Aug 10, 2020 | Analytics, Management, Strategy
Data is inherently tactical, just numbers without intelligence. It takes structure, capability development, and governance to turn it into a useable asset that adds value. In the absence of a structure that is designed to enable the identification, analysis, and leveraging of that data, and to turn it into useable intelligence, it will remain just data.
To go about that task, ask yourself a number of questions:
What are the data flows?
Through the enterprise, who uses the data, how do they use it, and to what outcome?
Where are the interconnections that occur, to what extend are they compounding positively? Data can also compound negatively, usually because it reinforces an existing confirmation bias that is flawed.
Data is functionally agnostic, should be readily available to all, and the outcomes of use transparent so they can be built upon and compounded.
Who ‘owns’ the data?
Too many times I see the IT department generating data, and keeping to it themselves. Similarly, the finance department is guilty, as are all functions. This is usually not malicious; it is just reflecting a lack of cross functional collaboration. It is becoming more common that marketing is driving a large part of the data agenda, enabled by digital tools, but few marketers have the capability to do it effectively.
Often, there is an expectation that ‘digitisation’ of the enterprise will change the way data is used. Not so, it is no more than putting a new coat of paint on the building, unless the internal structures are changed as well, nothing really changes, you just get a few press releases and nice photos for the annual report.
What data is used?
Piles of data is generated, often collated, and distributed, or made available, but never put to productive use. Usually the missing ingredient is curiosity. Those who are curious approach the data with a ‘why’ and ‘what if’ attitude, they ask questions which identify holes in the data, drives them to be filled, and seeks new sources.
Where does the data add competitive value? Competitive value is a two sided coin. On one side is the need to keep up with what your competition is doing, to leverage the opportunities for productivity and not fall behind in your customers eyes. The second is to find ways for data, and more specifically the knowledge that comes from analysing data, to give you a competitive edge. If a proposed investment does not do at least one of these two things, why would you proceed?
How well do the data outcomes reflect alignment with strategy?
Having data and the analyses that goes with it that leads to conclusions that are inconsistent or divergent from the stated strategy must cause you to question the data, its analysis, and the strategy. In these circumstances, it makes sense to deploy the scientific method, create a hypothesis, test it, collect more data and rinse and repeat until you have alignment between the strategy and its supporting data.
Where are you on the digital adoption curve?
Data is just another asset, it requires explicit actions to build the capabilities necessary to generate, use and fund it. There has to be explicit policies and priorities given, or the investments in data development and the capabilities required, or it will not happen. There needs to be a clear picture of the structures of data domains, from engineering, finance, marketing, sales, and they need to be prioritised and organised to deliver the best return in the long term.
The tools being used to accumulate, process and analyse data are just tools, no different to the hammer that drives a nail. It is how we use them that make the difference. Tools everyone should have are those that ensure the data is both clean and robust. Decisions based on data that fails either of these ‘sanitary’ tests will be sub-optimal at best.
We have entered the digital world. Data and its organisation, funding, leveraging and governance are rapidly becoming the key to competitive survival.
How well are you, and your enterprise placed?
Header cartoon: courtesy Tom Gauld at tomgauld.com.
Aug 5, 2020 | Change, Strategy
Everyone and his dog is making predictions about the shape of the economy, post corona, a state that is seemingly moving out of our grasp currently with the resurgence of the bug. The reality is that the cards have all been thrown in the air, never has the immediate future looked so uncertain. Therefore, why should I miss out on pontificating?
Friedrich Nietzsche seems to have got it right when he wrote: ‘What does not kill me makes me stronger’. I suspect he will be again proven correct, just bad luck for the dead.
The tone of the predictions made is usually reflective of the mouth from which it came, and the interest they have. However, the almost unanimous view is that we are in for a really tough time. Whether the recovery is ‘V’ shaped, ‘U’ shaped, or more like an ongoing ‘L’ only time will tell.
However, my money is on the ‘L’, with a few upticks in specific areas.
- Demand will be constrained, which will filter through the economy, resulting in sustained unemployment and underemployment, cycling back to lower demand.
- Supply will be constrained, as businesses disappear, their supply chains are disrupted, and manufacturing sovereignty takes front and centre, but is unable to fill the void. Therefore the gap between the rhetoric and the reality might be wider than we think at this point.
- Government policy changes will occur, but will they be the right ones and be sufficiently effective to make a real difference more than the immediate triage. Policies are fairly flexible, subject to quick change; entrenched modes of behaviour and belief are not so flexible. Therefore it may be that the short term measures do not stick after the initial pressure is removed, and policy drifts back to the pre-existing status quo. This would be an opportunity lost.
- The systemic shock to the financial system will be substantial. I am not an economist, but the butchers bill from this response to the virus will have to be paid. That payment will come through a reorientation of financial markets and tax regimes. With very low interest rates, there will be money looking for a home, but the system might be in some sort of semi catatonic state driven by uncertainty, and the chances of further rounds of infections that lead to subsequent close-downs. Household balance sheets will have been severely impacted as people have reached into reserves of all kinds to pay living expenses. The Australian house is the super fund of many older Australians, it is likely that the values will drop substantially in the face of low demand. This is concurrent, with their super balances from super fund investments, which have tanked. Older Australians will simply have to work longer to be able to retire, but there are no jobs for older workers.
- Tax relief except in specific cases such as the usurious payroll tax, will probably not be forthcoming, but fundamental changes in the tax system to reorient it towards greater equity and to plug the gaping holes is essential. The decade old Henry tax review should be dusted off and rethought for a start. Some real political backbone is required, but I suspect will remain missing.
- For a considerable time, it seems likely that the stock market will undervalue performance, reversing the trend of the last 20 years, where markets have overvalued stocks. This feeds into the social problems of how we look after in increasingly large and unhealthy cohort of ageing baby boomers and their parents, as their investment incomes are reduced.
- Business models will be transformed. Working remotely will become far more accepted as we simply do not revert to the commute mentality of pre-corona. This has all sorts of implications for CBD property, infrastructure development, and the way communities are run.
- Supply chains will become more transparent and collaborative, even amongst competitors, as it becomes obvious that agility above all else is necessary to maintain the flow through the whole system.
- Technology will get a shot in the arm, as innovation and tech always does in times of crisis. However, it will be technology emerging from the current pool of scientific knowledge, some of which may have been hiding on the shelf for some time. Original science that will deliver solutions to problems we may not yet have seen, will have to wait longer for the necessary funding. Meanwhile, our stocks of really smart, trained and funded scientists, capable of creating the science that will deliver the future will continue to diminish to close to extinction levels. This is despite government rhetoric, and some current reallocation of funds from humanities to STEM. It is a systemic challenge ignored for at least the last 30 years because it extends well beyond any election cycle.
What have I missed?
Jul 22, 2020 | Change, Leadership, Strategy
As we hesitantly, with stumbles, come out of this lockdown, we will see the landscape has changed. For some, it will be a land of opportunity, for others, a wasteland.
Rather than seeing it as a calamity, those who choose to see it as an opportunity, will be able to look and see that what has actually happened is that the lockdown has dramatically accelerated many trends that were already slowly impacting on our lives. They were all evident before to those who were looking, now they are in ample evidence to everyone who is not completely blind.
The more obvious ones, are:
‘Digitisation’.
So called digitisation has taken off, whatever digitisation means in your context. Suddenly ‘digital’ is the new normal. From remote control of factories to grannies interacting with their grandchildren via Zoom, nobody has been immune.
Remote work
Working from home, cafes, the car, has been developing for a decade. Suddenly, it has been accepted as an alternative to expensive office space in central locations. What will probably evolve is some combination of decentralised ‘meeting places’ and working from home, serviced offices, and cafes. The trend has been pushed along a decade in 5 months.
Retail delivery services.
Similarly have been pushed ahead a decade. Everything from the local restaurant to the supermarket, and department store now have to be geared up to deliver, or lose the sale. This will change the nature of retail from transactional to more ‘showrooming’, a trend harnessed by Apple a decade ago while everyone else was cutting retail prices and locations in order to save money. However, retail shop fronts will become more important than ever as a means to communicate with customers, rather than just being a point of sale.
The end of ‘purpose’ marketing.
The focus of marketing, at least by corporate marketers, will have pivoted from the banality of the ‘purpose driven’ marketing of the last few years. In the absence of a compelling idea, marketers deluded themselves that people really cared about their empty statements of ‘purpose’. Your potential and current customers will be demanding evidence that the statements carry weight in the behaviour of those seeking their money.
Politics.
Politicians have had a huge wakeup call. We voters really hate the division and spite of the practise of politics as usual pre corona. We long for some evidence that those elected to lead, actually do so, rather than just taking the trappings of office for their own benefits. The pressures on politicians and the political orthodoxy that has dominated to date will have to be revised. The basic assumptions about what services government provides, and from who and how, the necessary funds are raised to pay for them, have moved.
Not since 1939 have our politicians been confronted with the profoundly difficult choices that now face. I wonder if they are up to the challenge?
The economy.
The economy has suffered a major stroke, one for which substantial rehab over a long period will be required. It would be naive to believe it will recover to look much like the pre stroke version, but recover it will, over time. For those willing and able to push the boundaries, there will be opportunity everywhere, from the remaking of supply chains, to the potential of rebirth of sophisticated niche manufacturing, and new export markets. Digitisation of just about everything that has been accelerated massively, will demand investment and different business models and enterprise capabilities. These will offer great opportunity as well as what for many will be a terminal challenge. None of this will be easy, but it will happen.
As we ‘wake up’ from the corona coma, there will be an inclination to revert back to the known, and comfortable. Succumbing to that urge will be a mistake, as we have all been forced to move on, to push the edges of our comfort zones. The economic and social climate has changed dramatically, and those that seek the comfort of the Pre Corona status quo will find themselves isolated, and falling behind their competitors.
Picking your way through all this will take effort, experience and careful planning. When you need the injection of those skills, give me a call.
Jul 17, 2020 | Change, Strategy
‘Pivot’ has been the word of the year so far.
Cafes have ‘pivoted’ to takeaway, fitness centres ‘pivoted’ to on line classes, supermarkets ‘pivoted’ to home delivery, entertainers ‘pivoted’ to all sorts of variations of on line delivery, and so on.
Huge changes to the business models of many businesses amidst the chaos.
Now things are starting to go back to some sort of normal activity, although the signs of a re-emergence of the Bug are alarming.
The entrepreneurs amongst us are thinking about the bits of the emerged business models to keep, adjust, or throw away.
It seems that while there is a new normal emerging, for many the challenge is not to slip back into the old ways, but to see the coming months as the second start-up for their business.
It may have been forced on them, but there is silver in the cloud.
New business models, new relationships and types of relationship, a wider recognition that communication is the core of success, and that customers are looking for value from all sorts of new sources.
This coming period for most will be much more than just a re-opening, it will have many of the elements of a start-up. For others, it will be the sad walk to the under-taker. It is unlikely there will be too many businesses remaining unchanged.
Header photo credit: Peter Orr photography
Jul 15, 2020 | Change, Strategy
Crises always drive rapid change, and this Corona crisis will prove to be no different. Many enterprises will flounder and disappear, but others will emerge, not just to take the place of the dead, but to build value in different ways.
The law of diminishing returns that had held true for most of the 19th and 20th centuries turned around, beginning in the 1990’s with the flattening of productivity increases. Slowly, scale had become its own worst enemy, as it outgrew the ability of the corporate bureaucracies that evolved to operate productively.
Manufacturing became organisationally top heavy, and productivity improvement became very hard to extract in anything more than small steps.
Even harder to find is relative productivity improvement. When everyone is increasing productivity at around the same rate, along a predictable curve, there is no net competitive improvement.
We had the early stages of the digital revolution in the mid 1990’s, culminating in the enormous profits of the so called ‘unicorns’ that emerged in the early 2000’s. These defied the rules of diminishing returns, and grew on the back of network effects and negligible marginal costs. In the process, they made their owners multi billionaires and rock stars.
Perhaps we have reached a tipping point, where the dollars flowing from the digitisation of our lives is starting to reach its limits?
Despite the enormous wealth and power delivered by the digital platforms, they still supply only a small part of what we need, and do not supply any of the basics, food, shelter, or clothing. They just make these things easier to get, and sometimes cheaper.
However, the application of digital capability to the manufacturing processes that deliver the things we need to live, may be in the nascent stages of reversing some of those limitations of scale.
Over the last decade, most of the unicorn wannabee’s have floundered, with a few notable exceptions. Their market valuation tanked, and in the recent case of WeWork, blowing up in spectacular fashion. Meanwhile, the market value of manufacturing businesses, those that produce the things we need to live, have not been as affected. However, when compared to the valuations of the digital platforms, their performance looks tepid at best. This comparison has sucked the life out of manufacturing investment, as investors seek quick wins.
Productivity increases, soaring in the latter quarter of the 20th century have flattened out, despite the ubiquity of software.
It was not supposed to happen like this.
Partly this flattening is because the barriers to entry have been radically reduced, and in many cases, removed. Meanwhile the benefits have moved very slowly from the owners of the software to those that use it.
Our productivity will rise again, as digital tools are developed and deployed into the production of the physical things we need and want to live comfortable lives.
The future is digital, but the emphasis will be in different places.
The evidence is all around if we look.
Tesla is just a car, re-imagined with a digital heart, Apple became the most valuable company in the world by adding a physical retail arm to their digital portfolio, and Amazon purchased the physical supply chain of Whole foods for US$16.5 billion, and got their money back overnight with the increase in their stock value.
Locally, the response to the Corona bug in manufacturing forums has been all about the deploying of digital capability to the production of physical things. This is together with the recognition of the importance of a sovereign manufacturing capability.
We are, maybe, approaching a huge inflection point.
A few weeks ago, I watched the Prime Minister speak at the National Press Club. If even a modest part of the rhetoric converts into action, we will be better off. When talking about the technical education system, he used the same phrase several times: ‘Why pour more money into a dud system?’ This is an overt acknowledgement that the current system is absolutely broken, and needs to be fixed if manufacturing jobs, with the social stability they generate, are to re-emerge.
What do you think?
Jul 13, 2020 | Communication, Customers, Strategy
Writing an email sequence is not as easy, or effective, as the videoed on-line courses (special deal $695, ends at midnight) would have you believe.
The templates and advice is all pretty vanilla although useful, but does not get to the heart of why people buy from you, and how, amidst the tsunami of stuff coming at them, they pick out yours.
Many seem to think digital is different from the old fashioned advertising I grew up with, and it is, tactically, but strategically, it is the same.
A potential customer goes through some sort of journey that differs in every case, but generally follows a process:
- recognition that there is something of interest out there for them
- Awareness that the stuff out there has relevance to them as a solution to some sort of a problem they have, or have recognised as a result of the discovery process.
- The problem now seen becomes something that has a value in its solution
- There is activity seeking that solution
- Choosing a supplier, and installation of the solution
- The after sales process, where they can be persuaded, assuming you did a good job, to be an advocate for the problem you solved for them, and more specifically for you as the solution provider.
The process by which this all happens is not a nice logical ‘Sales funnel’ where progress is made in an orderly manner. In reality is looks more like a huge ball of tangled fishing line, a real mess. Seeking to put order to the mess makes sense so long as you do not lose sight of the simple fact that the whole thing will resist the orderly, sequential nature of software, and revert to the mess at any and every opportunity.
The targets of your ‘content’ at each stage also has wrinkles.
You have current customers, the easiest to reach, potential customers, those you really want to reach who may have the problem unrecognised, some who may have recognised their problem, and you have advocates, those who might amplify your content.
The further audience is the wider community, out of whom all the other three groups emerge in one way or another.
Therefore, you need to mix and match between the mediums and the message to maximise the outcomes of the investment in content. You do this by the combination of focus on specific market personas. This includes personalised messaging of current and past customers, as well as more general communication of the problem/value proposition equation to gain reach into the varying audiences, to generate marketing leverage.
How deeply have your considered your mix of content and medium to reach your preferred audience?
Header credit: Maksym Kopylov via Flikr
