Blog Layout

A new way forward

Adrian Di Marco

Companies need to rethink the risk/reward equation for the digital future, and shed ways of thinking born in the industrial era. TechnologyOne made a bold move 10 years ago to move to cloud-based Software as a Service (SaaS), and has reaped the benefits since. 

TechnologyOne started 32 years ago, and was one of Australia’s first innovation-led startups.

TechnologyOne is today a top-150 ASX-listed company, with one of the largest software R&D centres in Australia. We have been one of the strongest performing companies on the ASX since we listed in 1999, with a market capitalisation now approaching $3bn. Our success has been driven by our aggressive innovation agenda.

When TechnologyOne started, we took a very different direction to the other software companies at that time. Up until then, software companies were focused on providing services. The products that existed either came from large multinationals such as MSA, McCormack and Dodge or IBM, or originated locally from custom software built for a specific customer, that was then ‘on sold’ to another customer. In all cases the software needed to be heavily modified to meet the specific requirements of each new customer. This was costly, time consuming and inherently risky.

TechnologyOne’s idea was to undertake deep research and use this to build a new generation of software products, that did not need to be customised to meet a specific customer’s requirements. All customers would use the exact same code line, which would provide significant advantages, such as quicker implementations, reduced costs, and enable the customer to take new releases of the software product without costly re-implementations.

To achieve this, TechnologyOne pioneered a concept called ‘configuration not customisation’, in which the configuration sat outside the software code, in a repository, which told the software how to behave for a specific customer. The code wasn’t changed for each customer, but instead the configuration, which specified the accounting rules, workflows, policies, procedures, themes, etc. It was a revolutionary idea, that has underpinned the company’s long-term success.

To make this happen, we had to identify new and emerging technologies, such as a new way of storing and retrieving data based on a mathematical model, which subsequently became relational database technology.

When TechnologyOne started 32 years ago, there was no Venture Capital industry, and banks would not lend to a startup with no assets, trying to pioneer a new idea of building software products that did not need to be customised, using unproven state-of-the-art technology. The fact that the company was based on undertaking deep research, which would need to be subsequently commercialised, was not something the banks understood. 

To fund TechnologyOne’s innovation agenda, I approached a past customer, Dugald Mactaggart, who owned a hides processing plant. Dugald was one of the first venture capitalists in Australia, and provided both the initial funding, as well as a shelf company from a previous venture called ‘Rent-a-Bull’, which was renamed to TechnologyOne. This would eventually become a partnership that lasted more than 32 years. It’s quite ironic that one of Australia’s leading software R&D companies started life as Rent-a-Bull.

TechnologyOne’s success, as well as our continuing strong growth over 32 years, is due to our aggressive innovation agenda. The company has consistently invested +20% of revenue each year in R&D, making it a global leader in R&D.  

Over that period of time TechnologyOne has reinvented itself, and rebuilt our software products many times. Our first-generation products were green screen based on relational database technology; our second generation was Client/Server with a Graphical User Interface; our third generation was Internet-based, and our newest generation is Software as a Service. 

We have been continually at the cutting edge of new technologies, ideas and concepts. By rebuilding the company and our products every eight years, it has freed our thinking from the past and allowed us to bring in new ideas, new talent and new concepts. 
Our aggressive innovation agenda is underpinned by a set of guiding principles:
  • New and emerging technologies - To create new opportunities
  • Simplicity – To make life simple for customers using new technologies, coupled with new ideas and concepts 
  • Leadership – Setting ambitious goals for R&D teams, and to work with them to navigate the ‘unknown path’ to a new destination that no one has ever been before
  • Failure - Accepting and learning from failures, which are inevitable when you are at the ‘cutting edge’, exploring uncharted domains
Having built an innovation-based company over 32 years, it is clear the Australian economy must move from its industrial past to a digital future; and we need to accelerate the creation of more innovation-led companies that can capitalise on the opportunities that lie ahead. To do this, the older traditional approaches that worked in the industrial past will not work going forward. We need to break through the past, and find a new way forward that is appropriate for the digital future. TechnologyOne has already made this leap.

We decided 10 years ago to become a cloud company, rebuild all our products, and commit to seamlessly and easily move all our on-premise customers to the cloud. When we announced this, as a public company, there was a lot of angst, as investors questioned why our customers, which are large government departments, councils and universities, would trust a software vendor to run their mission critical ERP software, as well as put their data into our cloud. They were concerned that we had no experience or track record building a cloud business, and we were committing hundreds of millions of dollars on this new direction. 

These were all valid concerns, yet as an innovation-led company we knew we could succeed because of our rigorous R&D-led approach. Today our global SaaS ERP solution is used by 500+ large government departments, councils and universities, and our SaaS revenues are growing by 40% per annum. There were significant challenges we had to overcome, significant risks we had to manage, and many mistakes made along the way, but today we have successfully delivered our global SaaS ERP solution, which is driving our growth going forward.

Key to our success as an innovation-led company has been to think and operate differently, and to have a board of directors that can effectively oversee and nurture such a culture. Ours is not a typical ASX-150 board, in both constitution and how it operates. It is not a board scared of technological change, of moving fast, and heading into an unknown and ill-defined direction, nor of making mistakes. What we have is a board that clearly understands how to manage the risk and reward equation that is inherent in a true innovation-led company.

Unfortunately being an innovation-led company in the publicly listed arena is becoming increasingly more difficult, because of the risk averse approach enforced on public companies by the mandated ‘one size fits all’ model of corporate governance. Public companies have been forced to embrace a common, unified and risk averse approach including:
  • Majority of independent directors
  • Independent chair 
  • Limitation on director tenure
  • Propensity to recruit from the pool of existing listed company directors
  • Segregation of CEO and chair roles
  • Restrictive guidelines for executive remuneration
Companies that do not comply to this mandated ‘one size fits all’ model are identified and punished at AGMs by Proxy Advisors. Boards have been forced to embrace this mandated risk averse approach, limiting their ability to be different and to innovate.

Clearly there are arguments that could be made both for and against this mandated approach. That is not the issue here.

Public companies come in all shapes and sizes, across a myriad of industries, with each company facing its own unique challenges, while at the same time having their own unique opportunities in the new digital world. To push all companies into a single mandated ‘one size fits all model’ will by definition push all companies to a standard ‘norm’ and remove out performance. If there is one thing that nature has shown us, it is that diversity and evolution are among the most powerful forces in the universe. We should be embracing diversity and evolution in our public company space. We should not be afraid that companies will make mistakes, that some will fail, as this is part of the process for the survival of the strongest. We should encourage diversity of approach between companies, just like there is diversity in nature. Only through diversity do we find new better ways, and create out performance.

What is important going forward is transparency. Companies must be open and transparent about how they operate, and clearly identify to their investors if they differ from the ‘one size fits all’ model, explaining why they are different. Investors can then make an informed decision on whether to invest or not.

If we are to encourage more and more innovation-led companies in Australia’s publicly listed space, and if we to allow them to truly succeed, they cannot be ‘hobbled’ by this risk averse, mandated ‘one size fits all’ model currently being promoted.


This piece is taken from our upcoming book, Australia's Nobel Laureates, Vol. III, celebrating Australian science and innovation. Taking a whole-of-economy healthcheck on Australia's innovation ecosystem, the book features words from industry, academia, and Government. 
By By Harley Paroulaksis, CEO Paspalis, CEO Darwin Innovation Hub 20 May, 2023
Getting asked what we look for in deals is one of the most common questions I get as an investment manager.
20 May, 2023
The Small Business Association of Australia is dedicated to supporting SMEs, acting as their voice to government and helping them connect, grow, and prosper well into the future.
By By Shiv Meka 20 May, 2023
Sensibles may sound like science fiction, but this revolutionary technology is making waves in aged-care facilities, and has the potential to transform health monitoring at scale.
28 Mar, 2023
Alice Springs and the deserts of Central Australia don’t sound like a food basket, but they are for businesswoman and bush foods innovator Rayleen Brown.
By Gillian Cumming 28 Mar, 2023
A new report aims to lay the foundations for a deeper and more meaningful and equitable relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in the mining transition sector.
By Dr Saraid Billiards - CEO of the Association of Australian Medical Research Institutes. 27 Mar, 2023
If the health and medical research sector in Australia is to move forward, it must address gender equity, diversity, and inclusion- which means making the sector a safe and inclusive workspace for all.
27 Jan, 2023
A ground-breaking sheep technology system is bettering the businesses and lives of Australian sheep breeders thanks to a revolutionary combination of software, hardware, and support never before combined into one cohesive unit.
27 Jan, 2023
ANCA took an early view to look beyond Australia’s shores whilst developing advanced manufacturing technologies now viewed as ‘business as usual’
By Andrew Downs 27 Jan, 2023
As Australia grapples with a critical skills shortage, many are now encouraging young people to embrace a career in the trades, where a wealth of opportunities awaits.
By By Ben Kehoe 27 Jan, 2023
In 2016 I published a blog article titled Moonshots for Australia: 7 For Now. It’s one of many I have posted on business and innovation in Australia. In that book, I highlighted a number of Industries of the Future among a number of proposed Moonshots. I self-published a book, Innovation in Australia – Creating prosperity for future generations, in 2019, with a follow-up COVID edition in 2020. There is no doubt COVID is causing massive disruption. Prior to COVID, there was little conversation about National Sovereignty or supply chains. Even now, these topics are fading, and we remain preoccupied with productivity and jobs! My motivation for this writing has been the absence of a coherent narrative for Australia’s business future. Over the past six years, little has changed. The Australian ‘psyche’ regarding our political and business systems is programmed to avoid taking a long-term perspective. The short-term nature of Government (3 to 4-year terms), the short-term horizon of the business system (driven by shareholder value), the media culture (infotainment and ‘gotcha’ games), the general Australian population’s cynical perspective and a preoccupation with a lifestyle all create a malaise of strategic thinking and conversation. Ultimately, it leads to a leadership vacuum at all levels. In recent years we have seen the leadership of some of our significant institutions failing to live up to the most basic standards, with Royal Commissions, Inquiries and investigations consuming excessive time and resources. · Catholic Church and other religious bodies · Trade Unions · Banks (and businesses generally, take casinos, for example) · the Australian Defence Force · the Australian cricket teams · our elected representatives and the staff of Parliament House As they say, “A fish rots from the head!” At best, the leadership behaviour in those institutions could be described as unethical and, at worst….just bankrupt! In the last decade, politicians have led us through a game of “leadership by musical chairs” – although, for now, it has stabilised. However, there is still an absence of a coherent narrative about business and wealth creation. It is a challenge. One attempt to provide such a narrative has been the Intergenerational Reports produced by our federal Government every few years since 2002. The shortcomings of the latest Intergenerational Report Each Intergenerational Report examines the long-term sustainability of current government policies and how demographic, technological, and other structural trends may affect the economy and the budget over the next 40 years. The fifth and most recent Intergenerational Report released in 2021 (preceded by Reports in 2002, 2007, 2010 and 2015) provides a narrative about Australia’s future – in essence, it is an extension of the status quo. The Report also highlights three key insights: 1. First, our population is growing slower and ageing faster than expected. 2. The Australian economy will continue to grow, but slower than previously thought. 3. While Australia’s debt is sustainable and low by international standards, the ageing of our population will pressure revenue and expenditure. However, its release came and went with a whimper. The recent Summit on (what was it, Jobs and Skills and productivity?) also seems to have made the difference of a ‘snowflake’ in hell in terms of identifying our long-term challenges and growth industries. Let’s look back to see how we got here and what we can learn. Australia over the last 40 years During Australia’s last period of significant economic reform (the late 1980s and early 1990s), there was a positive attempt at building an inclusive national narrative between Government and business. Multiple documents were published, including: · Australia Reconstructed (1987) – ACTU · Enterprise Bargaining a Better Way of Working (1989) – Business Council of Australia · Innovation in Australia (1991) – Boston Consulting Group · Australia 2010: Creating the Future Australia (1993) – Business Council of Australia · and others. There were workshops, consultations with industry leaders, and conferences across industries to pursue a national microeconomic reform agenda. Remember these concepts? · global competitiveness · benchmarking · best practice · award restructuring and enterprising bargaining · training, management education and multiskilling. This agenda was at the heart of the business conversation. During that time, the Government encouraged high levels of engagement with stakeholders. As a result, I worked with a small group of training professionals to contribute to the debate. Our contribution included events and publications over several years, including What Dawkins, Kelty and Howard All Agree On – Human Resources Strategies for Our Nation (published by the Australian Institute of Training and Development). Unfortunately, these long-term strategic discussions are nowhere near as prevalent among Government and industry today. The 1980s and 1990s were a time of radical change in Australia. It included: · floating the $A · deregulation · award restructuring · lowering/abolishing tariffs · Corporatisation and Commercialisation Ross Garnaut posits that the reforms enabled Australia to lead the developed world in productivity growth – given that it had spent most of the 20th century at the bottom of the developed country league table. However, in his work, The Great Reset, Garnaut says that over the next 20 years, our growth was attributable to the China mining boom, and from there, we settled into “The DOG days” – Australia moved to the back of a slow-moving pack! One unintended consequence of opening our economy to the world is the emasculation of the Australian manufacturing base. The manic pursuit of increased efficiency, lower costs, and shareholder value meant much of the labour-intensive work was outsourced. Manufacturing is now less than 6% of our GDP , less than half of what it was 30 years ago!
More Posts
Share by: