|
We in the IT industry habitually look at technology
first, believing that a
technical edge is more important than any other advantage a business could have. This
isn't the way most industries work, but our industry has been hypnotized
by the bright shiny objects of techno. We make most of our decisions
as Supply Siders, assuming that if you improve the product, the demand will
come. We believe the best product wins.
You
don't need to read The Innovator's Dilemma to know this is
short-sighted. The hard reality is that over the long run, the best
technology loses out to commercial advantages like market power, financial
strength, and serious marketing. In the end, it is almost axiomatic that
the best technology loses, even when it's from a big company. Think IBM.
Think DEC.
So
when we in high tech look at the phenomenon of Open Source, we're looking at it
the wrong way. We're fascinated with its supply-side attributes...the
things that aren't likely to matter much over the long term. So, let's
look at what open source does to sales and marketing -- the processes that will
be the long-run determinant of success.
|
|
|
Hot News
Many publications are now syndicating the Taber Report.
The latest one is the Sand Hill Group's Sand Hill.com Opinion
blog.
* Read
it here
|
|
Best Practices
If you're looking at an open source
strategy, focus on how you will grow and work your community. A large,
dynamic community is the sine qua non allowing phenomenal changes to
your business model.
Instead of spending on Sales and Outbound
Marketing, spend on community development and a flawless, scalable
ecommerce site. Typically,
build a really tight telesales
operation before you hire an expensive sales rep. Focus on high-volume, low cost transactions, knowing
that your direct reps will only be able to sell into accounts that already
have bought a few low-cost licenses over the web.
|
|
Open Source, inside-out
Listening
to Open Source advocates (I count myself as a card-carrying member of that
group), you hear about these kind of advantages:
- faster,
more open innovation,
- lower
cost of development
- user-driven
feature mix (avoiding the confusion of too many marginal features),
- broader
testing,
- quicker
time to market, and
- dramatic
reductions in cost of ownership.
While
there are great examples of each of these advantages, it is rare for an open
source project to achieve all of them. And most of the advantages are stated from a supplier's point of view.
But
what if Open Source's engineering aspects aren't the pivotal ones? What if
they are supporting arguments, and the real story is about business model?
I
have a confession to make: I've been holding out on you. This
article was drafted over a year ago, but I didn't want to upset people by
publishing it too early. But John Roberts, CEO of SugarCRM, has been
eloquently making the case about the open source business model, and it seems like the
industry is ready to hear this -- look at this month's LinuxWorld keynote
address:
Death of the Enterprise Software Business Model
According
to recent research by software analysts at Goldman-Sachs, Enterprise software
companies spent 82% of new license revenues on sales & marketing in 2005, up
from 66% in 2000. Effectively, traditional Enterprise software companies are
charging their customers to sell to them.
The specific data in the paragraph
above are very debatable, but the underlying issue is not.
The costs of the Enterprise Sales model can eat you alive unless you get
hypergrowth or market dominance.
The
Enterprise Software business model is characterized by large customers, high
prices, direct channels, high commissions, and relatively low volumes. The
Enterprise sales cycle is high-touch, its salesman using a consultative
style. Thousands of software companies have followed this model, and most of the
Software 500 continue to do so. For software that is specialized and
relatively low volume, there really hasn't been a great alternative. (Sure,
consumer software can use channels, OEM bundling, and the web...but you need
high volumes for that to work out).
But
if you narrow the field a little bit, looking only at consistently
profitable software companies, the Enterprise model seems to be working only if
you're an 800-pound gorilla. IBM, SAP, CA, and Oracle do just fine with
their software packages. Cisco does fine with its network management
software. But there are hundreds of other Software 500 companies who have spotty profitability because of the cost
of customer acquisition. One delayed deal can blow their quarter, and
that trashes their stock for months.
So
if you have a new piece of software that maybe a thousand customers will be
willing to pay for, how do you get it to market without losing your shirt?
The Open Source Alternative
Instead
of hiring an expensive sales force to do the market education, control all the conversations, and tap into
the customer's buying process, you give away fully functional, somewhat-usable software to anyone
who wants to try it. You give complete access to your source files, so
engineers in your target customers can see the inner workings and understand how
they could add to it themselves. The user convinces themselves they want
to buy the "real version" before they even contact you.
Essentially, you dispense with the entire
cycle of
lead generation, market education, prospect qualification, proof of concept, and
chase-the-purchase-order. You replace the Sales and Marketing engine with a dynamite web site, community development,
and ecommerce system. Early on, this means a marketing and
"sales" staff of 3 world wide. You add telesales reps only when
the existing ones are too busy to take any more orders. You don't hire a
direct rep until you already have hundreds of (low-price) customers who can be
up-sold.
The cost structure
scales with revenue. More important, you cut in half the costs of the single most expensive
part of running a software business -- Sales and Marketing can be done for 25%
of revenues. Because you aren't spending as much on Sales, your cash requirements will be much lower. VCs
will like the idea of a slow burn rate with the global reach of the internet
(this is what they were banking on for all their investments during the
bubble), but you will need to manage their expectations about revenue.
At
the same time, you automatically expand the market. Since you have no sales
force anyway, there's no reason not to go after SMB or
even micro-businesses via the web. The goal at all times is to increase
the size
and dynamism of your community.
In fact, your community is more valuable than the code. As
Bernard
Golden recently wrote, "an open source project without a community is
just shareware." Since your community is in
cyberspace, countries you could never afford to do business in can still host
your customers. Large open source communities let you tap into and harvest
long-tail markets.
Watch
out though: these open source community dynamics only really work well
when you own your category, when there are no "competing" open source
projects. Avoid this kind of bifurcation at all costs.
Psychologically,
open source feels really different. You're giving away the crown
jewels. The vast majority of your users will never pay you a dime -- in fact, you'll have
almost no idea who your users are. But you'll get a hundred times more users than
you'd ever have had with the Enterprise model. The perceived free price
can put you Inside
the Tornado of hypergrowth much more readily than was possible before.
Once you have a bazillion users, you may just be able to harvest
your community.
Open
source business models depend on the law of large numbers. The numbers you
really care about are numbers of downloads, numbers of community registrations,
and numbers of posts per month in your online forum. For the flywheel
effect to kick in, you'll usually need more than 100,000 downloads. Conversion rates in open
source aren't necessarily any better than in closed source, so you may need 10,000 downloads (vice
10,000 leads) to do 10 deals. (JBoss was the miracle project when it came
to conversion rates -- 3% or more -- which was why it was such a tempting
acquisition target). Further, the deals must be smaller to drive the
high volumes -- much closer to $1000 than $100,000 per purchase.
So
watch out: if your software really isn't interesting to more than a small
group, an open source strategy will fizzle. Your techno will simply be
another anonymous project among the 130,000 ones hosted at SourceForge.
For highly specialized software, sticking with proprietary tactics is the only
way to go.
The Biggest
Sales Productivity Hint -- coming in May
Contents copyright 2006 by DOTnet Consulting, Inc,
all rights reserved.
Feel free to forward this report, but you must include this copyright notice.
All trademarks and graphics are the property of their respective owners.
This newsletter was mailed to you because our records show you asked to receive
it.
Click
here to opt-out of future newsletters, although that will make us feel very sad.
|