The marketing flip, with pike & twist.

The marketing flip, with pike & twist.

The marketing degree of difficulty has exploded, making getting a good score  exponentially more difficult.

There used to be a few TV and radio stations, newspapers and magazines by which to reach potential customers, and supply them with the information you thought they needed to buy your stuff.  It was mass marketing, with little to no ability to customise, personalise, or engage.

The name of the game was scale.

Scale of capital to control the means of communication and mass produce products for sale

Scale of financial resources  to afford the advertising costs demanded by the communication owners

Scale of markets, mass consumers

Scale of intermediaries like supermarket chains, and suppliers of capital and equipment.

Scale had all the power.

In 15 years, less than half my working life, marketing has flipped.

Individuals now have all the power

Marketing has to be personalised, one on one, or it will be ignored

Media channels are now virtually infinite, and the cost can be modest to free

Brands are only as good as the last delivery of value to the individual

However, the objective remains the same, just as with the fancy dive. It is to go through the surface with as little splash and disturbance as possible, a good old fashioned, well executed and relatively simple swan dive can achieve that objective as well as the fancy risky, and hugely complicated combinations of tricks.

Next time you are contemplating a complicated marketing dive with a pike and twist, consider the benefits of simplicity.

 

Will Amazons venture into book stores rewrite history?

Will Amazons venture into book stores rewrite history?

I love books, thousands of them infest my home, and I have spent years of my life browsing. I may be one of the last “heavy consumers’ of books, and particularly coming towards Christmas, my local Dymocks and Berkelouw’s which have so far survived, welcome me with open arms.

There is a physical tactility to a book that you cannot get on a ‘device’, no matter how great the design, which has the potential to generate an emotional attachment.

Perhaps it is just me?

As a result of this I am on the Dymocks mailing list. Every month or so, I get an email outlining the deals on the best sellers, books of interest, and new releases.

Now, I do not mind the odd romance, or light ‘love and discovery’ adventure, I have probably read 2 or three in my time, but they are not my normal fare.

Nowhere near my normal fare.

Despite a couple of emails, and even a phone call to them indicating my absolute lack of interest in their hit list, and observing they have access to a significant amount of purchase data should they choose to use it, I still get this crap filling my inbox.

Meanwhile Amazon is opening book stores, bricks and mortar book stores.

Unthinkable a few years ago that having disrupted and almost destroyed book stores, they then venture into them.

Shades of the Washington Post turnaround under Jeff Bezos

They will be doing all the stuff in bricks and mortar stores that Dymocks, and all the other retailers now disappeared had the opportunity to do, but lacked the foresight and understanding of their customers to be able to do, despite having 15 years head start.

Book stores have a place, long live real books, and the stores that sell them, I guess they will be branded ‘Amazon’, and Jeff will keep laughing.

 

 

 

Is it schizophrenia or just something in the cactus?

Is it schizophrenia or just something in the cactus?

For years consumer markets have been relentlessly commoditised by retailers who hold the power over the distribution, and who not unreasonably, have sought ways to divert the proprietary margins available from manufacturers pockets into their own. Short term thinking, but that seems to be the world we live in.

Largely retailers have won the game, and branded FMCG products are now becoming an increasing rarity, and mostly where they survive, it is on the back of trade deals and residual strength of brands built by smart and visionary marketing in yesteryear. In liquor there are still many brands, but unbeknownst to most consumers, many of them are just housebrands infused with the wine industry hyperbole that seems to be expected.

The impact on category innovation is yet to be really seen, but I suspect it will stumble further, as by my observation of the shelves, it has done over the past few years.

There however, is the schizophrenia.

Every now and again, a product emerges that runs against the trend.

Consumers are increasingly concerned with the integrity of the supply chains that deliver products to their mouths, so on the fringes there are some very expensive products, usually in alternative distribution that use long lists of adjectives to describe their products: organic, hand- made, all natural, crafted, you have seen them all. Occasionally they are genuinely ‘new’ products, but mostly they are better quality, low volume versions of the commodities available on supermarket shelves.Sometimes they work, and consumers pay a significant premium for  the story that supports the claims, but generally the promise given by the adjectives is taken on trust by consumers.

Technology will increasingly have a role in this as magic like Blockchain emerges that can both guarantee the integrity of products supply chain, and make it absolutely transparent. Suddenly the hyperbole can be subjected to rational scrutiny.

In 2013 George Clooney and a few of his mates wanted their own brand of tequila. Why not, they can afford whatever they want, (but why Tequila??) anyway, the brand they chose and subsequently built,  ‘Casamigos’ has just been bought by Diageo for $US1 billion, around 1.3 Billion Aussie. Not bad in four years!

I do not drink tequila, and the term ‘Super Premium Tequila’  seems to me to be an absolute oxymoron, although perhaps I am unduly influenced by one very bad night involving a bottle of the stuff and a lemon tree while at University.

For $1.3 billion I could be persuaded to give tequila a second chance. Is this growth and purchase of such a highly personalised brand another signpost that consumers are demanding a whole set of new experiences from the items they buy, or is it just something in the cactus?

 

 

 

 

 

Is Amazon about to hunt the Aussie retail gorillas?

Is Amazon about to hunt the Aussie retail gorillas?

Amazon has bought Whole Foods in a deal worth $13.7 Billion, around $18 billion Australian. The gorilla of the digital retail troupe has invested in an old fashioned, albeit trendy, bricks and mortar retailer.

This Whole Foods purchase makes it very clear that Amazon is setting out to be a significant player in grocery, and you would be brave to bet against Jeff Bezos.

In the US, listed retailers shares took a real dump, while here, Woollies and Coles shares dropped a bit on the announcement of the purchase, but seem to have largely recovered. Perhaps this is because share punters considered the considerable time frame of an impact by Amazon on the profitability of  Woollies and Coles, and the shorter term ‘Aldi effect’ is already priced in.

Amazon sells some grocery staples, and is experimenting with delivery options, including the Amazon Go store in Seattle, but this is a step further. What does this purchase gives them, beyond the small market share estimated at 1.7% ?

  • A footprint they would have found hard to replicate from scratch in a reasonable time,
  • A well known and liked brand that fits comfortably with the heavy users of their on-line services,
  • 20 years of experience in the creating of fresh supply chains from farm to the consumers plate.

I suspect this last one, not mentioned by the financial analysis that has happened in the last few days,  would have been a significant factor in the considerations. Being able to put Amazons tech capabilities alongside that experience could just be the game changer that grocery  home delivery  has been looking for.

Add this purchase to Amazon’s other activities and extensive list of experiments like Amazon Go, and you have the dynamic pricing capability of  Amazon being deployed into the centralised and rigid pricing system that drives the supermarket model.

Isn’t this what taxis used to look like?

In Australia Amazon are pretty well known to be recruiting, and they will not be doing that without some sort of  plan. Retail of any colour requires trade-offs between speed, variety, convenience and price. Home delivery has ‘taken off’ according to some pundits who have a horse in the race, but still has no more than 3 – 5% market share, depending on whose numbers you use. Whatever share it may be, it is heavily skewed towards shelf stable commodities.

These numbers do not seem to have dented the enthusiasm of Coles and Woolworths for store expansions. Their business model serves the last retail step better than  any home delivery has to date, albeit becoming a bit frayed at the edges. The combination of order size, delivery density, and labour and freight infrastructure costs has been toxic for home delivery to date.

Of particular concern to both sides of the equation are the perishable lines, fresh and frozen,  now a significant part of any households consumption. The cold chain requires very close management, and there is no room for error.   At some point I guess someone will ‘Uber’ it by enlisting the crowd in some way to pick up and deliver a packed order at a specific times for a small fee.

Perhaps history will repeat itself.

As a very small boy I remember Mum shopping at a small store in Avalon beach. There was one man in the shop who served from behind the counter, and pretty much knew what Mum bought, so assembled an order from memory as she walked into the store. These days the ranges of SKU’s has exploded, but that can be fixed with a data base on your phone and perhaps the supermarkets of the future will go the way of other capital intensive infrastructure and decentralise.

Amazon has picked on the retailer who does fresh best in the US. In Australia, there may be a couple of options for  them to do the same thing. I wonder if the Harris family is prepared to sell out this time?

Online also misses the impulse sale, the one made as you wait in the queue, although Amazon has a pretty good handle on the personal preferences of their customers. My wife of 35 years ‘never knows’ what to buy me for Xmas and birthdays, but Amazon sends me invitations to buy stuff several times a week, some of which I would genuinely like. The irony of that!

The challenge of traditional retail is the very high fixed costs involved. Retailers seek to convert as much of those fixed costs to variable ones so at least  they can match their costs to activity to some extent. They do this by casualising the workforce, and deploying technology. In contrast, the on line retailers have way lower fixed costs, but their variable costs in the order construction and delivery are much higher.

Even that may not be the major hurdle faced by the established retailers. That hurdle is the capacity Amazon brings to the table for innovation, at high speed. While Woolies and Coles are contemplating a new store layout to trial somewhere, Amazon has trialled, optimised and dumped or implemented several iterations of the best ideas they have at any one time.

Retailers seem to me to have thought that merging their legacy operations with some level of ‘digital transformation’ is something they can do over an extended period, with all the risk modelling that has evolved to supp0rt their existing business model. However, that assumption now seems to have gone out the window.

I do  not know the percentage of revenue that Coles or Woolies spends on anything genuinely new, but suspect it will go nowhere even in sight of the 11.8 % Amazon spends on ‘technology and content’ on their revenue of $135billion.  The major part of that massive amount will not be directed at FMCG, but the lessons will be directly applicable.

I may  not be around to see this all finally play out, but I know for sure that grocery retailing will  not look anything like it does now when my baby granddaughter is buying for her family.

 

10 point leadership framework for reviving SME manufacturing businesses.

10 point leadership framework for reviving SME manufacturing businesses.

The Modest sized manufacturing sector in Australia has  a huge problem. It is being wiped out like an insect  pest at your backyard barbie. The problem with that is that they provide the bulk of employment and training in the economy, and without them, we will become a nation of baristas.

Perhaps it is not that gloomy, there are some exceptional little businesses out there, intensely competitive on the world stage, aggressive, and innovative, but they are a rarity.

For the average manufacturer, the task of just surviving is daunting.

In 20 years of advising these sorts of businesses on change and improvement there are some leadership lessons that seem to crop up time after time, in one form or another.

The survivors learn them, rarely an easy path, the others just go the way of the Dodo.

Management of people and their capabilities.

Successful leaders manage their people and their capabilities on an individual basis. When you have a bunch of people performing well and growing individually, you get  groups of them doing the same as the group, and then the enterprise benefits. For the person at the top of an enterprise, even if it is a small one, this aspect of managing cannot be left to chance. This is first on my list, as it is the most important by a long way.

Identifying the molehills early.

Every enterprise has more than its fair share of molehills that need attention, The challenge is to address them, smooth them out before they become mountains, or even little hills that get in the way of performance. The impact of even a tiny molehill on the performance of an enterprise is like the ripples in a pool when a rock is thrown in. They radiate out, and when meeting up with ripples from elsewhere, there is rough water. The job of everyone in a business  is to remove the molehills as they emerge, before any ripples can be sent out.

Get it right first time.

The fundamental lesson of ‘Lean’ can be summarised as getting it right first time, every time. While this is hard to achieve, but every corner that is cut, every expedient decision and compromise that is made, will come back to bite you hard, some time, in some way. Never settle for less than the absolute best that can be done, every time, and improve the processes that deliver that  outcome to increasingly demanding specifications, relentlessly.

Focus, Focus, Focus.

The 80/20 rule works every time in every circumstance I have ever seen. Do a limited range of things for those who really care, and do it better than anyone else. Anything else means you are compromising the things you do by spreading them too widely, and as a medium business, you simply cannot afford to do that. Be opportunistic only if it can be done from within the existing narrow definition of  what you are great at doing.

Team alignment.

Alignment has unfortunately become a bit of a consulting cliché, which must be some indication that it is right. Having everyone pulling on the same direction is essential, but you never get there without hard training and robust debate on the way through. The metaphor I always like is of a rowing eight. The best team always wins, but to get the best team in the boat on race day, and working in that absolutely coordinated way that seems so fluid and natural, is really hard, the result of training, mutual respect, and the subordination of the individual to the performance of the team.

Right, not popular.

It often happens that the right decision is not always the popular one. That is why business is  not a democracy, someone always holds the right of veto. It is the responsibility of that person to make the right decision, best made after robust debate amongst those affected, what I call ‘Due Process’. At the end of the debate, the leader has to make the call, and those who may not have agreed with the decision need to line up behind it and support it in every way. Any ongoing dissent needs to be behind closed doors, and between the parties involved only.

Humility and Agility.

Having made the point about right not popular, not every decision taken will be the right one, so the really good leaders amongst us moderate their right to the veto by  being able to acknowledge mistakes, change course and get on with it. Managers are usually loathe to admit they are wrong, as they consider that it shows weakness, the leaders amongst us know  that being able to admit they were wrong shows strength of character, which is what we follow.

Balance the competition between today and tomorrow.

Taking the short term easy route at the expense of the longer term good rarely pays off. The urgency of the immediate often outweighs the importance of getting the foundations right for tomorrow, and while doing so may make for an easier weekend, it usually makes for a crap year.

Write it down, and create a rhythm.

Documenting your plans makes them available to everyone else who needs to know, and provides the framework for decision making, without which, there can be no chance that everyone will be working off the same hymn sheet, another worthwhile cliché.

A really effective plan is a combination of a number of elements that add to the clarity of the plan, which makes it something that can be effectively implemented, managed and improved.

Your ‘why’ or business purpose, or Mission, however you choose to describe it will only evolve slowly over time.

Your strategy also evolves, but over a shorter period, a few years. it used to be that 5 years was a reasonable evolutionary period, but the speed and aggression of competitive pressures have shortened that to three in most cases.

Operating plans, usually called budgets are the financial expression of what you will and will not do over the next 12 months. Allowing the numbers to determine the activities is a common mistake. It is way better to manage activities by the objectives that need to be achieved and then measure the outcomes and adjust as necessary by the numbers. Having your sales, marketing, and operational plans in place that have been derived from a combination of the objectives and zero based budgeting , rather than fitting the activities to some vague notion of the acceptable cost, is the way it should be done.

Unless you measure the outcomes of what you are doing, you will have no idea of the effectiveness of your activities and investments. Having said that, you cannot measure everything, and trying to do so will tie you up in administration, and compromise the learning that comes from having a few key metrics where you understand clearly the cause and effect chains in place.

Learn and adjust. Plans that do not change in the face of contrary outcomes are worse than  no plans at all. Therefore your metrics need to drive adjustments in your activities and costs as you cycle through the year.

Someone is the driver.

That leader, the one with the veto, is the one doing the directing, the cox if you like in the  rowing eight metaphor. They are the ones with the overall view of the progress, both in the scull and across the competitive arena, and should be the one most sensitive to the changes necessary to achieve  the optimum return from the assets, financial and otherwise, invested.

When you, as the leader get all that stuff right, or close to it, the performance improvement will be considerable.