How do you think about Android?

วันพฤหัสบดีที่ 30 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2552

How Customer Buy on Downturn Marketing

โดย ดร.นิเวศน์ ธรรมะ, 2552, ลูกค้าซื้ออย่างไรในภาวะเศรษฐกิจถดถอย "สถานการณ์ปัจจุบันทางการตลาด" มหาวิทยาลัยรามคำแหง
By Guru-Marketing-Thailand, How Cutomer Buy on Downturn Marketing, Current issue in Marketing, 30 April,2009

การเปลี่ยนแปลงพฤติกรรมของลูกค้าภายใต้การถดถอยของเศรษฐกิจโลก เริ่มต้นเมื่อ อเมริกาเริ่มประสบภาวะเศรษฐกิจฟองสบู่มีการแตกตัว ใน ค.ศ. 2009 ส่งผลกระทบต่อประเทศมหาอำนาจทางเศรษฐกิจอย่างเช่นประเทศจีน ญี่ปุ่น และ กลุ่มประเทศทางยุโรป ได้รับผลกระทบจากเศรษฐกิจโลกอย่างหลีกเลี่ยงไม่ได้ รายได้จากการส่งออกสินค้าและการยกเลิกกิจกรรมการท่องเที่ยวของนักท่องเที่ยวต่างประเทศเริ่มเกิดขึ้นกับหลายประเทศและได้รับผลกระทบโดยตรงต่ออุตสาหกรรมภายในประเทศที่คำสั่งซื้อมีการยกเลิกและลดลงเรื่อยๆ จนกลายเป็นปัญหาภาวะการตกงานของแรงงานภาคอุตสาหกรรมการผลิตและการบริการตามในหลายๆประเทศ
ประเทศไทยเป็นประเทศหนึ่งที่หลีกเลี่ยงไม่ได้กับผลกระทบดังกล่าวเนื่องจากรายได้หลักของประเทศ ไม่ว่าการส่งออกหรือการท่องเที่ยว ต่างได้รับผลกระทบไปตามๆกัน ข้อสำคัญปัญหาภาวะการตกงานและการว่างงานของแรงงานใหม่ที่เพิ่มจบการศึกษามาแต่ละปีเริ่มเป็นปัจจัยสนับสนุนทำให้กำลังซื้อในประเทศที่พยายามกระตุ้นให้เกิดการใช้จ่ายเงิน ต่างฝืดไปตามๆกัน นำมาซึ่งปัญหาการไม่กล้าตัดสินใจใช้เงินของคนส่วนใหญ่ของประเทศ ไม่ว่าจะเป็นกลุ่มคนที่มีรายได้สูง ปานกลาง ต่ำ ไปจนถึงผู้ประกอบการรายเล็กรายย่อยที่เริ่มทยอยปิดกิจการกันตามๆกัน

ผู้ประกอบการและนักธุรกิจหลายรายต่างพยายามประคองธุรกิจให้อยู่รอดภายใต้เศรษฐกิจถดถอยซึ่งไม่รู้ว่าจะต้องใช้ระยะเวลานานแค่ไหนเพื่อรอการฟื้นกลับของเศรษฐกิจก่อนหน้าที่ภาวะเศรษฐกิจยังเฟื้อฟูนักการตลาดอาจลืมคิดไปว่ายอดขายที่เพิ่มขึ้นนั้นเกิดจากสื่อสารการตลาดด้วยการโฆษณาที่มีประสิทธิภาพและคุณค่าของตัวผลิตภัณฑ์ การตัดสินใจซื้อของลูกค้าเกิดจากปัจจัยด้านรายได้ รูปแบบการดำรงชีวิต ความรู้สึกมั่นคงในอาชีพ ความรู้สึกมั่นใจในตัวสินค้าและภาวะเศรษฐกิจในอนาคต แต่เมื่อประสบกับภาวะเศรษฐกิจที่กำลังถดถอย ในแต่ละวันข่าวร้ายต่างๆ ต่างเข้ามามีอิทธิพลต่อความมั่นใจในการชื้อ และการกระตุ้นการบริโภค

สถานการณ์เช่นนี้เป็นที่ท้าทายสำหรับนักการตลาดไม่เฉพาะในขณะที่เศรษฐกิจถดถอยเท่านั้นแต่ยังรวมถึงช่วงเศรษฐกิจกำลังฟื้นตัวด้วย สิ่งแรกที่นักการตลาดควรทำคือการทำความเข้าใจลูกค้ากลุ่มเป้าหมายใหม่ (new customer segments) ในภาวะเศรษฐกิจตกต่ำว่าจะมีการปรับเปลี่ยนพฤติกรรมหรือไม่ จากลูกค้ากลุ่มเดิมที่มีพฤติกรรมปกติในการบริโภคสินค้าหรือบริการอาจมีการปรับเปลี่ยนพฤติกรรมในการใช้จ่ายเงินมากขึ้น โดยเฉพาะการชลอการตัดสินใจซื้อหากสินค้าหรือบริการนั้นยังไม่มีความจำเป็น นักการตลาดอาจต้องแสวงหากลุ่มเป้าหมายใหม่ที่อาจมีอายุมากขึ้นหรือกลุ่มสร้างครอบครัวใหม่ หรือกลุ่มรายได้ระดับกลางขึ้นไปเนื่องจากกลุ่มนี้ยังมีกำลังซื้อและมีเงินมาพอในการเลือกซื้อสินค้าจำเป็น มาตอบสนองความต้องการ หรือจับกลุ่มตามรูปแบบการใช้ชีวิต (lifestyle) เช่น กลุ่มคนอนุรักษ์นิยมหรือหน่วยใยสิ่งแวดล้อมเป็นต้น การแบ่งส่วนตลาดตามเกณฑ์เดิมไม่ว่าจะเป็นเกณฑ์ประชากรศาสตร์ (Demographic) เกณฑ์ภูมิศาสตร์ (Geographic) เกณฑ์พฤติกรรม (Behavioral) หรือเกณฑ์จิตวิทยา (Psychological) นั้นอาจจะเหมาะสำหรับภาวการณ์บริโภคปกติ แต่อาจจะไม่สอดรับกับสถานการณ์การเปลี่ยนแปลงของสิ่งแวดล้อมในปัจจุบัน โดยในภาวะเศรษฐกิจถดถอยการแบ่งส่วนตลาดที่เหมาะสมกับพฤติกรรมที่เปลี่ยนแปลงไปนักการตลาดต้องเข้าใจความรู้สึกที่แท้จริงของลูกค้าว่าลูกค้าต้องการอะไรกันแน่การมุ่งเน้นส่วนตลาดที่เปลี่ยนแปลงไปที่พออธิบายพฤติกรรมที่เปลี่ยนแปลงไปอาจ กำหนดส่วนตลาดด้วยเกณฑ์จิตวิทยา (psychological segmentation) ที่สะท้อนให้เห็นความรู้สึกของผู้บริโภคตที่อ่อนไหวต่อภาวะเศรษฐกิจถดถอยได้ดี ซึ่งกลุ่มเป้าหมายกลุ่มนี้อาจจำแนกได้เป็น 4 กลุ่มประกอบไปด้วย กลุ่มซื้อเฉพาะสินค้าจำเป็น (Slam-on-the-brake) กลุ่มชะลอการซื้อสินค้าราคาแพง (Pained-but-patient) กลุ่มยังรู้สึกปลอดภัยสูง (Comfortably well off) และกลุ่มใช้ชีวิตไปวันๆ (Life for today) ทั้ง 4 กลุ่มนี้ต่างมีความรู้สึกในการใช้จ่ายสินค้าที่แตกต่างกันดังนี้

กลุ่มซื้อเฉพาะสินค้าจำเป็น (Slam-on-the-brake) การแบ่งส่วนตลาดกลุ่มจะใช้จิตวิทยาในการทำนายพฤติกรรม กลุ่มนี้จะได้รับอิทธิพลจากการรับรู้ข่าวสารเกี่ยวกับผลกระทบทางเศรษฐกิจและการเงินของตนสูง กลุ่มนี้จึงต้องลด ละ เลิก หรือชะลอการจับจ่ายสินค้าเกือบทั้งหมด แล้วปรับพฤติกรรมมาใช้สินค้าทดแทน ไม่เพียงแค่ผู้บริโภคที่มีรายได้น้อยเท่านั้นที่ถูกจัดให้อยู่ในส่วนตลาดกลุ่มนี้เท่านั้นกลุ่มตลาดที่มีรายได้สูงหากสภาพจิตใจได้รับผลกระทบจากสิ่งแวดล้อมที่กำลังเปลี่ยนแปลงในทิศทางที่แย่ลงก็จัดอยู่ในกลุ่มนี้ได้เช่นกัน

กลุ่มชะลอการซื้อสินค้าราคาแพง (Pained-but-patient) การแบ่งส่วนตลาดกลุ่มนี้ยังตระหนักรู้ว่าเศรษฐกิจน่าจะมีการฟื้นตัวเร็วๆนี้ ยังพอมองโลกในแง่ดีได้บ้าง มีความสามารถในการปรับตัวได้กับเหตุการณ์ในระยะยาวแต่ยังไม่มีความมั่นใจกับการปรับตัวในระยะสั้นสักเท่าไร จึงประสบกับปัญหาระยะสั้นไม่ต่างจากกลุ่ม Slam-on-the-brake กลุ่มนี้ยังสามารถรักษาระดับคุณภาพชีวิตให้ได้มาตรฐานเช่นเดียวกับกลุ่ม slam-on-the-brakes พวกเขาจะประหยัดไปทุกเรื่อง ส่วนตลาดกลุ่มนี้มีขนาดใหญ่พอรวมทั้งกลุ่มครัวเรือนที่มีฐานะทางครอบครัวดีที่ไม่ได้ผลกระทบจากการว่างงาน และมีรายได้ต่อครอบครัวอยู่ในระดับสูงรวมเข้าด้วยกัน สิ่งเลวร้ายหากกลุ่มนี้ได้รับผลกระทบเยอะขึ้นก็จะขยับไปอยู่รวมกับกลุ่ม slam-on-the-brakes ได้เช่นกัน

กลุ่มยังรู้สึกปลอดภัยสูง (Comfortably well off) ส่วนตลาดกลุ่มนี้ลูกค้ามีความรู้สึกปลอดภัยกับความสามารถในการรักษาคุณภาพชีวิตได้ดีทั้งในปัจจุบันและอนาคต เขายังจับจ่ายใช้สอยได้ปกติเหมือนเหตุการณ์ก่อนหน้าเศรษฐกิจถดถอย แต่อาจจะมีความละเอียดมากขึ้นในการตัดสินใจซื้อสินค้า แต่จะหลีกเลี่ยงการเป็นเป้าสายตาของคนทั่วไป ส่วนตลาดกลุ่มนี้จะประกอบไปด้วยกลุ่มคนที่มีรายได้สูงอยู่ในระดับ 5 เปอร์เซ็นต์แรกของประเทศ และอาจประกอบไปด้วยกลุ่มคนที่มีคุณภาพชีวิตต่ำแต่มีความมั่นใจในการใช้เงินสูงเนื่องจากมีรายได้หลักจากการลงทุนหรือเงินเลี้ยงดูที่ได้รับการสนับสนุน เช่นกลุ่มคนที่ เกษียณอายุแต่มีเงินบำนาญ หรือนักลงทุนที่ออกจากตลาดได้ทันก่อนเศรษฐกิจถดถอยหรือกลุ่มคนมีเงินเย็นฝากไว้กับสถาบันการลงทุนที่มีความเสี่ยงต่ำเป็นต้น

กลุ่มใช้ชีวิตไปวันๆ (Life for today) ส่วนตลาดกลุ่มนี้ดำรงชีวิตในปัจจุบันได้อย่างเป็นปกติและไม่นิยมการออม ตลาดกลุ่มนี้จะตอบรับกับเศรษฐกิจถดถอยไม่แตกต่างกับเศรษฐกิจก่อนหน้า กิจกรรมส่วนใหญ่จะสูญเสียไปกับซื้อสินค้า โดยเฉพาะกลุ่มคนหนุ่มสาวในเมือง พวกเขานิยมที่จะเช่าสินค้าที่มีราคาแพงมากกว่าการซื้อเป็นสมบัติตนเอง ส่วนการตัดสินใจซื้อสินค้าสินค้าในปัจจุบันจะเกิดจากพฤติกรรมความเคยชินที่เกิดจากประสบการณ์เดิมก่อนหน้ามากกว่า การตัดสินใจซื้อสินค้าประเภทเครื่องใช้ไฟฟ้าหรืออิเล็กทรอนิกส์ ส่วนตลาดส่วนนี้อาจรวมถึงคนว่างงานเข้าไปด้วย

วันพฤหัสบดีที่ 23 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2552

Reaching Up Your Customer

โดย ดร.นิเวศน์ ธรรมะ, 2552, เจาะลึกพฤติกรรมผู้บริโภค, "สถานการณ์ปัจจุบันทางการตลาด" มหาวิทยาลัยรามคำแหง
By Guru-Marketing-Thailand, Reaching Up Your Customer, Current Issue in Marketing ,23 April 2009

หัวใจสำคัญคือการที่เรารู้ว่าลูกค้าของเราคือใครและเขาต้องการอะไร (Bierck, 2000) การเรียนรู้เพื่อการประยุกต์ใช้กลยุทธ์สำหรับธุรกิจประเภทค้าปลีกท่านต้องรู้ว่าอะไรคือสิ่งดึงดูดใจลูกค้าให้เข้ามาหาคุณ อะไรคือวิถีทางในการสร้างความเข้าใจลูกค้าได้ดีไปมากกว่าการศึกษาพฤติกรรมที่แท้จริงของลูกค้า (Actual consumer behavior)

ตัววัดพฤติกรรมดีที่สุดตอนนี้คือ การวัดความคุ้มค่าของเงิน คือ “เงินที่จ่ายไป กับจำนวนของสินค้าที่ได้กลับ” และพฤติกรรมของลูกค้าที่เกิดจากการซื้อ ต่อไปนี้เป็นการสังเกตพฤติกรรมการซื้อขนมปังและเนตของ Paco Underhill ผู้เขียนหนังสือ “Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping” และที่ปรึกษาบริษัทวิจัยด้านการตลาดของ Envirosell มลรัฐ นิวยอร์ค ได้สังเกตพฤติกรรมการซื้อสินค้ามานานกว่า 20 ปี

Underhill อยู่เบื้องหลังความสำเร็จการค้นพบแนวคิดด้านการตลาดมอย่างมากมาย งานวิจัยส่วนนี้ก็สนับสนุนแนวคิดของเขาเช่นเดียวกับกรณีศึกษาของ Gerald Zaltman ผู้เชี่ยวชาญด้านการตลาดของมหาวิทยาลัย Harvard ที่ได้ใช้เทคนิคเชิงคุณภาพมาแก้ปัญหาจุดอ่อนของเทคนิคเชิงปริมาณ ขณะที่ Underhill ทำการศึกษาพฤติกรรมว่าผู้ซื้อซื้ออะไร แต่ Zaltman ได้ทำการศึกษาสาเหตุที่พวกเขาซื้อ(Bierck, 2000) ทั้งสองวิถีสามารถเจาะลึกข้อมูลจาก อุตสาหกรรมผู้ผลิต(manufacturers) ธุรกิจค้าปลีก (retailers) นักการตลาด (marketers) และ นักธุรกิจทั่วไป โดยเฉพาะนักธุรกิจต่างพยายามค้นหาข้อสรุปที่สำคัญๆ เพื่อสร้างความรำรวยในอนาคตจากการวิจัยครั้งนี้ สื่อสารมวลชน ต่างพยายามจัดเวทีให้ได้มีโอกาสได้รับฟังความคิดเห็นของ Underhill และ Zaltman ในเวทีต่างๆ และต่อไปนี้เป็นข้อความสำคัญที่พวกเขาได้กล่าวไว้ เพื่อจะได้รู้จักลูกค้าได้มากขึ้น

ให้ตรวจสอบข้อความที่สื่อสารออกไป (Examine the message you’re sending) พวกเขาคือกลุ่มคาดหวังที่คุณต้องการแล้วใช่หรือไม่ คุณแน่ใจหรือไม่ว่าพวกเขาไม่ได้มาจากตลาดเป้าหมายอื่น หลายๆข้อความเกิดการสื่อสารผิดพลาดเนื่องจากความไม่เข้าใจ รากเง้า ความเชื่อของคนที่แตกต่างกัน ผู้ที่ทำงานทางด้านการตลาดมักจะใช้ความพยายามที่จะติดต่อกับกลุ่มเป้าหมายดังกล่าวทั้งๆที่ไม่รู้จักตัวตนที่แท้จริงของลูกค้าเลย เช่น มีร้านค้าปลีกจำนวนมากมองข้ามความเป็นสัญชาติ เชื้อชาติ ภาษา วัฒนธรรม และอายุ ของกลุ่มเป้าหมาย Underhill กล่าว “เมื่อเร็วๆนี้ผมได้ไปที่ปารีส ที่ร้านอาหารแห่งหนึ่ง มีเมนูอาหาร 5 ภาษา”(Bierck, 2000) แต่ที่ South Florida ซึ่งเป็นพื้นที่ที่มีชาวสเปนใช้ชีวิตอยู่หนาแน่นมากแต่ร้านอาหารแถวนี้หลายร้านไม่มีเมนูภาษาสเปน ที่ Washington D.C. มีร้านขายยา ซึ่งคิดว่าน่าจะให้บริการเฉพาะชาวแอฟริกัน-อเมริกันโดยตรง 100 เปอร์เซ็นต์ ซึ่งสังเกตได้จากมีสินค้าจำนวนมากเป็นสีบลอนด์ ซึ่งเป็นสีเอกลักษณ์ของชาวแอฟริกัน-อเมริกัน ได้อย่างชัดเจน

ในตลาดที่พึ่งพาแรงงาน วัยรุ่นกลุ่มเป้าหมายดูเหมือนจะปารถนาที่จะได้ครอบครองความมีระดับในสังคม โดยเฉพาะในตำแหน่งงานที่อยู่ในบริษัทมีชื่อเสียง ในประเทศนี้นักการตลาดต่างใช้ความพยายามในการขายสินค้าไปยังกลุ่มเป้าหมายที่มีอายุอยู่ในยุค Baby Boomer ซึ่งมีอายุค่อนค้างเยอะเป็นส่วนใหญ่ การเรียนรู้ในครั้งนี้จะพบว่าหากเข้าไปในเวปไซด์แล้วจะพบว่าเวปไซด์อ่านไม่ได้เลยเนื่องจากเนื่องจากตัวอักษรที่ปรากฏอยู่ไม่รู้ว่าเป็นภาษาอะไร และมีร้านค้าอีกจำนวนมากที่ใช้ป้ายโฆษณาในการสื่อสารแต่ตัวอักษรในป้ายโฆษณาช่างเล็กเหลือเกินจนอ่านไม่ออก โดยเฉพาะผู้สูงอายุเป็นต้น

อย่าเชื่อผลของการทำ Focus Groups มากนัก (Don’t rely heavily on focus groups) Zaltman ได้กล่าวไว้ว่า “การจัดกิจกรรม โฟกัสกรุ๊ป เสมือนเป็นกดของค้อน(law of hammer)” ที่สอนให้เด็กใช้ค้อนทุบที่สิ่งที่มีคุณลักษณะคล้ายตะปู ซึ่งคุณไม่สามารถได้รับข้อมูลเชิงลึกมากนักจากการทำ โฟกัสกรุ๊ป เนื่องจากกลุ่มเป้าหมายจะเตรียมคำตอบที่เป็นแนวโน้มที่เกิดจากการที่พวกเขาต้องสมมติขึ้นมาตอบมากกว่าสิ่งที่เป็นความคิดที่แท้จริงของพวกเขา และเนื่องจากจำนวนการทำโฟกัสกรุ๊ปจะมีประมาณ 8-12 คน กับเวลาที่มีอยู่จำกัด จึงไม่เพียงพอสำหรับการให้ข้อมูลในการแลกเปลี่ยนความคิดระหว่างกัน

หากจะใช้ผู้เชี่ยวชาญในการสัมภาษณ์กลุ่มตัวอย่าง ผู้สัมภาษณ์ต้องไม่ตีกรอบหรือชี้นำความคิดให้พูดในสิ่งที่ต้องการ ซึ่งเป็นความผิดพลาดพื้นฐานนี้มักเกิดจากการคาดคั้นให้ได้คำตอบให้ตรงกับผู้สัมภาษณ์และเป็นข้อผิดพลาดเล็กๆน้อยที่มักเกิดขึ้นในขณะสัมภาษณ์

พยายามสื่อสารกับกลุ่มเป้าหมายหลักในร้านค้าให้มีประสิทธิภาพ (Reserve your best customer communication efforts for the areas well inside the store) Underhill ค้นพบว่า ผู้บริโภคส่วนใหญ่จะไม่สังเกตเห็นสิ่งใดๆ นอกเหนือจากสื่อที่อยู่ในร้านค้า เนื่องจากในร้านเป็นพื้นที่สังเกตเห็นได้ง่าย “transition zone” โดยเฉพาะป้ายโฆษณาบริเวณจุดที่จะต้องหยุดชลอการเดินให้ช้าลง เช่นตามจุดชำระเงิน จุดแสดงสินค้าหรือพื้นที่ที่จำเป็นต้องเดินผ่านช้าๆ ซึ่งเป็นหน้าที่ของคุณที่จะต้องสื่อสารให้ลูกค้าที่อยู่ในพื้นที่นี้ไม่ให้เกิดความสับสน

บางร้านค้าได้เพิ่มพื้นที่ส่วนนี้ด้วยการสร้างจุดกีดขวาง เช่น พื้นที่วางสินค้าพิเศษ(กระบะ) โดยมีความสูงไม่สูงมากจนปิดบังมุงมองของลูกค้า แต่ก็มีความเสี่ยงว่าลูกค้าอาจจะหยิบสินค้าในกระบะแล้วก็เดินกลับไป ทำให้สูญเสียโอกาสในการทำกำไรขายสินค้าตัวอื่นมีกำไรสูงกว่า

สื่อสารด้วยตัวผลิตภัณฑ์เอง (Communication itself sells products) Underhill ได้ค้นพบว่าสิ่งแวดล้อมของร้านค้าปลีกเป็นแรงผลักดันให้การสื่อสารระหว่างลูกค้าให้เกิดการซื้อสินค้าได้มากขึ้น แสงสว่างที่สว่างเพียงพอ การตกแต่งที่สวยงาม ไม่เพียงแต่จะให้ลูกค้าใช้มากกับการเดินปล่อยอารมณ์ แต่อาจทำให้ลูกค้าบางกลุ่มที่ไม่สบบรรยากาศเดินหนีออกไปก็เป็นไปได้ ดังนั้นจึงมีความจำเป็นที่จะต้องพูดถึงกระบวนการที่จะนำไปสู่การซื้อที่สูงมากขึ้นต่อไป

ต้องเข้าใจว่าลูกค้าคิดเสมือนเป็นนักเดินทาง (Understand that shopper are on a mental journey) ผู้จัดการร้านส่วนใหญ่จะพยายามเพิ่มคุณค่าของพื้นที่ภายในห้างโดยการทำวิจัยและตกแต่งพื้นที่ให้สวยงาม ซึ่งใช้เงินไปไม่น้อย แต่ก็เป็นเรื่องหนึ่งที่ควรใส่ใจ เรื่องที่ควรหันมาให้ความสำคัญอีกเรื่องคือการทำความเข้าใจกับลูกค้าว่าเมื่อลูกค้าได้หยุดอยู่กับสิ่งใดสิ่งหนึ่งที่เขาสนใจเขาจะคิดถึงเรื่องอะไรที่เกี่ยวข้องอีก นั่นหมายความว่าหากสามารถคาดเดาว่าเมื่อลูกค้าซื้อสินค้าอย่างหนึ่งเป็นแล้วจำเป็นต้องมีสินค้าอื่นรวมด้วย ได้เมื่อไรเมื่อนั้นคุณก็จะมียอดขายเพิ่มมากขึ้น ดังนั้นผู้จัดการหลายคนจึงยอมทุมเท่เงินไปกับการทำการวิจัยเพื่อให้ได้มาซึ่งข้อมูลและรูปแบบการตกแต่งร้าน Zaltman ได้ยกตัวอย่างว่า เมื่อเขาเห็นคนเดินช็อปปิ้งกระเป๋าเดินทาง เขาจะคิดถึงอะไร เขาจะคิดถึงวันหยุดพักผ่อนที่จำเป็นต้องใช้กระเป๋าเดินทาง เขาคิดถึงการทำความสะอาดเสื้อผ้า สิ่งของที่จะใส่ไปในรถ รวมทั้งของใช้ทุกสิ่งตลอดระยะเวลาเดินทาง หากคุณสามารถทำความเข้าใจลูกค้าได้นั้นหมายความว่ารายได้ที่จะเพิ่มมากขึ้นเป็นเงาตามตัว แต่เรื่องพวกนี้ส่วนมากแล้วจะถูกละเลย



Zaltman เชื่อว่าอารมณ์ความรู้สึกภายที่จูงใจให้ตัดสินใจซื้อสามารถพิสูจน์ได้ด้วยการวิจัย เพื่อหยั่งรู้ความสนใจที่มีต่อสินค้าหรือของใช้ในครัวเรือน โดยรูปแบบการศึกษาครั้งนี้เขาเรียกว่า Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) ด้วยการสัมภาษณ์โดยมุ่งเน้น การศึกษาภาพลักษณ์ของสิ่งที่เกี่ยวข้องและมีต่อความรู้สึกที่เกี่ยวกับคำถาม




เหตุที่ต้องศึกษาภาพลักษณ์ของสิ่งที่มีผลกระทบต่อระดับความรู้สึกนั้น (The images consumers select reflect a range of emotions)เนื่องจาก ในขณะช็อปปิ้งนั้นจะมีความรู้สึกพอใจและสูญเสีย




ใช้เวลากับการทำความเข้าใจข้อมูล (Take time to extract meaning from data)




บ่อยครั้งที่นักการตลาดได้แค่ตั้งสมมติข้อมูลสถานการณ์เพื่อทำนานแนวโน้มอัตราผลตอบแทนในอนาคตได้อย่างมีนัยสำคัญทางสถิติแต่ก็บ่อยครั้งอีกนั่นแหล่ะที่วิธีการดังกล่าวก็เชื่อถือไม่ได้ ข้อมูล (data) อาจจะบอกคุณถึงเรื่องราวที่เกิดขึ้นในอดีต แต่ไม่ได้บอกถึงสาเหตุที่แท้จริง จึงทำให้การกำหนดสมมติฐานผิดพลาด บ่อยครั้งที่นักการตลาดเกิดความสับสนเกี่ยวกับข้อมูลเชิงลึกของพฤติกรรมลูกค้า แต่ยังมีบริษัทที่ประสบความสำเร็จอีกมากมายที่สามารถทำความเข้าใจลูกค้าของเขา แต่ต้องใช้เวลากับข้อมูลให้มากขึ้น




อ้างอิง
Bierck, R., (2000). 'Are You Reaching Your Customers?' Harvard management Communication Letter Article (Harvard Business School):4 PPs.

วันอังคารที่ 21 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2552

L'Oreal's Owen-Jones: 'I Strive for Something I Never Totally Achieve

BUSINESSWEEK ONLINE : JUNE 28, 1999 ISSUE

'L'Oreal Chief Executive Lindsay Owen-Jones has turned the French cosmetics company into a global force by distilling the cultural cachet of different countries into its vials. He spoke with Paris Bureau Chief Gail Edmondson at the company's headquarters in Clichy about how to balance L'Oreal's growth with the creativity so crucial to its success. Here are edited excerpts of their conversation:Q: How has L'Oreal achieved 10 years of top-line growth superior to the cosmetics industry?A: First, you have to have an army of people who share the obsession to grow the company. They have to have the right to err. Otherwise they are afraid to take risks. You will never see a bloodbath of people at L'Oreal as a result of something gone wrong.Q: What have you changed at L'Oreal over the past decade?A: I tried to bring more focus to the company through a huge pruning of brands and activities. We focused on five core businesses and technologies -- hair color, hair care, skin care, color cosmetics, and fragrances. Then we concentrated on 10 global brands, which now make up 85% of sales. A whole list of brands has disappeared. It's focus and then extreme drive on the remaining products to take them global.Q: How do you fight the complacency that threatens a successful company?A: I'm a very critical person, and I'm a perfectionist -- I strive for something I never totally achieve. But then I transmit that striving to the rest of the organization, which is so busy trying to do better that it doesn't have time to be pleased with what we have.Q: L'Oreal's debt level is quite low. Do you intend to make acquisitions?A: Ideally, we would have more debt today. We are constantly looking for acquisitions that will complete either our brand portfolio, our technology families, or our geographical presence. You can expect to see us continuing to make regular small- to medium-sized acquisitions. There are not many opportunities in this industry to make megadeals. This is true for us and for others.Q: Do you have a preference or priority for the next acquisition?A: No, it's strictly [opportunistic]. This industry, to some extent, has consolidated already.Q: What do you see as your toughest challenge moving forward?A: Competition is going to be even fiercer in the future than it has been because this market is going to continue to attract strong players. There is also a challenge in reconciling the irreconcilable. Many requirements for survival in the next century are going to be size-related. On the other hand, the imperative for size is balanced by the need for genuine innovation, creativity, flair, intuition, imagination, taste, a sense of what is cool and what is not, and those are not qualities which go with huge companies. That's going to be a major challege.Q: How do you keep creativity flowing?A: The key to that is the unique combination of delegation and control. The only way to favor creativity in large corporations is to favor multiple brands in different places which compete with each other. L'Oreal favors self-competition of its own brands. It sets one research center against another research center, one marketing group against another marketing group. They fight among themselves and in so doing, we hope, also beat the competition.That's why it was so important for me to create the second whirlpool of creativity in brands in the U.S. I think that if we had continued to handle only brands out of one huge creative hub, Paris, with ever huger labs, ever more marketing teams coming from the same people with the same mindsets and the same backgrounds, ultimately it would have slowed.Q: You say research is critical to L'Oreal's success, but don't all large cosmetics companies have equal access to good research? Isn't the emotional importance of a brand much more important than the technology, which consumers assume all leading brands have?A: If you say it's more important, I disagree. If you say it is just as important, I totally agree. It's strictly survival of the fittest in this area. All brands are obliged to more clearly define who they are. You either have a strong personality, or you disappear.Q: At some point, don't all these brand images start to blur?A: Absolutely not. Just take L'Oreal and Maybelline, which in the U.S. have for the last two years been the two fastest growing brands. The two brands have never been more distinct -- L'Oreal from France, supreme elegance, high prices, sophisticated packaging, sophisticated models. Maybelline, on the other hand, America, value, street-smart as opposed to traditional elegance. New York as opposed to Paris. Wider distribution. They are two totally complementary and different brand positions, and we can take them around the world together.Biotherm is extraordinarily successful with a much younger customer than Lancome, [and it's] about 25% to 30% cheaper than Lancome. Biotherm is younger, cheaper, no makeup, pure skin care, less anti-aging, more freshness and youth.Q: What went wrong with Biotherm's launch in the U.S.?A: Some years ago, the American team felt they had to change the personality of Biotherm to make it acceptable to the U.S. market. I think the changes made were not very successful. The distribution at the time was not particularly well managed.But it's a good example of sheer determination and perseverence. We kept it going exclusively in Florida, where it had a good following. Then we relaunced it gradually in a few select stores in California, but this time on a true, worldwide youth model, and now it is the hottest brand in California. It's only a question of time before it will be rolled out again throughout the U.S.Q: What about Helena Rubinstein -- some have expressed confusion about this very dramatic advertising with green lipstick and white eyeshadow for a luxury brand. What's that all about?A: It's not actually incoherent. That has to do with some rather fixed ideas amongst industry observers who have not necessarily seen how fast this market is changing. For example, is it incoherent for younger people to buy luxury cosmetics? Why? Perhaps it was 10 years ago when luxury was equated to the middle-aged customer. But sorry, the biggest luxury consumers in all of Asia, which is one of the strongest luxury markets in the world, are between 20 and 25. This is why the Guccis and Pradas have taken the luxury-goods market by storm. The worldwide luxury consumer no longer equates to a middle-aged lady. She can be. But she can also be young and trendy.So the whole idea that it is incongruous for Helena Rubinstein to be cutting edge in terms of image and makeup...is out of date by about 10 years. On the contrary, it's very good, original positioning for Helena Rubinstein to be the coolest of the traditional luxury brands.... I loved [the advertising]. I just thought it was outrageous, which is exactly what it was designed to be, which is what I want.Q: L'Oreal's brands rank 10th overall in Japan. Can you move that up?A: That is changing very quickly. We took a long time to disentangle ourselves from a traditional licensee agreement in Japan. It took us a long time to get our own business established, fully controlled. Now we have it growing quite quickly.Q: What about competition from direct marketing?A: We are the only large cosmetics company which sells through normal outlets and also has direct marketing. It's a $160 million business, and it's growing very rapidly in France, Germany, and Japan. And by the way, we are doing a lot of electronic business thanks to the French Minitel system, just a crude form of the Internet. So we are already in direct marketing, we know the economics of it. Before you get too caught up with the notion, you have to be aware of the simple economics of putting everything into a little box and sending it to somebody.Q: Were Maybelline sales in China hurt by the U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, given the brand's emotional appeal of American urban chic?A: No, it wasn't. I thought it was going to be, but there was some question about how spontaneous all these riots really were.... A huge number of Chinese people basically love things American, the American lifestyle, the American way of doing things. So you can both be angry with a nation and like its people. It's not like our products come with an American flag. It's more subtle. It's just part of a brand's personality. You don't actually buy a country -- you buy the virtues of a country, like German engineering, Swedish steel, British country-club atmosphere.Q: When you take to the streets and look in shops and talk to people off the street, what are you hoping to discover? Have you ever had a revelation as a result of these encounters?A: I am looking for two things. Does the theory match the facts, and do the facts match the theory? We have this great strategy back in the head office of how we are going to do it worldwide. But when you go out and look at what's happening, is there a big gap between your projections and the reality of what you see and hear? It's so important to have a world vision because otherwise, decentralized consumer-goods companies with many brands can fracture into as many little parts if somebody isn't pulling it back the other way the whole time with a central vision.Q: What's your definition of beauty?A: It's an appearance that makes other people feel a sensation of harmony or pleasure. But I don't think this industry is about beauty. It's about feeling better about ourselves. It's not just about the vanity of looking pretty.Q: What are your hobbies?A: When I get out of this office and [after] all the compulsory reading I have to do, my No. 1 priority is to get on a sailboat or a helicopter -- something that takes my total attention [and] is outdoors, competitive, and takes my mind off the business.Q: You are a big fan of New York. What draws you to that city?A: It's a place for those who are competitive, and I have that weakness. The fact is that New York is a magnet for the world's talents, and anybody who hasn't gone and exposed themselves to the burning rays of New York's sun hasn't really taken the plunge.

L'Oreal: The Beauty of Global Branding (int'l edition)

BUSINESSWEEK ONLINE : JUNE 28, 1999 ISSUE

L'Oreal: The Beauty of Global Branding (int'l edition)The French giant stays on top by selling cultural cachet as well as cosmetics It's a sunny afternoon outside Parkson's department store in Shanghai, and a marketing battle is raging for the attention of Chinese women. Tall, pouty models in beige skirts and sheer tops pass out flyers promoting Revlon's new spring colors. But their effort pales in comparison with L'Oreal's eye-catching show for its Maybelline brand.To a pulsing rhythm, two gangly models in shimmering lycra tops dance on a podium before a large backdrop depicting the New York City skyline. The music stops, and a makeup artist transforms a model's face while a Chinese saleswoman delivers the punch line. ''This brand comes from America. It's very trendy,'' she shouts into her microphone. ''If you want to be fashionable, just choose Maybelline.''Few of the women in the admiring crowd realize that the trendy ''New York'' Maybelline brand belongs to French cosmetics giant L'Oreal. In the battle for global beauty markets, $12.4 billion L'Oreal has developed a winning formula: a growing portfolio of international brands that has transformed the French company into the United Nations of beauty. Blink an eye, and L'Oreal has just sold 85 products around the world, from Redken hair care and Ralph Lauren perfumes to Helena Rubinstein cosmetics and Vichy skin care.Thanks to this strategy, masterminded by L'Oreal Chief Executive Lindsay Owen-Jones, the French company has not only enjoyed a decade of double-digit growth but has pioneered new ground rules for staying on top in a fiercely competitive industry. L'Oreal's net profits rose 12% in 1998, to $768 million, while its stock has soared 900% in the '90s.L'Oreal's success is proof that when done right, global branding can speed growth in mature consumer-products companies even when global markets themselves are shaky. Asia's economy is a mess, Latin America is tottery. Other worldwide marketers, such as Procter & Gamble Co., are suffering partly as a result. But L'Oreal is surging in markets stretching from China to Mexico. Its secret: conveying the allure of different cultures through its many products. Whether it's selling Italian elegance, New York street smarts, or French beauty through its brands, L'Oreal is reaching out to more people across a bigger range of incomes and cultures than just about any other beauty-products company in the world. That sets L'Oreal apart from one-note marketers such as Coca-Cola Co., which has just one brand to sell globally.L'Oreal's strategy positions it beautifully to profit even further when the middle class begins to grow again in emerging markets. Says Veronique Adam, analyst at J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. in Paris: ''L'Oreal is the only real global leader in every segment of the industry.''For Owen-Jones, the trick will be staying ahead in the game as his powerful rivals seek to play the global branding game. From giant P&G to niche players such as Los Angeles-based cosmetics maker Stila, L'Oreal's competitors are hustling to catch up. ''We want to become more of a global company like L'Oreal,'' says Yoshikuni Miyakawa, a general manager of the cosmetics-marketing division of Shiseido Co., Japan's No. 1 cosmetics company. Already, Shiseido is dominant at home and now expanding around the world. Meanwhile, the French company is No. 10 in Japan, trailing rivals such as Clinique and Estee Lauder.ELECTRONIC THREAT. As Owen-Jones races to expand international sales of his products, he must be careful that his brands don't blur together for consumers. Yet another threat may come from the electronic world. An Amazon.com of the beauty business could shake up the industry in unexpected ways--just when L'Oreal is experimenting with its own retail formats.Owen-Jones knows the risks--the 53-year-old CEO is always asking himself what aggressive marketer, what hot fragrance could steal share from L'Oreal. Glancing at shelves in his Paris office lined with L'Oreal's latest products, he notes: ''I'm never satisfied and never convinced we are winning. I try to convince my people we might not be.''That healthy doubt is just one of the ways L'Oreal's chief has kept his company on top. Known by his rivals as a marketing whiz, he loves to prowl the aisles of department stores, quizzing customers and salespeople alike on every aspect of the beauty business. On his latest visit to China, he stopped two women on the street and asked whether they used L'Oreal products to color their hair. When the women said they had their hair done in a salon, Owen-Jones escorted them to the nearest store selling L'Oreal products and offered them hair-color kits for free.The knowledge he gains in the street helps him keep his executives sharp. Owen-Jones is known for raking his managers over the coals in meetings, hammering them with skepticism. ''He tries to destabilize you to see if you are capable of defending your ideas,'' says a senior L'Oreal executive.At the same time, Owen-Jones--known simply as ''O-J''--has used his own multicultural background to the company's advantage. Owen-Jones was born in Wales, studied at Oxford and Paris, married an Italian, and has a French-born daughter. Although his first job was selling shampoo in Normandy in 1969, he has spent half his professional career outside France and all of it outside Britain. ''I've tried to be a hyphen between France and English-speaking countries,'' says Owen-Jones, who speaks four languages. ''We have made a conscious effort to diversify the cultural origins of our brands.''That philosophy has proved key to L'Oreal's success. While many companies seek to homogenize their brands to make them palatable in myriad cultures, Owen-Jones has taken L'Oreal's products in the opposite direction. He wants them to embody their country of origin. So he has turned what many marketing gurus consider a narrowing factor into a marketing virtue.L'Oreal's work with Maybelline is a prime example. In 1996, L'Oreal acquired Maybelline for $758 million and began a complete makeover of the brand, including moving the headquarters from Memphis, Tenn., to New York City. The key: figuratively stamping ''urban American chic'' all over Maybelline products to promote their U.S. origins. In 1997, for example, Maybelline rolled out a radical new makeup line, heavy on risky colors such as yellow and green, dubbing it Miami Chill. And when L'Oreal marketers discovered that the moderately successful Great Finish nail enamel dried in one minute, they changed the name to Express Finish--and sold it heavily as a product used by urban women on the go.The makeover was a hit. Maybelline's share of the nail-enamel market in the U.S. has climbed from 3% to 15% since 1996. Altogether, over the past three years, Owen-Jones has almost doubled Maybelline's sales, from $320 million to $600 million, and pushed the brand into more than 70 countries. Sales outside the U.S. market now make up 50% of total revenues.Maybelline's success exemplifies the L'Oreal blueprint. The company has pursued the same basic approach with Ralph Lauren fragrances and Redken hair care. ''It's a cross-fertilization,'' says Guy Peyrelongue, head of Cosmair Inc., the U.S. division that oversees Maybelline.TWIN HUBS. The Maybelline deal has prompted a change in management, too. Recognizing that two beauty cultures are prominent--French and American--Owen-Jones figures L'Oreal's empire will thrive best by embracing both. So after buying Maybelline, he decided to galvanize L'Oreal's Paris operations by setting up a second creative headquarters in New York, complete with R&D as well as marketing and advertising teams. ''We set up a counter-power in New York with people that have a totally different mind-set, background, and creativity,'' he says.The two creative hubs tap into the same fundamental research but compete in marketing. Although he admits it's a recipe for tension, ''a charged atmosphere is exactly what I'm looking for,'' he says. One example: L'Oreal is preparing a rollout of hair care products by Redken, a U.S.-based brand it acquired last year, into the French market, even though Redken will directly compete with the long-established L'Oreal Preference line. Most CEOs would be afraid of cannibalizing their established brands by introducing newcomers. But Owen-Jones says the competition will inspire both the Redken and Preference marketing teams.The pressure is on L'Oreal to keep reaching higher as the company faces attacks from rivals big and small. ''Global branding is something we are all interested in, we are all pursuing,'' says Revlon CEO George Fellows. Revlon has had little in the way of worldwide efforts until recently--and it's not the only cosmetics maker ramping up globally. Germany's Beiersdorf, which owns the well-known Nivea skin care and cosmetics brand, is betting on a new anti-aging cream to help build its presence even more both in Europe and the U.S. ''This is war,'' declares Rolf Kunisch, chief executive of the Hamburg-based cosmetics company.Beiersdorf has already stolen a march on L'Oreal by beating it to the market with its Nivea Kao brand of strips used to clean pores. Worldwide, Nivea ranks No. 1 in mass-market face cream, with an 11% share, slightly ahead of L'Oreal's Plenitude, according to market researcher ACNielsen Corp. The Germans aren't the only problem: P&G's Oil of Olay skin cream is going head-to-head with L'Oreal's Plenitude around the globe.As the competition intensifies, Owen-Jones is likely to continue making acquisitions. He has purchased five companies in six years. The company is actively exploring acquisition targets elsewhere in Asia. Already huge in established markets such as Europe and the U.S., L'Oreal is venturing further afield. Last year, the company acquired Soft Sheen, a U.S. line of hair-care products aimed at African-American women. Owen-Jones intends eventually to use it as a springboard for expanding into Africa. L'Oreal is expanding rapidly in India since it introduced its L'Oreal Excellence line of hair color in 1997--the first time a company dared sell any color other than black. In Mexico, L'Oreal ranks No. 1, with a 28% spurt in sales last year.SORRY SHOWING. Most of all, though, Owen-Jones is eager to improve L'Oreal's poor market position in Japan, whose $25.4 billion cosmetics market is second-largest in the world. Owen-Jones partly blames L'Oreal's sorry showing there to market regulations ranging from a protectionist distribution system to strict scrutiny by health and safety authorities. While its luxury brands are starting to gain, the company's problem has been selling Maybelline to the mass market. Only recently did L'Oreal acquire marketing control of Maybelline from Japan's Kose, a cosmetics maker that owned the rights prior to L'Oreal's purchase of the U.S. company.L'Oreal is also taking greater risks with its in-house projects, partly to be sure each of its brands stands out with its own image. ''That's a big challenge for this company--to add brands, yet keep the differentiation,'' says Marlene Eskin, publisher of Market View research reports on the cosmetics industry. The most radical experiment is the relaunch of the 96-year-old Helena Rubinstein skin care and cosmetics brand as a hot product providing for the 21st century. The target is 20- to 30-year-old women in urban centers such as New York, Paris, London, and Tokyo who want wild colors. ''We've made it the coolest of luxury brands,'' says Owen-Jones.To sell the new Helena Rubinstein line, L'Oreal has opened a New York spa--the first time L'Oreal has tried to run a retail operation. And the target market is younger and trendier than L'Oreal's typical luxury customers. It's not clear how well the company will be able to manage its ever-growing stable of upscale beauty brands while mixing it with street-wise new products. But that's the thrill of being in the beauty business--what's hot is always changing, and only the savviest of sellers can keep up with the trends. In this fickle business, Owen-Jones is trusting that his instincts won't lead him astray.By Gail Edmondson in Paris, with Ellen Neuborne in New York, Amy Louise Kazmin in Shanghai, Emily Thornton in Tokyo, Karen Nickel Anhalt in Hamburg, and bureau reports

Why Rebranding Often Failsby

By Galen De Young ,Published on October 24, 2006, Site, 21,April 2009.http://www.marketingprofs.com/6/deyoung1.asp?sp=1

As competition heats up and sales start to stagnate, companies often seek to breathe new life into the brand through rebranding. In all too many cases, however, those expensive rebranding efforts fail to yield the desired business results.
Here are some of the key reasons rebranding often fails. More than executional mistakes that blunt the effectiveness of rebranding efforts, these are critical errors that almost always lead to failure.

Lack of True Change
Sure, sometimes rebranding is done solely to sharpen the image of a company or brand; after all, periodically things need to be freshened up. However, unless you operate in the world of packaged goods, don't expect great things from launching some new designs and fresh copy.
Rebranding signals change. A new image will cause people to take a fresh look at you—and people's primary motivation in taking a new look is to see what's changed. If you're the same old place dressed up in new wrapping and ribbons, you'll merely confirm the existing position you own in their minds. You'll have wasted a valuable opportunity to change their perceptions.
There are only so many times your prospects are going to reconsider you. Use them wisely.

Making Too Big a Leap
Rebranding should be about truly changing perceptions in the marketplace—changing the position you own in people's minds. That position, however, isn't dictated by you. It's based on what others believe about your company; it's something granted by those in the marketplace.
Corporate insiders often lose touch with reality and begin to believe their visions of market dominance. Marketers and corporate executives get consumed with what they would ultimately like the company to be versus the position it can reasonably attain in the marketplace at the present time: i.e., the next permissible step in the company's evolution.
When rebranding, keep your primary focus on the achievable, not the aspirational. If you make too big a leap, your market won't believe you.

Lack of Internal Alignment
If rebranding is an initiative implemented solely by the marketing department, it's likely to fail. As noted above, rebranding should signal change—and that change should be evidenced throughout the organization and conveyed through every brand touchpoint. That includes sales, finance, engineering, customer service, manufacturing—basically everyone.
A brand is the sum of perceptions people have about your company and its products and services. Ultimately, a brand isn't something you have, it's something you do. Actions change perceptions. Words and images rarely do—unless they're backed up by actions that support them. Unless everyone throughout the organization understands and delivers on the promises implied by your rebranding, not much will change. In fact, you'll probably do more damage than good. Better to do nothing than imply a promise and not deliver.
Failure of the CEO to Champion Rebranding.While rebranding may be born in the marketing department, unless the CEO is the champion of that effort it will likely die there, too. It is not enough for the CEO to "support" the effort from the corner office. The CEO is the only one who can drive change in all functional areas of the enterprise. As the chief branding officer, the CEO needs to set the vision and lead the charge, ensuring that products, services, people, and resources are aligned to deliver on the promises implied in the rebranding.

Failure to Clarify Positioning
Rebranding should always clarify and refine your positioning. Your goal in rebranding should be to make it easier for customers and prospects to understand exactly why your company should be one of their top choices—why there are few credible substitutes for your company in the market. This isn't the place for puffery. Merely claiming to be the best is meaningless—and using empty words like "best value" and "exceptional customer service" do nothing but heighten skepticism.
Use rebranding as an initiative to force you to focus, to better define and support your expertise in a clear and compelling manner. Doing so will require you to draw tighter boundaries around your stated expertise—and that's likely to scare you. Conventional wisdom is that more generalized positioning gives a company more opportunities.
The reality is generalized positioning positions a company as, you guessed it, a generalist. To win business, generalists have to not only win over other generalists but also have to beat out specialists.

วันจันทร์ที่ 20 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2552

What is Rebranding?

Rebranding
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 21 April, 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebranding

Rebranding is the process by which a product or service developed with one brand, company or product line affiliation is marketed or distributed with a different identity. This may involve radical changes to the brand's logo, brand name, image, marketing strategy, and advertising themes. These changes are typically aimed at the repositioning of the brand/company, usually in an attempt to distance itself from certain negative connotations of the previous branding, or to move the brand upmarket.
Rebranding can be applied to new products, mature products, or even products still in development. The process can occur intentionally through a deliberate change in strategy or occur unintentionally from unplanned, emergent situations, such as a corporate restructuring.

Corporate rebranding

Rebranding has become something of a fad in the last decade, with some companies rebranding several times. The rebranding of Philip Morris to Altria was done to help the company shed its negative image. Other rebrandings, such as the British Post Office's attempt to rebrand itself as Consignia, have proved such a failure that millions more had to be spent going back to square one.
According to Sinclair (1999:13)[1], business the world over acknowledges the value of brands. “Brands, it seems, alongside ownership of copyright and trademarks, computer software and specialist know-how, are now at the heart of the intangible value investors place on companies.” As such, companies in the 21st century may find it necessary to relook their brand in terms of its relevancy to consumers and the changing marketplace. Successful rebranding projects can yield a brand better off than before.
Due to the tremendous impact that renaming and rebranding a company can have, it is critical to take the client through the process with great sensitivity and care. The new company identity and brand should also be launched in a subtle and methodical manner in order to avoid alienating old customers, while aiming to attract new business prospects. There is no magic formula, however, there is a methodical process which involves careful strategy, memorable visuals and personal interactions, all of which must speak in unison for a customer to place full trust and invest their emotions in what is on offer.
Marketing develops the awareness and associations in consumer memory so that customers know (and are constantly reminded) which brands best serve their needs. Once in a lead position, it is marketing, consistent product or service quality, sensible pricing and effective distribution that will keep the brand ahead of the pack and provide value to its owners (Sinclair, 1999:15)[2].
New Coke and British Airways ethnic liveries are both attempts at rebranding that had to be aborted due to a poor reception from the public. BA's world art tailfins were well received abroad, but failed to please the carrier's key customers, British and North American travellers.

Product rebranding

As for product offerings, when they are marketed separately to several target markets this is called market segmentation. When part of a market segmentation strategy involves offering significantly different products in each market, this is called product differentiation. This market segmentation/product differentiation process can be thought of as a form of rebranding. What distinguishes it from other forms of rebranding is that the process does not entail the elimination of the original brand image. Dexxa computer mice are rebranded Logitech devices sold at a lower price by Logitech in the low-end market segment without undercutting their mid-range products. Rebranding in this manner allows one set of engineering and QA to be used to create multiple products with minimal modifications and additional expense.
Following a merger or acquisition, companies usually rebrand newly acquired products to keep them consistent with an existing product line. For example, when Symantec acquired Quarterdeck in November 1998, Symantec chose to rename CleanSweep to Norton CleanSweep. Later on, the company chose to reposition its entire product line by grouping products into a bundle known as Norton SystemWorks. Symantec is not the only software company to reposition and rebrand its products. Much of Microsoft's product line consists of rebranded products, including MS-DOS, FoxPro and Visio.
Another form of product rebranding is the sale of a product manufactured by another company under a new name. An original design manufacturer is a company which manufactures a product which is eventually branded by another firm for sale. This is often the case with international trade. The manufacturing can take place in a place with lower operating costs, while being sold under a local brand name.

วันศุกร์ที่ 17 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2552

And Now a Word From Our Sponsor...

And Now a Word From Our Sponsor...
Spend Another Day ,18/04/2009

Media Awareness Network,http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/resources/educational/teachable_moments/word_from_our_sponsor.cfm ,


In Die Another Day, the latest James Bond film, viewers can be forgiven if they have a hard time distinguishing the action from the ads.
Like its predecessor, Tomorrow Never Dies (which garnered the largest product-placement deal in history at that time - over $100 million), Die Another Day is more of a pyrotechnic-laden infomercial, than an action movie. With $120 million in marketing campaigns tied to the film, unofficial co-stars included Samsonite luggage, Omega watches, a Phillips heart rate monitor, Bollinger champagne, Heineken beer, Sony security systems, laptops, TV cameras and cellphones, and British Airways. In addition, in Die Another Day James Bond has traded in his famous BMW for an Aston Martin Vanquish - courtesy of Ford, which reportedly paid $35 million for the privilege of providing wheels to James and his foes. This kind of aggressive advertising campaign, which combines the allure of movies with product placement, is proving to be a potent advertising package that film producers and advertisers find hard to resist.
Product placement in movies and TV is becoming more and more pervasive. When the main character in a movie or a TV show touches, eats or uses a product, companies expect maximum returns. For example, Ray-Ban claims that sales of the Predator 2 sunglasses worn by Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones in Men in Black, have tripled to almost $5 million since the release of the movie in 1997.
Product placement is not new to the movie and television industry. In 1982, ET: The Extra-Terrestrial made Reese's Pieces a household name. The Reese's Pieces deal involved no money, just free candy.
An estimated 90 percent of movie and almost all TV product placements involve no exchange of money - a legacy of U.S. "payola" regulations from the 1950s. However, both the studios and the companies end up making money. Studios get free props, and the companies get advertising, which they hope may result in the kind of product awareness ET brought to Reese's Pieces. In Canada, the regulations are less restrictive, but since most Canadian shows want to be exported to the U.S., they stick to the U.S. guidelines.
TV producers say product placement practices arose in the 1980s as a way to make sets look more realistic. Stephen Stohn, an executive producer for the CBC soap Riverdale, says realism is one of the primary reasons his show features over 250 brand name products.
"If people are going to believe they're inside a Canadian mall, they're not going to believe it unless there are real companies and brand names around."
Phillip Hart, President of MMI Product Placement in Toronto, which currently represents 19 major companies with more than 200 brands, says it is important that the studios portray these products in a favourable light.
"A lot of our work is making sure the product sits in environments where it really belongs, that it won't insult the company," he says.
"Not insulting the company" has taken on a special relevance after Reebok's breach-of-contract suit against TriStar Pictures over product placement in Jerry Maguire. Reebok had asked that the film contain a full-length commercial for Reebok, which was eventually edited out of the movie. However, a scene in which one of the characters shouts obscenities at Reebok remained on film, and Reebok's subsequent settlement of $10-million dollars sent a chill throughout the movie and television industries.
Precedents like these ensure that products used in movies and on TV will most certainly be presented in a positive light. For now, it's safe to assume that James Bond will not be seen crashing his Aston Martin Vanquish, after drinking a little too much Bollinger Champagne and Heineken beer.
Source for recent James Bond statistics: Globe and Mail, November 22, 2002
In 1998, BusinessWeek featured a Product Placement Hall Of Fame, that included:
the Reeses Pieces in E.T (sales shot up by 65% after these candies appeared in the movie)
Budget Rent-a-Truck in Home Alone
Red Stripe Beer in The Firm (within a month of the film's release, sales of Red Stripe in the U.S. rose by 50%)
the "Junior Mints Episode" of "Seinfeld"
Pizza Hut Pizza and Nuprin pain relievers in Wayne's World
the "Reebok scene" in Jerry Maguire
Ray Ban glasses in Risky Business and Men in Black
the product placement bonanza: Visa card, Avis car rentals, BMW cars and motorcycles, Smirnoff vodka, Heineken beer, Omega watches, Ericsson cell phones and L'Oreal makeup in Tomorrow Never Dies
Chanel perfume in Anastasia (the first time product placement appeared in an animated picture)
Hasbro action toys in Small Soldiers
Product placement has become so much a part of the movies and television, that an entire industry has developed in this area. A visit to the "Feature This" Web site, at http://www.featurethis.com/, offers a fascinating glimpse of the marketing opportunities that are available on the big screen.
Classroom Activities
Ask students to count the number of brand name products they can spot on a prime time television show.
How often is each product shown? Are some products displayed more often than others?
Does there seem to be a relationship between product placement and the viewing audience? For example, are the products used by characters in a sitcom such as Friends or Beverly Hills 90210 the sort that would appeal to a predominantly teenage viewing audience?
At what points in the program are the visible brand name products shown? Is there a pattern?
Are these products shown in a favourable light?
Do you agree that name brand products add realism to television shows and movies? Why or why not?
Do you agree with the concept of 'favourable representation'? Are there negative aspects which should be shown ? for example, an overweight person eating a calorie-laden burger, a smoker who has lung cancer, a character who gets drunk and injures him/herself or others.
Have students watch a non-animated children's movie and note the product placement.
What makes children particularly vulnerable to this kind of advertising?
Are there any guidelines in place to protect children from this sort of influence? (Have students look check out the CAB Broadcast Code for Advertising to Children.)
What about the phenomenon of product placement through cross-marketing, where characters from children's movies are part of kids' "happy meals" and promote the hamburger chain in commercials?
Is this similar to product placement?
Is money exchanged in this sort of arrangement? If so, how much?

The World's Most Innovative Companies

BusinessWeek,APRIL 24, 2006

Their creativity goes beyond products to rewiring themselves. BusinessWeek and the Boston Consulting Group rank the best.

It was a fitting way to wrap up the first day of IBM's (IBM ) innovation-themed leadership forum, held in Rome in early April. Guests were treated to small group tours of the Vatican Museum, including Michelangelo's frescoes in the Sistine Chapel. They sipped cocktails on a patio in the back of St. Peter's, the vast dome of the basilica outlined by the light of the moon. They dined in a marble-statue-filled hall inside the Vatican. What better place than Italy to hold a global confab on innovation, the topic di giorno among corporate leaders? It was, after all, the birthplace of the Renaissance, another period of great innovation and change.

Quiz>>
The next day, at the Auditorium Parco della Musica, 500-odd corporate executives, government leaders, and academics listened as a diverse group of innovative leaders took the stage. Sunil B. Mittal, chief executive officer of Indian telecom company Bharti Tele-Ventures Ltd., described his radical business model, which outsources everything but marketing and customer management, charges 2 cents a minute for calls, and is adding a million customers a month. Yang Mingsheng, CEO of Agricultural Bank of China, the country's second-biggest commercial bank, spoke of building a banking powerhouse from a modest business making micro loans to peasant farmers.Their stories echoed a comment IBM CEO Samuel J. Palmisano had made the day before: "The way you will thrive in this environment is by innovating -- innovating in technologies, innovating in strategies, innovating in business models."Palmisano, to be sure, was making a subtle pitch for IBM and its ability to help the assembled leaders do well in an increasingly challenging business environment. But he also summed up the broad focus of innovation in the 21st century.

Slide Show >>
Today, innovation is about much more than new products. It is about reinventing business processes and building entirely new markets that meet untapped customer needs. Most important, as the Internet and globalization widen the pool of new ideas, it's about selecting and executing the right ideas and bringing them to market in record time.In the 1990s, innovation was about technology and control of quality and cost. Today, it's about taking corporate organizations built for efficiency and rewiring them for creativity and growth. "There are a lot of different things that fall under the rubric of innovation," says Vijay Govindarajan, a professor at Dartmouth College's Tuck School of Business and author of Ten Rules for Strategic Innovators: From Idea to Execution. "Innovation does not have to have anything to do with technology."THE QUICK AND THE BLOCKED To discover which companies innovate best -- and why -- BusinessWeek joined with The Boston Consulting Group to produce our second annual ranking of the 25 most innovative companies. More than 1,000 senior managers responded to the global survey, making it our deepest management survey to date on this critical issue.

Slide Show >>
The new ranking has companies evoking all types of innovation. There are technology innovators, such as BlackBerry maker and newcomer Research In Motion Ltd. (RIMM ), which makes its debut on our list at No. 24. There are business model innovators, such as No. 11 Virgin Group Ltd., which applies its hip lifestyle brand to ho-hum operations such as airlines, financial services, and even health insurance. Process innovators are there, too: Rounding out the ranking is Southwest Airlines Co. (LUV ) at No. 25, a whiz at wielding operational improvements to outfly its competitors.At the top of the list are the masters of many genres of innovation. Take Apple Computer Inc. (AAPL ), once again the creative king. To launch the iPod, says innovation consultant Larry Keeley of Doblin Inc., Apple used no fewer than seven types of innovation. They included networking (a novel agreement among music companies to sell their songs online), business model (songs sold for a buck each online), and branding (how cool are those white ear buds and wires?). Consumers love the ease and feel of the iPod, but it is the simplicity of the iTunes software platform that turned a great MP3 player into a revenue-gushing phenomenon.

Slide Show >>
Toyota Motor Corp., which leapt 10 spots this year to No. 4, is becoming a master of many as well. The Japanese auto giant is best known for an obsessive focus on innovating its manufacturing processes. But thanks to the hot-selling Prius, Toyota is earning even more respect as a product innovator. It is also collaborating more closely with suppliers to generate innovation. Last year, Toyota launched its Value Innovation strategy. Rather than work with suppliers just to cut costs of individual parts, it is delving further back in the design process to find savings spanning entire vehicle systems.The BusinessWeek-BCG survey is more than just a Who's Who list of innovators. It also focuses on the major obstacles to innovation that executives face today. While 72% of the senior executives in the survey named innovation as one of their top three priorities, almost half said they were dissatisfied with the returns on their investments in that area.The No. 1 obstacle, according to our survey takers, is slow development times. Fast-changing consumer demands, global outsourcing, and open-source software make speed to market paramount today. Yet companies often can't organize themselves to move faster, says George Stalk Jr., a senior vice-president with BCG who has studied time-based competition for 25 years. Fast cycle times require taking bets even when huge payoffs aren't a certainty. "Some organizations are nearly immobilized by the notion that [they] can't do anything unless it moves the needle," says Stalk. In addition, he says, speed requires coordination from the hub: "Fast innovators organize the corporate center to drive growth. They don't wait for [it] to come up through the business units."

Slide Show >>
Indeed, a lack of coordination is the second-biggest barrier to innovation, according to the survey's findings. But collaboration requires much more than paying lip service to breaking down silos. The best innovators reroute reporting lines and create physical spaces for collaboration. They team up people from across the org chart and link rewards to innovation. Innovative companies build innovation cultures. "You have to be willing to get down into the plumbing of the organization and align the nervous system of the company," says James P. Andrew, who heads the innovation practice at BCG.Procter & Gamble Co. (PG ) (No. 7) has done just that in transforming its traditional in-house research and development process into an open-source innovation strategy it calls "connect and develop." The new method? Embrace the collective brains of the world. Make it a goal that 50% of the company's new products come from outside P&G's labs. Tap networks of inventors, scientists, and suppliers for new products that can be developed in-house.The radically different approach couldn't be shoehorned into managers' existing responsibilities. Rather, P&G had to tear apart and restitch much of its research organization. It created new job classifications, such as 70 worldwide "technology entrepreneurs," or TEs, who act as scouts, looking for the latest breakthroughs from places such as university labs. TEs also develop "technology game boards" that map out where technology opportunities lie and help P&Gers get inside the minds of its competitors.To spearhead the connect-and-develop efforts, Larry Huston took on the newly created role of vice-president for innovation and knowledge. Each business unit, from household care to family health, added a manager responsible for driving cultural change around the new model. The managers communicate directly with Huston, who also oversees the technology entrepreneurs and managers running the external innovation networks. "You want to have a coherent strategy across the organization," says Huston. "The ideas tend to be bigger when you have someone sitting at the center looking at the company's growth goals."ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS Coordinating innovation from the center is taken literally at BMW Group (BMW ), No. 16 on the list. Each time BMW begins developing a car, the project team's members -- some 200 to 300 staffers from engineering, design, production, marketing, purchasing, and finance -- are relocated from their scattered locations to the auto maker's Research and Innovation Center, called FIZ, for up to three years. Such proximity helps speed up communications (and therefore car development) and encourages face-to-face meetings that prevent late-stage conflicts between, say, marketing and engineering. In 2004 these teams began meeting in the center's new Project House, a unique structure that lets them work a short walk from the company's 8,000 researchers and developers and alongside life-size clay prototypes of the car in development.For many companies, cross-functional collaborations last weeks or months, not years. Southwest recently gathered people from its in-flight, ground, maintenance, and dispatch operations. For six months they met for 10 hours a week, brainstorming ideas to address a broad issue: What are the highest-impact changes we can make to our aircraft operations?The group presented 109 ideas to senior management, three of which involve sweeping operational changes. One solution about to be introduced will reduce the number of aircraft "swaps" -- disruptive events that occur when one aircraft has to be substituted for another during mechanical problems. Chief Information Officer Tom Nealon says the diversity of the people on the team was crucial, mentioning one director from the airline's schedule planning division in particular. "He had almost a naive perspective," says Nealon. "His questions were so fundamental they challenged the premises the maintenance and dispatch guys had worked on for the last 30 years."Managers are scrambling to come up with ways to measure and raise the productivity of their innovation efforts. Yet the BusinessWeek-BCG survey shows widespread differences over which metrics -- such as the ratio of products that succeed, or the ROI of innovation projects -- should be used and how best to use them. Some two-thirds of the managers in the survey say metrics have the most impact in the selection of the right ideas to fund and develop. About half say they use metrics best in assessing the health of their company's innovation portfolio. But as many as 47% said measurements on the impact of innovation after products or services have been launched are used only sporadically.Actually, most managers in the survey aren't monitoring many innovation metrics at all; 63% follow five gauges or fewer. "Two or three metrics just don't give you the visibility to get down to root causes," says BCG's Andrew. Then there are companies that track far too many. Andrew says one of the top innovators on our list -- he's mum as to which one -- collects 85 different innovation metrics in one of its businesses. "That means they manage none of them," he says. "They default to a couple, but they spend an immense amount of time and effort collecting those 85."The sweet spot is somewhere between 8 and 12 metrics, says Andrew. That's about the number that Samsung Electronics Co. uses, says Chu Woosik, a senior vice-president at the South Korean company. Chu says the most important metrics are price premiums and how quickly they can bring to market phones that delight customers. Samsung also watches the allocation of investments across projects and its new-product success ratio. That, Chu says, has nearly doubled in the last five years. "You want to see it from every angle," he says. "A lot of companies fall into the trap that they thought things were really improving, but in the end, it didn't work out that way. We don't want to make that mistake."AWARDS AND ETHNOGRAPHY One of the biggest mistakes companies may make is tying managers' incentives too directly to specific innovation metrics. Tuck's Govindarajan warns that linking pay too closely to hard innovation measures may tempt managers to game the system. A metric such as the percentage of revenue from new products, for instance, can lead to incremental brand extensions rather than true breakthroughs. In addition, innovation is such a murky process that targets are likely to change. "There's a dialogue that needs to happen," says Govindarajan. "Operating plans may need to be reviewed, or you may need to change plans because a new competitor came into your space."Susan Schuman, CEO of Stone Yamashita Partners, which works with CEOs on innovation and change, says that besides numbers-driven metrics, some clients are adding subjective assessments related to innovation, such as a manager's risk tolerance, to performance evaluations. "It's not just about results," she says. "It's how did you lead people to get to those results."That's one reason the bastion of Six Sigma-dom, General Electric Co. (GE ), has begun evaluating its top 5,000 managers on "growth traits" that include innovation-oriented themes such as "external focus" and "imagination and courage." GE has also added more flexibility into its traditionally rigid performance rankings. GE will now have to square its traditional Six Sigma metrics, which are all about control, with its new emphasis on innovation, which is more about managing risk. That's a major change in culture.How do you build an innovation culture? Try carrots. Several companies on our list have formal rewards for top innovators. Nokia Corp. (NOK ) inducts engineers with at least 10 patents into its "Club 10," recognizing them each year in a formal awards ceremony hosted by CEO Jorma Ollila.3M (MMM ) has long awarded "Genesis Grants" to scientists who want to work on outside projects. Each year more than 60 researchers submit formal applications to a panel of 20 senior scientists who review the requests, just as a foundation would review academics' proposals. Twelve to 20 grants, ranging from $50,000 and $100,000 apiece, are awarded each year. The researchers can use the money to hire supplemental staff or acquire necessary equipment.Of course, rewards won't help if the inventions aren't focused on customer needs. Getting good consumer insight is the fourth most cited obstacle to innovation in our survey. Blogs and online communities now make it easier to know what customers are thinking. Hiring designers and ethnographers who observe customers using products at work or at home helps, too. But finding that Holy Grail of marketing, the "unmet need" of a consumer, remains elusive. "You need time, just thinking time, to step out of the day to day to see what's going on in the world and what's going on with your customers," says Stone Yamashita's Schuman.THE WORLD IS YOUR LAB Try learning journeys. That's what Starbucks Corp. (SBUX ), up 10 spots from 2005 to No. 9, does. While the coffee company began doing ethnography back in 2002 and relies on its army of baristas to share customer insights, it recently started taking product development and other cross-company teams on "inspiration" field trips to view customers and trends. Two months ago, Michelle Gass, Starbucks' senior vice-president for category management, took her team to Paris, Düsseldorf, and London to visit local Starbucks and other restaurants to get a better sense of local cultures, behaviors, and fashions. "You come back just full of different ideas and different ways to think about things than you would had you read about it in a magazine or e-mail," says Gass.A close watch of customer insights can also bring innovation to even the most iconic and established products. Back in 2003, 3M began noticing and monitoring two consumer trends. One was troubling: Customers were using laptops, cell phones, and BlackBerrys to send quick memos or jot down bits of information. Every thumb-tapped message or stylus-penned note on a personal digital assistant meant one less Post-it note.The other trend, however, was encouraging: the rise of digital photography. While observing consumers, 3M researchers asked to see their photos. What followed was always a clunky process: Consumers would scroll through screen upon screen of photos or have to dig through a drawer for the few shots they printed. Nine months later a team of one marketer and two lab scientists hit upon the idea of Post-it Picture Paper, or photo paper coated with adhesive that lets people stick their photos to a wall for display. "We listened carefully to what consumers didn't say and observed what they did," says Jack Truong, vice-president of 3M's office supply division.To get a sense of the value of customer research, imagine you're a Finnish engineer trying to design a phone for an illiterate customer on the Indian subcontinent. That's the problem Nokia faced when it began making low-cost phones for emerging markets. A combination of basic ethnographic and long-term user research in China, India, and Nepal helped Nokia understand how illiterate people live in a world full of numbers and letters. The result? A new "iconic" menu that lets illiterate customers navigate contact lists made up of images.Other innovative ideas followed. By listening to customers in poorer countries, Nokia learned that phones had to be more durable, since they're often the most expensive item these customers will buy. To function in a tropical climate, it made the phones more moisture-resistant. It even used special screens that are more legible in bright sunlight.Consumers increasingly are doing the innovation themselves. Consider Google Inc. (GOOG ), our No. 2 innovator, and its mapping technology, which it opened to the public. This produced a myriad of "mash-ups" in which programmers combine Google's maps with anything from real estate listings to local poker game sites.Google's mash-ups are just one example of the escalating phenomenon of open innovation. These days the world is your R&D lab. Customers are co-opting technology and morphing products into their own inventions. Many companies are scouting for outside ideas they can develop in-house, embracing the open-source movement, and joining up with suppliers or even competitors on big projects that will make them more efficient and more powerful. "When you work with outside parties, they bear some of the costs and some of the risks, and can accelerate the time to market," says Henry W. Chesbrough, the University of California at Berkeley Haas School of Business professor who helped establish the concept with his 2003 book, Open Innovation.India and China are growing sources of innovation for companies, too. The BusinessWeek-BCG survey shows that they are nearly as popular as Europe among innovation-focused executives. When asked where their company planned to increase R&D spending, 44% answered India, 44% said China, and 48% said Western Europe. Managers tended to look to the U.S. and Canada for idea generation, while a lower percentage looked to Europe for the same tasks. India and China, though, are still seen as centers for product development.Few companies have embraced the open innovation model as widely as IBM, No. 10 on our list. While the company's proprietary technology is still a force to behold -- Big Blue remains the world's largest patent holder, with more than 40,000 -- the company is opening up its technology to developers, partners, and clients. Last year it made 500 of its patents, mainly for software code, freely available to outside programmers. And in November it helped fund the Open Invention Network, a company formed to acquire patents and offer them royalty-free to help promote the open-source software movement.Why the generosity? IBM believes that by helping to create technology ecosystems, it will benefit in the long run. "We want to do things that encourage markets to grow," says Dr. John E. Kelly III, senior vice-president for technology and intellectual property at IBM. By helping nurture those markets, says Kelly, "we know we'll get at least our fair share."GOING OUTSIDE FOR IDEAS P&G has helped establish several outside networks of innovators it turns to for ideas the company can develop in-house. These networks include NineSigma, which links up companies with scientists at university, government, and private labs; YourEncore Inc., which connects retired scientists and engineers with businesses; and yet2.com Inc., an online marketplace for intellectual property.Only a CEO can change a business culture at top speed, and in Alan G. Lafley, P&G has its own innovator-in-chief. Lafley sits in on all "upstream" R&D review meetings, 15 a year, that showcase new products. He also spends three full days a year with the company's Design Board, a group of outside designers who offer their perspective on upcoming P&G products. "He's sort of the chief innovation officer," says P&G's Huston. "He's very, very involved."That sort of support from the CEO is essential, says Jon R. Katzenbach, co-founder of New York-based management consultancy Katzenbach Partners LLC. "The CEO determines the culture," he says. "If the CEO is determined to [improve] the surfacing of ideas and determined to make critical choices, then the chances of an [organization's] figuring that out are much, much greater."Infosys Technologies Ltd. (INFY ), the Bangalore-based information technology services company that popped up at No. 10 on our Asia-Pacific list, takes a direct approach to making sure management stays involved in the innovation process. Chairman and "chief mentor" N.R. Narayana Murthy introduced the company's "voice of youth" program seven years ago.Each year the company selects nine top-performing young guns -- each under 30 -- to participate in its eight yearly senior management council meetings, presenting and discussing their ideas with the top leadership team. "We believe these young ideas need the senior-most attention for them to be identified and fostered," says Sanjay Purohit, associate vice-president and head of corporate planning. Infosys CEO Nandan M. Nilekani concurs: "If an organization becomes too hierarchical, ideas that bubble up from younger people [aren't going to be heard]."Mike Lazaridis, president and co-CEO of Research In Motion, hosts an innovation-themed, invitation-only "Vision Series" session in the Waterloo (Ont.)-based company's 100-seat auditorium each Thursday. The standing-room-only meetings focus on new research and future goals for the company that gave us the BlackBerry.Lazaridis is likely the only chief executive of a publicly traded company who has an Academy Award for technical achievement. (He won it in 1999 for an innovative bar-code reader that he helped invent that expedites film editing and production.) He has donated $100 million of his own money to fund a theoretical physics institute and an additional $50 million to a university quantum computing and nanotechnology engineering center in Waterloo. He has even appeared in an American Express (AXP ) commercial, scratching complex equations across a blackboard while proclaiming his commitment to the creative process. "I think we have a culture of innovation here, and [engineers] have absolute access to me," says Lazaridis. "I live a life that tries to promote innovation." As the BusinessWeek-BCG survey demonstrates, it is a life every manager around the world must embrace.

How To Hit A Moving Target

BusinessWeek,AUGUST 21, 2006

These days all competitive advantages are fleeting. So the smartest companies are learning to create new ones—again and again and again Spend a weekend plowing through even the best of the 18,038 business books found on Amazon.com (AMZN ) that mention the word "competitiveness," and you're left with four things: a splitting headache, two bleary eyes, and a mishmash of utterly random and conflicting advice.

Differentiate your products. No, nothing's unique anymore; just slash your costs. Sorry, everyone's doing that. Invent new markets instead. Hug your customers, that's the ticket! Get real, you wuss -- it all comes down to squashing your competitors like bugs.The message between all those lines is unmistakable: No matter what strategy you try, competitive advantage -- whether it's Home Depot's (HD ) big-box appeal, Intel's (INTC ) chip technology, or Disney's (DIS ) magic aura -- is tougher to create and sustain with each passing year. Says C.K. Prahalad, professor of corporate strategy at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor and co-author of several books on competition: "Whatever advantage you have, someone will take it away from you."Yet there's hope behind this harsh truth. As hard as it has become to create an edge, some smart organizations are finding new ways to do it. Not for good, mind you -- maybe not even for the years that many companies and their investors have come to expect. But a few standouts are managing to do the next best thing: They keep creating new competitive advantages, over and over, faster and faster.Meet the corporate chameleons. They're organizations that have learned to adjust to rapid social, economic, and competitive changes with relative ease. The most successful among them don't settle for hunkering down in soul-depleting market-share wars to protect an increasingly fleeting edge. Instead they zig and zag with the zeitgeist to keep coming up with new ideas.EXPERIMENT FEARLESSLY And they don't much care if those ideas sound a little nutso. Analysts still aren't sure, for example, about those digital music kiosks at Starbucks (SBUX ). And what the heck is Amazon's Mechanical Turk? (It's a sort of online marketplace for farming out small jobs.) But a culture of experimentation is crucial in a fast-changing world. As Amazon Chief Executive Jeff Bezos told a group of Stanford University students last year: "Invention always leads you down paths that people think are weird."Not that there's much choice. Competition keeps intensifying around the world. For one thing, after decades of rising power, Asian companies are starting to run circles around American and European rivals across a wide variety of industries. A few years ago, who would have thought that India's Wipro (WIT ), Infosys (INFY ), and Tata Consultancy Services each would have market caps bumping up against, or even eclipsing, that of General Motors (GM )?Not only that, the Internet is busting the boundaries of many industries, creating openings for unexpected newcomers. With its Net communications subsidiary Skype, for instance, eBay is assaulting telecommunications players by offering free phone calls. Even more broadly, as the Net helps more businesses evolve from merely selling products to providing services, companies are invading markets they could never touch before. Google's (GOOG ) new online services, such as e-mail and word-processing, challenge Microsoft's (MSFT ) cash-cow software applications. Caterpillar's (CAT ) new logistics services go up against the likes of Ryder (R ) and FedEx (FDX ).What's most striking is that the classic mano-a-mano battles, such as Coke (KO ) vs. Pepsi (PEP ) and Microsoft vs. Apple, are only one small part of being competitive. From Starbucks and Cirque du Soleil to Caterpillar to Whole Foods Markets (WFMI ), companies are finding new ways to differentiate themselves and create entirely new markets. Many are finding that in an intensely networked age, cooperation works better than direct competition. Leaders know that if they fixate on competitors, they'll miss the real prize. "If you want to do a breakthrough, don't look around," says Daniel Lamarre, president of Cirque du Soleil. "Look ahead."That's what the best of the bunch are doing. Granted, not all of the practices they employ will work for every company in every industry or at all times. But in an era when the competitive playing field is constantly morphing, a few key guidelines have emerged for how to stay ahead of the pack.DON'T JUST GET BIGGER, GET UNIQUE. Dell (DELL ), Wal-Mart (WMT ), Intel, Home Depot, and Microsoft: Each dominates its field -- and each faces new challenges to growth and profits. Is the quest to be an 800-pound gorilla the smartest strategy? Harvard Business School strategy guru Michael E. Porter doesn't think so. In an age of infinite choice, he contends, there's a better way to achieve competitive advantage. "There is no best auto company, there is no best car," he says. "You're really competing to be unique. One can now be a very, very large company by really meeting a very well-chosen set of needs -- but doing it on a global basis."Whole Foods Markets, for instance, is "not just trying to be a great food retailer," says Porter. "It's trying to meet the needs of a certain set of customers." Those customers view the 183-store chain's eco-friendly ethos as representative of a healthy, socially responsible lifestyle they want to identify with (not to mention that they crave those Medjool dates and organic heirloom tomatoes). It's unlikely that Kroger's (KR ) or Wal-Mart will ever be able to claim that kind of brand loyalty -- even if Wal-Mart is out trumpeting its goal of "going green."WHY COMPETE? CREATE NEW MARKETS. Niches are nice, but inventing a new market is a whole lot better. Former fire-eating street performer Guy Laliberté founded Canada's Cirque du Soleil 22 years ago on the notion of a unique combination of circus (but without the animals) and theater (but more acrobatic). Despite massive global expansion, with about $700 million in profitable annual sales, Cirque has no significant direct competitors.Cirque's Lamarre attributes the company's edge to a stubborn resolve to "stay crazy" and keep "the suits" away from all creative decisions. To keep shows fresh and get a read on shifting public tastes, an in-house group called New Tendencies studies what's new in restaurants, car design, fashion, and other unrelated industries. One result: The group noticed the ascendence of Asian themes, so that flavor was injected into Cirque's hit MGM Grand show Kà.This kind of market-making lets innovators from Cirque du Soleil to Apple to Starbucks avoid market share wars and reap big rewards, says W. Chan Kim, co-author with Renée Mauborgne of the 2005 book Blue Ocean Strategy. Their research over the past decade shows that 86% of launches by 108 companies were mere line extensions, which accounted for 39% of profits from all new-business launches. The remaining 14% represented new markets, and they generated 61% of profits.OBSESS ABOUT CUSTOMERS, NOT RIVALS. Heavy equipment is an intensely competitive business, but No. 1 Caterpillar keeps its eyes on the prize: what its customers want. Instead of just selling that familiar yellow gear, the Peoria company sells service -- or, as its informal motto says, "Buy the iron, get the company."Caterpillar will ship spare parts to a customer anywhere in the world, from the Alaskan tundra to the deserts of Timbuktu, in just 24 hours. But the dividends of that high level of service extend beyond customer loyalty. The company's various service contracts serve as a kind of annuity, and the need to arrange distribution of several hundred thousand parts worldwide led it into a profitable, fast-growing logistics business. Even with a recent slowdown in housing construction, Caterpillar saw its second-quarter profits jump 38% and raised its earnings outlook for the year.GIVE AS GOOD AS YOU GET. More than a decade ago, James F. Moore noted in his book The Death of Competition that huge, cooperative networks of companies such as the IBM (IBM ), Intel, and Microsoft troika in computing, or Toyota (TM ) and its close-knit supplier network, were overtaking individual companies as new competitive forces. Now a lot of companies are taking an even bigger leap forward. They're tapping into the cooperative crowds that create things like open-source software, eBay's massive marketplace, and Skype's peer-to-peer Net phone network.In some cases they're finding ways to leverage that cooperative force to huge advantage. Google, for instance, instantly polls millions of people and businesses whose Web sites link to one another, and as a result the company produces better search results than its rivals do. That has allowed Google to continue gaining market share. It has also enabled the company to build a highly profitable ad business with $6.1 billion in revenues, up 93% from a year ago.GET PERSONAL. Thanks to the Web and just-in-time supply chains, the mass-market era is fading as customers begin to tailor companies' products to their tastes. Amazon offers personalized book recommendations based on your literary leanings, Build-a-Bear Workshop lets your kids design their own teddy bears, and virtually every Dell PC is a custom job. "With personalization, you have infinite ways to differentiate," says Prahalad, whose 2004 book The Future of Competition, co-authored with Venkat Ramaswamy, urged companies to "co-create" products with customers.That approach is working wonderfully for Lands' End. Six years ago the mail-order and Web apparel retailer began offering customers the ability to order jeans, men's dress shirts, and other items to their exact measurements. Today, even though the clothes cost at least $20 more apiece, up to 40% of Lands' End customers choose the customized versions. And 33% of those customers reorder the personalized product. Even better, about a quarter of these made-to-measure fans are new customers.STAY HUNGRY. A low-cost business model isn't much of a differentiator anymore, but staying efficient remains crucial. So is engaging in direct combat when necessary -- let's face it, in some industries competition ain't pretty. "It's a hard world," shrugs Boston Consulting Group's George Stalk, co-author of 2004's Hardball: Are You Playing to Play or Playing to Win? "It's 'I'm going to eat your lunch or you're going to eat my lunch."'Today, even the most dominant companies need to stay on their toes. The truth is, there's no final winner in the global game of corporate competition. "All winning does is let you compete against a whole new set of better-funded competitors," observes Joe Kraus, founder and chief executive of Web collaboration software startup JotSpot. "Competition never ends."

Wal-Mart's Midlife Crisis

BusinessWeek, APRIL 30, 2007 By Anthony Bianco

Declining growth, increasing competition, and not an easy fix in sight

John E. Fleming, Wal-Mart's newly appointed chief merchandising officer, is staring hard at a display of $14 women's T-shirts in a Supercenter a few miles from the retailer's Bentonville (Ark.) headquarters. The bright-hued stretch T's carry Wal-Mart's own George label and are of a quality and stylishness not commonly associated with America's über-discounter. What vexes Fleming is that numerous sizes are out of stock in about half of the 12 colors, including frozen kiwi and black soot.

Fleming may be America's most powerful merchant, but a timely solution is beyond him even so. Wal-Mart failed to order enough of these China-made T-shirts last year, and so they and other George-brand basics will remain in short supply in most of its 3,443 U.S. stores until 2007's second half, depriving the retailer of tens of millions of dollars a week it sorely needs. "The issue with apparel is long lead times," says the quietly intense Fleming, who spent 20 years at Target Corp. (TGT ) before joining Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT ) "We will get it fixed."For nearly five decades, Wal-Mart's signature "everyday low prices" and their enabler—low costs—defined not only its business model but also the distinctive personality of this proud, insular company that emerged from the Ozarks backwoods to dominate retailing. Over the past year and a half, though, Wal-Mart's growth formula has stopped working. In 2006 its U.S. division eked out a 1.9% gain in same-store sales—its worst performance ever—and this year has begun no better. By this key measure, such competitors as Target, Costco (COST ), Kroger (KR ), Safeway (SWY ), Walgreen's (WAG ), CVS, and Best Buy (BBY ) now are all growing two to five times faster than Wal-Mart.Wal-Mart's botched entry into cheap-chic apparel is emblematic of the quandary it faces. Is its alarming loss of momentum the temporary result of disruptions caused by transitory errors like the T-shirt screwup and by overdue improvements such as the store remodeling program launched last year? Or is Wal-Mart doing lasting damage to its low-budget franchise by trying to compete with much hipper, nimbler rivals for the middle-income dollar? Should the retailer redouble its efforts to out-Target Target, or would it be better off going back to basics?If Wal-Mart seems short of answers at the moment, it might well be because there aren't any good ones. Increasingly, it appears that America's largest corporation has steered itself into a slow-growth cul de sac from which there is no escape. "There are a lot of issues here, but what they add up to is the end of the age of Wal-Mart," contends Richard Hastings, a senior analyst for the retail rating agency Bernard Sands. "The glory days are over."Simple mathematics suggest that a 45-year-old company in an industry growing no faster than the economy as a whole will struggle to sustain the speedy growth rates of its youth. In Wal-Mart's case, this difficulty is exacerbated by its great size and extreme dominance of large swaths of the U.S. retail market. Wal-Mart already controls 20% of dry grocery, 29% of nonfood grocery, 30% of health and beauty aids, and 45% of general merchandise sales, according to ACNielsen.However, the expansion impulse is as deeply embedded in Wal-Mart's DNA as its allegiance to cut-rate pricing. Wal-Mart was able to boost total U.S. revenues by 7.2% last year by opening new stores at the prodigious rate of nearly one a day. According to Wal-Mart CEO H. Lee Scott Jr., the company plans to sustain this pace for at least the next five years. In fact, he is on record saying that room remains in the U.S. for Wal-Mart to add 4,000 Supercenters—the largest of its store formats by far—to the 2,000 it now operates.Does Scott, 58, recognize any limits whatsoever to Wal-Mart's growth potential in the U.S., which accounted for 78% of its $345 billion in sales last year? "Actually, and I know it's going to sound naive to you, I don't," he replies. "The real issue is, are [we] going to be good enough to take advantage of the opportunities that exist?"TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORTWall Street does not share Scott's bullishness, to put it mildly. Wal-Mart shares are trading well below their 2004 high and have dropped 30% in total since Scott was named CEO in 2000, even as the Morgan Stanley (MS ) retail index has risen 180%. "The stock has been dead money for a long time," says Charles Grom, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. (SPM ) analyst.Even money managers who own Wal-Mart's shares tend to see the retailer as a beaten-down value play, not a growth company. "I'd be surprised if true growth-oriented investors were involved at this point," says Walter T. McCormick, manager of the $1.2 billion Evergreen Fundamental Large Cap Fund, which began buying the stock a year ago. "The issue the Street has is market saturation: We may be in the seventh inning of a nine-inning game."One can argue that the deceleration of Wal-Mart's organic growth is a function of the aging of its outlets, given that same-store sales rates slow as stores mature. Outlets five years or older accounted for 17% of all U.S. Supercenters in 2000 and 44% in 2006, and will top 60% in 2010, according to HSBC (HBC ) analyst Mark Husson. "There's an inevitability of bad middle age," he says.Meanwhile, the underlying economics of expansion have turned against Wal-Mart, even as it relies increasingly on store-building to compensate for sagging same-store sales. On balance, the new Supercenters are just not pulling in enough sales to offset fully the sharply escalating costs of building them. Part of the problem is that many new stores are located so close to existing ones that Wal-Mart ends up competing with itself. All in all, the retailer's pretax return on fixed assets, which includes things such as computers and trucks as well as stores, has plunged 40% since 2000.Even many analysts with a buy on Wal-Mart want it to follow the lead of McDonald's Corp. (MCD ) and cut way back on new-store building to concentrate instead on extracting more value from existing stores, which vary wildly in their performance. Wal-Mart disclosed a year and a half ago that same-store sales were rising 10 times, or 1,000%, faster at the 800 best-managed outlets than at the 800 worst-run ones. Equally shocking was its admission that 25% of its stores failed to meet minimum expectations of cleanliness, product availability, checkout times, and so on.Scott is acutely aware of the Street's discontent. "We have to find a way to give our shareholders back the returns that they need through some mechanism," he acknowledges. In March, Wal-Mart boosted its dividend 31%. Apparently, the board also is considering spinning off Sam's Club, the warehouse club division that is a perennial also-ran to Costco.Wal-Mart announced late last year that it would trim its customary 8% annual addition to U.S. square footage to 7% in 2007. At the moment, though, slamming on the brakes is out of the question. Says Scott: "If you stop the growth at Wal-Mart, you'd be silly to think that [alone] means you're going to have better stores."Wal-Mart's "home office" has taken a series of steps to improve the performance of its far-flung store network. Last year it implemented a whole new supervisory structure that required many of its 27 regional administrators to move out of Bentonville and live in the districts they manage. In April, Scott removed the executive in charge of U.S. store operations and put her in charge of corporate personnel instead.The number of stores falling below the threshold of minimum customer expectations has declined but remains "more than would be acceptable," says Scott, who is surprisingly philosophical about the persistence of mediocrity. Asked why it has been so difficult to fix bad stores, HE replies: "That's a very good question. It's a question I ask all the time."The polite, self-deprecating Scott is no Robert L. Nardelli, whose ouster as Home Depot Inc.'s (HD ) chief had as much to do with his abrasive personality as the chain's business problems. That said, Wal-Mart's stock has performed worse under Scott than Home Depot's did under Nardelli. "The Street is going to look to the back half of 2007 for evidence of improvement," says an adviser to a large, longtime Wal-Mart shareholder. "If that doesn't happen, you're going to see a tremendous amount of pressure."Scott & Co. already are struggling to cope with mounting sociopolitical backlash to Wal-Mart's size and aggressive business practices. Over the past decade, dozens of lawsuits were brought by employees claiming to be overworked and underpaid, including the mother of all sex discrimination class actions. Organized labor set up two Washington-based organizations to oppose the antiunion employer at every turn (see BusinessWeek.com, 4/9/07, "Stop the Bullying, Wal-Mart"). And hundreds of municipalities across the country erected legal obstacles of one kind or another.Wal-Mart's initial reaction to the gathering storm of opposition was to ignore it and maintain the defiant insularity that is a legacy of its Ozarks origins. "The best thing we ever did was hide back there in the hills," Sam Walton, the company's legendary founder, declared shortly before his death in 1992.In the past few years, Scott has reluctantly brought Wal-Mart out from behind its Bentonville barricades. Virtually from scratch, this famously conservative company has built a large public and government relations apparatus headed by Leslie A. Dach, a veteran Washington political operative of pronounced liberal bent. Few CEOs have embraced environmental sustainability as avidly as has Scott, who also broke with the Republican orthodoxy of his predecessors by advocating a hike in the federal minimum wage.It's not just rhetoric: Wal-Mart has indeed made substantive reforms in some areas. It has struck up effective working relationships with many of the very environmental groups it once disdained. No less dramatically, the company has added three women (one is Hispanic) and two African American directors to its board and also tied all executive bonuses to diversity goals.It turns out, though, that there is a dark, paranoid underside to Wal-Mart's visible campaign of outreach. What began as an attempt by Wal-Mart's Threat Research and Assessment Group to detect theft and pro-union sympathies among store workers grew into surveillance of certain outside critics, consultants, stockholders, and even Wal-Mart's board. Bruce Gabbard, a security technician fired for allegedly unauthorized wiretapping of a New York Times reporter, has described himself as "the guy listening to the board of directors when Lee Scott is excused from the room."Wal-Mart's spreading Spygate scandal is perhaps the most damaging in a long sequence of PR disasters, including last year's conviction of former No. 2 executive Thomas M. Coughlin on fraud and tax evasion charges stemming from embezzlement of company funds. Coughlin, a Walton protégé who had been Scott's leading rival for the CEO post, is serving a sentence of 27 months of house arrest.There is no way of measuring how much business Wal-Mart is losing to competitors with more benign reputations. According to a recent survey conducted by Wal-Mart itself, though, 14% of Americans living within range of one of its stores—which takes in 90% of the population—are so skeptical of the company as to qualify as "conscientious objectors."But the Arkansas giant's fundamental business problem is that selling for less no longer confers the overwhelming business advantage it once did. Low prices still define the chain's appeal to its best customers, the 45 million mostly low-income Americans who shop its stores frequently and broadly. But the collective purchasing power of these "loyalists," as Wal-Mart calls them, has shriveled in recent years as hourly wages have stagnated and the cost of housing and energy have soared.More affluent shoppers also walk Wal-Mart's aisles in great numbers, but they tend to buy sparingly, loading up on toothpaste, detergent, and other "consumables" priced barely above cost while shunning higher-margin items such as clothes and furniture. To the selective middle-income shopper, quality, style, service, and even store aesthetics increasingly matter as much as price alone. "Here's the big thought Wal-Mart missed: Price is not enough anymore," says Todd S. Slater, an analyst at Lazard Capital Markets.BACKWOODS KNOWHOWAt first, Wal-Mart management blamed its loss of momentum mostly on rising gasoline prices—a theory undercut when same-store sales kept falling even as the cost of gas receded during the latter half of 2006. Today, Wal-Mart executives are more willing to acknowledge the X factor of intensified competition. Says Fleming: "We're now up against world-class competitors that are each taking a slice of our business."Wal-Mart not only was slow to recognize this threat but also responded haphazardly once it did. The nub of the problem was that the discounter had relied for so long on selling for less that it did not know any other way to sell. Wal-Mart did not begin to build a marketing department worthy of the name until Fleming was named to the new position of chief marketing officer in spring, 2005, an appointment Scott hailed as "an extraordinary move for us."Founded in 1962, Wal-Mart rose to dominance on the strength of its mastery of retailing's "back-end" mechanics. Forced by the isolation of the Ozarks to do for itself what most retailers relied on others to do for them, Wal-Mart built a cutting-edge distribution system capable of moving goods from factory loading dock to store cash register faster and cheaper by far than any competitor. It added to its cost advantage by refusing to acquiesce to routine increases in wholesale prices, continually pressing suppliers to charge less.Walton, who was both a gifted merchant and a born tightwad, also pinched pennies in every other facet of business, from wages and perks (there were none) to fixtures and furnishings. Aesthetics counted for so little that when the retailer finally put down carpet in its stores it took care to choose a color that matched the sludgy gray-brown produced by mixing dirt, motor oil, and the other contaminants most commonly tracked across its floors. To Wal-Mart, the beauty of its hideous carpet was that it rarely needed cleaning.Low costs begat low prices. Instead of relying on promotional gimmickry, Wal-Mart sold at a perpetual discount calculated to make up for in volume what it lost in margin. Walton's philosophy was price it low, pile it high, and watch it fly. His belief in everyday low prices made him a populist hero even as he built America's largest fortune. (His descendants still own 40% of Wal-Mart's shares, a stake worth $80 billion.) Regulators forced "Mr. Sam" to modify his slogan of "Always the lowest price" to the hedged "Always low prices!" But hundreds of retailers went broke trying to compete with Wal-Mart on price just the same.In many ways, Wal-Mart has remained reflexively tight-fisted under Scott, a 28-year company veteran who trained at Walton's knee and rose to the top through trucking and logistics. Last year, Wal-Mart began remodeling the apparel, home, and electronics sections in 1,800 stores, replacing miles of that stain-colored carpeting with vinyl that looks like wood. To Fleming, the new "simulated wood" floor is all about aesthetic improvement. His boss takes the classical Wal-Mart view. "The truth is that vinyl costs less," Scott says. "And the maintenance on the vinyl costs less than the maintenance on the carpet."Yet Wal-Mart is neither as low-cost nor as low-price a retailer as it was in Walton's day, or even when Scott moved up to CEO. Most dramatically, overhead costs jumped 14.8% in 2006 alone and now amount to 18.6% of sales, compared with 16.4% in Scott's first year—a momentous rise in a business that counts profit in pennies on the dollar.The imperatives of reputational damage control have prompted Bentonville to add hundreds of staff jobs in public relations, corporate affairs, and other areas that the company happily ignored when it was shielded by the force field of Walton's folksy charisma. And as the nation's largest electricity consumer and owner of its second-largest private truck fleet, Wal-Mart was hit doubly hard by the explosion of energy costs.Wal-Mart also has purposefully, if not entirely voluntarily, inflated its cost base in expanding far beyond its original rural Southern stronghold. It is far more expensive to buy land and to build, staff, and operate stores in the large cities that are the final frontier of Wal-Mart's expansion than in the farm towns where it began. Then, too, the company is encountering mounting resistance as it pushes deeper into the Northeast, Upper Midwest, and West Coast, requiring it to retain legions of lawyers and lobbyists to fight its way into town.NARROWING THE GAPUnder Scott, Wal-Mart even blunted its seminal edge in distribution by letting billions of dollars in excess inventories accumulate at mismanaged stores. A dubious milestone was reached in 2005 as inventories rose even faster than sales. "You'd see these big storage containers behind stores, but what was more amazing was that [local] managers were going outside Wal-Mart's distribution network to subcontract their own warehouse space," says Bill Dreher, a U.S. retailing analyst for Deutsche Bank (DB ).Over the past decade, top competitors in most every retailing specialty have succeeded in narrowing their cost gap with Wal-Mart by restructuring their operations. They eliminated jobs, remodeled stores, and replaced warehouses, investing heavily in new technology to tie it all together. Unionized supermarkets even managed to chip away at Wal-Mart's nonunion-labor cost advantage, signaling their resolve by taking a long strike in Southern California in 2003-04. The end result: Rival chains gradually were able to bring their prices down closer to Wal-Mart's and again make good money.Consider the return to form of Kroger Co., the largest and oldest U.S. supermarket chain. Cincinnati-based Kroger competes against more Wal-Mart Supercenters—1,000 at last count—than any other grocer. Which is why until recently the only real interest Wall Street took in the old-line giant was measuring it for a coffin. Today, though, a rejuvenated Kroger is gaining share faster in the 32 markets where it competes with Wal-Mart than in the 12 where it does not.A recent Bank of America (BAC ) survey of three such markets—Atlanta, Houston, and Nashville—found that Kroger's prices were 7.5% higher on average than Wal-Mart's, compared with 20% to 25% five years ago. This margin is thin enough to allow Kroger to again bring to bear such "core competencies" as service, quality, and convenience, says BofA's Scott A. Mushkin, who recently switched his Kroger rating to buy from sell. "We're saying the game has changed, and it looks like it has changed substantially in Kroger's favor," he says.While Wal-Mart vies with a plethora of born-again rivals for the trade of middle-income Americans, it also must contend on the low end of the income spectrum with convenience and dollar-store chains and with such "hard discounters" as Germany's Aldi Group. These no-frills rivals are challenging Wal-Mart's hold over budget-minded shoppers by underpricing it on many staples.To right Wal-Mart's listing U.S. flagship division, Scott installed Eduardo Castro-Wright as its president and CEO in fall, 2005. The Ecuador-born, U.S.-educated Castro-Wright, now 51, worked for RJR Nabisco and Honeywell International Inc. (HON ) before joining Wal-Mart in 2001. In Castro-Wright's three years as CEO of Wal-Mart Mexico, revenues soared 50%, powered by sparkling same-store sales growth of 10% a year.To date, Castro-Wright has fallen so far short of replicating the miracle of Mexico that in January he had to publicly deny rumors that he was about to be transferred back to international. Instead, Scott shifted the vice-chairman over Castro-Wright to new duties. That the U.S. chief now reports directly to Scott both solidifies Castro-Wright's status and ups the pressure on him to show results.Castro-Wright can point to progress on the cost side of the ledger. By tightening controls over the stores, headquarters has halved the growth rate of inventories to 5.6% from 11.5% two years ago. Wal-Mart also has squeezed more productivity out of its 1.3 million store employees for eight consecutive quarters. This was done by capping wages for most hourly positions, converting full-time jobs to part-time ones, and installing a sophisticated scheduling system to adjust staffing levels to fluctuations in customer traffic.Wal-Mart has found other new ways to economize, notably by cutting out middlemen to do more contract manufacturing overseas. The company's much publicized green initiatives have tempered criticism from some left-leaning opponents but are perhaps best understood as a politically fashionable manifestation of its traditional cost-control imperative.By any conventional measure, Wal-Mart remains a solidly profitable company. Rising overhead costs have cut into net income, which in 2006 rose a middling 6.7%, a far cry from the double-digit increases of the 1990s. Return on equity continues to top 20%, however, and U.S. operating margins actually have widened a bit under Castro-Wright, as costs have risen a bit slower than Wal-Mart's average selling price.Evidently, though, it is going to take a lot more than Castro-Wright's workmanlike adjustments to revive Wal-Mart's moribund stock. In the end, Scott's aversion to a McDonald's-style strategic about-face leaves Wal-Mart no alternative but to try to grow its way back into Wall Street's good graces. But if opening a new Wal-Mart or Sam's Club almost every day can't move the dial, what will?Foreign markets present an intriguing mix of potential and peril for Wal-Mart, which first ventured abroad in 1992. Although the company now owns stores in 13 countries, the lion's share of those revenues comes from Mexico, Canada, and Britain. In 2006 international revenues rose 30%, to $77 billion. At the same time, though, Wal-Mart's long-standing struggles to adapt its quintessentially American low-cost, low-price business model to foreign cultures was underscored by the $863 million loss it took in exiting Germany.Wal-Mart is the rare U.S. company that is more politically constrained at home than abroad in angling for outsize growth opportunities. In March it withdrew its application for a Utah bank charter just before a congressional committee was set to convene hearings. The retreat marks an apparent end to its decade-long campaign to diversify into consumer banking.Although Wal-Mart regularly makes sizable acquisitions abroad, it is in no position to respond in kind to such domestic dagger thrusts as CVS's $26.5 billion acquisition of pharmacy benefits manager Caremark Rx. "That deal is a real threat, but Wal-Mart would have huge antitrust problems if it made an acquisition of any size," says a top mergers-and-acquisitions banker. "They are kind of stuck."In the end, Wal-Mart seems unlikely to regain its stride unless it can solve what might be the diciest conundrum in retailing today. That is, can it seduce tens of millions of middle-income shoppers into stepping up their purchases in a major way without alienating its low-income legions in the process?Largely because of the pressing need to differentiate itself from Wal-Mart, Target began grappling with this very puzzle more than a decade ago and gradually solved it with the cheap-chic panache that transformed it into "Tar-zhay." Says the president of a leading apparel maker: "Target has an awareness of what's happening in fashion equal to a luxury player, maybe greater. They have set the bar very high."Scott acknowledged as much in making former Target exec Fleming chief marketing officer, reporting to Castro-Wright. Fleming, who had been CEO of Wal-Mart.com, went outside to fill every key slot in building a 40-person marketing group from scratch. He supported Wal-Mart's move into higher-priced, more fashionable apparel and home furnishings with the splashiest marketing the retailer had ever done, buying ad spreads in Vogue and sponsoring an open-air fashion show in Times Square.Wal-Mart's top management all the way up to and including Scott presumed that Wal-Mart could run like Tar-zhay before it had learned to walk. "What Wal-Mart tried to do smacks of a kind of arrogant attitude toward fashion—that you can just order it, put it down, and people will buy it," says Eric Beder, a specialty retailing analyst at Brean Murray, Carret & Co.CRASH COURSEWal-Mart did everything at once and precipitously, introducing ads even as it was flooding stores with new merchandise and before it could complete its store remodeling program. Bentonville was learning marketing on the fly and did not even attempt to adopt the sort of formal, centralized merchandise planning at which Target and many big department-store chains excel. Instead, Wal-Mart relied on dozens of individual buyers to make critical decisions as it pushed hard into unfamiliar product areas.How else to explain why a retailer whose typical female customer is thought to be a size 14 loaded up on skinny-leg jeans? Or why Wal-Mart's cheap-chic Metro7 line got off to a flying start in 350 stores only to crash and burn as it was rolled out to 1,150 more? Or why Wal-Mart not only severely misread demand for George-brand basics but also is unable to replenish its stocks for months on end while "fast-fashion" chains such as H&M easily turn over entire collections every six weeks?Scott loved Wal-Mart's bold new direction until he hated it, his enthusiasm diminishing in sync with same-store sales throughout much of 2006. "We are going to sell for less," Scott says now, emphasizing a return to Wal-Mart's first principles. "I believe that long after we are gone, the person who sells for less will do more business than the person who doesn't."Yet Scott also signaled his continuing commitment to the pursuit of the middle-income shopper by promoting Fleming to yet another new post, chief merchandising officer, as part of a January shakeup of the senior ranks. Although Wal-Mart no doubt has sponsored its last glitzy runway show, Fleming insists that the company is sticking with its underlying strategy of "customer relevance"—that is, of moving beyond a monolithic focus on price to try to boost sales by targeting particular customers in new ways. "We're not going to back off," he vows. "We've learned certain lessons. Some things we'll build on, some things we won't."While the look of its stores is primarily a function of how much Wal-Mart chooses to spend on them, the retailer is unlikely ever to come up with an ambience conducive to separating the affluent from their money without changing its whole approach to labor. The chain's dismal scores on customer satisfaction surveys imply that it is understaffing stores to the point where many of them struggle merely to meet the demands of its self-service format.It is entirely possible even so that Wal-Mart in time will figure out how to sell vast quantities of dress-for-success blazers, 400-thread-count sheets, laptop computers, and even prepackaged sushi. But as Wal-Mart closes in on $400 billion in annual revenues, it is going to have to overachieve just to get same-store sales rising again at 3% to 5% a year.The odds are that Scott, or his successor, will have to choose between continuing to disappoint Wall Street or milking the U.S. operation for profits better reinvested overseas. Only by hitting the business development equivalent of the lottery in countries like China, India, or Brazil can the world's largest retailer hope to restore the robust growth that once seemed like a birthright.

Click here to join a debate about Wal-Mart.