But that’s not what makes them special.

Their exceptionalism comes from another source: the rare ability to perceive a paradigm shift taking place, and the courage to act on it early and wholeheartedly. By building their businesses from the ground up to embrace the challenges and opportunities of a new age, these companies have been able to fundamentally transform entire industries.

Sprinklr is cut from that same coveted cloth. And today, I’m thrilled to say that I’ve joined the company as CMO to help share its incredible story with the world.

Most recently as Consultant-in-Residence at Andreessen Horowitz, I’ve spent countless hours observing disruptive companies and technologies to help one of the globe’s most respected venture capital firms distill its view on how – and where – software is eating the world. From that perch it was clear to see that, for the marketing industry and, in fact, all customer-facing departments, the moment of software eating our world is taking place right now.

With the rise of social media, today’s consumers are more empowered and connected than ever. And as a result, their relationships with businesses have changed forever. Funny enough, it took social technology to bring us back to our roots and give us a global platform for fostering the human experiences we all crave as individuals.

For brands, that opportunity to become human – to converse with customers one-on-one, instantly, and in a truly meaningful way – has never been greater or more critical. But, as it is for every one of us, it’s a skill that must be nurtured and refined over time. And for brands, it can only happen with the help of tools that not only break down the walls within their organizations, but also allow them to think with one mind and speak with one, human voice.

By providing the world’s most powerful and sophisticated social technology to Fortune 500 companies like Intel, Microsoft, Samsung, and many others, Sprinklr is helping global brands do exactly that by creating a social infrastructure that puts customers back at the heart of their enterprises.

In much the same way, we at Sprinklr are committed to putting our customers at the heart of our enterprise and everything we do. We know this is a noisy, crowded, and fast-changing industry where the inclination to shout above the fray is all too pervasive. We also know, however, that the days of shouting as an effective mechanism for reaching and engaging with audiences are over.

That’s why we choose to “sprinkle.” If you filter out the noise, listen closely, and genuinely care, we believe it’s easy to spot the needs of your customers. And if you address those needs and consistently work to add real value, you create the possibility of trust. Trust – that enormously valuable yet illusive state – is what lies at the foundation of every lasting relationship.

About the Author: Tom Butta is a marketing leader who has spent his career helping some of the world’s most pioneering enterprise software companies build trusted, global brands that have defined and fundamentally transformed entire industries. Prior to joining Sprinklr, Tom served as Consultant-in-Residence at Andreessen Horowitz, where he worked to define the venture capital firm’s points of view as a guide for Fortune 2000 companies and entrepreneurs looking for insights about the future of technology

Do you ever notice how good it feels when you experience the power of simplicity? It’s clarifying, even freeing. On the other hand, do you notice how heavy it feels when you’re experiencing complexity? It has a certain weight to it.

Why does simplicity feel so good? Because simplicity eliminates, or at least minimizes, intricacy, ornamentation even pretentiousness. Simplicity cuts out the extraneous middle. Simplicity is a faster way to get to whatever and wherever you’re after.

Complexity, by its very nature, creates obstacles between where you are and where you’re going. Complexity gets in the way. Complexity makes everything it touches a lot more difficult – and a lot more confusing.

If simplicity frees and complexity limits, then why does complexity clutter our world? Why does complexity become the way we engineer experiences and convey information? I believe it’s because we’re focused on what we want to share instead of what our audiences will experience.

As a general rule, we don’t do a very good job of listening. This is most true when we have something to say or sell. We tend to talk at people. We want others to listen to us, but we rarely ask people how their experience of us makes them feel. This holds equally true for their experience of our products as it does for our interactions.

Why do we pay more attention to what we think rather than what others feel? It’s because we believe a rational argument complete with facts and figures will win the day. Our intellectual side is seduced by data, content and possibilities. We want to demonstrate why all of it matters. This is how complexity starts.

That’s why white papers are so popular. And why websites are cluttered and confusing. And why we typically purchase business books that are weighty and long. It’s why our answers tend to be long-winded. And why our customer interfaces are complicated.

If we can just get out of our own heads to consider the experience of our audiences, we will go a long way toward driving simplicity in many important ways. For example,

• Positioning. It’s a lot easier to assemble all the elements that support what you are rather than being absolutely clear about what you’re not. Can you get your positioning down to three words or less? What can you eliminate right now?
• Selling. It’s a lot easier to go deep on reasons why rather than stating no more than three that matter the most. Can you commit to three reasons why you/your products matter?
• Writing. It’s easier to build compound sentences than to focus on the one set of words that say it best. This is where editors have enormous value.
• Interface Design. There are many things that make your products cool. You want to show them all off. But in an app and Twitter world you need to strip away everything extraneous to drive the user as simply as possible to the end. Why do you think Apple has such a loyal customer base? For its leadership in driving innovation, Apple’s users regularly experience elegant simplicity.

Beware of complexity. It’s not your friend. Focus instead on enabling simplicity in all you do. The result will be welcomed in our overly noisy world.

I recently dined at a ‘west coast fish house’ in San Francisco called Anchor & Hope. It’s in a renovated turn of the century artist’s warehouse. The food and ambiance were terrific, but the name of the place is what keeps me remembering it.

The name, Anchor & Hope, seems to be a really good metaphor for what we often spotlight in this blog – the challenge of breaking free from the weight of the past in order to pursue the possibility of a more valuable future.

If we were truly honest with ourselves, many of us would admit that we’re bogged down by the security of the past. It’s no one’s fault, really. Human nature relies on a cyclical, continuous system to stay alive. It’s called Life. We survive on patterns, repetitions, and consistency.  As the saying goes we are creatures of habit. Is it surprising, then, that some organizations are stuck in their ways?

We take comfort in the way things are – even the way things have been. The past and present are familiar on multiple dimensions. You know what was involved. You know how you felt. You even know the impact of your actions. Anything beyond that, by definition, is unknown.

Most people don’t do well with the unknown. Nor do they jump into situations that are ambiguous and fuzzy. That’s why it’s so difficult to enroll people in change platforms.  We are innately opposed to doing something different.

Then why do some people and certain organizations risk the comfort and reward of the past and present for the possibility of a better tomorrow?

1. Darwin said only the fittest survive. Put another way, someone will always step up to do whatever it takes to win. That’s drive.
2. Some people simply desire more. And they are willing to risk everything to take them to a place they believe is better. That’s ambition.
3. Whether by intent or accident someone will disrupt what’s known with an innovative solution to a big problem. That’s curiosity.

To break the grip of inertia, we need leaders who are unafraid of the dark. We need leaders who are comfortable with ambiguity. We need leaders who can paint a powerful picture of what’s possible. We need leaders who can articulate a compelling case for the journey there.  We need clear, tangible tools to guide us forward. And we need constant reminders of our progress.

Sustainable change will not happen without proper leadership and fortitude.  Give people a compelling reason to believe. Show them where you’re going and how you’re going to get there. Make it emotional, not just rational. Reinforce the message every chance you can. And transparently highlight your progress.

Do this, and you will release the anchor that’s holding you back. Give people hope and they will move mountains.

What is your anchor? What is holding you or your organization back?

What is your hope? What do you really wish for?

The sooner you focus on shedding what’s holding you back, the sooner you can start realizing the potential of what you hope for. Otherwise, your hope will remain anchored in the past.

Thomas Butta

For me 1WTC is less about what it is — a building — than what it stands for — the commitment to building something bigger, better and bolder. Think about it.

• A building is static. The act of building is active.
• A building is about what is. Building is about what can be.
• A building is the embodiment of how things were. Building is about forward progress and reaching higher.

Why is the notion of building so important — especially now? Because doing the opposite — not building — is a path to nowhere. Why?

• Consider the speed at which everything is changing.
• Consider how innovation lifecycles are shorter and shorter.
• Consider our easy access to just about anyone and any market.
• Consider the thousands of entrepreneurs and billions of investment currency committed to challenging conventional wisdom and current market leaders.

Taking pleasure from past success may be comforting, but it’s delusional. Continuing to operate in the same manner and style as how it’s always been may feel familiar, but it’s an insular trap. A new workout routine ceases to produce new results after six weeks. Budgeting off of past year models is an inside-out view that doesn’t reflect what’s going on in the market. Managing off of organizational practices built for productivity and efficiency will not produce the innovation and breakthroughs needed to prevail in a highly dynamic and fiercely competitive economy.

Contemporary thought leaders are actively promoting the need to think and act in this manner. Take Gary Hamel, who was ranked #1 most influential business thinker in the world by the Wall Street Journal. His latest book, What Matters Most, is about “how to win in a world of relentless change, ferocious competition, and unstoppable innovation.” You should also check out The Management Innovation Exchange. It’s “an open innovation project aimed at reinventing management for the 21^st Century.”

You have a choice. Remain as you are. And stay how you’ve been. Or courageously commit to aggressively building a bigger, better and bolder future for yourself and your organization. 1WTC may have eclipsed the Empire State Building as the tallest building in New York City, but it is committed to building the tallest building in the Western hemisphere and third largest in the world. Now that’s ambition.

The question is: Are you a building? Or are you building for a better future?

Thomas Butta

Inertia is a force far greater than momentum.

By Adam Hartung, Contributor

There is a big cry for innovation these days.Unfortunately, despite spending a lot of money on it, most innovation simply isn’t. And that’s why companies don’t grow.

The giant consulting firm Booz & Co. just completed its most recent survey on innovation.  Like most analysts, they tried using R&D spending as yardstick for measuring innovation.  Unfortunately, as a lot of us already knew, there is no correlation:

“There is no statistically significant relationship between financial performance and innovation spending, in terms of either total R&D dollars or R&D as a percentage of revenues. Many companies — notably, Apple — consistently underspend their peers on R&D investments while outperforming them on a broad range of measures of corporate success, such as revenue growth, profit growth, margins, and total shareholder return. Meanwhile, entire industries, such as pharmaceuticals, continue to devote relatively large shares of their resources to innovation, yet end up with much less to show for it than they — and their shareholders — might hope for.”

(Uh-hum, did you hear about this Abbott? Pfizer? Readers that missed it might want to glance at last week’s blog about Abbott, and why it is a sell after announcing plans to split the company.)

Far too often, companies spend most of their innovation dollars on making their products cheaper, operate better, faster or do more.  Clayton Christensen pointed this out some 15 years ago in his groundbreaking book “The Innovator’s Dilemma” (HBS Press, 1997).  Most R&D, in most industries, and for most companies, is spent trying to sustain an existing technology – not identify or develop a disruptive technology that would have far higher rates of return.

While this is easy to conceptualize, it is much harder to understand.  Until we look at a storied company like Kodak – which has received a lot of news this last month.

Kodak invented amateur photography, and was rewarded with decades of profitable revenue growth as its string of cheap cameras, film products and photographic papers changed the way people thought about photographs.  Kodak was the world leader in photographic film and paper sales, at great margins, and its value grew exponentially!

Of course, we all know what happened.  Amateur photography went digital.  No more film, and no more film developing.  Even camera sales have disappeared as most folks simply use mobile phones.

But what most people don’t know is that Kodak invented digital photography!

Really!  They were the first to create the technology, and the first to apply it.  But they didn’t really market it, largely because of fears they wouldcannibalize their film sales.  In an effort to defend & extend their old business, Kodak licensed digital photography patents to camera manufacturers, abandoned R&D in the product line and maintained its focuson on its core business.  Kodak kept making amateur film better, faster and cheaper – until nobody cared any more.

Continue Reading >

Say what you want about the Occupy Wall Street movement, but we can surely agree it has garnered attention and sparked debate. The question is why. Why has the Occupy Wall Street movement — and the related activities it has spawned — tapped our interest and emotions? What is there to learn from this change platform?

I can tell you I have questions about the movement, especially its beginnings. Were people hired to protest? Where the protestors put in place by a powerful, quietly controlling organization? Is the march on Wall Street a made-for-media event not unlike that depicted in the brilliant film, Wag The Dog? I wonder.

What I don’t wonder about is why we have been drawn into this explosive issue.

Like any smart positioning platform, the Occupy Wall Street movement has tapped into something fundamentally important to many of us — the state of the economy and what it means to us personally. We might have our different opinions about it, but one thing’s for certain: The movement has become a lightening rod for how we feel about how things are — our individual and collective economic circumstances, what caused us to get into this precarious place, and how we can get out of it.

For some, there is extreme dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs. For others, there’s a defensiveness about being seen as the cause. For others still there’s relief, perhaps even delight, in not being personally ensnared in the downward spiral of a global economy that’s sucking wind. No matter which camp you’re in, the movement is purposefully and effectively drawing our attention to what is arguably the most important issue of our times.

Smart positioning — especially positioning for a change platform — is about being four things:

1. Relevant
2. Powerful
3. Differentiating/Unique
4. Authentic

Being relevant is about focusing on an issue that’s personally important to your audience. Being powerful is about focusing on the issue that’s most relevant to your audience. Being different is about carving out a unique point of view, sometimes in relation to one that already exists and sometimes one that is controversial. Being authentic is about being real.

You can position around the first three, but not have your platform be true. If you’re inauthentic, you’ll do more damage than if you were honest in the first place because people will eventually uncover the truth. But, if your platform is authentic — especially if it’s about a fundamental truth and your point-of-view is compelling — then you have the opportunity to unleash emotions because most people will respond in one way or another when they feel something.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is an effective change platform because its core issue is not only highly relevant it’s real. Its point-of-view on who’s to blame may be controversial, but the movement has successfully sparked the debate that is shining a spotlight on the economy.

The economy is precarious. Jobs are illusive. Money is tight. The future is uncertain. Families and businesses are nervous. Many are suffering. Political rhetoric, let alone proposed solutions, aren’t satisfactory. People need resolution and answers now.

What happens as a result of the Occupy Wall Street Movement remains to be seen. What’s clear now is that all sorts of people are finally focused on it and talking about it.

What change platform are you trying to drive?

Let’s take a look at what usually happens.

Transformation efforts are commonly dominated by the planning and setting strategy. As you have surely witnessed anything having to do with strategy is a natural magnet for opinions, points of view, and involvement. That’s all well and good. Strategy requires input from a range of internal and external voices – from customers, analysts, partners, competitors, the product group, sales, services, marketing, finance, shareholders, and the board. But, once the strategic direction is determined transformation efforts often suffer a precipitous – and predictable – drop-off in attention, focus, and follow-through.

Why? Why do transformation efforts fall down as you shift from strategy to execution?

Making it Happen is Hard

First, the actual making-it-happen and bringing-it-to-life work is a lot harder than simply identifying what to do. Look at what’s required to achieve sustainable transformation.

1. Your entire organization needs to be galvanized to do things in a purposeful way – a way that is often different than how things were done before.
2. The new way requires a steadfast focus on what needs to happen.
3. Inertia, a force more formidable than momentum, will rear itself. You need to be resolute in your commitment to doing battle with the inevitable return to how things were done before.
4. You’ll also need to be courageously clear. Shutting down work that’s not on the transformation agenda is a lot harder than starting new things.

No One’s in Charge

Second, someone needs to be in charge, but often no one is. You don’t have a Chief Transformation Officer in your company, do you? What would such a transformation leader look like?

1. A transformation owner/driver needs to have the executive charter to make transformation happen and hold people accountable for new behavior.
2. Charter aside, the job requires someone who has the credibility, intellect, and leadership qualities to gain commitments from critical stakeholders across all functions of a business.
3. A transformation leader needs to have a full grasp of the opportunity, a deep understanding of the state of the current business, a pointed plan for where it needs to go, the wherewithal to orchestrate the effort inside the organization, and the personality to motivate, inspire, and drive momentum.

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 >

Leaders do not live in the middle. Leaders are bold and willing to take a stand. Innovators do not live in the middle.  Innovators live on the edges of new possibilities. Scientists do not live in the middle.  Scientists are always searching to know what doesn’t work.

The middle is full of people who choose to be exactly where they are. It’s a place where they are most comfortable. That’s okay. What is not okay is for people to use the safety of the middle as a place to criticize rather than create, to pontificate rather than push, to damage rather than define. These people will not advance our cause.  We have no time for such people just as we didn’t have time for them when America was being shaped at the turn of the century.  Hear Teddy Roosevelt’s words from 1910 as if they were said today.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Thomas Butta

Leading doesn’t mean having all the answers. Good piece.

Mike Myatt writes, speaks and offers advice on the topics of leadership, strategy and innovation. He is widely regarded as America’s Top CEO Coach and is the author of “Leadership Matters — The CEO Survival Manual.” For more information, visit his blog.

Many leaders are very skilled at challenging the thoughts and opinions of others, but are woefully inept when it comes to challenging their own thinking. The reality is that it takes no effort to cling to your current thinking; however to change your mind requires you to challenge your mind. I’ve believed for quite sometime the most profound and commonly overlooked aspect of learning is recognizing the necessity of unlearning.

How difficult is it for you to change your mind? When was the last time you actually changed your mind? Do you consistently challenge your own thinking, or do you wait for others to bring the challenge to you? When your thinking is confronted, how do you react? I’ve often said the rigidity of a closed mind is the first step in limiting opportunity. I can think of no better definition for a closed mind than someone unwilling to change their opinions. Smart leaders recognize it’s much more valuable to step across mental lines in the sand than to draw them.

Let me begin by suggesting that changing one’s mind isn’t necessarily the same thing as being wishy-washy. The difference is found in the motivation underpinning the change. If your opinions change with the wind based on little more than the court of public opinion, you’re not a leader but just someone else trying to fit in with the cool kids.

There is a big difference between taking a principled stand and trying to be liked. There’s also a big difference between standing on conviction versus just wanting to win an argument. When evaluating your position on any given topic, are you trying to learn something, or are you just trying to justify your opinion? Having strong convictions is a healthy thing so long as you’re convicted by the truth and not your pride or your ego.

Here’s the thing: No one has all the answers, so why even attempt to pretend that you do? Show me a person that never changes their mind, and I’ll show you a static thinker who has sentenced his mind to a prison of mediocrity and wasted potential. If the world is constantly changing, if the marketplace is always evolving, if the minds of others are continuously developing, how can you attempt to be unchanging and still be relevant? The smartest people I know are the most willing to change their minds. They don’t want to be right, they want the right outcome — they want to learn, grow, develop, and mature.

Smart leaders don’t tell people what they should think; they surround themselves with great thinkers, and then consistently seek their insights, observations and opinions. Subjecting yourself to dissenting opinion allows you to refine your good ideas, weed out the bad ideas and acquire new ideas. Moreover, it’s the ability to evolve and to nuance thinking that leads to the change and innovation your organization needs to survive.

Leaders and their ability to change their mind demonstrates humility, confidence and maturity. It makes them approachable, and it makes them human. People are looking for authentic, transparent leaders willing to sacrifice their ego in favor of right thinking.

Bottom line — when you fear being wrong more than being proven wrong, you have arrived as a leader.

Read the Original Article >