Professional Handlers and Breeders – thank you , from a grateful dog owner


Many of my friends at work and in my social circle have asked me what is the point in dog shows if you get a professional handler to show a dog. It’s a good question – I thought that way too initially.

Dog shows in US have way more professional handlers than any other country that I am familiar with . And many of those handlers are now good friends . While I don’t always agree with their tactics , I am a huge fan of the profession .

When I first came to this country , I got the impression that these folks have a good thing going financially . Looked like easy money to me . But it didn’t take long to understand I was way off in my judgement . And not too long after , I started being a fan – a big fan.

I consider myself a decent handler – but I seriously doubt I stand a chance against the best professional handlers in the sport today . In theory – I should be able to beat them easily. I will only be showing one dog at a time , and I can probably afford to buy one of the best dogs available for sale and I probably can advertise all out to promote my dog . I can train my one dog with full focus and groom it with more precision . I can pick the shows where I think the judge would like my dog. So why bother with a handler ?

Because that is theory and it is not in the least bit practical 🙂

In my day job, I will never get around to training and exercising my dogs to the degree they need it to be competitive . I travel hundreds of thousands of air miles a year which means I don’t want to be at a dog show every weekend. I would rather be home with my family . I will never have enough dogs to become great at grooming them professionally and so on . And I will never have the face recognition needed to win repeatedly in shows . Also – just because I can afford to pay the asking price doesn’t mean that a good breeder will sell me her best puppy or dog . Finally , my interest is only in showing -not breeding .

So for me – the solution is to find the best handler I can , and trust that he or she will do everything ethically possible to get my dog to his potential . It is also way more economical for me in terms of time and money . And to some degree – I have a better shot at finding the dogs or puppies I like via a handler than by myself . It also helps that I have trained and competed at a high enough level in my younger days that I don’t need to do it myself to feel fulfilled . I am happy to sit back and watch a professional do the job. And when I think it is not fun for the dog or me – I can stop and go throw him oranges to fetch and never take him to another show again.

While they do it for a living – handlers love dogs just as much as I do . At least – the handlers I know do , if not everyone . That is important for me – if I have the slightest doubt on that factor , I won’t hire that person . Same about ethics and integrity . I am an extremely competitive person. But while I like to win as much as the next person – I won’t do anything against the spirit of good sportsmanship . Dog shows are not a game I play just to win . It’s just an irrational hobby 🙂

It takes a physical toll on these folks – I know many have bad knees, back and feet at a minimum. And sadly, many of them can’t get the right medical treatment to take care of it because they cannot afford it . Yet weekend after weekend , they show dogs with utmost professionalism . Some are blessed to have great clients who have them on a retainer year after year. But vast majority have to work supremely hard throughout the year to make a living . That takes the kind of tenacity and toughness I admire .

There isn’t a dog show I have been to where someone hasn’t said “oh it’s a handler breed” or “it’s all political” or “the judge always looks at the wrong end of the leash”. None of these comments are wrong . But I think the handlers get a disproportionate degree of blame . Actually I think so do judges for that matter .

Professional Handlers do it for a living – and they become good at it . The opportunity to beat them is available to everyone including owner handlers if they put in the same effort and cost . Since it is not feasible for an average owner handler to train and show as many dogs in as many shows as a professional , the professional has an edge in most cases . That is not some evil plan 🙂

To make a name – handlers have to start with great dogs . Over time their skills and face recognition increases and lesser dogs will start winning with them . That is true for owner handlers too – if you keep at it , it is a natural result . In my line of work as a technology executive – the same holds true . What my colleagues and I do can be done by many others – but it will take a lot more time and effort and money to do it as well as we can . It is not because we are more intelligent – it’s because we have done it many times over for many customers in varying circumstances. That is why our customers buy engage us to get some stuff done and not try to build everything themselves . I think the same way when hiring a handler .

That being said – there is one case where I look forward to handling myself . That would be if I ever show in India again . For old times sake – I totally would love to hold the leash and trot my dog. But even there , I would rather have a professional groom my dog . Hopefully I can do that soon – nothing beats the feeling of showing dogs with people I grew up with , under judges that taught me a lot about dogs and dog shows .

Before I sign off – a big shout out should also go to the responsible breeders in the fancy. Although I have a problem with the sheer number of breeders , I am a big fan of their insatiable appetite to breed a dog that meets the standard in letter and spirit . Almost no breeder I know got rich by breeding – many could have bought a second home with money spent on dogs . And it is exhausting to bring up a litter – which is why I don’t breed . Owners like me – who just enjoy the fruits of their labor – owe a lot to these kind folks . I am very grateful to have the opportunity to have the choice of several excellent breeders to buy a puppy from . THANK YOU

Once an IBMer …


I left IBM a year ago – but have always held the company in high esteem . A lot of what I know today about the industry is stuff I learned in my time there . And I definitely had more good days than bad days there . I still own a tiny little bit of stock in IBM , and some of my best friends and mentors work there . Where I work now , IBM is both a partner and a competitor . And for all those reasons – I keep a close eye on IBM . As always – I am posting this as my personal opinions , not that of my employer .

It was pretty disturbing for me to read that IBM is planning another round of layoffs in 2014 and they have kept aside a billion dollars for that, like they did in 2013 . Having several friends who work there – it is pretty sad for me when I see IBM in such trouble .

When I joined IBM, I think the share price was a little less than $70 . And every year it kept increasing and at some point went well over $200 and now it is about $182 or so . So over the long term, they did pretty well and many employees and investors did well as a result . While there were always some unhappy employees – for the most part , IBM did ok .

IBM is unapologetically capitalist in nature . By the time I joined – there was no pension plan or life time employment type things . And the company was expanding rapidly outside USA. If you look at IBM as an American company , it is kind of hard to see it in a good light . But if you think of them as a global company – it made sense to make use of cheaper labor, better access to other markets and so on .

IBM , in Sam Palmisano’s time made the promise to investors that it will hit $20/share as EPS by 2020. And EPS has been on an upward trend through every quarter I think , irrespective of top line growth.

And then Sam handed over the reins of IBM to Ginnie Rommety . She had already managed services and sales for him, and was supremely qualified for the job . She also grew up the ranks at IBM and knew the company inside out . I thought it was a great decision to make her the CEO and Chairman . It was a pretty smooth transition too .

Sam not only grew the share price and EPS , he also did some savvy stuff like selling off the low margin PC division , investing significantly in IBM Watson etc . So all things considered – it seems Sam set up Ginnie for a decade of success . And Ginnie told the world that she is executing on current strategy .

IBM is laser focused on that EPS goal , and uses all possible levers . There are mainly just four things –
1increase revenue
2.decrease cost
3.buy back shares
4. show investment commitment to future revenues .

The latter three levers were the ones IBM seems to have played best in recent past . In Sam’s time – this was amply rewarded by the capital markets . But in Ginnie’s time – Market is punishing IBM for playing exactly those same levers . Not growing revenue is what is hurting IBM big time .

Selling the low margin part of hardware business to Lenovo seems like a good idea – but probably something the market has already factored in . I have mixed feelings of this sale – I have friends among the people in that business , and I can only wish them the best . But stemming that bleeding profit is good financially for the company .

All that being said – one question remains in my mind . Did Ginnie do the right thing by telling investors that she will follow Sam’s strategy and not chart her own course ?

Street likes predictability more than anything . So if a CEO resets expectations, market will usually give the company more time as long as the plan and time line is communicated well . In much worse situation, HP CEO asked for more time and the Market didn’t punish HP stock for that . If anything I felt HP CEO should have asked for even more time to steady her ship .

So if Ginnie had said “I am playing a long game – so I am going to extend the time frame of EPS roadmap” , would IBM stock have been punished more than the value it lost so far ?

Market is used to not seeing profits – companies like Salesforce and Amazon have gotten the market to believe that revenue/bookings growth should be rewarded even in absence of real profits . Yet, IBM will get punished for showing real profits and growing EPS but not revenue growth . I guess that is why capital markets have that mystic aura 🙂

Or maybe market is not that irrational – and IBM can’t cut costs forever and reach their promised glory . Like every large matrix organization, I am sure IBM has opportunities to cut costs and get leaner – but every time they do that, it does a lot of harm to its employee morale and that is not easy to repair . It is a hard choice to make .

Competitive landscape doesn’t make it easy either . IBM is an amazing technology company and has a habit of making long term bets – like Watson. But a mothership cannot always easily turn on a dime .

Amazon is the Walmart of infrastructure providers with its everyday low price model . That is not IBM’s game . IBM needs to play up its “value added services make us better than Amazon” card really well to see if it works . While I don’t under estimate Mr Bezos, I actually think IBM can out do Amazon since it has staying power in abundance . Soft layer acquisition is a good indication of IBM doubling down . Also , while intel based HW is out – IBM still has Z and P business which can provide manufacturing expertise for their cloud . IBM microelectronics has cutting edge expertise on semiconductors too. But data centers are a capital intensive business and IBM will need to get to the efficiency of the consumer company data centers at some point . Not at all easy , but eminently doable in my opinion .

I am pretty positive that IBM will do well again . I have three main reasons for that

1. Before my time at IBM, they had a near death experience . They know how bad it can get if things don’t go their way . But they survived that and thrived . That is invaluable experience that they can use again

2. IBM has invested a lot in leadership development . People like Ginnie and Steve Mills are some of the best in the industry and they have plenty of leadership bench . I always bet of good leaders and I would be shocked if these people can’t pull it off . It’s not just the top leaders – they have some very bright engineers and an amazingly well trained sales force with great customer relations . This is a people business first and foremost .

3. IBM has continued to invest in research through all kinds of economies . They have more patents most years than other companies . That kind of IP is invaluable in the long term – and not easy for someone else to overtake them

Good luck IBM – I wish you nothing but the best . But in the few times that I have to compete with them – I will try everything possible to kick their butt . That is how IBM trained me 🙂

A short personal response to Josh Greenbaum’s SAP FKOM blog


Well known analyst Josh Greenbaum posted 2 blogs with his views on how SAP sales reps should be selling to customers .

The New Year in SAP-land: Selling Customer Success (Part I)

The New Year in SAP-land: Selling Customer Success (Part II)

I absolutely enjoyed reading it – and want to make a few minor comments , strictly in a personal capacity . I don’t work in sales at SAP – I am on the engineering side of the house , but I work closely with sales all the time . But please don’t consider it as some kind of official SAP response . I am just typing as fast as I can on my phone in response to tweets from Josh and Jon Reed .

1. Relationships – do they matter ?

Josh starts off slightly dinging the idea of relationship based sales . I disagree with that position All business is done between people and for sales to move away from transactional realms to transformative realms – a strong relationship is a must .

The IBM quote of no one getting fired for hiring them – IBM didn’t earn that with clever marketing . IBM earned it with the blood , sweat and tears of its employees trying their best to do what is right for their customers . When I worked there , I have had CXOs tell me that “one reason we hire you is that we know that you will do right by us if things go bad in a project”.

This is true with SAP too – no one just listens to a transformative message and then writes a check . You have to work really hard to build a relation with key people at the customer to earn your seat at the table to tell them that story.

2. Quota vs Customer’s long term interests

I don’t think these are mutually exclusive things. And when they are – I won’t hold the sales people accountable – I hold the managers accountable .

Sales people have little to no choice in determining quota – that is done by sales leaders . So telling them to not worry about quota is essentially telling them that they can’t worry about putting food on the table for their families . That will not go anywhere in terms of getting another behavior . The possible course of action is that the quotas are set realistically and rewards being set on not just quota but on other things like customer satisfaction scores etcetera . Again – I agree with Josh , just want to point out that sales people cannot act on that message directly . This can happen only top down for the most part – and not bottom up .

3. Sell own services VS Partner services

I think this is a sure shot recipe for disaster . The SI ecosystem gets a bad name because of a few high profile projects that turned into disasters . What does not get mentioned in news is that vast majority of SI projects are successful . And when things fail – it is seldom that it is the SI that caused the failure by themselves . Most of the time the customer and SAP would also have done something to contribute .

SAP can never scale enough to cater to all service requirements . So it is in SAP’s best interests to make sure that SI partners get a good share of that business . SAP has an excellent services arm , but most projects need non SAP skills too to make them work . And the SI partners usually have plenty of expertise there .

SAP is primarily a software company – and what I would rather see is an acceleration on engineering efforts to make sure that customers don’t need as much services to use our products . But where services are required – I think it is best to either partner with other SIs or let the customer pick the best SI , including SAP services .

SI partners have fantastic relations at several customers . By partnering instead of competing all the time , SAP gets to leverage those relationships . Channel is good business for SAP – and SIs are important part of the channel business . Many SIs are also resellers .

4. Selling training and education

Quite agree with Josh here . Training should be part of every deal in my opinion too . However , my wish is that ultimately the software should not need any training to use it in vast majority of cases . That onus should be on engineering to make sure we build products that need less and less of training .

5. Don’t sell mobile , cloud etc

Again, completely agree – what an organization needs is a business strategy and not a mobile or cloud strategy . However , most customers start small and will have to satisfy themselves that the software works well before they think of transformative use cases . Selling cloud and mobility licenses are an integral part of helping those customers without bleeding the profitability in short term .

Ideally , the sales should be of solutions – not individual technology products . But that is again something that lies with product and solution management . Sales can only work with things they have in the bag . And when the SKU list is vast – no one in sales can realistically figure out what solutions are possible by combining all the cool toys . That means some portfolio rationalization needs to take place – which is not controlled by sales people .

Apart from these small points , I am more or less in great agreement with Josh . SAP and other technology vendors should change how they sell . It won’t happen over night and it won’t happen without customers changing their buying habits too . As I have always maintained – the sole judge of innovation is customer , and not vendors or analysts. All I can hope as an SAP employee is that customers continue to trust SAP in 2014 just like they did for last four decades .