Interested in Competitive Intelligence qualifications. We are faculty members of the Institute of Competitive Intelligence offering Accredited CI & MI training.
Top languages used today on the Internet - and their growth. (With thanks to @Luis_Madureira)
Originally, the dominant language by far on the Internet was English. That lead has now decreased. A third of all around 3bn+ web users converse in English but just over a quarter (26%) are Chinese speakers and 10% are Spanish speakers. That means 30% of web-users use another language to converse.
This has implications for international business as you can no longer view English as the web's lingua franca. If you want to do business with China, Chinese is the language you should use. The same with Spanish, Arabic, and other top European AND Asian languages. ... See MoreSee Less
Competitive & Marketing intelligence analysis shouldn't only look at what's visible - otherwise you risk "survivorship bias".
Sometimes only survivors make it back. Looking at where the survivor is hurt doesn't tell you about those who don't make it back as their injuries were much greater. Understanding this can tell you where to protect (or attack).
Abraham Wald, in WW2, understood this when decisions were being made about protecting planes from attack. The original idea was to add additional armour to the parts of the planes with the most bullet holes. Wald showed that this approach was wrong - as these planes had returned. Instead you should protect those parts that didn't show damage as these were likely to be on the planes that did not make it home.
The same rule applies when looking at business weaknesses and failures - on both yourself and your competitor. This can tell you where to attack and where to defend. ... See MoreSee Less
A Step-by-Step Guide to Conducting Competitive Analysis
Napoleon Bonaparte apparently said: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" But what if it's you who are making the mistake. You'll never know if you don't know what your competitors are doing, how and why.
First: set goals. Then identify competitors. Look to see what they are doing and how usable they are e.g. by analysis of their website. Then consider their value proposition - what are they offering. Speak to competitor customers. Measure how they are doing..... and more. ... See MoreSee Less
Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle had Sherlock Holmes state "If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" This is an example of Occam's Razor - which can also be summarised as "Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected"
In competitive intelligence analyses, and in strategy this principle is worth thinking about. A strategy that is overly complex and not clearly stated or understandable is going to be a bad strategy. Occam's Razor is a way of looking at strategy, scientific theory, theology and more and is a useful mental approach for looking at complex issues. buff.ly/2qnnkvW... See MoreSee Less
Top 10 self-liming beliefs... that silently sabotage us in life - and how to address them.
1. I’m too old 2. I’m not smart enough 3. I am not educated enough 4. I’m afraid of trying and failing 5. You have to have money to make money 6. I’ve already tried everything 7. I can’t do that 8. I don’t feel I really deserve it 9. I’ll never be able to do that 10. All the good ones are taken
In fact, you are never too old to set new goals or dreams, you are good enough and intelligent enough to succeed.... and if you don't try then of course you'll fail, but if you do try or try again you may succeed. There is no such thing as failure - it's just feedback you can use to learn from so the next attempt takes you towards success. Each self-limiting belief can be overcome by rethinking how you view things. buff.ly/2qnwgSG... See MoreSee Less
Leadership is making sure that the whole group is with you - not that you are above them but that they and you are all in this together and if the weakest fail then it's a fault in your leadership.
"A group of wolves:
The 3 in front are old & sick, they walk in front to set the pace of the running group lest they get left behind.
The next 5 are the strongest & best, they are tasked to protect the front side if there is an attack.
The pack in the middle are always protected from any attack.
The 5 behind them are also among the strongest & best; they are tasked to protect the back side if there is an attack.
The last one is the LEADER. He ensures that no one is left behind. He keeps the pack unified and on the same path. He is always ready to run in any direction to protect & serves as the 'bodyguard' to the entire group."
Assisted, augmented and autonomous intelligence will all play roles in future corporate/organisational strategies. Companies need to make decisions today so they are prepared for future #AI requirements to keep them ahead.
There's always a conflict between ethics and profit. Profit often comes first - explaining why so many companies behave unethically. When caught out, they lose - as long-term it is ethics that build brand and customer loyalty that lead to profits. However too often the profit motive is ingrained in a company culture, over and above ethical behaviour.
Dilbert cartoons over the last week have been looking at corporate culture and today's cartoon shows why ethical approaches lose out to the profit motive. ... See MoreSee Less
5 Industries That Are Prime Targets for Disruption
During the Industrial Age the course of history was changed as new technology disrupted everything from production to transportation. Today we're in the midst of similar upheaval as digital technologies spread. Change will impact most industries but these 5 are ripe for further #disruption: Furniture: Ikea is only the first step Retail: Going beyond Amazon Healthcare: Wearable devices promise major change Education: E-learning Real Estate: LA-based startup Open Listings shows you can bypass the real-estate agent… ... See MoreSee Less
When service is designed well and delivered expertly, it is because there is alignment among your strategic goals, your customer’s wants and needs, and what actually happens between the two of you. That alignment is a function of 10 key elements. Once you understand these and can assess how successful your company is at delivering them, you can begin to take the action needed to transform.
Notice the first five elements emphasize the customer’s side of the relationship while the second five are mostly about you, the provider.
• Empathy: Developing products, services, and experiences from the customer’s point of view; taking full account of how your customers interact with you
• Expectation: Ensuring that customers know what to expect from their interaction with you
• Emotion: Knowing the emotions your customer brings to your relationship, and guiding customers to a satisfied feeling about working with you
• Elegance: Providing offerings that are clean, simple, easy to work with, and complete — nothing superfluous, nothing omitted
• Engagement: Communicating with customers — and allowing them to communicate with you — at every point of contact, to understand their experience and how to improve it
• Execution: Reliably meeting all the expectations you have set
• Engineering: Possessing technical excellence (compared to your peers, but also to general business standards) and eliminating waste of materials, time, and effort, so that no extraneous effort is necessary on the part of you or your customer
• Economics: Pricing your services appropriately, so the customer gets value for his or her money and you make the profit you expect
• Experimentation: Building processes for improvement and innovation into the daily work of your business; developing capabilities to create and roll out new offerings
• Equivalence: Managing the customer, your team, and partner organizations so that you, the service provider, are satisfied too
These 10 elements can be used to create a service design and delivery report card that helps you measure how successful your company, department, or function is in creating a superior experience with and for your customers. Once you carefully and fully assess how well your service is delivered to your customers, you can use that assessment to set priorities for improvement.”
I just read an interesting blog post from Fuld & Co. (insights.fuld.com/blog/competitive-chess-with-cheese). The post discusses how one cheese brand (Boar's Head) had tied up a channel in the local area supermarkets, freezing out the other brand (Land O'Lakes). The story itself is an interesting example of competitive strategy and channel marketing. However what concerns me is the conclusion. The author implies that the frozen brand has lost out and that this is permanent, and that the consumer loses. I disagree! Please comment if you think my analysis is wrong.
The author concludes "There are large implications of this kind of direct competitive brand war. Primarily, it’s the consumer who loses. While retailers are enjoying whatever perks and profits reaped from selling promotion and shelf space to brands, consumers suffer from less choice and limited options. Less choice leads to higher prices as controlling brands leverage their newfound market freedom.... Staying ahead of a competitor’s strategy, including the innovative approaches competitors may take to win in the marketplace, is integral to a company’s success. And time is a driving factor: twenty years of doing the same thing is not a recipe for success, in fact it’s quite the opposite. The deli counter was ripe for disruption. Had Land O’Lakes better controlled the distribution channel, it could have forestalled or at least diminished Boar’s Head’s competitive strike. When the distribution of your product rests in a sales channel outside of your control, it’s crucial to maintain a mutually beneficial relationship with that channel. Even beloved branded staples like Land O’Lakes American cheese aren’t immune to innovative competitive tactics."
Apart from this not being a classic product disruption in that there is no innovation as such and in fact nothing new in grabbing a channel in this way, I see this as a classic "prisoners dilemma" scenario.
Boar's Head has made a move - presumably by offering the supermarkets a better deal to take its brand over the competitor. Land O'Lakes now has a choice. It can sit back, losing share, and ultimately profits, OR it can go to the supermarkets and offer an alternative (better) deal so it can be stocked also. It may make less money doing this than was the situation previously BUT it is better than doing nothing. Meanwhile Boar's Head will have lost its monopoly and, having accepted a lower-price deal will make less money. Essentially both brands should be available but at a lower price to the supermarket than before Boar's Head tried to steal the channel. It means that the winner is the supermarket who pays less to the cheese suppliers OR the consumer if the savings are passed on (i.e. the opposite of the Fuld blogger).
If Boar's Head has put in provisions to guarantee exclusivity in some stores, then Land O'Lakes can do that in others and so divide the market up. Again both suppliers lose and the supermarkets gain. Consumers lose in having less choice in this case however.
The only scenario where Boar's Head can win is if Land O'Lakes cannot match Boar's Head's offer at all - anywhere. If that is the case it means that ultimately Land O'Lakes will disappear or become a niche supplier - and so the Fuld analysis would be correct. However as both cheese suppliers seem to be major brands, this is the least likely scenario. ... See MoreSee Less
India is building an "industrial corridor" of "Smart Cities" linking the capital, Delhi, with the business centre, Mumbai. Costing upwards of $100bn, they will include state-of-the-art technology including transportation and infrastructure and be built to be environmentally friendly. China is spending over $1.2 trillion on infrastructure to link it commercially and financially to 65 countries, while Malaysia is in the middle of an initiative aimed at creating a world-class economic region in its North-West states by 2025.
Essentially these (and other) emerging markets are industrialising and building foundations for growth. To succeed they need to include human development and high living standards, institutional infrastructure and opportunities for growth in terms of transport, communications, finance, energy, etc. If they succeed they will be the power-houses for the future in not only these markets but globally. buff.ly/2q1CCqZ... See MoreSee Less
At present, the Internet of Things remains a wide-open playing field for enterprises. It’s young, heterogeneous, and full of uncertainty. Estimates of potential economic impact by 2020 range from about US$2 trillion to more than $14 trillion. Companies small and large, old and new, are scrambling to stake out their territory. One in every six businesses is planning to roll out an IoT-based product, and three-quarters of companies are exploring how to use the IoT to improve their internal operations and services. Much early work is likely to focus on boosting efficiency and cutting costs, but the greatest long-term business value of the Internet of Things will involve getting to know customers—both consumers and businesses—more intimately, and providing new digital services and experiences to delight them.
Rarely, if ever, has a single technological platform combined this much complexity, speed of development, global reach, and novelty among customers. Consider the range of interconnected systems, products, and services the IoT will enable, from simple monitoring of home temperature and security to the “quantified self” (the tracking of personal health, diet, and exercise metrics), to fully networked factories and hospitals, to automated cities that respond to the movements and interests of thousands of people at once.
Yet for all its power, the IoT is still at the early-adopter stage.... ... See MoreSee Less
Social media is now ubiquitous and most people have camera phones so if a company does something offensive (or a police department for that matter) it is likely that somebody will video the event. Similarly if a company does or says something that misses the zeitgeist, it is likely to get attacked.
Failing to recognise this is likely to lead to damage to a brand, and so to stock values and ultimately, if not adequately corrected, to falls in profits as customers switch to alternatives. Two recent cases show how fast social media can condemn a company but more importantly, how failure to react appropriately will cause damage.
Pepsi put out an insensitive advert featuring Kendall Jenner in a "protest" giving a Pepsi to a police officer. This jarred against real protests and police behaviour - but Pepsi quickly recognised their mistake and apologised.
In contrast, United Airlines has been mauled. They'd overbooked a flight and asked for volunteers to leave to make way for some United Employees that needed to get to another location. Three people gave up their seats - but the fourth, a Chinese doctor, refused. United arranged for security to drag him from his paid-for seat, and pulled him violently off the plane. This was videoed with other passengers protesting.
As if United's behaviour wasn't bad enough, the CEO, instead of apologising offered platitudes and defended his staff. He'd forgotten that it is the customer who pays for the company and the job of the company's staff is to serve the customer. Although United has attempted to resolve the situation - and says they are now speaking to the customer, the damage has been done. What is worse for United is that this is not the first time they've been insensitive to customer complaints and this has not gone unnoticed. In 2008, to save $1200 they lost millions after rough baggage handling destroyed a musician's guitar and United refused to accept responsibility. (bit.ly/2o7npQd - and the comparison can be seen at bit.ly/2o7GIbX)
When mistakes happen and they get transmitted via social media it is essential to 1) Own-up to a mistake 2) Make amends / apologise 3) Ensure that the mistake (or anything like it) is not repeated.
Artificial Intelligence (#AI) is getting better. OpenAI researchers found that a neural network they'd trained to predict the next character in Amazon reviews had taught itself to also analyse the reviews sentiment. (buff.ly/2oI6rg0)
The dream for machine learning researchers is to get completely autonomous / unsupervised learning from information - without the machine being trained, and so this is a significant step forward.
A number of top technologists - including Elon Musk & Stephen Hawking have warned about dangers posed by AI. (bit.ly/2oI6TuS) - saying “In short, the rise of powerful AI will be either the best or the worst thing ever to happen to humanity...We do not know which.” Of course this isn't new - as Isaac Asimov looked at such issues in his Robot series of books (some, such as I Robot, made into films). To answer these, he devised the 3 Laws of Robotics - programmed into his fictional robots. These would help answer Hawking's and others' objections. ... See MoreSee Less
What should you do when someone angrily challenges your market research results?
1) Try taking their perspective. Understand why they are disagreeing with you. Their anger often indicates they care about the results. Frame your data in a way that helps them to meet their goals. 2) Collect more data - to answer the criticisms. Every comment is useful and researchers need to understand how their research is understood. Try and address the concerns - with further data collection that answers these. 3) Don't view the challenger as an opponent but as an ally. Look for ways to collaborate to get their buy-in. Once you are both invested in a joint investigation, you can channel the anger to a good result.
It's not just the data you have. Existing / previously collected data creates bias and blinds us. It is important to shift the focus away from readily available data. Crucially, not having the right data is no excuse. Think about what data is not being collected that may help embed existing data in a richer context.
“There are few management skills more powerful than the discipline of clearly articulating the problem you seek to solve before jumping into action.”
In the late 1990s, Harley-Davidson was planning to implement the Toyota production system into its plants. They hired a consultant to help them. The consultant toured the plant and then the Harley Davidson manager started asking when the process would start, the expected results, the total costs.... The consultant refused to answer - and instead asked "What problem are you trying to solve?". The meeting didn't go well - but in hindsight, creating major change should be done to solve an identified problem and not for change's sake. Identifying the problem takes a process. A good problem statement has 5 elements: 1) It looks at something the organisation cares about and connects this to a goal. 2) It clearly describes the gap between the current state and the goal 3) It quantifies the target, the current state and the gap between the two. 4) It is neutral of bias 5) It is small in scope - so it can be handed quickly.
In contrast, failure is likely if the problem isn't properly formulated, or if the problem is seen as the solution or if there is no gap between the current situation and the end-goal or if the problem is too big to solve and isn't broken into smaller, achievable pieces.
More opportunities come knocking than we know what to do with.
They often come enshrouded with hassle, perceived risk and the need to overcome inertia. It's easier to just say no.
And so no becomes the default, a habit, it's easier than discernment.
Do you and your organization have a method to sort the opportunities out?
In emergency rooms, they put people into three groups: • Gonna die no matter what, • Going to be okay if we help them eventually, • Needs help right this moment. By prioritizing where to focus, they serve the patients who can benefit the most.
What happens if instead of ignoring opportunity, you triage it?”
The Future of Free Speech, Trolls, Anonymity and Fake News Online - sadly the trolls are winning!
Pew Research asked a single question to 1537 leading / well-known technology experts, academics, business & government leaders looking at current attitudes to the impact of online social interactions "In the next decade, will public discourse online become more or less shaped by bad actors, harrassement, trolls and an overall tone of griping, distrust and disgust?"
The responses,showed that 42% thought there'd be no change, and 39% that things would get more negative! Only 19% believed that things would get better with less harassment, trolling and distrust.
The research identifed 4 major themes relating to the future of the online climate. 1) Things will stay bad - to troll is human and anonymity encourages bad behaviour. 2) Things will stay bad - there are benefits (tangible & intangible) that support trolling. 3) Things will get better because of technical / human solutions as the online world splinters into controlled social zones (supported by Artificial Intelligence (AI). 4) Oversight / Communty moderation have a cost - some solutions will further change the nature of the Internet, as surveillance rises, State regulations, etc. This will polarise people and limit information access and free speech. ... See MoreSee Less
The importance of getting your corporate culture right - to gain competitive advantage. A 90-second overview video summarising what is meant by corporate culture, and a tip on how to change it if advantageous. ... See MoreSee Less
The EIU (Economist Intelligence Unit) measures the strength or lack of it in countries across the world and looks at how democratic countries are. The top 10 democracies include all the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Ireland but not the UK or USA. The USA has become less democratic - a trend which started before President Trump.
Overall democratic involvement has fallen and under have the world now lives in a democracy. 72 countries experienced a decline in democratic values last year. Countries with declining levels of democracy outnumbered those becoming more democratic by more than 2 to 1. ... See MoreSee Less
In 1994 I was at the US Information Industry Association conference in New York when all this sort of thing was discussed. I still remember the video where we'd have a computer game type app where we'd drive our shopping trolley down the supermarket aisle - and take items off the shelf to put them in our trolley. If we weren't sure, we could look at 360º image of the product - turning it round, zooming in on the extensive ingredients, or cooking instructions or allergy warnings.....
That was 1994. We didn't get that for almost 20 years (and still haven't got all aspects now). So although I think some of this will be true, a lot won't. I do agree online shopping will grow as will automation. However a lot of the other aspects e.g. 3D food printing, will not be with us in 10 years for the majority.
So what do you think? Is this correct? Will we lose the human touch or will that remain in some format?
Also what about the old traditional market - especially outside the most developed nations. ... See MoreSee Less