This disruption thing is harder than it looks

In a recent Wall Street Journal article, writer Kimberly Chou reviewed the fates of several contenders to be disruptive technologies in the industries in which they were introduced. . Among these are the flip videorecorder, the "peek" phone and various forms of internet enabled devices. What they have in common is that they are all trying to carve out a niche in markets that were established at much higher price points. As the article makes clear, it's not as easy as it looks. To be truly disruptive, along the lines of Clayton Christensen's definition of the term, a device would have to introduce a new dimension of competition, or offer a radically different price, making usage affordable for previous non-users or otherwise appealing to customers who weren't attracted before. Unfortunately, the Peek phone is finding that established rivals may be dropping prices so quickly that its would-be niche of customers willing to trade off more advanced functionality for a cheaper price may be a lot smaller than it initially thought. All of which goes to illustrate one of the principles of disruption -- the offer has to be dramatically, not just incrementally, different along several important dimensions to disrupt an industry. Just price, or simplified features, isn't going to do it.

Share this article:      

• Posted Rita McGrath on July 18, 2009

Rita’s rules for email

A blog post over at the Harvard Publishing site led me to put together my own "golden rules for email." As follows: Rita's Golden Rules for email: 1. Meaningful subject lines that tell the reader what to expect. Don't say "Thursday's meeting" as your subject. Say "followup expected by client from Thursday's meeting." 2. No email should ever be longer than one screen of information. If it means scrolling down, you're not being concise. 3. One subject per email. When I've dealt with it, I want to delete it or file it and I can't do that if your email contains 10 action items, one of which is going to hang out there for 6 months. 4. Email is the wrong place for emotional outbursts. 5. Email is the wrong place for communications of a personal nature. 6. Assume everything you put in an email could end up on the front page of the New York Times and be accordingly discreet. 7. Find ways of making sending you email you don't need to see more costly to the sender. One CEO I know fines people $1 for every email he gets that he didn't need to see. 8. Because you sent it doesn't mean I got it. Because I got it doesn't mean I read it. Because I read it doesn't mean I understood it. Because I understood it doesn't mean that I agree with you. Check for closure on your communications. 9. Mrs. Johnson in first grade was right - spelling and grammar count. 10. Don't send email when a short phone call would do the job better.

Share this article:      

• Posted Rita McGrath on March 30, 2009

Discovery Driven Planning: Good new book on Innovation

It’s always a welcome moment when a new perspective on innovation is offered from the folks over at Clayton Christensen’s Innosight consulting firm.  They’ve just recently published a new book, The Innovator’s Guide to Growth that looks to be a very welcome read.  I’ve just ordered it and will give it a review here when I get the chance!

Share this article:      

• Posted Rita McGrath on October 08, 2008

Powerful use of symbolism by leaders of change

One of the most powerful levers for leaders to use in trying to create change is through symbolism.  Symbols give meaning to activities that would otherwise lack emotion or conviction.  I was thinking about this when reading a recent Fast Company article on Michelle Rhee, recently appointed chancellor of the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS).  The article cites Kent McGuire, dean of Temple University’s education school as saying “An unfortunate reality about large urban districts is that they’re set up to satisfy the adults who work in them, not the kids they’re supposed to serve.  Kids don’t vote.”

Rhee has turned this observation into something of a battle cry, with powerful symbolic effect.  In response to criticism about having fired 15% of the central office staff, she said, “Children are losing their lives because we’re not educating htem well.  But we’re concerned about the adults?  I’m not firing people because I’m mean or heartless or don’t care about people.  I’m just not willing to forsake the future of thousands of kids for the comfort of a few adults.”  In a further powerful bit of symbolism, Rhee’s own children attend school in the district she is trying to reform.

Tackling large-scale change is never without controversy and it’s early days yet for the efforts to solve the intractable problems of a large district like DCPS.  But as an example of powerful symbolism, it really works. 

Share this article:      

• Posted Rita McGrath on August 31, 2008

It’s hard to grow a socially unpopular core business

The Wall Street Journal yesterday reported that Altria had, after a three-year trial, pulled the plug on a whole line of Marlboro products intended to be safer for smokers than the conventional cigarettes.  As the story reports:

Marlboro Ultra Smooth, which had been sold in Atlanta, Tampa, Fla., and Salt Lake City for more than three years, drew little attention from consumers. Philip Morris USA, which had hoped to market the cigarette as a reduced-risk smoke, stopped making new shipments to its wholesalers April 1. Remaining stock is still on sale. Its other cigarettes with the new activated-carbon filters—the Marlboro Ultra Lights in Phoenix and North Dakota, and Basic Ultra Lights in Washington state—also were just discontinued, the company said.

It’s pretty clear that Philip Morris, USA, is going to have to find some other pathways to growth, as this one doesn’t seem to be working.  With aggressive marketing also unpopular, it sure does seem to leave the company in a bind.  So what could we suggest might represent new growth opportunities, even in a market that doesn’t seem to be allowed to grow (and to which the company is confined, now that it has spun off its international division)?

Well, if we follow the guidelines from MarketBusters, here are some ideas they might try.

First, perhaps there is something about the customers’ total experience that could be changed.  It does seem as though a lot of these innovations focus squarely on the product, and in the traditional attributes, not on something about the customers’ total experience.  For instance, maybe they could add in featues that improve the purchasing, usage, or disposal experiences.  Or sell cigarettes with a different model—I could see brands that are used for different experiences and settings, for instance.

Or perhaps they need to think about a whole different business model.  Maybe they could develop a subscription like model, or figure out how to sell cigarettes using an entirely different methodology.

Or perhaps it’s an attribute play.  Unfortunately, one of the reasons that many young women (particularly dancers, as a colleague of mine has famously documented) appears to be to maintain their weight at what they consider to be acceptable levels.  So given that the company is largely prohibited from promoting such attributes directly, a viral campaign might be in order.

I’m not a huge fan of smoking, by the way, and don’t smoke myself, but as a strategy challenge this one is very interesting. 

Share this article:      

• Posted Rita McGrath on June 24, 2008

Search: