Nov 6, 2013 | Alliance management, Branding, Marketing, retail, Small business
The agricultural supply chain that has dominated the way we get our food has evolved as a fragmented, opaque series of transactions that occur to fill the gap between the producer and the consumer. Many of these transactions add no value to the consumer, rather, they serve to capture value for some link in the supply chain.
As they add no value, it is fair to ask “are they necessary”, and in many cases the answer will be “No”, in others it will be that whilst it may add no value, it is a necessary cost, like transport.
Were we to set out to re-engineer the supply chain with consumer value as the driving force, what would we change?
Well, a fair bit, much of it as a result of the communication and data transfer capabilities that have exploded in the last decade. There is now absolutely no reason a grower cannot see where his product goes, each transformational stage, every point at which it is moved, and the costs and margins involved.
Whilst there are sensitive commercial implications in all this, the technical capability is there, and using those capabilities to eliminate costs and margins that do not serve the consumer will increasingly become the focus of competitive activity and innovation.
Wool is the archetypal Australian commodity, and it is also representative of the worst of commodity “marketing” where each link in a very complicated operational chain is a set of strand-alone transactions. However, even in this conservative, institutionalised chain, there are rays of light, enterprises like WoolConnect that have evolved over a considerable period, to deliver a transparent, collaborative chain that has eliminated much of the cost that adds no consumer value, becoming far more productive in the process.
I am working with a small group of horticulture growers and specialist retailers in Sydney on a pilot, a transparent, demand driven chain that responds to consumers, not what growers have on the floor, or what wholesalers think they can squeeze a good margin out of, but real demand. It is a fascinating exercise, one that is hopefully successful and commercially scalable.
This will deliver tree ripened fruit to consumers the day after it has been picked, and similarly, veggies harvested this morning, on your plate tomorrow.
“Sydney Harvest” brand, get used to seeing it in your greengrocer.
Innovation in a horticulture supply chain, who would have thought??
Oct 29, 2013 | Change, Management, Social Media
There have always been gatekeepers, those people who make the decisions about what you see, what you have the opportunity to buy, and weather or not you can participate.
The supermarket buyer determines what goes on the shelves, a faceless committee determines what constitutes the levels of “obscene” and therefore what is able to be published, and the bloke running the big dipper determines that no-one under 5 feet can take the ride. The examples go on.
The web is usually cited as the medium that has democratised information, made it available to all with a computer, and that is true, but it has also introduced a new form of gatekeeper: the algorithm.
Algorithms are simply instructions that determine what computers do with a piece of information, or set of instructions, they are the guts of everything we now do with computers.
Facebooks “Edgerank” determines what you see on your newsfeed based on an algorithm, Google uses algorithms to determine the order of responses to a search, sign up to a blog site, and an algorithm sends you a “thanks for joining” note of some sort, and it is the application of algorithms to the mass of so called Big Data that is enabling the extraction of individual behavioral information.
Don’t kid yourself, the gatekeepers are still there, and probably more influential than ever, just better hidden, so you better understand how they work.
Oct 28, 2013 | Alliance management, Communication, Management
A story on myself.
I am in the middle of a small project that requires considerable collaboration amongst people not used to collaborating. Always challenging.
In a conversation over the weekend with an old mate, wise in the ways of start-ups, he offered me a gentle shove by saying:
“Sometimes people spend huge amounts of time and energy getting their ducks in a row. Pity it does not really matter what they look like, it is what you do with the ducks that counts”.
Ouch.
What are you doing with your ducks?
Oct 9, 2013 | Customers, Management, Marketing, Personal Rant
Definitions of marketing abound. A bit like a scratch in the morning, everybody has one!
The lament of President Roosevelt that if you had 7 economists in a room, you had 8 opinions, is equally true for marketers, except that to date, most have used smoke and mirrors and snake-oil rather than data to support an opinion. Most usually, you get the “5 P’s” regurgitated as a definition of marketing, easy to remember, but unfortunately irrelevant since the time of Don Draper.
Asked a few weeks ago what my definition was, I said “Marketing is the identification, development, protection, and leveraging of competitive advantage” To me, this covers all the elements of marketing process, collaboration, customer value, management discipline, and innovation that go to make up modern marketing.
Whilst the context of every marketing challenge differs, and the potential solutions numerous, the discipline necessary to tease out the core issues are pretty consistent.
As it happens, a day or so later, I came across an alternative definition, expressed as a formula that I also like very much:
Marketing = the creation of unique value.
That seems to say it all, and very simply.
What is yours??
Sep 6, 2013 | Governance, Management
How often have you been in a position of trying to get something done in the face of an illogical or bureaucratic impediment ?
It is enormously frustrating, Authority being exercised.
On the other hand when faced with complexity, ambiguity, or technology beyond our knowledge and understanding, sensible people seek advice from an authority, someone who knows more than us, and can clarify and explain.
This person often has no authority, but is an authority.
So often these two things get tangled up. Someone “in authority” exercises that authority as would “an authority”, and the outcome is usually rubbish.
As management of our institutions has become flatter, more collaborative and individually accountable, this distinction has become more important as those with the authority are less and less likely to also be an authority on any given topic.
Failure to recognise the distinction is a huge burden on productivity.
Sep 2, 2013 | Communication, Management, Small business, Social Media
Digital technology has offered all of us an astounding range of opportunities to challenge and interact with our social environment, creating as we go. Gary Hamel has summarised them into a “5 C” list,:
Contribution
Connection
Creation
Choice
Challenge.
You read them, you just know the truth of it, but the next step, the really hard one, is how to harness the potential energy unleashed by these revolutions.
As a consultant to small businesses, I find no lack of energy, determination, and intelligent, informed risk taking, but I do find that the digital revolution has marched past the capabilities of many of the established businesses, and as time passes, the gap just becomes wider.
Recognising the presence of the capability gap, and finding a way to bridge it is rapidly becoming the most significant challenge faced by SME’s. Until that bridging has happened, digital is a millstone rather than a freedom, and freedom feels great!.
Go for it.
