“Why can’t we build cool products like Apple?”

If I hear this question in a high tech company again, I’m going to puke.  For starters, because your/my company doesn’t have Steve Jobs.  He’s a freak of nature.  A genius of sorts.  And one of a tiny number of people in the history of the technology industry that have his skills.

But lots of companies make great products and lots of money without needing a Steve Jobs.   Shouldn’t we focus on that instead?

First, let’s stop doing the things that are sure to deliver a bad product.  That should raise the chances of success by 50%.  Such as: catering to a small percentage of a user base with esoteric features that will appear complicated to the rest.  Or, rushing to deliver something without proving it’s useful and useable.

Then, let’s do the things that look like best practice. Spend the time upfront designing it right.   Explore contrarian approaches and avoid mimicking competitors without knowing exactly why.

Sweating the details.  Avoid making the user’s life too complicated with extraneous features.  Wait a minute, isn’t this what Apple does so well?  😉

Food is Travel, Travel is Food (part two in Tokyo)

Japan has been weighing on my mind lately for obvious reasons.  So why not write about Japan in Part Two of this series of posts?

Before I go there, I have to confess.  After writing the first post of this series, my wife asked me, “What about my cooking?  Don’t I rate in your memories of great meals?”  To which I replied, “Of course, honey.  But I was writing about travel and food.”  Being the clueless male that I am, little did I realize that I screwed up.  So, let the record state that my wife is indeed an accomplished and passionate cook.  Many of the best meals I have had were prepared by her.

On to the travel bit.

Unlike travels in North America where I can recall the exact names of many restaurants I’ve visited, I can’t do the same in Japan.  But I can recall specific meals for sure.

Probably the most memorable meals were two different kaiseki meals.  These are multi-course feasts.  You get a little of everything: a perfectly grilled portion of beef (kobe if you’re lucky and/or rich), the very freshest sashimi, delicate soups and more.  Every course is a revelation of simplicity and pleasure.

Kaiseki is a typical setting for business dinners, so in some regards the enjoyment of the meal is also a reflection of the relationship with the persons with whom you’re dining.  As a meal with someone you’ve just met, it can be a bit formal.  But with business friends, it can be thoroughly enjoyable.

One can’t mention Japan without talking about ramen.  It’s so plentiful, cheap and common as a lunch meal that you could dismiss its sublime nature; rich broth, toothsome noodles and just the right balance of ingredients.

If you’re my wife, the quest for great ramen outside Japan is approching an obsession.  Too bad she hasn’t been to Japan more often.  And ramen causes obsession in Japan too, as evidenced by the movie Tampopo.

Another memorable meal was a simple one.  I asked the concierge at the hotel to send me to a neighborhood sushi restaurant.  The type that would be small and catered to the residents.  My colleague led me to believe that he loved sushi too, though in retrospect his tastes were pretty limited.

We walked into a place with maybe two stand alone tables and took two of just eight seats at the sushi bar.  It was simple, almost rustic.

I ordered omakase style, where you place your trust in the chef to choose your food.  You are often richly rewarded.  The chef proceeded to present a series of fishes, many of which I hadn’t had before. Given how much sushi I’ve eaten over the years, this was an accomplishment in its own right.

The most surprising dish of the night was when the chef lit a small bunsen burner, and proceeded to grill a couple of oysters on the half shell.  Before serving, he drizzled a little bit of soy and maybe some rice wine vinegar.  The dish embodied Japanese food: fresh, simple.  Every ingredient contributes something, but only 2-4 ingredients are used in all.

I can’t wait to return.

A silver lining to the Japan earthquake?

My heart is heavy over the destruction and loss of life in Japan following the earthquake;  Japan is one of my favorite places on earth.

However, there might be a (small) silver lining in the face of such bad news.  The massive capital expenditures required to re-build the country may help Japan reinvigorate economic growth in the face of many years of financial stasis.

I’m no expert, but it seems that Japan has been in an economic logjam for a while.  First, you have a personal savings rate that is very high relative to other G20 countries.  And that rate hasn’t fluctuated much despite the recessionary periods of the last 20 years.  Second, you have a very healthy population whose life expectancy is high and getting higher.  Third, you have a low birth rate.  Last, you have a country with an isolationist immigration policy.  The end result: Japan’s growth has stalled as a result of expensive labor and a shrinking workforce.  It can’t afford its lifestyle of circa 1985 that followed a long period of economic expansion.

The system is hamstrung in terms finding new incentives and sources of investment capital .  Many of the constraints in the system are self-imposed by the populace as consumers and voters.

Which is where the silver lining could come in.

The massive spending required to re-build infrastructure will be government-led.  And that government is going to quickly find that a blue-collar workforce in Japan is in scarce supply and/or very highly paid.  Which it cannot afford.

Thus, the situation may necessitate the need to import workers from other countries.  Unlike during periods of stasis where cultural norms have prevailed, this relaxation of immigration policy could be face-saving in the name of “rebuilding”.

Why would this be good?  If you examine any other G20 country, you will observe fewer structural barriers to bi-lateral trade and immigration.  In other words, inexpensive labor can flow into a country when the conditions warrant it such as high capital investment.  And Japan needs this labor to afford the bill that the catastrophe has levied.

One could argue it’s not a very efficient use of capital to pay for infrastructure that was already paid for and is in fine working condition.  But Japan needs a reason to break the stasis and constraints of the last 20 years.  It changed so rapidly in the 40 years since World War 2, and prospered mightily.  Another wave of change would help Japan re-calibrate in a world has changed a lot in the last 20 years and is more interdependent than ever.

Physically, an island.  Metaphorically, perhaps not for long.  Which could be good.

I’m having a case of “TED envy”

The TED Conference is going on this week.  I wish I was there, even as I’m consoled by the fact that the weather in Tel Aviv is gorgeous during my business trip.

While I’ve never been to the TED Conference, I have adopted the habit of watching TED Talks online.  The premise of the talks is that a (presumable) expert gives the “talk of their life” in 20 minutes on their area of their expertise.

An aside: I noted that humorist John Hodgman is speaking there this week.  He wrote a wickedly funny and strange book called “Areas of My Expertise”. Maybe that’s why he was invited.  The book is highly recommended.

While TED and TED Talks have been pretty interesting stuff, I thought about the undercurrent of TED.  Which seems to be the unspoken: “let’s all get together, call each other smart, and be confident that the high cost of conference admission weeds out the others”. This type of self-referential, self-reinforcing elitism usually brings out the contrarian and cynic in me.  As in, “the really smart people probably avoid this type of conference like the plague”.

But when you look at the caliber of the speakers, you have to ask yourself: is there a still-higher caliber of people left out?  If so, what percentage of the “smart people” population are they?  Probably very small indeed.

In the end, I decided TED people are way smarter than me.  Ergo, I’ll keep watching TED Talks and wishing I was there.

Food is Travel, Travel is Food (part one)

To me, food is perhaps the most significant manifestation of a culture.  What else has the potential to express a culture’s values three times a day, every day? And the consumption of food is highly ritualistic, an integral part of defining how families interact, how business is done, how communities function.

To test my assumption, I thought about all of the countries I have visited and my ability to recall memories of food.  It was easy.  So many memorable moments revolved around food.  In many cases, I could recall the precise dish and restaurant.

This post is the first in a series.  I’ll start with North America followed by Europe, Asia and the Caribbean in future posts.  Here’s a sampling:

New Orleans.  Oysters and 300 beers to choose from at Cooter Brown’s.  Pecan waffles at Camellia Grill.  Mac and cheese at Rocky & Carlo’s in Chalmette.  Barbeque shrimp at Pascal’s Manale.  Fried oyster po-boy at Mother’s.  Anything at Jazz Fest.  Muffuletta sandwich at Central Grocery.  A great meal at Herbsaint whose details I can’t remember.  With New Orleans, I could go on.

Boston.  This one’s tough as it’s my home town with too many memories to fit one blog entry.  That said, here’s a few.  Clam chowder at Legal Sea Foods.  Tasting menu at Radius.  Cannoli at Mike’s Pastry.  Fried clams at Woodman’s or The Clam Box.  Anything at Oleana.  Pizza at Emma’s.  Shrimp & grits at Hungry Mother.  Burgers at Barley’s.

San Francisco.  Crab cakes and broiled fish at Tadich Grill.  Anything Asian in downtown Mountain View.  Mongolian pork chops at Mustards Grill in Napa.  Cheap sushi and sake bombs at Miyake in Palo Alto.  Simple pasta dishes and sidewalk dining at a defunct Italian resto in Palo Alto whose name I can’t recall.

New York.  This one’s hard if only because my culinary adventures span 30 years.  Maybe the most memorable trip was my first, at age 13.  My older brother first exposed me to Thai food, sushi and Chinese in one weekend.  Thereafter:  Sugar Reef on Second Avenue for great, cheap Caribbean food in the East Village.  Brunch at Maxwell’s Plum.  Sushi at innumerable good places.  Aureole for some duck dish I can’t remember.  Henry’s End in Brooklyn Heights for exotic game on the grill.  Zarela for killer margaritas.  Gustavino’s for one of the more memorable settings ever: under the arches of the 59th Street Bridge.

Halifax.  Clearwater for freshly cooked lobsters to take home and make lobster rolls.  Lots of meals cooked at my Mom’s house.  In fact, she probably wouldn’t want me to speak of anything in Halifax that she didn’t cook.

Toronto.  Bouillabaisse with grilled seafood at Pronto, long defunct.  I would literally go there every trip to Toronto in the early 90’s.  And that was a lot of times.  Bistro 990 for duck confit and celebrity sightings during the film festival.

Montreal.  Schwartz’s for smoked meat sandwiches.  Bagels at Fairmount.  Though I can’t profess a love for their wood-fired oven flavor and texture, they certainly differ from New York style.

Washington, DC.  Sushi Taro for some of the best Japanese cuisine I’ve had outside of Japan.  Also the place I first tasted unfiltered sake.  Yum.  I suppose it helps to be located near the Japanese embassy.  Restaurant Nora before the Clintons even got there.

Other cities with great food but foggy memories:  Chicago.  Portland, Maine.  Seattle.  Los Angeles.  Vancouver.

Stay tuned for future installments elsewhere in the world.

My parents are on Facebook; I’m outta here!

I’m not the first to write about how parents’ arrival on Facebook has driven their children elsewhere.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see some other social media site overtake Facebook in popularity amongst teens and young adults .  Just as Facebook did to MySpace years ago.

But for people over 25, Facebook is here to stay.

Being a teenager is about experimentation.  Teens go through phases of trying on “personas” through the cliques they belong to, the way they dress, their tastes in music, TV, movies, books etc.  A lot of those experiments are best forgotten, even if they form some facet of the future adult.

For example, I had the nickname “Bambi” in college when I wore my hair shaved to half an inch. I also wore Stranglers t-shirts with swear words on them.  The hairstyle and the t-shirts are gone now, but the music remains in my collection.

If you’re leaving evidence of one of those experiments online, you might prefer to forget about it later.  And you might also prefer others (read: parents) not to see the details along the way.  Hence, the reluctance to share Facebook with your parents.

So if being a teen is about forgetting , is being an adult about remembering?

I think the attraction of Facebook to adults is the ease of remembering by staying connected.  As an adult, friendships get left behind not out of embarrassment but out of practical necessity.  Getting married?  Your single friends might be superseded by couples.  Having kids?  You’ll probably hang out with other parents.  Moving cities?  It’s hard to keep in touch with your friends in the prior city.  Changing jobs?  Your old work friends will drift away.

Facebook helps keep you connected.   100 years ago, people were less mobile and had circles of friends that didn’t change much over time.  Today we change so fast.  But that doesn’t mean we want to divorce ourselves from the past.  Facebook plays a valuable role in helping us stay connected.

Turning customer complaints into inspiration (and action)

At work, I subscribe to an email distribution list where customer complaints from web forms get routed around.  Every day, someone complains.  It’s logical given the size of our user base (100 million+), but more importantly because we know we can do better.

That steady drumbeat of complaints motivates me.  Call me a masochist. Complaints are a constant reminder that with every improvement we make, there is still work to do.

An aside: you won’t be surprised to know that one of our web forms, for general feedback and product suggestions, is highly skewed towards complaints too.  If you ever doubted the adage that for every customer that praises, there are ten who complain, I’m pretty sure I have the proof.  No matter.

You’re probably wondering, where’s the news here?  Don’t we all try to listen to customer feedback?  Yes and no.

It’s tempting to get immune to that drumbeat.  If you get ten complaints every day, is it possible to eventually accept this as “normal”?  After all, your business is probably growing regardless.

I’ve seen two dilemmas in multiple companies where I’ve worked (disclaimer alert: this blog isn’t about my current company per se).

One dilemma is that the corrective action isn’t obvious.

A quick win is to inspect how customer complaints get categorized on receipt.  Regardless of whether you have a call center, online help forums or both, the taxonomy by which you classify complaints can matter.  At numerous companies I’ve worked for, that taxonomy was broken in the sense that for those people who built the product (product managers, developers, QA et al), this customer care data wasn’t categorized clearly enough that it would guide their behavior.

The second dilemma is that not each and every complaint can be resolved to the customer’s complete satisfaction.  Like all things, the corrective actions require prioritization, on the basis of user impact, prevalence, etc.

If you’re good at categorization, then the corrective action is clear and so is the priority.  Try it, you’ll like it!

Global workforces: when will we get it right?

From time to time, my company looks at its strategic initiatives and asks the question: “where in the world should we locate the people for this work?”  Every company does it (or should),  so what follows should in no way be construed as being about my current employer.

But these internal conversations led me to reflect on how we still don’t seem to have the formula right in high tech.  And perhaps by extension in other industries that can have globally distributed workforces.

It seems like every country in the universe of high tech choices is stereotyped and typecast.  The USA is a place to export work from.  India or Czech Republic are places to export work to.  What about the inverse options?  Or the distribution of work between two (stereotypically) low cost countries?

I hate to say it, but management consultants’ use of the term “value chain” is apropos.  We need to get better at framing our choices and thinking about the integrated whole.

Let me suggest a simple scorecard.  Maybe each element can be rated on a 5-point scale.

First is labor costs.  For a given type of work, what’s the fully burdened cost in each locale?  And what’s the rate of wage inflation that forecasts costs in 2-3 years?  For example, I think a lot of people were disappointed in their near-term return on investment in India given the wage inflation, especially in high tech.  Those who have taken a long-run view of costs in India have been rewarded with an ever-deepening talent pool.

Second is critical mass of the labor pool.  Does the locale in question have an ecosystem to tap into?  Such as large companies you can raid.  Or lots of venture-based start-ups.  Or strong universities.  Bottom line: will there be enough people to choose from?

Third is critical mass of the team. Will the work being performed reach critical mass to form a team?  When teams feel ownership over their assignment, they can accomplish great things together.  Individuals working on teams located elsewhere perhaps not so much.

Fourth is distance from dependent resources.  This could be the distance from key executives.  Or peer departments.  Or subordinate functions.  It’s a hassle for people to stay late at work, or make calls from home at night, or get up really early, all to simply interact with the rest of a team.  Hence the critical mass comment above.

But it’s also a huge tax on managers’ and executives’ time and energy to travel long distances to oversee a distant operation.  After a few trips to a new site, the number of visits from “headquarters” starts to dwindle and the sites become divergent.  I had the pleasure of working for a company that was truly committed to its global locations, and the executives traveled accordingly.  I’m not sure this is the norm.

Last is infrastructure.  What kind of communication infrastructure do you need to link these sites?  This is not trivial if you want to maximize the flow of information, as you must.  For example, Cisco’s 3-screen Telepresence is a wonderful product.  But at $100,000 per site means most people will opt for something inferior.

I’ll sum it up.  People need to feel that they belong.  That they “own” the work they do.  That they don’t have a target on their back because the company is unsure if they are good “value for money”.  That they have easy access to others on whom they depend.

If we get this right, good things will surely happen.

Can we please stop calling it “software engineering”?

I’m a deep skeptic of “absolutism”.  And the use of “engineering” to describe software development breeds absolutism.

The word Engineering in other contexts is grounded in science.  As if there is one answer, or at least one best answer, to a scientific problem.  For example, mechanical engineering is bound by properties of the materials in use.

Whereas software development is about the art, not science, of using languages. While languages have rules, they also have flexibility.  Use of a language can be precise, obtuse and everything in between.

Lots of priorities can be served (or not) with a given program.  Want your code to be performant?  Want your code to be maintainable, as in understandable by others?  Want your code to be modular so that it can be easily refactored or replaced?  All will affect how the code is written.

If you doubt the flexibility of coding languages, then what can explain software quality assurance?  After all, these myriads of tests are to deal with the innate diversity, flexibility and expressiveness of code and of the coder.

And we haven’t even got to the choices in designing components of code and architectures.

So why does this matter?  Because thinking about software development in – pardon the word – binary terms ignores many of the choices and challenges of building great software products.  You might not care about things like “cyclomatic complexity”, but you will when you inherit someone else’s code from 10 years ago and you need to keep it going.

We need to focus on choices not absolutes; on degrees of truths.  Software has gotten too damned complicated to think of it in simplistic terms.

Maybe we should call developers “software linguists”?