AOL: Why we will win, pt 2 (why not)
I wrote in part 1 that AOL would win because:
3) We have scale (of audience, infrastructure, and marketing)
2) We still have a highly engaged relationship with known customers
1) We have a well known, wide reaching brand
Continuing my All-Hands speech from last year:
Greatness is forged in the fire of great opportunity, and that's what the above add up to me: great opportunity.
That's why we can win. However, its not all motherhood and apple pies. We have some challenges.
And why AOL won't win...
3) Identity
What is the mission of AOL? Who ARE we? In a world where AOL inarguably helped get people connected and, more or less, saw the Company's original mission fulfilled and then ursurped - what does AOL stand for? "Revenue transformation", "More customers", and "OIBIDA targets" are not exactly rousing missions... those are vaguely Dilbertesque business goals.
2) Relevance
Directly related to the previous point, but, when AOL does things, even good things, do people care anymore? Not nearly enough, I'd say - there's a trust in our future AOL has to rebuild: with users, the press, investors, and even ourselves. When people talk about Internet companies, AOL often don't even make the list.
1) Brand rejectors
On this point, most people think I mean AOL's brand perception in the market at large. Yeah, that's a problem, but as the old adage goes: there's no such thing as bad publicity. No, I'm talking about something far more insidious: there are too many people who hate AOL who work at AOL. It disappoints me to hear employees talk about "non-members" as our future (the term, not the concept, bothers me because of what it implies about our self esteem). If people are in our namespace, if they use our software, we should be inclusive in our view of them as "members" of our services. There is a deep condescension at work there. And it disappoints me to see the rejection of terms like "AOL Experience" - it ought to be something we work to be proud of, dammit, not something we want to leave behind. We have too many brand rejectors who work here, and you have to believe to succeed.
In my view, our BIGGEST problem is that because there is often this subtle self-loathing in our culture, we're too busy, as a company, copying where we should be leading. If we're not chasing a press relese, or the latest flash-in-the-pan "disruptive technology"(remember [EDITED FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION] or [EDITED FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION], anybody?), we're busy copying (read: being constrained by) our past.
We CAN compete, but we have to recognize that there is no magic; there are no silver bullets. It takes vision, commitment, and hard work.
Most importantly, AOL is best when we're defining the rules, not conforming to them.
And, like dignity, this self-definition comes from the inside out - as Eleanor Roosevelt said so well, "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent".
3) We have scale (of audience, infrastructure, and marketing)
2) We still have a highly engaged relationship with known customers
1) We have a well known, wide reaching brand
Continuing my All-Hands speech from last year:
Greatness is forged in the fire of great opportunity, and that's what the above add up to me: great opportunity.
That's why we can win. However, its not all motherhood and apple pies. We have some challenges.
And why AOL won't win...
3) Identity
What is the mission of AOL? Who ARE we? In a world where AOL inarguably helped get people connected and, more or less, saw the Company's original mission fulfilled and then ursurped - what does AOL stand for? "Revenue transformation", "More customers", and "OIBIDA targets" are not exactly rousing missions... those are vaguely Dilbertesque business goals.
2) Relevance
Directly related to the previous point, but, when AOL does things, even good things, do people care anymore? Not nearly enough, I'd say - there's a trust in our future AOL has to rebuild: with users, the press, investors, and even ourselves. When people talk about Internet companies, AOL often don't even make the list.
1) Brand rejectors
On this point, most people think I mean AOL's brand perception in the market at large. Yeah, that's a problem, but as the old adage goes: there's no such thing as bad publicity. No, I'm talking about something far more insidious: there are too many people who hate AOL who work at AOL. It disappoints me to hear employees talk about "non-members" as our future (the term, not the concept, bothers me because of what it implies about our self esteem). If people are in our namespace, if they use our software, we should be inclusive in our view of them as "members" of our services. There is a deep condescension at work there. And it disappoints me to see the rejection of terms like "AOL Experience" - it ought to be something we work to be proud of, dammit, not something we want to leave behind. We have too many brand rejectors who work here, and you have to believe to succeed.
In my view, our BIGGEST problem is that because there is often this subtle self-loathing in our culture, we're too busy, as a company, copying where we should be leading. If we're not chasing a press relese, or the latest flash-in-the-pan "disruptive technology"(remember [EDITED FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION] or [EDITED FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION], anybody?), we're busy copying (read: being constrained by) our past.
We CAN compete, but we have to recognize that there is no magic; there are no silver bullets. It takes vision, commitment, and hard work.
Most importantly, AOL is best when we're defining the rules, not conforming to them.
And, like dignity, this self-definition comes from the inside out - as Eleanor Roosevelt said so well, "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent".
13 Comments:
Talking about internet companies and why AOL never makes the list... maybe AOL should cut down on the red tape and allow all those brilliant ideas to get into a space where they can compete in real time. For employees to believe they have to be empowered and feel like they are part of a great organization which wants to boost possibilities and confidence not stomp on their morale. Pat them on their backs and then fire them geeez.
But all big companies face the same problems to different degrees. There is hope, cos AOL does have the stuff - not the Phd's, but who needs them anyway :)
Actually in a way, its good that we don't make the lists ... that way we can be the underdog and keep pressing onward against what may seem as insurmountable odds to Wallstreet...and overcome those odds we shall!
Being an underdog only works in sports...in business this usually is a recipe for disaster, see brand image, market perception. Sree, I think the issue with your 3rd point is that many at AOL do not see the end game to what we are working on. This is no fault of yours, just looking at the big picture can be overwhelming, whether it be rumors of a TWX split up, or the constant pressure on our OBIDA, etc.
I dare say that it was the executive level that started speaking of the departure from 'members' to 'users'. I found the entire contect to be a betrayal of sorts. The betrayal is complete due to the fact that we haven't added true value for our members in two years. We've been too busy adding bytes (harddrives) to our users instead
I think everyone has valid points on what our problems are, were, and who is to blame.
But really, who cares about all that. What truly matters now is Sree's commitment, his direct manager's buy-in, and everyone's leadership and commitment to change things.
I've been at AOL for 9 years and half of it has been the good times and half not the good times. I am ready to give it a solid 2 years or so to see if we can turn it around.
Anyone else willing? If not, I'd say its time to consider options.
we join in considering the options. its transition time or google rejects.
A few other problems that AOL is facing:
Legacy. It's much easier to innovate when you don't have thousands of old systems to migrate and maintain. Even seemingly insignificant changes can have huge impacts. Once upon a time, we could add a user preference in the morning and have it in production by nightfall. Those days are long gone. Now, you have to deal with rollout plans, database schemas, code branches, performance impacts, etc. AOL's 15-year-old forms engine is still around, long after HTML has surpassed it in speed and flexibility. And the war on spam would have been lost if an ops programmer hadn't taken it upon himself to reject the complex, multi-tiered legacy infrastructure and write a simple scanner that ran on a single machine - in Perl, yet!
Stakeholders. Likewise, there are just too many groups with a vested interest in any given feature. That checkbox would have to go through usability testing, product design, UI mockups, localization, etc.
The two of these together create the "combinatorial problem" - the negative economy of AOL's scale. A certain lead client developer was always fond of stating that a given feature couldn't be implemented, because given the number of client spins and the number of regression tests it would require, we'd delay the client for an infinite amount of time. The sad truth is, that argument can be true for any given feature on any given platform. Maybe things are more agile now, but it's a tough problem to solve.
Member experience. In the early days, AOL had a clear goal - make something easy and fun enough that Steve Case's mom could use it. We were highly member-centric; features, advertising, even billing changes were done while keeping in mind how this would affect the member experience.
But as we went public, hired "adult supervision", and moved away from hourly fees, that gave way to profit-seeking. We still called them members, but really viewed them as marketing receptacles. We were less interested in what members would enjoy, and more concerned with how much they could tolerate.
Can this form fit an ad? Sure. Do they cancel more? Nope. Great, it's a go. Hey, they're blocking popups, but these are super-special Important popups. Are they cancelling more? No. So it's fine. Hey, let's turn customer service into a profit center by upselling.
Miller seems to be backing away from that mentality in public statements, but I've had mixed experiences as a member since he came on board. Focusing on the customer is such a key part of any business that it's hard to believe companies can forget to do it - but AOL has.
Been-there, done-that syndrome. I was probably one of the worst perpetrators I knew; for any bright idea, I had ten reasons why we'd tried it five years ago and it couldn't work. But times change, and people are wrong. Heck, I predicted that spam wouldn't be a problem. Sometimes, it's better to let the new folks try something they don't know is impossible. Who would ever have thought buddy lists could scale?
What AOL has going for it:
Environment. It's taken a lot of blows since the good old days, but overall, from what I hear, the corporate environment is still healthier than the vast majority of large companies. There may be more days that resemble Dilbert or The Office than before, but realize that in a lot of other companies, EVERY day is Dilbert day.
Smart people. AOL never got publicity as a cool, hip development ship the way Google does, but everything I read about Google I recognize in AOL. There are more smart people per square foot at AOL than just about anywhere - even, I must admit, in marketing.
For a while, AOL was empowering them. For the last few years, it's been getting in their way. If it can figure out how to let those creative people create, then it'll succeed.
Great points Sree and others. Here are my 2 cents.
I am a firm believer of hard work and vision. I view some of our issues with an analogy: folks want to make and use the highway, but no one wants to raise taxes or cut spending to get the highway constructed, usable, and nice.
Highway: Solidify what the highway is. This gets to Sree's identity point. Web Audience can mean just about anything, so more granular vision(s), or communication of vision(s), is good in my opinion.
Taxes: Invest money and time in people, technology, and projects. It's gonna hurt, but it is necessary; we shouldn't give up too quickly. Hire experts in fields; it does matter. Not everything can be purchased off the shelf.
Spending Cuts: cut things that do not matter and repurpose the funds and energy. In my humble opinion we spend too much time fighting over unnecessary orgs, projects, and technology. Cut things and the fighting goes away!
In my opinion we need both, more taxes and more cuts, to win. The good news is that we're doing better with the taxing and spending we've done to date, but how much better can we do with more of the same?
Being so close to government and with the increased traffic congestion around Dulles, the analogy seemed rather appropriate. :)
Wow, this inspired more passionate comments than I expected.
Good.
It means we can still win :)
Carl, you're right on - though that's a mighty big gauntlet you're tossing.
there are too many people who hate AOL who work at AOL
I've been trying absorb the irony of this statement being written by an AOL VP while using Google's blogging product but so far it's been too much irony for me.
LOL - ya-OUCH. touche.
This may be hard to believe, but not every product we make is targetted at every segment of its potential market.
"Hate AOL" and "Blind Love" don't seem like the only options?
Still, perception is reality, so its hard for me to argue TOO strenuously.
That said, I'm in fine company :)
The potential is there... breaking out of the old business model and taking risks. Going global too. It's one to watch out for.
runescape money runescape gold runescape money runescape gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft Power Leveling Warcraft PowerLeveling buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape items runescape gold runescape accounts runescape gp dofus kamas buy dofus kamas Guild Wars Gold buy Guild Wars Gold runescape accounts buy runescape accounts runescape lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold runescape money runescape power leveling runescape money runescape gold dofus kamas cheap runescape money cheap runescape gold Hellgate Palladium Hellgate London Palladium Hellgate money Tabula Rasa gold tabula rasa money 陈楚生 压力开关 压力传感器 流量开关 流量计 液位计 液位开关 温湿度记录仪 风速仪 差压开关 可燃气体检测仪 过滤器 强磁水处理器 自清洗过滤器 自动反冲洗过滤器 保鲜棕榈树 棕榈树
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home