One must contemplate the distinction between branding and rebranding. Rebranding is often miscast as an exercise in repairing one’s reputation. Some rebranding efforts focus on mitigating a negative image (such as Philip Morris’s name change to Altria or AIG’s move of their advisory business to Sagepoint). Yet rebranding may also represent subtle changes in positioning, or the recasting of visual identify, such as Starbucks recent move to a more contemporary look.

If you’re thinking about rebranding your company, bear in the mind the following considerations:

Seek out simplification-Today’s rebranding efforts are often a function of providing clarity to the marketplace and removing brand confusion. Citi’s recent rebranding removed a single word (if the word bank is in your name, it may not be a bad idea to remove it). Our cluttered market values simplicity.

Leverage Social Media from the ground up- Within our firm, we recently rebuilt our website, refreshed our brand, and printed new business cards (including a QR code). All of our marketing includes embedded social media components, with the intent of driving traffic to our website where prospects can experience various multimedia tools that are featured online.

Use emotional triggers-Google famous Parisian Love ad (when an American finds love in Paris) is a classic example of using emotional messaging to capture the imagination of your audience. All marketing should utilize emotional triggers.

Enter new markets- Pabst Blue Ribbon, perceived as an also-ran in the U.S. rebranded in China as an ultra-premium American lager (PBR) and is selling for upwards of $44 a bottle (the Chinese may not have everything figured out).

Reshape perceptions about quality-Rebranding should not appear cosmetic or contrived. Harley Davidson’s slide in perceived quality in the 80’s was magnified by stiff competition from Japanese competitors.  The company’s drastic repositioning included a return to its core products and the formation of the Harley Owners Group (HOG’s),  which reestablished Harley a bad boy brand.

Identify unmet needs- Your offer may need to change as the utility of your product or the benefits that differentiate it may shift over time.  Marketers will often use a tag line when they wish to preserve their brand equity, and point out new features or benefits.

Use professionals- Rebranding can back fire when companies draw attention to their marketing.  Many smaller companies try to utilize self service template web sites and similar home grown tools that come off as……home grown. Marketing requires constant investment. Hire people who can assist you with both messaging and technology.

Understand the hard and soft costs- Change can be expensive, given the need to reprint, re-sign, change email addresses, etc. Consider all your hard and soft costs (including management team band) with as you refresh your brand.

Organizations often under appreciate the importance of branding. In this world of hyper-competition, the way you communicate the nuances of your brand are more important than ever.

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.

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.

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.

Many CEOs feel that they are the victims of a lackluster economy and a government that is ineffective at offering any meaningful stimulus. In fact, 79% of CEOs fear that the fundamentals of our sluggish economy will remain the same or get worse.[i]

Economists have long understood that our thinking about the economy is governed by emotion. U.S. history is riddled with periods of growth and decline steered by the mood of the nation.

My generation grew up with a relative level of stability. We are simply not accustomed to the notion of “economic uncertainty” and we are not very happy about it. As a result, we have the tendency to overreact to stimuli in the form of collective euphoria or collective despair. This emotional response explains the nature of bubbles, as we all race to adhere to the conventional wisdom of the moment.

Today’s wisdom is that we should be scared…about sluggish growth, high raw material prices, health care costs, China, the Federal deficit, taxation and lots of other things. You know our psyche is a bit fragile when people are worried about inflation and deflation at the same time.

Our thinking often crystallizes around “the economic cycle,” which is something of a misnomer. Every business participates in this broader cycle, as well as a monetary cycle, industry cycle and company life cycle. The economy itself is merely a component in a spider-web of stressors that can be triggered by a myriad of forces from around the world.

Our expectations seem unrealistic, framed during a time when banks over leveraged, real estate was overpriced and stock market multiples were in the stratosphere.

The reality is that our economy is still growing (although perhaps in tepid fashion). Forecasts are for GNP growth of 1-2% for the remainder of 2011. When our GNP is growing at 4% we are bulls, but at 2% we are bears.  This meager difference illustrates that our fear is based on perception and is somewhat irrational. It is like the fear of flying: one knows that statistically there is virtually zero chance of a crash, yet to some, the fear is quite real.

Perhaps what we really have to fear is fear itself.  We should not be scared of a 2% variance, we should embrace it. In many instances, it will be the confidence of the CEO that will drive the level of investment businesses make, which will in turn either be the impetus for growth or maintain mediocrity.

Of the CEOs recently surveyed, 41% believe that prices of their products or services will rise next year. The potential for rising raw material and energy prices in 2012 could actually be a boon to vendors who are posturing to raise prices.

It is time to reset expectations with our customers, vendors, employees and ourselves. Within this data, there is plenty of salt, but perhaps there are a few grains of sugar as well.

A good leader must exude confidence in his or her business every day. If you don’t see the value in your products and services, no one else will. When the competition is weak, it is time to attack. Let your competitors have the scarcity mindset, while you focus on the strategic gambits that will grow your business and create sustainable competitive advantage. We will get our 2% back some day—we just need to be a little patient.

[i] Vistage CEO Confidence Index

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.

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.

In Intended Consequences, I illustrated how our economy had endured a period of unparalleled turbulence. From Y2K to 9/11, the wars in Iran and Afghanistan, the Asian Financial Crisis, Katrina, Mad Cow and Enron/WorldCom we have experienced a decade of volatility. Recent history has presented the Gulf spill, the Haiti and Chile disasters, and now civil unrest in the Middle East. Volatility has become the norm.

The violence in Egypt is particularly daunting because we don’t have a sense of the extent to which the unrest will spread to other nations in the region. Even the White House seemed surprised as stories spread of the President watching television like the rest of us, trying to make sense of it all.

The passage of time has only magnified the “strategy paradox”. How can an organization plan for a future that is impossible to predict?  I believe that in the face of such uncertainty there is a compelling need for more examination, reflection and planning.  Uncertainty should prompt us to think more provocatively about how changes in our environment will manifest within our businesses and our society (one lesson we learned from protests in Egypt is that social networking is not only a tool, but a potential weapon).

Raw materials continue to be unstable, as prices from oil to cotton have moved sharply higher.  If you were a business dependent on such materials, you may need to rethink your pricing strategy, positioning, marketing, etc. in an effort to weather the storm, or perhaps take advantage of new opportunities (to raise prices for example).

One of the ironies of global events is that we cannot comprehend their severity in midstream. When we initially heard of the first plane striking the World Trade Center, we didn’t understand the implications. It was only after time that the terrorist plot and its affect on the world crystallized for us.

So as the events in the Middle East unfold, we must be more thoughtful about what might change. Will civil unrest further American interests or de-stabilize the region? What will be the affect on the stock market, currency markets, energy prices and raw material costs?  How might the U.S. and its allies react?

Only time will tell.

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.