Smart is Dumb, and..

...dumb is smart.

I was reminded of the importance of what I read about years ago in the best-selling negotiating guide, Getting to Yes, watching TURN, AMC's new drama about America's first spy ring in the American Revolution. In episode two, a Captain in the Continental army charged with creating the spy ring, serves dinner to a captured British Captain in a gesture of apparent civility between officers. At the end of the meal, the British Captain, wishing to reciprocate, gives away the exact information the the Continentals needed. The dialog:

British Captain: "Now then, to business. What is it you wish to know?"

American Captain: "Oh nothing, sir. We already know all we need to know."

BC: "Truly? You know where we mean to strike after retaking New York?"

AC: "We know you have four thousand men stationed at Throgs Neck in Brooklyn, New York, as part of your occupation force."

BC: (incredulously) "Four thousand??? (derisive snort) Try six!"

Good information is critical to success, whatever your decision-making endeavor - military, negotiations, strategy, marketing, sales... And, it requires careful planning to obtain, and validate.

Just don't let your ego get in the way.

23 Reasons Not to Talk to Strangers? Or...

...Little Red Riding Hood?

My friend and former colleague Eric Pelletier blogs in a wonderful post, Croissants and fairy tales. How storytelling makes strategy happen that

...when people in a similar context, are exposed to the same facts, they tend to arrive at the same conclusions. And so, when they're in the same organization then, they're also likely to arrive at the same conclusion about the right strategy to take the organization forward.

While he focuses on the power of getting people on board via storytelling to implement strategies, I have little doubt he'd agree about the power of creating shared conclusions on formulating a winning strategy in the first place.

In The Biggest Problem in Strategy? Mindset, I noted how the railroads in post war America missed out on growth opportunities because they saw themselves in the railroad business, not the transportation business, and how Blockbuster missed out on digital distribution, ignoring intelligence on the looming threat. While railroad efficiency made enormous strides post deregulation in 1980, it basically kept the surviving companies in the game. Rail's share of freight traffic in the US (measured in ton-miles) declined from about 75% in 1930 (A Short History of US Freight Railroads, pp3) to 28% in 2000 (Freight-Rail Bottom Line Report, pp 14). Worse, its share of freight revenues dropped to a mere 6%. Blockbuster went bankrupt in 2011, shuttering the last of its outlets in 2013. Other examples of failed strategies aren't hard to find: cell phone manufacturers Nokia and Motorola; bookstores Borders and Barnes and Noble; computer manufacturer Sun; the plethora of desktop application software firms - remember VisiCalc, Lotus 1-2-3 and Freelance Graphics and WordPerfect, all of which dominated at one time?

Storytelling works because of the evolution of the prefrontal cortex of the human brain, which helps us recognize and act on patterns. It also works, as Eric notes, because it creates a shared context, or "experience" (even if vicarious) in the tribe. 

But this pattern-recognizing ability is both a help and a hindrance, for individuals and groups. It helps tremendously when the situation is reasonably stable, but often fails us in times of significant environmental change, when we are unable to recognize new patterns. And the worst failures occur when the "tribe," and especially the decision-making leadership, is unable to jettison outdated mindsets.

The most powerful stories are the ones collectively arrived at, through shared experiences. And the most powerful of these are crises. IBM (where I worked for the better part of a decade), was able to reinvent itself in the early 1990s because the tribe members (the employees) knew there was no other choice, enabling Lou Gerstner to drive a change in the collective mindset. But it was painful, to the tune of 200,000 layoffs.

So I return to a theme readers of my blog will recognize: why not create simulated "crises" to enable decision-makers to "experience" the consequences of potential actions. Militaries, governments and airline pilots (see Chance Only Favors Prepared Minds) do this regularly. And some companies regularly incorporate scenario planning or business wargaming (among other experiential planning techniques), designed and facilitated by experts for maximum effectiveness, into strategy development.

Companies that invest in these now, incorporating the latest available intelligence on potential opportunities or threats, reap huge future returns and often avoid debilitating disasters.

The Biggest Problem in Strategy? Mindset

A question in a LinkedIn forum asks what the biggest problem people haven't yet solved in strategy?

My answer: decision-maker mindset.

In one of the most famous business articles ever, Theodore Levitt wrote about the mindset of US railroad industry in “Marketing Myopia” (Harvard Business Review, July / August 1960):

The railroads did not stop growing because the need for passenger and freight transportation declined. That grew. The railroads are in trouble today not because that need was filled by others (cars, trucks, airplanes, and even telephones) but because it was not filled by the railroads themselves. They let others take customers away from them because they assumed themselves to be in the railroad business rather than in the transportation business. The reason they defined their industry incorrectly was that they were railroad oriented instead of transportation oriented; they were product oriented instead of customer oriented.

Take a more recent example, Blockbuster, which went bankrupt in 2011, closing its last stores in 2013. It didn't fail from a lack of intelligence. “The fascinating issue for me,” wrote Forbes blogger George Anderson wrote in Blockbuster Beyond the Grave “is that Wayne Huizenga and his executive team were well aware of the risks from digital distribution of media and discussed it at times.”

Given the lack of action, the Blockbuster executive mindset was clearly that not only would the near-term future be like the present, but also that they would have enough time to respond to a "real” threat, before a crisis hit. But by the time it did, it was too late.

Mindset is of course, useful. It helps us interpret the barrage of new information that bombards us daily. And it works, so long as underlying conditions remain essentially the same. But it often fails us in times of radical change (brought on by external factors such as changing market or economic conditions or new technologies, or internal decisions, such as launching new products or entering new markets). Unfortunately, senior executive decision makers, because of their long years of experience – they "know" the business, the customers, the competitors, the technology and the industry – are resistant to changing their mindsets.

So, to the question, the real challenge for strategy professionals becomes how to change decision maker mindsets. Unfortunately, most traditional “strategy” processes fail in this critical regard (we could have another whole discussion on whether most companies really practice strategy, or whether they practice planning and budgeting…). Given human nature, changing long- and deeply-held mindsets requires a crisis. As English author Samuel Johnson said, "nothing so focuses the mind as the possibility of being hanged in a fortnight."

But rather than awaiting a real crisis, forward-looking organizations find ways to create structured "crisis" experiences, where decision-makers collectively evaluate intelligence, develop new insight and assess the strategic and operational risks of changing customer needs, new forms of competition, changing technologies, new discoveries and emerging government policies.

This also means strategy professionals must change their own mindsets, from “producing” strategy documents and presentations and overseeing planning processes, to creating experiences that enable decision makers to create their own insights. Once they, and not the strategy professionals, “own” the insight, they will change their mindsets. And once their mindsets change, developing winning strategies becomes, if not easy, at least straightforward.  

____

                  

Creating Winning Strategies by Changing the Dialogue

In far too many companies, "strategy" has become a euphemism for planning or budgeting. The underlying - and unstated - assumption is that marketplace conditions are largely static: the future will be largely an extension of the past and, thus, all we need to do is optimize our current operations.

This assumption, unfortunately, has proved fatal in industry after industry. Just a few years ago, Motorola and Nokia were major cell phone players, Sun was a significant server manufacturer, Blockbuster was the source for many of us for at-home movie viewing, and Borders and Barnes and Noble were where we shopped for books...

To drive serious strategic discussions, you first need to accurately assess your source of competitive advantage. Here's a framework we've found useful:

Source of Competitive Advantage (worst to first):

1. Commodity with cost disadvantage

2. Commodity with cost parity

3. Commodity with 10% to 20% cost advantage

4. One-year offering development lead

5. Two-year offering development lead

6. Brand, patent, copyright

7. Owning the customer relationship

8. A string of dominant positions (for example, cost advantage + development lead + patent protection

9. Managing the value net or ecosystem

10. Owning the industry standard

Importance of Marketplace Insight

The first two, of course, confer no competitive advantage; unfortunately, a realistic assessment of their true competitive position would surprise many companies... Hence the importance of helping decision makers develop relevant marketplace insight. Answers to these critical questions will help:

• What are customers really buying? How are their preferences changing?
• What new initiatives are current competitors undertaking: operations, innovation, marketing, sales, customer service?
• What economic or regulatory trends will impact the industry?
• Which emerging competitors have the potential to change the nature of competitive dynamics?

Assessing the Consequences

Once the decision makers have grappled with these issues, they'll need to assess the impact on the organization, including:

• Systems and processes: Do we need to change our offerings development or production processes? Which need to be re-engineered? Which can we outsource? What support do we need from IT?
• People and skills: Do we need to retrain our existing workforce? Change our hiring requirements? Restructure the organization?
• Culture: Do we need to change the behaviors? If so, where? Only in specific functions? Or everywhere in the organization?
• Incentives: Do we have the right incentives in place? And how will we align these across the organization?
• Profits: How will we make money in the future? How can we protect our profit streams?

Creating Winning Strategies

With all of the above in hand, decision makers can proceed to the important work of re-allocating resources to create:

• Differentiated value propositions
• Innovation, operational and go-to market initiatives
• Organizational alignment

Challenging work, all this, since it means the nature of the strategic discussion must change, from planning / budgeting to strategy, from past to future and from business-as-usual to new business models. Importantly, it means changing mental models - how decision makers interpret information about the marketplace. And this, in turn, means creating opportunities for dialogue and debate, v. reading reports.

But it could mean the difference between organizational life and death.

Will Your Assumptions Cost You $24 Billion?

As I passed a shuttered Blockbuster store, one of the last to remain open, I wondered what assumptions its executives used to guide their decisions.

Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy in 2011, closing its last stores in 2013, in the face of competition from Netflix, Vudu, Hulu, Amazon.com and the cable / satellite providers. Dish Network bought Blockbuster's streaming service from the bankruptcy court for $321 million. In contrast, Netflix' market cap is worth over $24 billion today - and Blockbuster could have bought it in 2000 for a mere $50 million.

The Blockbuster executives didn't fail from a lack of market intelligence. NetFlix was founded in 1997 and began video streaming in 1999, followed by Vudu in 2004 and Hulu in 2007. And Blockbuster didn't even enter the DVD-by-mail business until 2004, long after Netflix had proven its success. Forbes blogger George Anderson wrote in Blockbuster Beyond the Grave:

“The fascinating issue for me is that Wayne Huizenga and his executive team were well aware of the risks from digital distribution of media and discussed it at times,” wrote loyalty marketing expert Bill Hanifin in a recent RetailWire online discussion.

Given their lack of action, they clearly operated under two critical - fatal - assumptions: not only would the near-term future be like the present, but also that they would have enough time to respond to a "real" competitive threat, before a crisis hit. But by the time it did, it was too late.

We all have assumptions, of course. They help us interpret the barrage of new information we are bombarded with daily. And they work, so long as underlying conditions remain the same. But all assumptions are susceptible to cognitive bias, particularly anchoring, where humans rely too heavily on the first piece of information they receive, using that as the basis for subsequent decisions.

But assumptions often fail us in times of radical change, when they need to be tested to ensure continued validity. Unfortunately, senior executive decision makers are the most resistant to challenging their assumptions. Because of their long years of experience, they "know" the business, the customers, the competitors, the technology and the industry. In turn, this leads them to lend more credence to facts or information that reinforce their world view (confirmation bias).

Given human nature, changing long- and deeply-held assumptions requires a crisis. As English author Samuel Johnson said, "nothing so focuses the mind as the possibility of being hanged in a fortnight."

But rather than awaiting a real crisis, forward-looking organizations create "crisis" experiences, where decision-makers collectively evaluate intelligence, develop new insight and assess the strategic and operational risks of changing customer needs, new forms of competition, changing technologies, new discoveries and emerging government policies, in structured situations.

They can then decide to weigh anchor - or even break the chains - and navigate to a new destination, before the storm hits.

Growth is Hard

Columbia Business School professor Rita Gunther McGrath writes that only 8% of the 5,000 companies with over $1 billion in revenues grew sales by 5% annually over a 5 year period, and only 4% grew net income by at least 5% annually.* Compounding the challenge are the prevailing conditions found in many markets:

• The new product failure rate is repugnantly high: estimates range from a minimum of 40% to as high as 95%; 

• Few completely new categories have emerged in recent years;

• Risk aversion results in few real disruptive market strategies;

• Rivalry is intense and along many dimensions;

• The role of channels is becoming ever more pervasive and powerful; and

• Cost pressures continue to escalate, absorbing significant company resources to address.

Companies can beat the odds through a structured approach (chart):

• Marketplace insight – What is the customer need or problem a new growth initiative will resolve? How have recent competitive and supplier initiatives and technological developments impacted customer needs? What is going on in competitors’ minds, what are they planning, and how will they respond to our initiatives?

• Opportunity assessment and selection – How can we extend current capabilities to address new opportunities or change the nature of competition? How do we develop and test new growth opportunities beyond our current strategy? Which customer segments will we choose to serve? Which will we not serve?

• Strategy – How do we resolve a market problem / need in a valuable and differentiated manner? What is the value proposition? How will we capture value, what scope of activities will we perform and how will we protect our profit? 

• Organization alignment – What processes, systems, structures, and incentives need to be changed? What will inhibit successful execution of the growth strategy: culture, mindsets, resources, incentives?

• Execution – What specific actions will deliver the product / offering and profitably capture value? How will we measure success? How will we monitor results?

*McGrath, Rita Gunther, “How the Growth Outliers Did It,” Harvard Business Review, January – February 2012

What Role Does Marketing Play in Your Organization?

Is it

Reactive? Does it focus on promoting new initiatives or products developed elsewhere?

Passive? Does it respond to requests for marketplace information to strategy, sales or new product development teams?

Proactive? Does it actively develop marketplace intelligence as inputs to decision-making processes?

A driver? Is it actively engaged in creating new initiatives and developing the necessary insight required for innovative new factor, operational, organizational and marketplace strategies and plans?

Which role should it play?

Droning On: Strategy Isn't Dead, Not by a Long Shot...

Last week, blogger Mark Wilson, in a post entitled "The End of Strategy as We Know It," noted that strategy has become "too slow; too inflexible, too cautious; too protectionist." He bemoans "old-school strategy" and asserts that "businesses need to think strategically, on a daily basis...the solution is that "business leaders should focus on their organisation's innovation behaviour and how to build a culture that supports it."*

At least he got it partly right, unlike Saatchi & Saatchi's CEO Kevin Roberts, who said last year that "strategy is dead, the big idea is dead, management is dead and marketing, as we know it, is also dead." Then he really stepped into it: "Who really knows what is going to happen anymore in this super VUCA [volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous] world. The more time and money you spend devising strategies the more time you are giving your rivals to start eating your lunch."**

No one, of course, KNOWS what's going to happen in the future. But throwing up your hands is dangerous.

Take Jeff Bezos' revelation on 60 Minutes last night that amazon.com is testing drones for package delivery. If successful, small packages could be delivered within 30 minutes. Attention getting sound bite? Without a doubt.

But listen closely to Bezos: "I would define Amazon by our big ideas, which are customer centricity, putting the customer at the center of everything we do, invention." Looking deeper, Amazon Fresh, which started delivering groceries in Seattle several years, has now expanded to Los Angeles. Grocery customers typically want same-day delivery and, says Bezos, "if we can make this model work, it would be great because it extends the range of products that we can sell."***

Now this is "old school strategy." What Bezos recognizes that Wilson and Roberts miss is that effective strategies start with insight that defines a marketplace opportunity. Only then can you innovate around customer needs and then drive the necessary changes in systems, structure, skills and culture through the entire organization to meet those needs. Focusing on innovation unlinked to a defined opportunity and you become Xerox PARC, whose radical innovations (Ethernet, laser printers, the GUI and even the modern PC among others) were successfully commercialized by others, not Xerox.

No, "old school strategy" is not dead.

But those who dismiss it soon will be. Their rivals will eat their lunch.

*Wilson, Mark, "Is This the End of Strategy as We Know It?", One Last Thing (blog), http://thehumanlayer.com/issues/issue-7/22-one-last-thing/index.html#!

**"Strategy is dead says Saatchi & Saatchi CEO," The Drum, April 25, 2012, http://www.thedrum.com/news/2012/04/25/marketing-dead-says-saatchi-saatchi-ceo

***"Jeff Bezos Looks to the Future," 60 Minutes, December 1, 2013, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazons-jeff-bezos-looks-to-the-future/

You Can't Find What You're Not Looking For

Ask the right questions

Smoke detectors are programmed for early warning. But they don't detect CO2, equally as dangerous.

With a specific threat - or opportunity - identified, designing a system or capability to capture and process the relevant signals and issue an alert is pretty straightforward.

The challenge for companies is to articulate the potential business threat or opportunity. But in a dynamic marketplace, these are everywhere. Organizations simply can’t monitor every Bill and Dave or Steve and Steve in their garages or Jeff in his warehouse.

It is exacerbated when organizations obsess on collecting reams of customer data or developing in-depth competitor profiles, especially when these focus is on what the customers wanted or what the competitor did. The often-unstated assumption – the mindset – is that the future will be largely like the past and, circuitously, the historical facts support the prevailing view.

But there are no “facts” about the future.

Creating the necessary insight requires asking the right questions:

• How will new technologies and business value propositions impact our customers, products, services, and business growth?
• Which industries, customer segments and offerings categories offer the best likelihood of future business growth?
• Who are the most threatening traditional, emerging and potential competitors? Why?
• Where are the greatest long-term profit streams according to the capital markets?
• What is required for future competitive success?

How many organizations have good answers to these questions? How many have the leadership that asks them?

You can’t find what you’re not looking for.

Next: Creating Crises

"Surprise"

December 7, 1941

Nothing frustrates executives I speak with more than a crisis caused by surprise: a new competitor product or unexpected price cut, unexpected loss of a key bid or long-held account, or new technologies or shifts in buyer behavior that obsolete current offerings. And heads roll when these cause a miss in quarterly earnings or, worse, bankruptcy.

The question that always arises is how could we have avoided surprise?

Lack of knowledge is not the problem. “We now live in a world where knowledge transfer and information exchange are tremendously efficient, and where there are numerous organizations in the business of collecting and transferring best practices. So, there are fewer and smaller differences in what firms know than in their ability to act on that knowledge.”*

Said another way, surprise rarely occurs due to a lack of signals. Information on the Toyota Production System was available to the US auto industry for decades, and traditional retailers certainly had time to absorb intelligence on amazon.com’s business model well in advance of having to declare bankruptcy. In the military sphere, “an analysis of surprise attacks suggests that the intelligence community seldom fails to anticipate them owing to a lack of relevant information.” And a US Congressional Subcommittee that examined several critical US political crises pointed out that “in no case had lack of data been a major factor in the failure to anticipate the crisis.”**

Take Pearl Harbor – why did the US navy fail to detect anytime in advance the movement the most powerful fleet in history? It was not as if Japan’s blue water fleet was a surprise – in 1905 it destroyed the Russian Pacific fleet. Nor were Japan’s expansionist intentions a secret – it invaded Manchuria in 1931. And it’s not as if the US Pacific Fleet wasn't concerned about the Imperial Japanese Navy: it knew it was the only real threat to those intentions. Finally, beginning in early in 1941, there was a slew of signals that the Japanese navy was targeting Pearl Harbor.

Given this, “intelligence officers could perhaps have foreseen the attack if the US, years before, had…flown regular aerial reconnaissance of the Japanese navy, put intercept units aboard ships sailing close to Japan…or recruited a network of marine observers to report on ship movements.”***

Did the US Navy create its own surprise?

Next: Avoiding "Surprises"

*Pfeffer, Jeffrey and Robert Sutton, The Knowing-Doing Gap, Harvard Business School Press, 2000
**Kam, Ephraim, Surprise Attack, Harvard University Press, 1988
***Kahn, David, "The Intelligence Failure of Pearl Harbor, Foreign Affairs, 70, no. 5 (Winter 1991/1992)

Rice, Autos and Online Retailers

Winning Marketplace Strategies

The biggest threat to success comes from failing to understand and incorporate all aspects of a winning marketplace strategy.

Success arises from differentiation in one or – better – more of three domains:

• Customer strategy (identifying and meeting unmet needs, branding – not just advertising – or finding new ways to go to market); 
• Factor strategy (raw materials, supplier relationships, logistics, manufacturing, technology); or
• Organization strategy (new business models, different systems and processes, new culture).

Many marketers focus exclusively on the first. But because differentiation is critical, marketing, perhaps surprisingly to some, has a significant, if not dominant role to play in understanding buyer behavior through the second and third, and then driving necessary changes through the organization.

To many Americans, rice is a simple foodstuff, something we eat in place of potatoes or bread, and as a side dish in Asian restaurants. And, like many, I grew up on Uncle Ben’s, Rice Krispies and Rice-a-Roni. Yet a master sushi chef in Japan might insist on Uonuma Koshihikari, which costs an order of magnitude more than the rice you’ll find in supermarkets (you can buy a 5kg / 11lb bag online for $130).

In 2009, both GM and Chrysler (for the second time) declared bankruptcy. Yet in 1990 – 20 years before – three MIT academics, James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos published The Machine That Changed the World, a book detailing the Toyota Production System (TPS) that simultaneously cut costs and increased quality. Worse, intelligence on this radical new production and organization system was available to Detroit in the 1960s – the ideas that led to the TPS came from Ford, which opened its doors to extensive benchmarking by Toyota executives in the 1950s.

And new internet-aided business models can inhibit if not completely destroy your business. Perhaps the best known examples are the bankruptcies of Circuit City and Borders 2011 and, just this month, the announced closing of the remaining Blockbuster stores, driven by online retailers modeled on amazon.com, founded in 1994, almost 20 years ago…

Rice retailers, restaurants and food processors have multiple factor strategies to choose from, influenced by and influencing their customer strategies. And imagine if, when Chrysler first declared bankruptcy in 1979, US auto marketers had focused on understanding the role of Toyota’s factor and organization strategy on consumer behavior. Finally, only a radical shift in strategy to embrace an Internet business model confounded expert opinion that Best Buy would soon follow Circuit City.

Next: Surprise

Understand the Competitor's Strategic Intent

What do you need to know about the competition?

The most important thing you need to know is their strategic intent – what is it they are trying to accomplish. Once you understand this, you’ll have a framework for understanding virtually every decision they make, from hiring key personnel, to product strategy, benefits, features and functionality and pricing. Take, for example, a competitor whose CEO has made aggressive revenue growth commitments. You might deduce s/he will aggressively pursue every opportunity in the marketplace, regardless of profitability. Or, if the technical staff dominates development, offerings may include features and functionality customers don't care about.

You don’t need 100-page documents, chock full of data but poor on insights. If your CI team is producing these, fire them. What you need is a one-page report that shows the competitor’s approach and what their likely next actions will be. You need to understand their key people – what they do and how they think, because people and organizations repeat their successes. You need to understand the likely impact of new initiatives, and their financial and technical capabilities. And, most importantly, you need to understand the competitor’s culture

Lou Gerstner was maniacally focused on customers and competition from the first day he joined he joined IBM. At his first executive retreat, he forced his senior executives into red-team exercises and asked them to attack their own businesses as if they were the primary competitors. He got immediate results, and extended the concept by naming each senior executive to be in charge of a major competitor as part of their responsibilities.

Make your executive peers part of your CI team. You’ll be delighted with the results.

Next: Differentiation: What Really Matters

Know Your Enemies

Creating differentiation: how much do you know about your competition? 

“You don’t have to be the best, you just have to be better than your competitor.”*

Successful marketing executives know a lot. That's how they create differentiated value propositions.

But first, please don’t tell me you think competitive intelligence (CI) is espionage. I’m not naive – there have been far too many cases to pretend industrial espionage doesn't exist and some major countries are well known to engage in spying for their companies.

Ethical competitive intelligence has a long history, going back centuries. The first published mention dates from 1876, in an Institute of Civil Engineers discussion of carriage design. It gained popularity in the 1980s following the publication of Michael Porter’s Competitive Strategy,** now in its 60th printing. Today, most major corporations have a CI function and there is even a professional organization of Strategic and Competitive Intelligence Professionals (SCIP).

I actually got my start at 18, as a mobile ice cream salesman. Ice cream sales is a winner-take-all business – if you get to a swimming pool full of kids on a hot summer day 10 minutes after your competitor, you sell nothing. A long-standing competitor straddled the routes of a friend who was selling for the same company I did. At the end of each day, we plotted his route until we knew exactly where he was when (this was before cell phones...). Once we had the intelligence, our sales skyrocketed, while his dropped to near zero. He abandoned the route within weeks and we had free rein for the rest of the summer. I didn't know I was doing CI. It was purely a matter of financial survival.

In my first corporate job, marketing aircraft tires, I could predict within 1% the price our competitors would offer, through a thorough analysis of bid performance. My technical team was able to assess the performance characteristics of each tire in our competitor’s line, which enabled us to arm the sales force with the information they needed to increase sales. We gained share every year.

Perhaps surprisingly, the first thing you need to do is learn as much as you possibly can about your own business, before you try to understand the competitor’s. You’re only as good as your ability to impact your business – you can be the greatest analyst in the world, but if you don’t understand your own business well enough to know what intelligence is needed to impact a decision, you’ll fail. And, as you deepen your knowledge of your business, you’ll gain incredible insights into the competition. Faye Brill, who was CI chief of Ryder Systems, Inc., ‘believes that 80% of what you need to know about your competitors is right inside your company.’***

You’ll find this easier than you might think. Consumers and “clients are often happy to provide feedback to soften the blow of losing a contract”**** or selecting another product.

As Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu wrote: “If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles.”

Next: What do You Need to Know About Competition?


*Elix, Doug, SVP, IBM, conversation with the author
**Porter, Michael, Competitive Strategy, The Free Press, 1980
***DeWitt, Michelle, Competitive Intelligence, Competitive Advantage. Grand Rapids, MI, Abacus, 1997
****“Get something from losing,” One Minute Articles (link no longer active).

Don't Talk About Marketing

Marketing Strategy and Planning

Many marketing plans look somewhat alike: executive summary, situation analysis, SWOT, objectives, marketing strategy, action plan and financials, with assorted appendices.

And most are equally ineffective.

The biggest deficiency is the lack of a business case: what business results will occur, and for what cost. This is not easy (see the post Meaningful Metrics), often because of the difficulty of proving, for example, the impact an awareness-building initiative had on sales. But building the business case is an absolute must.

It starts with the company objectives. Are you pursuing organic growth? If so, how? By expanding the customer base for current products, increasing sales to existing customers, or entering new markets? Then (yes, this is simplistic, my apologies), how will each marketing initiative support the objective?

Take increasing sales to existing customers. One organization, with two distinct offerings, wanted to increase cross-sales into accounts where one offering dominated. The challenge was that not only did the account executives not know enough about the other offering to create selling opportunities, they didn't know who in the organization to talk to. Marketing got sufficient funding by working with sales to agree on account penetration objectives and identify what programs and investments were needed to "open new doors" (offerings education, easy-to-use collateral and reference-selling coaching).

In another case, the "objective" was to increase sales, based on the assumption that was the only way to increase profits. The research marketing then unearthed a critical insight: consumers saw multiple benefits to the product that were not being communicated. This led to a new communications strategy that both increased unit profits as well as unit sales.

These plans succeeded - that is marketing got the budget it needed - because they focused on business results. The material that makes up many typical marketing plans was available during the strategy discussions, but not "presented" - when the rest of the business leadership team asked specific questions, the marketing team knew the answers.

As Andy Berndt, Head of Google's Creative Lab says, “my advice to marketers is don’t talk about marketing. Bring the CEO ideas that can make the business better or solve a problem.”*

*"What Do You Want From Me: How High-Performing CMOs Exceed Expectations," Spencer Stuart, November 2010

Setting the Marketing Agenda

The marketing agenda is critical to your success. It lets others know what is important and creates a framework for evaluating resource allocation and hiring decisions. While developing the marketing agenda will require input from a variety of constituencies, controlling it will make or break the CMO.

Successful agendas focus on business objectives which, for the CMO, generally fall into one or more of the following categories:

• Acquiring new customers and growing market share
• Retaining high value customers
• Increasing brand awareness
• Leading the charge into new areas

Whatever the objective, effective CMOs focus on five distinct processes:

• Market insight and analysis
• Marketing strategy and planning
• Awareness building
• Sales readiness
• Support

Upcoming posts will take each of these in turn.

Next: Winning Over Time

Where Do You Start?

The first 90 days.

“The first thing you should do is read, or re-read, the book The First 90 Days*,” says Nigel Dessau, CMO of Stratus Technology and ex-CMO of both AMD and StorageTek.  “In the first 30 days of any new job I've taken, I gather data, qualitative and quantitative. I’m not choosy, at first. I meet with as many people as I can, and then review every night for what I've learned. From that I come up with six focus areas, two of which are most likely going to be people and budget. Then I sit with the leadership team and discuss. And then I discuss with my marketing team, to get alignment. What ensues becomes my plan for the next several years, which is the average tenure of a CMO."

Let’s go to the source: “The actions you take during your first three months in a new job will largely determine whether you succeed or fail, ” writes Harvard’s Michael Watkins, author of The First 90 Days. “The stakes are obviously high. Failure in a new assignment can spell the end of a promising career.”

Sobering.

Luckily for us, Watkins has researched the success and failure of new executives and offers a checklist of things you need to do :

1. Promote yourself. No, don’t hire a publicist. Mentally accept that you've been promoted into a new position that will require different skills than what’s made you successful in the past.
2. Accelerate your learning. Go into learning overdrive – spend as much time as you can reading about markets, product, technologies, systems and structures, and especially the company culture and politics.
3. Match your strategy to the situation. Start-ups are quite different than product line turnarounds which are quite different from new market entry situations
4. Secure early wins. This may be the most important thing you can do: nothing succeeds like success. It builds personal credibility.
5. Negotiate success. Your new boss thinks you’re the right person for the job, but isn't totally sure yet. Schedule time, weekly, to go over your assessment of the situation, his or her expectations, reporting style and the resources you will have available.
6. Achieve alignment. With each promotion, you’ll find that you “do” less and have to “get more done.” The only way to achieve this is to align, or re-align, the structure with the strategy
7. Build your team. Evaluate the team early and, if necessary, make tough calls. You can’t afford to depend on non-performers.
8. Create coalitions. More important jobs increasingly depend on your ability to influence people who don’t report to you. Make them your allies, and you succeed. Make them your enemies, and you fail.
9. Keep your balance. You’ll be drinking from a fire hose – you’ll find that the demands on your time are more than there are hours in the day. Find ways to keep your perspective and don’t be rushed into making risky decisions.
10. Expedite everyone. Bosses, peers and especially direct reports – the quicker you can get everyone up to speed, the better your performance will be.

Even - or maybe especially - if you've been in your job for some time, this is sound advice. Take some time to mentally promote yourself into that next position and contemplate what it would take to succeed. Then, follow these steps as if you were already in the position.

You may get that promotion faster than you think.

Next: Day 91

*Watkins, Michael, The First 90 Days, Harvard Business School Press, 2003

Insource or Outsource

First Things First discussed the first of five key things the CMO must do well*, getting the marketing mandate right. Allies, Agnostics and Antagonists focused on the second, building meaningful relationships with functional and business leaders. Meaningful Metrics addresses agreeing on how to measure success. 

The fourth focuses on collaborating with external partners.

Once you've got measurable objectives in place, you need to determine how to accomplish these objectives. You’ll need to carefully evaluate the capabilities of your staff against those objectives and then determine whether to retrain, hire or seek outside assistance.

Luckily for you, marketing may be the most outsourced function in business. There are a plethora of advertising, brand, marketing communication, marketing strategy, public relations, demand generation, digital marketing, marketing research, print and social media agencies, all of whom provide specialized skills that few but the largest of marketing organizations can afford to keep on staff.

How you manage these firms can make or break your success.

First, determine exactly the type of help you need. For this, you need to be very, very clear on what needs to be done. There are subtle but important differences in the types of firms and the types of personnel they hire. Many of them, like your organization, look to expand their offerings to meet the needs of their clients. Some of these expansions make sense, but only if they deliver real results and, importantly, provide real experts. I, for example, am immediately skeptical of the branding firm that launches a PR or social media offering, which require different skill sets than their core business.

Therein lies the key. You’re not hiring an agency; you’re hiring people and a culture. 

Says Maureen McGuire, CMO of Bloomberg, “there may not be a major difference between what the different agencies do, but the team that is working on your business will be different. The chemistry that you build with that team and their ability to get fired up about what they’re trying to do and bring in new ideas is what counts.”*

*“What Do You Want From Me? How High-Performing CMOs Exceed Expectations,” SpencerStuart, 2010 

Next: You're Not an Island

Meaningful Metrics

First Things First discussed the first of five key things the CMO must do well*, getting the marketing mandate right. Allies, Agnostics and Antagonists focused on the second, building meaningful relationships with functional and business leaders. 

The third is agreeing on how to measure success.

Once you've agreed on the marketing mandate and started the process of building meaningful relationships, it is absolutely imperative that you agree on how success will be measured.

Joe Tripodi,  Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing & Commercial Officer of The Coca-Cola Company, advises CMOs to make the CFO a partner in their leadership teams as they develop marketing budgets and metrics. “Unless you have full transparency on everything going in your budget, you’re going to continue to have this marketing-as-a-black-box philosophy. Once you bring people into the tent and then say, ‘Listen, we have nothing to hide here,’ and jointly determine the metrics for measuring marketing effectiveness, you take marketing out of the little black box”

Says Maureen McGuire, CMO of Bloomberg, “every marketer has had this kind of experience: You want to run an advertising campaign to raise awareness and then everybody’s looking for leads and revenue and you say, well, the metric to measure this is whether or not we actually raised awareness. But people are saying, ‘How many leads did it drive and how come my phone wasn't ringing off the hook?’ One of the most difficult things to convince people of is that you should measure your marketing effort according to the objective you’re setting.”*

John Dragoon, CMO of Houghton Mifflin, says “we've rotated (maybe over-rotated) to marketing metrics – I’m fond of the term ‘the ROI of a handshake.’ No one’s written about the softer things – just because you can’t measure it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.”

So, how do you set meaningful metrics?

Allies, Agnostics and Antagonists

First Things First discussed the first of five key things the CMO must do well*, getting the marketing mandate right. 

The second is building meaningful relationships with functional and business leaders.

After the CEO, the most important constituents for the CMO are his or her peers. Senior leaders look to the CMO to be a thought leader on the businesses’ critical issues. They want the CMO to learn how other functions and businesses work and what their challenges are and be willing to engage them early in the development of marketing plans.

“I want my CMO to be sincere about enabling cross-functional success; he’s in a position to tear down walls. Get out of the office and spend time with customers, at the factory, attend the national sales meeting. Take an interest in other functions,” said the president of US sales for a consumer products company.**

“As much as possible, try to understand where they’re coming from and make them the hero. Come in humbly and say, ‘You make great things. I can help you tell the world about them. Let’s figure out how our skills are complementary,’” said Andy Berndt, Head of Google’s Creative Lab.***

This is going to require all the political and networking skills you've acquired over the years. You’ll find allies, agnostics and antagonists:

First Things First

Congrats! You're a Marketing Exec - Now What??? listed the five things SpencerStuart* identified that CMOs must do well:

• Get the marketing mandate right
• Build meaningful relationships with functional and business leaders
• Agree on how to measure success
• Collaborate with external partners
• Cultivate the best talent 

Let's take these one at a time.