Learn from Google

Learning from Google means thinking about the end user, whether that user is an end consumer, employee or top manager.

The classic attributes no longer apply. Google's behavior is best described by pragmatics and common sense.

While SAP and many European companies still think and act in categories such as "fast, large, comprehensive, aesthetic, dominant, autonomous, perfect, elitist", Google and others offer practical and simple solutions that are perfectly tailored to the user.

The self-driving car

The solution could not be more different: The self-driving Google car that has been on California's roads for months is hardly perceived as such by Europeans with aesthetics and taste.

When you look quickly, it's hard to tell where the front and back are. The antenna from the DIY store on the roof of the "car" makes the whole thing look like precocious tinkering by aliens.

How pleasant the self-driving car from Audi appears here! There is plenty of horsepower and you don't see any antennas that disturb your visual perception.

The concepts between Google and Audi could not be more different. In California, the ugly duckling; in Germany, the desirable sports car at the Hockenheimring.

Google dared to experiment: mothers with children and pensioners were invited to test the "car. The test subjects sat a little lost in an unadorned driver's cab without a steering wheel or dashboard and waited for things to happen.

The Google car drove off and completed the specified route without any problems. The result: the passive drivers were thrilled! They raved about the stress-free and safe way of getting around.

The test subjects felt well taken care of and no one discussed the external shape, the "unaesthetic" appearance, the color of the "car" or any other trivialities that obviously do not matter for the safe and efficient travel of the route.

For Hockenheim, Audi hired an English-speaking motor journalist to comment on the breakneck drive of the driverless PS bolide.

The car drove an absolutely perfect course at maximum speed. The corners were approached optimally. The car was safe on the road. A human race driver could not have done better than the built-in electronics - a triumph for German engineering.

Apart from the motorsport journalist and a few Audi employees, no one was enthusiastic about this drive. The few bored onlookers on stage would probably have liked to sit in the high-horsepower car themselves.

What's the added value and fun in chasing a race car around the Hockenheimring completely autonomously? Does anyone need that? What does the Audi technology study say about future mobility? How sad and maddening is this demonstration of technology, design, power and speed compared to the ugly but usable Google car (compare for yourself: Google and Audi).

Another interesting example about wrong goals and old views: SAP is trying to create a new graphical user interface (UI).

Fiori created design guidelines and tools to bring S/4 and Hana to tablets and smartphones, and the desktop and browser should also benefit from Fiori.

The added value? Everything becomes more colorful and louder! Is that what ERP and CRM users need? One of the ugliest UIs is run by one of the most successful internet companies: Amazon. Every time you order books, DVDs and coffee, you wonder when there will be a design update and how long you will have to look at these undefinable screen colors - but it works!

At SAP, a lot of things are not working at the moment, but they love to talk about Fiori, user experience, dashboards, Apple native apps, and so on. Topics such as the S/4 roadmap, release upgrades, indirect use, licensing models, open source, and much more are ignored and hushed up.

SAP's perspective has shifted in the wrong direction. Existing customers need well-founded and stringent business processes, and then the user interface can be idiosyncratic - see Google and Amazon.