It’s a beautiful sight when, year after year, a company stays true to its original idea. But when a business loses the plot, we witness a sorry spectacle, an expensive slide into mediocrity. Every wayward company is wayward in its own way: Accountants masquerading as product planners; wannabe visionary execs jealousy trying to prove that they, too, can put a dent in the universe; board members panicking over bad press. But the result never varies: Customers leave.
A few weeks ago I was in France, enjoying the benefits of the French Paradox and happily testing its limits: Lots of duck fat washed down with an ethanol tincture of polyphenols. It was in this fulfilled state that I watched the launch of the latest iteration of an iconic product. There was a little stretch in one dimension, a little squeeze in another, measurable weight loss, more power better utilized, bigger screen for navigation…
The kommentariat were unanimous, the sum of the improvements equals a blockbuster.
I’m not talking about the boring iPhone 5. The occasion was the seventh iteration of the Volkswagen Golf, introduced at the 2012 Paris Motor Show (or, in the modest French appellation, the Mondial de l’Automobile).
The praise is deserved. Golf 7.0 comes with plenty of new features, yet stays backwards-compatible with previous releases…it’s still recognizable as a Golf.
Born in 1974, the Golf (then dubbed the Rabbit in the US) managed to stay true to Volkswagen’s overall corporate brief — its “People’s Car” mandate — while giving the idea new life by walking away from the Beetle’s design. The engine and drive wheels moved upfront; Giorgetto Giugiaro, the legendary and extraordinarily prolific designer, outlined the hatchback’s iconic silhouette, still recognized and loved 38 years later.
Admittedly, the Golf strayed a bit over the years, it gained weight, developed haunches. At one point, it grew to nearly twice its original mass. Worse, reliability was up and down, as were the experts’ opinions of its drivability.
But despite the swerves and cul-de-sac design details, Volkswagen managed to return to the original concept of a sexy, functional hatchback. And the customers didn’t leave — more than 30 million Golfs have been sold.
The Honda Civic story isn’t nearly pleasant. The Civic was introduced in 1967 as a tiny kei car hatchback called the N360 — for the 360 cubic centimeters of its motorcycle engine. In 1972, the little hatchback grew a pair of additional cylinders and became an auto industry icon, the first for Honda.
Year after year, Honda lovingly improved the Civic: Larger, smoother body; more comfortable interior; cleaner, more powerful engine; smoother suspension. For about twenty years, the Civic was a model of neat progression, of staying true to the original hatchback idea.
But in the mid-nineties, the Civic lost its unmistakable identity. No longer satisfied with being a versatile, dependable transportation machine, the Civic wanted to be treated with respect, it wanted…valet parking. A few years later, the Civic suffered a midlife crisis and tried to become a sports car.
What happened? Was it because of a change of the guard inside the company? Honda was often taken to task for being too much of a maverick; did the Japanese company try too hard to placate critics and become more “normal”?
The parallel Golf and Civic stories show a sharp contrast between the two companies. In many respects, the Civic started as a technically superior product. It had a better engine, better manufacturing, and legendary reliability. But Volkswagen stuck to the original concept and is well rewarded as a result.
There are even sorrier examples of lost plots in the auto industry — think Citroën — but it’s time to turn to our industry.
Regard Hewlett-Packard, serial plot loser.
In the early 70’s, HP owned the PC market (and forgive the anachronism…back then they were called “desktop computers”). Using the technical and financial might it had earned with its late-sixties “programmable calculator” line, HP developed a range of “discrete logic implementations” (integrated circuits) of their 2100 series minicomputer instruction set. It was a clean, visionary strategy. Very quickly, HP’s 9800 series of desktop computers flattened every competitor in its path: Wang, Olivetti, Tektronix, Seiko…
Then, in 1972, Intel introduced the 8008 microprocessor. HP looked down its nose at these cheap, woefully underpowered 8-bit gizmos…there was no way these toys could compete with HP’s fast, powerful, 16-bit desktop devices — why, even HP’s old 9810A calculator used a 16-bit brain.
We know the rest of the story: The inexpensive devices Pac-Manned their way into HP’s PC business. The 9800 series was displaced by a crowd of entrants, many powered by Microsoft software, including the Apple ][, whose Basic Applesoft interpreter came from Redmond.
It wasn’t until 2002 that HP regained the PC industry’s top spot — and it only did so by acquiring Compaq, the deposed king of PCs. (Ironically, Compaq’s history is similarly predatory: It vaulted to the top when it acquired DEC, another erstwhile king, albeit of the minicomputer industry. DEC missed the PC revolution entirely.)
Ten years later, after a sorry successions of CEOs, HP’s PC business has become a lackluster, low-margin (5%) endeavor, and Lenovo (or will it be Acer?) is about to assume the number one position in sales.
There is more.
HP was once the king of “mobile computing”. Starting with the HP 35 pocket device (1972), the company grew a phenomenally successful range of iconic devices such as the HP-80 and the HP-12C, the darlings of financial users.
In 1974, the HP-65 topped the range with its magnetic stripe reader for external program storage. The HP-80 had such high margins it provided most of the company’s meager profits during a mid-70‘s financial downturn. (Or so I, lowly HP trenchworker at the time, was told by “upper management”. I’ve researched the record but haven’t been able to confirm the factoid.)
HP owned the pocket-sized form factor, but they’ve since lost the mobile computing plot. There have been a few spasms — the iPaq devices, an iPod dalliance, the amazingly botched $1.2B Palm acquisition– but now HP plays no part in the mobile revolution.
HP CEO Meg Whitman knows this is a problem, that it must be fixed. She tells us that the company must “offer a smartphone because in many countries of the world that is your first computing device.” Her solution? HP won’t have a smartphone in 2013. (Whitman has also announced losses for this year, more losses for next year, and plans to lay off 29,000 people.)
Indeed, for more and more people, in both developing and developed countries, the smartphone has become the first computing device, the really personal computer. So what does “No Smartphone In 2013″ say?
There’s no dearth of Taiwan companies ready with customizable designs. That’s how Nokia got its first Lumia phones from Compal. So why isn’t HP coming up with a Windows Phone 8 device in the next few months? There’s only one possible answer: margins. The smartphone business, dominated as it is by Samsung and Apple, is now in a clones race to the bottom. For HP, this is an all-too-familiar plot line.
How can HP, with its new Make it Matter slogan, continue to lose its key plots? Waiting until 2014 to re-enter the smartphone race won’t help. And competing against Lenovo, Acer and others in the Windows 8 PC-cum-tablet space won’t make HP’s clone business more profitable.
Related columns:
- Losing value in the “Process” TweetDigital media zealots are confused: they mistake news activity for the health of the news business. Unfortunately, the two are not correlated. What they promote as a new kind of journalism carries almost no economic value. As great as they are from a user standpoint, live blogging / tweeting, crowdsourcing and hosting “experts” blogs bring [...]...
- HP’s PC Addiction TweetWhy is HP still in the PC business? It must be for the sport, because the money isn’t there. Looking at the quarterly figures released this past week, we see PC revenue down 15% year-to-year, with a low 5.2% Operating Profit: HP can explain. In the earnings release conference call (transcript obligingly provided by Seeking [...]...





9 Comments
Jean Louis
Another way to read your exposé is to wonder if there has been consistency in brand positioning…
Especially to guarantee that new products are immediately perceived as “further proof of well known brand values”..that some projects are killed according to the said principles …. as opposed to re-engineer the brand values (or logo, or choice of colors) to the latest bend in the corporate approach (Palm/No Palm-Web OS, PC- No PC, Enterprise Division – Software Y/N)
My hunch on HP today is
* the brand has probably retained a “scientific” touch…(for testing, measuring, oscilloscopes yes yes)..
* the brand is undisputed in printing… (an HP printer at home is not a bad choice)
* the brand has kept a “B2B”, good engineers, we know how to implement a challenging projects..
* and I have kept somewhere my first HP calculator…(unlike my first Macintosh..)
If I am right.
. an updated version of Leo Apotheker’s plan, to split activities in 2 :
those true to the engineering roots and excellence, which would retain the HP brand
and those transformed by the consumerization of IT (PC, etc)..(to private equity ?)
… might provide a chance to find the “old spot-plot”
What used to Honda Civic was split into
Fit, Civic, CRV, Jazz, City, Integra, RSX, ILX.
Most of the trouble for Honda has been American managers
and American design especially the nose.
Honda had real lead with VTEC but now all other manufactures
have them because of OEM and/or patent expiration.
Even Honda has to get tech from these same OEMs.
So you can see that Honda went from 250 Yen to Dollar to 80.
Can any American company deal with that much currency change.
Mind you real vulnerability of Hondas is their Transmissions
but because they last up to the warranty expiration, people don’t raise their fist.
In the 90s, Honda has had really atrocious Transmissions.
I think “HP” is just a brand. It is as material and valuable as “Compaq” — not at all. The brand is meant to make you buy a Microsoft PC because you once bought an HP calculator or read a Hewlett bio.
If you could look back in time and change all the HP, Compaq, Dell, Lenovo and similar PC logos over the past 20 years to say “Microsoft,” then that would be more accurate. If Microsoft had bought all the PC makers rather than co-opted them that would just be different bookkeeping. The reality is the same: HP hasn’t made anything matter for about 20 years. They didn’t have a backup plan for when Microsoft failed to keep up with new developments in PC’s like ARM processors or touch screens.
Me, I’m using Apple stuff for the longest time, I have no nostalgia for HP. It is actually good to see a giant dinosaur make giant mistakes and fall into a giant tar pit and go extinct.
But Mr. Gassée, how can you combine the names Apple and Samsung in one sentence containing the phrase ‘is now in a clones race to the bottom’?
Does it make any sense that after a string of CEO disasters they hired a CEO with no experience in any of the industries HP participates in? What HP probably needs is a new board.
HP deserves all the pain it gets. The money it charges for printer ink, and the steps it takes to block third party providers is unconsionable. If HP fades away into well-deserved obscurity, it will be proof that the market sometimes does function as it should.
In Australia, the Honda Jazz (Fit in US) has taken the place of the Civic. The model has become a ubiquitous symbol of pragmatism, thrift and reliability. In contrast, VW is marketed as a luxury “European” brand, along side Audi.
So I guess it depends on how the marketers in a region segment and define the product brackets. In the Antipodes, the Thai built Jazz is positioned as the successor of the 1980s Civic, and marketed as such. In contrast, the Civic is caught between the Jazz and the larger Honda sedans.
The only path for HP; follow the leader – IBM. Invest in services and consulting, not products.
They can’t create services that power the consumer mobile devices like google facebook apple or even amazon.
Enterprise cloud services is what IBM, HP and Microsoft will fight for, without a clear winner. They have to buy up CRM tools before other upstarts like Salesforce can grab them.
A history refresher for those who think of HP and scientific and engineering instruments:
In 1999, the then existing HP was spilt into two parts. The part that retained the HP name was the part that made computers, printers, and everything else IT related. A new company, Agilent Technologies, was made an independent company, that continued with HP developed as well as new developments in scientific instruments, semiconductors, optical networking devices, and electronic test equipment for telecom and wireless R&D and production.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agilent_Technologies
Some could say that Agilent is the real heir to the HP reputation; that the heirs that retained the HP name have tarnished it, possible beyond repair.