Aug 31, 2011 | Innovation, Marketing, Personal Rant
The retirement of Steve Jobs last week has prompted a blizzard of comment, even a cartoon, from my favorite Tom Fishburne, and at the risk of just adding to it, it seems appropriate to simply state that a bloke I have never met, who has never even heard of me, about whom I know nothing more than has been published over the 30 years of his extraordinary career, has changed the way my life is lived. His commencement speech at Stanford is now one of the web classics, with millions of views.
We all have ipods, or their substitutes, connected phones have revolutionised the way we communicate, tablet computing has just been changed forever, and my kids insist on a Mac at double the price of a technically comparable PC, and that is not to mention the huge impact the original Toy Story movie had during Job’s forced sabbatical from Apple.
It will be truly fascinating to observe the transition of power at Apple, can the innovation and marketing machine he built survive in its current form without Jobs?
Aug 30, 2011 | Alliance management, Collaboration, Innovation, Strategy
I was amazed to realise that the recent dog fight to buy Nortel, was really driven by the patents they had, rather than the value of the operational parts of the business.
After an opener bid by Google of $900mill, Nortel eventually was sold to a consortium that included Apple, Microsoft, (ironic partnership that) Ericcson and Sony for $4.5 billion, outbidding Google and Intel who had teamed up. The winners will share the patent bank of Nortel, some 30,000 of them covering all sorts of electronic ideas and gizmos. The Nortel sale then prompted the sale of Motorola to Google for 12.5 billion, as it put a value on their patent bank.
A new business has emerged from the development of the last 20 years, “patent troll” someone who buys up patents, and then launches litigation to extract royalties. Given the hazy boundaries of patents in the digital space, the ideas that patent applications address in the first instance often have potential applications in applications never dreamed of in the original form. Enter the patent troll, who chases the royalities, potentially ensuring innovation driven startups may make never get off the ground, as the threat of litigation is enough to smother the commercialisation process.
The giant of Patent Trolls appears to be Intellectual Ventures, started by Nathan Myhrvold, a brilliant bloke whose contribution to Microsoft was a key to their success, and who since has made heaps by effectively greenmailing tech companies with lawsuits and threats suits for patent infringement.
Long intro. This cost of insuring against greenmailing ends up in the cost of the stuff we buy, and virtually all of it is just risk management, avoiding the risk of litigation that adds no value to the innovation process at all. The patent process was developed to protect ideas in a simpler time, and seems to me to have lived beyond its useful life, at least in the digital arena. Ideas scale, they get better with use, and the evolution of patent trolling acts as a disincentive to use, a tax.
Aug 29, 2011 | Innovation, Operations
Global sourcing, whilst offering benefits to customers in the county doing the outsourcing, has the long term effect of reducing the relative innovative capacity of the “outsourcer.”
As innovators seek the lowest cost for the product of their innovative output, the location of that resulting manufacturing acquires the capability to improve on the original from the proximity of daily interaction with the production, so are in a better position than the original innovator to build on the knowledge emerging from operational implementation.
What do you think the chances are that the next iteration of mobile technology will come from Chinese subcontractors to Apple? Following the example of chip manufacturing, formerly located in the US where the development was located, and now concentrated in Taiwan, I would think pretty good!
In the Australian food industry, manufacturing has been gutted, significantly driven by the twin impacts of the power of the retailers, and high Australian dollar making packaged goods imports cheaper.
We all understand sustainable innovation is the lifeblood of industry, and are increasingly understanding that sustainable innovation also requires the proximity of the manufacturing operations to the R&D and commercialisation activities that feed the process. That virtuous circle has been broken in the Australian food industry, amongst others, and I despair that it is so far gone that there will be no coming back, no matter how much the SME sector points out the obvious to the wallies who make the short term decisions with such dire long term impacts.
Aug 26, 2011 | Change, Management, Marketing, Small business, Strategy
The decision yesterday by the federal Court to allow Metcash to purchase Franklins from Pick n Pay, then onsell, presumably with tied supply agreements is another nail in the coffin of competition in the retail trade, despite the interpretation of the law by the courts.
Now you have Coles, Woolworths and Metcash with a share above 90% of the supermarket trade, limited choice for consumers, a nightmare for suppliers, particularly the decimated local suppliers who have struggled against the increasing power of the retailers for 30 years, and have largely failed.
Several things will emerge that will accelerate change in the supply landscape.
- Scale should dominate the strategic thinking of suppliers. You need to be a gorilla to play with gorillas, so get big or get out. The only alternative is to back off and be a small specialty producer, concentrating on the small share of retail trade not controlled by the 3 gorillas.
- It will be increasingly difficult at the smaller end of the size scale. The businesses left that turn over between a couple of million, and 50 million, many of them regional, with extreme pressure on their finances at a time when banks are not being helpful despite their advertising, will struggle. There are only a few left, and many of those will go to the wall.
- Competition between supply chains, from growers through to retailers will increase. Soon, if you supply Coles, you will not be able to supply Woolies, without risking your position with Coles. Suppliers will need to make choices, and gear up to integrate themselves into a supply chain system, losing their independence, and closing off options. This may not be a bad thing, but it is a substantial change from the current practice and way of thinking, and it limits the scope of customer base available through which to reach consumers with your product.
- The move to housebrands will accelerate, further enabling global sourcing by retailers, squeezing local suppliers. The $A has punched this process along over the last couple of years, adding more pressure to local suppliers who, having lost shelf space for their brands, were relying on contract packing to stay afloat
- Retailers are lousy marketers, good at sales, but lousy marketers. With housebrands coming to dominate categories on price, attractive to consumers in tough times, where will the innovation come from? Where is the incentive for local suppliers to risk their limited capital in doing something different?.
The ACCC, governments at all levels and the courts implicitly decided years ago that the SME end of the food industry was fair game, the survival of the fittest, and all that, and from an economic perspective, it may be the right thing to have done, but at what cost in human terms. The old question I have used in many seminars to make the point about retailer power:
Question. “Where does the 400kg gorilla sleep?”
Answer. “Anywhere he bloody likes”
Aug 25, 2011 | Communication, Marketing, Social Media
“Old” marketing is all about a business sending its messages out to their markets, it is what we are all used to, and it is the way much of our marketing ecosystem has evolved, outbound marketing.
The “new” marketing ecosystem is all about attracting your customers, potential customers, and brand building targets to you, inbound marketing.
But is it “new”?
Not really, trade shows which have been with us forever, are largely about inbound marketing, and marketers have always been aware of the power of word of mouth, and have sought ways to harness it.
Inbound marketing is pretty powerful, as by the time a customer has come to you, the first couple of hurdles of awareness, and empathy that need to be cleared by outbound marketing before there is a chance of a sale, have been cleared by the customer before they meet you. They are willing to be engaged in the next stage of building a brand, or making a sale.
Social media, blogs, and all the exploding electronic opportunities to communicate constitute the means to embrace outbound marketing. Increasingly we are seeing research that supports the power of these “new” marketing mediums, and whilst some remain wedded to the old ways, the future is with those who innovate in the ways they communicate.
