Mar 28, 2013 | Governance, Innovation, Leadership, Operations, Small business
Manufacturing is not just an amalgam of industries, far more importantly, it is a capability, a way to capture imagination in a physical form.
In discussions about manufacturing, its slow demise in Australia, the level and type of support it should receive, its importance to long term prosperity, and the links between manufacturing and innovation, we leave one really important factor aside, one I suspect it is just not generally recognised. We define “industry” with the assumptions and words that came with the explosion of manufacturing in the last 100 years, the “food” industry, the “Auto” industry, the “Airline” industry, and so on. We do not seem to recognise that the capabilities are “cross industry” that the definitions we use no longer hold, if they ever did , beyond adding a bit of convenience to the language.
The lines are blurring further, rapidly and irrevocably.
Is Apple an electronics designer and manufacturer (Mac computers), a service provider (itunes) , or a product marketer (ipad)? My answer: They are all, and none of the above. Rather, Apple is a marketer that delivers its value proposition via a range of operational and sales channels that have nothing to do with the generally accepted definitions of industries. Certainly Apple has been able to leverage their collective imagination better than any other enterprise I can think of.
The next step is a truly scary one for many, the advent of 3-D printing.
Within a very short time, 3-D printers will be as available and cheap as desktop computers, all you need is a digital design file and a printer. We will be able to produce everything from simple household items to highly specified parts for our cars, produced in our kitchen.
The marvelous wind powered devices of designer Theo Jansen have been printed in miniature, and work just like the full sized ones, and dramatically make the point. If you can imagine it, you can now print it!
Manufacturing is about to go through a change as profound as that brought on by the steam engine.
20th century notions and boundaries to “manufacturing” are as outdated as a bow and arrow in a gunfight, so we must change the language and intellectual boundaries of the conversation if we are ever to make any sense of the dynamics at play.
Mar 27, 2013 | Branding, Customers, Marketing, Sales, Small business, Social Media
Things move on petty quickly.
It is just a few years ago that even ordinary websites had a reasonable chance of being noticed, and communicate something worthwhile. Not now, a site that just offers static information is as relevant as last weeks chip wrapper.
“Content” suddenly became the next big thing, useful information in graphic and video formats, links to other sites, and research reports to the wazoo, all offered in the interests of “engagement” of the reader. Still pretty useful, but the production of content has become so easy, that most of it around is just crap, and it takes effort to sort through it. Research comes from unknown, unqualified sources, video is largely of the result of a kid with a mobile, there is simply so much of it, that no longer does it easily fit the bill.
Social media of various types now fills the role of information, and engagement. Websites are rapidly becoming the business end of the sales process, and as such must be transactional, their relevance as purveyors of information, is rapidly eroding to that of relevance only in the sence of confirming terms of trade.
A website without a capacity to transact is like a fancy car without an engine, nice for enthusiasts to look at, but no good for getting the shopping.
Mar 26, 2013 | Branding, Marketing, Social Media
Everybody has something to say, and the democratisation of the web means everyone has the opportunity.
Just take a look at the twitter feeds of some of the big brands, some inane crap written by a 10 year old intellect can attract thousands of “likes”, and the wombats breed just to provide more of them.
So what?. Why should these big brands bother? Surely such nonsense detracts from their brand?
Well, to my mind they shouldn’t do it, building and maintaining a brand is hard enough without putting extra lead in the saddlebags.
On the contrary, the opportunity to say something of value, pass on some wisdom, offer useful advice is now easier than it has ever been. Those thoughts need to be heard, debated, and they add to our lives.
Just a pity that we have to wade through the mountains of crap, despite all the filtering and prioritisation tools available, to find the interesting stuff.
Mar 25, 2013 | Communication, Customers, Marketing, retail, Small business, Social Media
One of the foundations of mass marketing was to be able to segment your market, geographically, demographically, behaviorally, brand preferences, and so on.
In the old days of mass media, it was really the only way to target messages at those most likely to be receptive, match the media selection to the characteristics of your target market.
But what has happened in the social world of networked consumers and crowd sourced comment and content?
An acquaintance runs a wonderful patisserie in a rejuvenated inner city location. It is pricey, but the value is there, reflected in the range, artistic presentation, great service, and above all, pastries to die for. However, some of the comments on the review sites would lead to a conclusion that the products were overpriced, too fancy, and lacked character.
Standing in the queue on a Saturday morning just before Christmas, observing others, and listening to the comments, the penny dropped. Those in the queue were older, clearly successful, were regulars, and loved the place, whereas the casual buyer, the ones far more likely to leave a comment on a review site were most probably Uni students, on their way between the train station and the campus just down the road. These buyers were more liklely to want a cheap, filling, snack rather than a tasty work of art.
The lesson: Do not believe all your read on social media review sites, any more than you believe all you read in a politicians press release.
Mar 22, 2013 | Branding, Communication, Marketing, Social Media
Digital communication is now a major consideration in any marketing budget, depending on whose numbers you believe, digital may now be even bigger than “traditional” communication channels.
So how should you develop your creative and communication briefs?
- Concentrate on traditional channels and adapt for Digital?
- Focus on digital and use traditional as the adjunct?
- Split the budget and treat them separately, or consider the cart and horse to be the one integrated delivery vehicle?
Making these choices, deciding which is the horse, the one that provides the “grunt,” you need and requiring real feeding, and which is the cart, which just needs some maintanence, is the key decision. Then you need to decide how you are going to manage the processes of feeding and maintaining, as they require very different strategies and capabilities.
Traditional media is passive, one way, the objective is to disrupt to gain attention and only then deliver a message with no effective feedback mechanism.
Digital media is wholly different. It has the native capability to be two way, a “conversation,” it cannot disrupt as the initiative is with the receiver rather than the sender, the originator can micro-target to the level of individuals, and there are immediate and hugely detailed feedback loops.
All this means that the manner in which the proposition is presented is entirely different, passive, mass creative Vs a message demanding action of an individual.
When put like that, the dilemma becomes more transparent, relatively easily addressed by a few simple questions:
- Is it a commodity, mass market product, or are you building a market customer by customer?
- Are you aiming to build awareness amongst a wide market profile or engagement of a niche?
- Can you identify and target the behavioral characteristics of your target market, or just the demographic ones?
The answers to these questions will offer insight not just to which is the horse, but how much, and what it needs to be fed to deliver the optimum result.
