Print or electronic, not really either/or

    A Wall Street Journal op-ed by Eric Schmidt, chairman of Google  argues that the demise of printed media, particularly newspapers and magazines is as much a result of their own hubris as it is the advent of new media, and that the opportunities for journalism have flourished rather than diminished.

    Fairfax have just announced that the outcomes of a strategic review conducted by McKinsey will result in significant changes to their commercial profile over time, with greater emphasis on electronic media. About time they woke up, having lost huge slabs of classified advertising, their “Rivers of Gold” revenue streams, to specialist web sites like “Car Sales”, “Seek” and others. The tenor of the public announcements still smells of them seeing electronic publishing as a competitive force, rather than a very different but  complementary one that will not go away.

    Print has lost its immediacy over a long time, first to radio, then TV, more latterly the web, but the process has not been one that should have taken them by surprise, the challenge is to harness the fundamental two differences the web has enabled:

  1. Anyone can be a publisher now, in a variety of formats from print to photographic  and video.
  2. The whole communication process is now 2 way, hugely networked and fragmented, no longer a one way broadcast, the source of Fairfax’s success last century. 
  3. My instinct is that it is too late for incremental change to their business model, even at a rapid rate, the game has moved on too far for them to recapture the fortunes of the past. Glad I am not a shareholder, although Fairfax chairman  Roger Corbett has a track record in instituting rapid improvement that generates great returns.

     

Sell the problem

Watching The Gruen Transfer a couple of weeks ago, one of the panelists quoted one of the oldest adages in marketing, ‘Sell the problem” as if it was a revelation. Fact is, addressing the problem is often forgotten as marketers become so entranced by the features of their products they forget to define the reason somebody would buy it.

People do not buy solutions to problems until they see the solution as costing less than managing the ongoing costs and inconvenience the problem generates, it therefore follows that the best way to sell is to  develop the understanding of the relative size of the problem to which you have the solution.

This is the basis of “SPIN” selling, (Situation, Problem, Implication, Need pay-off) which is still the best sales book ever written, outlining a selling process that focuses on  what a sale delivers to the buyer, and the best way to get there.

 

 

Mutuality and network development

 

Social networks have boomed, tools to enable the networks abound, MySpace, twitter, face book et al being the most  well known, but many more fail than succeed, and they do so based on the degree of mutuality that exists.

Bear with me here.

Imagine 2 people who have $10 to distribute between them, one has the power to divide the money any way he likes, the other has just one thing, the right to accept or veto the deal for them both.

Rational economics would suggest that the holder of the veto would accept any deal that has him better off beyond the inconvenience of saying yes or no, say 2 cents, as both parties will be better off with a yes. However, experiments consistently demonstrate that the second person will veto any offer he sees as unfair, resulting in both parties losing, and this “fairness” point kicks in around a 70/30 split.

This implies there is a deep willingness to punish unfairness, even at personal cost, and that there is a strong  emotional dimension to decision making, something very hard for economists to take account of in their models.

This emotional dimension underpinning behavior has profound implications for the way we should be thinking about the development of networks, irrespective of weather they are social, commercial or political ones.

Social networking works because there is an unspoken deal in place, which promises mutuality, Wikipedia being a shining example, there appears to be no control  and there isn’t, control is exercised by the “wiki community” by virtue of their ability to remove any incorrect, irrelevant, or corruptive content, the access to the edit key which is easier to exercise than the effort required to post something, keeps things on track.  Wikipedia in its earliest incarnation was a failure, as it left control with a small group of expert editors and contributors, with nothing left for the community which then failed to show up, as the “mutuality deal” was not in place.

Much of my work is with farmer groups, and the greatest challenge in the formative stages of getting a group “over the line” is the notion of mutuality, and how the group coalesces around a source of that mutuality, then finds ways to self regulate, if it is to be successful. 

 

 

Social Capital revisited

It occurred to me that during the recent election campaign, and subsequent “Phony Government” that  both sides over-used the term “Social Capital“, as well as mis-using it. Whilst it was not one of the hollow slogans of the campaign, it got a pretty fair run as each side tried to give their “policies” substance.

Social capital is created when a person contributes without any expectation of reward, it is just the right thing to do for the group, and for that sense of well being that individuals feel but do not often articulate. This giving creates a sense of mutual obligation, which is the glue that holds social groups together.

The same dynamic is at work in collaborative systems, if you put in, the sense of obligation is created, and others join the effort. Commercial collaboration has at its heart making a bob, but the social aspects of the collaboration process are ignored or under-estimated at the peril of the collaborative project.

For a number of years I have looked after the grass courts at my local tennis club. It takes some time, it is entirely voluntary, and I do  it simply because I enjoy playing the game on grass, the costs of professional maintenance are way beyond the capacity of a small club to fund, and once the grass is replaced or let go to become a cow paddock, it will never come back, and few would want that to happen. In this case, perhaps the mutual bit comes in when other club members are still prepared to play with me in my tennis dotage, which is sometimes a bit closer than I would like.

 

The web laboratory

Product optimisation is not product discovery, the techniques to get the best results differ, usually markedly, as the challenge to collect data to mitigate risk for entirely new products is substantially more difficult than collecting the same data for what is effectively a range extension . 

However, in a web environment, experimentation is becoming easier and easier with the Google analytic tools now freely available, so product optimisation is easier and quicker than ever, to the extent that there is no excuse not to use them. The same tools also make collecting data on new products, almost  as easy, so long as an “experiment” can be set up.

However, outside the web environment, where the results are not so immediate or transparent, a bit of creative thought will open up ways to use the tools of the web to track test markets, early adopter customer feedback and reactions, service difficulties, unexpected uses that evolve, and the myriad of other factors at play in a genuinely new product, it just takes a bit more effort to dream up and implement the experiment.

Lessons from Shakespeare

Many companies face the challenge of commercial sustainability in mature markets, with declining patronage, increasing costs, and often a fatalistic view of the future.

Last year, I went with a couple of my kids to a performance of ‘A midsummer nights dream” in the  Sydney Domain. Wonderful!.

This performance recognises there is an untapped market for these wonderful plays amongst people who would be unlikely to be theatre goers in the “normal” sense,  i.e., they do not subscribe to a theatre season, or frequent Shakespeare performances, but the less formal, relatively cheap experience of seeing a classic comedy play under the stars, enjoying a picnic on a summer evening is irresistible to some of those missed by traditional theatre marketing.

What a great way to introduce new customers to Sir Bill, and perhaps convert them to regulars, opening new avenues for exploration, a lesson for others in mature markets?.