Tag: strategy

  • Thinking beyond the group

    Thinking beyond the group

    It’s nice and comfortable living in an echo chamber and we’re all guilty of it one way or another. An example of how insular echo chambers can be are two surveys done by UK company Apollo Research on who UK and US tech writers follow on social media.

    The answer was each other, with most tech writers following a common core of twenty in the UK and thirty in the US. Basically the groups are talking to each other which explains how technology stories tend to gain momentum as variations on the same stories feed through the network.

    While technology journalists are bad for this, it could be argued their political colleagues are far more guilty of this group think as their working in close quarters makes them even more insular and inward looking. That explains much of the political reporting we see today which often seems divorced from the real world concerns of voters or challenges facing governments.

    For all of us, not just journalists, it’s easy to become trapped in our own little echo chambers and find it harder to think outside the pack as the web and platforms like Facebook deliver us the information we and our friends find confirms our own biases.

    Clearly, thinking with the pack creates a  lot of risks and for businesses also raises opportunities. At a time of fast moving technology and falling barriers to entry, thinking outside the prevailing group could even be a good survival strategy.

    A good example of industry group think is the US motor industry of the 1970s where they dismissed Japanese competitors as being cheap and substandard – similar to how many think about China today – yet by the end of the decade Japan’s automakers had captured most of the world’s market.

    On a national level, Australia is a good example of dangerous groupthink as up until three years ago the consensus among governments, public servants, economists and business leaders was the China resources boom would last indefinitely.

    Today that consensus looks foolish, not that those within the echo chamber are admitting they made the wrong call, and now governments are struggling to find new revenue streams as the expected rivers of iron ore and coal royalties fail to arrive.

    For Australian businesses, governments looking to raise revenues are another factor to plan for and getting one’s tax return and company paperwork in on time might be a good idea to avoid fines from overzealous public servants.

    The bigger lesson for us all however is not to think like the group. While it may feel safe in the herd, we could well be galloping over a cliff.

    One simple way to avoid groupthink, and that cliff, is not to copy the tech writers or the Australian economic experts who mis-called the China Boom. With the web and social media we can listen to what other voices are saying, most importantly those of our markets and customers.

    A varied information diet is something we all need t0 understand what our markets, economies and communities are doing. It might be comfortable huddling down with the herd, but you’ll never stand out from the pack.

    Similar posts:

  • Omni Channel Buzzwords

    Omni Channel Buzzwords

    Retailer entrepreneur Gerry Harvey yesterday unveiled his strategy to arrest the declines in his home goods chain’s sales.

    One of the key points in his investor presentation was “continued investment in strengthening our Omni channel strategy”.

    When asked exactly what an “omni channel strategy” is, Gerry reportedly admitted that until last week he had no idea what it was.

    For an entrepreneur whose business model is suffering badly in the face of changed markets, Gerry seems to be remarkably flippant about how he and his team are going to react to the challenges.

    Gerry lack of understanding is bad news for his team, because appears there is no management commitment to the major changes Harvey Norman, and many other incumbent retailers, are going to have to make in order to recover the sales and margins they have long been used to.

    The “omni channel strategy” is an interesting beast, which was described by Myers CEO Bernie Brooks last April on ABC’s Inside Business.

    We’re building our own omni-channel approach, which will include everything from kiosks in store right the way through to being able to provide very good office online up to 250,000 items, free delivery.

    What’s interesting with the retailers’ talk of “omni-channel” is the talk of service. Both Myer and Harvey Norman claim customer service is the centre of their strategy but their emphasis in the past has been to reduce customer service.

    The reduced emphasis on service has been part of the decline of the both chains; Harvey Norman could get away while consumers were happy committing to “no-interest for 72 months” finance plans, while Myer steadily declined as their key difference with discount chains like K-Mart and Target was eroded.

    Hopefully both Gerry Harvey and Bernie Brooks will get their omni channel strategy strategies working, though it will be interesting whether both can get their management teams to re-discover the meaning of “customer service”.

    Without getting the service right, their “omni channel strategies” will just appear to be another management buzzword in a declining business.

    Similar posts:

  • The four why’s of Sam Palmisano

    The four why’s of Sam Palmisano

    The New York Times’ profile of IBM’s outgoing CEO, Sam Palmisano, is an interesting study of how an established business can make well thought out long term plans through asking some basic questions.

    Under Palmisano, IBM moved a large part of their business from manufacturing and distributing computers to more Internet based products and services.

    A key part in IBM’s reinvention was recognising the PC hardware business was in decline as commoditisation of the computers and associated components eroded margins.

    To counter this, IBM looked at the areas where they believed the margins would be for the next decade and decided they lay in “on-demand” computing – what we now call “cloud computing”.

    What is particularly notable with IBM’s move to the cloud is this renting time on mainframes was the mainstay of their business up until the 1990s so the culture of reliable, accessible services backed by well priced plans is something not unknown to IBM.

    Having decided on the on-demand computing strategy, IBM then looked at who would buy their hardware division. Here they acted strategically and rather than selling to the highest bidder – someone like Dell or a private equity firm – they sold to China’s Lenovo which enhanced IBM’s standing within the Chinese markets.

    The notable thing with all of these plans is that they were made strategically and executed without the dithering we see at other companies struggling with similar issues. Yahoo! and HP being the two standouts in this area.

    While smaller businesses can’t execute on the same scale companies the size of IBM can should they choose, Sam Palmisano’s thinking was guided by four key questions;

    • “Why would someone spend their money with you — so what is unique about you?”
    •  “Why would somebody work for you?”
    • “Why would society allow you to operate in their defined geography — their country?”
    • “Why would somebody invest their money with you?”

    These four are something all of us could ask of ourselves and those around us. The answers to those questions are will guide what we do, where we do it and how we do it.

    For IBM, the future is fascinating as a new CEO comes in and they apply their investments in cloud computing, consulting and data mining to bigger picture projects like the Smarter Planet initiative.

    How this works for IBM and the other large technology companies remains to be seen although it’s quite clear that unlike many of their contemporaries, IBM’s management has a vision of where their business fits in the 21st Century.

    Similar posts: