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

    The Real Estate Dilemma

    April 18th, 2012

    I just recently wrote in this space about the housing market’s affect on our broader economy. It appears as if real estate is the Pareto principle at work. Five states (Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan and Nevada) have generated a shocking 46% of the nation’s foreclosures[i].

    While there are a number of forces as work, there is one explicit predictor of foreclosure activity. States where judges must approve foreclosures in writing have 260% more activity than in other states.  As homeowners and banks wait for the government to take action, markets spiral downward, only diminishing the value of properties that have positive equity.

    In the states where foreclosures are dealt with quickly, the market has already begun to turn.  Each of us can reach our own conclusions about the role of government (this is not the appropriate venue for such a debate).

    The broader point is that the U.S. real estate market, like many other markets has vast regional differences and elements within it moving in different directions.  The concept of the “business cycle” is a bit of a misnomer. Traditional cycles have been disrupted and replaced with a series of variables that drive markets very quickly, sometimes without pretense or warning.

    The events that created the recent housing bubble created the perfect storm.  The recovery will be another type of storm, with regions and even areas within regions recovering more quickly than others. We see similar phenomena in employment and growth in various industries.

    It used to be that selecting the right industry was enough to ensure some level or prosperity. Today, entrepreneurs and investors need to find very specific opportunities and niches where growth and profit are plausible.

    Like everything else, choose your real estate carefully.


    [i] The Kiplinger Letter March 16th, 2002


    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


    The Dilemma of Variable Pricing

    February 27th, 2012

    Globalization has enabled unprecedented hyper-competition, and all types of dynamic comparative pricing models. Yet pricing within many segments of our economy appear like something from the The Stone Age.

    If you go into a white tablecloth restaurant and order the sea bass on a Wednesday, you might pay $30.  If you return to the same restaurant on a Saturday the price would be the same, even though demand in the restaurant is likely to be very different.  Eateries price on the cost plus model built in the industrial age; the price is based on some multiple of raw materials (or labor).

    Our economy doesn’t work this way anymore.  Consider the market for sports tickets. Sports franchises (the Lakers for example) set the initial price for a ticket. But the market resets the price in real time based on supply and demand. If it is a Tuesday night game against the Raptors, a seat may command a few dollars more than the face value.  A Sunday game against the Celtics could command double that within a market being energized by the likes of Stubhub and other online exchanges.

    Variable pricing based on nuanced supply and demand is the future, and it is the present.  Marriott has historically been the most profitable hospitality company, as its revenue per available room (the industry benchmark) often exceeds that of rivals. In the case of hotel rooms (or airfares), business-to-consumer pricing models can shift daily based on numerous variables such as weather, events, or the calendar.  Like it or not, exchanges that provide comparative prices are proliferating, in both B2C and B2B.

    I am not advocating the companies participate in such portals: they the fastest way to commoditize an industry. What I am saying is that the acceptance of such tools points out a broader problem (or opportunity), that markets re-price based on real demand, not arbitrary prices set by the seller.

    Businesses, including those that market products and services business-to-business will need to be more analytical about which products and services could and should command higher prices and which will command less.  To set up a fixed pricing schedule seems overly convenient in a world where buyers have far more sensitivity over some purchases than others.  A software developer may need to sell a project at a low cost to win the business, but could charge far more (on an hourly basis) for change orders that are not foreseen by the client.

    Most small and mid-market companies have not done enough research to understand the relationships between the products and services they sell.  If an accounting practice sells tax work and audit services, how should they price one against the other and what is the likelihood that clients will gravitate to them as a result of their pricing model or other variables? I think few really know.

    Companies should test various pricing strategies to see what works best, and be more purposeful about tweaking pricing to reflect current demand.


    5 Keys to Managing Labor Costs in Times of Uncertainty

    November 14th, 2011

    Businesses constantly struggle with capacity issues. Manufacturers seek access to the ideal manufacturing capacity, and service providers look to employ the optimum number of employees.  Both understand their labor spend is a key component of a company’s profit formula. So how is the entrepreneur to scale in an uncertain economy?

    Those who had not experienced rapid market erosion previous to the liquidity crisis learned an important lesson; high fixed costs can be truly catastrophic when demand contracts quickly. Employers must marry labor costs with demand. There are several steps one can take to mitigate labor capacity risk:

    Optimize Labor Efficiently- Most entrepreneurs intuitively understand that they should push low value activities down through (or out) of the organization.  Senior managers should aim for “zero administration”, where virtually all of their time is spent improving service or profitability, and not loading paper in the copier.  A good administrative assistant is worth their weight in gold. Similar thinking should apply to all; all work should be allocated to the appropriate staff based on their skill level, experience and cost.

    Outsource Low Value Activities Based on Demand- The zeal for outsourcing is far from over. Organizations are not only seeking lower costs, they are looking to move resources outside their organization so that they can scale  their bandwidth quickly. Look for outsourcing partners who have infrastructure that can move, (in real time) with your business. Such organizations typically have an existing core competency in the services provided, including technology and human capital geared towards executing such work.

    Increase Weighting of Incentives to Total Cash Compensation-Those who only provide subjective bonuses are actually doing themselves a disservice. Practically the entire Fortune 500 have moved to some type of performance based pay. Part of the rationale is to only pay out incentives when an organization reaches certain performance thresholds.  Failure to have a significant portion of cash compensation in incentives (20% or more) creates fixed costs and puts stress on a business and on employees. Fluctuations in demand require drastic action such as lay offs or furloughs.

    Measure Labor Meticulously- Labor KPI’s are amongst the easiest predictive indicators to measure, and directly affect the bottom line. Examples include overtime, labor dollars per unit, direct labor, indirect labor and labor as a percentage of revenue.

    Beware of External Demand Indicators- Within virtually every business segment there are external measures that provide context on future demand.  Add external indicators to your scorecard/dashboarding system so that you can stay in tune to the market place. Government websites, trade associations, and private research organizations offer a litany of statistics.  Plot such data  against company revenue to find which numbers correlate with business growth.


    Predicting Future Events Step by Step

    October 18th, 2011

    And now for my very favorite quote of the year, offered by Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn.  In reference to the Nissan Leaf, a zero emission vehicle, Ghosn said “this is the future, and everything else is going to look obsolete, like sending messages with pigeons”[i].

    As Gnosh put it in an interview in Fast Company, “if you already have an emissions problem with 700 Million cars, what problems are you going to have with 2 Billion?”. In the case of Nissan, Ghosn is looking beyond the defined needs of customers and is anticipating the needs of the global market in a decade or more. It is not good enough to solve problems we can see, the strategist must seek to solve problems that are not readily apparent. To consider such scenarios, strategists must consider Social, Technological, Economic, Ecological and Political trends and consider how various combinations may change the landscape of an industry.

    In my book and blog“ Intended Consequences”, I predicted remarkably volatile prices for fuel and the potential for oil to reach prices of far north of $100 a barrel. The predication which became an eventuality was based on an evaluation of “converging factors”, independent trends that combine to create a tipping point. The automobile industry is on the cusp of such a fundamental shift. Toyota has been selling the Prius since, 1997 but the initial curve for adoption was remarkably slow. What we see in evidence today are converging trends that will provide the impetus to create disruptive change in the form of rapid adoption of alternative vehicles:

    Political: The U.S. government’s recent announcement of an agreement with thirteen automakers that will reset the Café fuel economy standards to require an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.[ii] The willingness of OEM’s (original equipment manufacturers), to work with the government in a race to dramatically improve fuel efficiency illustrates their understanding of radical changes in their operating environment.

    Social: Shifting sensibilities towards sustainability will drive adoption. Electric cars are somewhat impractical for working people who may not have time to charge them (up to 8 hours) providing a leg up to hybrids.

    Technology: The new Prius plug in will offer up to 87 miles to the gallon illustrating explosive improvement in battery technology. Many of the world’s top scientists are working on batteries that could expediently improve performance, size and cost.

    Ecological: In Nissan’s case,  the rapid growth of highly polluted Asian markets is viewed as a driver for future demand. Recent disasters in the gulf and elsewhere have heightened awareness of the risks of oil exploration.

    Economic: Americans are still fearful of OPEC’s influence and the ability of the cartel to manage worldwide oil prices. As battery prices decline, the value proposition of hybrids will only continue to improve, and the total cost of ownership for such vehicles will be drastically reduced.

    Businesses are well advised to review such variables as to develop scenarios about their industry. It may not be possible to look into a magical crystal ball to predict the future, but careful study of trends provides us context on what products and services to develop in order to create disruption.


    [i] Fast Company The 50 Most Innovative Companies March 2011

    [ii] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy#Future_2


    Expertise in a World of Hyper-Specialization

    August 11th, 2011

    In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell asserts that one needs to invest 10,000 hours in an activity in order to become an expert. I take solace in knowing that I am evidently both an expert in Strategic Planning, and overcoming the drama induced by teenage daughters.

    The rapid escalation of global competition has brought about a new round of hyper-specialization.  The concept of specialization is nothing new; the division of labor has been a key tenant of economics since the birth of capitalism. Yet sites such as Guru or eLance, have propelled specialization to a new art form, where one can access dozens of specialists from around the world in any conceivable competency in a matter of minutes.

    Specialties that do not require any special education (other than what is readily available on the internet) such as graphic arts have quickly commoditized. You can hire a graphic artist online for $15 an hour.  In cases where greater technical aptitude is required, specialists still out-earn generalists. The median Internist in the U.S. earns $176K per year, while Cardiologists earn a median of $403K (some make $800K or more). [i] If you had a heart attack, which would you see?

    Perhaps the most common strategic blunder I observe within entrepreneurial companies is a penchant for addressing overly broad targets. Marketers, seeking the largest audience cast too wide a net. In their need to satisfy the largest number of prospects, they become de facto generalists. That is, instead of addressing a niche market with specific solutions, they try to satisfy a larger audience with a multitude of products and services. At some point, the value they can provide suffers from diminishing returns.

    The more crowded a space, the more difficult it is to differentiate, and the greater the need for expertise. Before its bankruptcy filing, GM attempted to sell within every segment, from sub-compact to Hummer. GM experienced what is often referred to as the peanut butter effect; the wider you spread something, the thinner it gets. GM’s branding was diluted and ability to control quality constrained.

    Many small businesses may employ generalists because of their lack of talent depth. To have one IT professional manage a network, build the company website, select an ERP package and fix all the desktops is an archaic paradigm worthy of recalculation.

    The reason that specialists are worth more than generalists is that they have a deeper subject matter expertise that drives:[ii]

    Quality-Processes replicated over time promote less deviation, less defects and fewer errors.  The specialist thinks deeply about an area of expertise in which they have experience and are less likely to make mistakes.

    Speed- Specialists do not need to reinvent things. Cycle times on proposals and product delivery is faster. If a company offers 50 stock products instead of 500, they can manage less inventory and ship items quicker. For every new project outside the boundaries of a company’s expertise there is resource draining learning curve that costs time and money.

    Relationships-As the specialist is highly respected, their opinions are sought after by the media and people who want to know them, hire them and refer them to others.

    The realities of outsourcing and off-shoring are driven by these phenomena. It is inherently inefficient to participate in activities that are not within a firm’s core competency and do not directly contribute to the bottom line. Thus, the migration of labor (outsourcing) will rise at a fervent rate.

    In fact, the entire concept of the corporation, with its multiple functional departments (such as accounting, sales and marketing, design, operations, engineering, manufacturing, etc.) is under some attack. Social norms around what constitutes a working environment are shifting quickly and enabling greater specialization. Collaboration tools make the world of work far more virtual, which will continue to feed the frenzy.

    Think about how to specialize as to optimize your revenue, margin and profit.


    [i] American Medical Group Association Survey

    [ii] Adapted from The Age of Hyper Specialization by Thomas Malone, Robert Laubacher, and Tammy Johns HBR July 2011


    Just In Time Revisited

    June 28th, 2011

    The long term implications of Japan’s massive earthquake and tsunami have recently begun to materialize. Over the course of the last twenty years, management principles have centered on efficiency; do more with less.  Six Sigma, Lean Manufacturing, outsourcing, and off-shoring have boomed. Perhaps our fascination with reducing costs and optimizing return on assets has manifested in an overly minimalistic view of the world.

    The recent supply chain disruptions have illustrated the vulnerability of our thinking as just in time translated into late product shipments, unsatisfied customers, and sluggish earnings, spanning from Toyota to Tiffany’s. The vulnerability may be far greater for smaller companies with less sophisticated logistics and reliance on a smaller web of suppliers.

    Thus the central question is shifting away from what is the minimum possible cycle time to what are the supply chain risks and how can they be mitigated? Manufacturers have had to adapt, in some cases reengineering their products to use components or materials that have been suddenly unavailable.  Some product development teams have had to adapt, at times looking like a scene from Apollo 13 (when astronauts famously had to construct a part based on the materials they had on hand).

    Customers have the right to ask more questions about how their vendors manage supply and what types of contingencies they have in place.  As has been evident in recent years, vendors and customers alike must think broadly about what eventualities could disrupt the global marketplace and collaborate on solutions. The horrific events in Japan reflect only the latest in a series of events that are reshaping how products come to market.


    Opportunities

    March 30th, 2011

    Being Opportunistic in a Volatile World

    Last week my post drew considerable attention, perhaps because of its shock value at a time when the news was truly shocking. While the tsunami was a natural disaster, the response on the part of the Tokyo Electric Company was a human calamity. Lack of preparation will invariably lead to unintended consequences, if you are managing a nuclear power plant or any other business.

    The reverse is also true. The entrepreneur capable of understanding seemingly unrelated external forces, and weaving them into a thoughtful strategy, will clearly realize strategic advantage. How might the strategist consider social, technological, economic, ecological and political factors to gain insight on how to take advantage of ever changing market conditions?

    Scenario planning is a methodology whereby the entrepreneur considers converging factors that (in combination) creates a tipping point. Consider some of the following predictions, based on facts already in evidence today.

    In the next decade, we are likely to see:

    Predicative Modeling-Cloud computing enables the migration and cross-referencing of large institutional databases.  For example, actuaries, using sophisticated algorithms are able to model ailments based on lifestyle choices monitored in real time. They are able to calculate your risk of a heart attack based on which smoothie you tend to order at Jamba Juice, your frequency of exercise, prescriptions you use, etc. Offered as a benefit of a health care plan, the member is offered incentives to opt-in and receive preferential rates. Such tools slow down rampant health care inflation.

    A Cashless Society-The majority of transactions amongst big banks are managed by exchanges where no money actually changes hands. Coins of small denomination are nearing extinction. Today, you can download an iPhone app that serves as a debit card, and can be swiped within Starbucks locations.  For most transactions, cash is already irrelevant.

    Smart Infrastructure- Automobiles come preinstalled with all of the features of an iPad (the 2011 Hyundai Equus will come with one) and all the benefits of the internet. Smart grids control the flow of traffic, directing drivers to particular lanes at a given speed to optimize drive time and reduce accidents. Traffic signals are regulated based on traffic volume. Sensors predict bridge and rail failures.

    Of course, rapid change will occur in every industry, and the strategist must weigh various opportunities based on an organization’s ability to take advantage of them. As a general rule, organizations should seek to achieve scale and reach within its core (at least 30% market share) before expanding into new endeavors. As Jim Collins points out in his sequel to Good to Great (How the Mighty Fall), many companies fail because of an “Undisciplined Pursuit of More”.  In their zeal for diversification they often leap too far from their core competency.

    Each opportunity must be assessed within the context of the organization’s resources, bandwidth, and human capital.  For every opportunity there is a cost, and an opportunity cost. To pursue any new opportunity an organization must leverage resources which dilutes focus on the core business.  Choose your opportunities carefully.


    Time to Retool

    March 1st, 2011

    The protesters marched on the highway, despondent about rapid inflation.  They shut down the thoroughfare for hours. 1000 miles away, protesters flocked the capital and drove the legislators to safe haven in neighboring territories.

    These were fundamentalists in Tunisia or Libya; they were students in California and state workers in Wisconsin.

    The impetus for civil unrest in the Middle East is that of the “lost generation” of unemployed misdirected youth.  In some regions of the world, unemployment is 40% or more.  In the U.S. , it is not just the young that face underemployment but generations of workers whose skills have become irrelevant.  The U.S. has the western world’s widest income distribution. The Top 10% make 6 times that of the bottom 10%, compared to 4.2 X for Great Britain and 2.8 X for Sweden[i].  The labor market has hollowed, as wages earned by shop floor workers have actually declined (when adjusted for inflation) over the last two decades.

    The labor imbalance in the U.S. has far reaching implications, not only for the unemployed but for our economy as a whole.  The inability of low wage earners to consume is a strain on U.S. growth.

    While there is plenty of banter about the need for jobs, there is no systematic solution in place for retraining American workers such as displaced auto and steel workers. President Obama has called on U.S. business leaders to: “generate ideas for creating jobs, sustaining the economic recovery and making America more competitive”[ii].

    Of course the notion of “creating jobs” is a little too convenient. Jobs are created when there is a need for them, and Americans get the jobs when they offer the most value. The problem is not that there are not enough jobs; it is that the cost-benefit for the employer often tips towards off-shoring.  If our workers do not offer enough value in the form of specialized knowledge, ability to use technology, etc., jobs will continue to be shipped overseas.

    This is not a protectionist rant, and my comments aren’t intended to incite a riot on free trade, or China manipulating currency, etc. I am focused on what we can control.  What our nation needs is a retraining effort. The money we are spending on unemployment and other services would be better spent invested in people so that they can acquire new skill sets that are relevant in an ever changing world.

    The question is who will lead, and who will pick up the bill?  To prepare our workers for the future will require collaboration across business and government. Tax and other incentives need to be in place to encourage the retooling of America. So as GE Chairman Jeffery Immelt and the rest of the White House Council of Economic Affairs weighs in on jobs, I hope they emphasize that we need to create opportunities for workers, and provide them will the skill sets required to compete.

    Otherwise, the marches may extend to Washington D.C. and a state capital near you.


    [i] The Price of Everything Eduardo Porter

    [ii] Obama wants business world’s best ideas on jobs USA Today


    Sam Would be Rolling in His Grave

    February 23rd, 2011

    Tuesday’s WSJ pointed out that Wal-Mart is experiencing its second consecutive year of lackluster sales[i]. Historically, the world’s largest retailer has exploded in downturns, and held its own in upturns. Its expansive international growth has been a boon over the last decade.

    While many focus on Wal-Mart’s controversial practices, the company is viewed as a leader in everything from sustainability to inventory management. Yet it seems that Wal-Mart has lost its way. In its zeal to reform retail, the company may have overstepped with customers. Consider the company’s initiatives towards organic foods, clearly a misread of customer wants at a time where value oriented shoppers could not afford to pay a price premium.  Former Wal-Mart executive Jimmy Wright said “the basic Wal-Mart customer didn’t leave Wal-Mart; Wal-Mart left the customer.”

    Target has done an outstanding job carving out a market with offers that resonate with their more metropolitan and suburban shoppers.  Wal-Mart’s efforts to go more upscale with fashion plays right into Target’s hands; a key strategic mistake.  Pricing may also be an issue, as Wal-Mart has moved away from Sam Walton’s “Always Low Prices” stance with more “high-low” pricing strategies that would be more akin to a traditional supermarket chain.

    It seems that Wal-Mart has lost sight of its core strength. There was elegance to Wal-Mart’s no nonsense approach to mass merchandising.  Stack it high, sell it cheap and do it more efficiently than everyone else. It was a formula that put the supercenter format on the map. Wal-Mart just got too hip, too trendy and too cute.  Maybe they have too many MBA’s complicating things.

    The lesson in all of this is that whatever you do to evolve in your business, one still has to stay true to the core. You can never forget what your guiding principles are.  Don’t get too cute.


    [i] Adapted from Mr. Sam’s Winning Formula by Miguel Bustillo, WSJ 2/22