Roger La Salle’s Matrix Thinking Blog

The mystical power of “Brand”
By Roger La Salle
www.innovationtraining.com.au
www.matrixthinking.com

In a previous blog we defined this most difficult of words, “marketing”.

If you ask somebody to define this word the general response would be ways of marketing, such as digital, the 4 P’s and so on. But this are not a definition. These are just some of the methods.

The best definition of marketing I ever heard and have now embraced, courtesy of a colleague, a professor in Medellin Colombia is”

“The art of winning the minds of people to have unconditional love for your offering”
Ref: Prof Paola Podesta, Colombia

If we look at this definition two companies seem to excel at achieving this: McDonalds and Apple.

Brand?
The mystical power of brand is amazing and hard to quantify.

There is an old saying, “Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”. There is a lot of truth to that and for good reasons.

When large companies look to purchase equipment that may be vital to the functioning of their business what they want, apart from “fit for purpose” is surety.

This surety takes a number of forms:
1. These are the biggest with a history of survival and success
2. It’s a safe decision
3. I am protecting my job in selecting one of the “big boys”
4. They will still be here tomorrow to support me.

These brand decisions are powerful and perhaps justifiable drivers.

A good example of this was in Australia when the last National Census was undertaken. The contract to deliver the IT services was given to one of the major software providers. From all accounts, on census night despite the best assurances, the internet was clogged and the outcome was a reported disaster. But most likely the choice by those in Government to use a major brand may have saved their jobs.

Valuing Brand?
There have been many studies on this subject but nothing concrete emerges.

For example, how do you value a ROLEX mechanical watch when a $5.00 quartz watch from the local service station most likely keeps better time and never needs to be serviced?

Mercedes Benz was once a statement of wealth. Mercedes has now commoditized its range and brand with models now affordable by most. Mercedes are trading on their brand equity, only the future will tell if this dilution of their status will ultimately be for the good.

Finally, airlines.

Reportedly, American Airlines saved 643,000 liters of fuel annually when they switched to a light weight paper for their in-flight magazine. Yet for many years American Airlines aircraft were largely unpainted, now they are almost universally painted all over adding more than one ton of weight to each, just to signal a Brand?

QANTAS and pretty well all airlines do the same.

Brand is vital. Protect it carefully and make sure that every customer experience is a good one.
Word of mouth marketing is the most powerful brand builder you will ever find.

**** ENDS ****

Roger La Salle, trains people in innovation, marketing and the new emerging art of Opportunity Capture. “Matrix Thinking”™ is now used in organizations in more than 29 countries. He is sought after as a speaker on Innovation, Opportunity and Business Development, is the author of four books, and a Director and former CEO of the Innovation Centre of Victoria (INNOVIC) as well as a number of companies, both in Australia and overseas. He has been responsible for a number of successful technology start-ups and in 2004 was a regular panelist on the ABC New Inventors TV program. In 2005 he was appointed to the “Chair of Innovation” at “The Queens University” in Belfast

So that’s the problem – No surprise!
By Roger La Salle
www.innovationtraining.com.au
www.matrixthinking.com

As readers of this blog would know I have always expressed concern about the Open Innovation model for a number of reasons, one being the ownership of the IP. Indeed a number of companies shun ideas from outside the organisation for fear of becoming involved in IP disputes.

It can become even more complicated when possible consequential ideas result. That is, ideas not directly related to the original but perhaps one where the initial suggestion led to an inspiration for something entirely unrelated. Indeed it is for this reason that many companies won’t sign non-disclosure agreements.

The following example may put this into perspective.

Suppose somebody suggests to me the idea of a drinking straw with micro holes in the side to aerate the drink as I suck. Perhaps not a good idea, but rejected in any case. However this may stimulate me to think of drinking straws in general and conceive one with an internal wall of flavor. Clearly the latter is not the original idea, but its inspiration may have come from having me think of drinking straws in a new way. This alone may lead to a costly dispute about ownership and IP. Such disputes are always difficult to adjudicate so instead, companies simply avoid the issue altogether.

As every budding entrepreneur and inventor may know, it’s often hard to get companies to embrace ideas from outside, for various reasons. The following extract from an article I recently received puts a different light on the issue. Perhaps it’s “not invented here syndrome”, with ideas from outside being seen as a threat to the jobs of the so called internal innovators or innovation departments.

To quote from an article by Hila Lifshitz-Assaf of 1 Stern School of Business, NY

……………..” After months of observation and study, researchers discovered the core issue behind the resistance: (to external ideas) some internal scientists and engineers believed open innovation to be a threat to their identity as problem solvers for the organization.

….…The underlying problem was one of identity. ….…scientists viewed themselves as “problem solvers.” But if the problems were being solved by those outside the organization, it presented an existential issue for internal problem solver? How can a problem solver be a problem solver if they are outsourcing their innovation solutions?”

This article certainly raises an important point and one that many entrepreneurs will have faced.

The real issue is the question it leads to and one for which senior executive and Innovation Managers must be held to account. For whom are you working, yourself or the organisation?

**** ENDS ****

Roger La Salle, trains people in innovation, marketing and the new emerging art of Opportunity Capture. “Matrix Thinking”™ is now used in organizations in more than 29 countries. He is sought after as a speaker on Innovation, Opportunity and Business Development, is the author of four books, and a Director and former CEO of the Innovation Centre of Victoria (INNOVIC) as well as a number of companies, both in Australia and overseas. He has been responsible for a number of successful technology start-ups and in 2004 was a regular panelist on the ABC New Inventors TV program. In 2005 he was appointed to the “Chair of Innovation” at “The Queens University” in Belfast.

So that’s the problem – No surprise!
By Roger La Salle
www.innovationtraining.com.au
www.matrixthinking.com

As readers of this blog would know I have always expressed concern about the Open Innovation model for a number of reasons, one being the ownership of the IP. Indeed a number of companies shun ideas from outside the organisation for fear of becoming involved in IP disputes.

It can become even more complicated when possible consequential ideas result. That is, ideas not directly related to the original but perhaps one where the initial suggestion led to an inspiration for something entirely unrelated. Indeed it is for this reason that many companies won’t sign non-disclosure agreements.

The following example may put this into perspective.

Suppose somebody suggests to me the idea of a drinking straw with micro holes in the side to aerate the drink as I suck. Perhaps not a good idea, but rejected in any case. However this may stimulate me to think of drinking straws in general and conceive one with an internal wall of flavor. Clearly the latter is not the original idea, but its inspiration may have come from having me think of drinking straws in a new way. This alone may lead to a costly dispute about ownership and IP. Such disputes are always difficult to adjudicate so instead, companies simply avoid the issue altogether.

As every budding entrepreneur and inventor may know, it’s often hard to get companies to embrace ideas from outside, for various reasons. The following extract from an article I recently received puts a different light on the issue. Perhaps it’s “not invented here syndrome”, with ideas from outside being seen as a threat to the jobs of the so called internal innovators or innovation departments.

To quote from an article by Hila Lifshitz-Assaf of 1 Stern School of Business, NY

……………..” After months of observation and study, researchers discovered the core issue behind the resistance: (to external ideas) some internal scientists and engineers believed open innovation to be a threat to their identity as problem solvers for the organization.

….…The underlying problem was one of identity. ….…scientists viewed themselves as “problem solvers.” But if the problems were being solved by those outside the organization, it presented an existential issue for internal problem solver? How can a problem solver be a problem solver if they are outsourcing their innovation solutions?”

This article certainly raises an important point and one that many entrepreneurs will have faced.

The real issue is the question it leads to and one for which senior executive and Innovation Managers must be held to account. For whom are you working, yourself or the organisation?

**** ENDS ****

Roger La Salle, trains people in innovation, marketing and the new emerging art of Opportunity Capture. “Matrix Thinking”™ is now used in organizations in more than 29 countries. He is sought after as a speaker on Innovation, Opportunity and Business Development, is the author of four books, and a Director and former CEO of the Innovation Centre of Victoria (INNOVIC) as well as a number of companies, both in Australia and overseas. He has been responsible for a number of successful technology start-ups and in 2004 was a regular panelist on the ABC New Inventors TV program. In 2005 he was appointed to the “Chair of Innovation” at “The Queens University” in Belfast.

Will the right product sell – it depends!
by Roger La Salle
www.matrixthinking.com

Incrementalism !
My last blog talked about finding the market need and of course the best way to do that is to find a product or service that is selling well and simply make it better, or “innovate it” if you like!

This is classic low risk business, unlike some of the disbelievers that scorn incremental innovation or making improvements to what is already well accepted, believe it or not, this strategy can be a game changing and highly disruptive strategy. Further, it’s virtually risk free.

Some game changing increments
Let’s take a product firmly embedded into every household in the 1920’s, the wireless. Let’s innovate that and add a picture, now you have TV. Highly disruptive and zero market risk. One could well argue the same about bringing colour to TV, or speech to movies and so on.

Let’s take the taxi for example, a commonly used means of transport, and innovate that offering to create UBER. In the accommodation industry “Airbed Accommodation”, again a new way of booking a room now made simple and with vastly reduced cost.

Similarly with the old fashioned telephone tethered to a wall by a cable, let’s remove the cable, classic incremental improvement with no market risk.

There can be no doubt that looking at everyday activities and creating small changes provides a great way to build a business with little or no risk. But there are caveats.

It’s not always easy
The above mentioned innovations, though in essence incremental and lacking in market risk, all took a long time and significant expense in development. However that said, the market risk in these was in essence negligible

Will any product be OK?
Unfortunately not, as too many innovators and start-ups find out the hard way.

Just taking a common product and making it better is not the answer without the essential ingredient of “a route to market”.

I am sure at times we have all been appalled at some of the well-respected branded products, brands we trust but that have delivered real trash to the market. One may ask, how can this happen, how can these products get through the supply chain? The answer lies in them already having an established distribution network.

As an American man many year ago once said to me, “It doesn’t matter what you’ve got, you gotta have distribution”.

What’s the lesson?
Whilst innovating widely used products or services may be the key to business success, unfortunately, if you lack that vital element of distribution you may find the going tough.

Perhaps you can use the internet and e-marketing to gain traction and thus disrupt the normal distribution model, but this usually a slow and can be very frustrating. Further, if your product involves low cost mass production and thus high start-up costs, your now back in the area of high risk!

**** END ****

Roger La Salle, trains people in innovation, marketing and the new emerging art of Opportunity Capture. “Matrix Thinking”™ is now used in organisations in more than 29 countries. He is sought after as a speaker on Innovation, Opportunity and business development and is the author of four books and a Director and former CEO of the Innovation Centre of Victoria (INNOVIC) as well as a number of companies both in Australia and overseas. He has been responsible for a number of successful technology start-ups and in 2004 was a regular panellist on the ABC New Inventors TV program. In 2005 he was appointed to the “Chair of Innovation” at “The Queens University” in Belfast. www.matrixthinking.com