• Blog
  • About
  • Archives

elemental links

brenda michelson's technology advisory practice

Its Not What You Sell, Its What You Believe – Bill Taylor – Harvard Business Review

April 5, 2012 By brenda michelson

“Cook did not respond with a detailed review of the products Apple made or the retail environments in which it sold them. Instead, he offered an impromptu, unscripted statement of what he and everyone at Apple believed — “as if reciting a creed he had learned as a child” in Sunday School.

“We believe that we are on the face of the earth to make great products, and thats not changing,” Cook declared.”We believe in the simple not the complex…We believe in saying no to thousands of products, so that we can really focus on the few that are truly important and meaningful to us,” he added.

“We believe in deep collaboration and cross-pollination of our groups, which allow us to innovate in ways other cannot…And I think that regardless of who is in what job those values are so embedded in this company that Apple will do extremely well,” he concluded.Its not what you sell its what you believe.”

…

“In a provocative and saucy book, It’s Not What You Sell, It’s What You Stand For, Spence explains the unique beliefs behind many of the one-of-a-kind organizations he has studied or worked with over the years, from BMW to Whole Foods Market to Southwest Airlines. Sure, these and other organizations are built around strong business models, stellar products and services, and (of course) clever advertising. But Spence is adamant that behind every great company is an authentic sense of purpose — “a definitive statement about the difference you are trying to make in the world” — and a workplace with the “energy and vitality” to bring that purpose to life.”

via Its Not What You Sell, Its What You Believe – Bill Taylor – Harvard Business Review.

Filed Under: business architecture, innovation, leadership

Active Info: Data Dirt & Business Architecture

February 23, 2012 By brenda michelson

Posts by Om Malik and Brad Feld inspired me to write (rant) my thoughts on business architecture and its meta role as digital business image. The post link with official excerpt:

Combat data (and decision) dirt with meta business architecture

If we are to classify contextless data dirt, this first case illustrates superfluous, distracting data. I posit that an equally insidious type of data dirt forms when data is analyzed without regard to origin, business-system and business goal contexts.

 

Filed Under: active information, business architecture

Enterprise Architecture Rant #4,892

March 14, 2011 By brenda michelson

Last week was primarily about Cloud Connect for me.  However, I did fit in a few other things, including a short rant inspired by enterprise architecture pundits.

As you all know, I believe in the value of enterprise architecture, and even more strongly, I recognize the unique talents and contributions of real-world (‘street-smart’) enterprise architects.

At the same time, I’m increasingly concerned about the macro-direction of our field, as we continue to suffer ivory tower enterprise architecture punditry, rigid frameworks and endless philosophical waxing.

A couple of weeks ago, I attempted to inject a little action / purpose / outcome orientation in the enterprise architecture conversation with the following tweet:

“Today’s word for Enterprise Architects: Utilitarian [u-til-i-tar-i-an]: designed to be useful or practical rather than attractive. #entarch“

Well, as you might expect, I got nit-picked parsed.  That architecture by definition is attractive.  [Aargh!]  My intended point was “useful or practical”.  Not easily defeated, I restated as follows:

“better stated, i think every #entarch needs to have a utilitarian perspective”

If you can’t answer “what is the purpose?”, that is an early warning indicator of folly, or worse.  This “utilitarian” aspect is something I find myself circling back to more and more, especially in my work on business architecture.

Anyway, on Friday, after witnessing yet another definitional discussion on enterprise architecture, I tried to inject the utilitarian perspective again with the following on twitter:

“Ok, last time: It’s not what enterprise architecture IS that matters. It’s what enterprise architecture DOES that matters. #entarch“

This “pithy” missive hit the mark with real-world enterprise architects and pundits alike.

So remember, next time someone tries to drag you down a “what & how” conversation on enterprise architecture, steer them to “why & outcomes“.  It’ll be more productive, in the moment, and for your long-term practice.

 

Filed Under: business architecture, enterprise architecture Tagged With: #ruckus, entarch

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 7
  • Next Page »

Brenda M. Michelson

Brenda Michelson

Technology Architect.

Trusted Advisor.

(BIO)

  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Recent Posts

  • Experts Sketch
  • PEW Research: Tech Saturation, Well-Being and (my) Remedies
  • technology knowledge premise
  • The Curse of Knowledge
  • better problems and technology knowledge transfer

Recent Tweets

  • Finding the lead refills and simultaneously misplacing the mechanical pencil appear strongly correlated. Yesterday at 4:30 pm
  • If it’s taking 20+ years to define the thing, maybe it’s not actually a thing... February 25, 2021 5:29 pm
  • Adventure Tourism for your brains. (credit to the esteemed @ruthmalan) https://t.co/7Z9478WagA February 24, 2021 3:49 pm
© 2004-2021 Elemental Links, Inc.