An amusing video sketch about Swedishness is famous on YouTube. It’s even funnier when you realize that the Prime Minister in the sketch was the real Prime Minister at the time.
Hi Donald, as always a great thought provoking piece of writing.
The comparison between Qlik and Microsoft highlights a critical lesson: understanding when to apply decisiveness or consensus is essential, depending on the unique demands of the situation and the cultural context of the organization.
I have always wondered if consensus doesn't mean 100% agreement, it does not mean 51% either.
Oh Donald. I have been watching your site silently for years now. This story is so timley I have to comment. I was just reminded of a story I shared once with my now business partner about a SQL Shiproom story. My MSFT exp and recollections run pretty true to yours, but maybe not as extreme. I remember a certain SQL release (version doesn't matter) and I was the RM for AS. We were down to the wire and there was something in shiproom I was pretty heated up about (again, doesn't matter). There was a very lengthy, heated discussion that was driven by me and an opposing EM or RM ( probably Engine 😉). Eventually, the VP sponsor of the release (again doesn't matter but he generally went by a single letter) made a call. The call was not favorable to either of us...and it was quite clear neither of us was happy.
We left shiproom and he stopped me and my combatant in the hallway. ' Sherry, you look pissed' me:'I am. ' He asked the other guy; yah he was pissed too. The VP to us both: 'that is great! Everyone is pissed. This is how you know a perfect compromise has been made.'
This may not be the analogy you were looking for, but my point is yah, there was (and probably still is) plenty of less than optimal behavior, but there were good things and good lessons from the Goliath that is MSFT.
While we didn't all agree with the decision that day, we released a product that we could all be proud of and make a ton of $$$. People still love PBI ;).
That guy probably has no idea the impact he had on me but it's one of my favorite stories I still share today. Kinda rings true, just in a different way, huh?
In the US, efforts at concensus often fall into a few traps due to the way we approach the process. The first trap is only trying middle of the road approaches, incremental improvements on existing or widely known things. The second is creating frankenproducts that incorporate one of each contributor's ideas without any enforcement of overall coherence. Clearly Qlik avoided both of these to a large degree, creating something both original and coherent. Can you talk a bit more about specific aspects of their approach that allowed concensus to form around something radical and that prevented the creep of incoherence from egalitarian contribution?
Hi Donald, as always a great thought provoking piece of writing.
The comparison between Qlik and Microsoft highlights a critical lesson: understanding when to apply decisiveness or consensus is essential, depending on the unique demands of the situation and the cultural context of the organization.
I have always wondered if consensus doesn't mean 100% agreement, it does not mean 51% either.
thanks
Oh Donald. I have been watching your site silently for years now. This story is so timley I have to comment. I was just reminded of a story I shared once with my now business partner about a SQL Shiproom story. My MSFT exp and recollections run pretty true to yours, but maybe not as extreme. I remember a certain SQL release (version doesn't matter) and I was the RM for AS. We were down to the wire and there was something in shiproom I was pretty heated up about (again, doesn't matter). There was a very lengthy, heated discussion that was driven by me and an opposing EM or RM ( probably Engine 😉). Eventually, the VP sponsor of the release (again doesn't matter but he generally went by a single letter) made a call. The call was not favorable to either of us...and it was quite clear neither of us was happy.
We left shiproom and he stopped me and my combatant in the hallway. ' Sherry, you look pissed' me:'I am. ' He asked the other guy; yah he was pissed too. The VP to us both: 'that is great! Everyone is pissed. This is how you know a perfect compromise has been made.'
This may not be the analogy you were looking for, but my point is yah, there was (and probably still is) plenty of less than optimal behavior, but there were good things and good lessons from the Goliath that is MSFT.
While we didn't all agree with the decision that day, we released a product that we could all be proud of and make a ton of $$$. People still love PBI ;).
That guy probably has no idea the impact he had on me but it's one of my favorite stories I still share today. Kinda rings true, just in a different way, huh?
Insightful and entertaining, as usual.
In the US, efforts at concensus often fall into a few traps due to the way we approach the process. The first trap is only trying middle of the road approaches, incremental improvements on existing or widely known things. The second is creating frankenproducts that incorporate one of each contributor's ideas without any enforcement of overall coherence. Clearly Qlik avoided both of these to a large degree, creating something both original and coherent. Can you talk a bit more about specific aspects of their approach that allowed concensus to form around something radical and that prevented the creep of incoherence from egalitarian contribution?