Yogi
As the notorious author who ripped Scoble during a recent speech at Microsoft, it’s been interesting to watch the conversation unfurl. After extricating my size 9 ½ Nikes from their resting spot deep inside my oral cavity, I’ve had time to do some research (OK, OK – this should have come before my comments, not after). My real interest is not whether Scoble is a good guy (he is), whether he’s technically credible (he is), or whether he wears boxers or briefs (too much information). What I really care about is whether or not he’s actually good for Microsoft.
Let me start off with what’s not so good for Microsoft. One of my major issues is that sometimes it doesn’t make a lot of sense to air Microsoft dirty laundry in public. Sometimes, it’s better to keep things in the family, and Scoble (IMHO) has occasionally crossed the line here.
Scoble, you responded to this issue by referencing the recent Six Apart public apology for issues they were having. Agree – the Six Apart apology was a good thing for them to do. But the apology came from its founder and president. This represented the official view of the company, coming straight from the founder’s mouth. It didn’t come from a “technical evangelist” or some other random employee. The problem is when technical evangelists get themselves confused with founders and CEO’s. So when Scoble rails against MS for their anti-discrimination policy (for example), he’s a rogue voice (regardless of how you feel about the issue) who happens to have an oversized megaphone. Like a union organizer, he invites sympathetic voices to join him in his proletariat march. There are plenty of outsiders who will kindly do that for you, free of charge! I’m as new age as they come when it comes to corporate conversations, but no amount of dope from the Cluetrain pipe will convince me that this type of public issue mongering is good for any company. Sensitive issues sometimes need to stay at the family dinner table. It’s hard for me to see how backing leadership into a corner and forcing them to debate delicate internal issues in public is a good thing for MS. Scoble has created huge stature for himself, and with that stature comes a responsibility to, well, be responsible.
The tough thing for Scoble to do, and he seems to be doing it exceptionally well, is to walk the very fine line between constructive critique and destructive criticism. I worry that his credibility is somewhat reliant on his willingness to be critical – that creates some warped incentives. But Scoble seems to be very very skillful at navigating that narrow balance beam.
Having said all that, I looked at the impact of Scoble overall. When viewed in the aggregate, I must admit that what he is doing is good for the company. The main point of our speech at MS was around their need to develop more personality as they evolve. Feature and function superiority alone won’t cut it in a world craving humanity, meaning, candor, simplicity and authenticity. In a way, that actually describes what Scoble is all about. He has put a more human face on MS, and his straightforward and authentic voice seems to be changing conversations and attitudes at MS. He pushes the company to raise the bar with its products, but does so in a way that is positive. It is still unfolding, and much of what makes it work is Scoble’s personal prowess at doing what he does. So overall, I was wrong about his impact on Microsoft. It’s pretty clear that he is having a positive influence not only with the outside world, but perhaps more importantly inside MS.
As Yogi Berra so eloquently put it, I made a wrong mistake.
Brian Fugere
Let me start off with what’s not so good for Microsoft. One of my major issues is that sometimes it doesn’t make a lot of sense to air Microsoft dirty laundry in public. Sometimes, it’s better to keep things in the family, and Scoble (IMHO) has occasionally crossed the line here.
Scoble, you responded to this issue by referencing the recent Six Apart public apology for issues they were having. Agree – the Six Apart apology was a good thing for them to do. But the apology came from its founder and president. This represented the official view of the company, coming straight from the founder’s mouth. It didn’t come from a “technical evangelist” or some other random employee. The problem is when technical evangelists get themselves confused with founders and CEO’s. So when Scoble rails against MS for their anti-discrimination policy (for example), he’s a rogue voice (regardless of how you feel about the issue) who happens to have an oversized megaphone. Like a union organizer, he invites sympathetic voices to join him in his proletariat march. There are plenty of outsiders who will kindly do that for you, free of charge! I’m as new age as they come when it comes to corporate conversations, but no amount of dope from the Cluetrain pipe will convince me that this type of public issue mongering is good for any company. Sensitive issues sometimes need to stay at the family dinner table. It’s hard for me to see how backing leadership into a corner and forcing them to debate delicate internal issues in public is a good thing for MS. Scoble has created huge stature for himself, and with that stature comes a responsibility to, well, be responsible.
The tough thing for Scoble to do, and he seems to be doing it exceptionally well, is to walk the very fine line between constructive critique and destructive criticism. I worry that his credibility is somewhat reliant on his willingness to be critical – that creates some warped incentives. But Scoble seems to be very very skillful at navigating that narrow balance beam.
Having said all that, I looked at the impact of Scoble overall. When viewed in the aggregate, I must admit that what he is doing is good for the company. The main point of our speech at MS was around their need to develop more personality as they evolve. Feature and function superiority alone won’t cut it in a world craving humanity, meaning, candor, simplicity and authenticity. In a way, that actually describes what Scoble is all about. He has put a more human face on MS, and his straightforward and authentic voice seems to be changing conversations and attitudes at MS. He pushes the company to raise the bar with its products, but does so in a way that is positive. It is still unfolding, and much of what makes it work is Scoble’s personal prowess at doing what he does. So overall, I was wrong about his impact on Microsoft. It’s pretty clear that he is having a positive influence not only with the outside world, but perhaps more importantly inside MS.
As Yogi Berra so eloquently put it, I made a wrong mistake.
Brian Fugere
<< Home