Lessons Learned from a Failing Dot-Com | 2

[previous]

Lessons Learned from a Failing Dot-Com

Focus.

We often spent days and weeks when top "hot" projects on any given morning were no longer even considered worth discussing by the end of the day. Projects were driven hard and strong with lots of overtime and when completed, were often not used internally or sent out to customer sites. More often than not, they were shelved before completion in lieu of technology or marketing changes. In one specific case, over a million was invested in funding an upgrade to our catalog and at project completion all work was shelved as we opted to move toward the ASP/IIS/SQL server based catalog.

Invest In and Trust Your Employees.

There is no need to demonstrate the power that low morale has on the effectiveness of production. Because our continual architectural changes demanded skill sets to match, internal staffing made every effort to comply wholeheartedly. Even so, at some sites, visiting management made no secret of the fact that they considered current staffing skill sets to be no longer adequate, sometimes commenting on this to outside recruiters while staff was within earshot. At times, work was outsourced and internal staff was excluded from much of the design meetings. As funding ceased on key projects, internal staffing was left to complete the same half-built projects that they previously were excluded from and were allocated much less time than those with superior expertise. Employee perception of trust was compromised as it became evident that key figures were strategically placed throughout the company to report on each site's effectiveness.

Luck and Timing.

There is much to be said for luck and good timing - neither of which we seemed to have. We had bad timing in bringing the best upper management in too late and lost huge contracts because of events that were outside of our control - such as new CTOs at client sites favoring other products. For a startup that had no clear definition of itself during most of its existence, good luck would have been essential to succeed but a good business with growth potential can never rely on luck as its strongest operating plan. Timing is another issue. Good leadership is capable of bringing foresight and knowledge through experience to the table. Failure to critically assess internal operations clearly and honestly along with undermining your own place in the market through underselling are not only key steps toward ensuring poor timing, but indicate inexperience and misunderstanding of current trends.

Looking at all of this in retrospect, it's easy to realize that uncovering problem areas as they were occurring is not as simplistic as the historical review would indicate. Addressing them quickly and positively may have even been almost impossible at times. Yet, if I ask myself if I would do it again, if I would put my career on the line for a startup that holds no more promise than a long shot, I would have to say "Yes." There is something adventurous in bringing new technologies and offerings to a fairly unknown market and to be a part of the growing pains of a Dot-Com just finding itself. Now, of course, though, I am in a better position to see the signs that indicate trouble ahead and when to part company.

Kathy Pendracky has 25 years of solid hands on experience in all phases of Data Processing software development and design. This experience encompasses both mainframe and client/server applications with emphasis on participation as technical and or architectural advisory lead in porting mainframe applications onto a client/server base for applications ranging from banking and imaging to procurement. She is currently adjunct professor of Computer Information systems for West Virginia Northern Community College and is a long time Member of Western PA Mensa. She can be reached at dhamu@access.hky.com.

[previous]