Satya Nadella’s first three years as CEO of Microsoft have been remarkable for the Redmond-headquartered company. The software giant, which was once struggling with internal cultural issues and failure to keep pace with a changing technology landscape, has since pivoted to newer technologies such as cloud computing, mixed reality and artificial intelligence. In a new book ‘Hit Refresh’, Nadella has written about how he led this transformational journey. In an interview with BusinessLine, he speaks about the future of technology, impact of digital economy on privacy and dealing with failures. Excerpts:
You decided to hit refresh in 2014 after you took over as CEO. With technology changing rapidly, do you think you will have to undertake many more hit refreshes before the transformation is complete?
The whole transformation journey has been framed not as a one-time episode but as a continuous process of renewal. In some sense, business success is only possible when you break the virtuous lock that happens between concept that once was novel, and capability and culture. You ought to have a culture that is not a ‘know-it-all’ culture but a ‘learn-it-all’ culture. It allows you to come up with new ideas.
Everything in technology look like a failure until it’s not. So you need to have courage to let people learn and also fail.
Here we are 43 years after Microsoft’s birth, talking about a whole set of new technologies. During these years, we have had to hit refresh every 2-5 years, and I am sure in the future we will have to do the same.
One of the critical issues in the digital age is privacy, which at times gets compromised as governments across the world are increasingly seeking access to data. You have prescribed a 6-point agenda in your book including creating an environment of trust and empathy. In reality, most State actors have a short-term view. Do you think that this approach could jeopardise faster adoption of technology?
As a global society we have to deal with some core challenges related to the new technologies. For example, the balance that is required between national security and public safety. This is something that, especially in democracies, the legislative process and the courts have to create a framework of law. We are certainly advocating that in the United States but beyond the U.S. we need a modicum of international order that spans the EU,
China and India. Then there is the issue of how State actors behave in a world where cybersecurity is a super important thing for citizens.
Comments
Post a Comment