There's one Shai Agassi who harbors violent visions of defeating Microsoft Corp. (MSFT ) "We're both going in with swords drawn, and we're going to do battle until we win. And there's not going to be any other result. We'll do everything possible to draw blood," vows this Agassi, the top technology strategist of German software titan SAP.
Another Shai Agassi considers Microsoft his company's closest partner. This kinder and gentler Agassi fancifully traded bags of green M&M's last year with his Microsoft counterpart, Jeff Raikes, to seal a deal to jointly develop a piece of software called Duet.
Both these Shai Agassis are two sides of the same person: a U.S.-based member of SAP's executive board who oversees the complex relationship with Microsoft. "This is the beauty of being human," he says. "You can have two conflicting thoughts at the same time and not go crazy."
Finding the right formula for this kind of "co-opetition" has never been more important. Many new products, from video to financial services, can be provided only in complex packages of hardware, software, and services. By working together, such as agreeing on the Wi-Fi standard for high-speed wireless, competitors can expand the market so everyone wins. "The traditional model says you have a fixed-size pie and you kill each other for a slice of it," says Navi Radjou, a vice-president at Forrester Research Inc. (FORR ) in Cambridge, Mass. "This new vision calls for collaboration to increase the size of the pie."
Putting aside narrow self-interest for the common good sounds easier than it is. Most companies hate to yield a millimeter to archrivals. Witness the war over a standard for high-definition DVDs between camps led by Toshiba Corp. (TOSBF ) and Sony Corp. (SNE )Neither side will back down. Customers are hesitating to buy for fear of picking the standard that becomes obsolete. Everyone loses.
The trick to getting deals done is to remember the real objective, which is bigger sales and profits. That's what SAP and Microsoft did. The companies vie for sales to midsize businesses, but elsewhere they're natural partners, since each dominates a different part of the software world. Duet, their jointly developed product, allows a Microsoft spreadsheet to pull in data from an SAP accounting program. Agassi said he had to assuage concerns of SAP's reps that working behind Microsoft's user interface would undercut SAP's sales efforts. Says Agassi: "The customer base wants us to stay gentlemen, so that's what we do. We keep the competition inside a fence and don't let the blood leak out."
TIT FOR TAT
A simple but effective strategy for cooperating with a rival was worked out by University of Michigan political scientist Robert Axelrod. In a computer experiment, he found that the best approach is tit for tat. Start by cooperating. After that, copy the other person. If he keeps cooperating, you do too. If he defects, retaliate. To stave off a breakdown of trust, be somewhat forgiving of mistakes by the other side. Axelrod showed that by following these rules, even if the other person doesn't initially cooperate, you will guide the relationship toward consistent cooperation with a minimum of cheating. According to Axelrod, the strategy has been used by "nations, bats, birds, and monkeys."
Of course, fraternizing with the enemy is a fire-able offense if it's initiated by anyone outside the C-suite. That's why the top boss has to be 100% behind the arrangement. Engineers tend to adapt quickly and view the deal as just another technical problem to solve, but salespeople are often harder to bring around. Microsoft's Raikes says that when the deal with SAP was announced, "the salesforce said: 'How can that be? You're now partners with a company that we compete with. Does that mean we're going to back away?"' His response was that Microsoft had no intention of going easy on SAP. "People have had a hard time parsing that," Raikes says. "[CEO] Steve Ballmer and I had to step up at the sales meeting last year and take them through the idea." Red Hat (RHAT ) CEO Matthew J. Szulik had similar difficulties this summer explaining to interns why his Linux software company considered IBM (IBM ) a partner, even though IBM sells competing software and partners with Red Hat rival Novell Inc. (NOVL ) "It was an hour discussion," he says with a sigh.
Get ready to have plenty of those conversations. The power of co-opetition will only grow as products become more complex and as competition widens globally. Says SAP CEO Henning Kagermann: "Our larger customers don't tolerate vendors acting like children and fighting among themselves. There's a point where you step back from being too competitive." In other words, it's not just about bashing the other guy. "This is a different type of competition," he adds. "You focus on what you can do for the customer."
一个名叫夏嘉曦的人一心要和微软公司分出高下。身为德国软件巨头 SAP 公司的顶级技术战略师，他发誓说：“双方都已亮剑，不分胜负决不罢休。我们别无选择，只有血战到底。”
而另一个夏嘉曦则把微软看成是自己公司最紧密的合作伙伴。这位更加宽容的夏嘉曦去年异想天开地与其微软的同行杰夫·雷克斯共同销售绿色 M&M's 巧克力豆游戏软件，并达成协议联合开发一种名为 Duet 的软件。
这两个夏嘉曦是同一个人的两面：他是美国 SAP 公司的执行委员会成员，负责处理与微软间复杂微妙的关系。他说：“这就是人性的玄妙所在。你在同一时刻会有两种矛盾的想法，却又不会失去理智。”
为这种“竞合策略”（ Co-opetition ）寻求合适的操作规则至关重要。诸如视频和金融服务等许多新产品，只能通过软硬件及服务的复杂组合形式提供。通过协同合作，竞争对手们可以把市场的蛋糕做 大，使大家都受益。位于马萨诸塞州剑桥的福里斯特研究公司的副总裁纳维·拉德杰说：“传统模式是基于蛋糕大小一定的情况下，大家为分得一杯羹而拼得你死我 活。而新观念则倡导通过合作来把蛋糕做大。”
为了共同利益而放弃狭隘的一己私利，这个道理说来容易做起来难。大多数公司在竞争中寸步不让。由东芝和索尼领导的两大阵营之间在高清 DVD 标准上的纷争就很能说明这个问题。双方都不愿让步。消费者持币观望，担心会选择过时的标准，其结果只能是一损俱损。
达成妥协的诀窍是要牢记真正的目标，那就是谋求更高的销售额和利润额。这也正是 SAP 和微软的做法。这两家公司在中等规模企业客户的争夺上尤为激烈，但在其他方面，它们是天然的合作伙伴，因为双方都在各自不同的软件领域占主导地位。它们合 作开发的产品 Duet 软件允许微软的电子表格直接从 SAP 公司的财务软件中抽取数据。夏嘉曦说他必须打消 SAP 公司销售代表的顾虑，让他们不要担心在微软用户界面上工作会影响销售，他说：“客户群希望我们和平共处，而我们也正是这么做的。我们的竞争局限在一定范围 内，不会让外人看出争斗的端倪。”
针尖对麦芒
密歇根大学的政治学者罗伯特·艾克斯罗德研究出一种简单有效的与对手合作的战略。通过电脑试验，他发现最佳方法是要针锋相对。大家开始进行合作，然后 仿效对方的做法。如果对方愿意继续合作，则相安无事；如果对方背叛你的话，就报复他。为了避免信任危机，对于对方的一些错误也要采取宽容的态度。艾克斯罗 德的研究表明，只要遵循这些规则，即使对方一开始并不合作，你也应尽量以坦诚的态度引导双方朝着长久合作的关系发展。
当然，如果向敌人伸出橄榄枝的人不是营运主管，则很有可能引火上身。因此最高领导应是 100% 的幕后策划者。工程师们很快就能适应，并把这项协议仅仅看成是又一个需要解决的技术问题，但是销售人员有时很难被说服。微软的雷克斯介绍说，当与 SAP 公司的合作协议宣布以后，“销售人员纷纷质疑：‘怎么能这样？我们现在成了竞争对手的合作伙伴。这是否意味着我们要作出让步？'”他认为微软与 SAP 很难会相安无事。雷克斯说：“人们对此进行了深入细致的分析，首席执行官史蒂夫·巴尔默和我去年不得不出席销售会议，帮助他们理解这个想法。”红帽公司（ Red Hat ）的首席执行官马修·佐利克今夏也遇到类似的麻烦，即向内部员工解释旗下的 Linux 软件公司为何要与 IBM 公司合作，尽管 IBM 公司正在出售与其竞争的软件并与红帽公司的对手 Novell 公司合作。他叹息道：“我们费了一个小时来讨论这个问题。”
做好大辩论的心理准备吧。只有在产品变得愈发复杂、竞争在全球愈演愈烈的时候，“竞合策略”的能量才会被释放出来。 SAP 公司的首席执行官孔翰宁说：“我们的大客户不能容忍厂家之间像小孩子那样打打闹闹。应该掌握一个度，在竞争升级时，你应该做一定让步。”换句话说，就是不 要只知一味穷追猛打。他进一步指出：“这是另一种形式的竞争。你应该把精力放在为客户服务上。”
作者：彼得·科伊（ Peter Coy ）
译者：夏芳
No comments:
Post a Comment