Para reflexão

Há dias ao conversar com o director comercial experimentado de empresa que está a fazer o caminho das pedras para convergir para o omnicanal apanhei um pormenor interessante.

A empresa tem uma vasta gama de clientes que que colocam os seus produtos em lojas onde os consumidores de todo o mundo, literalmente, vão comprar no retalho físico.

A empresa também tem vendido através da internet directamente ao consumidor final, embora em quantidades que não se comparam.

Os lojistas, ou porque são muito conservadores, ou porque as cores escuras ficam melhor nas lojas, preferem encomendar artigos em preto e cinza. Os consumidores, talvez porque seja a sua preferência, ou porque a prateleira virtual saliente mais a cor, preferem de muito longe as cores garridas.

Um choque!

Um choque!

Perceber que na Alemanha e no todo poderoso sector da engenharia também se verifica, e com números impressionantes, o fenómeno dos clientes não rentáveis:

• "To what degree are suppliers aware of the profitability of customer relationships?

• Are unprofitable customer relationships a common phenomenon among business-to-business suppliers?

• To what degree does profitability influence customer management strategies?

• Are suppliers ready to terminate unprofitable customer relationships or are there differences in their willingness to make the final move?

...
Empirical data were gathered among sales managers in the German mechanical
engineering industry.
...
Still, being in charge of managing customer relationships, we expected our respondents to at least intuitively know, which relationships are profitable, regardless of the measurement techniques they apply. On average, respondents estimated 75 per cent of their customer relationships to be profitable. As shown in Figure 2, unprofitable relationships are a common phenomenon among the responding firms. Nearly a fifth of respondents (17.5 per cent) claim that more than half of their customer portfolio is not profitable.
It appears that few firms have a systematic approach to managing unprofitable customers. Only a third (33.7 per cent) uses minimum requirements concerning the profitability of customers such as minimum gross margins. Only a fifth (21.2 per cent) claims to have guiding principles on the handling of unprofitable customers.

...

In order to learn more about suppliers’ motivation not to end unprofitable customer relationships, the respondents were asked to rate several predefined statements on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 to 7.
...
The vast majority of respondents regard possible future contributions of the customer as a main reason not to terminate currently unprofitable relationships (statement 1). The fact that the majority of respondents agree with the statement that “it is always more expensive to attract a new customer than to keep an old customer” (statement 10) suggests that they have a rather cautious or passive view concerning the issue of ending unprofitable business relationships.
...
Information on customer profitability is scarce in the industry and the methods we examined to measure it are not commonly applied. As knowledge of methods to evaluate customers and their implications is incomplete, firms and their staff have only modest or no reliable knowledge about the value and profitability of their customers. ... very few marketing practitioners are able to provide meaningful estimates of the profitability of their individual customers.
Most respondents confirm that unprofitable relationships are a common feature of the market. Nearly a fifth of respondent firms have to cope with a customer base more than half of which is not (yet) profitable. This means that the other half has to cover up for losses to ensure the supplier’s overall profitability. This might be particularly difficult to achieve during an economic downturn. Given the striking number of unprofitable customer relationships, we have to consider the possibility that industries such as mechanical engineering might often be faced with relatively low profitability. This industry revolves around high capital investments, high costs to serve individual customers, and the need to establish long-term relationships."

Como será por cá? Quando uma empresa não tem uma estratégia clara, quando uma empresa não comunica essa estratégia, quando uma empresa não tem uma estrutura de capital saudável cai nesta armadilha da incapacidade para dizer não, para receber no curto prazo algum dinheiro para se manter à tona e, acaba por se enterrar ainda mais no médio prazo.


Trechos retirados de Sabrina Helm Ludger Rolfes Bernd Günter, (2006),"Suppliers' willingness to end unprofitable customer relationships", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Iss 3/4 pp. 366 - 383

"achieving strategic resonance"

"Whilst it has been argued by others that manufacturing strategy is the ‘missing link’ in corporate strategy, the gap between the two has widened, rather than narrowed since it was identified. This gap in the literature is true both in mainstream strategy (where manufacturing strategy remains an undeveloped theme and is lost in its critical importance to resource-led and competence based literature) as well as within manufacturing strategy where the root cause of exclusion of manufacturing personnel in the main stream strategy process has not been developed.
.
The reasons for this gap, we suggest, have not been explored sufficiently to date. We suggest the key issue is that, although the change from craft production has often been explained in terms of changes within manufacturing processes, this transition has not been developed in terms of the fundamental impact upon the strategic decision process within firms. Strategic resonance is difficult to achieve in the internal strategy process of the firm whose processes often remain rooted in hierarchical settings fraught with conflicting demands between top levels (strategic) and lower levels (operations) of management. The growth of large, multi-divisional enterprises, particularly within the United States during the emergence of mass production, brought with it the creation of increased levels of hierarchy within the firm. The exclusion of operations personnel from the strategic direction of the firm had enormous impact because now, in contrast to craft enterprises, there could be conflict and tension between conflicting goals within the firm resulting in strategic dissonance.
However, whilst achieving strategic resonance is a profoundly difficult task, it will be a necessary requirement in the continuing highly competitive arena."

Trechos retirados de "Aligning Manufacturing Strategy and Business- Level Competitive Strategy in New Competitive Environments: The Case for Strategic Resonance" de Steve Brown e Kate Blackmon, publicado por Journal of Management Studies · June 2005

"Focus on Problems, Not Ideas"

"1. Don’t Get Trapped in Your P&L
For any business to succeed over the long term, it must earn a return that exceeds its cost of capital. That’s why good managers put so much focus on measuring and managing return on investment (ROI) as a basic operational practice. It is through continuously making incremental progress in lowering costs and increasing revenues that firms achieve competitive advantage in their industry.
.
Yet every enterprise is essentially a square-peg business waiting for a round-hole world. Unexpected changes in technology, customer preferences, and regulation can disrupt even the best-run operation. When that happens, traditional practices will only lead to getting better and better at things people care about less and less.
...
2. Focus on Problems, Not Ideas
Another common misconception about innovation is that it is about ideas. It’s not. The truth is nobody cares about what ideas you have. They care about what problems you can solve.
.
While brainstorming about ideas can be helpful in an operational context, because problems are front and center, for innovation identifying a meaningful problem is half the job."

Trechos retirados de "4 Ways Leaders Can Get More from Their Company’s Innovation Efforts"

"impede que mais valor seja gerado"

Engraçado como ainda ontem ao almoço conversamos sobre um tema parecido com este. Gente que tem um script e não foge dele por nada deste mundo. E com isso, algumas vezes, destrói valor, ou impede que mais valor seja gerado.

"most leaders and organizations tend to focus on just one type of performance. But there are two types that are important for success.
.
The first type is known as tactical performance. Tactical performance is how effectively your organization sticks to its strategy. It is the driver of focus and consistency. It allows organizations to increase strength by directing limited resources to the fewest targets. In Precision’s case, good tactical performance required developing rules, checklists, and standard operating procedures and then following them closely. Similarly, when Starbucks baristas make your latte the same way across cafés, or when a software engineer delivers the expected features each sprint, you are witnessing tactical performance.
.
The second type, known as adaptive performance, is how effectively your organization diverges from its strategy. Adaptive performance manifests as creativity, problem solving, grit, innovation, and citizenship. It allows organizations to create value in a world filled with, as the U.S. military says, volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, where technology and strategy changes rapidly. At Precision, good adaptive performance would have included every line worker coming up with new ideas and then teaching them to their colleagues. If you’ve ever seen a Starbucks barista adapt their greeting to make you feel personally welcome, or an engineer lean over to help a colleague solve an unexpected problem, you’re witnessing adaptive performance.
.
Essentially, tactical performance is how well you stick to your plan, and adaptive performance is how well you diverge from your plan. Every high performer needs both. A great salesperson will operate much more efficiently with a defined process for reaching out to prospects. They will represent the products more consistently. But they must also adapt the standard approach based on each customer’s unique needs. The same is true for any team or organization."

Trecho retirado de "There Are Two Types of Performance — but Most Organizations Only Focus on One"

"algo que a empresa já tem no seu ADN "

Há dias num e-mail tentei descrever de modo sucinto a metodologia que sigo para facilitar a formulação da estratégia numa PME. Escrevi, entre outras coisas, este trecho:

"Normalmente trabalho com PME. E partimos do princípio de que uma PME não tem a veleidade de mudar o mundo nem tem capital suficiente para mudar radicalmente de vida. Assim, procuro que seja feita uma reflexão acerca do ADN da empresa.
.
O que trouxe a empresa até aqui? O que pode servir de ponto de apoio para alavancar uma hipótese de futuro? Onde é que a empresa dá cartas, tem uma vantagem competitiva, pode diferenciar-se? Com que produtos/marcas e clientes consegue melhores margens ou tem menos concorrência?
.
Assim, partindo de algo que a empresa já tem no seu ADN e que a diferencia ou dá potencial de diferenciação peço que desenhemos o ecossistema da procura para a sua oferta futura. Por ecossistema da procura entendo o desenho das entidades externas que a empresa deve privilegiar para criar o futuro modelo de negócio."

Algo que se sintoniza bastante bem com algo que leio em "Strategy is the story":

"Frank Martin, who as a CEO orchestrated the revival of the British model-train maker, Hornby, by turning it from a toy company into a hobby company, put his strategy story in just 15 words. “We make perfect scale models for adult collectors, which appeal to some sense of nostalgia.” He decided to focus on making perfect scale models because that is what collectors look for. Moreover, people would usually specifically collect the Hornby brand because it reminded them of their childhood, and with it a nostalgic, foregone era. Frank Martin’s choices were not just a bunch of disconnected strategic decisions; they hung together, and, combined, made for a logical story.
.
Second, the story must tie to the company’s resources. Importantly, the set of choices has to be clearly linked to the company’s unique resources, those that can give them a competitive advantage in an attractive segment of the market. Although Hornby had been hovering on the brink of bankruptcy for a decade, it still had some valuable resources. First of all, it possessed a valuable brand that was very well-known and appreciated by people who had owned a Hornby train as children.
.
Additionally, the company had a great design capability in its hometown of Margate. However, these resources weren’t worth much when competing with the cheaper Chinese toy makers. The children who wanted a toy train for their birthday didn’t know (and could care less) about the Hornby brand. The precision modelling skills of the engineers in Margate weren’t of much value in the toy segment, where things mostly had to be robust and durable. However, these two resources — an iconic brand and a design capability — were of considerable value when making ‘perfect scale models for adult collectors’. It was a perfect match of existing resources to strategy."

Um bom exemplo do racional que procuro seguir no exercício. O que é que há no nosso CV que possa ser usado para fazer a diferença a trabalhar para outros clientes-alvo com outra proposta de valor?

Acerca do pensamento sistémico

Outro tema relacionado com os ecossistemas da procura:

"The circular economy uses understanding the system to give a better overall result. You can’t ignore the feedback, it’s real. Just because it is not in your model or idea – doesn’t take away the issue. So, systems thinking really is understanding bigger contexts over longer periods and looking at the connections, not the parts, for insights. We are looking for patterns not certainty, because certainty does not exist, but the pattern gives us insight about which direction to move in. A circular economy reflects this more contemporary scientific understanding of how the world works.
...
Lou: So how can people know where to start when it comes to systems thinking? How do we break free from habitual thinking and take things forward?
.
Ken: This indirect causation makes it difficult to know where to intervene in the system, because people expect visible action. They are used to reacting to cause and effect. Having a different perspective on how the world works doesn’t sound like taking action"

Trechos retirados de "What is systems thinking? And why does it matter for a circular economy?"

"dealing with unprofitable customers" (parte II)

Parte I.

Gosto desta linguagem da SDL para explicar o fenómeno dos clientes que destroem valor:

"By identifying and considering a range of stakeholders, firms can gain competitive advantage by engaging not only with customers but also other partners to encourage intergroup engagement [Moi ici: Ecossistema]
...
The SDL literature states that value is created within a service system. The firm uses its operant resources to interact with other actors in the service system and, in particular, engages with customers’ value creation as actor-to-actor. These interactions, providing they are positive, lead to an improvement in the well-being of the service system as a whole, wherein the customer and value co-creation become embedded.
.
Value destruction, however, arises from incongruent elements of practice, which depart from the shared understandings of practice among firm, customer and service system. If these understandings are not shared, value is destroyed rather than created and leads to the decline in the well-being of at least one of the systems and brings about an asymmetry in the service system. Instead of gaining competitive advantage through the action of the actors, the firm and the wider system are placed at a disadvantage.
...
Although it has been suggested that the firm thinks of its consumers as equipped with the full range of operant resources to co-create value, it may only be ‘good’ customers who are able and willing to apply the specialized skills and knowledge to gain value-in-use. The firm has customers or prospective customers who are unwilling to provide reciprocal resources who fail to understand the reciprocity of the value proposition, who are unable to acquire the skills and resources to be effective resource integrators or, who ‘may botch...’. All of these suggest that in terms of value co-creation, customer operant resources may not necessarily interact beneficially with the operand resources of the firm as required by SDL. In these circumstances, these customers may not gain value-in-use so that the firm’s service propositions will have negative value for them, both experiencing a loss. If certain customers are unwilling or unable to use their operant resources to co-create value, they cannot act as the fundamental units of exchange and hence collaborative value-creating partners. The firm may provide opportunities for these customers to learn how to develop their operant resources to co-create, but if it encounters repeated instance of value destruction, it may have to discontinue further investment in that customer and discourage further interactions.
...
The destruction of value is not limited to the firm/customer dyad but resonates throughout the service system."

Continua.

Trechos retirados de "Selective demarketing: When customers destroy value" publicado por Marketing Theory 1–18, 2016

Curiosidade do dia

À atenção dos fragilistas, "L’affondo di Schäuble: «Insolvenza automatica per i Paesi in difficoltà
che chiedono aiuto»":

"Era la sua ultima occasione e non l’ha sprecata. Nel gesto, prima ancora che nel suo contenuto, è racchiuso il messaggio che Wolfgang Schäuble ha voluto lasciare al resto d’Europa: io vado, ma le mie politiche restano. Le presento da solo, senza aspettare neppure la Francia. E prevarranno.
...
La differenza è che stavolta il «non paper» di Schäuble ha il pieno appoggio della cancelliera, anche nel prossimo mandato da leader. Washington, sotto Donald Trump, è presa da troppi problemi per notare cosa fa la Germania in Europa. E quel testo uscito ieri dalla cartella di Schäuble non è molto meno radicale di quello che, espellendo la Grecia, avrebbe trasformato l’area euro in un club in cui un Paese può sanzionarne un altro nel modo finanziariamente più duro.
...
L’obiettivo esplicito per la Germania è introdurre un fattore di disciplina che spingerebbe i governi a ridurre i debiti. L’obiettivo implicito sembra invece di ridurre l’esposizione tedesca a futuri salvataggi simili a quelli di Grecia, Spagna, Portogallo, Irlanda e Cipro. Berlino prevede infatti che i rimborsi dei titoli di Stato siano rinviati se un governo chiede aiuto all’Europa. Quindi, «gli investitori dovrebbero contribuire» (cioè subire perdite esplicite sui titoli di Stato) se l’emergenza non passasse."

Um pouco de estratégia na agricultura pode fazer toda a diferença

Há dias aproveitei passar perto de Estarreja e passei pelo casal de lavradores que me vende ovos caseiros de contrabando e sem factura (pica especial por chatear a ASAE e a AT em simultâneo). O lavrador contou-me que este ano foi um ano excepcional para a produção de milho. Há muito milho e, por isso, o máximo que consegue é que o comprem a 0,20 € por kilo. Daí que já tenha decidido usar o milho na alimentação dos seus animais.

Enquanto o ouvia pensei logo que ele deveria optar por outras culturas e abandonar o que não faz sentido para um pequeno produtor de um país com fronteiras abertas. Aposto que há muitas culturas alternativas, não tradicionais, que lhe dariam muito mais rendimento.

Voltei a recordar-me deste episódio quando ontem à noite descobri que o amigo Graça me tinha enviado este texto, "New England Is Cracking the Code to Farming — All Year-Long". Texto que me diz muito porque também faço parte de uma "community-supported agriculture, or CSAs", a AMAP Gaia.

Um pouco de estratégia na agricultura pode fazer toda a diferença:

"The community-focused process is especially fruitful in pastoral New England, which has a higher proportion of small operators and family farms than anywhere else in the country. The region doesn’t have a single representative in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s top 10 agriculture-producing states. “You’re never going to convince really large farmers to get away from the monoculture of planting 1,000 acres of corn,” says Greg Noden, USDA farm operations manager in Geneva, New York. But for a midsize or beginning farmer, it’s a viable shift. And that class of farmer, Noden adds, is “more prevalent in the Northeast than anywhere else.”
.
There are financial benefits for those who change up the typical farming equation. “If you can get people greens in December, not only will you have plenty of demand but you will be able to charge a premium,” says Jim Hafner, executive director of the Keene, New Hampshire–based nonprofit Land for Good. “That’s why you also see people moving into non-land-based farming, such as hydroponics.”"

Estas CSAs permitem:

• assegurar clientes-alvo;
• assegurar prateleira;
• assegurar mecanismo de desenvolvimento da relação;
• mudar de proposta de valor;
• mudar de preço;
• mudar de ecossistema da procura. 

"dealing with unprofitable customers"

Para quem descobriu as curvas de Stobachoff em 2011. Para quem acredita no tecto de vidro, para quem usa o marcador "clientes-alvo" desde 2007, é claro que o desafio de lidar com clientes que destroem valor é aliciante. Não esquecer Byrnes.

"Selective demarketing is a strategic option for a firm to manage customers who are or are likely to be a poor fit with its offering.
...
these customers effectively destroy value by misusing or misunderstanding how to integrate their operant resources with those of the firm.
...
A firm interacts with selected customers to co-construct a consumption experience from which the customer gains value-in-use or co-creates value. The firm directs its marketing efforts at identifying new customers with whom it may be able to co-create value and seeks to extend value co-creation opportunities with existing customers. However, the business environment is far from static; changes occur for the firm, its customers and members of its network. The firm, as a result, may decide to withdraw from existing markets and/or to prioritize new customer groups. Such actions have been labelled selective demarketing, the aim of which is to reduce demand from certain classes of customer. These segments or customer classes may be considered relatively unprofitable or undesirable in terms of their impact on other valued segments of the market, becoming candidates for selective demarketing.
...
some customers effectively destroy value by misusing or misunderstanding how to integrate their operant resources with those of the firm. By destroying value, these customers may be suitable for selective demarketing.
...
Serving some customers may engender high psychological as well as financial costs such as disruptive or aggressive customers encountered by airlines prompting firms to seek ways of encouraging them to go elsewhere. Firms may have up to 30% of their customers making a negative contribution in B2C situations, rising to a half of customers, in a study of German engineering firms.
...
It has been asserted that resource allocation decisions at the market or segment level can result in suboptimal strategies; therefore, firms should allocate resources at the individual customer level instead
...
The firm can then identify those customers who do not generate a desired level of return and may encourage these customers to spend more or reduce the quantity of sales communications
...
By not dealing with unprofitable customers, the firm is failing to optimize its resources. This failure is likely to affect its stakeholders – it has already been noted that serving unprofitable customers raises costs for profitable customers – with costs resonating within the stakeholder system. Although the mandate for selective demarketing is increasingly being accepted, firms are caught in something of a dilemma. On one hand, they have a proportion of customers who generate insufficient revenue and affect stakeholders as well as the firm itself. On the other hand, the repercussions of eliminating these customers either directly or indirectly damages the firm’s reputation. It is, therefore, not surprising that firms may hang back from selectively demarketing but at the same time, the decision not to take action against unprofitable customers is damaging to the firm and its system."

Continua.

Trechos retirados de "Selective demarketing: When customers destroy value" publicado por Marketing Theory 1–18, 2016

Foco e mosaico de actividades (parte IV)

Parte I e parte II e parte III.

"The final two categories depict companies that are living a coherent identity:
.
10. Coherent companies have a powerful value proposition and a system of a few differentiating capabilities that support that value proposition. Their portfolio of products and services grows successfully because of the strengths they consistently bring to bear.
.
11. Supercompetitors use their coherence to shape their future. They apply their capabilities to a broader range of challenges and loftier goals, serve the fundamental needs and wants of their customers, and ultimately lead their industries. These companies are not just playing the game of business well — they’re changing the rules."[Moi ici: Recordar scripting markets, performativity, mercados como configurações]

Trechos retirados de "11 Types of Strategic Maturity: Which One Describes Your Company?"

"There is no silver bullet"

"That’s the problem with patterns. It is beyond our human capacity to swallow them whole, so we curate them to make them more comprehensible. In doing so, we eliminate important context and overfit selected elements of the past onto the future. That makes for a nice story, but fails to take into account the messy details of reality.
.
The truth is that patterns can never be validated backward, only forward. So it doesn’t matter how many success stories we can database and then squeeze into snazzy little graphs. The ugly little secret of business strategy is that you need to make your best guess in an uncertain context, manage resources wisely and see what works. There is no silver bullet."

Trecho retirado de "Don’t Bet On Someone Else’s Success Story"

Olhar para o ecossistema (parte II)

Parte I.

Pensar a nível de ecossistema passa por perceber que os mercados não existem, os mercados são seres vivos que vão existindo e evoluindo:

"the starting point is to view markets as emerging outcomes best understood by following the process of their practical realization
...
the idea of markets as plastic entities that are continously ‘in the making’
...
markets as ‘on-going socio-material enactments that organize economized exchanges’
...
by conceptualizing markets as continuous enactments rather than ready-made, CMS goes beyond simplistic stage models of market emergence, for example, formation–stability– change–dissolution. It stresses that markets are continuously shaped both by explicit efforts to create new markets or change existing ones, and by the everyday activities of buyers and sellers. This allows us to explore how users exert influence over markets beyond the initial commercialization of an offering."

Por exemplo:

"We conceptualize market shaping as five interrelated subprocesses in which users may be involved as agents: qualifying goods, fashioning modes of exchange, configuring actors, establishing market norms and generating market representations." 

Fundamental perceber que se pode ser um arquitecto de paisagens competitivas.

Trechos retirados de "How users shape markets" publicado por Marketing Theory 1–24, 2016

Foco e mosaico de actividades (parte III)

Parte I e parte II.

"Four archetypes refer to companies that have developed a coherent strategy but struggle to execute it:
.
6. Distracted companies have defined a coherent identity for their company, but they have a hard time resisting diversions. They pursue market opportunities that aren’t in line with their strategy.
.
7. Resource-constrained companies struggle to find the funds to execute their strategy. Building differentiating capabilities is difficult and expensive, and the executives at these companies don’t think their financial situation allows them to make the bold moves they need.
.
8. Capability-constrained companies lack the knowledge, skills, or technology needed to build out their capabilities to a world-class level, or to scale them throughout the organization.
.
9. Overstretched companies have defined a coherent identity for themselves, but it is so far away from the company’s current status — and their ability to enlist customers, employees, and investors on their behalf — that they can’t successfully realize their goals."

4 pecados capitais!

Qual será pior, a incapacidade de ter disciplina, muitas vezes por causa da inveja sobre o que outros estão a conseguir, ou o desenho de uma estratégia que não tem em conta a realidade de uma organização.



Trechos retirados de "11 Types of Strategic Maturity: Which One Describes Your Company?"

Olhar para o ecossistema

E volto a "Strategy for a Networked World" de Ramírez & Mannervik para olhar para esta figura.

Várias unidades de negócio da mesma entidade (Scania, a azul).

Compradores do serviço realizado pelos veículos da Scania.

Operadores do serviço realizado pelos veículos da Scania.

Fornecedores e concorrentes de peças para veículos da Scania.

Oficinas que intervêm nos veículos da Scania.

Distribuidores de veículos da Scania e de concorrentes.

Fabricantes de carroçarias.

...

Tal como Normann escreveu...

"take stock of what (one has), yet distance (oneself) from it and explore new territory"

Olhar para o ecossistema actual ou desenhar um ecossistema potencial para subir na escala do valor.

Está tudo relacionado

Está tudo relacionado.

Este texto, "Starbucks Closes Online Store to Focus on In-Person Experience", tem tudo a ver com "How Not to Fail at Retail" e com perceber o papel das interacções e da co-criação de valor.

Tudo o que, por exemplo, o jornalismo mainstream nunca percebeu.

Se os "chineses" do retalho, as lojas online, têm preços e diversidade de oferta imbatível, não adianta tentar competir com eles nesse campeonato (good old Kasparov), não adianta entrar numa guerra entre cães, mais vale mudar para gato.

"O truque está no jogador reconhecer aquilo que faz melhor. Se é melhor na espera e numa estratégia de paciência, então é esse o caminho que deve seguir; se é melhor num ataque poderoso, deve criar condições para o fazer. O elemento chave para uma estratégia de sucesso é assegurar que, no ambiente que está criado, somos muito melhores do que o nosso concorrente. Trata-se de forçá-lo a cometer erros.
...
é preciso conhecer a nossa natureza e a do nosso adversário. Reconhecer as forças e as fraquezas de cada um. E assegurar que a luta se processa num território no qual as nossas fraquezas são menos importantes, enquanto que as do adversário são flagrantes.
...
Se o meu exército tem cavalaria, convém que a batalha seja num vale; mas se a cavalaria for do adversário é melhor que o confronto seja nos montes. Trata-se de encontrar o campo de batalha que potencia a nossa vantagem competitiva e no qual as potenciais vantagens do adversário encontrem contrariedades. Acredito que a maioria das batalhas - na história militar, nos negócios ou no xadrez - são decididas por manobras prévias e que as grandes vantagens competitivas são acumuladas antes da batalha propriamente dita." [Moi ici: Claro que há que dar um desconto à visão dos negócios como uma guerra ou um jogo. Não devemos ser como o Dick Dastardly e darmos demasiada importância à concorrência. Nos negócios o objectivo não é eliminar o concorrente, o objectivo é  seduzir de forma sustentada um cliente]

Por um lado:

"“Every retailer that is going to win in this new environment must become an experiential destination,” Mr. Schultz told investors in April." [Moi ici: O mais provável é que o máximo que o comércio online possa fazer seja "permutar". O comércio online é muito bom para artigos padrão, é muito bom para artigos permutados, não é bom para quem procura algo à sua medida, para quem procura algo que ainda não existe, para quem não sabe o que procura]

Acerca da evolução da vantagem competitiva

Este artigo "Pay Attention To Your ‘Extreme Consumers’" aparece-me numa altura em que ando a fermentar uma ideia.

Neste postal recente apresentei um insight poderoso:

"Customers often think we are different not because we are different, but because we recognize what makes them different."

 Há dias num artigo qualquer alguém recordava a falência da Monitor fundada por Porter e declarava-a como sinal do fim das vantagens competitivas. No entanto, não consigo engolir essa afirmação.

Acredito é que o material das vantagens competitivas agora é outro. No apogeu do século XX a grande massa de plankton estava disposta a comprar o que a produção lhes oferecia. A competição era pela eficiência, a vantagem competitiva era o preço.

Há medida que convergimos para Mongo e que a massa de plankton diminui para dar lugar a cada vez mais tribos apaixonadas, e se a vantagem competitiva passa agora pela capacidade de co-criar valor através de interacções preciosas? E se a vantagem competitiva passa agora não pelo que cada um tem mas pelo que resulta da interacção entre o que cada um tem?

O artigo inicial remete-me para o número crescente de tribos de consumidores extremistas, os tais assimétricos de que falava Taleb, gente que valoriza uma interacção com gente do mesmo sangue.

o potencial de subida na escala de valor ...

Um título que diz tudo "The World's Worst Pricing Model":

". . . is also one of the world’s most popular. It is cost-plus. I’m talking about anything where the price is based on a mark-up applied to costs.
...
Cost-plus pricing has many apparent advantages. It is simple to use, appears systematic, even “scientific” and can be easily audited. It avoids the need to get to grips with the psychology of pricing. On the debit side, though, it can leave huge amounts of money on the table and in some cases destroy a business.
...
you need to understand what value you actually provide to customers. This can surprisingly hard because if you have been operating cost-plus you have been able to avoid thinking about it. It needs an understanding of context.
...
Secondly, you need to be sufficiently different from your competitors that they will pay for the value you create. If you are just one of the crowd, it makes no difference how much value you create; one of your competitors will be stupid enough to quote a daily rate or other cost-plus amount and you will have to match it. All that extra value you create is captured by the customer.
.
So there are the two things you need to do:
.
Develop distinctive skills;
Understand and communicate the full value of what you do.
It’s surprisingly rare to find businesses that are really good at this, but if you could develop these two skills maybe you also could raise your margins from 25% to 70%."

E este é o método mais usado em todo o mundo... o potencial de subida na escala de valor

A experiência é o truque

"Whoever gets the experience right will be the winner, because people don't always want the least expensive thing, and early majority and late adopter customers don't appreciate the newest technology, but everyone wants a great experience. Since experience can be improved in any product or service, in any industry or situation, the opportunities to improve customer experience are virtually unlimited, and simply waiting for the right entrepreneur or innovator to come along."

Trecho retirado de "Why You Should Spend Bigger on Customer Experience Innovation"