Posts from — September 2009

Credibility
The pitch given by Burgess provided plenty of information about what Royal Roads should do with Open Courseware but did not quite convey how they would effectively overcome risks and achieve success with the project. Throughout the pitch, Burgess presented more factual information rather than clearly pitching why RRU could provide uniqueness in their Open Courseware.

Management Team
Other than mention of a marketing team, there is little evidence of a team in place to execute this plan or which existing teams in the University would or could be used as resources. Providing more information on the teams responsible for executing the plan would have been beneficial in strengthening the pitch for Open Courseware.

Business Model
The idea is feasible but the argument is not so compelling. There is evidence of opportunity and weaknesses but not so much how the University can use its strengths or how RRU will face threats to the idea. In the pitch, Burgess could have focused more on what will make students want to go to RRU or any other university with established open courseware in place? How do the courses from RRU differ from the ones offered by other institutions that are part of the Open Courseware Consortium (OCW) and should these other universities be viewed as opportunities or threats for providing similar learning tools?

Competitive Products
The main competition Burgess identified is MIT, although the other post-secondary institutions that are part of the OCW make the service very competitive. Within five years, MIT was able to grow their open courseware program significantly. As pointed out, if RRU were to do the same, they would have to effectively target and market to students.

Market Readiness
Without knowing exactly how students can or will be drawn into the market, the critical path ahead seems challenging and may take more time than necessary if RRU is not prepared.

Technical Innovation
This pitch did not provide strong evidence of RRU having an edge technically.

Exit Strategy
Burgess makes the destination clear, however the success of the project is brought to question.

Overall Investment Status
As an EVA, I would say at this point in time, unless Burgess could provide further proof that this venture would be successful, an investment cannot be made on this proposition.

I’ve decided to take the challenge of being brief and to the point in evaluating the presentation of the OLT at UBC. I adapted a marking rubric that we use at the elementary school level in order to facilitate this (it actually looks a lot better as a Word document):

UBC’s OLT Pitch Pool Marking Rubric

Summary:

The format of the interview was not formal enough to make a reasonable judgement as an EVA. Michelle Lamberson was obviously at ease and familiar with the interviewer and this led to an overly casual environment (as far as trying to evaluate the ‘Pitch’). Ms. Lamberson seems excited about her role and is confident as she discusses it. I would have liked to see a formal presentation (an actual ‘Pitch’) so that I could understand clearly what it is that her department does and what its vision of the future is.

Scroll down this link to view the non-fiction book being reviewed Oct 28th.

http://www.alumni.ubc.ca/connect/bookclub/index.php#cook

While I haven’t read the book, it has a fear monger feel to it.  Check the facilitators bio, he is giving Pro-D seminars on this book!!!  Am I the only one bothered by this one-sided labeling?

Michelle Lamberson does not have a job I envy.  Balancing the needs and budgets of her office with the needs of UBC students, faculty and departments is a recipe for the adage. “you can’t please all of the people all of the time”.  There is no way to please everyone.

She is intelligent and obviously possesses the skills to balance all of the demands placed upon her and her office.  She gives the impression that she takes in multiple viewpoints and considers them all.  If I had any critique to offer, I would suggest she be more aware of her eye movement during the interview.  While very often intelligent people look away to form a thought it can be misinterpreted as evasiveness.  She is fully versed in her subject and would project this more clearly if she held her gaze more directly.  This small nuance falls into the credibility category.

In a short interview, deeply considered projects can appear to have been quick and easy judgments.  The decision to offer blogs and wikis to all students is almost presented as an experiment.  The endpoint or definition of success is unclear yet, I am not sure in this case it can be clear.  Decision-making within this paradigm is most challenging. An institution like UBC must be willing to try a few ‘experiments’ after intelligent consideration.

As for the question – would I invest in this enterprise? – I believe my tuition bill speaks for itself.

Brad McFee tries to make a compelling case for his company.  They seem to have gone through early growing pains about how to position themselves as a product or service company. He talks about a year of transition.  They seem to have a product which up until recently was not being purchased “off the rack” but is now being better represented to customers.  I would like to see more discussion of this boxed product and what they think it’s potential is as it stands, without customization.  It sounds as if Mind Leaders got a customized product. How much in sales have been attributed to their boxed software?

Mr. McFee proudly discusses their new, large partner – Lighthouse Publishing.  He seems very optimistic that they will share their 700+ customer base with them.  He is perhaps a bit too optimistic.  Will Lighthouse risk losing a customer of their own for a small incentive?  I worry that he underestimates the corporate change the doubling of a small workforce can bring.  An expansion from 12 to 22 in a few weeks is extremely rapid and it will not be seamless.  As the number of staff doubles there will be a friendly period where everyone sizes each other up followed by internal re-positioning struggle as old and new employees ‘stake their claim’ to areas of the business they deem important.  Hopefully, their HR department is adept at interviewing for ‘fit’ as well as qualifications.

Innovation in b2b programming is fleeting.  Unless Recombo can get a boxed product out which fits a needed business solution they will be customizing to prove the product works but not really producing a product that has a high enough sales potential.  Very quickly someone else can (and will) customize a single solution for each of the larger customers leaving the market shallow.  India and China are producing a generation of very savvy programmers who will be cutting into Recombo’s market with one off, customized solutions for less.

If  Recombo could show me a large customer base to sell boxed software into and could show me it would need little or no customization then I might consider investing.  I would have to make sure my exit strategy matched theirs or there may be issues about when to sell the company.

Analyzing Ingenia’s Pitch

* CEO Credibility – Does this person exude capability and convey confidence that they will achieve success against all obstacles?

Ramona’s voice is clear, concise and confident. It was a great place to begin the pitch but the ongoing professional experience of Ramona became really distracting. The perception of the company seems to rely on simply Ramona and not a team based approach. Her core team consists of people with “Masters” but in what field? How will their expertise contribute to the success of Vietnam? Are they experience dealing with Asian markets? In addition, does Ramona speak Vietnamese? Does she have local support? What are the demographics of Vietnamese people who want to have an education? Just because there are youth along the street where Ramona took her picture, it does not suggest those people would be willing to engage in e-learning. What makes her so sure?

* Management Team – Have they assembled a stellar team along with the other human and material resources required for success Consulltants (Willing to seek out consultants depending on the project)

The mention of seeking out consultants in addition to have a core team was very reassuring, however there does not seem to be enough of a team presence within the pitch for me to trust in this “team” she mentions. The only mention is of Ramona’s professional experience  but her team is missing from the picture. It doesn’t seem to be a team based production. Perhaps in a pitch, she wants to focus the attention on her professional qualifications but I find it hard to trust the venture when it seems like there is only one reliable face for the company. What if something happens to Ramona? Are there other people to follow up and support it? Will it be worth risking 100, 000 Canada for the suggested expected rate?

* Business Model – Is this feasible? – have they done their homework? – are their arguments and information accurate and compelling?

The business model seems to be feasible within a North American region and culture. Moving their ideas to Vietnam will probably include the differences in culture, language and environment. In their pitch, they have not really addressed this. Is it going to be a problem or since they are going to deal  with multinational companies, this is less of an issue. Regardless, the difference in regions in relationship to their past experience needs to be mentioned. As an investor, I want to know why they think that Vietnam would have the same positive reaction in Canada?

* Competitive Products – What is a realistic market size, market share and selling price that these products or services can capture in a very competitive world?

Ramona does not seem to mention who are the competitors. It seems she is underestimating the interest in Vietnam. Is that really reliable? If there is money to be made, why aren’t other competitors jumping at the opportunity. What are their hesitations?

* Market Readiness – How long and difficult is their critical path to success?

From the investments of the World Bank and other Asian financial institutions, why would they not hire their own e-strategy company to handle their own educational launches? Why would they hire Ingenia? If they are investing those amounts, what would keep them from establishing their own e-learning departments within their own institution? How can Ingenia ensure that the investments there will be interested In Ingenia? The breakdown of the finances seems to be unbalanced. $40K seems to be quite a large amount for the market development trips. It needs to be more specific within this part because this is a major part of the equation. What does she mean? It seems like she mentioned a lot of accommodations and hotels. Can there be a permanent establishment arrangement there. It seems the budget for the “trips” seem to use a lot of money. This needs to be reassessed and what kind of lifestyles are we talking about because this is 40% of the budget. I am not comfortable with this because it does not seem that Ramona has thoroughly researched the Vietnam context enough. It seems like she is using the 40K to see if this venture would be successful rather than using it to develop the already researched plan.

* Technical Innovation – Do they have an edge, and can they keep it?

The idea of promoting e-learning within Vietnam and this region gives Ingenia an edge, but it seems like that is all for their venture. What are their future goals? What will happen if the politics of Vietnam change? Is it really stable? Is Vietnam going to be the only target? Why are other companies not exploring opportunities in Vietnam? What are their reasons for not investing their money there. If there is money to be made, why are other companies not going there. Is it because they don’t see the growth that Ingenia sees or is it that the expected return rate is not as attractive? What are the reasons for other companies not to invest?

* Exit Strategy – Do they really know what success looks like – is their destination clear

They seem to know what their destination looks like. However, it seems their pitch is rather empty. There seems to be more information about Ramona, than there is about the Vietnam project. What has been confirmed with Ingenia as of this moment? *

Overall Investment Status – Am I going to risk my investment capital on this proposition?

At this time, I am interested in Ingenia’s pitch. However, I am hesistant because of the points above. The face of the company seems to be Ramona. I don’t know if I can risk spending that amount of capital into just simply one person’s professional experience. I need to see and meet the team. I would like to know more about the small team which is at the core of the company. This is a good beginning for a pitch. However, I still need a lot of persuasion beause there are things that she mentions which cause me to wonder if they are really able to establish a presence in Vietnam. I want to know more about the partnership firm and that company’s background. I still have a lot of questions regarding Ingenia. The presentation was very well put together with the slide presentation and Ramona’s voice but this is not enough persuasion for an investor to hand over the amount of money the company is asking for. A good beginning but needs a lot more references and support.

I have decided to compare and comment on two very different pitches: Ramona’s from Ingenia and Ted’s from UBC.

Ramonacame across and a capable and confident speaker. The pitch was well-paced and easy to listen to and follow. Her credentials are high and she seems to have a strong team working with her. I found it interesting that due to the competitive Canadian and US markets and a decrease in spending, Ingenia has shifted their focus oversees to Vietnam. I do see that there is a need in Vietnam (and other countries in South East Asia) for e-learning programs, and I believe the market there is ready, I just wasn’t convinced from this pitch that Ingenia was the one to do it. Although they have already partnered with Vietnamese software firm, they admitted to not having much experience in Vietnam. Their goal, however, is clear: they want to establish themselves as a major learning services provider in Vietnam.

I was wondering who would be creating the curriculum for these courses as I believe that there are many cultural differences that must be considered when developing courses for another country. As an EVA I am intrigued by their idea, but I would definitely need to know more information about exactly how they are going to carry out this plan. I wanted to know more about the company and what they are doing in Canada so I found their website and noticed that they have since acquired many more Canadian clients.

http://www.ingenia-consulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14&Itemid=1

I also noticed this update:

August 2009– Ingenia is pleased and proud to be involved with the 2010 Winter Olympics. The City of Vancouver has awarded Ingenia with a contract to design and develop classroom training for over 200 protocol officers.

 ____________________________________________________________

Ted Dodds is clearly an intrapreneur who has been continually asking the question: “Where is the better business in this?”  Ted is extremely capable and he displayed confidence in what UBC has already accomplished and the level of success they hope to achieve in the future.  I was very engaged throughout the interview.

There is clearly a huge amount of support for the continuously developed e-learning strategy. The five Vice Presidents, faculty members of UBC, and members of the community work together to evolve and give voice to this strategy. This has been done through various methods such as an annual town hall meeting, conferences, meetings and monthly newsletters.

 This model is obviously feasible and has already shown a high level of success. There continues to be a demand for e-learning from the community and the innovators or “partners” are working within the various faculties in order to assist and develop the most up-to-date resources available.

Looking towards the future, Open Source software and a Community Source system connected with other universities are being discussed. Their destination is clear, with the objective being to making the best decisions for the faculties and the University, while continuing to raise the bar. I think many Universities could learn from what UBC has achieved so far in e-learning. As an EVA I would definitely support this kind of project at my University.

Hi,    My name is Greg Lewis – sorry about the late “introduction/post” but I didn’t quite get the instructions until today – my bad!

This is my 7th MET course and from what I have read and seen, it looks interesting and this motivates/energizes me which is great.  I teach at  Ballenas Secondary School in Parksville on Vancouver Island, BC – home of the sandy beach and a holiday destination.  I teach History 12 and am half time in the library – a wonderful assignment that I very much appreciate.

The two “blondies” near myself – man in white shirt with “Vikes” hat – boo UBC! Just kidding 😉 – are Nolan (orange) and Mason(Nemo skimboard) and they keep me moving constantly!

Looking forward to this course and the different focus it offers.  I am on “Stalin’s Five Year Plan” and take two to three courses a year so I am getting closer.

Cheers,

Greg

Initial Response to Recombo

My initial response to the Recombo pitch was positive. I found Brad McPhee to be knowledgeable, confident, personable and realistic. He appears to have a good grasp of his market niche and knowledge of the other players. I don’t personally know how innovative his product is but it certainly seems to be in demand and able to fill several needs. As I heard recently on “Dragon’s Den”, his product is not a “one sku wonder”! He was focused on a clear goal, being a “100 million dollar” company, yet admitted that if the price was right he might sell before hitting that mark. I felt that he was able to see ahead yet still be flexible.

In terms of market readiness, Recombo is already in the market and has reasonable plans for expansion. I do worry a bit about the rate of growth (he talked about needing to double his work force in 10 months). Through personal experience I know that extremely rapid growth can sometimes be problematic for a company. However, his calm, matter-of-fact manner put me at ease.

Would I risk my investment capital? Yes, I think I would.

UBC IT Services

Ted Dodds Chief Information Officer

Strengths:

Ted Dodds is an articulate, credible speaker who seems to have a clear vision where the UBC IT Services e-learning strategy is headed.  The e-strategy framework is an excellent idea.  It is inclusive and flexible plan, designed to reach out to early adopters of technology and faculty communities, avoiding centralization.  The management team seems very strong.  The team building process is inclusive where “thought leaders” and early adopters are invited to participate in the process from the early development stage, contributing to the over all vision.  This inclusive and empowering strategy may have helped establish strong links to the university community, and there is a nice balance of leadership and community participation.  The plan also has a built-in strategy for dealing with mavericks and innovator whose talents are used to further support the efforts of the university by providing input to the direction of the program, as well as, providing links to university faculty—playing critical role of liaison between IT and faculty.  Moreover, the e-learning venture may also have some commercial potential and may find open-source applications that go beyond the campus.

Weaknesses:

In theory, the “inclusive” community based e-learning strategy should be effective; however, the “inclusive” design has the potential to disrupt the focus of the venture by trying to meet the needs of too many.  Moreover, there maybe times when a greater top-down strategy may be needed to make change possible. In addition, the potential for open-source application beyond the campus seems problematic, and there seems to be limited commercial or inter-university potential.

Was the pitch effective? The pitch is very effective, and I am convinced that the venture is worthy of investment.  Most appealing is the inclusive e-strategy framework; it seems like an ideal model for a university setting: flexible and dynamic.