• Optimize Inc.
  • Home
  • About the Author
  • Our Services
  • Order Intended Consequences Now!
  •  

    Revolution: The Kony Video and the Future of Marketing

    March 12th, 2012

    You would have to be living under a rock not to have heard about the grass roots effort to capture Joseph Kony of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda.  A video posted on You Tube this week went viral, with over 56 Million hits (as of this writing.) In my case, my 15 year old daughter pleaded with me to turn off 60 Minutes to watch it; providing a stunning commentary on our movement to new forms of media.

    The video, shot by a little known videographer is being promoted by the advocacy group “Invisible Children” and tells the story of a Ugandan child and others like him, who have been the victims of horrific crimes against humanity.

    While the story and cause is compelling, it is the story telling that should capture our attention.  The 30-minute video is presented like a short, part documentary part sensationalism. The themes of children killing their own parents and mutilating others are shocking and captivating.

    All marketers should become aware of this medium. The movie blurs the line between amateur videos on You Tube and professionally produced movies. Companies often attempt to tell their story through static documents that lack color and texture.  Those of us who are on the wrong side of aging must recognize that  those who we market to no longer process information in the form of static text. We have been conditioned to view our news, our sports and our marketing offers in multimedia form.  The marketing of the future will include many dimensions, including video, sound, and info-graphics launched online, rated by others and spread through sites that have not even been built yet.  Media will be in constant flux, with new views, tidbits and vignettes wetting our appetite for real time information.

    The other thing unique about the video is its call to action; setting a very clear goal to capture Kony in 2012. If you think that this is just another cause being thumped by a set of leftist activists, think again. The U.S. military has dispatched 100 Special Forces “advisors” to Uganda in an attempt to find Kony, and senior U.S. officials are scrambling to harness the populism of the video.

    As the video proclaims “Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come.” View it here


    How to Maintain Strategic Discipline

    January 27th, 2012

    There are many ingredients required to develop and execute a successful strategy; none more important than discipline. Disruptive innovations that reshape an industry are rare. Most innovation is incremental, and successful execution is a function of hard work, time and patience.

    Jeff Bezos’s insight about selling books online (which resulted in the formation of Amazon) was conceived while he worked as an analyst at an investment bank. His conversion of strategy into tactics will go down in history, as Amazon took on all the best in retailing, seemingly overnight.

    Bezos remains hungry and focused. Amazon’s top 5 managers meet every Tuesday for four hours to review and rebake strategy. Not once a year, not once a quarter – every Tuesday. Twice a year his team has a two day off-site to think about “big ideas” that may require 2-3 years to implement.

    Alan Kay once said, “Perspective is worth 80 IQ points.”  Where the rubber meets the road in strategy is maintaining the right perspective – the intersection of strategic thinking and tactical execution.  Business owners can easily lose perspective when they spend too much time muddled in solving day to day operational problems.

    To maintain strategic discipline:

    Create a strategy committee, task force or executive management team (EMT).

    Each member should have a role in strategy formation and implementation and be accountable for key initiatives of the company. Meet with the EMT monthly to review progress versus goals.

    Engage mid-management in strategy formation and execution

    Mid-managers are often insightful in identifying latent needs as they are often closer to the customer than their senior counterparts.  Many entrepreneurial companies lack management depth. They are well served to include mid-managers in executing strategy.  Provide learning opportunities for junior managers by delegating tasks for them to complete.

    Hold your teams accountable

    Results oriented organizations are built from the ground up to support execution, rigorously using scorecards that drill down to individual performance. Best-in-class organizations orchestrate goal setting for individuals that align with the broader goals of the organizations.

    Include outside variables in your dashboard

    While most successful companies measure internal activities, few score external variables. Seek out external metrics that may be predictive of future demand. Leverage the data to plan capacity, labor, facility expansion, procurement of equipment, etc.

    Bezos said, “We are willing to plant seeds and wait a long time for them to turn into trees. Every new business we’ve ever engaged in has initially been seen as a distraction by people externally and sometimes even internally.”

    Great strategies convert into initiatives that become the unifying vision of the strategically successful organization. Ideas that lack resources, energy and concentration are just a distraction.


    The Fall Out of Occupy Wall Street; How will it Affect Small Business?

    October 28th, 2011

    As evidenced during the Arab Spring, and earthquake in Japan, we are often unable to recognize the magnitude of events as they unfold. Such could be true of the Occupy Wall Street Movement.  Are world-wide protests an indicator of momentum into a global revolution of the people, or will it fizzle into a clash between local police and a group of poorly organized discontents? What effect will all of this have on the business climate?

    Many remain skeptical. One analyst said that a friend of hers had mused that she could, “smell them through the TV.”

    Yet this is no ordinary protest, and to dismiss “the movement” on its face would seem shallow and naive. Regardless of ones political leanings, we must all be conscious that the movement on Wall Street has struck a nerve on Main Street. It is clear there is a faction within America who believes that significant reforms are required, and they believe they represent 99% of Americans.  It is hard to know if Wall Street CEO’s are paying much attention, but  one must assume that legislators are watching the 6 o’clock news with some discomfort.

    The most direct effect will be the influence all of this has on the Presidential election, not only in terms of the selection for President, but of the agenda, which will define his term. Seemingly, the protestors will embolden those who seek higher taxes on the rich and broader controls and regulations.  The inability for the Republican Party to provide a clear front-runner, with a populace message could only further the left’s ambitions to reallocate American wealth.

    Regardless of the winner, it would appear that laissez-faire capitalism is the institution under greatest attack. There seems to be a belief that the corporation itself is an instrument for evil.  A tentacle of the movement seems to be that government should legislate or guarantee employment, a concept with deep implications for labor law, unions, and taxation.

    In the year ahead, the executive branch will continue to drive on tighter regulation. While there are streams of regulations under review, some of the most noted include[i]:

    • Stricter interpretation by the IRS on expenses related to meals and entertainment, and a new tax on self insured health plans.
    • A revamp of the SEC, including greater oversight of “broker/dealers”.
    • Labor Dept. enforcement on the use of “contractors” and more restrictions on the use of minors on farms.
    • Environmental controls on “fracking” and similar activities.
    • The revamp of Medicare by the “deficit panel, including the potential of extending the Medicare eligibility age.
    • New rules by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that crack down on discrimination against disabled workers.
    • The Occupational Safety and Health Administration focus on violence in the work place and protections required in “high risk” work settings.
    • A push by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for new rules on banks offering high-interest direct deposit loans.

    The spread of protests in Europe is of particular concern, as the degradation of fragile economies there could provide fuel to the fire.  Those feisty Europeans are not new to protest, and their governments are not immune to violence. One thing that is hard to reconcile is that governments (such as Greece) are completely broke, yet their residents seem to expect a preservation of services, a zero sum game for all.  The failure of banks in Europe poses a much greater threat than in the U.S. It is a situation ripening quickly.

    The fact that tax rates will escalate for the wealthy is somewhat inevitable. The President is calling for an unfathomable increase in corporate tax rates to boot.  Let us hope that such impetus does not create much in the way of immediate stress on the U.S. economy in the short term.

    Batten down the hatches; it could be a long winter.


    [i] The Kiplinger Letter


    Where to Diversify: Consider Barriers to Entry

    June 14th, 2011

    A common theme in recent years is the thirst to diversify. Often organizations wish to minimize customer concentration risk, or seek out new markets with less competition.

    Competition is a matter of degrees, and one can predict which markets will attract competitors based on the ease by which they can enter or exit. While there are industry specific hurdles to consider in any business, barriers to entry include:*

    Economies of Scale- Companies seek out volume or vertical integration in an effort to control raw materials or create a cost advantage.

    Capital Requirements- The need for access to heavy equipment, factories, or labor is so expensive to fund that only large competitors enter the fray.

    Switching Costs- The cost for customers to switch suppliers becomes too high.  When one takes on a new cell phone contract, the price penalty to switch is punitive. By the end of the contract, when switching costs are low, providers offer incentives to keep customers in their network.

    Access to Distribution- Companies such as Coke, Pepsi, Nabisco and Frito Lay control distribution at retail outlets, keeping competitors off the shelf. Once distribution is established, it is relatively easy to expand into new categories such as bottled water and iced tea.

    Cost Advantages- In some instances cost advantages have nothing to do with scale, but are a function of strategic alliances or bets that provide cost savings.  During the last run up of fuel prices, Southwest Airlines’ clever hedge only expanded their cost advantage.

    Government Policy- Government is unpredictable and is an X factor in many businesses. Government contracts often exclude suppliers who cannot meet or choose not comply with a myriad of requirements from eco standards, to minimum labor rates.

    When analyzing which business you should be “in”, it is not enough to consider the current state of competition. How might competitors behave in the future?  Is the market large enough to attract behemoth companies?  How have such companies reacted to price competition in other markets?

    Another consideration is the cost of exit. Companies who provide parts may have legacy costs that may last many years and erode profits. There are many variables to consider in any new endeavor, and diversification offers both opportunities and a myriad of risks.

    *Adapted from Competitive Strategy by Michael Porter


    Health Care’s Perverse Incentives

    January 25th, 2011

    A federal judge’s recent ruling that elements of the health care bill are unconstitutional has heightened the health care debate.  Republicans, feeling their oats and perceiving a mandate are threatening to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

    It was only after my friend and colleague Dr. Bala Chandrasekhar explained most of the information in this post to me that I first came to understand the fundamental problem.  Our medical community suffers from perverse incentives. The system does not reward results; it rewards the extension of care.

    In the world’s best hospitals, such as the Mayo Clinic, physicians collaborate, in a finite space, where information is shared and decisions are made. In the overwhelming majority of cases, patients are shuttled around, from general practitioners, to specialist, and from one laboratory to the next.  Information about the patient’s medical history is rarely shared, an approach that does not support the best medical outcome for patients.

    The advent of electronic medical records and new rules governing payments is the impetus to consolidation in a business so unsophisticated, that many medical files and prescriptions are managed with a piece of paper, pen and fax machine.  The institution of medicine needs to undergo radical change, and the prospects of larger organizations managing our care means that the stakes are getting higher.

    Unlike professionally managed businesses, there are massive variations in best practices in medical groups.  Physicians hate oversight, and we pay the price in an estimated 100,000 people a year dying in U.S. hospitals from pure negligence (errors).

    It is intuitive to all of us that raising medical care costs are unsustainable, yet the numbers are daunting.  The convergence of an aging populace and exponential health care inflation will double Medicare costs within a decade.  By 2020, Medicare and Medicaid are projected to increase from 21% to over 30% of federal spending (non-interest payments), and that doesn’t include massive spending by state and local governments. Proponents argue that we have the best medical care in the world; but at what cost? A knee replacement that costs upward of $40,000 in the U.S., costs $5,000 in Germany. We all want the best health care, but at some point common sense must prevail.

    According to the bipartisan congressional report -Restoring America’s Future, “slowing the growth of health spending is realistic. Other advanced countries have substantially lower health spending as a share of GDP, while still achieving measures of access and quality that often exceed those in the United States. Although a uniquely American approach is required, these comparisons show what is achievable.” Health care reform focuses on capping costs for doctors and reforming various forms of insurance coverage (including universal coverage). It does little to reform the underlying behavioral issues that are driving up health care costs.  The fee for service model is dated and irrelevant.

    If these costs are not constrained, our fiscal mess will get much worse, and our businesses and personal wealth will be drained by massive tax increases.  Small business owners, who bear the brunt of a bloated health care bureaucracy in the form of inflated health insurance premiums must advocate for more meaningful reforms.  Our economic future depends on it.