Comments

Sorry TP, but you talked in circles and didn't answer the questions he asked.

Posted by scott swift at October 27, 2009 5:37 PM

OUTSTANDING!!!! You could not be more correct in the road map you provided for any leader, at any level, of any type of an organization to improving performance, productivity or results. The ability to listen, apologize, break down barriers, be a salesperson extraordinaire, execute, and to be a dream "enabler" are indeed the attributes that successful front line managers must develop. Credibility is a leaders most important capital and those are the skills one uses to earn and bank it. Which explains why so many fail...soft is indeed hard for many! These traits and skills are just as relevant today as they were in the early 80's when I learned them...

Posted by Dave Wheeler at October 28, 2009 12:29 AM

Really enjoyed the interviews! Completely agree the leader does not have to be the top performer and should be the one identifying and developing the key talent. Interesting point about innovation and not removing the people considered to be "difficult" who often drive this. Great refresher on what's important in leadership and picked up some new tips as well, so thank you!

Posted by Lucy Canning at October 28, 2009 3:14 PM

Good interview! Many really good points. I loved "experience marketing," as "a clean loo in a little restaurant in a small town." The actualization of this concept is great. I have shared the interview via Twitter and Facebook. But I did wonder about the praise of Netscape over GM with regards to the sheer numbers of employees that benefited over an extended period of time, benefiting the country as a whole. I guess it has all to do with perspective, but I also wonder if the present perspective, if this kind of focus, can be damaging later on. There is no disrespect intended in this remark at all. Language fails me at the moment, so let me ask it this way. Can an outlook be dangerous down the road while sounding cool at the moment? I do not agree with Tom's perspective here with regards to these two companies, not that all companies will span decades.

I imagine that employees and employers generally are not looking for disruption but a sense of security. I suppose this can also set in a sedentary state when, in fact, the very nature of things, humans and businesses included, are always in flux. But does a company that exists for "72 months and dies" build for others than itself or the other online networks? It seems like the notion of building to last is important, even if it doesn't last, and the need for constant innovation is disruptive. Perhaps there is also a difference between disruption and destruction as what occurred in Netscape in such a short time or with GM over many years. In any event, the preference of the latter to the former for the sheer number of building of human lives that GM enabled doesn’t seem comparable.

The Japanese constructed cars from American cars with great re-engineering. Tom said something like he was delighted that the Japanese are now developing such fine automobiles. GM had its time. But it can probably be assumed that they are building to last. For a company to desire long-life seems quite natural indeed and when the electric power grid was built it was done so to last. (Like I said I am well aware that not all companies will last. But to praise such seems like another thing altogether. I might be missing something here. I will admit this too.) The fact that we can now build upon that system for renewable energies for electric cars and the like proves this. I guess Netscape built applications that are serving others in that business now too. But to praise Netscape as one of the greatest companies ever and diss GM seems quite odd to me. What matters to me is for whom and what purpose. GM put people, many people, to work. How many did Netscape employ?

Posted by Judith Ellis at October 31, 2009 10:10 PM

The subtext of much of Toms work is people matter
- mainly when you need them to work for you.
It is a very big deal that Tom would bring back the Netscape/GM story in this economy. It shows how little he actually care about people.
Demming is the reason why Japan makes great Automobiles. The Japanese people honored Demming for this. Demming has a provable success track record that goes far beyond publishing and performing. Tom has no such track record.
Demming was a beliver in Build to Last. He knew it was important for the strength of a nation.

Tom produces nothing but words. He speaks of action but has no record of doing anything but writing and talking.
He makes pronouncements like "Most things get done by pissed off people and backs it up with little 'just so' stories' - no data - and then declares 'Fooled by Randomness' to be his bible. He never reflects upon what his bible says about his own work.

Posted by zorro at November 1, 2009 1:22 PM

I saw and listened to the video. Very revealing and insightful.

Posted by Andres Agostini (Andy) at November 9, 2009 2:13 AM