Oct 8, 2009 | Management, Small business, Strategy
As we appear to be coming out of the worst of the downturn, as highlighted by the .25% increase in the prime rate day before yesterday, it would be a mistake to think that the good times are back without trying to learn from the pain of the last 18 months.
Across my little group of clients, a number of things are clear:
- Cash is king, and will remain so for some time. If you have it, great opportunities will arise, if you do not have it, life is very difficult indeed.
- Customers buy on price unless there is a compelling, relevant, and engaging value story attached to your product. Where that story exists, price is not an issue. The middle ground appears to have been significantly eroded, never was branding so important, and at the other end of the spectrum, without a brand, you need to be the lowest cost supplier to survive, and there is always someone who is about to supplant you as the lowest cost supplier.
- It is uncertain how the government stimulus package will impact over the coming months. Confidence appears to be pretty fragile, and looming are the political difficulties inherent in pulling back on announced initiatives, alongside the difficulties of a ballooning deficit. Do not rely on the public stimulus as anything more than a transient, one-off cash generator.
- Information moves at the speed of the mouse, and is totally insensitive to your situation. Spin is easily recognised for what it is, and attracts the cynical response we all think it deserves, and good news or bad, your opportunity to manage it is greatly reduced, so you better be under-promising & over-delivering, or you will find yourself left on the shelf.
- Creativity and innovation were never more important, being like everyone else is a recipe for a slow commercial suffocation.
- Focus on fewer things, and make sure they are strategically the key items. Focus makes everything you need to do easier to execute, but it is very hard to stop being attracted by the siren song of expediency. Resist the temptation, remembering the old adage that if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Oct 6, 2009 | Leadership, Management, Strategy
One of the most widely known strategy tools is the SWOT, but it is widely misunderstood.
Often there is confusion about what is a strength, and what is an opportunity, similarly, what is a weakness, and what is a threat.
Strengths and weaknesses are internal to the business, they are under the control of those in the business, and a strength is not just something you do well, that is like having a watch that tells the time, it is something that makes your business distinctive.
Threats and opportunities are a result of external conditions, and usually there is little a business can do to create them, the best they can do is anticipate and manage the adverse impacts, and leverage the opportunities.
Most businesses automatically set out to build on their existing strengths, when often improving on their weaknesses offers a better return on the resource investment necessary. Turning a weakness into a strength also has the potential to create surprise, and the resulting competitive edge, simply because it is unexpected.
Sep 22, 2009 | Change, Innovation, Leadership, Strategy
There is a growing trend driven by the difficult times for management to set very big goals (Big Hairy Audacious Goals… BHAG),and hope to create the focus necessary to achieve the BHAG outcome.
Often however, the opposite appears to occur, as those in the organization charged with the execution of the plans simply do not believe the objectives are achievable.
Sometimes this is just that the objective is divorced from the reality of the competitive environment, sometimes it is simply a failure of leadership, but most often, it is just that the goals emerge from wishful thinking that puts off difficult decisions for a bit longer.
JFK said in 1961 “I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon, and returning him safely to earth. ” This is probably the most famous BHAG of all. It is a statement in a single sentence that contains the three elements of a successful BHAG. It creates the vision of where we want to go, the measures of success are clearly articulated, and everyone recognised the resources necessary to achieve the task would be made available, because the President had committed himself to the goal.
No room for wishful thinking or bland leadership in that statement, and it was achieved. Would it have been achieved, had any of the three conditions been missed? Probably not, because it would have just been the wishful musings of the President.
Sep 20, 2009 | Management, Marketing, Strategy
Modeling scenarios has become a pretty big business, but notice that you often get only the numbers out of the end of the model, rarely the assumptions that drive the outcomes, and rarely a range of options.
This has been brought home again as I read the “strategic plan” completed at great expense on behalf of an industry body that covers a wide range of individual sub industries, each with their own characteristics and issues, albeit with some common drivers such as water availability, labour availability and capital generation.
Consultants at great expense produced a model that churned out numbers supposed to show the way forward, but which common sense says has a lot of dodgy assumptions going in, because what is coming out is unusable by any of the individual enterprises in the industries, or the industry bodies supposed to assist them.
Most commercial models I see set out to prove a point of view, and that point of view usually aligns with some preconceived notion of what the outcome should be. In this above case, the outcome was driven by the consultants need to tell the industry body what they wanted, not necessarily what they needed to know.
Scientific method by contrast works in the opposite way, it sets out to disprove a hypothesis, and by that means, advance our knowledge a bit, as you reconsider the hypotheses on the basis on one more thing you know does not work.
Bit more time consuming, but outcomes that are untainted by an existing perspective.
Numbers are only as good as the assumptions that drive them, so next time you are given an argument backed by numbers, don’t look at the numbers, have someone explain and debate the assumptions that have driven them.
Sep 6, 2009 | Innovation, Leadership, Marketing, Strategy
Then notion of “industrial commons” as a metaphor for the clustering of firms of a similar type in an area put forward by Gary Pisano of Harvard Business School is immediately attractive, as it easily explains things we have all seen, without recognising the implications.
Pre industrial revolution, the notion of commons applied to the common land on which all villagers could graze their cattle, or carry out other communal activity.
In the post industrial age, it is about the manner in which particular skills assemble over time in a location that enables them to leverage the proximity of the intellect into goods and services. Silicon valley is the best known example, but there are many others.
This puts a simple platform under many publicly funded efforts to enhance “clusters” in my area of work, particularly in the production of high value specialty food products.
The growth of Orange in the central west of NSW as a fine food centre is supported by a wide range of agriculture, from broad acre cropping to intensive horticulture and wine making, further supported by mining operation which give some scale to the engineering services sector, and the University offering agricultural science amongst a wide range of disciplines. By contrast, nearby Mudgee has all the agricultural advantages, possibly more, but lacks the mining, university and the attraction to general tourism and passing trade, and so the clustering of food value adding has failed to gather the momentum of Orange.
The challenge in creating a “common” is the timeframe of the return on investment in the necessary infrastructure. Governments create and abandon a development program in sync with the electoral and economic cycles, commons will take a generation at least to gain traction, so governments should not be surprised to see their efforts largely fail, whilst next door, a “cluster” will evolve with little or no engagement of public funds beyond basic services, simply because it has all the natural conditions to thrive.
Sep 2, 2009 | Marketing, Strategy
Customers do not always fall into the easy demographic segments so favored by marketers. They think, and react to a range of stimuli that have little to do with their age, sex, family situation, education, where they live, how much they earn, and what job they do.
Each consumer is a market of one, and they must be won over by your brand and product offering, so make sure you really understand why they behave the way they do.
So called “new media” offers a channel to communicate with consumers individually rather than on mass, this does not make it easier than the old “mass media”, if anything it is harder, and it is certainly different.
