The Illusion of Communication

Wow. The flu came through Texas a few weeks ago and just ravaged our town. I’m mostly healthy now, but still … I’m not 100%. While I was on the mend, I didn’t have much time to log onto the computer—it’s been about 10 days since my last post, which isn’t good, so I’ll make amends for that a little later.

Besides getting ill, I was busy putting together more information on SWOT analysis. There was a tremendous response to my previous post, and I barely scratched the surface on the topic.

The impetus for this whole thing was kind of a reaction to something I heard from a client, about how their company was small and agile—in other words, they didn’t have time to plan and organize. The simple act of “thinking,” it seemed, would undermine their best competitive advantage of being a small company.

I was floored. It didn’t make any sense to me. So, this is my response. A previous post was the beginning of this response, but it has since grown into a 9-page .pdf document, complete with charts and matrices and such.

One of my favorite parts of the document was supported by a thought that I originally attribute to Wayne McKinnon. He stated it a little differently, but essentially what he said was this (and this is what I wrote in the document):

… while it may be a competitive advantage to have lightning-quick reactions to market opportunities, such an ability should not be the only reason the organization is able to do what it does. Much like a professional athlete, such as in basketball, football, baseball, or auto racing, quick reflexes are important. But what separates the good from the truly great is vision, the ability to see things as they are developing, and an understanding of where they need to be and when. When looked at from this perspective, quick reactions are supplemental, allowing for minor adjustments or quick recovery from mistakes.”

Anyway, I’ve finished the document and feel pretty good about it. It’s now available from the Aperio Marketing Web site, but don’t go get … at least not yet. I have a little something special planned for my readers here, especially since I haven’t posted anything in over a week.

If you want to learn more about SWOT, the benefits (and risks of SWOT), and how you can turn a SWOT into actionable information, I hope that you will download this document. It’s available there for $35.94 … But before you go, follow these simple steps, and you’ll get it for free, just because you came to my blog:

1. copy this code: 9da316d540
2. go to the Aperio Marketing Web site
3. put the document in the shopping cart, then paste the code into the appropriate discount field to get it for FREE!

Hopefully, that’ll make amends for my lack of posts, and will also serve as an appropriate token of appreciation to all of my readers. Thanks!

Posted by Matthew under Marketing Strategy & Business Strategy | No Comments »

Windows XP is just another example of inside-out thinking that backfires. I remember—it must have been some time in 2005 or so—when a bunch of developer friends of mine were watching videos of Microsoft employees showing off new features of the yet-to-be-released version of Vista. Admittedly, some of the things they were showing off were pretty cool. But ultimately, the value of these cool new thing were a little lost on me. As it turns out, it’s not just on me.

InfoWorld has started a petition to save Windows XP, which is slated for end-of-life on June 30, 2008. As of this writing, there are more than 84,000 people who have signed the petition. And a lot of the comments that people are sharing about why they want to save XP is exactly that: why should I upgrade to Vista? What’s the value? What I have is good enough. I don’t really need the expense, frustration, etc. of upgrading my operating system.

What happened? The long and short of it is Microsoft innovated from the inside. It found some very interesting challenges for their developers and tried to find ways to solve those problems. No doubt, it took a lot of really smart people to come up with the solutions. However, no one outside of that core group really cares.

On a similar, but somewhat tangential topic, the Xbox 360 suffers from much of the same problem (and we’ll lump the Sony PlayStation 3 in there too). They targeted the hard-core gamer, who really wants to play on a PC anyway, to come over to the game console environment. So they beefed up the hardware, and violá—a slight jump in sales. The two major heavyweights in the division for gaming consoles had a minor hit with their new, seventh-generation, innovative consoles.

Why only a minor hit? Because, while the hyper-real graphics and sound were interesting to many people, it just wasn’t worth the cost of admission. What they had was good enough. Or was it? Enter stage left: the Wii.

Knowing that they couldn’t compete straight up with the big dogs, Nintendo decided to do an end-run. They looked for other areas to innovate, and what they uncovered was a huge risk—and it paid off, big time.

In case you haven’t heard, the Wii comes with an innovative new control system, which read the movements of your body and replicates them on screen. So now, when you are bowling, you actually have to use a real bowling motion to interact with the game. The graphics are good, but sub-par when compared to the competition. But who cares about pixel resolution when you can actually have fun while playing a video game? And it’s not just the kids. It’s the grandparents, and nursing homes, and other non-gaming enthusiasts who are getting in on it. Do you think there’s a big market there?

Not only that, because Nintendo didn’t have to go all-out on top-of-the-line hardware, they are actually seeing a big of profit on each console sold. This compares very favorably to the competition, who knowingly take a hit on the hardware, and hope to make their profits on selling the games and other services (such as online gaming).

So there you have it: go ahead an be innovative. Just make sure you are innovating for the right reasons and with the right perspective.

P.S. Readership of the blog is going up and up and up. Thanks to everyone for checking it out. For those of you who are interested, I also write a marketing newsletter, which goes out about every three weeks or so. You can sign up for the newsletter and check out the archives here: http://aperiomarketing.net/newsletters/

Posted by Matthew under Innovation & Marketing Strategy & Business Strategy | No Comments »

It is not unusual for organizations to find themselves in situations they wish they weren’t: revenues are down, profit margins are thin and getting thinner, costs are rising, customers are defecting … the list goes on and on.

When this happens, employees and management may suggest the need for better planning. While this is a great idea, putting a plan together at this juncture will likely lead to more misfortune. Much like getting lost in the woods, you’re better off staying put until help arrives. Or, if you want be proactive and save yourself (usually the preferred method for business managers), it’s best to first recognize where you are, what condition you are in, and what opportunities and threats the environment provides.

This is why, before a plan is put in place, the first thing on the checklist should be an assessment of the organization’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, otherwise known as a SWOT analysis.

What is a SWOT analysis?

A SWOT analysis is a tool used for assessing an organization’s situation. SWOT stands for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. Using the earlier analogy of being lost in the woods, strengths and weaknesses represent the individual (I am strong, can build things, good swimmer, tired, cold, etc.), while opportunities and threats represent the external environment (there’s a natural shelter nearby, it’s raining, no water source nearby, etc.).

What is the purpose of a SWOT analysis?

The goal of a SWOT analysis is take inventory of a specific situation at a specific point in time and present information in a more usable format. I also feel that a SWOT analysis is a great method to slow down, take pause, and reflect on a given situation before decisions are made out of haste or panic.

With such analysis undertaken, it becomes easier to identify weaknesses and strengths and to identify opportunity from threat. As odd as it may sound, many weaknesses are not perceived as such, thus providing a faulty foundation on which to rest a strategy or to make a decision. Still, it happens all the time. Think about it: how many times have you done something against your better judgment?

However, the situation is further compounded in a business environment because when many people work on the same project, efficient communication and working together are critical to success. Without a SWOT, it becomes much more complicated to inform everyone about any particular situation and have them understand it in a similar way.