by Adam Hartung | Jan 2, 2006 | General
There’s a better than 50% chance you shopped at least once in WalMart. Five years ago, there was an equally large chance you shopped in KMart or Sears. But this year, did you shop at Sears? Or Sears Essentials (the replacement concept for KMart)?
Sears is still trying to figure out what to do with Martha Stewart. Months after we heard that KMart + Sears was going to be a big competitor to Target, Kohls and WalMart the fact is that Sears missed this 2005 holiday season. Imagine that. Do you think the execs at Sears needed someone to provide a calendar so they new when shopping season would start?
Sears remains hopelessly Locked-in to its old Success Formula. Eddie Lampert might be rich and smart, but he has no clue how to deal with a large, Locked-in organization. He hasn’t Disrupted the Success Formula, despite much hoopla and personal press coverage regarding his supposed genius. Lacking that Disruption, we haven’t seen a new Sears emerge – just an even weaker verson of the old, failing Success Formula.
If you avoided Sears this Christmas (without even trying) I think you can probably avoid the stock as an investor. If you’re a supplier, be sure to watch your receivables line. And here’s hoping that the talented folks working at Sears are lookng at Dick’s Sporting Goods, and other emerging retailers, for new opportunities to compete more effectively.
by Adam Hartung | Jan 2, 2006 | Disruptions, General, In the Rapids, Innovation, Leadership, Lifecycle
Most people I know think Howard Stern is an oddity. Although he’s had a loyal following for 30 years, most business people never listen to his show. And they can’t believe he’s being offered $500M to change his broadcast to satellite radio. Of course, few of them listen to satellite radio, either.
But, I think anyone who uses radio advertising had better get serious about Sirius. Many electronics stores (Best Buy, Circuit City) sold out of satellite radio equipment this Christmas. Sirius now has over 3 million subscribers. XM Radio (the competitor) has over 5 million subscribers. Quarterly subscriber growth, before Christmas, exceeded 20%.
Back when Ted Turner launched 24 hour news, and "America’s Team" (the Atlanta Braves) to fill programming for his cable TV stations most people thought cable TV was an oddity. Now, the networks have long lost their grip on market share as customers flock to targeted stations on cable TV and increasingly avoid commercials with Tivo and other Digital Video Recorders. Do we think the transition in radio will be slower, or faster? History would say that the adoption rate of similar technologies is exponentially quicker.
If you own stock in a radion station, and think people want "local programming", you’d best be taking stock of Sirius and XM. This is a serious shift in behavior. Sirius only needs 1 million new subscribers to make the Stern offer profitable. Since they added nearly 360,000 new listeners in the third quarter that looks pretty likely.
Challenges to business don’t often present themselves like a hurricane. They are subtle. Business people have to read the Challenges to catch winds early and make changes. The Telltales are showing that something is happening in radio-land. Don’t take long to prepare. If you invest, or if you depend on radio advertising, you had better pay close attention and start making your contingency plans. As shocking as Howard Stern is, he won’t cost you money like the shock of missing the lastest shift in behavior.
You don’t want to be committed to CDs when iTunes hits. You don’t want to be long on newspapers when Google’s classified ads start making inroads. And right now, I’d be paying close attention to listener behavior in radio — and thinking about how it will impact your business and investments.
by Adam Hartung | Dec 23, 2005 | Disruptions, General, Innovation, Leadership, Lifecycle, Lock-in, Openness
This week before Christmas, 2005 I had a great lunch. I was in L.A. and I called an old acquaintance to join me for lunch. He’s a great guy, somewhat trapped in an "old-line" American manufacturing company that’s been Locked-in for several years. They’ve not done their shareholders, nor their employees, much good for a decade. Executive turnover hasn’t helped as new leaders just follow worn-out strategies that have eroded their pricing and competitiveness.
"How about some Sushi?" I asked. Now, this buddy was a "meat and potatoes" guy, so my question was intended as a ribbing. I was surprised when he said, "Sure. Whatever you like." "You must be kidding" I said, "since when do you eat so adventurously?" "Over lunch" he said, leading me to wait for a juicy answer.
During the last year, he had taken on a new role helping develop a company strategy. In that role, he had made a half dozen trips to China. "You know" he said to me "I never really understood just how dramatic the globalization changes were going to be to our business until I went to China. They do work entirely differently than us. It’s beyond culture and how smart we versus they are. The Chinese are using resources we ignore, and approaching the opportunities differently. If our company doesn’t change – fundamentally change – we won’t survive another 10 years. The decision, the opportunity, is up to us. If I can get our top management to see what I’ve seen, and we step up to the Challenges, we can get out of our Lock-in and create a future that exceeds everyone’s expectations. But, if we sit doing what we’ve done – well, we’re a gonner."
My friend got outside the box. When he changed roles and entered strategy he Disrupted his thinking about the business. He visited foreign companies, and he saw opportunities for sales, marketing, product development, and manufacturing that he believes obsolete the existing Success Formula and create opportunities for a new one. And, while doing this, he changed himself. His personal Lock-ins to "the way this business is done" for the last 20 years disappeared and he sees a new industry competition developing.
Now he eats Sushi. And he eats all kinds of Chinese food I’ve never had the opportunity. He also eats Indian, or whatever food is served. He got outside the box, he started thinking, and the old barriers fell away as he moved toward a new definition of success
I hope everyone enjoys their Christmas, Hanukah or Kwanzaa meals in joy and peace this year. Whether it’s roast beef, turkey, goose, lamb — or Sushi.
by Adam Hartung | Nov 2, 2005 | Defend & Extend, General, In the Swamp, Leadership, Lifecycle, Lock-in
Vornado has acquired a 1.2% stake in McDonald’s (check out full Bloomberg News article.) Does anyone remember this scenario? It was just November, 2004 when Vornado bought 4.8% of Sears leading to Sears acquisition by Kmart. Simply put, the Sears real estate was worth more than the stores (KMart’s rebirth as Sears Holdings hasn’t changed that situation, either). Vornado has learned how to spot these opportunities – including acting as a principal in buying Toys R Us in March to capture the value of that struggling retailer’s real estate.
While everyone knows that McDonald’s franchises most restaurant operations, did you know the company owns about 37% of the land under those stores, and 59% of the buildings? Once again, to sharp real estate people the land and buildings look more attractive than the hamburger operations which use them.
McDonald’s reaction? In an email McDonald’s spokesperson Anna Rozenich said that McDonald’s plans to stick to its current business strategy. Over the last 5 years McDonald’s has struggled with flattening demand for its products, selling off most non-hamburger operations, closing stores and restructuring. Now an external party has emerged to question the validity of the business model. But despite all these Challenges McD has refused to Disrupt its old Success Formula and develop new value for its shareholders, employees, vendors and customers.
This is the operating definition of Lock-in.
by Adam Hartung | Oct 26, 2005 | Defend & Extend, General, In the Swamp, Innovation, Leadership, Lifecycle, Lock-in
Imagine you bought stock in a small restaurant concept in 1993 (12 years ago) with a handful of restaurants. Today, that chain has expanded to 450 locations, profits have grown five-fold since turning profitable in 2004 and sales are up 33 percent in the first six months of this year after doubling between 2002 and 2004. Would you want to sell that stock?
I wouldn’t either. But that’s what McDonald’s is doing, by selling off ownership in Chipotles. Chipotles is growing faster, and more profitably than McDonald’s. But McD is saying they can’t afford to invest in Chipotle, they need to sell their ownership to have others pay for continuing to grow this skyrocketing opportunity. Why? Because McD wants to focus on their 37,000 stagnant hamburger restaurants.
The urge to Defend & Extend the hamburger business is greater than the urge to grow at McDonald’s. McDonald’s shareholders and franchisees would all benefit from McD getting behind expanding Chipotles. The growth and profit opportunities in the new business are multiples of the hamburger business. Yet, even though the data is clear, the Lock-in to perpetuating its outdated Success Formula keeps McDonald’s from taking advantage of its own opportunity. Instead of migrating McDonald’s Success Formula toward this overwhelmingly successful White Space project, they are sending it out the door.
McDonald’s is horribly Locked-in. Leadership doesn’t understand how to Disrupt that Lock-in in order to move the company from the Swamp back into the Rapids. They only difference between McD and GM is that McD hasn’t moved far enough into the Swamp. But time will tell.
For employees and investors, now’s the time to run, not walk, toward Chipotle. It’s always better to be in the Rapids of Growth than stuck in the Swamp of mediocre performance.
by Adam Hartung | Oct 25, 2005 | Disruptions, General, In the Rapids, Innovation, Leadership, Lifecycle
What is ESPN? Many people would say "a TV channel about sports." What an understatement. ESPN has not one, but several channels (in multiple languages) and radio channels. Beyond that ESPN is a magazine, an internet portal (over 17million hits/month), a provider of on-demand video, book publisher, apparel maker and retailer, restauranteur, video game producer, and soon to be provider of cell phone services.
Is all this just so much brand extension? I don’t think so. All of these are different businesses that ESPN has entered, learned, and now makes money on. Cable TV content is a tough, low margin business with more failures than successes, yet ESPN has grown its viewership and revenues by more than double digits every year for a decade. Radio listenership has been declining for almost a decade. Periodical publishing has had negative growth in ad dollars and pages printed for over 5 years (just review the declining fortunes of New York Times and Gannett). Apparel makers and retailers are struggling with changing market tastes and offshore competitors, while restaurants is the #1 most likely to fail start-up business and video games are dominated by a handful of very large, trendy shops. And ESPN has entered all these extremely competitive businesses and turned a profit within only a few months.
ESPN has profitably grown by staying in the Rapids, rather than resting on it’s original Success Formula to provide sports news over cable TV. The company has overcome its Lock-In to the past by hunting out opportunities which aren’t obvious, and certainly aren’t core competencies, and then openings White Space for these opportunities to succeed. Instead of trying to optimize its old Success Formula, the company keeps trying to invent a new one. Every time you’d think the growth would flatten, they run right past the market Challenges to put more projects into the Rapids for ongoing growth.
At the top of ESPN is a mild-mannered 47 year old named George Bodenheimer who for the last 7 years has led the charge into all these initiatives. Like all leaders that keep their organizations growing, he constantly Disrupts his organization. He creates White Space, and he works to make the new projects a success. He’s atypical of many executives (especially media executives) in his emphasis on teamwork rather than ego, and success rather than promotion. Things simply get done – maybe not because he tries to "own" all the success and instead by unleashing his organization to succeed.
by Adam Hartung | Oct 20, 2005 | Defend & Extend, General, In the Swamp, Leadership, Lock-in
Kraft‘s shares have dropped about 22% in the last year. They are flat over 2 years. They are down around 25% for three years, and down 35% from their peak in 2002. Recent profit announcements affirmed that Kraft is currently making 13.5% less than it made in the same quarter a year ago.
Company CEO Deromedi explained away the poor performance with "We don’t want to repeat mistakes we made in early 2003 when we raised prices and had significant share declines." So, 3 years into a restructuring the CEO says investors can hope for either sales at low profits, or less sales? (see full Chicago Tribune story)
When was the last time your boss said you could spend 3 years trying to get your job right with no performance improvement? The CEO certainly has high expectations for investor patience, doesn’t he?
Kraft is completely stuck in the Swamp, as it moves toward the Whirlpool. The company never disrupted its worn out Success Formula, and keeps trying to regain the glory years when "America Spelled Cheese K-R-A-F-T" (remember that ad slogan?) Yes, it is launching a new South Beach Diet line, but because it’s still using its old, poorly performing Success Formula that line is not moving the company toward a bright (and more profitable future.) The head of new products left in June. And in the last year they’ve sold businesses to both Wrigley and Kellogg in an effort to shore up the P&L.
Kraft’s leadership needs to create some White Space and find a new future – instead of trying to resurrect Velveeta-land.
by Adam Hartung | Oct 17, 2005 | Defend & Extend, General, In the Swamp, Leadership, Lifecycle, Lock-in
GM announced a plan to cut retiree and employee healthcare costs by $18B per year today. It also plans to cut another 8% of its workforce (25,000 jobs) on top of the 30% cut in employment it’s taken over the last 5 years. Oh, and by the way, the company is investigating selling it’s most profitable (and practically only) profitable business – GMAC.
Analysts cheered the actions, and the stock climbed on the news (despite reporting big losses.) What do they expect? Is GM going to save its way to prosperity?
GM is hopelessly mired in the Swamp. With losses mounting, and a corporate raider on their doorstep (Kirk Kerkorian now owns 10% of GM) you’d think leadership would recognize that the Challenges warrant some serious Disruption of their Success Formula (and not these ineffective disturbances). But no, not this leadership. They appear willing to take any action to Defend & Extend their failing Success Formula. Even if it means cutting off their supply of resources (GMAC) and cutting rations to their own troops.
Maybe Kerkorian can bring in a management team capable of really changing GM (he did team with Lee Iacocca on his takeover of MGM Grand). It’s certainly clear that the current leadership has no clue how to overcome existing Lock-In.
by Adam Hartung | Oct 17, 2005 | General, In the Swamp, Leadership, Lifecycle, Lock-in, Openness
To do something truly new and innovative requires operating in White Space. You have to get outside the box of the traditional business in order to develop a new Success Formula. And for White Space to have breakthrough results it must have Permission (as well as resources) to be breakthrough.
I spoke to a colleague recently who is head of change for a very, very large oil company. As you can imagine, profits are exceptional there these days. And he’s been very eager to make some big changes in a behemoth. But, even though top management puts out lots of words about their desire to make breakthroughs, his role is constantly being pushed to "manage" incremental improvements to existing processes.
He doesn’t really have permission, nor committed resources, to make breakthroughs. In this environment, he’s worked hard for two years to get leadership to accept the use of virtual teams for process analysis. He’s had to nudge and cajole to gain acceptance for experimenting with process changes that have saved millions of dollars while greatly improving customer and supplier relationships.
Is he failing? Not at all. His company does not perceive a serious external Challenge to their business – profits are greater than ever. Without a threat, there isn’t the passion for an internal Disruption. And they haven’t established White Space. If he were to try and drive breakthroughs he would be on a suicide mission that would do him, and his company, no good. So, in the current environment he’s actually doing quite well. He’s realized that until a Challenge promotes a Disruption his success comes from helping the organization further Defend & Extend its Success Formula. While the sledding has been slow, and sometimes frustrating, he’s in fact made some great contributions.
Success requires understanding what you can do, not just what you want to do. If you’re organization isn’t ready for White Space then recognizing your role is to help promote D&E practices is critical. Kamikaze’s have short life expectancies – and they don’t do much for helping the organization succeed.
by Adam Hartung | Sep 20, 2005 | General, In the Rapids, In the Swamp, Innovation, Leadership, Lifecycle
It’s always risky to challenge a company as large and successful as Microsoft – but read these quotes from the recent BusinessWeek article:
"Employees… feeling trapped in an organization whose past successes seem to stifle current creativity."
"Microsoft faces serious long-term challenges: the rising popularity of the Linux open-source operating system, a plague of viruses attacking its software, and potent rivals such as Google in the consumer realm and IBM (IBM ) in corporate computing. It’s the company’s ability to respond to these challenges that current and former employees fear is being compromised by Microsoft’s internal troubles."
"When Ballmer took over, he was determined to overcome the looming challenge of corporate middle age. He pored over how-to management books such as Jim Collins’ Good to Great. But since Ballmer took the helm, Microsoft has slipped the other way. The stock price has dropped over 40% during his tenure, and the company, whose revenue grew at an average annual clip of 36% through the 1990s, rose just 8% in the fiscal year that ended on June 30. That’s good for a company of Microsoft’s size, but it is the first time the software giant has had single-digit growth."
"..monopolies are at the root of the company’s malaise. As Microsoft fought the federal government and litigious rivals, it developed an almost reflexive instinct to protect Windows and Office, sometimes at the expense of looking for groundbreaking innovations." "Every time Bill and Steve made a change to be more like other big companies, we lost a little bit of what made Microsoft special" "So much of what Microsoft is doing right now is maintenance" "Instead of coming up with the next great technology, Microsoft programmers have to cater to itsmonopolies"
"With revenue growth slowing, Ballmer has tried to squeeze more down to the bottom line to make the company more appealing to investors. In the past fiscal year he slashed $2.6 billion out of operating expenses."
