THE ENTERPRISE--Change, change, change...
WHEN YOU TRY TO BE EVERYTHING TO EVERYBODY, YOU END UP BEING NOTHING TO ANYBODY
Perhaps my grammar is not perfect, but the message is clear. Pick up a newspaper and read about GM's dilemma. Still stuck with too many brands and way too many dealers. Complexity strikes in many ways, one of which is to dilute resources and get in the way of focusing on what you should be--and to whom. Alfred Sloan of GM made a legendary decision back when Henry Ford was offering one model (Model T) and one color (black). He decided to create a car brand for every purse and purpose. It required five brands: Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac. GM would be wise to harken back to Sloan's wisdom and dump all but five brands. Clearly, Chevy and Cadillac stay. GMC is probably worth keeping for trucks and SUVs alone. Now it comes time to "pick two" from Buick, Pontiac and Saturn. I say keep Buick (a huge winner in China) and Pontiac (some of the most exciting new GM cars in its lineup). It already killed the premise of Saturn when it abandoned its revolutionary plant in Tennessee and its plastic body panels. Finish it off now. It is simply an assembly of cars made to be sold under other badges. Oh, yes--send Hummer back to its military roots and Saab back the Swedes.
POLITICS IS A MARKETING CAMPAIGN, THE CANDIDATE IS THE BRAND
The next place this problem is occurring is in politics. The label "flip-flopper" is a media favorite, since John Kerry wore it with such aplomb. Both John McCain and Barack Obama deserve its connotations and both have changed positions during the campaign. McCain made his changes earlier, and thus they get lost in the noise of history. Obama is making his now--and his staunchest supporters don't like it. Thus the "brand" Obama, which was so masterfully created and marketed is being blurred and its distinctiveness diluted. One thing you can't do with a brand is keep changing what it stands for. Kodak suffers because film is passe' and digital is in. Dell suffers because so many computers come with nearly all the features built in; its build to order model is no longer much of an advantage. Apple wins because it sticks to its innovative, cutting edge heritage (whether it is Steve Jobs, or the culture he has created). Many, many companies suffer when they try to support too many brands, and even keep all the various sub-brands and varieties of branded products--especially if they don't play to the brand's primary message. So, voters and marketers alike, watch what the brand really stands for and whether there is substance behind it. Choose wisely.
HERE'S THE KIND OF PROBLEM THAT THE WRONG GOVERNMENT CHANGE CAN CAUSE FOR COMPANIES
By GEORGE MCGOVERN
August 8, 2008; Page A13 Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company
As a congressman, senator and one-time Democratic nominee for the presidency, I've participated in my share of vigorous public debates over issues of great consequence. And the public has been free to accept or reject the decisions I made when they walked into a ballot booth, drew the curtain and cast their vote. I didn't always win, but I always respected the process.
Voting is an immense privilege.
That is why I am concerned about a new development that could deny this freedom to many Americans. As a longtime friend of labor unions, I must raise my voice against pending legislation I see as a disturbing and undemocratic overreach not in the interest of either management or labor.
The legislation is called the Employee Free Choice Act, and I am sad to say it runs counter to ideals that were once at the core of the labor movement. Instead of providing a voice for the unheard, EFCA risks silencing those who would speak.
The key provision of EFCA is a change in the mechanism by which unions are formed and recognized. Instead of a private election with a secret ballot overseen by an impartial federal board, union organizers would simply need to gather signatures from more than 50% of the employees in a workplace or bargaining unit, a system known as "card-check." There are many documented cases where workers have been pressured, harassed, tricked and intimidated into signing cards that have led to mandatory payment of dues.
Under EFCA, workers could lose the freedom to express their will in private, the right to make a decision without anyone peering over their shoulder, free from fear of reprisal.
There's no question that unions have done much good for this country. Their tenacious efforts have benefited millions of workers and helped build a strong middle class. They gave workers a new voice and pushed for laws that protect individuals from unfair treatment. They have been a friend to the Democratic Party, and so I oppose this legislation respectfully and with care.
To my friends supporting EFCA I say this: We cannot be a party that strips working Americans of the right to a secret-ballot election. We are the party that has always defended the rights of the working class. To fail to ensure the right to vote free of intimidation and coercion from all sides would be a betrayal of what we have always championed.
Some of the most respected Democratic members of Congress -- including Reps. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, George Miller and Pete Stark of California, and Barney Frank of Massachusetts -- have advised that workers in developing countries such as Mexico insist on the secret ballot when voting as to whether or not their workplaces should have a union. We should have no less for employees in our country.
I worry that there has been too little discussion about EFCA's true ramifications, and I think much of the congressional support is based on a desire to give our friends among union leaders what they want. But part of being a good steward of democracy means telling our friends "no" when they press for a course that in the long run may weaken labor and disrupt a tried and trusted method for conducting honest elections.
While it is never pleasant to stand against one's party or one's friends, there are times when such actions are necessary -- as with my early and lonely opposition to the Vietnam War. I hope some of my friends in Congress will re-evaluate their support for this legislation. Because as Americans, we should strive to ensure that all of us enjoy the freedom of expression and freedom from fear that is our ideal and our right.
Mr. McGovern is a former senator from South Dakota and the 1972 Democratic presidential candidate.
----------------------------------------
SHAPE-SHIFTERS KEEP UP WITH CHANGE, OTHERS DON'T
Over ten years ago I wrote a book, THE SHAPE SHIFTERS—Continuous Change for Competitive Advantage. In that book, I stated that "value" was the determining metric of the 21st century, and whoever consistently created and delivered the best value would win. I still believe that. I went on to point out that the best value is defined in the minds of the customers, but it is a constantly moving target. Value changes, often rapidly, and varies widely in its "definition" from customer to customer. When companies fail to recognize the shifting shape of value, they fall behind the curve of their competitive industry. Motorola missed the shift from analog to digital cell phones. McDonald's missed the shift from mass production of hamburgers that were all alike to the need to "customize" the production of hamburgers and meals--but still do it fast. It faltered until it changed its entire system of preparing burgers and meals.
The US auto industry is in the midst of missing another shift. The problem isn't that they are myopic per se (although some may be). it is that being caught in a shifting situation requires rapid adjustments, and that is not easy in auto, and especially among the US automakers. As gas prices have climbed rapidly, GM, Ford and Chrysler have been trapped with far too many of their products in gas guzzling, large (albeit profitable) vehicles--large SUVs, large trucks and large minivans. These are only profitable vehicles IF people still want to buy them. The $100 fill-up is a daunting obstacle, and the trend is rapidly to more fuel efficient vehicles. While the Japanese and Korean producers have an advantage in this area, the US car companies can recover. The problem is that amidst all their other problems (excess capacity, still some outdated vehicles, union problems, failing suppliers, etc.) this is one they didn't need right now.
THE BEST VALUE WINS--NOW & NEXT--FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS!
Unfortunately the marketplace is a relentless truth-teller. There is no escaping it. Just as brands must be true to what they stand for, products must be responsive to what customers consider to be the best value right now--and next. For those who are curious about the concepts in THE SHAPE SHIFTERS, I have arranged for it to be put back in print as a trade paperback, and you can find it at:
http://www.amazon.com/Shape-Shifters-Continuous-Competitive-Advantage/dp/0595481957/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218316792&sr=1-1
FREQUENT FLIER AWARDS = A FARCE & A FRAUD
If you travel much, you already know this. The airlines are failing, and as they do, they are devaluing everything they do in the desperate search for profitability. Fees for baggage, Fees for pillows and blankets. Meals consisting of cashews, trail mix, cookies, etc. and you pay for them. It was only a matter of time before the frequent flyer programs were also devalued. According to Delta, it now costs me $150 each way to carry my 6 lb. dog onto a plane in a bag, and keep him under the seat in front of me. Hmmm. No wonder it is considered a customer-unfriendly airline.
THE LAST WORD: CHANGE
Are you ready for it? It is the only constant. Keep up with it and you get a chance to compete. Fall behind and you lose. Get too far ahead of it, and you may suffer while you wait for the change to catch up. If you'd rather not change, consider that carefully. Even the decision not to change something is a decision--because the environment around you is changing while you make it.No matter what, embrace change. The good news: in change lies opportunity. And if you don't think Americans will need to change in the decades ahead, you didn't see the staggering opening ceremonies the Chinese staged for the Olympics. It was impressive, amazing, awesome, delightful, beautiful, daunting and frightening--all at once. That's the way future will be too.
Best, John
PS: A REMINDER ABOUT THE COMPLEXITY FACTOR DATABASE. If you want your company's data incorporated while participation is still FREE, please send this information. Confidentiality by company is assured.
SALES REVENUE ($ or other--specify)
NUMBER OF PRODUCT "SKUs"
(Products, services, plans/programs, etc.)
NUMBER OF MARKETS SERVED
(markets--e.g. consumer & industrial)
NUMBER OF FACILITIES
(significant facilities, not small offices)
NUMBER OF LEGAL ENTITIES
(countries where different ones exist)
NUMBER OF SUPPLIERS
Inventory + supplies/services
NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS
entities who pay you--not indirect
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
employees and FTE if temp or contract
Comments