I've never been a technologist, and I have done that on purpose. I really try to take on a user's perspective as we develop new products and enter new markets. There are enough smart R&D and engineering people within the company, and what I feel I need to do is really understand the user base. You just really need to sit down and listen to the customer instead of trying to sell your thousands of features. I try to identify with the end user.

Business Objects's extranet strategy was a key growth driver throughout 2001. How are you seeing companies using extranets to make their businesses more efficient?

With the extranet, companies can start communicating with their vendors, for example. They can allow vendors to access inventory levels and in turn can access their vendors' manufacturing activity. It allows companies to use that data to deliver inventory just in time. Admittedly, just-in-time inventory has been around for years, but it has been done through a lot of hard work, not with the use of intelligence. When I was in Japan, we would deliver our products to the Japanese. They wouldn't accept our product until they ran out of inventory. In the past, the vendor would depend on the company to give it the right demand. But people often make mistakes. The extranet allows you to have access to more-timely information and be much more accurate.

How pervasive have extranets become throughout Corporate America?

Extranet development is still in its early stages in terms of its adoption by companies. The original problem around extranets was concern about security. People were worried about opening up too much data to nonauthorized people. People have slowly become more comfortable sharing information with key partners. We are now starting to talk about the next step beyond extranets: business intelligence networks. An extranet is a link between two companies. Networks link many companies together using business intelligence as a communication tool.

Companies delayed buying large software systems last year, but as BI's recent success shows, they are still willing to dole out cash for some software. Why do you think BI is something that companies have continued to spend money on?

First, business intelligence is not a large purchase. Also, with business intelligence you can calculate an ROI a lot more easily and clearly than you can for an ERP system, for instance. Companies want to have information at their fingertips as long as it is simple to understand. In the past, you didn't have the data sources that ERP and SCM systems have provided. Companies are now realizing that they need to make those data sources more productive by using business intelligence, whether it's ours, our competitors', or internal systems.

During your tenure at Business Objects, you have been able to meet or exceed Wall Street guidance on revenue and profits for 18 consecutive quarters. How have you been able to pull that off?

That is true. In fact, I've hit 22 consecutive quarters in my career. I think it all goes back to my days at Texas Instruments and Schlumberger, where I was known for hitting forecasts. I think it's not any different doing an internal forecast for a division than it is working with Wall Street. As you set expectations that are realistic, you make sure that you have a forecast internally that supports that, and you never get carried away with yourself. You try to position yourself as much as possible to allow for upside and not stretch yourself to the point that everything needs to go right for you to hit your numbers.

Once you get in that mode, then you start to hit the numbers and that's what Wall Street is looking for. They're not looking for sandbagging, but rather consistent numbers. I think companies often get in trouble because they try too hard to meet expectations that should never have been set in the first place. We try to set realistic goals and manage to them.

A number of software companies have come under fire for improper revenue-recognition practices. Is that an area you keep a particularly close eye on, and how do you make sure that revenue is being booked properly?

Revenue recognition is important from our perspective because we are a software company and the SEC has some very tight rules on software recognition. What we do is make sure that we always leverage the expertise of our auditors. I know these days with the Andersen issues, you can no longer say, "the good news is the auditors have signed off," because of the skepticism out there. But the reality is most audit firms are doing a good job. We work closely with our auditors every time there is a new rule or announcement on revenue recognition. In some cases, we chose to be even more strict than the auditors think we have to be. Revenue recognition is indeed a tricky one in the software space. We therefore try to always err on the conservative side when it comes to revenue recognition.

• « previous
• 1
• 2