The new power of one

The power in commercial relationships has shifted dramatically since the net. It has removed the power previously held by companies and institutions and handed it to individuals who choose to use it.

No more can an enterprise afford to ignore or annoy an individual without cause, or even with cause, as the individual now has  the capacity to publicly respond with twitter, facebook, linked-in, et al, and have an impact inconceivable just a few years ago.

This is not evolution, it is revolution, as the constraints on the ability to communicate and coalesce around an issue is unprecedented, and represents a fundamental re-ordering of the balance of power. The  changes in the external environment are changing much, much quicker than the average organisation is able to change in anticipation, creating a significant short term risk for many of them. 

 

Few transaction costs = easy group formation = new corporate risk

Corporations default to functional silos, despite the efforts of most to recognise the horizontal cross functional nature of processes, the things that gets stuff done. This is because in the past, you required hands to move things around, make calls, stuff envelopes, travel, all adding to the cost of completion.

Individuals personal networks tend to also run  in silos, the football group, the school friends, workmates, and so on, but the demarcation is a bit more blurred than at work.

Social networking tools have further blurred the demarcation , and networks can go way beyond the face to face relationships of old, and those networks can be leveraged across many tipping points and considerable social energy can be built, simply by harnessing the dynamics of the group.

Corporations are coming around to this self-evident (if you happen to be under 35)fact, but they are largely run by people not engaged with social networks so the evolution is far quicker outside corporations than inside them. Remember the huge embarrassment of Nestle a while ago, in relation to use of non sustainable sources of Palm oil, embarrassment that could have been easily mitigated had someone in a senior position watched their own facebook site, twitter, or even listened to someone who was.

The formation of groups around a question, issue, or cause is suddenly quite easy, and for corporations adds a huge risk to their intangible assets, and they usually are blissfully unaware in the boardroom.

The risk can be mitigated, but it requires individual with the organisational power  to cede control of the details of “management” of the on line groups to individuals who are engaged in the processes, as the risks can emerge almost instantly, and requires instant response.

What next for “Free”?

As the marginal cost of transactions on the web approaches zero, more and more stuff is “free” . When something is given, the  act of giving usually sets up a dynamic of “obligation” on the part of the receiver.

This blog is published on WordPress, for free, the cost to WordPress of hosting my blog, and supplying me with the software is approaching zero.

At some point, I will probably want some features not offered for free. At that time, it is highly unlikely I will go anywhere but the upgrade button on the Blog dashboard, and then Wordpress will generate some revenue, and I will feel I have offered some return for the free use of the software and hosting to this point, as well as not having to climb the barriers to exit.

This dynamic is being repeated everywhere on the web, almost to the point of “free” being the generic price of many services, Wikipedia being the classic.

For marketers, the question is “what is better than free?”, how can we attract customers when free is no longer sufficiently distinctive to be attractive? This goes to the heart of how publishers, of all types, reconstruct their business model to extract a living as their consumer base gets increasingly used to getting their “product” for free.   

 

Innovation requires simplicity

Peter Drucker once said that innovation is the only sustainable competitive advantage, and most who have thought about it would agree.

However, in most situations, this commitment to innovation tends to result in more and more potential products and technical solutions, adding complication and cost to every business process.

By contrast, Apple does the opposite, led by Steve Jobs, Apple ruthlessly eliminates all but a very few, and then ensures that the products left on the list are done remarkably well, and remarkably differently.

In 1998 Jobs reduced the products in Apples inventory from 350 to 10, tough love that has resulted in the resources to redevelop the iPod, iPad, and iPhone, rather than spreading themselves thinly across the many products that they already had, and that beckoned.

To be remarkable, (remarkable is Seth Godin’s term, it works!) Apple has removed features, no buttons on a phone, no dials on an iPod, taking seriously the designers mantra that perfection in design is achieved when there is nothing superfluous to the functionality left to remove, rather than all that can be added has been.

 

Location of a consumers wallet

I am a member of three frequent flier programs, Qantas, Virgin and Singapore, and get frequent updates, offers, and spam from all three, all ignored.

I know where and why my business is split, but they do not, and none have ever asked me the question, although it would be very valuable information to have, not just for me, as my expenditure would hardly rate as significant, but at a macro level.  If they had the information, and could mine it, and develop programs that may make them more relevant to me, and presumably many other consumers.

Well, that is coming.

The emerging location tools of the mobile world are going to offer the possibility that Qantas will be able to track my presence in an airport and know when I am not booked to travel with them.

Intrusive perhaps, but valuable consumer share of wallet information if they cared to ask why I travelled with one and not another in any given circumstance.

Brand building brilliance.

The communication alternatives are mind-boggling today, but sometimes someone comes up with an innovative way to combine them. Imagine Social Responsibility Marketing linked with social networking and the broadcast media, backed by comment around the world, for what must be a pretty modest outlay compared to, say, a 30 second ad spot in the superbowl that few remember. Pretty cool!.

“Chalkbot” did it brilliantly for Nike during the recent Tour de France, just how you measure the impact is a tricky question, but the value must be huge, and it is going viral, so will multiply for Nike and cancer awareness over time. Next year will be “huger”

Nike is a  consistently brilliant marketer, they may have plenty of $ to splash around, but they just go to the essence of brand-building by grabbing people by the heart, not the wallet, and not letting go.