What's your marketing conveyor design?

The Internet works like a conveyor with multiple parts. Parts whose independent actions work together to move prospects along to become customers. It is foolish to say that only understanding and implementing a single part will bring success. The beauty of today’s marketing universe is the vast numbers of options for cost effectively integrating multiple strategies to build a perfect conveyor, one that moves your prospects along to become customers.

The Internet is not just the Internet anymore. It is everything that touches the web. It is everything that can access the web. It is every technology, mobile and fixed, that can drive your customers to a web site, deliver your brand, interact with your audience, alert them to a deal, or a location, or whatever turns your prospects into customers and your customers into cash flow.

The Internet, and most marketing efforts, continue to require of its most successful users a solid understanding and occasional use of traditional media. Knowing what mediums, how much to spend, how to buy, how to measure, and how to translate those “parts” of the conveyor to work with all the other “parts” is critical. These often include parts that exist on a new technology or involve driving your prospects to new forms of customer interaction.

The Internet, regardless of what the web “experts” say, is no longer just about inbound vs. outbound. It’s a mash up of both and sometimes it is not about inbound nor outbound but about the conversations you have, your prospects have, your customers have and the conversations they listen to. To leverage those facts you need to integrate social and PR into your entire mix, remembering that they are also ad platforms as well, and not lose sight of their importance even when they seem “indirect” in their bottom line impact.

In the “old days” the big marketing departments and ad agencies were all about “integrated campaiWhat's your conveyor design?gning”. They were also all about “the brand”. They were quite right to be focused on these general strategies.

Today’s marketing requires you to continue to consider both of these “general” strategies to be critical components to your marketing and public relations. The only difference today is that you have a mind boggling array of messaging and interactive channels available to you for use in integrated campaigning (whether they are inbound or outbound or a mash-up of both) and the definition of “brand” has taken on new complexities with the reemergence of social image needs, personal brands and old brands mutating into surgically altered younger versions of their former selves.

I can see how this would confuse younger less experienced marketers and I am sure that many executive leadership teams, who have often been ill at ease with the more difficult to quantify mysteries of motivating human behaviors, are beside themselves trying to figure out whether or not to support any of them with ever tightening budget dollars.

If executive teams were confused before when they saw in your plans that you intended to integrate messaging via print, radio, TV, and billboard, then having everything from consumer social networks with ecommerce applications to mobile and proximity marketing has probably shut them down completely.

Their solution is likely to be to assume that only one or two of these are the “magic bullet” and proceed to seek, hire and/or fund folks solely focused on those “magic bullet strategies”. It’s what happened with dot coms, and before that telemarketing, and before that direct response…in fact before every “new” ad-scheme-to-end-all-ad-schemes since the dawn of marketing.

And…they will find many over zealous folks around today, particularly in the B2B social networks, who will absolutely proclaim that there is only one or two that matter. They of course do this speaking generally and without doing one bit of analysis into your audience or their current behaviors or any evidence whatsoever.

Don’t fall for it.

Take the time and understand your prospects and customers thoroughly. Employ a firm or individuals internally that have both the width and the depth, including a strong understanding of more traditional channels, to help you define your strategies and select the proper messaging and interaction channels for implementing your marketing, PR and sales. Only after you are sure what components need to make up your “conveyor” can you build one that will bring you customers.

The one thing that’s sure is that your audience’s attention span is short and gets shorter every day. Multiple channels, designed to deliver your messaging, drive conversations with your audience and build your brand, ensure that your short messages combine eventually into compelling arguments for your prospects to buy your products or services.

So the next time so hear someone say “it’s all about social” or that “it’s only the new media” or that “XYZ is dead”, think twice and find yourself expertise that is savvy in identifying the best pathways to your prospects and customers…not one who insists there is only “one way to skin a cat”, and let them help you fire up your conveyor.

Better yet…call me.

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

Social & B2B Networks - Evolution or Revolution?

Again I am posting here some thoughts I shared in a LinkedIn discussion (kind of the reverse norm for LI I think) so again they are brought into this environment where I hope to speak in every increasing detail about a variety of subjects I believe get more hype than substance in more general social and B2B networking sites.

The question posed was, and I paraphrase here a bit, “are social networks replacing advertising?”. The multiple comments prior to my inputting had been simply wonderful with some of the most balanced observations about social network marketing I have seen without a heavy interjection of the hype, almost religious in nature, from real hard core social networking devotees.

I of course went slightly a different way:

What I find most interesting about these discussions is how they seem to discount even ignore the fact that although we call these “social networks” and they have evolved, as far as user interfaces and site functionality is concerned, in many ways out of the affinity network sites which have been around for years. These sites in turn grew out of the BBS and Undernet chat rooms of the Internet’s distant past (more BBS than chat).

Unlike the affinity sites (I am most familiar with those of a music industry nature…talkbass.com being the one I was most active in) the social network is based on relationships in the real world (and those I suppose you now establish virtually), both old and new, whereas the affinities have some hobby, professional niche or other common interest that is more specific than I know you and you know me.

These groups have always had to balance advertising and more important to this thread, how discussion based interaction between a (for ease I will use a talkbass.com example) member of the group who is also representing a service or manufacturer who wishes to sell to this audience without it becoming a flaming bloodbath of hostility from other participants passionate about their art but not willing to be marketed to in a discussion forum unless it is clear that is your purpose (they do it by identifying in the online “signature” the individuals endorsement or employment status so that other participants can weigh their comments or “buying suggestions” accordingly. Often the folks who are industry reps and there in part to bring back customers are also the most helpful, have an obvious ability to be honest and even handed in their recommendations. Many will suggest another manufacturer or service when it is clear they do not have the right solution for the participant.

I will also point out that it takes a considerable amount of effort and time to get to a place where you are accepted by the group and certainly after the hard work is done there is evidence that it has had a favorable affect on the business as many have been involved in these types of sites for over ten years (yes Virginia there were social networks of a fashion prior to YouTube, MySpace and Facebook) and in their particular niches have become experts at integrating and using both site advertising, discussion leadership and participation in day to day discussions that have a positive affect on both the participants and the web community they are part of.

Much of the discussion I read here at LinkedIn concerning social network marketing seems to not recognized the evolutionary path that social and business networking sites sprang from and as such often don’t look to those past, and in many cases still active, niche affinity networks and sites for clues on how to effectively market in both B2B sites (like this one) which are really the closest to an “affinity” network as well as how to do it in a more “social” environment as the more sophisticated affinity sites have well integrated approaches to both site ads and “discussion” marketing.

As for the original question I prefer “evolve” over a prediction of a specific end to an activity relating to the marketing and selling of products and/or services to humans…I wanted very much to predict the end of disco but I hear it’s coming back…like bad 50’s rock…to state at this time that any of these networks will replace and eventually eliminate all other forms of human communication is far too “crystal ball” for my sensibilities.

This of course precludes the eventual inclusion by Walmart of every conceivable product and service known to man and their complete enslavement of the entire human race…at a low low price and questionable quality…at which point they will outlaw advertising and this discussion will be rendered moot.

The original discussion can be found here: http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers&discussionID=15877628&gid=145854&commentID=13659722&trk=view_disc

Several of the comments thus far are very insightful and I encourage any readers of this blog to visit those as well.

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

Jazz vs. Symphony as a business management metaphor

I read a strategy professors use of these two musical genres today as a way of showing the difference between, and the downside according to him, an entreprenuer and a leader of an organization that had grown or was growing beyond what the traditional entreprenuerial skill set is good for…or so he was trying to demonstrate.

Although I agree with the metaphor use and think there is value in using them, his knowledge of music was limited so I replied with the comments that follow this brief introduction. I am also posting them here as I do believe it to be an excellent comparison to make and wish to ensure that my thoughts on the subject are available to folks foolish enough to read my blogs!

Here are my comments:

As both a strategist and a Jazz musician of no small prowess I must say that although I agree about the metaphor you unfortunately lose me in paragraph 3 with statements made in an attempt to draw the parallels (jazz vs. symphony) and yet your knowledge of Jazz is lacking hurting somewhat your use of the comparisons here.

It is overly simplistic to focus on improvisation and too tightly tie it only to raw talent. It is hardly the truth as the accomplished improvisational player can only function well if they are first a consummate student of the rules (music theory and standard notation at the very least). This is precisely the same for those who are at a professional level in the symphonic arts as they too must know these rules within exactly the same basic structure. There are some rule and structural (or at least rules for when there is a lack of structure in the case of Jazz) differences between the two genres, but I think the impression that it is just free flowing self expression that comes without direction or plan, simply blowing where the wind does…is not correct.

I believe it fair to say that strategy with a symphonic metaphor would be heavily bureaucratic, orchestrated with each member in perfect sync and following strictly with little or no room for any flexibility, other than perhaps an occasional first chair or soloist with a enough room for dynamic “personal expression” but not necessarily more than touch, volume, a tad bit of note length leeway.

Jazz, as a strategy metaphor, also has structure (and a very strict one in the case of many modern jazz pieces), and is still ruled by the same system that the classics are. Jazz has allowances for some deviation from certain scale and mode rules, starts out with and understanding between players of the end game or way to conclude the piece. It may provide within the structure multiple paths for exploration and experimentation; but with firm cues or specific “anchor” parts or players so that improvisation may move along different paths but still have a way to return to the structured end-game.

Each player is in “tune” with every other player in real-time (the musical shared desktop), often communication in the form of a specific familiar musical phrase(s), or rhythm or eye contact or body language or all in combination. It is a language that is almost spontaneously creating itself at times. They are also musically synced with each member of the ensemble with certain key rhythm section instruments even more acutely in “charge” of pulling things back into time or tonality so that the ending of whatever happens improvisational, still sounds “tight”. Does any of this sound like real-time shared collaboration in a business context yet? Do you still think that jazz really just plays it fast and loose?

I admit that these are very different strategic approaches but I assure you just having “raw talent” won’t get you far without a thorough understanding and appreciation for all approaches. I also will tell you that Jazz isn’t all loose, with the exception of some forms that frankly are about as out there as many a business model I have reviewed…and just as commercially and critically successful. It is in fact a carefully orchestrated form that is more about creating and guiding chaos into pleasing musical forms.

I prefer Jazz, musically and from a business strategic/management standpoint, but will tell you that my preparation for Jazz is far more intense and has a much more demanding nature than that of the symphony. In a symphony you just have to be able to play in time and read the music. Skill is still a factor and I have much appreciation for the skill of a consummate member of a symphonic organization. In Jazz you have to understand every theory, listen to every part simultaneously, and play as if it were flowing naturally from you with every breath. You can’t just read the music you must become the music.

Your suggestion that somehow only an entrepreneur and then only at a start up stage should be the Jazz strategist and that once scaled to a larger size such a strategy as Jazz can not be the backbone of a larger company…is absurd. However the size of the community of folks who can in fact “play Jazz” into the billion dollar range, particularly a team of them correctly suited to each other and the task is once again up to the “general’s” ability to identify and recruit the right ensemble.

Symphonies on the other hand in the near future will fail over and over as all are led by folks unable to play Jazz. In fact the best world would be an ensemble led by a consummate player who has experience and talent within either a classical or jazz setting.

You indicate also that you feel that the leaders relevance recedes as the jazz plays on into the more mysterious realms and I would argue exactly the opposite, it is the leader (particularly a strong one like a Miles Davis or a Chick Corea) who takes the whole thing out on a limb and then deftly brings it back to a musical conclusion…an attainment of their objective. Had you ever tried to play “Spain” with an arrangement for live play that leaves it entirely up to the soloist to determine direction and length of their solo section, understanding the whole time that once chaos has ensued you, particularly the supporting team, must return to a particularly strict and difficult to play piece of music…you would likely understand what I mean.

Speaking of a little Jazz:    Mark Bowen’s Clown Island

If you would like to read the original article in question it can be found at http://blogs.hbr.org/tjan/2010/02/strategy-as-jazz-vs-symphony.html .

Besides if you think a jazz style management scheme is chaotic…wait until we hit the rock and roll stage of business management!

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

How to Grow Your Business in a Tough Economy

Whether you believe it or not, there have been recessions before. There have been thousands of businesses that have seen tough times in the past. They managed to survive and, best of all, grow. For many their growth was greater than what would have been possible in a non-recession economy. These were businesses that saw opportunity in the down economy, made adjustments to their businesses and seized the day.

The good news; if you are willing to adapt there are more tools than ever available to help you “seize the day”. Tools that will help you look for and take advantage of new opportunities, grow your revenue, and even expand your market footprint. As with any set of tools there is an equal set of rules for getting the best out of them.

First the rules:

  • Stop and be honest…

…take a step back and really assess the state of your business AND marketing. Not every tool will fit your business. In order to succeed in a tough economy you need to be honest about your strengths and weaknesses. It is equally critical to honestly gauge the effectiveness of your marketing. Understand these and you are almost ready for opportunity to knock.

  • Don’t operate in a vacuum…

…figure out what’s working and what’s not. Set up Google Analytics on your website, code your mailings, and ask people where they heard about you. Also ask your front facing employees to ask, and keep asking. You need to do whatever it takes to really understand who your audience is and what they respond to.

  • Mine your existing customers…

…and understand their needs. Understand why they continue to do business with you, and more importantly what they like, what they need, what their customers need. Email a questionnaire to your top customers, hold a focus group at your place of business, take some of them out to lunch AND really listen to them. Keeping these folks as customers means being in closer contact, accessible all the time and serving them better than your competition.

  • Use this data to build a new business plan…

…and then write a new marketing plan. This is your opportunity to challenge your business to explore new ideas, new markets, and reconnect with the customers who got you this far. To survive today you need a good plan built on solid data. Armed with those you will be ready to seize your opportunity to grow your business.

  • Accept that changes will be hard…

…and then make them anyway. Many of the options you have will be unfamiliar and you may want to run to the safety of what you know. Trust your data, don’t make excuses for bad habits and write a plan that is built on reality. If your plan says “embed your phone number in a web ad and never again use yellow pages”

…take a deep breath and do it.

Now the tools:

  • Business Social Networking (LinkedIn, Plaxo, Twitter)

Business Networking is just like networking in the real world where we do it as individuals who are part of an organization. Demonstrate knowledge, skill, and expertise by being a resource to folks in the network. Be the person who knows the person and even give information away if it builds your network. Then get your employees to do the same. This is the best way to utilize these types of “business social networks” to build credibility, find new partners, connect with your customer’s networks, and establish new prospect relationships.

  • Digital Gear & Gadgets

Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) communications tools are giving an increasing number of businesses greater mobility and flexibility in the way they communicate. “Gadgets” have made it possible to be more connected to customers, accessible to prospects, and some allow you to seamlessly integrate your personal and professional communications. New mobile data access allows you even more mobility and can make a business sharper and faster with information that is always available in real-time. If your plan calls for closer contact, better customer service or growing a bigger footprint, technologies like VoIP may be the answer.

  • Blogging

It used be hard to get published and big companies spent thousands of dollars trying to get paper publications to talk about the advantages of their products or services. These days though, the world seems to belong to the “bloggers”. Blogging requires frequent updates and postings if it is to be lively and attractive to regular readers. However it takes time to build an audience so be sure you are willing, or have authors onboard who are willing, to commit daily time over many months for the best results.

  • Social Network Marketing (Facebook, MySpace, Twitter)

Social networks are large parties on the Internet built primarily to have fun and to communicate with friends, family and new folks met online.  If you are “selling” in that party you are largely going to be ignored. If you are there for brand building be sure you don’t “hard sell”. What you need to work towards is being the life of the party, that’s what will get you attention and help build your brand. If your business is B2B evaluate the audience in these types of “social networks” carefully. Many B2Bs have found marketing to businesses not as successful in these environments and more impact from “business social networks”.

  •  YouTube (Viral Video)

YouTube can be used for viral marketing and in some other useful ways. If you use it for viral marketing remember it is what it says it is, “viral”. That means either it will spread or it won’t. What successfully spreads on YouTube is all about what gets attention, what is entertaining, and even what is shocking. For B2B YouTube can be a good place to store video for demonstrations or providing technical help to customers or potential customers. For viral, short presentations, low budget video, attention on entertaining content (dull is to be avoided here) all are what works when using YouTube. With YouTube, and many other viral marketing efforts, frequency matters…the more you post the more attention you get.

***Note: The foregoing article is from a work for hire project for TDS Telecommunications Corp. Copyright 2009

Audio version: How to Grow Your Business in a Tough Economy

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

Broadband Access – The No Hype Zone

Broadband Internet access for both consumers and commercial customers alike has been all about speed. Today, even though speed is a consideration when selecting a provider, it’s not all you need to know when selecting these services for your business. Getting through the hype is the hardest part and understanding the true “value” of a service takes digging into more than just the top download speed.

 What is broadband?

Broadband is a term used to describe a service that uses a wide range of frequencies that collectively are called bandwidth. The amount of bandwidth available determines how fast data can be either downloaded or uploaded through this pipeline. Broadband services like Cable and DSL are capable of carrying much larger amounts of data because they handle a much “broader” range (band) of frequencies; hence the name “broadband”.

Download vs. Upload

Download speed is a term used to describe how quickly your computer is able to receive (download) data from the Internet. Download speed is a general benchmark of an Internet service, and where most of the hype has been concentrated. Most access service providers compete in terms of offering a faster download speed than a competitor in terms of megabits (Mb) per second. Theoretically the larger the download speed, the faster you will be able to receive files from the Internet.

Upload speed is the term used to describe the speed your computer is able to send (upload) the information via the Internet. Although it isn’t as obvious why users need upload, it is a very important component of your connection to the Internet. Whenever you log on to a web page or send a password to log on to your email account, you are uploading. For consumers uploading may be less of a concern compared to downloading, yet for most businesses today upload speeds are a significant concern.

Asymmetrical vs. Symmetrical

Asymmetrical* bandwidth provides a higher download speed than upload speed. Access providers do this so that they can dedicate more bandwidth to downstream for faster downloads. This is true for almost all of the home services where downloading data has been seen as more important than uploading data.

Symmetrical* bandwidth provides the same upload speed as download speed. In most cases this results in lower overall download speed but the increased upload speed for most is worth it. Synchronous services generally are more favorable for business use, especially if your business regularly uploads large files or has a need for more frequent uploading.

*Asymmetrical and Symmetrical bandwidth are sometimes also referred to as Asynchronous and Synchronous services.

DSL vs. Cable

In terms of peak performance under optimum conditions cable services run faster than DSL. Cable technology is able to support roughly 30 Mbps of bandwidth while most forms of DSL struggle to reach 10 Mbps. However your local network speed, how many end-users you have on your network, the speed of the PCs they use, what types of files they are uploading or downloading, and the overall level of traffic on the Internet itself all can adversely affect speed. When all of these are factored-in, cables “theoretical” speed advantage weakens or disappears.

Cable is not as predictable as DSL, and cable’s speed and performance may fluctuate during a typical business day. This is because cable bandwidth is shared by you and all the other Internet users in your area using the same service. Cable providers say this doesn’t affect your connection speeds, but many businesses and consumers report that it does. DSL connections are never shared by other users in your area on the same service and as such don’t suffer from this issue. Shared bandwidth is also considered to be less secure than having a dedicated connection, like DSL. Shared mediums are more susceptible to eavesdropping, denial of service attacks, and service theft.

Wireless Internet: 3G vs. WiFi

Up until the last year or so, these two technologies were not necessarily competing against each other and served very different audiences. WiFi capability is built into virtually every new laptop and is available free where there is a public “hot spot”. 3G is a mixture of mobile wireless technologies that customers can subscribe to and is available wherever you can receive the service provider’s cell phone signals. However with the advent of “smart phones” and the introduction of 3G USB Sticks for your laptop or netbook, 3G wireless access has become more widespread and is even now entering the home.

For business the most important issue, whether you choose WiFi or 3G for your access is security. WiFi security has improved and when used in concert with a solid data security plan that covers all of your internal and external data use will be reasonably safe. 3G enjoys a similar level of security, although once again a security policy for employees and limiting the type of data that is accessible outside of a more secure network setting continues to be critical.

T1

The question for many is whether DSL or cable broadband services are fast, reliable and flexible enough to meet the needs of businesses today. The upsurge in interest in Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) has increased the importance of having Internet access that is as robust and, perhaps even more important, stable as possible. There is only one technology short of a fiber optic connection that has historically offered as much bandwidth flexibility and operational stability…the T1.

T1s are more secure than either cable or DSL and are almost always symmetrical with data speeds the same up or down. They can be provisioned to carry both circuit switched voice, voice and data, VoIP, or can be pure data pipes that facilitate only your Internet access. They can be bonded to increase bandwidth and thereby increase speed. Often you can get service level agreements from T1 providers to ensure you have the highest level of up-time possible. In fact the cost of subscribing to T1 services has come down considerably over the last few years, making them a much easier option for small business to consider.

A Final Word

The one thing that most businesses caught up in the “hype” surrounding speed miss is the importance of support and customer service. Any service you select will have technology issues that occasionally cause customers to engage provider support teams. While consumers may tolerate a modest outage for even several hours, a business cannot be so tolerant. How easily you can connect with your service’s support team, how responsive they are to you, how quickly they spring into action, and their track record for maintaining service levels all should be considered before you make your choice.

***Note: The foregoing article is from a work for hire project for TDS Telecommunications Corp. Copyright 2009

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

A Look at Internet Centric Business Modeling

A Look at Internet Centric Business Modeling…

…or Some Really New Ideas and Some Old Ideas Dressed Up as Really New Ideas…

…or How I Spent My 2009 Sabbatical

       I.      Overview/Soapbox

What else…a disclaimer.

Summer 2009 was kind of slow and cold, which made for more of a reflective time than one of hectic productivity. My attention centered on the changing landscape of a nation as reflected through the fall of one small grocery store in a bad mix of timing, technology change and horrible economics. Of course, as things do with me, I found that this one small event turned into a much larger and further reaching range of thoughts about what opportunities might emerge from this difficult time.

I admit here, where you can decide right off the bat how much further you will indulge me with your reading, that I am neither an expert in the grocery retailing industry nor do I claim any particular expertise beyond years of leading successful marketing communications teams for sizable corporations. If I have any expertise in the areas I describe throughout the words that evolve during this blog posting, it has been acquired through 40 some odd years of observation, self education and the good fortune of having a large network of very intelligent folks who have, mostly through osmosis, managed to instill some small understanding of the business dynamic in me.

What I am about to recount to you are the observations and ideas for not just including the Internet in a business model but rather re-thinking a business model with the Internet at its center and used to resolve specific problems, not just for “Wiz Bang” purposes. This combined with a belief that a “re-connection” is long over due between Internet commerce and the brick and mortar “real world” that we all live in.

There are models that I have “stolen” ideas from and signal, to me at least, that others perhaps smarter than I are already making this reconnection happen with their businesses.  They also happen to be models that reinforce some of the other observations I will make as we proceed through this “business model makeover”. I am also taking lessons from “dot com” history and combining them with current trends (and woes) to shape what I think is a reasonable look at a successful future business model.

Why the multiple titles?

I, like many folks who have focused on copywriting for others but have seldom written anything in thier own voice, wanted to do something in detail and use whatever language, style and silly comment I wanted to. The “academic” title slash “silly” title approach just started out as a reminder that it was my deal and I should write it my way. Pay no attention to these titles other than to have a laugh if it suits you and to help you navigate through the chapters five, as that is my target length for this little ongoing rant.

I am counting this chapter as one of the five so that means your only four chapters away from ending this silly thing.

On to the soapbox part; Chapter 2.

    II.      The Internet Centric Business Model/Why the World Must Change

Larger cities must shrink. Larger companies must shrink. Companies in general need to become more interdependent and regionalize logistics. A more distributed population, workforce and employer system needs to be created that provides for less population concentration and that tend to result in large, difficult to maintain and impossible to manage infrastructures. Industry and government need to work together to use all the available resources and provide for greater focus on effective management of the overall infrastructure, particularly the reach and availability of broadband data access.

The above is true regardless of country, nation, religion or other predefining description of the economy or culture. The “animal brain” that was the old Internet must give way to a more organized operating system so that this new matrix can be reconnected and directly interact with the real world.

For me this was what I saw as the overreaching problem, both economic and societal. We have made the world smaller via the Internet but we have been concentrating too much into too little space for much longer than the web has been around.

Now by space I am referring to just about every way you can over concentrate our human society. We cram too many people into too small a geography in every major metropolitan city in the world. We have too many industries with too few competitors in them and too many trying to serve national and international customers from too centralized and concentrated power centers. Workforces are either feast or famine in whole regions and when they don’t do well they tend to drag down the rest of the economy. Like dominoes they fall with rippling affect and take market after market, country after country down in their wake.

I say this with reluctance because I believe in free economies and capitalism in general. But I believe that in order for the world economy to stabilize permanently and for there to be any chance of a calmer and more productive world we need to change just about everything, including introducing ideas into the capitalist system that clearly could be viewed as “stolen” from a more socialist or even communist system models.

Communities need to evolve around the growth of local industry regardless of whether that is expressed as manufactured hard goods, the cultivation and marketing of farm goods, the creation of electronic content, the development of software, or the overall acquisition, storage and use of data. In other words cities must strive to begin anew with hand in hand efforts to cultivate more regionalized economies that are tied directly by the Internet to the world economy.

Assets from infrastructure items like unused or underutilized warehouse space, manufacturing facilities abandoned or with an option to repurpose, office and industrial parks that are not well populated, and any other facilities or silenced equipment that could be cataloged, turned into searchable data and delivered as part of the resources for creating new businesses.

In turn these assets themselves can, and should be, evaluated as to what they need to further drive business occupation and use. In general this will be about broadband access; as in many cases these facilities, when located in smaller and/or rural locations, lack affordable access to high bandwidth services. By offering the analysis as motivation to deploy to specific facilities more affordable broadband these locations improves their chance of being matched with a business venture that will improve the overall economic and employment conditions in smaller towns and communities.

Increasingly fair cost (notice I am not saying “low” or “cheap”) and high value will be what business and consumers alike will be seeking. Helping existing businesses to adapt and find ways provide fairly priced, higher value products and services are absolutely critical to moving Michigan (where this case study is derived from) and the entire US economy back into the “thriving” category.

Most of what needs to happen is about the more inefficient and wasteful habits companies have developed over time. Most of this is how willing we are to ship steps in a process all over the country and world without any regard for sound, efficient logistics. Now that we also need to be concerned about the energy those wasteful shipping steps consume, whether concerned for cost or for the health of the planet certainly makes no difference anymore, shipping here and there for no good reason is just stupid.

Now that it is totally clear that the “reset button” has been pushed there is no time like now to begin a meaningful metamorphosis of our business models to ones that adapt to the new market economics and are built to ride its ever rising tide. The ugly side of this reset for some is that the return to anything like the inflated booms of the last two plus decades is both unlikely and should not be welcome.

We just plain over did it. And yes I am stating the obvious. In fact for this whole tome so far I really feel I may be stating what is obvious to anyone paying attention.

 III.      The Grocery Web Business Model/What You Do While You Watch a Business Die

The Small Town Grocery

I have recently taken a look at a large grocery wholesaler and in particular the brand of grocery stores that once held a monopoly on my small town. As one of these stores is in my little town it is a model I can see in action and have for many, many years.

A few years ago Meijer’s™ (a larger chain of stores similar to Walmart™) moved in across the street and the store has struggled ever since to keep its doors open. In fact all of the stores owned by this brand struggled so much so that the chain itself, a privately held business, was sold to their grocery supplier, a generic product labeler and wholesaler, of many years.

What is interesting to me about this particular store is that in its case it has a liquor license and the larger “super store” does not. As such some local business continues to be driven there by the sale of spirits but not all of the liquor buyers are also converted into grocery shoppers and in fact only a small portion do in fact shop the rest of the store.

As a grocery competitor they cannot compete without a significant differentiator that would cause buyers to pass on grocery shopping at the super store. Unable to keep up the kind of diverse inventory and level of service personnel, without sufficient cash flow from to overall grocery business to support any effort to compete “head to head”, leaves them with shrinking customers, personnel and the ability to maintain services. This of course makes them less competitive and continued service shrinking will only result in the store closing eventually as its customer base shrinks away.

Old Idea, New Twists

Now let’s introduce an old idea with some new twists.

There are still a number of “online groceries” but most are mail order style home delivery types of businesses and have no real physical presence at all in the “real world”.

I have always been intrigued by the idea of the online grocery shopping experience but can never get passed a few aspects that would get me to use one and use it regularly. My primary one is the lack of ability to pick your own fresh produce, meat, and other grocery items that I like to pick out myself rather than receiving seemingly “source unknown” packaged meats or other perishables. Produce also does not always ship to the home well and waiting for your groceries to arrive via shipment seems less gratifying than just shooting over to the store and shopping.

Convenience alone won’t drive business to an online grocery; even savings alone can’t do it. But combine the online service with a physical location designed to accommodate the purchase of wine, beer and spirits, fresh produce, meat and other more perishable items as well as providing for the rest of a shopping order to be picked up and paid for (if it wasn’t paid online already). This would mean a very different sort of store layout but would require a significantly smaller frontend footprint and fewer overall staffing requirements.

So in the case of my little local store, with its valuable liquor license, removing the need for dry good and other shelf items to be in the physical front end of the store means the space utilized for storing these shelf items can be utilized more efficiently.

No need for special service counters for over the counter medicines or tobacco products that can’t be on open shelves, no need for a frozen section, for the most part even packaged dairy products and other types of cold case items would not need to be in the physical frontend of the store.

A deli/meat and fish counter, room for fresh produce, some wines and spirits (most liquor and beer would be other items generally purchased online and picked up, immediately reducing liquor theft which I understand is a big problem in many of these stores) and perhaps some impulse items scattered around the now smaller store footprint.

Check out would be a matter of adding anything you selected fresh to your already package order and paying only for items that were not paid for online. Packing orders could start immediately after receiving the online order and pickup could be designated as 30 minutes to one hour out in order to help control customer flow. Kiosks that allow for additional ordering of items you may have forgotten will also need to be available.

Now reducing many of the overhead issues and bringing as much of the customer experience as possible online should allow for greater flexibility in product pricing, incentives for buying generic (this is especially true of this organization as they are more a generic provider and wholesale operation who has taken on stores in order to keep their distribution channels open) become possible with the ability to provide side by side comparisons of contents and customer reviews of product quality as it relates to a brand vs. generic product.

Even brand names could be sold at more aggressive pricing if all other cost containment efforts made possible by this hybrid online/brick and mortar approach are fully realized. It all could ad up to a very nice value proposition for the store and one that their competition would be slow to adopt if they adopted it at all. This is the primary marketing differentiator and if aimed at the right target audiences could be worked marketing wise in an effort to appeal to that audience’s need for more time, less dollars spent on groceries and desire for a less stressful shopping experience.

It would not displace the bigger stores as they will still carry items beyond grocery and not all folks are looking to avoid the “traditional” shopping experience. It would however create a new customer base which arguably will grow over time not shrink in an environment that is highly flexible and easily can adapt to changing customer needs.

This particular chain continues to have a few “video rental” stores open but they have suffered from bigger chains with larger selections and more aggressive pricing. In this “online” scheme they could reinvigorate that portion of the business by also adding the video rental inventory online and provide for pickup/drop-off at the same location (I might suggest a return by mail option as with Netflix or even a partnership with an entity like Netflix with private branding for the store and Netflix distribution system as the engine) as the brick and mortar outlet and/or some additional home delivery options that could be developed if a need arises.

 As the example above reflects these are dramatic changes to a business model. They do not accept that the current model works and insists that the old model has to be scrapped to make way for an engine that drives the business forward and allows for customer and revenue growth.

I expect that if I were to walk in and propose this to the organization that I have used in this example they would run me out on a rail, more than likely tarred and feathered!

They would be wrong to of course and without looking at their books I can certainly understand how this will be a daunting shot at something that cannot be guaranteed 100% to work. However I believe that in the case of this particular business it is the way to not only start to grow their business again but could easily be a model that they could spread beyond their current footprint or offered to companies in a similar pickle as a turn key model and provide for a new revenue source to add to their cash flow.

As much as this speaks to the integration of the web into the model it also serves, and this was another aspect to why I felt it was really worth expanding my thinking on, to attack head-on one of any retail operations greatest problems, shrinkage and loss through theft.

This is the simplest aspect to communicate and why it is last in this section. In the store layout model described above theft could be reduced almost entirely and at very least limited to only those items available in the now reduced store front end. The rest becomes a cake walk thanks to it becoming a more data driven warehouse type of fulfillment operation. This obviously provides an environment where even employee theft is far more controllable.

Here is the Web 3.0 Part

Now that we have solved some major problems and probably saved the business dollars already let’s start the sticky stuff.

Now that you are driving folks to an online store you begin to take advantage of the social networking, product comparison, ad and special offer generation (based on end-user shopping data), perhaps games, perhaps a “shop smart” club etc. etc.

At the heart of this the collection, storage and application of shopping data gathered at the customer’s level. Implementation of as many “one to one” online ad, game, and special offer user experiences give further opportunity to fine tune that data.

Understanding what they currently buy, particularly if you wish to drive more generic product sales or more of a particular brand name than another, allows you to:

  • Opportunities to do side by side comparisons of products a customer regularly buys.
  • Show a testimonial from a neighbor or someone in the same town professing the strengths of the product being pushed.
  • Make a special offer to first time buyers (why should such a fine marketing approach be wasted on a PC or a new flat screen TV…why not on a box of generic elbow macaroni or a particular brand of sliced cheese!!!) so that they are motivated to potentially switch their loyalty to either your generic offering or the brand you are pushing.

Facebook’s compelling social game “Farm Town” could give way to the online store’s version “Shop Till You Drop” with customers getting special coupons for certain events in the game (again of course tailored to reinforce a behavior that is of value to revenue generation, customer retention, growth etc.) that will further drive or maintain involvement…maybe even commitment; to the online store brand.

Needs! [From here on folks we are into the more uncharted ground and the content below with be edited further and added to as the list below indicates.]

To properly present this idea and aid in understanding the broad impact that this either major makeover or start up business model several things need to be developed.

  • A rough layout or architectural drawing of a re-conceptualized physical store front-end
  • A rough layout or architectural drawing of the warehouse, staging and packing area
  • A rough layout or architectural drawing or the outside and parking of a hypothetical location
  • An electronic mockup of a potential store interface and various depictions of key data driven activities as described above.
  • Potentially we could get investors to fund the development of the whole code, building specs, possible liquor licenses for sale and locations etc. and go out and sell it nationally or internationally as a turn-key business solution

 IV.      The Regional Distribution Model/Why Big is No Longer Good and Big Communities Exist Just to Prove Big Won’t Last

Part of what drives the “IShopLocal.com” idea is the same thing that makes Netflix.com so darn convenient…the regional distribution system. Warehousing inventory close to customers to minimize shipping time and guarantee on-time delivery for orders placed on the Internet. I am sure that is not their mission statement but it is as close to a stab at an academic description for the real value of where they store the videos you rent and how they get them to you.

It’s too bad that long term, and after they finally put out a truly theft proof algorithm for digital media or give up on the idea of controlling its distribution completely (I could go either way really), even Netflix hasn’t gotten it completely right and will need to alter their model eventually. Fact is I see it as an “evolve or die” future for most of entertainment (or antiquated content development communities, as I like to call them) industry. That future is likely to also mean enclaves of creative’s developing content for consumption but perhaps no real “star system” anymore.

Instead I think that Godin is right that a more tribal way of expressing the monetization of creative works will evolve with creative folks, artists if you will, “stars” if you must, having more reasonable incomes and, although I think there will and always must be some form of class system, the strata of that they occupy will not be as far away from the rest of us as it is now.

I guess I have digressed this far I may as well continue just a little further and state that in my opinion the death of the entire entertainment, music, video, TV, book, game development etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, is immanent and it is about damn time. Once again too much money, power and well power have been concentrated into too narrow a corridor. But that is not the real problem. For particularly the record, movie and television industries it’s their long history of entangled relationships and just plain too many people who have a piece of every single pie. These industries are driving others, like the telecom, cable and satellite companies who must buy packages of channels that no one really wants to watch with tons of programs that no one ever watches, to not keep up with a public that knows full well that they should be able to just pick and pay for what they want to watch when they want to watch it.

My point is that all of these models no longer can work and all must be scraped. They will need to die as new “content” distribution models are developed and the public becomes used to their new freedom.

[I will be going into the whole vision for the “new disposable entertainment” industry in future posts.]

    V.      Summary/Why Should You Give a Crap

This is where I will stop for this portion. More as I continue my research and evaluation.

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

About BTU's Philosophy

Mark Bowen, Strategy Czar BTU

Mark Bowen

A couple of facts that will help you to understand the cornerstone of BTU’s view of our emerging new economy. Much like the Industrial Revolution we believe there is more than one part to the communications revolution that started with personal computing and the creation of the Internet.

The original industrial revolution spanned nearly a century and “revolution” really was only accurate for the actual technology developments that drove it. The first was considered to have begun in England and primarily was expressed in the manufacture of textiles. Here the use of machinery for the first time, all powered by coal fueled steam engines, created the first stages of the “revolution”.

However this revolution didn’t enter its second stage until a process was invented that allowed for the cheap production of steel. The insatiable demand of the railways for more durable rail led to the development of the means to mass-produce steel at a cost far lower than previous methods allowed.

Steel is often cited as the first of several new areas for industrial mass-production, which are said to characterize a “Second Industrial Revolution”, beginning around 1850, although a method for mass manufacture of steel was not invented until the 1860s, when Sir Henry Bessemer invented a new furnace which could make wrought iron and steel in large quantities at a low cost.

Sir Henry was amidst folks who were for the most part content with the progress of the “revolution” and did not see a need for the process improvements that would eventually accelerate the mass production of…well everything. Sir Henry Bessemer could not accept the status quo and worked tirelessly to find another way, a better way to produce steel. It was the invention of this process that many say brought about the final push into the mass production age.

When asked in later years what drove him to question what others did not he wrote “I had an immense advantage over many others dealing with the problem inasmuch as I had no fixed ideas derived from long-established practice to control and bias my mind, and did not suffer from the general belief that whatever is, is right.”

This is the founding principle of BTU Marketing Services. We also do not suffer from the general belief that whatever is, is right. We also view our new information age and world economy as entering its second revolution. If we apply both of these concepts together we understand that our task is to help business discover their opportunity in this revolution and remake their businesses and organizations so they can also innovate and thrive in the new economy.

What Sir Henry Bessemer did for the industrial revolution BTU intends to do for businesses who wish to grow new opportunities, restructure business models, expand thier market footprint and flourish in the new economy.

At BTU we also “Do not suffer from the belief that what is, is right”.

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print

Welcome to

Mark Bowen

Mark Bowen

Welcome to BTU Marketing Services. Look for articles covering business subjects, online collaboration, communications technology and occasionally musical composition.

Share and Enjoy:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Print