Leadership: Episode 1

Despite the multitude of writing about the topic of leadership, I believe it is still largely disregarded as the difference between success and failure. Success if often rationalized as ‘the right market’, ‘the best product’, or ‘solving a key problem’, while failure is often rationalized as the inverse. Based on some recent observations, I’ve decided that leadership alone can be the key determinant of the success/failure of a team.

3 recent examples have brought this home to me. These examples stick out in my mind, because in each case, the team in place, the ‘market’, and the overall ‘goal’ did not change. They were constant. The only thing that changed was the Leader. And when the new Leader came onboard, despite all of the other constants, success came rapidly.

Episode 1: James Franklin




Vanderbilt University, in Nashville, Tennessee, has a reputation for a few things: great academics, great medical school, and a weak football team. Vanderbilt football has historically been at the bottom of the SEC, driving limited fan attendance and attention. A few facts on the full history:

-The Commodores have been in 5 bowl games since 1894.
-The last time Vandy won 5 SEC games in a season was 1935.
-Vanderbilt has finished the season ‘ranked’ 1 time…in 1948
-Vanderbilt has only 4 winning seasons. Ever.

And the more recent history:

-The Commodores won 1 SEC game in 2009 and 2010. Combined.
-The Commodores won 4 games total in 2009 and 2010. Combined.
-All 7 SEC losses in 2010 were by >14 points and 4 were by >24 points.

In short, this is a team that has never succeeded consistently and hardly succeeded at all. All of that would change on December 17, 2010.

James Franklin came to Vanderbilt with an incredible confidence and swagger. His energy was infectious from the first day. He was a polished speaker, engaging everyone that would listen to his plan and approach. However, Franklin had one major problem. He was inheriting nearly the same team that had won 4 games over the last 2 years. Specifically, 12 of 22 starters were returning from the team that had 4 wins over the last 2 years. Over 80% of the team was identical to the previous year…and most of the 20% that were new were freshman with zero experience. In short, the leadership adage of ‘hire A players” was not available to him. For 2011 at least, his hand was dealt…and they were not winning cards. This is where the leadership story begins.

From day one, Franklin was focused on setting expectations for the program: for the players, parents, faculty, administration, and fans. The foundation of the expectation setting was to instill a culture of winning. While many leaders try to do this, the difference here was consistency. The message has not changed since day 1 and it’s the foundation of this Leader.


Bold Expectations

If a team is a reflection of their Leader, setting expectations is what sets the bar of achievement. I am still amazed at how many organizations I see where there is no expectation of behavior and achievement. Note: In the business world, “Hit your sales numbers”, is not an expectation. That is just a statement of the obvious.

For Franklin, expectations are about shaping behavior:

-Positive attitude
-Competing, in everything you do
-Focus on micro-segments of a season: 6 seconds at a time (1 play), 1 week at a time (stated goal is to go 1-0 each week)
-Not worrying about things you can’t control

While some of these may sound like leadership clichés, it’s the consistency of their execution that makes them stand out. Meet expectations…and you’re on the team. Miss expectations….and you’re not needed.

Says Franklin:

“After every game, I go over the different firsts with the team and some of the things we’ve accomplished,” Franklin said. “But we plan on getting to a point with our program where we move past all of these firsts and there’s a culture of winning here at Vanderbilt that everyone expects.

“That’s why all the talk about making it to a bowl game doesn’t really register with me. Our goals are to win a national championship and an SEC championship. We’re not going to limit ourselves by settling for anything less.”


Positive Attitude

One reason that Vanderbilt has always struggled at football is the high academic standards. The great players don’t want to have to deal with the academics or worse, simply cannot qualify to play at the school. This is a negative that every previous Commodore Coach has tried to overcome. Many have resigned to the fact that they will have to learn to win without the best players. Franklin, turned this seeming negative into an enormous positive. According to Franklin:

“Vanderbilt is the only place where you can get a world-class education and an opportunity to play in the best college football conference in America. Plus, you can get early playing time. To me, that is something to be really proud of, that is something you can sell.”

With one short statement, he turned years of a negative into an immediate positive. In fact, this became his punch-line on recruiting trips. By embracing Vanderbilt’s admission standards, yet maintaining the Expectation of leading the country in recruiting, he has willed his way to success. This is a Positive Attitude in action…far from a cliché or a simply a ‘jovial’ approach to life.

To bring an even edgier approach to recruiting and a positive approach, Franklin has been known to woo players by selling the fact that at Vanderbilt you don’t ‘rent’ a football tradition; you get to build a football tradition. Clever. Positive. Edgy.


Engagement

Engagement is a combination of factors: Having an edge, polished speaking, intensity, passion, and presence. Ultimately, the proper level of engagement instills belief in the team. Winning starts with believing and when you couple belief with Attitude, it’s a potent combination.

Franklin has championed engagement in the program through transparency. Opening up the walls of the program to the public and creating an emotional buy-in from everyone: players, parents, students, administration, and alumni.

This is done most effectively through social media. If you don’t believe me, follow @jamesfranklinvu on twitter or check out these videos:

Dodgeball
Scholarship
Ole Miss Game


Planning

Many organizations blow in the wind. They are constantly reacting to outside opinions and circumstances. In contrast, Franklin has proven to have a consistent and proactive approach to everything the team does. Very little is reactive. It can be summed up as:

-Focus on process, not outcomes. Do your job.
-Focus on the present. Forget what happened or what might happen.
-Maximum intensity: 6 seconds at a time, one week at a time.

Sports psychologist Dr. Bob Rotella talks about how successful people focus on process, not outcomes, in his book, “Life is Not a Game of Perfect”. Says Rotella,

“When people with real talent approach any endeavor, they look for a method, a process, that will lead to success. They follow that process every day. They set themselves up to succeed.”

Franklin is so focused on process and consistency; it annoys the media at times:


“For us, it’s always going to be about this week and getting better as a football team,” Franklin said. “I know some in the media don’t really buy that, but that’s our approach. We don’t even have any schedules up in our building. That’s because each game stands on its own. We’re going to do everything in our power to be 1-0 this week.”


If you’ve read books on leadership and/or books by other coaches like Nick Saban or Bill Walsh, you see similar themes. The difference is the passion, intensity, and consistency of message from Franklin. Planning and process turn hopes into belief. And belief leads to success.


The Results

So, has it worked? With essentially the same group of players that won a mere 4 games in the 2 years prior to his arrival, Franking and Vanderbilt have achieved the following:

-Franklin's wins in first 2 years are the most by Vandy coach since 1904-05
- Vandy is in a bowl game in back-to-back years for the first time ever.
-Only 1 Vandy team, since 1935, has more SEC wins than the 2012 team
-Last year, 17th ranked in recruiting nationally according to ESPN.com
-Finished in the Top 20 in defense nationally in 2011
-Beat rival Tennessee in Nashville this year. Last time was 1982.
-Recovered from 23-6 deficit, on the road at Ole Miss, to win.
-2012: first winning record in SEC since 1982, before that 1959
-Dores have 4 SEC wins of 23+ points under Franklin. 4 all time prior.
-4th game scoring 40+ points…first time since 1916
-Won 6 games in a row in 2012, first time since 1955
-1st time since 1873 that VU has 3 road SEC wins

The facts on the success are evident. However, the real indicator, if you’ve watched Vandy for all these years…is in the competition. The team competes like they never have before. You see it in their faces, body language, and attitude. It’s simply a reflection of their Leader.





Expectations- Attitude- Engagement- Planning ----------→ RESULTS

hack/reduce


I joined the hack/reduce launch last night in Boston. The venue itself, Kendall Boiler and Tank building, was worth the trip alone. It is a tremendous atmosphere, in a great location, but that's just a small part of the story.

I met Chris Lynch a few years back. He personifies the old adage, "Often wrong, never in doubt.", and I mean that as a huge compliment. He is the type of person that believes obstacles exist for a reason: to prove how much you want something. Like everything else he has done, hack/reduce seems to be a product of his will.

When the concept was introduced to me, the mission was simple: Ensure that Massachusetts is at the heart of the next wave of IT innovation, namely Big Data. Given IBM's extensive lab presence in Massachusetts, that alone was enough to make sponsoring an easy decision. That being said, I think there are even more important reasons for our participation.

1) I believe this is real and substantial. The leadership ensures that.

2) Big Data is not a buzz word nor an idea, technology or product. It is the next generation of IT. See here, if you want to know why Warren Buffett agrees with me.

3) Big Data is about skills and talent for the next 5 years. Those with access to talent and the ability to cultivate talent will win. hack/reduce is ultimately about bringing the data and resources to the talent. From there, the talent can grow.

4) Massachusetts is critical to IBM. We have acquired many companies in Massachusetts and it has been a wonderful experience. All of this activity culminated in our opening a significant development lab in Westford. For this reason, it is essential to us that the Mass tech scene remain vibrant. The tech scene must include an entire ecosystem: talent, companies, venture firms, business partners, universities, etc. hack/reduce has the potential to be a key driver of the tech scene. It's great for the folks involved, great for the community, and ultimately great for our business.

We will be very active at hack/reduce: training, learning, providing technology and tools, etc. It's great to be a part of this and we can't wait to get started.

A Framework for Enterprise Software

Pop Quiz:

For decades, the companies in this industry have produced sophisticated and complex products. They are difficult to assemble, require the stitching together of a variety of component parts, and its often a long time from the beginning of a project to when the end user sees value/success. Unfortunately, many times, the user is never satisfied. The product breaks or does not work quite as it was described it would. As these quality problems emerge, the companies in this industry turn to 3rd parties, asking the 3rd parties to help their clients have a better experience. The companies incorporate IP from those third parties and many times, they ask the 3rd parties to service the products. While this often improves the customer experience, it does not solve the problem of the negative externalities (and the implications on the users) of the product. In many cases, the negative externalities drive up costs for the users.

Then, along comes the threat of a new approach and technology. It simplifies many of the previous issues. The product looks better on the surface and clients tend to be happier, sooner. It also solves the problem of the negative externalities. It's a homerun all around. Does everyone move to the new approach/technology en masse?

Well, you tell me: do you own a battery-powered car?

-------------------------------------

The story above is merely an illustration that history repeats itself and there is a lot to be learned from understanding and spotting patterns. I suppose most people who read this will think of enterprise software, as they read that story. And, when I get to the part about the new approach/technology, they start thinking of SaaS and Cloud. However, the answer to the question is the same, whether we are talking autos or enterprise software: The world does not move en masse in any direction, even though benefits are apparent.

I continue to see rhetoric that postulates that the future of enterprise software is simply cloud and SaaS. While its hard to argue this at a conceptual level (given its lack of specificity), I think it trivializes a very complex topic. Not everything will be cloud/SaaS, although those will certainly be two possible delivery models. To really form a view of how enterprise software evolves over the next 10-20 years, I've constructed some over-arching hypotheses, which hopefully provides a framework for thinking about new business opportunities in enterprise software.


Hypothesis 1: The current model of 'pushing' your product through a salesforce does not scale and is not optimal for clients/users. Usability will dominate, and I extend usability to include topics like time-to-value, ease of use, and self-service.

Hypothesis 2: The model of paying Systems Integrators to make your products work together (or work in the first place) will enter a secular decline. There will continue to be a strong consulting market for application development, high-end strategy/segmentation, and complex project management. However, clients will no longer tolerate having to pay money just to make things work.

Hypothesis 3: Enterprises cannot acquire skills fast enough to exploit new technology. So, on one hand, usability needs to address this. On the other hand, continuing education will need to offer a new method for driving skills development quickly. Continuing education is much more than ‘product training’. In fact, while ‘product training’ is the majority that is paid for today…I believe it will be the minority going forward.

Hypothesis 4: There will be different models for software delivery: Cloud, SaaS, On-premise, Outsourced, etc. Therefore, just because a company offers something in a certain model does not mean that they will be successful. Clients will buy the best fit model, based on their business goal and related concerns (security, sustainability, etc).

Hypothesis 5: Clients will optimize easy (implementation and ongoing support) and return (on investment and capital). Products that deliver on both are a no-brainer. Products that only hit one of them will be scrutinized. Products that deliver neither, will cease to exist.

As I meet with new companies and even assess products that we are building, this is my current framework for thinking through how to identify the potential winners and losers.