Irrelevance and the media

Real problems are ignored as the big boys play games

It’s a shame we weren’t around when dinosaurs became extinct. Then again, maybe we are.

News Limited business commentator Terry McCrann writes about the “Bleakest of views from the shopfronts” in his Sunday column describing the problems of retail.

All of the problems Terry cited are from big retailers – Woolworths, Dick Smith, Harvey Norman and JB HiFi. To make it clear he was talking about corporate issues there’s even a reference to General Motors.

Nowhere does Terry talk about smaller businesses or those challenging the big guys, folk like Ruslan Kogan or the Catch of the Day team. It’s all about the big end of town.

Terry’s article illustrates the problem of relying on incumbent mainstream media commentary; that it is Big Media talking about Big Business and Big Government.

“Small”, “ordinary” or “average” has no place in their conversation, if you can call the pronouncement of mainstream media commentators a conversation at all.

We can understand this – for a journalist, it’s good for the ego and career to look like a “heavy hitter” in big business. For the politician, small business and community groups can’t pay the speaking and consulting fees paid by corporations to supplement their meagre retirement benefits.

Increasingly what happens in the corporate board rooms or the once smoke filled rooms of political caucuses is out of touch with the real world.

This has become particularly acute since the responses to the 2008 crash proved to the management classes that their bonuses and perks will be protected by government bailouts regardless of how many billions of shareholder wealth they manage to destroy.

In the United States we see this in political controversies being focused on contraception – an issue settled forty years ago – while the country faces fundamental challenges to its economic base and the basic welfare of its citizens and industries.

While in Australia the media ‘insiders’ rabbit on about pointless internal party politics and soothing articles on how everything else is fine, we just need to be more optimistic. Yet the real questions about how we take advantage of the country’s greatest export boom, position the economy for the next 50 years and the nation’s dependence on the Chinese economy are being ignored.

Terry McCrann’s story is emblematic of just how out of touch Big Media, and their friends in Big Business and Big Government, are with the real world.

All we can do is let them get on with it and not take them too seriously.

Similar posts:

Why we should give Gerry Harvey a break

Big retail’s problems could be ours as well

Gerry Harvey’s been having a bad year. This time last year he was moaning about the Internet stealing his business and now his profits are down.

In Mark Fletcher’s Newsagency Blog, Gerry gets a serve for dragging the entire retail channel down.

Mark quite rightly points out that Gerry’s problems are of his own making and his chain’s difficulties aren’t necessarily those of the rest of the industry or even shared by individual franchises within the Harvey Norman group.

While I’ve been as critical of Gerry as anybody else, maybe it’s time to give him a break.

It’s worth considering how Gerry made his billions. When he started in business in the late 1950s, it was tough for the average person to get credit. At best working families could get something put aside at the local store or enter into an Encyclopedia Britannica style subscription plan.

Gerry and his generation of retailers changed that. They made credit available to the masses who could suddenly afford to buy household appliances and electrical goods without years of savings.

I remember my parents buying things from Norman Ross, Waltons or the ACTU’s Burke Street store (Bob Hawke once stepped on my mum’s foot while she was shopping for a sofe) because working class people could get credit there.

Gerry was at the beginning of the consumer revolution that defined the second half of the Twentieth Century.

In the late 1980s financial deregulation changed the game again and Gerry’s business took off as credit became even easier to get with new providers entering the market. First we saw three month interest free offers and by the mid-2000s six year interest free deals were available.

These deals were so good that Harvey Norman franchisees often made more money selling the credit deals than on the actually product that the ‘no interest’ loan had been taken out to buy.

For Gerry, this was insanely lucrative as his business was able to clip the ticket at almost every level of the retail and distribution chain while moving much of the risk and capital cost onto franchisees and landlords hungry for high traffic anchor tenants.

In 2008 this entire model changed as the credit boom came to a crashing halt and consumer spending with it.

Business models based on cheap credit now have to find something else that works and this is what Gerry Harvey is now struggling with.

To complicate matters, the Internet has changed the distribution model that worked for Harvey Norman and other bricks and mortar retailers. All of them are now having to make a major shift in the sales cultures.

Adapting to this new world is tough for everybody and we should have some sympathy for Gerry Harvey as our businesses and jobs are being affected by exactly the same forces.

How Gerry adapts, or doesn’t, could be a bellwether for our own industries.

Similar posts:

The clique

Who is putting your interests first?

A Fortune story about the inner workings of social media service Facebook reportedly claims the business is increasingly dominated by friends of the Chief Operating Officer.

On Sheryl Sandberg and the circle of friends she has brought into the company: “There’s a term spoken quietly around Facebook to describe a cadre of elites who have assumed powerful positions under the leadership of Zuckerberg’s chief operating officer: They’re FOSS, or friends of Sheryl Sandberg.

Most tellingly is the quote, “‘You can’t really cross a FOSS,’ says one former senior manager.”

While this may not be true at Facebook – the reporters are quoting anonymous sources so their story can’t be taken as gospel – when a small, interconnected clique runs an organisation things usually don’t turn out well.

It’s bad enough when it’s a government agency like a police force or a not for profit like a charity, but in big and small business things are usually worse.

The main imperative of clique is to protect its members regardless of the damage they do to their organisation or even the global economy, as we saw in the banking crisis of 2008.

Inside the clique, you often have incompetence, corruption and almost always a strong thread of nepotism. None of this makes for an effective organisation or efficient business.

As investors, employees, suppliers, customers and taxpayers we have to be on guard against these cliques as they rarely act in the interests of those outside their circles.

It may not be the allegations at Facebook are true, but this is happening at other organisations right now. It’s probably happening in your government as well.

Similar posts:

  • No Related Posts

Omni Channel Buzzwords

Can nice phrases save a declining business?

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:

Competing in a high cost world

Business can compete when costs are high and currencies are strong

It’s often said that Australian businesses can’t compete and the nation can no longer can support manufacturing or high tech industries.

With the high Australian dollar, many economists, business leaders and politicians have said industries have to adapt to being an expensive economy. Interestingly, few of these experts explain how businesses should, or can, adapt.

At the recent Kickstart forum I had the opportunity to meet two Australian companies succeeding with high tech products and using the high dollar to their advantage.

David Jackman of Pronto Software, a thirty year old business intelligence company, is proud of the fact the business he leads does most of its development in Australia. As business owned by it’s employees – Pronto had  an employee buy out in the late 1990s – he sees his role as building the business to last centuries like some European businesses.

Linus Chang developed his Melbourne based business, Backup Assist, when he discovered the data backup tools built into Microsoft Windows weren’t very good. Taking the basic Microsoft products, he added the features that made these tools usuable at a fraction of the cost of bigger companies’ data backup software.

Today Backup Assist is sold in 124 countries with the US as the biggest market.

Both Backup Assist and Pronto find keeping the bulk of the software development in house in Australia makes sure they are producing high quality, effective products.

Software development isn’t the only sector dealing with the high cost evironment, David Jackman says Pronto has many customers in the Australian manufacturing industry who have adapted to a high cost environment with niche and high value added products.

Identifying these opportunities is where the challenge lies; what do our businesses do well that customers in international markets are prepared to pay for?

We also have an advantage in being a relatively open economy with first world standards. This is another reason why investment in new infrastructure like the National Broadband Network is important.

One thing is for sure, selling low priced commodity products with small margins is not where the future lies, even if the Aussie dollar collapses.

We have success stories and businesses adapting to being a high cost economy, it’s a matter of understanding how our industries can add value while  do this.

Similar posts:

Pro Bono

Exposure rarely pays the bills.

“Could you write a guest post for our corporate blog?”

“Sure, I’d be delighted. How much are you paying?”

“Sorry, we don’t pay. You’ll be getting a lot of exposure.”

This organisation had a profit of over five billion dollars last year. Imagine how much the outfit would be making if the managers and executives contributed their time for free in the hope of getting some “exposure”?

It’s nice to be recognised as an expert, but if you’re not going to make a living then it’s just an expensive, time consuming hobby.

Similar posts:

  • No Related Posts

The over reach

Sometimes we take things too far

Sometimes we’re on a roll, all is going well, everything we touch is successful and those around us seem not to be able to win a thing.

Then we over-reach.

We get smart, we get cocky, we decide one more demand or humiliation will show the other guy just how good we are.

And everything starts to wrong, because we took things too far. We over-reached

The greatest asset all of us can have is a little humility and respect.

Rather than wanting everything, maybe leaving a little bit on the table for the other guy may turn out to be a wise business move.

Similar posts: