article page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |

non-duplication of platforms, and reuse of assets. They're still silos, but there has to be one group in each part of the organization.”

Figueras reiterated this idea by remarking that “the key is horizontal structures. You have to maximize the opportunity for reuse. I think the product managers have to have shallow roots into the delivery infrastructure. If you give them too much ability to go and specify, that's where the problems come in.”

Muderack stated his own beliefs in the merits of these goals, saying that “if you have everyone working off of a common repository and a common set of business rules within the appropriate P&L lines that they've been allocated to and collaborating across P&L lines,” then “the business process within that central repository is the glue that pulls the pieces together.” In many companies, including one that Muderack mentioned working with, product management, product marketing and pricing were three separate organizations with three separate heads. “In the end, a product needs to include components of all three of those. You don't

point of reminding the panel that these are solvable problems. “People believe it's so complex it can't be solved. There's a self-fulfilling prophecy in that.” He illustrated the possible snatched from the jaws of the seemingly impossible by talking about Boeing's 747 jetliner. The aircraft has so many moving parts, and the situation is so high risk, but the results of Boeing's efforts to overcome these issues is evident on the tarmacs of major airports around the world. Ruzicka was quick to point out that the 747 is possible because of program management, not product management. The knowledge exists within the knowledgeable. Ruzicka pointed out that, within that room, “We could white board that process [product management] in a big hurry. We know what it is.” The underlying issue is that inertia and atrophy dwell within the layers of so many companies that having those with the know-how on staff simply isn't enough.

want a lot of bureaucracy and a lot of fiefdoms around those, because at the end of the day, this business should be like a pharmaceutical or fast-moving consumer goods company. You should be churning stuff out of the door strategically, but rapidly.” Muderack mentions his own experiences as he began his professional career 20 years ago at Del Monte foods. Within his divison, everyone was expected to know how many products were currently on the market, along with information about what products were being introduced and retired, and the gross margin on each. To find telecommunications personnel with all of that information on-hand would be difficult, indeed.

Where Are the Solutions?

The seeming (and existing) complexities behind product management in the telco space makes correcting the aforementioned problems a daunting task. Margitta made a

Figueras particularly liked the 747 example because the real challenge in assembling that aircraft lies within supply chain management. “Their supply chain is more complex than their production chain.” Those aforementioned moving parts come from many, many vendors, and are assembled into a single aircraft. Telecom, likewise, has a very complex supply chain and, until recently, very few deliverables.

Wilshire made it clear that he feels that many of the problems start at the beginning of the process. “Simplicity should be an objective,” he said, mentioning that many telcos make processes more complex than they need to be. Telcos must, he says “start to inject the message at the beginning of the process, and realize that they are in the business of selling services as simply as possible.”