The enterprise has a problem. This problem is not new. It was summarized by the English economist E. F. Schumacher in his influential text, Small is Beautiful, which he wrote in 1973. “What characterizes modern industry is its enormous consumption to produce so little… It is inefficient to a degree that goes beyond imagination!”
The same holds true today. Somehow, in spite of nearly 50 years of massive innovation and incredible technological feats, big enterprises remain defined by their inefficiency.
Salesforce’s announcement that it was acquiring Slack for $27.7 billion in cash and stock signaled a monumental shift in terms both of the future of enterprise software and, more broadly, the future of work.
Specifically, it signaled the end of the era that Salesforce itself created — that of full-stack packaged cloud apps liberated from the limitations of on-premise software.
That era — call it SaaS 1.0 — constituted a quantum leap in mankind’s ongoing march towards full digital transformation, mostly by making software more available.
But it didn’t bring us all the way there. Software remained siloed, and as…
Over the last decade or so, fears about automation and its capacity for upending society have been front and center both in the news and in politics. The concept of safeguarding our incomes against automation’s insatiable appetite for our jobs, for example, has even become a centerpiece of our political discourse.
When people think about automation today, they don’t think of technology that empowers or augments, but rather, technology that displaces — and exacerbates issues of inequality and economic opportunity in the process.
Over the last few years, it’s become commonplace to reference “low-code” technology and “no-code” technology in the same breath, as if they were the same thing — the same functional kind of company-changing technology, implementable at the same low, company-altering cost. Leah Solivan, the founder of TaskRabbit, suggested recently that “low-code/no-code” technology will “be the secret to fueling our economy’s recovery.” Vivek Goel of Quixy wrote that “no-code/low-code” solutions will together facilitate a holistic shift from “manual to digital for all systems.” …
Change management has been considered something of a formal business discipline since the 1980s. At that time, business journalists were beginning to study the challenges of bridging “persistent and troubling gap[s] between the inherent value of the technology they develop and their ability to put it to work effectively.” We knew then that managing change effectively, such that we derive actual value from the technology we invest in, was a difficult undertaking. Nevertheless, we considered it a necessary evil.
Editor’s note: The Tonkean team has written about how you can eliminate change management in a new eBook, which you can…
This article originally appeared on Crunchbase.
A key question on the mind of most business leaders today is: “How can I adapt my business to survive and even thrive in a post-COVID world?” Although answers vary, it seems that many are hoping that one technology in particular ends up solving their problems: automation.
According to analyst firm Forrester, in the months and years ahead, enterprises will invest in automation technology more than rehiring, because “the enterprise coverage and strategic value of automation” has so meaningfully increased.
Here’s why that matters.
Over the last 25 years, a wide manner of ops functions have emerged within the enterprise: SalesOps, MarketingOps, and Customer SuccessOps (which comprise the field known as RevOps), BizOps, LegalOps, HROps, etc. Basically every business function has grown to maintain an ops-focused arm. This is a good thing for the ops community, because it evinces a certain acknowledgment of how important the ops function is inside the enterprise.
But both those working inside operations departments and business leaders more generally would be wise to remember no ops function operates in a silo. Every operations team is…
Today, we announced the completion of Tonkean’s $24 million Series A round, led by Lightspeed Venture Partners. This is something we’re remarkably excited about. It’s a huge step for our company. Our mission is to empower operations teams to design and manifest the future of work — a future that’s more adaptive, efficient, and appreciative of the importance of people, as opposed to tech, or data. This round of funding, in allowing us to scale the Adaptive Business Operations technology we’re building, will help us do precisely that. …
Business leaders in general (and members of the tech community, in particular), have a tendency to prioritize and celebrate — above all else — the sanctity of product. From focusing myopically on product design to investing lavishly on product release parties, it would appear that many believe a company’s job is done once they have a prototype to demo on a stage floor.
This is, in a word, misguided.
Imagine the following. It’s 4 p.m. on a Friday, and the client project your account manager has been working on all afternoon is almost finished. She’s already completed 80% of the work; all she needs to do is confirm deployment with engineering, get sign-off from legal on the contract, and confirm final logistics with you, the VP of Customer Success, to whom she reports. Then she’ll be able to close her laptop, leave the office, and return home to her family for the weekend.
Unfortunately, that’s just not how things work today. The people she needs to complete these last…
Founder & CEO of @Tonkean; An entrepreneur, innovator and tech guy