Carl Hutzler’s Blog

A great post detailing both where Sree is, and where a lot of other (presume AOLers) are themselves.

“Why we will win” - by Sree Kotay
Part 1 

Part 2

AOL is a hard place to work these days. Some of this is due to the fact that we are not growing as a company. Some is due to the stock price being flat for years. Some is due to uncertainty of knowing what will get us healthy and growing again. Don’t get me wrong, our CEO has laid out a strategy of moving content and customers to the web which makes sense and is consistent with our competition and the marketplace going to broadband.

But more than a strategy, it is the uncertainty that makes life at AOL difficult. And people just do not like uncertainty. People like to know what is happening, what is going to happen, and like to minimize changes overall. I don’t know why this is, but I know that I am as guilty as anyone in wanting things to stay the same at some basic human nature level. Not that everyone does not want to see the stock price change, but otherwise, people are just people and not always comfortable with change.

But AOL needs change. And closer to home, our technology organization needs change. Just about everyone in Tech Dev management (about 150 people more or less) agreed last week that on a scale of 1 to 10 (where 10 is major change needed) we were an 8. In other words, we do a few things right, but as an organization, we need to change significantly.

But what to change? Is the QAR process broken? Do we need better open APIs? Do we need more scaleable systems? Do we need to work better across teams on larger projects?

While I do not know all the things that need to change across an organization of several thousand people (and you won’t find a list in my next post) I do believe I know what needs to happen. What should happen is that each individual should be looking introspectively to determine what they can change in themselves. When people change something, others notice and it can quickly become contagious. Setting an example is a powerful weapon and it can start anywhere.
- It could be as insignificant as treating co-workers in other teams with respect no matter what the pressure of the situation.

- It could be taking the time to recognize someone for a job well done, even if they are not in your team or management chain.

- It could be setting up a website to share information on a good book you read or conclusions from an offsite you attended.

The bottom line is that it is all of these things and so much more. But the most important thing is to not sit back and wait for someone else to do “it”. We are all leaders and when we work together to improve things, the effect can be orders of magnitude bigger than the individuals participating. Don’t be afraid of changing something in yourself.

What am I doing?

I intend to treat everyone I work with in my team and externally with the highest level of professionalism possible. I have gotten used to the blame game and quickness to point fingers “culture” we seem to live in all the time. I want to break out of this and set a better example.

Link to NYTimes Arctle
“Goodmail isn’t good because it’s new, but neither is it bad because it’s new. If it’s a good model, it will succeed and improve over time. If it’s a bad model, it will fail. Why not let the customers decide?”

Agree. (but please read the full op/ed….its balanced)

Oh, god. Here goes another idiot’s view on leadership. He probably just read some management book like the 7 habits and thinks he has seen a vision or something. Well, actually no. He has just been thinking about what makes a good leader, people he thinks of and looks-up to as strong leaders, and what traits people desire in their leaders. Below is a short (compared to my other blog posts) list:

1) Leaders should care about what their team is doing. When their team is finished doing it, the leader should be able to appreciate that work in a personal way for each individual who contributed. Otherwise, why bother doing the work if no one cares about the result?
2) Leaders don’t need to be the expert on everything. In fact you could argue that the less they know, typically, the better chance micro-management is not an issue. And the better chance the leaders will be effective delegators of responsibility, thus empowering the larger team. Does this mean leaders should not do anything or not be involved at all? Heck no. Leaders must be involved and they must have a solid understanding of the mission of the team and systems the team works with. Without this base knowledge, leaders can not add value, such as, asking smart questions, vetting designs, removing obstacles for success, and ensuring projects are moving ahead. The leader is, after all, responsible for the outcome just as all the team members are responsible for their pieces.

3) Leaders take initiative and have Passion. And they provide an atmosphere where others can innovate and take initiative. They value new ideas. They encourage people to bring new concepts to light. Leaders help take these new ideas and help form a campaign around the idea (hopefully with the help of the original idea person). They may take the idea to stake holders in other teams and help get buy-in from these teams. Leaders do not wait for their managers or manager’s manager to take the initiative or direct what they need to work on. Leaders should have a sense of what is important from knowledge of their system, its capabilities, and the marketplace they operate in. And everyone on the team seek to have this knowledge as well.

That’s it. Maybe there is more, but these are what I consider important today at 12:01pm EST.

So today AOL took a (big?) step to try and satisfy the non-profits, political groups, and others that are currently protesting our Email Tax. We announced that we would pay the way for qualifying not-for-profit groups so they could get accreditted for sending email with a third party service. We also promised that these groups would get the same delivery to the inbox and also have links and images show up automatically. And that we would do all this with no cost to the sender or recipient.

To do this, we are providing two solutions (from the press release):

1. Not-for-profit organizations that conform to, and abide by, AOL’s anti-spam and email policies and standards, may qualify for AOL’s Enhanced White List, which provides delivery of email - with images and web links in the email — on a comparable basis to the Certified Email program administered by Goodmail for commercial bulk emailers. The email may not be marked as “certified,” but will be handled and delivered on an identical basis to Certified Email. This program will be administered and provided by AOL directly to not-for-profits, at no charge.
2. The second delivery option available to not-for-profits will enable them to use one or several third-party email accreditation service providers to authenticate their email. These services ordinarily charge mailers a nominal, flat, non-recurring fee to qualify. However, AOL will fully pay for not-for-profits’ flat-rate, sign-up costs associated with the third-party provider program on a pro-bono basis. The company is currently in discussions with email accreditation providers, and expects this new, pro-bono program will be evaluated and tested internally in the next 30 days. AOL intends to identify one or more third-party email accreditation providers during this time, and is targeting implementation of this program in the next 90 days.

And we emphatically state several times that we will never charge these groups. But we are also careful to note that they must qualify for these services…so no spam bypass for organizations who don’t follow good mailing practices (the same rules we have had for eons).

So what was the initial reaction of the DearAOL coalition? Well, here are a few quotes from yesterday:

I guess email to the inbox with links and images enabled and a seal of approval will need to be available for free to everyone. We should create a whitelist and put everyone on it?

I wonder how the DearAOL coalition proposes to keep people like Jeremy Jaynes (appealing his conviction next week, actually) from getting on this new whitelist? Complaints rates, bounces? Well some members of the DearAOL coalition (moveon.org is just one example) have had some of the highest complaint rates sending into AOL. They have always claimed they were being sabotaged by groups on the Right. But many others seem to think it may be their mailing practices. Puts Dear AOL in such a tough spot, doesn’t it?

I understand everyone’s concerns with whitelists and blacklists and charging for them, but I sure don’t know the answer. I wish someone would write to me or comment on this blog and tell me what we should do going forward.
-Carl