Are you a day trader or a marketer?

Are you a day trader or a marketer?

It is a paradox to me that we treat investments in capital equipment for our businesses and various financial instruments for our own wealth generation, as items on a balance sheet. By contrast, we treat marketing investments, and particularly those made in various forms of communication, as discretionary items recorded in the profit and loss account as an expense.

Nothing is more critical to the long term commercial health of an enterprise than the investment in marketing. Identifying, communicating, creating transactions and building relationships with customers.

There are 3 basic strategies considered by financial investors

  1. Index investment. This is a low risk strategy, sticking to stocks that reflect the particular index against the performance measures that will be applied. The most usual are the reserve bank interest rates, and the top 200 stocks.
  2. Arbitrage investment. Essentially this is a short term strategy that assumes the investor is smarter than the market. It involves a lot of buying and selling of stocks, essentially bets that the short term is higher or lower than the current. Over the long term, there is plenty of research around that indicates that the performance is around the major stock indices. This is also a high cost strategy, in that the constant trading incurs transaction fees, usually not included in the published performance metrics.
  3. Value investment. Investing for value is a strategy that involves taking a long term view of the businesses in which you invest. This means you engage deeply, not just with the numbers, but with the management and culture, as well as taking a view of the marketplace in which they compete. It is a ‘filtering’ strategy, one where a lot of research boils down the potential targets to a very few, in which you take a significant position. It is a focussing of resources at the specific points where you see there is long term returns available, and are prepared to accept the vagaries of the short term focussed market gyrations.

If you apply a similar frame to the manner in which businesses make investments in marketing, there is a remarkable similarity.

  1. Index marketing. Doing what everyone else is doing, being average, a follower, and risk minimiser. It also ensures you do not stand out from the crowd, which in a cut-throat marketing world means nobody notices or cares about you, so perhaps you should save your money.
  2. Arbitrage marketing.  Those following this strategy are just applying tactical actions to situations they see, there is no underpinning strategy, just advertising and promotion, usually driven by a budget that has to be spent, and KPI’s that measure the activity, not the harder to measure  outcomes of that activity. The driving word is ‘campaign’. A string of tactical activities will be seen as a campaign, and usually there is little flow from one campaign to another. This tendency has been accelerated to stupid proportions by digital, where the cycle time of a campaign, limited as they are, has reduced from months to days. No longer are we looking for the ‘big idea’ that will engage and motivate customers over a long period, we are looking for 10 ideas for the Facebook and Instagram posts in the next 24 hours.
  3. Value marketing. Successful marketing requires a solid strategy, well executed with a long term perspective. Over time, you will fiddle with the details as you become more familiar with the minutiae involved, and you fine tune the application of funds as you learn, but it is a multi-year commitment, not a short campaign, and certainly  not a few ‘cat photos’ on Instagram. Such ‘cat photos’ may be a tiny part of the tactical execution, but are never a component of the strategy. This takes time, resources, and most importantly, a laser focus on what is important to the selected group of primary customers. Over time, you communicate your value proposition that defines why they should do business with you rather than someone else, and do so at a price that delivers you a premium return, while delivering them premium value.  Then you retain their business, increasing your share of wallet, innovating, reducing customer churn, all of which delivers sustainable returns. 

 

If any of the above arguments hold true, then it must be that the measures we use to make decisions about our financial selves should be able to be adapted to the investments we make in marketing.

Step one is to see it as a long term investment in prosperity, and not a short term expense to be reported and forgotten, hidden in a monthly P&L.  

Step two is to have a robust, well thought out, and agile strategy.

Step three is to implement relentlessly.

None of this is easy, there are no templates of any value around that you can just download and apply. The requirement for success is the wisdom that comes with long and deep experience, not some superficial knowledge of the advertising algorithms in Facebook.

 

Header cartoon credit xkcd.com

 

 

Does your packaging tell a story?

Does your packaging tell a story?

You can have the best product in the world, but if the packaging is inconsistent, out of place, bland, and does not accurately describe the product, or what a consumer might be expecting, it will not get bought.

Jeans and T-shirt will normally not get you entry to a black tie event!.

As I wander around supermarkets, I regularly see packaging that has  been designed to appeal to the designer, or perhaps  the product manager, rather than telling a story about the product to the consumer, the one being assailed by messages inside and outside the store.

The design may be artful, it might meet the regulatory standards, and it almost certainly has a logo prominent somewhere. However, does it stand out on shelf, does it deliver a message to a busy and stressed buyer who does not really care about your artful design, but just wants to get what she (and it is still almost always a she) needs, so she can get on with it, and get out of the store as quickly as possible.   

A really good test is to put a package in front of people who do not read English, and have a translator ask them to describe the product, and what benefit it delivers. Fail that test, and back to the drawing board you go.

Pack design is a part of a process, the make or break part when it comes to consumer trial.  Developing and launching a product, even a line extension is a significant investment, don’t you think it should be given the best chance possible to succeed, to be selected off the shelf, and to deliver a return?

Next time do not do the pack design at the end of the development process, do it at the beginning. Sending it out to a ‘designer’ at the end of the development process, looking for a quick turnaround and cheap price,  could end up being the most expensive piece of design you ever did. Failure to grab attention, and encourage customer trial will make that cheap, quick, but artful pack design, a really dumb idea.   

When you need help thinking this all through, call me.

PS. Bet nobody nicks my grandaughters lunch again!!

 

Have we only ourselves to blame for ‘The Bug?’

Have we only ourselves to blame for ‘The Bug?’

We have a political situation of our own making.

It is very hard to convince people to invest against the possibility of something that may happen at some time in the future. The cost of the investment is immediate and measurable, the benefit unknown, and perhaps some time in the future.

In a democracy it is very hard to get people to vote for something they cannot see and feel, immediately. We moan, and I am a chief moaner, about the lack of foresight and planning evident, that has enabled the bug to run riot through our economies, but do we only have ourselves to blame?

There are three types of actions that can be taken by any organisation, public or otherwise.

  1. Reactive. These are decisions and actions taken after an event.
  2. Responsive. Actions and decisions taken as events are unfolding
  3. Pre-emptive. Actions and decisions taken in anticipation of an event designed to mitigate the impact.

If we were to categorise the performance of our various governments over the past 12 months, I would say that in relation to the fires that started in September last year, they were reactive, and even that is being very kind. The floods, now almost forgotten in February, the response was again reactionary, and sadly lacking substance. In relation to the Corona bug, they seem to have done better and been responsive, taking decisive action as events unfolded, and being prepared to adjust the response as more data becomes available.

Coming out of this, I would like to see some sort of pre-emptive actions taken to mitigate the impacts of the next catastrophe, whether it be another bug, fire, flood, or financial meltdown. As a country we have to build our operational resilience, meaning the ability to invest so that the impacts do not drown us.

Do this, and we will be a much stronger nation. Alas, in a democracy this is really hard, as it requires a collective desire to invest now without any idea of the outcome or payback, and electorates are not good at this.

This difference neatly explains the quick and substantial reaction to the current Corona crisis, but our almost total of lack planning and investment to mitigate the impact of climate change.

The current idea of a location app on our phones is a great example of the dilemma we face.

It makes absolute sense that we are able to track the movements of people in the face of a highly infectious disease, to see with whom they interact, even by chance, so that we can throw a ring fence around the bug. Most would probably agree,  but the downside is that we do not trust the politicians and ‘forces of evil’ to turn the thing off, and leave it off, when the crisis is over, thereby impinging on our rights to privacy.

In a democracy, like , this will probably mean a very good idea is thrown away. However, I bet that in a different system, it would be embraced, as public sentiment would not matter, and is kept private anyway as a means to stay out of the spotlight, which can be a dangerous place to be.

 

Header cartoon: courtesy David Rowe, AFR.

 

 

How do you lead effectively in a crisis?

How do you lead effectively in a crisis?

 

By definition, a crisis is something that has to be managed weekly, if not daily. There is no time for long winded discussions about strategy, competitive reviews, investments in technology transformations, the newest shiny idea someone has. While these are profoundly important they are the framework against which to measure the daily and weekly performance to the plan that will, if implemented, deliver commercial life. If you do not have such a framework, you will be in far greater trouble than you may otherwise have been. However, ensuring that at least the day to day decisions you now make are consistent with each other, and lead to a simple, single objective will be a good start.

 

The leadership style in this case of a crisis is different from the  strategic leadership necessary to position for the long term. Churchill failed as a leader in every situation other than the crisis in which Britain found itself in 1939, in which he excelled. He communicated the objective, to beat the Nazis, nothing else mattered, and everything was measured against that single objective.

 

There are many examples from more recent times. Steve Jobs taking over Apple a few weeks from bankruptcy, and turning it around into the cash powerhouse it is today. Jeff Bezos buying the Washington Post as a personal investment (as distinct from one Amazon made) as the corpse was about to be lowered into the ground, and remaking it as a journalistic powerhouse.  Alan Mulally doing the double act, leading  Boeing  through the tragedy of 9/11, then repeating the dose by saving a dead man walking Ford, during a time further made challenging by the 2008 financial crash. You might even add Kevin Rudd to the list, ensuring Australia escaped that 2008 crash relatively unscathed.

So, how do you do it?

Simple to say, hard to do: 2 rules only:

  • Have a plan with a simple, single objective
  • Work the plan relentlessly. This means daily, weekly, monthly review and rework of the plan at every level of implementation and accountability.

 

The plan has to be articulated at the macro level, and progressively broken down into the micro, so that the role of every person, and element of the plan, plays in the achievement of the objective is transparent.

I call it a ‘nested plan,’ best visualised by the typical organisation structure diagram. It replaces the names in the pyramid with objectives, and the cascading individual plans and personnel accountabilities required to achieve the cascading objectives, culminating in the overall objective at the top.

 

Every plan review meeting, from the shop floor to the executive suite should follow a consistent format, which enables single minded focus on the single objective. That format should be something like:

  • Department plan
  • Plan status
  • Forecast
  • Opportunities and risks
  • Period over period summary, qualitative as well as quantitative
  • Status of any items requiring attention from outside the power or capability of the meeting group.

Best practice for meetings of this type is well documented, following well understood principals of psychology and accountability, but in summary:

  • The above format, or your version of it, acts as the agenda
  • The plan status is delivered by the responsible person, or multiple persons.
  • The review is not a forum for resolving problems, just articulating them. Resolution is outside the meetings, but reported back.
  • There is a consistent format to individual presentations, again following the format above.
  • Never shoot the messenger of bad news, allocate a priority to defining the problem and accountability for suggesting solutions, to be reported in the subsequent meetings.
  • Concise questions that serve to clarify and quantify are encouraged from all participants.
    Meetings are open to any from outside the specific group who may have a valuable or even different perspective to offer.
  • Meetings are absolutely transparent to all.

There will be resistance to the implementation, people are not generally used to the levels of accountability and transparency a system of this type delivers. However, once you get it rolling, it builds a momentum of its own, as people take responsibility for their part in delivering the objective.

 

The header photo is of the priorities set by Alan Mulally on taking the reins at Ford. For the whole of his tenure, the process above was relentless implemented, and Ford came though the 2008 crash not requiring any government assistance, and went on to regain its significant and profitable position in the auto industry.

How to insulate your business from the inevitable recession

How to insulate your business from the inevitable recession

 

The inevitability of a bad deterioration in the economy is now absolute. No more fluffing around with nice, reassuring words, the  consequences of this Corona pandemic will be an economic and social clusterf**k.

So, in these circumstances, how do you insulate your business from the effect, and even make some competitive and strategic headway?

Five things I have learned over my 45 years in business, the last 25 of them helping SME’s improve, and from time to time, survive, often in adverse circumstances. Over the course of that 45 years, I have lived through a number of events that caused significant distress at the time, and resulted in massive changes to the way we live and work. However, none I suspect will be as cataclysmic as this current crisis. Nevertheless, the lessons from the past can be applied to the present, so long as we do so recognising they will not be just copies, they will have their own characteristics, and some nasty traps for the unwary. 

 

Have a strong balance sheet.

This means having cash reserves. In tough times, nothing is as valuable as cash, it delivers flexibility and options, without which you are at the mercy of others. In days of low interest rates as we have, many have been seduced by the siren song of leverage. It is the ‘ make your assets work harder‘ pitch of those in the financial leverage game. Leverage however, works both ways, and in a downturn, accelerates the rate at which you go broke.

If you are leveraged, deleverage as hard and fast as possible, and hoard your cash.

 

Have a plan

While plans are made to be broken, at least you are able to track where the divergence happens, figure out why, and how to do it better next time. Planning effectively requires that you have a common strategic objective, broken down into ‘nested’ tactical objectives. This cascading of objectives ensures that priorities are clear, that the required resources and capabilities are delivered to the points they are needed to achieve the objectives, and deliver the best return.

 

Have a spring clean

Every enterprise carries the imprint of its past, often deeply buried. Many should be jettisoned  during the bad times, when it is easier, which has the effect of delivering a leaner more responsive enterprise as things improve. Apply the Pareto principal to everything you have and do: customers, processes, product lines, employees, inventories, fixed assets,  and suppliers. Clean out the ones that do not deliver value in excess of cost, and that are inconsistent with the more focussed strategy you will have developed. Hidden deep in most businesses are transaction costs, which are almost always a source of significant cost reductions  and ‘no-cost’ capacity increases. Eliminating the friction that generates these costs, will save time and money, deliver ‘no added cost’ capacity, and make customers very happy.

A question I ask my clients at some point is: ‘What would a VC do if they bought this business? Everyone understands a VC investment is always on the basis of a fast profit. Invest, optimise, sell. The question and subsequent conversation focusses the mind on what actually generates the value customers are prepared to pay for. Sometimes there are regulatory costs, and there will be a core of necessary cost that enables operations, but the rest is on the block. 

 

Focus on getting money in, not just cutting costs

Cost cutting is the reflexive response to a cash crisis, and short term it works, but not in the longer term. To use a sporting analogy, you cannot win a game by being defensive, the very best you can do is have a draw. Having a draw in these circumstances means you go down the gurgler with all  the others. No, you have to find a way to expand, get new money in the door.

 

Let the inmates run the asylum.

Post this Corona crisis, the world will not just go back to the way it was. Many of the changes necessary to beat this thing will be baked into the way we interact with each other. Work and the expectations of our institutions will be forever altered. Setting out to manage these changed dynamics without the appropriate level of change in management processes and behaviour will lead to inevitable failure. Following are a few thoughts on the pivotal changes necessary

  • Remote work. The most obvious is that we will all be more attuned to working remotely. While it was an increasing trend prior to the bug, it has become a tsunami in the past few weeks and it will not go into reverse. Therefore, the management  task is how to harness and leverage the capabilities of a remote workforce. Most senior managers are of the vintage that did  not grow up with digital as an automatic and natural part of their lives, and for many this is a scary prospect. Most have accommodated the digital revolution in some way, but the institutional cultural barriers that remain in their hands, need to be dismembered.  
  • KPI’s need to be set on outcomes, not activity. No longer will presence at a desk, and seemingly adequate levels of activity be enough, it is the outcomes that will dominate. This change requires a whole rethink of the manner in which performance is measured in most organisations.
  • Management behaviour has to change. The best leaders and managers BB (Before Bug) spent a significant part of their time ‘walking around’, and communicating face to face. Time spent understanding the problems and opportunities for individuals, and groups of individuals at every level paid dividends. This face to face, personal interaction will no longer be practical. Leaders need to develop processes that deliver that sense of personal interaction to employees and contractors operating remotely. This means they have to have in place systems that deliver emotional security and stability while focussing individual and group effort on achieving a common goal.
  • Transparency creates accountability. Instinctively, we all know this, but for so long, information has provided power, so it has become the default to hang onto it. No longer will this be the case. Leaders will create accountability by being transparent themselves, and forcing that transparency through the organisation structures to the lowest levels. This change will be very uncomfortable for many, and will lead to a wholesale turnover in older managers who simply cannot make the changes necessary. This will lead to a social challenge for us all. However, those managers will be replaced by younger ones who are more attuned to accountability based on outcomes rather than presence. All those who have not read Ray Dalio’s book ‘Principles’, should use this downtime to do so. It lays out a comprehensive and compelling argument for what Dalio calls ‘radical transparency’. This will become, I think, the emerging  default.
  • Communicate, communicate, communicate. The options for communication have exploded, in the post bug world leaders will be using all of them, continuously. The communication is an essential ingredient in the mix of creating transparency, accountability, and focus on a common objective. It will require entirely new processes and habits to be developed, replacing old ones, and a radical reordering of the priorities of many managers.
  • Creativity will flourish, if you let it. Crises always lead to creative solutions to existing problems, and innovation to create opportunities in areas not previously recognised. The two world wars last century led to an explosion of technology, Microsoft was launched during the 1970’s oil crisis, the iPod launched in the aftermath of the dot com bust, and the 2008 meltdown led to Uber and Airbnb. All of these were spawned outside any corporate boundaries, except perhaps the iPod, but Apple was as good as broke at the time, so had little to lose. 

When you need the wisdom of having lived through it all before, and learnt from the experience, give me a call.