Sapience great company wheel

© 2010-12 Sapience Analytics Pvt. Ltd. www.sapience.net

The ‘Great Company’ Wheel

• US Patent ASN 13/151,889• India Patent App. No. 1722/MUM/2010


Innovation is the key to Greatness

Sapience Analytics www.sapience.net

© 2010-12 Sapience Analytics Pvt. Ltd. www.sapience.net 3

Success Cube for an individual

Engagement

Excellence

(Capability)

TeamPlayer

Wrong hire

Star

WastedTalent

Superstar

Innovation


As a Company: Beware of Future Shock

• “We don’t like their sound. Groups with guitars are on their way out.”– Decca Recording Company executive, turning down the Beatles in 1962

• “There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home.” – Ken Olson, President of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977

• "Apple is already dead.“ - Nathan Myhrvold, former Microsoft CTO, 1997

4


Why Companies must innovate

5

• Every product and service has a typical lifecycle• Steady growth eventually leads to decline• Technology disruptions and new competition are threats• Re-invent yourself – at the right time

LifecycleChange the game


Types of Innovation

• Idea: Leap of Imagination (1% inspiration)• Innovation: step by step execution (99% perspiration)


Examples of Innovation


• Company was new, and Usability Services from India is not a known capability

• Took new approaches– Revenue Sharing model based

on app downloads by users– Revamped existing UI at their

cost, and won business

Innovation @ Clarice Technologies

8


• Transforms your iPad/iPhone™ into a portable art gallery

• Watch your favorite pictures morph into stunning paintings

• Share over Facebook, e-mail

Revenue Share model with Corel

9


Consumerizing the user interaction – simple, intuitive & non-intrusive

Role: Information Architecture &

Detailed UI design

UI transformation for Quick Heal

10

BeforeAfter


Innovation @ VERITAS

• VERITAS Software (1992-2004)– Startup to $2.5 billion in 11 years

– Acquired by Symantec in 2005

• VERITAS in Pune – Outsourced to a vendor – Frontier Software (1992-96)

– Own subsidiary – VERITAS India (1997 onwards)

• Why Innovation @ VERITAS Pune?– Subsidiary is often seen as a ‘cost center’

– VERITAS Pune decided to become an equal ‘value partner’


Innovation @ VERITAS

• Technology Innovation Strategy– Encourage innovative effort – 20% beyond 8 hours

– Combination of senior architects and new hires (IIT M-Techs)

– Define idea, own the prototype implementation, demonstrate when US VPs visited India

– Examples: new features in file system, porting to new platforms (Volume Replicator to Windows), transformation to web UI (Netbackup)

• Business Innovation Strategy– Hired Usability experts, Technical Support, Technical Writers, Product

Managers under one pretext or another– Scaled these functions to create a rounded product engineering team


Impact @ VERITAS• Impact @ VERITAS

– High retention rates (< 2% attrition between 1999-2003)– Converted diehard opponents of outsourcing (e.g. Netbackup)– Grew rapidly from 40 engineers and 2 teams in 1999 to 600+ engineers

and 16 teams by 2003– 22% of worldwide engineering

• 2002 was a turning point– VERITAS initiated a patent program in 2001– By end 2002, VERITAS India was the source of 30% of patents filed– CEO termed “VERITAS India” as the company’s “business differentiator”

• Today– Over 60 ex-VERITians are entrepreneurs, CEOs, VPs at early and growth

stage companies


Measuring Innovation


Innovation Initiative• Based on an initiative at Symphony Services by one of the founders• Lack of innovation at most Indian IT companies and subsidiaries

– Do what the customer asks to do– Cost center or Time & Material contracts– No incentive to encourage innovation

• Key Principles– Differentiate Innovation (the “unexpected”) from Delivery Excellence

(“part of the job” for a competent team)– Define a system of Innovation Points (IPs)– IPs awarded increase exponentially as ideas actually get implemented – IPs depend on the ‘impact’ of innovation (moderate, high, game-changing)– Include the customer in review of the innovations

• Similar approach possible for Delivery Excellence (but separately)

15


Infrastructure• Visibility through Innovation Portal

– FAQs, program repository, filing of ideas and innovations, award IPs to users– Innovation statistics at user, group, location, business unit level– “Chinese wall” between groups to protect customer IP– Differentiate customer specific and non-customer innovations

• Participation– Senior Exec (VP level) to drive the program– Appoint Innovation Mentors in 1:20 ratio (technology gurus and not seniors)– Embed innovation theme into the corporate messaging– Monthly email listing participation, IPs granted to create competition

• Rewards– Accumulate IRPs – awards at various thresholds, and eventually title of ‘Innovator’– Quarterly Project Group awards for highest Innovation Intensity (based on both

aggregate IPs and # employees in the group)

16


Impact @ Symphony

• Energized the entire company – Discovery of previous innovations (surprised even senior management)

– Showcasing innovations (helped in Sales)

– Surge in “out of the box” thinking for customers

– Customer Delight scores noticeably higher

– Improved employee retention

– Alternate career path for highly technical people

• Today: Symphony calls itself as a “Software Innovation Company”

17


Engagement @ Work


Output @ Work is critical for the business

19


✓ Reasonable Work Time

✓ Work-Life balance

Engagement Efficiency

How to improve Work Output

Capability

Output = Capability x Engagement x Efficiency


?? hrs on Important Work + ?? Non-core work

Typical Day @ Work

+ ?? Non-work‘X’ hrs on Important Work + ‘Y’ on non-core + ‘Z’ Non-work hours


Business Need: Collective Effort

• Time/Effort powers the business, yet it is hidden – We can only track the outcome (deliverables, revenue/profit)

• When outcome is below par?– We react: change staff, improve process, cut expenses– Timesheets don’t work, KPIs have limited value

• Real problem is not being addressed– Effort Leakage, Idle Time, Distractions– People Engagement at work cannot be measured

22

Assigned Work

Done?People put in Time/Effort


Measuring Engagement,and more ..


Sapience Server: SaaS or On-Premise

Sapience Automated Enterprise Effort

WAN/Internet


High Impact, Quick Impact

25

> 20% Outp

ut Gain

Before Sapience –

Deliverables tracked, but Effort is hidden

People Engagement Project Efficiency Overall Efficiency


Time on Work matters, not Time in Office

• Office time: 7-10+ hrs

• Average Work Time: 5.5-6 hrs

• Average On-PC: 5-5.5 hrs

• Top 20% v/s Last 20%: – < 1 hr more time in office

– > 3 hrs more on work

• Activity Focus– < 40% on core activities

– Outlook, meetings take up lot of time


Users can view long-term trends, reports and alerts

Steady gain in work hours

Managers can view aggregate output

Gain Productive Time


People Engagement

28

Encourage team to increase work hours


Time Profile: identify anomalies

29

Time Profile for PoseidonPeriod: Mar 01, 2011 – May 31, 2012

Accounted Time

(A = B + E + F + G)

Time on Projects

(B = C + D)

On-PC Time on Projects (C)

Off-PC Time on Projects

(D)

Time on Corporate

(F)

Time on Private

(G)

Daily Est. Time

Unaccounted Time

Ideal 8.0 6.5 6.0 0.5 0.5 1.0 NA NA

Average 7.7 6.9 5.8 1.1 0.3 0.5 9.4 1.7 Sunil 9.3 8.4 7.9 0.5 0.4 0.5 9.3 0.0

Poonam 9.5 8.8 7.4 1.4 0.5 0.2 9.7 0.2 .. 8.1 7.7 7.3 0.5 0.1 0.2 11.2 3.1 .. 8.0 7.5 6.6 0.9 0.1 0.3 10.0 2.1

7.7 6.6 6.5 0.1 0.1 1.0 9.0 1.3 7.7 7.2 6.2 1.0 0.2 0.3 9.0 1.3 7.6 6.9 6.1 0.8 0.1 0.5 9.2 1.5 7.0 6.6 5.5 1.1 0.2 0.2 8.4 1.4 7.1 6.3 5.4 0.9 0.3 0.5 9.9 2.8 7.3 6.4 5.3 1.1 0.1 0.7 10.1 2.7 7.4 7.0 5.0 2.0 0.2 0.2 8.7 1.3 6.7 6.4 5.0 1.4 0.1 0.3 8.8 2.0 7.6 5.8 4.8 1.0 1.3 0.2 9.4 1.8 8.0 6.1 4.6 1.5 1.2 0.6 11.3 3.3

Ravi 6.9 4.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 8.5 1.7 Sundar 8.0 6.1 4.2 1.9 0.4 1.6 9.1 1.1


Covey Quadrant: Important versus Urgent

30


Improve Activity Focus

Improve Development time to 50+%

Enhance Effort qualitatively by shaping Activity Mix


Application Usage

32

Top 3 apps ok? Can % time on Skype be

reduced?


Role-wise Activities

33

• Activity Mix changes dramatically based on roles in the company – examine areas of improvements possible

Sr. TLs spend 2x time on Dev

compared to TLs!


Activity Comparison by Role

34

• Test Execution: Trainee Engr is at 44%, but low at other levels (14-23%) • Communication, Browsing is high: >25%, >12% for most roles


Optimize Capacity Utilization

Spot under-utilized teams


Sapience: benefits all levels

36


‘Great Company’ Wheel

37

Encourage disruptive models

InnovationInnovation ExcellenceExcellence

EngagementEngagement

Continuous Improvement program

Work-life balance


Thank you for your TIME!

www.sapience.net

Sapience great company wheel

Services

Transcript of Sapience great company wheel