Articles

Why do your customers choose to buy from you rather than from your competition? For the past three years, marketing professors Mark Vandenbosch and Niraj Dawar have posed that question to more than 1,500 senior executives in interviews and group discussions. And despite the vast range of industries represented by the executives they probed, the responses they got were remarkably similar. The executives agreed almost universally that offering great products, technologies or services is merely the entry stake into the competitive arena. Most spoke of the need to maintain an edge in the way their companies interact with customers; that is, they recognized that customers often value how they interact with their suppliers as much or more than what they actually buy. As the main drivers of customer choice, the executives cited cost-oriented factors such as convenience, ease of doing business, product support and risk-oriented factors such as trust, confidence and the strength of relationships. Strategies built around reducing customers’ interaction costs and risk are strategies that offer a systematic way to tap into new sources of customer value while avoiding the often futile attempt to compete on product innovation. The authors illustrate five different strategies that some companies are using to build a sustainable advantage through their approach to customers. These strategies are not easy to devise or implement; they require creativity, imagination, hard work and a willingness to take risks. But as the examples in this article demonstrate, the rewards are more than worth the effort.

The product-development process is often seen as an undependable black box” that rarely produces results that exceed business expectations. Traditional financial models have limited success exposing the numerous product-development risks that underlie the assumptions in a typical business case. Applying the same rules to development as they do to research, managers often accept unpredictable performance as normal. Most companies’ evaluation and approval processes are driven by accounting-based metrics such as discounted cash flow or net present value (NPV) that make understanding the underlying risks of development difficult for decision makers. When risk is discussed in the business case, technology uncertainty is often confused with product-development risk, and the narrative discussion of risk is designed more to persuade than inform. In this environment, decision makers are often hard-pressed to evaluate the potential commercial success of the new-product-development investment. With an approach called “net present value, risk-adjusted” (NPVR), author Craig R. Davis, CFO of product-development consulting firm Product Genesis, offers an operational framework that gives decision makers quantitative tools to evaluate relative project risks. He shows how these tools can be integrated into existing stage-gate methodologies to create a risk-adjusted NPV that considers the impacts of product portfolio, user needs, and technical and marketing risks. The framework also provides insights into the value of additional research in advance of full commitment to development. The framework provides a vocabulary appropriate for complex technology products in medical, commercial and industrial products but is easily adapted to the unique terms, methods and measures for each risk-assessment area.

Hiring CEOs from outside the industry is a higher-risk, higher-reward proposition.

Some business builders in the Internet era have blindly focused on “getting big fast” in the mistaken belief that Metcalfe’s Law applies ad infinitum. The value of a network, in fact, does not increase forever, but there are ways to counteract the forces that put the brakes on network effects.” Around 1980 Robert Metcalfe, the inventor of the Ethernet standard and founder of 3Com, observed that the value of a network increases in proportion to the square of the number of people using it. This observation came to be known as Metcalfe’s Law. It was similar to an idea developed by economists about network effects” & #8212; meaning that some resources become more valuable to a person using them according to the number of other people also using them. At the dawn of the Internet era, network effects became the Holy Grail for many business builders, who wanted to “get big fast” in order to exploit them before the competition did. But Metcalfe’s Law doesn’t always hold, say Harvard Business School professor Andrew McAfee and consultant Fran ois-Xavier Oliveau. As networks become very large, they can fall prey to saturation, cacophony, contamination, clustering and high search costs. Those phenomena mean that larger networks can, in some cases, have less value than smaller ones. The authors have identified several strategies that network builders can employ to maintain network effects or limit their decline. When followed properly, these strategies are more effective than a blind, bigger-is-better approach in which network builders rush to sign up as many users as quickly as possible.

Storytelling has emerged as the preferred approach for teaching leadership effectiveness in many companies.

In 1996, the Web-browser "wars"

Monitoring employee behavior may not always have the desired effect.

Identifying and addressing the environmental factors that can affect success

Today’s world calls for less hypothesis testing and more systematic observation.