Could Information Flow spell the End of the “Great Recession”?

24 03 2009
Back in Boston

Back in Boston

It’s good to be back in Boston after 3 months of travelling around the world– finally back in my own bed, back with my friends, and back to being able to write on this blog.

I’m not sure what I expected to happen to the business environment whilst I was away, but I think it’s safe to say that no one would’ve expected the deterioration that’s happened over the last few months. Since I’ve gotten back, it’s been interesting to see the various different viewpoints I’ve heard on what the current recession is, and how long it may last – everything from a very doom and gloom “10+ years of darkness” from Mark Turrell, my former CEO – to rather more optimistic visions of “over by this summer” from one of my former clients.Credit Crunch

All we ever really know about recessions however, is that they very rarely conform to the timelines we predict for them, with things getting worse quicker than expected, and likewise businesses recovering faster than we expected – no one ever comes out with an accurate prediction (that I know of– by all means let me know if any of you find a reliably accurate source!). One would think that with the pace of change still at breakneck speeds however, that the pace of change/recovery within the markets would be equally quick – with the effect of information flow and arbitrage essentially magnifying the classic economic indicators – on the one side magnifying the negative effects of the banking problems we’re currently still facing – but then probably helping us to come out of the other side that much quicker too…

It was then with interest that I read a blog post by my friend, Donald Smith on his “Perspectives on Connected Innovation” Blog. The post, entitled “The Race to the Top – Information Arbitrage” – details a new goal in organizations as they embrace social media to both save money at the bottom, and look for value-adding advantages from unique information sources at the top.picture-3

As he puts it:

“Today, value comes from the following statements:

“Did you see?”

“I found…”

“Check this out…”

Information is driving a “race to the top” in terms of value. Each newly discovered tweet, story, or theory could be the nugget that wins recognition, fame, or accomplishment. So we mine Twitter and read RSS dumps trying to identify the tidbit that will be most valued by the organization. ….. No longer do I need to spend hundreds of dollars on professional groups to network in my industry or thousands of dollars to bring in consultants. The web makes this information more accessible and in most cases free. The challenge for employees is to make the information palatable for the organization to devour.”

Don, and I say this with unabashed extreme jealousy, has the enviable situation of being on a paid sabbatical to explore the whole world of innovation and social media for his company – to essentially develop and disseminate a flow of information on this subject for the corporation’s benefit. There was a time, not that long ago, where a company doing something like this was not that alien (pre-2001 for example..) but now? During a recession?

Combine that then with my experience on a recent job interview with a large company (and former client) for a role where I would be leading a team to drive a flow of innovations into the organization to solve problems 3-4 years out. Based on my previous experience, companies generally expect roles like this to generate some form of identifiable value every year in order to justify budgets and also as a prime measurement of performance amongst other things. But this company was different – it seems that they see value in simply establishing a flow of new insights, innovative thoughts, and information even if it doesn’t lead to actual executable implementations. Again, in a so-called massive recessionary environment – this is either incredibly progressive – or incredibly reckless – thinking.

Unless, of course, we’re all wrong about where we are in the economic environment. Could actions like the one exhibited by Don’s company and the one I interviewed with be a sign that the market has bottomed out?ist2_5267850-volatile-stock-market

As I commented on Don’s Blog – the point at which companies stop looking at the bottom line and start valuing input other than cash is typically only seen when a company is growing and prospering. Could the development and recognition of information flow as a source of value be a sign that the recession is beginning to finish? Some may think of that as optimistic – but it’s not the only signs out there – and the ramifications for a business world that embraces the massive information flow that is driving the social world at the moment is quite…interesting to say the least.

Has anyone else had similar experiences? – if so – please share!





The Innovator’s Guide to a Galaxy in Recession

20 11 2008

 

Don't Panic ButtonRecessions are funny things – on the one side economic horror story on the other harbinger of an explosion of innovation opportunities – sort of a “is the glass half full or half empty” coin toss really. 

I always find it interesting to watch how companies react during bad times – their reactions, whilst perfectly understandable from a human emotion standpoint – can be dreadfully short sighted at times. In fact – it’s this over reaction towards short term thinking that triggers the economic horror stories out there as people get laid off, companies post ever lower profits, and economic doom and gloom dominates the newspaper headlines. 

For example – take this typical strategical cycle that typifies corporate recessionary behavior: 

In a non-recessionary environment, people are employed; stability reigns, and people feel comfortable enough to part with their hard earned cash on non-essential items. And when times are really good – people approach their purchases in a more “cavalier” attitude looking at a wide array of factors beyond whether or not it simply “does the job” – and happily paying for things like extra “coolness”, the right brand, or a color that matches those shoes you bought last week.  In this environment, companies can lazily throw low-level innovations at the market with impunity to capture a fickle market that carefully matches their purchases with their lifestyle and changes frequently because of the easy availability and reliability of cash to the consumer. For the last 7 years or so (and some might say longer as the 2001-2002 recession was a short one) we’ve been facing just such a market. 

In a recessionary environment, consumers get jittery about spending their money as stability is no longer guaranteed – consumer mentalities change and so do their buying preferences. Top of the list of consumer preferences are now two simple elements, 1) whether or not the product can do the core job needed, and 2) price.

The net effect of that, on most markets, is to essentially commoditize all the products within because the incremental differences between competing products are no longer valued individually.  As a result, the companies able to provide the least expensive goods that still do the job begin to take on market share.

Consumer paying with coins

In order to compete, companies likewise begin to compete on price, initially by reducing their operating costs (i.e. headcount), which allows them to be able to maintain margins and profits on lower demand.  Then eventually they begin to sacrifice margin for increased market share in a bid to make up the reduced margins with increased volume.  Whilst these moves result in short term gains, they only last as long as it takes for competitors to do the same, which usually isn’t long. 

Eventually companies reach a point at which they are operating at minimal margins that barely cover their costs – and go on to the next stage – a battle of bank balances as companies continue to reduce prices at the cost of the business until only one remains…. 

Sound familiar? It should, the car industry pretty much just followed this model of competition to its demise, and current bid to be bailed out by the US Government.  There are several other similar cycles as the failure on one group of companies resonates up and down their value chains to affect the entire economy.

Who Dares Wins DVD cover

Yet out of every major recession, several companies emerge as winners.   Companies that have somehow found a way to separate them-selves from competition, found new ways to do business, or capitalized on new markets that no one new existed before. Home Depot, the iPod, the PC, even MTV have all triumphed from past recessionary environments.  In a recessionary world it really is “He Who Dares,Wins” (read this McKinsey Quarterly article for a fantastic quantification of this).

It’s easy to overlook the big obvious solution to the whole problem and get caught up in all the doom and gloom that dominates our media headlines as so many other commentators have. 

Recessions result in one certainty – BIG CHANGE – and the longer and deeper the recession, the more change there is – in your consumer/client, in your market, in your industry, in global business as a whole.   

Big Change is scary – but Big Change is good. Big change means BIG OPPORTUNITIES. Opportunities to change the game, to take advantage of weaker competitors, to find new and novel ways in which to not only survive, but to thrive. 

Innovation is all about realizing and capitalizing on the opportunities available to your company, and it’s the way out of vicious cycles like the one described above. 

The great news is that companies intent on winning the game are now forced to look at innovation with a sense of urgency previously unseen.  They will look towards innovation to revisit past assumptions, norms, and directions in a bid to become different from the competition in the eyes of the consumer/client.  To no longer be able to be compared on a like for like basis, and to compete in a market of one instead of many. 

Winners emerging from this downturn in the economy will develop an innovation strategy that looks at innovation in a very unique way from most companies. They will see innovation as something that can impact all parts of the business, in short and medium, as well as long-term time frames. 

1) Short Term Innovation Strategies

In the short term, winning strategies look to help companies with their short-term goals of increased efficiencies.  They do this by developing new and novel ways for the company to achieve cost reductions, process improvements, and business model changes that can catapult them into a new league of efficiencies that are impossible with old-school models.  The more sophisticated the efficiency developed, the more defendable and long lasting that innovation will become.  This will give the company a short term cost edge on its competitors, which is more conducive to the long-term health of the business than simple cost cuttings and harder to emulate.  Dell’s development of their unique business model in the 90’s is a classic example of the type of base changes that can propel a company into a market of one. 

Embracing the creative potential of their employees, GE is currently using Imaginatik’s software to drive their DMP (Direct Material Productivity) Work Out process.  This looks at reducing overall costs through design changes whilst maintaining or improving quality and customer acceptance. The results will directly impact the short-term productivity of GE’s business units. 

Another client I worked with had the interesting idea of creating a marketplace to drive efficiencies in the way the company used external consultants. Rather than individual bids or blind RFP processes – they invited all the consultants into an online system (with company names suitably anonymised) where they could not only see everyone else’s proposals, but could also add on to other company’s proposals.  This allowed the client company to pick and choose the best combination of services to fit their need – and to negotiate pricing in a very transparent process! 

The key here is to focus on short-term strategic objectives, and on areas that will result in ideas developed and implemented. In many cases this means not looking to create new projects, but rather to enhance existing funded projects by providing them with new and novel solutions to the problem they are already addressing. 

For example, why not play into Six Sigma and Lean projects?  They’re all about increasing efficiency in company processes – however all of them rely on small teams of people studying a process at length and then brainstorming between themselves to come up with a more efficient process.  In today’s technology literate and collaborative environments, it seems awfully short sighted to not involve hundreds or thousands of people in the process to come up with better ideas. cardboard toilet rolls

 

 

Georgia-Pacific was a great example of this.  One of their cost reduction initiatives I worked on zeroed in on shaving the cost of the cardboard tubes inside rolls of paper towels. By embracing the collaborative innovation infrastructure at their disposal, mill workers from among the company’s 16,000 North American employees quickly responded with little changes that shaved about $1.2 million a year, or roughly 4%, off the cost of the tubes – not too shabby, eh?  

2) Medium Term 

When looking at the medium term you can start looking at how to take advantage of some of the more obvious changes in the changing marketplace. 

Starbucks Cup and WaffleI loved one story I read about how Starbucks are doing just that.  They’re currently testing out new pricing strategies to try and overcome the recessionary effects on their consumers that are much more price sensitive nowadays, and no longer want to be spending $4 on a daily “Grande pumpkin spice vanilla latte (hold the cream, it makes me fatter)”.   One idea they’re piloting at the moment offers consumers small bottomless cups of coffee (i.e. free refills, not that the cups don’t actually have a bottom, that would be just silly…) for $1.  The move ensures that Starbucks customers return to Starbucks for their daily fixes regardless of household budget changes.  It also provides Starbucks with opportunities to up sell them additional products like music and baked goods that will contribute to the overall margin per customers that they achieve while satisfying new needs for the customer. 

Several clients I’ve worked with have also had fantastic results in the medium term by looking for adjacent markets for existing products. One performance chemicals company I worked with found a multi-million dollar new market for their existing waterproofing wrap used in the construction industry.  This was found when one curious sales person found that his client was buying the product to rapidly waterproof boats they were manufacturing instead.  

Bayer Production FacilityBayer, another Imaginatik client did something similar, collecting 147 ideas from their employee base for alternative uses and markets for one of their existing products.  This resulted in Bayer being able to enter a brand new market area with a new application in less than a year. 

Finally, when looking at the medium term, don’t underestimate the benefits of working with your business partners.  One large tech company ran one event over a 30-day period on optimizing their supply chain with select partners. The resulting ideas picked for implementation realized over $2 Million in benefits and saved them over 3000 man-hours!  I think the correct terminology for those kind of benefits in my current US homeland is “There’s gold in them’ hills”! 

3) Long Term 

Long-term strategies are all about changing the game – finding new products, new markets and taking advantage of concepts such as Blue Ocean Spaces, Disruptive Innovations, or Lead Adopters (depending on whom you choose as your academic guru of choice).  There’s no shortage of proof of the potential that a good innovation program and process can deliver to your business.  Whether it’s the ability to take your business to new heights (i.e. Apple or Google for several over publicized examples of innovation programs of different sorts at work), or more importantly, its ability to provide longevity to your business, even if that means changing the nature of the business Nokia N-Series(i.e. Nokia– originally a forestry company, then rubber products (they still make tires bizarrely), and now a telecoms giant – what could be next?).  

However, success in the long term has to be driven by success in the short and medium term. Their ability to drive real value will give you the credibility and time to drive the big changes that will propel your company into the next generation. 

After all, winners emerge from recessions and innovation is what will make you one of those winners. 





“I ain’t got nooooboooodddyy….”

2 07 2008

“We’d love to innovate, but we just don’t have the resources – everyone’s just too busy on more important projects”…. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve recently heard this from both clients and prospects that I’ve been put in front of in the last few months. There’s a general impression that Innovation in itself is a separate project that you do in addition to your other workload – “PHOOEY!” I say (not sure on the spelling of that word btw – but am sure you get the point). 

What I don’t understand is how clients get to thinking like this. Innovation is not a goal in its own right – it’s a methodology, a discipline, and a strategic tool to achieve your corporate goals – not a goal in its own right. You’re most successful when you’re using it as a way to help the company to find new, novel, and better ways to achieve what it’s already motivated to do – not when you’re floundering along trying to swim against the flow that the company is trying to go in. 

Ah – but what about companies like Nokia, for example I hear you say. Companies that have  changed and morphed through time (in Nokia’s case from forestry, to rubber, to mobile communications so far) by being constantly innovative? What people fail to acknowledge is that Nokia was actively trying to change – it was part of its strategy to be open to and drive new business models away from their core business – business models that eventually proved more profitable than the previous ones and quite rightly became the main focus for Nokia.  Innovation you see, can change the entire company in many weird and wonderful ways – IF your company WANTS to change in those directions.  It’s no use trying to force change that the organization isn’t open to – you’ll just waste a lot of time and effort that will ultimately fail and will not be positively recognized by your leadership. 

Instead – take the company strategy and identify the direction the company wants to go in and the goals that it has set for itself. Identify the people working on projects aimed at progressing the company towards that goal and offer them a different and better way in which to achieve the work that they’re already trying to get done.  They’ll already have the desire, enthusiasm, commitment, and more crucially – resources – to get the innovative ideas and approaches your team is bringing to the table implemented.  And at the end of the day innovation is about getting things implemented and to do so in a way that adds value to your company – this approach does both.






Innovation in a Recession

17 06 2008

 

Most talk around recessions is doom and gloom – but there is one business discipline that booms during a recession – innovation.  In fact, recessionary environments have been responsible for some of the biggest booms in corporate innovation history. The reason for this is that recessions increase the need for companies to change and be different from the pack.  Changes can be forced in:

  • business efficiency
  • business models incorporated or devised
  • what the customer wants
  • what the differentiating factors for a particular product segment or industry are 
  • and many others 

In a recession things work differently, so look for how they’ve changed and target your innovation efforts at adapting to and exploiting those changes!








%d bloggers like this: