Happy Belated Birthday Microsoft (who turned 37 last week)…
Having worked at Microsoft for nearly half of Microsoft’s existence as well as more than half of my career it has provided one of my broadest pools of experiences including the areas I explore here. I was struck by Ray Ozzie’s (heir to Bill Gates as technical visionary of the company) memo (going on a little while ago now) that echoed so many of perspectives about ‘Black Box Complexity’ I have been investigating…
- “But as the PC client and PC-based server have grown from their simple roots over the past 25 years, the PC-centric / server-centric model has accreted simply immense complexity…. Complexity sucks the life out of users, developers and IT. Complexity makes products difficult to plan, build, test and use. Complexity introduces security challenges. Complexity causes administrator frustration. And as time goes on and as software products mature – even with the best of intent – complexity is inescapable…Complex interdependencies and any product’s inherent ‘quirks’ will virtually guarantee that broadly adopted systems won’t simply vanish overnight….But so long as customer or competitive requirements drive teams to build layers of new function on top of a complex core, ultimately a limit will be reached.”
It’s not just technical complexity that threatens to forge an inscrutable black box around the code base. But also organisational complexity can make the equally large and intricate matrix of decision making as inscrutable and opaque.
Happy Anniversary to me. Well, this blog. Today marks 11 years blogging on Turning Adversity to Advantage as well as Leadership and Management. My friend Hugh similar straddles Leadership and Failure (and many other topics) and his piece above (which coincidentally he shared on my anniversary last year). I not only appreciate the vibrancy and colour of the piece, I applaud the celebration of grit and complexity which is imbued in all good leadership. Too many people think that leadership is floating to the top above all that mess. When in reality, the best leaders have the ability and do dive into the nitty gritty at any point.
A few cases in point. First, one of the great leader/managers, Bill Gates, always astounded me when he did Q&A. He could answer the abstract 30,000 foot questions with poise and clarity (eg. Q: “What is the biggest management challenge?” Bill’s answer, “Getting high IQs to add up. Strangely, when you get a bunch of high IQ people together, collectively their intelligence drops. A good manage gets all the IQ working together in one direction.”). But he could also dive into the most esoteric issues. Some technical director would ask him about why Microsoft chose some approach to handling memory management with the new chip architectures. Most CEOs would say that they would have to have someone get back to them with the details, but Billg jumped in with enthusiasm describing the various constraints of the new architecture and the compiler considerations and trade-offs.
Second, another Microsoft friend of mine, Andrew Voysey, recounted his bucket list journey sailing across the Atlantic. He joined a charter with a number of enthusiastic sailors led by the charter captain with many years and crossings under his belt. The captain briefed the crew on the procedures and protocols at the outset of the journey. When it can to the tedious chore of setting watch, all the crew was split into a rota. All except the captain who didn’t have to take a shift. Andrew challenged him saying, “Everything I’ve ever learned about great leadership is that the leader supports the team and gets stuck in with them. Why don’t you take a share of the dirty work of staying up for watch in the middle of the night? ” The captain responded cryptically, “At some point in the journey you will find out.” Well, all was going fine until one day they hit a major storm. The man on watch came down to the cabin and woke him up to alert him. The captain ordered everyone to get their lifesaving suits on, hunker down below in the cabin and shut the boat up tight while he manned the helm. The captain wrestled with the boat for 36 hours straight of high winds and seas until conditions finally settled. As he stumbled into the cabin heading for bed, he turned to Andrew and said, “That’s why I don’t take a watch. When the proverbial hits the fan and I need to be the one sorting the mess out, you want me fresh and not just having come off a long watch shift.”
Powered by failure for 11 years.
This is not writing. Well, not “real writing. According to some.
Whatever it is, I have been doing it for a complete decade as of today. Recently, life has indeed seemed a bit unreal. So it is hard to determine the ‘real’ from the ‘unreal’. With the override role of cognitive bias in the human condition, the only “real” answer is constant questioning. Especially self-questioning. And whatever this blog is, it does that.
Seth Godin penned in his own blog a fine defence for the “unreal” in his post Walking away from "real"
- “As in, ‘that’s not a real football team, they don’t play in Division 1’ or ‘That stock isn’t traded on a real exchange’ or ‘Your degree isn’t from a real school."’ Real contains all sorts of normative assumptions and implicit criticisms for those that don’t qualify. Real is just one way to reject the weird. My problem with the search for the badge of real is that it trades your goals and your happiness for someone else’s.”
Embracing failure often means debunking fallacies (ie. failure of knowledge) and this “real writing” arrogance does sort of wreak of the “Real Scotsman” fallacy (ie. a logical fallacy that occurs when: during argument, after their favored group has been criticized, someone re-defines the group in order to deflect uncomfortable counter-examples and thus makes the group entirely praiseworthy).
Blogs get poo-poo’d by the pros as not ‘real writing. But I have been in the fraternity of ‘professional writers’ both as an overseas correspondent in Africa and commissioning work in my role at Microsoft marketing. I can tell you right now that a very large majority of ‘professional’ (or ‘real’) writing is in no way real. Rehashed press releases, anodyne stringing together of buzzwords, pay-per-word padding. Echoing Seth’s sentiments, most of this material is also written to the lowest common denominator or normality and unexceptionality.
But it is in the printed world where the embrace of failure to secure a publisher is most interesting. My mother adapted my letters home when I was in Africa into a self-published book. At first, I thought it would be a book that ‘only a mother would love’, but it kept her busy in her new phase of retirement so it seemed harmless. The book hasn’t been a best-seller, but it has been a great way to share a part my experience with not just extended friends and family, but also with other people interested in the topic. My father self-published ‘Shorelines’ and it is in many ways a culmination of his life’s work as a clergyman. Our daughter, Isley, self-published a book of poetry after getting more and more popular on the poetry recital and spoken work circuit and having people ask for a copy of her work. Our son, Chase, self-produced a field recording album “Four Points” and it turned out that the British Library wanted a copy for its archive (being an creative acoustic illustration of the British Isles).
Amateurish? Get real.
Happy Birthday Google. Seventeen years ago Google started transforming our personal and professional lives with not just their search technology, but a whole alphabet soup of innovations. Start-ups no longer want to be the “next Microsoft”, they now want to be the “next Google.” This TED talk by Astro Teller provides an intriguing peak into this post-millennial success story especially for the powerful role that failure plays in its culture.
- “I have a secret for you. The ‘moon shot factory’ is a messy place. But rather than avoid the mess – pretend it’s not there – we tried to make that our strength. We spend most of our time breaking things. Trying to prove that we are wrong…Get excited and cheer ‘Hey, how are we going to kill our project today?’”
- “Enthusiastic skepticism is not the enemy of boundless optimism. It’s optimism’s perfect partner it unlocks the potential in every idea.”
It’s a sentiment echoed in Hugh’s “Herding Cats” post…
- “’Herding cats’ is a nice colloquialism, it certainly describes most businesses I know. Life is messy. The thing is, it’s supposed to be messy. Can you imagine if it weren’t? How utterly dull that would be! The next time you’re having “one of those days” at the office, tell yourself, ‘This is how it’s supposed to be’. Knowing that this is normal, that this is what you chose, makes it manageable.”
Happy Birthday Microsoft. Although maybe 23 August is the date to celebrate Microsoft’s Re-Birth Day. That was the day CEO Steve Ballmer announced his resignation. Ballmer had an indelible part in writing Microsoft’s history which I have shared my own perspectives on in this blog. But it was his decision to step aside which changed the course of the company. And from most perspectives, for the better.
The Wall Street Journal analysed his decision in their piece “Microsoft’s CEO explained how he came to believe he wasn’t the best person to remake the company” which revealed his generously humble dose of embracing failure…
- “Mr. Ballmer says he started to realize he had trained managers to see the trees, not the forest, and that many weren’t going to take his new mandates to heart. In May, he began wondering whether he could meet the pace the board demanded. ‘No matter how fast I want to change, there will be some hesitation from all constituents—employees, directors, investors, partners, vendors, customers, you name it—to believe I’m serious about it, maybe even myself,’ he says. His personal turning point came on a London street. Winding down from a run one morning during a May trip, he had a few minutes to stroll, some rare spare time for recent months. For the first time, he began thinking Microsoft might change faster without him. ‘At the end of the day, we need to break a pattern,’ he says. ‘Face it: I’m a pattern.’ Mr. Ballmer says he secretly began drafting retirement letters—ultimately some 40 of them, ranging from maudlin to radical. On a plane from Europe in late May, he told Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith that it ‘might be the time for me to go.’… ‘While I would like to stay here a few more years, it doesn’t make sense for me to start the transformation and for someone else to come in during the middle.’ The board wasn’t "surprised or shocked," says Mr. Noski, given directors’ conversations with Mr. Ballmer. Mr. Thompson says he and others indicated that ‘fresh eyes and ears might accelerate what we’re trying to do here.’"
Nobody is perfect. We all have our strengths and weaknesses. A while back, I stepped down as Chairperson of a charity I had run very successfully for a number of years. I did so for the same reason why it was time for me to leave Microsoft’s Server Business Division that I had run for 5 years. Both had become very “Bruceified”. I had done all the things that I knew how to do to make a team great. Those were a lot of things and they made the team very strong. But, for starters, once done, my ability and value to make further progress was limited. And second, there were plenty of things that were not ideal and were not my forte to fix.
And after more than three decades of Steve Ballmer at the top (or near penultimate top) of the Microsoft organisation, it too had become very “Ballmerfied”. His focus on the enterprise brought Microsoft many revenues from the lucrative business market, but the surging consumer market was less familiar. His focus on high energy determination anchored Microsoft in the heady days of fast paced growth, but was less effective in the era of a mature market and a more complex organisation.
Since Ballmer’s resignation, Microsoft stock has risen appreciably with investors returning the embrace of this embrace of failure.