Kind of like sales numbers and employee engagement overall.
But don't worry folks, Aventure is coming to the rescue. To help with internal transfers and career planning and such.
35 replies (most recent on top)
"The skills required to architect, design, and manage a large software project — one that customers want — are not statistical. Those skills are software engineering, and the management of software engineers.
The Forester lacked those skills, and so did most of his predecessors."
THAT! That is the best and most succinct explanation of why SAS has declined. SAS will continue to decline until that is corrected.
I have tremendous respect for JG but he is overly committed to holding the ship on the Viya course heading and that has proved to be the dagger of death. JG should have folded that hand 7-9 years ago. Hindsight is always 20/20. Such is life.
@165 Statistics is certainly a valuable skill.
However, statistical skills were never in short supply at SAS. SAS had a world-class group of statisticians.
The skills required to architect, design, and manage a large software project — one that customers want — are not statistical. Those skills are software engineering, and the management of software engineers.
The Forester lacked those skills, and so did most of his predecessors.
We don’t hire a doctor when we need a plumber, and we don’t hire a plumber when we need a doctor.
We hire a person with the skills and education to do the job.
SAS cannot hire the Google leaders that @13w+1jy9rtw1y named — because SAS hires cheap. The best people won’t go where they are offered neither equity nor high salaries.
You get what you pay for.
You keep knocking Forestry. I don't like the guy either, but...
Agriculture is all about maximizing land productivity and yield while minimizing cost. Statistics help determine which variables and factor levels result in optimal yields. Lots of Experimental Design and Statistics are required, especially at the graduate level.
On one level you are absolutely correct. Some of the best Software engineers on the planet only have an undergraduate degree and sometimes not even in computer science or a directly related field. However, those involved in the highest levels of excellence where innovation requires deep scientific expertise and mathematical fluency, often have PhD’s. The PhD alone doesn’t guarantee stratospheric talent, yet often present in those possessing the highest engineering insight and ability.
I worked with well over 100 PhD’s at SAS, many with computer science emphasis and OS was as good of a programmer and had as deep of an understanding into an array of computing problems as they did. Do agree with others that he lacked a deep understanding of what it meant to design, engineer and integrate cutting edge data management and analytics software with modern generalized cloud platforms. However, that was a long-standing problem at SAS during the genesis of Viya, because leading edge platform R&D had been in decline since around 2000, as micromanagement and a stultified “proprietary multitiered enterprise computing” model took over.
Degrees have never been what defines excellence.
Phd simply means you are willing to bear academic teaching and debt for a long period of time.
“Sharp ones at SAS… match up nicely with the sharp ones [at Google]” does not apply to leadership.
The Google leaders @13w+1jy9rtw1y named have Ph.D.s in Computer Science from top universities.
Such leaders have opportunities in Silicon Valley. They can command top salaries, with equity positions. They’re expensive.
SAS prefers leaders with undergraduate degrees, or unrelated degrees (e.g. Forestry). They’re cheaper.
SAS leaders were able to maintain a revenue stream that someone else created. They proved, many times over, that they were not able to create new revenue streams.
You get what you pay for.
"Imagine betting the future of company with an academic person having zero real world business experience,"
That worked great during the infancy of SAS for a variety of reasons, The most important of which was SAS filled a void in the market.
Most of those reasons were gone when SAS tried a repeat with the Big German. Another difference is that Big Jim had way more skin in the game than the Big German. The Big German had way less to lose if his brain child was a failure.
I have been in a room with both men and the older man listens MUCH better.
SAS wasted 10 years developing something(Viya) that only they found tasty. The market has navigated around Viya, leaving it mostly irrelevant. The 10 year Viya development effort is proving to be an unrecoverable delay of game.
1900 should read 1990 in @12s+1jy9rtw1y
Here is Google’s annual revenue since 2010:
https://m.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GOOG/alphabet/revenue
In the same timeframe SAS’ annual revenues have actually declined (due to inflation AND license cancelation) with less-than-impressive growth in a few products.
Then what do we make of the “sharp ones at SAS who match up nicely with the sharp ones here (Google)”? How do we account for the vast disparity in their results?
Here are two of the biggest current brains in the history of Google who are still at the top of their game:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urs_H%C3%B6lzle
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Dean
Does SAS have anyone functioning in their intellectual and results orbit who is actually free and resourced to make things happen?
Yet Google and most other tech companies who have experience massive growth since 2000 have been and continueto suffer similar growing pains (“A+++” players kick things off and by the time tech starts to mature B and even C players have been hired) SAS has since a decade prior (~1990) when MVA released. Between 1982 and 1900 SAS saw exponential growth and doubled employee headcount every 2-3 years. Both the SAS technology and business model were very relevant and high-growth prior to 2000.
Happy you’ve moved on, but I worked at SAS for well over 30 years, including pre-MVA and have worked with the kind of top people who pioneered the core Tech at Google and other modern tech behemoths. For at least the past 15 years, SAS often lacks that rare kind of talent because 1. they refuse to pay for it, especially with equity and 2. In the rare instances where such do/did work at SAS, the are constrained by mangement and culture. This is true both with R&D and on the business side.
At this juncture in tme building great products that have chance at billion dollar annual revenues takes rare talent, the best ideas, razor sharp decisions and high velocity business and tech execution where sufficient-to-generous investment is made in the building the correct projects and services in a timely (very fast) manner.
Google is not immune to the same decline we witness with SAS. The difference is Goggle has a scale, reach and relevance that provides a safer margin of error for now — plus they and many other public tech companies are not afraid to lay off 1000’s at a time.
“ What SAS has failed to realize for about 25 years is that the best software architects and product designers are at least an order of magnitude more competent, imaginative and productive than most SAS technical employees”
You are wrong. I worked at SAS for a long long time and jumped to Google in 2021.
The sharp ones at SAS match up nicely with the sharp ones here. Same for average and low performers.
And in about the same ratios.
Imagine betting the future of company with an academic person having zero real world business experience, limited listening experience, and overly confident of his abilities.
Big gamble big loss. Sad
What SAS has failed to realize for about 25 years is that the best software architects and product designers are at least an order of magnitude more competent, imaginative and productive than most SAS technical employees and definitely most of SAS’s leadership since 2000.
This is why SAS has not been able to effectively execute on major new revenue generating products. Instead most of R&D remained mired in the issues well described by @r0+1jy9rtw1y.
For those following these threads, read "The Power Broker - Robert Moses and the Fall of New York" by Robert Caro. Yes, it's long, and it drags in places. Eventually you will see that SAS has the same dynamic as Moses: the transportation world moved on, but Robert Moses didn't -- it was narcissism on a grand scale.
Both opinions are valid. The cost of Viya is not its dollars invested, but its opportunity cost — what we could have built instead. SAS could have been in a better place.
The Big German gets blamed for the decline of SAS, but that began decades ago, when SAS stopped innovating. Arguably, its last successful innovation was JMP — 35 years ago. The world moved on, and SAS didn’t.
The SAS culture was insular and stagnant; it rewarded sycophants, promoted incompetents, ignored abuse, and stifled innovation. Steady renewal revenues masked these problems for decades.
Management deserves all credit for growing the original revenue stream, taking SAS from agriculture to business, and from the US to the world.
But once SAS acquired Open Source competition, survival required innovation. The SAS culture prevents that.
There is nothing to do now but sell the company. SAS will go down in history as a successful long-run business — 50+ years. Few businesses do so well. All good things come to an end.
They wouldn't be in a better place with, or without Viya. The world moved on. SAS didn't.
If SAS had not worn the Viya blinders for so long, one has to think they might be in a better place today. Minimally SAS would have much more cash. And likely fewer angry V9 customers who felt ignored or marginalized.
Ten plus years of barking up the wrong tree is eternity in the software world.
Asking price, leaked at the time of the Broadcom talks, was $15-20B.
@dz+1jwf1pvnn pointed out that both VMWare and Informatica sold for 5X revenues. So, it’s not unreasonable to ask $15B.
Yet, clearly, no one has offered that.
Salesforce declared that their purchase of Informatica was strategic. They were willing to pay 5X, because they see how to use Informatica to grow revenues.
I don’t see how SAS can be strategic — because I don’t see much that a buyer could do with SAS that they can’t do with Open Source.
If SAS is not strategic, then it’s just a cash cow, to be milked until it dies. Broadcom and others may have offered 3X revenues for that.
SAS appears to have concluded that they’ll get a better price in an IPO.
I hear engagement is also lively in the Art Department, which is safe. Who wouldn't want to join together and draw pictures for Mom's refrigerator?
"3 billion is dead as a door nail? LOL. You know how many companies dream of this problem?"
3 billion is not the problem. The problem is no revenue growth for over 10 years despite huge investments(Viya). with the idea of growing revenue.
The other problem is an even greater problem, and is that the company remains unsold. That is a huge signal that the pool of potential buyers does not see a value proposition at the current asking price(whatever that is).
Yes, this is a platform for helping them choose layoff targets.
Be active in developing your skills, and ensure you enter them into this system. Ensure you have a broad network of communication throughout the company and strive to be perceived as a problem-solver.
What is wrong with employee engagement? Pretty lively where I am.
“Think Op meant https://www.avature.net/
employees list their skills so they can “float “ to where needed. I have also not seen anything done with this.”
Hoo boy. Good luck to all of you who are still at SAS and want to maintain that status.
3 billion is dead as a door nail? LOL. You know how many companies dream of this problem?
so it's a way to figure out who to lay off?
Think Op meant https://www.avature.net/
employees list their skills so they can “float “ to where needed. I have also not seen anything done with this.
Waiting for the July packages maybe? Or is a secret sale in the works? IPO 2029!
Is this the outside consulting firm that was/is being brought in?
@OP Did you mean "Accenture"?
Aventure? An e-bike?
"Who is hiring for SAS Viya skills?"
COBOL skills are in better demand, which is not saying alot.
Aventure? I’ve been retired for 3.5 years so I don’t know/recall what that is.
Who is hiring for SAS Viya skills?
On Aventure, it seems nothing has happened with that? I assumed devs would be matrixed to address BH/JP whim de jour.
Kind of like the number of job openings asking for SAS Viya skills