The Talent Management Shootout - Why It Doesn’t Matter
Are you one of the many asking this morning, “…who won the talent management shootout yesterday?” I have received many inquires already and, in our live blog yesterday, that’s all the audience wanted to know at the end.
Don’t get me wrong, Bill has created something unique in the shootout and it always makes for great theatre. It is an event favorite that creates buzz. And buzz is good.
Although I love the session, I hate the resulting effect. Many of our enterprise clients see one of the participants products on stage, and then, a few months later when they demo the product in person, see something completely different. “Where is that product we saw in the shootout?” is a typical question that arises.
One of the great benefits of SaaS is that you can show live, without interruption, what and how actual customers are using the system. The world, with SaaS as the new foundation, has become a perpetual beta. Those in attendance at our New Technologies session yesterday saw that in person with our ability to launch a video Skype call directly from our Center of Excellence. We built it 24 hours prior to the session (with no IT resources), it is now in a live environment, and clients are already using it. In fact, you can “Skype Me” now if you would like!
So…my recommendation to make the shootout better in the future…
- Anything demoed on stage must be in production, generally available, and live in at least one customer. Sure it takes away from the coolness of the event and having a look into the future but, as we’ve seen more often than not, the stuff we see on stage never makes it into the product.
- As Jim Holincheck suggested last year, have a customer on stage to demo what they are doing with the respective product. Yes…this takes away from the showmanship but I really think that’s what the buyers in the audience want to see.
- Use scenarios that customers actually use. I get it…iPhone demos are hip, but there is not one client we are working with right now that wants to use the iPhone to do talent management!
For those scoring at home, Authoria yet again won the shootout (congratulations to them for winning all three scenarios) with Cornerstone OnDemand, Softscape, and Salary.com all tying for second place (the first time in 12 years) . If you are asking me to score at home, though, I think they all won. Authoria has already built a marketing campaign around their win (rightfully so). Softscape, often a company of mystery, came out of their shadows to show a feature-rich product and Cornerstone OnDemand and Salary.com became “recognized” as a worthy and viable solutions in talent management.
A live blog recap of the event can be viewed in our Center of Excellence Event Center.
Technorati Tags: hr technology conference, shootout, cornerstone OnDemand, softscape, salary.com, authoria, talent management
12 Comments Add your own
1. Syris | October 17th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Jason -
I disagree that shootout doesn’t matter but agree that it is flawed…and the flaw is in the shootout format itself, not in the “shootoutized” versions of the vendor applications. The fact that these are SaaS applications should give some weight to any on vendor’s approach to vision and strategy as these will play vital a role in any client’s long-term success with these applications.
There is an old adage that says “you can tell me what to do or you can tell me how to do it, but not both.” The shootout rules need to have less specific instructions and more general problem sets where a vendor can amply demonstrate how they would solve real world business problems through a combination of product, service and support as well as measure the end results. There should also be a specific stipulation to allow for future feature & functionality, but balanced with a majority of shipping code.
2. Lisa | October 18th, 2008 at 5:16 am
I have put together 10 one sentence action scenarios for vendors to show me as part of the competitive analysis on integrated talent management I am currently doing. It is l ikely that few vendors can do all 10 and they’ve told me so. I think it is more realistic an assessment to put forward a challenge that raises the bar to that level. I understand that the shootout did not include recruiting or learning for the most part. Eliminating these may make for better theater but it short changes the audience. So longwinded response to say that I agree with you, Jason.
3. TechSphinx | October 18th, 2008 at 7:01 am
I think the fact that many of the stronger players, namely SuccessFactors, Taleo, Plateau, Stepstone declined to participate, is indicative that the value of the shootout is somewhat questionable. This year it seemed more like the “best of the rest” competition, although it did give us all a glance some less well known players.
I will say however, Softscape’s mobile demo was pure rubbish. Essentially, they have very little competitive software in release, and Bill let them get away with a vapor-ware concept demo. Of course, they did lose.
4. Bill Kutik | October 18th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
TechSphinx:
All of the vendors you mentioned had good — and private reasons — to decline to participate. And since you are ignorant of all of them, it is presumptuous to assume that it indicates anything, let alone that the value of the event is “questionable.”
One tiny example that is public information: Taleo has no compensation functionality. Did you know that? Do you think that might have factored into their decision to avoid a script that featured comp?
As for Softscape’s mobile device, Authoria showed one as well. Do you think that’s rubbish, too, or are would be guessing about that one as well?
And I did not let anyone “get away” with anything. I announced from the podium that their demos were not pre-screened, so the audience had to judge their integrity, as I had to.
BTW, care to tell us your name, or do you prefer to snip from behind a wall?
Mine is Bill Kutik, and I approve this post.
5. TechSphinx | October 19th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Bill, in my defence, I only said “somewhat questionable”, but as I have said on my own blog I expect to receive as much I give, so certainly I am fair game. I do think your Shootout Event is great entertainment and provides valuable information to attendees, one of the highlights of the HR Tech show.
But, this is not pure sport with a governance entity like FIFA, ensuring that all the rules exactly followed. So, by its very nature, you do let vendors “get away” with breaking some rules, you just don’t have a means to completely enforce those rules. So what? I don’t think you should care, neither do I. You are right, the audience is the judge and that’s part of the deal.
Jason, above, is somewhat critical stating “I hate the resulting effect” of the Shootout. He seems to favor the “can’t everyone be a winner?” school of competition. But, I like the fact that there is a winner and three losers. The whole point is to have a winner! It’s just not going to be perfect and there will be room for debate all around.
As to the non-entering vendors, I would love a way to get them in the event again. I am worried that they won’t want to participate in the future because they can’t get the degree of control they likely want. I admire the companies that do participate, they have some guts.
Last, for reasons I stated on my blog, I do prefer to snip anonomously from behind a virtual wall. I know it’s irritating, but I could not comment otherwise. Sorry mate.
6. Jason Corsello | October 19th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Techsphinx…is your real name Sarah Palin?
7. AddressInvestigator | October 19th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Techsphinx can’t reveal his true identity because if everyone knew that he works for Stepstone, his biases would be revealed and his credibility would be shot.
8. TechSphinx | October 19th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
You’ve outed me Jason!
Now can we talk about my energy experience in Alaska?
9. Colin Kingsbury | October 20th, 2008 at 7:00 am
TechSphinx may have oversalted the broth a bit but there is a valid point behind the posturing. The non-presence of what many would call the largest companies in the space, for reasons good or ill, does leave one with something of a case of the dog that didn’t bark. That said, I don’t know how you go through all dozen or so name-brand vendors without causing terminal narcolepsy or forcing extreme superficiality upon the proceedings.
I do however like the idea of having customers doing more of the driving. A good sales engineer can make bum software demo very well.
10. Becky | October 21st, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Jason - Was it absolutely necessary to bring politics into this discussion? I’m sick to death of hearing the ads and the debates at this point, and don’t want to discuss it in the professional arena unless it is a relevant issue. Let’s fast forward to mid-November and be done with it already. Either way, we’re in trouble no matter who you vote for.
11. Bill Kutik | October 23rd, 2008 at 6:20 am
Another word on the Shootout.
Our control and verification that all the software is GA (which the rules require) and none is custom built for the Shootout is minimal. We can’t pre-screen the demos, often not finished until days before.
I understand completely that the proposal for a customer to do the Shootout using his/her own system is a great way to guarantee the above.
But that presents enormous obstacles. First, what customer is so loyal as to devote the hundreds of hours it takes to prepare for a Shootout? Second, what customer is prepared to load reams of dummy data into their production system, necessary to demonstrate the problems in the script?
No problem, you say. Their vendor can just set up a demo system for them. Which brings us right back to the problem that everyone is pointing out.
After doing 12 Shootouts in eight years, it’s still a work in progress.
12. Chuck Penfield | October 27th, 2008 at 8:01 am
I personally enjoyed the shootout. Clearly every one involved from Bill Kutik to the vendors that demo’d worked extremely hard on their presentations. I do think that while having the CEO’s present is a nice twist, I wonder if one of their lead Sales Consulants presented we would get a more real world view during the demos. The CEO’s seem to be working hard to do what they do best, promote their companies and talk bleeding edge. Just a thought.
BTW, While atendance may have been down from last year, I thought this years HR Tech was the best I’ve attended.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed