I retired from personal blogging in July 2008.
But you can find me over at http://blog.xero.com.

More on Yellow Pages discussion
Posted by rod@drury.net.nz in Communications, TechBiz at 1:49 pm on Saturday, 3 February 2007

Interesting comments from Telecom CFO (possible soon to be CEO) on the Directories sale … Bosses stand united on Yellow Pages sale

However, Telecom had reached a point where it had decided it was better off operating with a partner in the search and communications business.

I think we’re seeing positioning of a sell down, rather than an outright sale.

I agree with the need to partner. But who is the best partner?

Is the Telecom (BigCo) + [Yahoo (HugeCo) | Google (EnormousCo) | ...]

or

Telecom (BigCo) + (Small NZ Mapping Provider) + (Small Mobile Commerce) + (Small Web Advertising expert)

Big + Big = Hard

Big + Small + Small + Small = Innovation

Why does Telecom not just acquire some of the NZ Tech companies operating in this space and drive the platform forward? The world class talent and vision is here and cheap. Working with a huge US company will just continue the death march. Didn’t they learn that with the EDS/Microsoft relationship they just exited?

Trackback uri |

Comments(2)

    Comment by Greg at 8:03 pm on 3 February 2007

    The problem with Big Companies going with small companies is that it raises the ante for the Big Company. Management want to deal with other big company management, rather than talent and vision. They are looking for safety, not innovation. For a manager, Telecom + Google = big kudos, and safety. Telecom + small company for a manager = risk. The risk is not necessarily real, as frequent project death marches from big companies testifies. But management can always be seen to have done the proper, ’safe’ thing. Ie, good management.

    So, the question is, how does the perceived risk associated with small companies and innovation become minimised, or at least realistic? And how does a big company cultivate an environment that encourages a search for vision and innovation, and not just safety?




    Comment by Paul at 9:04 am on 16 February 2007

    Good idea, in theory the problem with this approach is culture and encumbency

    Big + Small + Small + Small = Innovation , except with Big co has massive network revenues and focus, directs its sales force at those, keeps the innovation bit close to home (cos its important after all), reverse integrates their monolithic culture into innovation and you get

    Big + Small + Small + Small = lots of smart people bailing from the small co.