Recently in Work Culture Category
How does an analytic company like Google make its most important decisions?
If we are to believe the Google myth, we learn, first and foremost, that they test everything:
We test everything at Google. While any company would prefer real-life data to hunches and guesses, Google is more focused than most (or any) on getting conclusive proof that a new feature or function improves the user experience. We release many of our products in beta on Google Labs to get this kind of feedback early in the process so that we can influence the design and iterate quickly.
The ability to test lots of products and features on hundreds of millions of users is enormously valuable. This test-bed of users (otherwise known as google.com) provides Google with an incredible advantage over enterprise-only search vendors. Bad ideas can be discarded quickly and great ideas can be implemented rapidly, because we have confidence and data to show that they'll improve the user experience.
Of course, when all decision-making is data-driven, it can lead to "madness."
Here's how Douglas Bowman explains why he quit Google:
When a company is filled with engineers, it turns to engineering to solve problems. Reduce each decision to a simple logic problem. Remove all subjectivity and just look at the data. Data in your favor? Ok, launch it. Data shows negative effects? Back to the drawing board. And that data eventually becomes a crutch for every decision, paralyzing the company and preventing it from making any daring design decisions.
In the end, said Bowman, he "won't miss a design philosophy that lives or dies strictly by the sword of data."
The testing culture doesn't end there. On the Google Testing blog, James Whittaker describes the testing frameworks he's observed among the job applicants he's looking to hire:
- Input Domain Framework
- Divide and Conquer Framework
- Fishbowl Framework
- Storybook Framework
- Pessimists Framework
Which one of these frameworks will be best for Google, asks Whittaker.
Which leads us to the topic of
this blog post: Just how do the executives at Google
make
decisions?
Do they base their decisions on the data? Let's look at one well publicized executive decision and the executive decision-maker: Eric Schmidt and his decision to buy YouTube.
On October 9, 2006, in a deal valued at $1.65 billion, Google outbid a number of other competitors to snag YouTube, the online video site which was growing at a rate far outpacing Google's own Video site.
The official Google line was as follows:
The YouTube team has
built an exciting and powerful media platform that complements Google's
mission
to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible
and
useful," said Eric Schmidt, Chief Executive Officer of Google.
"Our companies share similar values; we both always put our users first
and are committed to innovating to improve their experience. Together,
we are
natural partners to offer a compelling media entertainment service to
users,
content owners and advertisers."
So how did Eric Schmidt value Google? Was he analytical, precise, objective?
By his own admission, Schmidt says, in a deposition by lawyers in the Viacom copyright lawsuit, that there was very little revenue coming into YouTube to justify the price his company paid.
Schmidt says that he told his company's board of that YouTube was worth $600 million to $700 million.
Via CNET, we get Schmidt's own words:
Viacom attorney Stuart Jay Baskin: And what was management's valuation?
Eric Schmidt: Much lower than we paid for it.
Baskin: And how was that communicated to the board?
Schmidt: I told them.
Baskin: So why don't you tell us what you remember telling the board in connection with the valuation?
Schmidt: I believe YouTube was worth somewhere around $600 million to $700 million.
...
Baskin: What methodology did you use to come up with that number?
John P. Mancini, an attorney working for Google, objects.
Schmidt: My judgment.
Baskin: Was it based on cash flow analysis? Comparable companies? What were you using as the basis for your judgment?
Mancini objects.
Schmidt: It's just my judgment. I've been doing this a long time.
...
Baskin: I'm not very good at math, but I think that would be $1 billion or so more than you thought the company was, in fact, worth.
Mancini objects.
Schmidt: That is correct.
Later...
Baskin: Can you tell us what reasoning you explained?
Schmidt: Sure, this is a company with very little revenue, growing quickly with user adoption, growing much faster than Google Video, which was the product that Google had. And they had indicated to us that they would be sold, and we believed that there would be a competing offer--because of who Google was--paying much more than they were worth. In the deal dynamics, the price, remember, is not set by my judgment or by financial model or discounted cash flow. It's set by what people are willing to pay. And we ultimately concluded that $1.65 billion included a premium for moving quickly and making sure that we could participate in the user success in YouTube.
What this tells us is that even in the most analytic company in the world, the big decisions are still made on intuition.
Here's why. Analytics can only tell us about the past. We have no data on the future. So Eric Schmidt was making an intuitive decision about Google's own future through examining the intangibles.
For example:
1. YouTube's popularity was sky-rocketing, making
it the
runaway market leader among video-sharing sites.
2. It was crushing his company's own site, Google Video.
3. YouTube was up for auction and would be sold to a competitor unless
Google
jumped first.
4. Google overbid to ensure YouTube didn't fall into rival hands.
And that doesn't take into account two other points which made the deal a winner. From the very beginning, the Google philosophy has been - get attention first, then monetize it. And that is what this bet was all about.
Schmidt saw the attention trajectory in YouTube's growth, and he knew that if anyone could monetize that attention it would be Google. To leave YouTube for Murdoch, Microsoft, or Yahoo was not an option.
In hindsight, it may have been a brilliant move. Although the monetization has proved difficult, Google is breaking even today, which is far better than what has happened at MySpace, for example.
The strategic role of Human Resources in the coming years
To generate creative added value is one of the surest ways for companies to win in the global competition today. Innovation is the new imperative. And in some industries business model reinvention is mandatory. A new approach to human capital is necessary to succeed in the new economy.
Because of the complexity of the new economy human capital becomes increasingly important for a company to succeed.
Let's explain why.
- The global economy is becoming more and more global, competition is steeper, speed to market is accelerating and barriers to entry into an industry are much lower
- More consumers are now becoming better informed and more discriminating "prosumers" with stronger values and higher expectations for return on their dollar
- The impact of technology tears down business models and transforms industries (media, music, financial services, etc.) and leads to powerful knowledge networks which creates active communities (Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) and boosts innovation (open models)
For these three reasons, creative added value is the safest path to beat competition.
Innovation is now part of every CEO's mandate and in many industries it's all about business model reinvention.
A new approach to efficiency needs to emerge... fast!
As we well know innovations comes from executives' ability to generate new ideas. But idea generating does not follow a linear path! Studies show that on the average an executive generates 80% of his daily value in 20% of his or her time at work. So it's really not that effective to impose tight working schedules on your team members.
Yet conventional management and most companies are still operating under the belief that productivity and time spent at your desk follow a linear correlation and not a variable correlation... Here is food for thought for all heads of HR if their companies believe innovation is a key driver of growth.
I recommend Ricardo Semler's book The 7 day week-end - changing the way work works. He's been so successful in his own company in Brazil that he wrote this book to share his no non-sense approach to efficiency and teaches it at Harvard Business School.
Inertia: the greatest stumbling block on the way to innovation
Designing smart innovative business solutions can be challenging but the real deal with innovation is implementation! Why? Because to implement new stuff you need to be able to change... and human nature does not like change... Actually it has a pretty reliable ability to resist change and this ability is called inertia. Any change entails some fear at some level, whether individual or collective, because it threatens our wellbeing and eventually our survival, even if it is ever so subtle.
Our propensity to inertia is linked our capacity for survival, i.e. our instinct. Inertia in an organization is all the more so powerful that it is exponentially cumulative with the number of people involved with a decision. It's easy to see how difficult it is to change mentalities and behaviors in large organizations with thousands of employees...
There are highly effective solutions to deal with inertia but once again they're not about logic. It is rare to get another person to be convinced and motivated to change behavior simply based on a lgical argument. People change because their environment is conducive of change.
People will let themselves be influenced all the more so easily that they feel emotionally motivated and their feelings are taken into account. I always wonder when I hear long impersonal rhetorical speeches at corporate gatherings where too many statistics and metrics are exhibited in tidy power point presentations. What's the strategy behind them? Aren't big collective changes often enough triggered by speeches with powerful emotions and great staging?
Recent research at MIT shows that 20% only of our grey matter is dedicated to conscious thinking and 80% to non-conscious thoughts. The best way to mobilize people is through symbols, rituals that impacts our senses and emotions and reaches our unconscious. Steve Jobs understands it well and long before him popes in Rome. Many companies seem to understand this much better when it comes to consumers than when it is about communicating to their employees. And few only are actually convincing in this arena.
Some food for thought for heads of HR to put on the top of their 2010 new resolutions list to accelerate change and foster innovation.
Profit alone is no longer enough. Actually it's on its way to become the biggest stumbling block to innovation.
Last point, even more important than the above mentioned. To drive innovation and reinvention the most important factor today is to factor in sustainable development into the mission of the company and its strategy.
The sustainability challenge is a mega trend - if not the biggest one in our economy - and it is nowhere close to disappearing. It will affect many generations to come. Its ripple effects are felt on many levels and far beyond and deeper than our conscious mind since they directly affect our wellbeing and potentially threaten our survival as a species.
Therefore they directly and powerfully impact our capacity for imagination, and change. The fastest and most compelling way to facilitate innovation and change in an organization is to move beyond the usual objective of higher profit (which in itself is quite legitimate and necessary of course) to focus on sustainable value creation, which of course entails financial profitability but is not limited to it.
Sustainable value adds on top of profit the notion of the prosperity of all employees, associates, and partners of the company and respect of all ecosystems whether societal, cultural or environmental.
Here is, in my opinion, a third hot topic for any head of HR who values innovation and its impact to drive growth in the organization or reinvent a failing business model.
It is possible!
This holistic approach to corporate mission and strategic management may seem daunting and remote from the day to day concerns of business unit managers in the trenches, busy fighting for their market shares. But the ROI is exponential and reaches far beyond traditional strategic management favored by logic. Based on personal experience both as business leader and advisor to prominent CEOs this approach engages people beyond imagination. Companies like Google, Danone, Toyota or today Renault with its electric car have proved this quite eloquently.
It is time to bring back human capital where it belongs... to the core of corporate strategy, mission and culture. Only intuition can blend the efficacy of logic with the power of instinct.
Intuitive Intelligence is the optimum ability to innovate and help directors of HR in their strategic mandate.

Translated:
Another way to manage and lead
Neurosciences in the service of business
Francis Cholle author of L'Intelligence Intuitive recommends to executives to combine their analytical mind with their intuitive aptitudes to gain further consumer insight and improve business performance.
From our correspondent in the Sillicon Valley, Laetitia Mailhes
For beauty and fashion executives time has come to reconsider every aspect of business. "The economy is changing consumers' behaviors, independently from the evolution of incomes, explains NY Fashion Institute of Technology Professor Stephan Kanlian. To open their wallet consumers today want more than brand prestige. They demand more and more added value and a greater match between products they buy and their own values." But the business community is not well prepared to adapt to such a radical change.
"Obsession for financial return has led leaders to often forget they share a common humanity with consumers," says Francis Cholle, author of L'Intelligence Intuitive, innovation consultant for large corporations and advisor to their C-Level executives. A graduate of the best European business school, HEC (Ecoles des Hautes Commerciales) Francis Cholle insists that sustainable value creation requires the necessary synergy between analysis and ROI on the one hand and play and instinct, on the other (see graph below of The Intuitive Compass™).

The role of intuitive intelligence
"Neuroscience showed in 2005 that parts of our brain traditionally associated with our instinct are involved in our most sophisticated decisions" says our expert in reference to MIT Picower Institute for Learning and Memory research on our reptilian brain aka instinctual brain, published in the scientific journal Nature. "It is very noticeable in consumer behaviors. For this exact reason if a company wants to understand its market and meet its expectations, it is necessary that they understand how intuition works and integrate an intuitive process in their business approach," adds Francis Cholle. His message is well received. "My daily conversations with Francis Cholle greatly deepen my thinking at a particularly critical time for our company" says Ralph Lauren Fragrances and Beauty President Guillaume de Lesquen, based in New York to orchestrate the brand development on the world stage.
Long before the economic recession Francis Cholle started to advocate the role of intuitive aptitudes and their impact on value creation. Biotherm for Men global marketing director, Charles Haddad is quite satisfied that he could attend one of Francis Cholle's seminar and acquire tools that explain in a simple language many key aspects of brand development and marketing that he could confusedly feel but could not clearly understand even less so replicate. Today Charles Haddad encourages in his team " free and spontaneous communication. We then select what we feel is relevant". "It is not about leaving behind our marketing objectives but rather about dissolving automatic censorship mechanism often inherent to corporate structures."
Armand de Villoutreys, CEO of Firmenich in Paris and president of Firmenich Fine Fragrance World Division, asserts that he has "learned to approach differently his leadership role in a creative corporation." And it showed very tangible results! "We started four years ago to integrate into our management practices the principles of Intuitive Intelligence," says the French executive. "We have been happy to see an accelerated growth of our financial results across continents well above market average."
© Les Echos n° 20486 dated 08-13-2009 p. 06 (Authorized translation by Peter Camo)

According to a recent report in the Wall Street Journal, L'Oréal SA, the world's largest cosmetics maker, reported flat sales for the first quarter of 2009 as consumers shied away from its luxury skin creams and shampoos in favor of its cheaper brands. The maker of products ranging from Giorgio Armani perfume to Lancôme skin cream and Maybelline eye shadows said sales increased 0.3% to €4.37 billion ($5.83 billion) in the first three months of 2009. Jean-Paul Agon, L'Oréal's chief executive, said that he would not offer specific guidance for the year but that results would "improve" during 2009.
After accounting for the effect of currency fluctuations, sales fell 9.3% in Western Europe and 5% in North America. This shortfall was partly offset by an increase in revenue in Asia.
Sales at L'Oréal's luxury cosmetics division fell, while sales of its consumer drugstore lines increased slightly.
This is an unfortunate turn for L'Oréal which has always been known for its commitment to scientific research and exceptional financial results.
In fact, you might say there is an unresolved tension in its culture between creativity and business results. This tension is visible even on its website. If you read about the "profiles they are looking for" under the marketing category, here's a description you'll find:
Creativity, imagination, openness to new ideas - coupled with the highest professionalism.
• Project-oriented, natural team player, at ease working with others in an environment of entrepreneurial challenge.
• Global-minded, flexible, able to juggle multiple priorities.
• Strong analytical thinker, excellent communicator.
You have a keen eye on the latest fashions, a finger on the pulse of emerging consumer and cultural trends. Highly developed interpersonal skills, a passion for results. The personality to make a difference.
Diagnosis: L'Oréal - When East dominates West...
For the past few years I have been working with L'Oréal to change this dynamic.
The challenge: help marketers and managers develop a sensitivity to the creative nature of the beauty product development process and specifically gain an understanding for the process of research and development.
When the cosmetic group decided to develop a world wide talent appraisal process Sir Lindsay Owen Jones articulated the need to develop a competence key to the success of the group in the eye of the CEO, and that is: sensitivity to métier. What Sir Lindsay Owen Jones was aiming for was to develop a global, shared understanding for beauty products development, for L'Oréal customers, and for a number of other confidential important characteristics identified by the CEO as key factors for success in the beauty industry.
The Human Company was commissioned to research how to define this specific aptitude and how to develop it and train for it. We developed an international training track that is seen today as one of the most successful and inspiring training program available at L'Oréal.
Our approach consists in helping marketers understand how to engage and inspire creative people to contribute the best of their creativity. We used the The Intuitive Compass™ to highlight the tension between results-driven managers and creative teams.
Our analysis: L'Oréal has a product innovation driven business model whereas most of its competitors have often a market-driven model. The company believes in scientific innovation to promote growth. Its founder was a scientist. It is how L'Oréal sustained 20 years of double-digit growth and became the world leader in cosmetics. There is, as I mentioned earlier, a tension in its culture between creativity and business results.
Results: We helped L'Oréal's teams understand the perspective of the different teams. The creative teams learned about the business aspects they had neglected, while the managers and marketers were helped to understand the creative process. The bridge is intuitive intelligence. Our training program is seen today as one of the most successful and inspiring training program available at L'Oréal. (Average rating: 19.5/20) because it is very relevant with the innovation imperative prevailing in the beauty Industry, articulated by the CEO Jean Paul Agon in his mandate.
Over the past few weeks, I've seen how teams of students have used the ideas we discussed, both on creativity and applied intuitive intelligence, to learn more about the possibilities for exploring new avenues for growth. They are full of enthusiasm and passion for their work - and that is what true education is about. May they keep the fire with them always!


Thanks to everyone for such a wonderful evening: FIT's Dr. Joyce Brown and Professor Stephan Kanlian, our gracious hosts; my industry colleagues: Karen Grant, Marc Gobe, Candace Corlett, and Mark Pritchard; and of course, Ellen Byron from the Wall Street Journal.
And most importantly, thank you to the students. Yours is the task of building a tomorrow that keeps us alive, hopeful, and yes, sometimes, truly joyful!
My keynote presentation is available here >>
As I studied the root cause of these failures, a common thread appeared over and over again, and still appears today. Executives manage their companies in analytic ways, focusing on shareholder value. By focusing on the business results, they fail to do what is required to achieve the very results they desire. They can't engage their key stakeholders, whether employees or customers.
- Our minds are essentially unconscious (80% of our grey matter is dedicated to subconscious thinking)
- Play gives access to our unconscious
- Most
innovative solutions are limited by our analytical minds, because our
analytical mind knows only what it knows
- Creativity originates in our unconscious. Breakthrough ideas often elude the rational mind
- People can rise above their perceived limits when they are inspired
Intuitive intelligence is the ability to combine our analytical mind with our intuitive aptitudes to solve problems in an innovative way and succeed in the new economy.
Because we now live in a network based society consumers have gained an active voice in our businesses. Relationships with consumers are on a reciprocal basis. We need to speak to their minds, their emotions and their guts. Authenticity is now at the heart of commerce. Advertising is about creating relevant narratives for consumers as much as it is about factual information about products and services.
We must respect our ecosystems and understand that business is part of an interconnected global web.
These are the primary reasons why I authored the book Intuitive Intelligence, and its application model The Intuitive Compass™.
In this blog I will share my ideas and findings about how to use intuitive intelligence to innovate and create sustainable value in order to succeed in this new, ever-shifting economy.
We'll look at how and why our intuition is often a better guide to problem-solving than reason alone.
We'll explore ways to use The Intuitive Compass™ and make a difference - in business strategy, leadership, innovative work culture, consumer intelligence, and product development.
Won't you join us on this journey?