 So we're going to talk about a very important topic now with some people with a lot of experience with that topic, which is success in transformation. So according to our calculations about a third of companies at any time right now, third of US public companies are actually undergoing some major transformational change, sometimes informal, sometimes formal, in relation to some competitive or technological threat. 75% of those companies actually failed to being successful at that change. They failed to restore results to sector medium levels, which is a fairly modest metric of success. And the effects of a failed transformation seem to be quite lasting. So a public company has about 10 percentage points of total shareholder return for a period up to 10 years. So in net present value terms, that's sort of roughly the enterprise value of the company. So not a very good bet with the approaches that we have today. So I'd like to investigate with the panel. They all have very different experiences of different types of transformation as to what is what is constitute success? What are some of the tips for successful transformation? So I would just ask maybe each of you, first of all, since you can be very different perspectives to describe the type of transformation that you'll be speaking to, maybe a particular episode or a particular type. So Tiffany, perhaps we could begin with you. This is always the challenge of sitting right to the right of the host. You get to go first. Okay. So obviously I work at a technology company at Salesforce, but I tend to try to get people to think that we don't have a technology problem. We have a people process problem. And so I couldn't agree more with the last comment that was made that we need to invest in people as we work through these transformations and not just digitizing the business to transform to drive costs out. So I'm hyper focused on working with clients and businesses around the world on making sure that they pull apart what they're doing technically from a transformation standpoint and then personally on the culture and the people side of it. Excellent. Thank you. Caroline, I guess you maybe have a very different type of transformation in mind. You've experienced transformation in the nonprofit sector. Could you tell us a little bit about the perspective from which you'll be talking this morning? Sure. Well, I mean in many ways, actually, it's not as different as you think. I used to work in the oil industry at Hess Corporation and then I went to the nonprofit sector. And I guess what surprised me was the similarities are much more than people expect. But what happened with site savers sort of 12 years ago, we had a kind of identity crisis. So the board, for example, thought we were like a medical charity and provided welfare services to blind people. But most of the organization felt that we were a development agency looking at systemic change. So there was a real disconnect. And one of the challenges we had to therefore go through was how do we pull everybody together so that we have the same identity? Because until you have that, how do you have a common strategy and how do you align around that strategy? And I think it's really interesting listening to people talking about the key role of having people. One of the things that I've really learned and I now believe very strongly, I think it's Jim Collins's view about it's all about the people on the bus. And initially I was told by the sort of management consultants, you know, you do strategy, then structure, then you kind of populate your structure. No, no, no, you hire the people and also you fire the right people because not everybody is going to be the right person for your new venture and you've got to get them off the bus as much as get people on the bus. From then you look at the strategy. And what I've also learned is you talk structure at the very last possible minute because the minute you open the structure door, that's all people want to talk about. And they don't even care about strategy anymore. I think it's not as much difference as we think between the non-profit and the profit sector then. Marsha, you're an expert on networks and ecosystems and platform businesses. What are the transformational challenges that you'll be speaking to this morning? So I would actually double down on the structural questions as well as some of the cultural questions. One of the things that we argue is that we're actually observing structural change in the economy today we haven't seen for a century. We're seeing the rise of gigantic firms, the seven of the top ten firms in the world now are platform firms. This is going to be a shift not just in product or business model, also in the mental model which speaks to the culture. It's also a change in how the firms operate, give you a tiny bit of data on it. If you simply take a look at the market cap per employee of Twitter relative to New York Times, it's a factor of seven. If you take a look at the market cap per employee of Airbnb versus Marriott, it's a factor of 17. Even Salesforce is a wonderful example. Salesforce market cap per employee is a factor of 10 relative to IBM. There's a structural difference in business model as you run a platform rather than a product company with a platform always beating the product company. That's very interesting. So let's get to the core of the question then. The discriminators between the 75% of companies that fail are transformation and the ones that get it right. So for the particular type of transformation that you're talking about, maybe product to platform or adjusting to the platform economy, Marshall, what would you say are the keys to getting that right? Because I personally can't think of many companies that have successfully made that switch. There are definitely some mindset shifts in making that work. In shifting from product to platform, one of the most important elements is to have an open ecosystem to actually have third parties that you're inviting in. To illustrate, we all know the story of Steve Jobs. In the 80s and 90s he got it wrong by keeping a closed ecosystem and focusing just on the product and he didn't grow. Then in the 2000s he had an open ecosystem and he did succeed. Another observation just in changing the mental map as you shift to a platform company is to create more value than you take. He says it speaks to the new business models of more value for stakeholders and not just shareholders. But if you create more value than you take, people you don't know will bring you ideas and resources you don't have. And that will be one of the ways you help grow your ecosystem. So one be open, create more value than you take. It's an interesting theme there. So in a sense you're saying that there isn't a general thing called transformation. There are the particular new challenges in the economy at this particular time. This platform strategy implementation that you're talking about is a very particular type of challenge. Clearly a lot of digital natives have been successful, those seven out of ten large companies in the world. But have you seen companies that have made the switch, that have transformed rather than created? So there's some wonderful examples of companies that have actually made some transformation. One of my favourites, I don't know if you're familiar with in China, Ping An is a large financial services company. Now the largest financial services company in the world, Klöckner Steel in Germany has done the same thing. You wouldn't think of a steel company as a platform company, but they have opened a marketplace, allowed competitors in, allowed third parties to sell new kinds of goods through their ecosystem. Again, in both of those cases it was an openness play, inviting third parties in. Often managers have a hard time cannibalizing existing business, but I'll give you even a third example. Mahindra Tractor, Mahindra's third largest conglomerate in India. And you would think that tractors would be great as an Uber for tractors to use it twice a year. But if you do that, you're going to sell fewer tractors and they didn't want to originally let competitors in. But think about it, if you let competitors in, all of a sudden you're going to get data on their failure modes, on their successes, you couldn't buy that data from them if you offered to pay for it. And now you're getting it for free, and you could redesign your own products. Creating these ecosystems allows you to get visibility into an entire spectrum of transformation and innovation that you wouldn't be witness to if you had to go it alone. In a particular type of transmission you're talking about, it's all about openness, it's all about data. But you had quite a different opinion, Caroline. You said that the transformations you'd experienced were more about people than you might think. Can you pull that first? I think as a general sentiment people wouldn't disagree with that. But how specifically do you conduct a people-oriented transformation in a way that biases towards success? Well, with us we were trying to transform an organization with offices in 30 countries. And with people, many of whom had been in the organization 10 or even 20 years, whose view was, well, we've always done it this way, we believe this is the right thing to do. Some were even hiding behind where values led when what they really meant was that this is how we like to do it. So that was our big challenge. And for us, I think it took longer than I expected. Coming in from the oil industry, I thought, well, in the six months it's sorted, we've done off we go. But no, no, in actual fact, it took several years. And first of all, to get everybody's buy-in and we had to do various different mechanics to bring people together both virtually and actually. But then the really big challenge was to get all the activities, all the programs that we were running and make those aligned with the strategy. Because a lot of people's view was, well, HQ, I mean, this new CEO, she's got these sort of crazy ideas, she just wants to change everything. If we keep our heads down and just keep doing what we've always done, it'll be all right, she'll go off, she'll go away. So having to do this alignment, we went through four or five processes really ruthlessly. And in the end, we cut over a third of our programs and said, no, it's not just the new stuff, that has so aligned with your new strategy, everything does. And that was extremely painful. But having gone through that process, what we now do, I try and avoid the kind of great big transformation with the thought of, I mean, one steady state and then there's a huge step change and I'm in another steady state. We have what we might call a restless organization, constantly evolving, making changes as you go to try not to have to do one of those really big steps. Because the other problem I've seen in our sector, where people are going through these big transformations that take a long time, is they become entirely internally focused. What's our governance structure? What is our staff structure? What are we doing for our own vision? And they stop looking externally. And that's when you get bitten by a disruptor who came from behind that you didn't expect. I think our research would support that. That even very big and open and custom oriented companies when under pressure become very introverted. And of course, you can't adapt to the things that you're not looking at, if it's external change in the world that you're trying to adapt to. But coming back to the people theme, I'm hearing a theme of keep the organization fluid so that there isn't this big jolt and maybe something about eliminating the comforting projects. In some cases eliminating people that are getting in the way of change. Are there any other key practices from a leadership perspective in terms of getting people on board rather than galvanizing them into inertia or resistance in a major change? Well, I'm lucky now because although I had to move on a number of leaders, I've been there 15 years and now I have around me some people that I absolutely trust. It's about empowering them and genuinely giving them a lot of freedom and holding them to account for what they actually deliver. Not really so much how they deliver it. So being very flexible about where they work when they work and sharing the limelight, sharing the stage. I mean, I love this kind of thing and Ted talks and all those kind of things. But then so do several of my guys and allowing them to be the face of site savers to do what fits their talents and strengths and to grow. That's what's important and that enables you to dramatically reduce employee attrition. So we went from a sort of nearly 30% attrition rate to one which is now only 7% and arguably getting to a point where it may even be too low because we need some new blood coming in. But it's very much about how you treat the people, how you respect them and how you give them space. So you said that it was all about the people and listening closely to it, it sounds like you might be saying at least to some extent that it's all about the mindsets of the people. Going from we always do it this way to we're open to new ways of doing things. How do you address sort of entrenchment models? I think one of the key things we've tried to change is moving from, as I described, a belief driven culture to an evidence and data driven culture. So if you have that, that takes some of the sting out of it. And presumably that was quite a jolt in a non-profit. Was that quite a new thing to do? Getting my board to understand that investing in systems, in data, and things that were not actually directly doing an operation on an individual. So it didn't appear to be pure philanthropy, but actually operations research which would enable us to do more effective work was a really good use of donor funds. And then what we were able to do is find some specific donors who said that's really cool and we really want to find non-profits who are data driven and who are not just sort of working off the basis of, you know, that pulls my heart strings, so let's do that thing. So Tiffany, you made this sort of very provocative statement that technology change may not in the majority of cases actually be mainly about technology, maybe more about people. Could you elaborate on that a little bit from your own experience? Yeah, so I'm going to qualify this a little bit. Obviously I work at Salesforce now, but prior to Salesforce I was a research fellow at Gartner for a decade and I spent time with a lot of very large tech companies on how are they going to change the tires on the car as it was going around the track, right? Transforming and competing against these new digital natives. How do they become platform companies? How do they become service companies? You know, Ginny Rometti, the CEO and chairman of IBM had 20-some quarters of no growth and one of her famous quotes is, growth and comfort do not coexist. So, you know, this is really difficult. This is a difficult time, but one of the things I would call back from a technology standpoint is it's not just about making platforms available for external, but this is about also empowering your people internally so that innovation and transformation could come from anywhere. And so those collaborative environments that you get in some of these newborn in the cloud companies that were mentioned, you want to also create that same kind of environment internally. So if someone in the call center notices that there's an issue, like how do we fix it? You know, the famous Post-it Note story, right? Came from an executive assistant, a secretary, not from an R&D lab. You know, the little green stoppers in a Starbucks cup actually came from a customer who was sharing information on a platform, right? And so allowing employees to be empowered to participate in innovation and transformation and the cultural shift that's happening is super important. So it's not just executives having to overcome this mental model adjustment, you know, that Mark Bonczuk has done tremendous work around mental model transformation, but in really thinking about empowering individual contributors to feel like they're participating in the cultural transformation as well. And that's very different. Are you saying that essentially technology transformation is no different from non-technology center transformation? It's all about the people. Are you saying technology transformation is especially about the people in some way? And what is that way? Well, there's no shortage from a technology transformation standpoint. There's some research where we found that an average enterprise has 900 apps that are internally in an environment and only 27% or so of them are actually integrated, which means an employee is having to open 10, 12, 15 applications or tools in order to do their job. And so technology is now obviously amplified an issue that maybe silos in an industry or in a company, in a division, in an organization. And so I would say that technology is probably shining a light that it was inefficient previously. And now in our consumer lives, we know it can be so much easier yet in our business lives it remains challenging. And so those sort of personalities of our home life and our work life are at odds with each other of how easy it is to get things done. You know, I often joke you can order, you know, a ream of paper for your printer if you still have one at home and have it delivered to your house within an hour. And sometimes at work you need three signatures and they need to approve it. It takes two weeks, right? You know, we can ride an Uber together and we can share an expense with one click. How difficult would it be if we worked together and we went on a business trip and we had to split business units and cost centers. One of us would say, forget it, I'll just pay for it because we would never want to do it. So you haven't mentioned the word digital transformation. That's very much in vogue right now. Is there such a thing? Would your perspective be digital transformation is just transformation in the presence of technology or is there a thing called digital transformation that requires a different approach? Which could be plausible because we've, you know, between us so far we've talked about some very different types of transformation. Yeah, I would say digital transformation in my view is you can digitize the business. So modernizing the back office to drive out costs. So that digital side is very technology and for me the transformation side is very people. So digital transformation to me is this combination of both. You can't just digitize the environment or try to inject technology to fix the problems that are inherent in the business already. So if you have a disconnect and a gap between strategy and execution and you layer in technology, that gap is going to get bigger. And so how do you pull those two things together and that's why the platform internally to allow all employees to participate in whatever it is that you're doing. And so for me, digital transformation is this big umbrella but as you mentioned and as many have mentioned already, you know, 70% are at a failure rate to throw technology at an issue because culture is the soft stuff, it's the hard stuff. The technology deployment is the easy stuff but arguably the people stuff is much, much harder. My social will be that there are some things in business that everybody thinks they're good at. For instance, marketing, strategy. There are some things that people are more modest about, which is technology. We don't all think that we can program or whatever. And so probably many managers will feel that they've seen many transformations before, they can do that. But 75% are failing to meet their goals. So on the flip side of the success factors, what are some of the myths or common traps do you think by which well-intended transformations fail? Yeah, well so it was many years ago, I think it was probably six or seven at the Gartner Symposium event that's going on right now in Orlando actually and our head of research said that all companies were going to become tech companies. And when that was stated and then you would hear all kinds of companies coming out and saying we're now a technology company and they were not before. They were selling coffee or they were selling apparel or whatever the case might be. And they have a mindset for developing and delivering the products and services that they were already doing. And now to put on the layer of it, one of our clients, Kone, who does the elevators and escalators, every day you could argue they're in that business. And they said no, no, we're really a technology company. And it wasn't about delivering unique technology on the escalator in the elevator, it was more about for their people and what could they do to empower them to repair them more quickly, make them safer, reduce the amount of time that it would take when something was broken. So in that case the trap is being distracted by a single theme and not looking at the... That's right. And I would say many companies start inside out. They digitally transform ourselves versus saying what would our customers actually notice that we do, because you want it to be customer driven and that goes back to the mindset of having this sort of beginner's mind of it's normally been very internally focused, digitized, drive down costs and instead saying what are our customers, what would they value or patience, whatever it might be and how do we actually drive the transformation from the outside in it? Transformation is sort of an internal, insular sort of word, isn't it? That's right. Would you identify the Carolina? Would you identify other sort of, you know, mental traps and false beliefs that cause this very high failure rate for transformations? I absolutely agree with the internal focus. Like we're going through our strategy review so we'll hunker down and, you know, we'll come out in a year and then we'll see what's going on after that. You know, or NGOs particularly, so nonprofits particularly bad at this, which is we're actually going to spend three months wordsmithing our vision statement so what really? That's not really a good thing to be doing. I think one of the traps we nearly fell into was the sort of concept of having an appointed separate change manager and a transformation office where we put up all these posters with all the things we might be doing and lock the office at the end of the day and you know, those are the guys doing the transformation and all that did was bring in a climate of fear in the organization because everyone assumed what we must be doing is coming up with some huge redundancy program. So we got rid of all of that and I said, look, I have to lead this as the CEO from the top. We need to bring in teams where we go in sort of diagonal slices across the organization so different parts of the organizations at different levels of hierarchy bring them together to work together be much, much more open in what we're doing what the challenges are and focus very, very much on what it is we want to achieve how we're going to measure that performance and do not talk about what that might mean for the structure of the organization and bring all of that down so we will focus very much on what are we doing, why are we doing it and who are we doing it for or what might that mean for the marketing department and what might that mean for my job. So the trap there is not thinking about the whole or not having sufficiently clear goals if I'm understanding correctly. And also not seeing the transformation as a separate something done by a separate team. So the transformation is something that somebody else does to you as opposed to something that we do. Even if it's an internal team it's a significant big transformation that's actually got to come from me from the top and then involve as many people as possible and at the same time the other trap which I've already mentioned I think you are too is the world is still happening while you are doing your transformation and if you're not out there scanning the horizon being aware of what's going on when you wake up and come out of your lovely chrysalis with your new organization it's already out of date. So how specifically do you keep when there's fear in the air that the organization is very busy with this sort of internal change how do you keep the eyes on the horizon? Do you with a particular techniques you employed to maintain the external orientation? Well it's mainly networks I find so I must admit I spend half my life on a Boeing you know so and forever in different countries. And how do you encourage your people to do that in the midst of the transformation? Well you have to try and do both things at once and you have to be very careful about your people setting clear goals and telling them what things they cannot do that's the other thing. So there will be some things that we try and take out of the equation maybe some of the more administrative things I mean you mentioned about expenses and all those kind of things so trying to streamline some of those processes or give people permission not to do some other things so they've got space to both do the transformation work and look outside and what we also did was we did bring in some people but not to be in a to make sure that people weren't so stressed that you know they couldn't actually fulfill their tasks. Marshall in terms of failure factors for platform transformations or ecosystem transformations and a couple of things that I've noticed is that you know there are management fads you know there's perhaps an idea in the air right now that everything needs to be an ecosystem and I've noticed that companies tend to assume that if an ecosystem is the answer that they have the right to be the orchestrator but if there are 100 or so companies in the average ecosystem that means that 99% of them are deluded in their ability to be the orchestrator and would you agree with some of those dysfunctions or would you appoint other you know critical mistakes in the thinking around platform transformation. So those are great questions. Is this in effect a hierarchy of questions that will help you get to the answer of that problem. So I would agree with the initial question they appreciate in value as opposed to depreciate in value and they innovate faster but not everyone is going to qualify to be a platform. The next question you have to ask is do you have the resources to tip the market. All these things are based on critical mass they're based on network effects. If you can't tip the market if you don't have the resources to do that then you may have to play ball with someone else's ability to understand. This goes back to the mental models and the people. It's probably failure to understand how platforms operate. One of the most fundamental aspects of a platform is helping ecosystems partner to create value for others. I'll back into the answer through a story of a failure. So I would argue that predicts at GE is a story of a failure. They tried it was a great idea. I even heard their presentation at many of you probably know the machinery and in principle it's a great idea. I even heard their presentation for their plan is first we do it for ourselves and we do it for customers and we do it globally. Never did they get to the point of we're going to help our customers do it for their customers expanding the ecosystem. So they never ask this question again how you're going to help others create value for their customers. They actually back into what I think is the most fundamental mistake of mind shift and this is for all of you especially those in lower finance. The first question everyone asks when they do platformers really how are we going to make money. Terrible question. You don't do that. The first question you have to ask is how do we create value after you've done that then you get the rights to earn that is helping third parties to create some of that value. So you have to shift again it goes deeply to mind. I've got a compliment you've been picking very different but extremely complicated ideas. You can't get these transformations without getting people involved without changing the models without changing the culture that has to be done or you won't get this to happen. But one of the deepest insights here is asking how you help third parties create value what's your role in that orchestration then you get to ask the question how you make money and how you transform. One of the interesting aspects that may be a platform transformation brings out that's actually present in all transformations is it has to in a sense destroy some aspect of the status quo to create the possibility of the new. So maybe you have to invite in competitors which may in some ways be damaging to your business in order to unleash new innovation. For the companies to get that wrong what goes wrong with that equation. So you've anticipated a wonderful challenge that lots have faced when they try to move in that direction all too often that what happens is as you launch into a platform venture some competitor will come with what is a better product than one of the ones that you sell internally internally and the manager of that product said no no no you can't do that you got to kill that problem but your customers hate that because now they're being denied access to something better. Some companies have actually solved that problem by setting up an equal division. It's a peer to the product divisions to represent the voice of the customer to get other voices in the room especially those of the customer that are of equivalent status as the managers inside the company. When that happens then you can actually invite in the best of breed and you can become the orchestrator. What this also does it conditions your division so you know what your product actually isn't as good as the competitors but we can give you the data here's a help we can redo the design so it gets better rather than keeping out of the ecosystem. So one is setting up an internal division at an equivalent status and also listening to your customers to keep your internal divisions from killing off really good product innovations that you want inside your ecosystem. So that sounds like the trap there might be not you know failing to reconceive the boundaries of your true organization. Absolutely correct. You must consider we describe it again as the externalization of value creation rather than simply trying to create all the value yourself. What you do is you orchestrate the best value also created by others and some of the simple description of an inverted firm part of the value moves from created inside being created outside and that orchestration might actually create a vastly greater value proposition which by the way also explains those numbers I gave you in the beginning. How is it possible that Airbnb has 17 times the market cap per employee of Marriott well it's because you and I provide the rooms. Or same thing with Facebook or same thing with Uber they're orchestrating value creation by third parties. Right. So maybe in a sense you're taking up a final question for us which is you know we talk about transformation as if it's one one unchanging thing you know we ask even the question that we ask essentially assumes some permanent body of wisdom that we can appeal to how do we succeed in transformation but you're saying the platform transformation is the adaptation to a new phenomenon in the in the world. Ecosystems that requires new thinking new structures. So if transformation is adaptation to a changing world even if right now we could define the success recipe we'd probably have to change it tomorrow. So what are the what are the changes in the world that should be prompting new transformational thinking do you think on the part of companies how will transformation need to change in order to adapt to a changing business environment what are some of the forces that you see Tiffany. You see the experience that a customer consumer in the B2B or B2C space actually has with a particular brand coming sort of in the next four or five years to be equal to whatever the products are you're selling so experience and that goes back to looking from the outside in really that voice to the customer the second is innovation and innovation is not only what customers are seeing is how you're using the technology they know that you're using it or not and then what is coming sort of around the corner are you doing those things the next is trust we're sharing a tremendous amount of data and especially in ecosystems like what are you doing with that data how are you protecting it what are the things what are the things that you're doing around it and the forth being values and those four pillars really driving what businesses want from brands and consumers want from brands so from a transformation standpoint if you have to do it in all of those four and then how are you communicating externally do people know where you stand on those four pillars what would you say Carolyn some of the new triggers for transformation that may change what we mean by transformation well within the NGO world is an increasing drive as we're going for bigger and bigger programs and more systemic change is that we need to work much more in consortia and that can be quite difficult because organizations that used to compete with each other and indeed still do for certain parts of funding need to come together need to agree that one of them will be the lead will be the kind of you like the grant manager with the main donor and then need to agree standard approaches and strategies and systems and that's something which didn't really happen in a 10-15 years ago and is now happening much much more and that's how you how successful if you refuse to be part of a consortium and try and just go it's just me and go alone you will never really succeed and that raises a very interesting question doesn't it because transformation as a nuance of I transform myself with full control I transform myself but if you're talking about a consortium you're talking about co-evolution where you only have partial influence so that have you got any experience of how that sort of transformation works because I would agree that's a rising transformational need how do we transform a network how do we not only create the sort of networks that Marshall is talking about but how do we transform and evolve them well for me it comes to the word trust which you use you have to try and establish trust amongst a group of organisations that historically has competed whether it be for money or for research papers and kudos or for sort of supremacy in the league tables of I'm the biggest and get those people to actually think well it's alright I can for example allow site savers to be the lead because they're not going to hog all the money and just you know keep all the overhead and just give me the sort of little bits and pieces what we've had to learn to do that is sometimes to give up space so for example when we're managing this global program and we wanted to take a lead in Kenya and another organisation wanted to take a lead in Pakistan now I happen to have a very strong country office in Pakistan but from the global level I said no that's okay we will let this organisation run in Pakistan then you have to deal with the great outpouring of grief the country director of Pakistan is saying but I'd be much better at doing this but now you've compromised my position with the Ministry of Health what can you be thinking and trying to explain and bring those people in so they can see a full global picture and not just what does it mean for me in my country and that's just a microcosm of trying to do that having to give up some space in order to make sure you protect other space and in order to overall protect those relationships that you need and then again that all comes back to people because I know we talk about institutional relationships but there's not really any such thing there's relationships between individuals in those organisations and so trying to have as many relationships as you can so it's not just the two CEOs go out to dinner it's actually got to be all at those levels and that's a lot of work certainly when I talk to big donors like the UK Government who love walking and consortia I've said don't think that this enables you to do things more cheaply it isn't actually cheaper it's better it's more effective but it isn't cheaper because there's so much works needed to keep that consortia together that's very interesting Marsha what's next on the so we've had sort of B2C ecosystems there's a big wave and we now got some very successful companies there what the economist calls the super companies once it's very high returns on tangible assets you know what's new what's emerging in terms of transformation needs in that space is it finding profitable internet of things business models you know B2B ecosystem models or something else additional factors after Carolyn and Tiffany have already listed all the good ones so thank you so write down what they said already let me see if I can add one or two additional things one actually in terms of the B2B space as opposed to the B2C space almost all of the really successful platforms are engaged in interactions of some kind so it's creating values interaction whether it's a ride a tweet a purchase what have you in the B2B space the value of those interactions is much higher but the numbers still focus on those or if you're moving in the direction of internet of things you can look at machine to machine where those interactions can actually be massive volume so that's a way to think about some of the differences another stepping stone that you should probably consider as you move in that direction is enabling your ecosystem partners to experiment so in the B2C example there's flappy birds and there's angry birds well one of those succeeded massively and Apple and Google but they could then appropriate those into the ecosystem in a B2B context ping on in finance and insurance is allowing its ecosystem partners to experiment and develop new financial products and these are B2B plays and they're actually pulling the best new innovations into the ecosystem so allowing that experimentation among your ecosystem is perhaps another one one last thought would simply be to help you design network effects design methods for your partners to help your partners if you can do that they'll create value for one another and be attracted into your ecosystem so it would be further thoughts so I think we have some time for audience questions and I'm told that we've collected some that we might put up on the screen yeah will they come up here you're going to read them out okay before they put that I have some some questions here and the first one for you Marshall is what can you tell us from your research on how traditional organizations can learn from and leverage customer insights and mega trends for transformational change efforts so listening to your customers is essential in the platform business model platforms really in some ways move the production and the consumption off-platform and really your job at that point is to curate whether it's rides, tweets, stays, apps but what you then have to do is to really listen to your customers about what's working and what's not this is why some of the curation and feedback systems are so essential in almost all these platform business models it gives your customers a place to recount their experience and to not only post new innovations exactly as an app in a Salesforce ecosystem but then also recount their experience and interacting with that which tells you here's what's working it then helps you do the design to give you another illustration when Amazon offered Fire TV it suddenly gained access to all of the content that folks then watched which then allowed them to design new content and new TV shows folding that in they've now won two Oscars and eight Emmys it's really being able to listen to your customers in some really interesting ways so give them voice both in terms of production and in terms of consumption and make sure you pay attention to what they've said the second question is for you Tiffany Salesforce is a heavily tech-based business I would love to hear from you what advice could you provide to incumbent traditional organizations to disrupt themselves the million dollar question so I would say many companies actually come to us in the three and a half years I've been here it's interesting when I do I'm involved in executive briefing so executives from companies like a Boeing you know come into our offices and they're very interested in the following question we want to learn Salesforce on Salesforce like how do you run the organization how do you metric and measure people we have something called v2 mom and they are trying to inject some of that sort of born in the cloud thinking into their environment that tends to be a little more legacy and if you look at somebody who has done it well it is usually that breakout of a division that they will pop something up so I'm going to go back to IBM again but when they stood up Watson they chose not to stand it up next to or in their home headquarters right they moved it to Silicon Valley they said we want to have a very different feel from a cultural standpoint and then at some point maybe we bring it back in and so we see organizations trying to learn from an organism but it has everything to do with changing the metrics that's one big thing of really letting people fail and learn and how do you continue to reward them and give them a safe environment by which they can do that versus just having it be the very did you did you win did it succeed did you hit your numbers where your metrics driven and no failure which is not reality so I think the backbone of corporate growth is personal growth and change is hard personally and so imagine multiplying that by a hundred people or a thousand or a hundred thousand lots more depending on if you're looking across the ecosystem so it's one of those things where you really have to look at the organization the metrics as well as the ability to allow people to fail so we have got an interesting question on trust which some of you bought up so trust building you can read the question that's one of the top there how pragmatically do we create the trust particularly in a situation where there are good reasons for fear things will change people may become more important less important you know may lose the job how do you main trust under those circumstances I think you were touching on that Caroline yeah I mean and I think it can be particularly difficult when you're in an organization which is spread out among many many offices across the world so you because trust is easiest to build face to face building actual personal relationships with people you know always try and do that if I can because it just is so much faster than any kind of email sort of correspondence and all that kind of thing which we do tend to rely on far far too heavily what I find personally now is that I I do a lot more video communication we used to do the newsletters and the CEO talks and all that kind of thing always in sort of bits of paper or emails now I do an awful lot more of the videos and I encourage my guys to do that the old fashioned phone calls rather than you know the the webinars are also far better because trying to get that personal contact I think is the way actually to to build the trust and we're interested to hear you talking about the importance of being able to fail now in our world that can be difficult because a lot of our income comes from donors and our donors they're not all like this some are better than others but what they tend to say is we want a really exciting novel innovative project with no risk and that is really quite difficult to do and one of the things we tend to do we do have other money that we generate from very large numbers of people who just give you small amounts of money month on month and we try and use that money to take some risk and encourage people to do things that might well not work What about the hard part of transformation because in a way there are some rational reasons for mistrust right a contract an exchange of value an understanding of someone's role may change may disappear there are and often the plans to do so necessarily have to be secret so you have information asymmetry power asymmetry in that particular sort of fearful context how do you how do you create or rebuild trust is it a case of getting the painful stuff over quickly or being very transparent or well certainly one of the things if you've had to move somebody on typically if it's not working rather than a kind of redundancy situation one of the things I've learned is the only regrets I've ever had is taking too long over it and particularly at a senior level hoping that things will get better and so what I've learned to do is make your decision fairly quickly and do it fast also it helps with the individual concern it's much easier if you spend four or five months in an organization to then say you know what this just was a really bad fit and then both sides can go off and the other people can say right I'm going to go and get a new job that wasn't a suitable place for me but if you spend a year or 18 months going through complex HR performance processes and desperately trying oh then everybody else in the organization is distraught it's extraordinarily painful and then that person's CV is more damaged because they've got a much longer period so being decisive when you have those difficult decisions to make it's hard and particularly in a non-profit where often the culture is well we'll just put them in another place until they retire and we'll certainly learn that's not the right way to go being decisive is key but you also have to call out just on trust specifically like there's a crisis of trust the Edelman trust barometer is not going in the right direction and so even with everything that's going on especially with the advent of technology the trust has to be core to what you do and who you are it's our core tenant it's our core value since day one our CEO Mark Benioff is very vocal about where we stand on trust and so if it's important to your customers and your employees you have to come up with a stance and that goes back to it has to be something that everyone understands where you stand on that and if you make a mistake everyone understands that something's going to happen it's also how you respond to that mistake and now with social how quickly you respond waiting a week to come up with the perfect answer you know the vision statement take three months like the perfect answer is the wrong answer right it is you have to come out with something and make sure that you stay ahead of it you have to be transparent I think back in the day when you used to do your annual reports or whatever reports you were doing you were always trying to spin it to make it all sound so that lovely phrase so that we can be even better than we are and now we've recognised we stopped doing that and actually put into the public domain when something's gone wrong because nowadays if I read a report or a website or something from an NGO where they've met every target and everything is absolutely wonderful and they've not had a single safeguarding moment you know that's to say actually this did go wrong and this project didn't work and then they will trust you when the project does work and they'll believe you let's just see if we can get in one question maybe with some short comments there's a very interesting question about the role of disappeared now the role of technology and actually facilitating transformation so we think about transformation we typically think of a program office and a Gantt chart and PowerPoint presentations but you know actually this is something that we can we can have data on and there are patterns of behavior and one can detect it more or less quickly maybe for you Marcia how can technology actually help the process of transformation can we be more scientific and more evidence driven in the technology age around about transformation so I think in some ways we have the answer to that Caroline mentioned earlier this wonderful point that you need data driven decision making so the technology that captures data the technology so they can see how a decision was arrived at by the way this also builds trust because then they see what evidence is being used to drive a particular decision so the technologies that actually capture and disseminate data and decisions is one another one I think is actually important is cloud and machine learning if you're going to do this you need to be able to capture the relationships from lots and the interactions that are occurring inside and outside your ecosystem and that's much easier to do than it is on premise and then it's also be able to train your ecosystems on top of that using machine learning using artificial intelligence those things will actually give you pattern recognition and give you extra help I was going to add one small thought to the trust element be clear about the rules up front and when they change make sure you have skin in the game if you communicate that fairly to everybody not just selectively but then you might absorb some of the downside something made that change and then they'll trust you if you're pushing all the damages of change in direction onto someone else why should they trust that if you are absorbing some of the damage then they feel okay this is a shared burden as you make a change and they're much more willing to trust you it's been tremendously rich discussion let me join me in thanking the panelists I think I've learned a lot today and I hope you have a great job