Hello Lenn - Fight for Trust and Freedom
Can this man make Skype work for developers? I met up with Lenn Pryor in the local Skype coffee office, down the street from their office in Soho in London a few weeks ago. The time between has given me some time for reflection. He was about to settle in Tallin as he begins work to build better relationships with developers. Lenn's enthusiastic and isn't doubting the size of the task ahead. I observed firsthand how Skype's growth is so fast it is challenging old staff and new alike. As new people join the company we should look to what we hope could change. We also use it as a signal of what needs to change.
The key to Lenn's success will be the relationship that emerges between PR who wants hierarchy and control, and what is beginnning to emerge with share.skype.com and more open communications by Skype staffers. Hierarchy and control, unfortunately seem to be winning currently. Skype wants the developer discussions all on its own forums, the conversation to center around its blog and wants to control as they extend to conferences and discussions with developers. How it chooses partners for these events will be indicative of how it wants to work with both small and large developers and corporates.
My view is Skype's message so far is failing independent developers. Efforts to land deals on hardware have also ignored software opportunities.
Example 1: Building a business around Skype has to make you money. Skype's messages to date have been unable to stir the methods by which they will enable that. They have also fallen short in communicating effectively with developers and potential developers. Good ideas created by developers are likely to be incorporated into Skype at some time in the future. Few developers will make money creating a product that works on the back of Skype. More will make money integrating Skype into solutions and services.
Example 2: Failing to be open and recognizing the smallest independent contributors. Window-dressing is a term used in accounting. Skype's dialogues with small developers have been similar. The reality is Skype keeps trying to do PR related deals with large firms that provide "visiblity" and get reported. In this sense Skype displays arrogance and has been taken to task for it. Motorola, or Tom-Skype or Live Door get more PR than a Qzoxy, Pamela-Systems, Jyve, or VoipVoice. While in fact it is these small developers that have put their businesses and profits on the line.
My reflections on this post and my concerns trace to what I interpret as a clash of wills between PR and Lenn's role with the developer community. The developer community needs access to better roadmaps, needs an independent sounding board, and help getting its message focused. We need certification programs. So far it's not been in Skype's nature to be open about these. The original SkypeAPI EULA and the rules for the SkypeAPI competition are just illustrations of this. The rules were written by lawyers and not in consultation with a developer community.
The challenge Lenn has is to get these discussions into the open. It's one of the reasons we started Skype Journal in the first place to bring issues of concern to developers to Skype's attention. One of our objectives is to encourage a more transparent Skype. Skype won't win without developers on board. At the moment it is hard to score them highly.
Concurrently, if Skype wants to become a truly global brand then the focus has to address:
1. Trust: If Skype loses user trust it will be dead as quickly as Napster (from different causes). Skype can lose trust by making the wrong pricing decisions, thinking their "contact" list centralization was ok, not fixing the API, or simply "security" breaches. Trust is central to being successful. As a user I am already wary. Organizationally Skype has also let me down. So ask yourself. Do you trust Skype more than Microsoft? Skype more than your Telecom provider? Skype more than eBay? I don't know that I do yet.
2. Freedom: Our right to converse, to talk to whoever we want wherever we want, without someone looking over our shoulders. Guaranteeing basic freedoms is a powerful direction, it also requires a higher standard of openness than Skype has guaranteed so far. Skype as a network has the potential to facilitate and empower many aspects of our info lives. That requires them to create new agency businesses, encourage massive participation. Ultimately this will come from the sharing of powerful ideas. I'm afraid that Skype is too scared to embrace this task and opportunity. This is not a regulatory battle, rather it is a message for consumers. While some may want Skype to hire lawyers and do battle for the VoIP industry the battle is to motivate users to action.
So some three weeks later I remain hopeful that Lenn can bring the "voices" into Skype. It remains an organization that has a lot of growing up to do. I'm hoping he gets the chance to facilitate that. In six months we will know whether or not they have made the transition. Let's hope they make it. That may be all the time they have to get the developers on board.
Comments
It does seem that Skype is very worried about 'letting go'.
Admittedly they will be under pressure from their VCs to show where the revenue is going to come from, but, as you say, they need to open up the platform and allow others to make money from it. They need to surrender some future revenue in the interests of attaining critical mass for the platform.
There will be plenty of revenue for everyone if they achieve that.
Posted by: Paul Jardine | June 28, 2005 11:58 PM
After Lenn asked on his blog for feedback, I spent some time laying out details of specific developer area features that would be useful in the Skype developers area. Never heard a word back from him (still haven't).
I complained about this in a blog entry a month later and Jaanus stopped by and said they were listening.
That's not the kind of communication with developers (prospective, current or otherwise). It wasn't like there was a landslide of developers offering feedback. Lenn just didn't bother to take the time to respond. The next time he asks for feedback I can tell you at least one developer that more than likely won't bother.
Communication is a two-way street.
Posted by: TDavid | June 29, 2005 03:47 PM
Hi Stuart, great article and it hits the nail on the head for sure! However, it all seems very strange. Let me elaborate (excuse my typical "negative" view):
On the one hand Skype is a communications company and on the other hand there is not one company I have known that has been as hard to get in touch with as Skype. What are they doing if not communicating with partners?
They need to get their developer program up fast. But this can only be done if they have a clear focus and direction of driving the business. Is it consumer, is it enterprise, what will they offer themselves, what is left for partner and so on. You get the idea, and why we don't know is related to my first point!
Technology moves fast and if Skype does not watch out there will be others attacking them on their weak spots (not the product, that is pretty good), but on relationships with developers and software companies and lack of innovation (yes!). This could result in Skype missing key markets, where the money is!
Posted by: Dick Schiferli | June 30, 2005 01:47 AM