Get Satisfaction!
Just happened upon a pretty cool new web service called Get Satisfaction. It is a community site self proclaimed as “People powered customer service for just about everything”.
I found the service doing a search on private video chatting for Seesmic.
It is incredibly easy to use, and addresses a number of customer experience and support needs:
- I can pose a problem to the community and get feedback and answers
- Users can vote on my problem / question and opt-in as having it too - allows the biggest issues to bubble to the top
- Customer self-support is naturally enabled
- Employees of companies represented within Get Satisfaction can identify themselves and participate in the discussion around their products and services
- I can add companies and products/services to my dashboard to monitor - I may be a customer or just interested in buying
Seems like a great site for getting customer support and service, and for referrals and pre-purchasing research.
The UI was very easy and intuitive … the process is easy … see the “how to” below … very interesting!

Disney / Pixar - lessons in cultural integration
After being on the buy and sell side of many merger & acquisition transactions, one thing that is clear is that cultural integration is one of the toughest aspects of bringing two companies together following a transaction. It is the largely unwritten reason for why many (and some will say most) mergers & acquisitions fail. This article about Disney’s acquisition of Pixar in last Sunday’s New York Times highlights a high-profile acquisition success story, in an industry where many M&A deals do not pan out as expected. The intriguing parts of the article had to do with some quotes from Bob Iger, Disney’s CEO, and his philosophies on M&A transactions.
Bob has been on both sides of many deals, and has seen first-hand the time and attention that needs to go into cultural integration, and the consequences of not doing it right. Bob also recognizes that cultural integration is probably the largest predictor of whether an M&A transaction will be successful and meet its original goals.
“There is an assumption in the corporate world that you need to integrate swiftly,” Mr. Iger said. “My philosophy is exactly the opposite. You need to be respectful and patient.”
Key to the successful integration, analysts say, has been Mr. Iger’s decision to give incoming talent added duties. Instead of just buying Pixar and moving on, Mr. Iger understood what made the acquisition valuable, said Mr. Price, the author. “If you are acquiring expertise,” he said, “then dispatch your newly purchased experts into other parts of the company and let them stretch their muscles.”
The more deals I do, the more I am in Bob’s camp per the above quotes. It is in our capitalist nature to want to do things better and faster. However, mergers/acqusitions are largely about bring people of different (corporate) cultures together - and this is true more so in today’s knowledge-driven economy than ever before. We certainly want to do things better all of the time, but the speed at which we do it should not be a sole measure, especially when trying to integrate people. The concept of shared experiences, and creating / fostering ways for these to happen, is one of the best culture melding techniques available, and Bob suggests this in the above quotes regarding ’stretching muscles across the company’. Some good things still do take time.
One last interesting quote from the article is below
“It took about a year before there was a collective letting down the guard,” he said. “Initially people were thinking, ‘Is something going to happen?’ ”
Even in the best of cases, such as the Disney/Pixar deal, the same dynamics of M&A apply - typically a constant and natural fear that something is about the change or be cut at any time, no matter how well things are going. It takes time even when things are going well to build up mutual trust and respect. The best deals happen when the mutual trust and respect exists, builds over time, and both parties work together over the right period of time, making key decisions along the way to implement the desired change.
Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week
Across the blogosphere, the topic of “Enterprise Social Software” was hot this past week.
- Fred Wilson asks if the term itself is an oxymoron.
- Sam Lawrence makes a case here on how social software vendors, including his own Jive Software, and SocialText, Atlassian among others, could upend the incumbent enterprise vendors SAP and Oracle, while referencing this article about a recent Forrester report about these emerging collaboration vendors.
- Dennis Howlett debates Sam and makes a case here for why the incumbents will not be upended, and partially bases his argument on this viewpoint on enterprise inertia from Sig Rinde.
- Jeff Dachis of Razorfish fame raises $50mm from Austin Ventures to pursue the social networking application space within the enterprise
- Last, but not least, Oliver Marks provided a good synthesis of this set of conversations.
The buzz is great news for those of us betting on collaboration and social networking as fundamental disruptors to the traditional enterprise landscape and as fundamental enablers for the next generation of value creation from enterprises of all kinds (corporate, governmental, non-profits, and others). It means something is happening, and it surely is.
However, I feel the debate about this “Enterprise Social Software” market is being viewed through the wrong lens. It is a great set of reading, but it seems that most of the conversation can be summarized with the phrase “Where’s the beef?”. This is consistent with ongoing discussion around Enterprise 2.0 continues to swirl around the topic of the lack of repeatable case examples of ROI for wiki, blog, forum and social network applications.
The perspective that I believe is missing from all of these conversations is that the next generation of enterprise applications - Enterprise Social Applications - are not strictly about wikis, blogs, forums, etc. The emerging Enterprise Social Applications market, as discussed in the conversations listed above, should be about how those Web 2.0 capabilities (blogging, wikis, forums, social networks) are applied to applications to solve the business problems of next generation enterprises.
The problems to be solved by and emerging demand for these new applications arise from three underlying multi-decade mega trends hitting large enterprises today - Globalization, the Talent Crunch and Web 2.0. The push toward being global and acting global will force enterprises to have much more agile, open and collaborative business processes, and the applications to support those processes. The same thing is true with the talent crunch which is upon us - as boomers “retire” and the Net Generation enters the workforce, the demands for more agile, open and collaborative work processes and applications will grow dramatically. This is how the Net Generation gets work done. The fact that Web 2.0 is upon us and that wikis, blogs, forums, social networks exist enables all of this - however, these capabilities are not the specific applications which will be the next generation of enterprise applications, or Enterprise Social Applications as coined in the conversations this past week.
Innovation, Customer-focus, & Long-term Thinking
Here is a fascinating interview with Jeff Bezos of Amazon. Jeff has been on a mission since day-one of Amazon and has done an amazing job of both short-term execution excellence while keeping the company focused on the long-term goal. This post is primarily directed at my colleagues at nGenera (yes, rather than dedicate an entire post to this, I’ll just announce it here - BSG Alliance has transformed into nGenera - check out our awesome new Web Community at nGenera.com).
Amazon is really hitting a stride executing on multiple fronts - it is quite amazing to see a company excel across so many diverse capabilities at once. nGenera colleagues take note - Amazon is not a software company, not a services company, it is many things at once geared toward delivering compelling customer experiences. Think about it - they are an e-tailer, an e-tail platform - both sales and physical distribution, a web-services platform, and a total consumer hardware solution provider (Kindle is more than just a device - think iPod - it is software, commerce, services and hardware wrapped in one). Sound familiar?
Here is a favorite quote
Q: Few CEOs have taken as much flak as you have for spending on innovation, in both good times and bad. What’s your philosophy?
A: My view is there’s no bad time to innovate. You should be doing it when times are good and when times are tough—and you want to be doing it around things that your customers care about. For us, it’s such a deep-seated belief, I’m not sure we have a choice.
Below is a re-post of this post by Tim O’Reilly which highlights some of my own takeaways and another favorite quote. The emphasis is mine.
Business Week has a great interview with Jeff Bezos as part of their innovation issue. The interview is entitled How Frugality Drives Innovation, but Jeff talks about far more than frugality. Here’s my favorite bit:
Q: Every company claims to be customer-focused. Why do you think so few are able to pull it off?
A: Companies get skills-focused, instead of customer-needs focused. When [companies] think about extending their business into some new area, the first question is “why should we do that—we don’t have any skills in that area.” That approach puts a finite lifetime on a company, because the world changes, and what used to be cutting-edge skills have turned into something your customers may not need anymore. A much more stable strategy is to start with “what do my customers need?” Then do an inventory of the gaps in your skills. Kindle is a great example. If we set our strategy by what our skills happen to be rather than by what our customers need, we never would have done it. We had to go out and hire people who know how to build hardware devices and create a whole new competency for the company.
Well worth a read. Another great line: “The key is to pick things that you think are really iimportant, and then focus on them.” It seems obvious, but so few of us do it as consistently as we should!




