toronto become important enough to be acquired by IBM, one of the most powerful companies in the world?

It did so in two ways:

1. Platform made the smart decision not to focus on the broad-based cloud market, but rather on the emerging space of private cloud favored by enterprises running large, mission-critical applications. Not only did this space closely resemble Platform’s roots in high-performance computing, but it was an area that was still forming. The same held true for big data. Focus gave Platform the the chance to compete.
2. Platform embraced a classic challenger brand stance. It established a compelling positioning platform around a provocative point of view. To Platform cloud — and whatever they call that which inevitably comes after cloud (like big data) — is simply an iteration of what came before cloud, like clusters and grids. To Platform the fundamentals of managing applications in cloud and big data computing environments are the same as running applications in clusters or grids environments. It all comes down to optimizing an application’s run time and minimizing infrastructure costs. Nowhere was this more true than in the emerging areas of private cloud and big data where critical applications and big enterprises played.

A simple, but bold refrain became Platform’s provocative point of view, positioning platform, and rallying cry: Clusters, Grids, Clouds, Whatever.

Everything flowed from that compelling, challenger positioning platform:

• The opportunity for growth

— The move beyond technical IT to corporate IT brought with it the chance for double-digit growth versus single-digit growth in the maturing technical IT market

• The acquisition of talent with enterprise computing and market formation experience

— New talent was enticed and secured for  product management and marketing, sales, business development, and corporate marketing

• Clarity of market sector

— Cloud had correlation to Platform’s roots, but private cloud had highly credible      relevance and no clear market leader. The same was true with big data. Focus increased Platform’s odds of success.

• Internal alignment

— The positioning platform provided a clear framework for internal decisions and    actions: Product development (best performing software for clusters, grids, cloud and whatever came next like big data); sales (cross-sell existing relationships with technical IT to get to corporate IT; attract new, enterprise customers); marketing (win over analyst and media influencers; drive awareness, interest & adoption)

• Brand Identity

— A change in identity is an effective way to get people to look at you in a fresh, new way. Platform’s new identity not only demonstrated exactly what it did, but it did so in a memorable way thereby achieving two strategic goals with one effort

• Messaging

— Platform lived the role of the challenger brand by being provocative and embracing bold in speeches, booth displays, advertising, webinars, its website, etc.

• Analyst  Relations

— Industry analysts are critical influencers to buyers, which is why Platform set out to become the advocate for private cloud, for example

• Recognition

— Leaders need to be recognized as leaders so Platform worked important industry and trade media to win and promote Platform’s technical credibility and prowess

• Thought Leadership

— Emerging markets are often led by the company that owns the customer problem so a series of Point-of-View booklets were created and marketed

• Sales Training

— Selling into the enterprise is where the best software selling machines operate. Platform needed a new kind of sales executive and a different mode of selling — from  feature/function focused to one that was value-oriented

• Partnerships

— Rarely does a company achieve rapid growth in a new market sector on its own. Hand to hand combat (i.e., selling to one prospect at a time) doesn’t scale. Finding one-to-many distribution opportunities is an effective match to direct sales

In two years, Platform achieved what it set out to do. It grew at double digit rates. It attracted new talent. It won over new important enterprise relationships. It generated credibility with customers, analysts and the media for its newest products.  It got noticed.

Could Platform have made it big if it continued on an independent path? It’s hard to say. But, Platform certainly transformed itself from a niche market, technical computing expert into a credible player in the hottest categories in enterprise computing today — important enough that IBM wanted to buy the company.

Platform’s Founder and CEO, Songnian Zou, summed it up this way in his post-acquisition blog. “Platform Computing as a standalone company may come to an end, but the journey continues to clusters, grids, clouds or whatever comes next.”

Will you be ready when you have that rare opportunity to transform your organization into a more valuable entity?  Will you be ready? Or will your attitude be one of … “whatever”?

The art of moving quickly with a savvy strategy.

By Stephen Wunker, Contributor

Today’s announcement of the Kindle Fire, possibly the iPad’s most serious competitor, underscores how Amazon’s Jeff Bezos remains one of the most predictably revolutionary leaders in business. Selling at just $199, the Fire can accelerate the growth of the already white-hot tablet market through leveraging revenue streams Apple lacks. It embodies the sort of asymmetric competition that has become Amazon’s trademark. How does the company do it?

First, consider the legacy preceding the Fire. Amazon launched as an online bookstore slightly ahead of the dot-com frenzy, and it used a distinct business model to up-end a staid industry. Through collecting payment from buyers well before it paid suppliers, and by initially declining to carry any inventory itself, it could slash prices on popular titles and still make money through the “float” interest it earned on the money paid by users for purchases. Bricks-and-mortar chains couldn’t respond. Then, once Amazon had built up its own distribution centers, it could become a hub for users’ e-commerce needs through selling and distributing products from rival merchants.

Users became increasingly loyal to Amazon even in the hyper-competitive world of Internet retailing, and competitors couldn’t match the scope of Amazon’s offerings because they lacked the scale economies of those centers. More recently, the firm leveraged its market leadership in selling physical books online to become the dominant vendor of e-readers, leaving potential rivals such as Sony unable to gain much traction. It has also started to compete against traditional book publishers, offering leading authors a far-better payout on sales if they self-publish under an Amazon imprint. With a business model predicated on providing these authors with services that many don’t really need, old-line publishers cannot come close to beating Amazon’s terms. The company is also a revolutionary in businesses where it has lacked much scale; for instance, Amazon’s free video streaming for top customers competes asymmetrically against Netflix’s paid model.

Continue Reading >

The notion of wanting some of this and some of that is a common refrain — one most often played out when making decisions.  When forced to choose between a strong, singularly clear idea and one that combines multiple alluring ingredients, the common response is to choose the blend.

I’m sure you’ve heard this talk track many times, “We really like the boldness of this one idea, but can you give it the flavor of this other idea while incorporating the angle from this other one?” In other words, “I’ll take one a dem and some a dem and one a dem.”

A little of this and a little of that is a whole lot of nothing. You need courage when making decisions. You need to be clear, single-minded, and bold. You need to avoid blurring the edges.  To do otherwise is to weaken your effort and dampen your effectiveness. The market will respond in accordance with the strength of your choice.

The belief that more is a better choice than less is, well, unbelievable.