One of our fastest growing startups dropped this message which I have edited for brevity: “We are working on a roadmap for blockchain technology on our platform. We are using blockchain as a mechanism to give customers authenticity, transparency and traceability…It will make a lot of sense in this modern world of technology adoption and it will make us stand out”.
I responded: “I hope that is not a distraction. You don’t have resources yet for that. You can record your goods well. Blockchain will not do magic if you can not provide the data. I will suggest you focus on execution with what you have now and hold on blockchain later”.
His response: “Well noted Sir”.
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 14 (June 3 – Sept 2, 2024) begins registrations; get massive discounts with early registration here.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
But honestly, I am not sure if I have provided the right guidance. It is a huge burden to use a simple paragraph to shape what founders are thinking, understanding that you can make a mistake. Typically, they take my perspectives very seriously and that makes whatever I share to be the best possible among options. This startup is growing very very well. I feel going into a new tech rebuilding will be a distraction. Also, blockchain despite the optimistic exuberance has not shown any major promise outside financial services [this startup is not a fintech] in Africa.
In other words, blockchain, while promising, does not offer any compelling leverage which can compound to make this company better, immediately. So, instead of spending the scarce funds it has and distorting the execution rhythm we have by integrating blockchain, I want the team to stay focused on using the technology that we have at the moment which customers truly like and understand.
I do cite the IBM and Microsoft/Apple case study which we have in Tekedia Mini-MBA. IBM began the quest to build esoteric technologies with IBM Watson, quantum computers, etc, and filed the most yearly patents. But yet, 15 years away, IBM is worth about $120 billion while Apple hits close to $2.8 trillion and Microsoft $2.3 trillion.
Simply, too much tech has not helped IBM. But what seems to have worked is this: delivering great services to customers, irrespective of tech. So, if the tech cannot change that outcome, whatever it is called does not help! After all, the mission of firms is to fix frictions. Tech is just a component in the production process of creating the products and services.
I do not see how blockchain can change the game plan in a sector where users do not even embrace web and mobile apps, preferring phone calls and physical visits. But possibly, in 3 years, those can change, and then we can soup blockchain in the business. What do you think?
Comment on FB feed
I agree absolutely. Tech doesn’t solve every problem. In fact, in some cases, it further complicates the problem at hand to be solved.
Someone called me last week to help him deploy an event registration app for a major annual event coming up in his organisation. Previously, they had been using Google form to achieve the same objective and it had worked flawlessly.
So I asked him why he was considering dumping the Google form solution for an event reg web app. I further asked him for the challenge they were having with the Google form. He answered that they had no challenge using the Google form so far. Someone in the event planning committee just suggested an event reg web app. I guess the person was trying to introduce a more sophisticated approach to the process, which was unnecessary.
Just to be sure, I asked him for the objective he wanted the registration process to achieve. From his response, it was obvious that the Google form approach would achieve the objective faster and more efficiently.
---
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA (Jun 3 - Sep 2, 2024), and join Prof Ndubuisi Ekekwe and our global faculty; click here.
Your call could be a good or bad one, depending on where the startup is headed and the sort of things that necessitated the idea of integrating blockchain. If the short and medium terms outlook have verifiable need for blockchain, leaving it for future will obviously make it costlier, because it might entail rebuilding everything.
Maybe you need to take a second look, ask some critical questions, and guide the team properly.
On the whole, tech remains an enabler, it’s not the end in itself, the primary purpose remains delivering the best possible value to your customers, using most efficient and effective means possible.
You do not innovate or upgrade your infrastructures just to feel good about yourself, anything that doesn’t help you serve your customers better is obviously a distraction.