Recent Updates RSS Hide threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • The beauty of war

    9:30 am on January 6, 2012 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , ,

    Personally, I would have to class myself as a pacifist. Perhaps outright coward could be another descriptor. War for me is something to be avoided, due to the inherent risks and fact that I have no interest in playing a role in the overall scheme of other people who want stuff like oil, power and more money for themselves. Oh, and I don’t look good in green.

    However, war is a very natural part of life, and therefore, business. As a model for innovation and commercialisation, war is actually hard to beat, because normal commercial rules do not apply. In the race to either kill more effectively or to become harder to kill, there are organisations that are well-funded, without woolly-minded shareholders wondering about their potential returns.

    War has delivered more than its fair share of marketable solutions that we take for granted, and has helped generate incredible wealth for large multinationals. War is a well-entrenched part of not just the human need to forcefully screw over other people, but also global business, marketing and technical development.

    The absolute global epicentre for this effect comes from the US, which has perfected the art of combining military research with science to produce highly significant technology. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) carries the can for projects that would be just too risky and expensive for normal commercialisation means.

    Since coming into being in the late fifties, DARPA has created the internet, mobile phone technology, lasers, rockets, weather satellites and is currently working on invisibility (mock them not – in theory, it is as plausible as splitting the atom). Put just these few achievements together (it has one, a lot more stuff) and it would be hard to think of any other organisation that has had much impact on so many people in so many ways.

    Fuelling this is a pretty big cheque book. In 2008, the worldwide spend on military gear was $1.4 trillion, of which the US accounted for 42 percent – a good effort for a country that represents just four percent of the global population. Little wonder it enjoys throwing its weight around so much, because the US holds a technical supremacy that money does buy. As the US marine and Desert Storm veteran Colonel James Braden once said, “I don’t ever want to be in a fair fight.”

    Along with all the blood lust comes the other prong, the continual need to save and preserve life, because the other side is not satisfied with using harsh language.

    You can track the lineage of modern day technology way back in time, and under the most dramatic of circumstances. Let’s head back to London during World War II, at the height of German air dominance, with Londoners cowering in shelters during the Blitz. Hitler is preparing to take the small island by softening it up. Infrastructure, housing, industry and people’s psychological wellbeing are all coming under nightly attack. So dire is the campaign that Churchill can only say, “Death and sorrow will be our companions on the journey, hardship our garment, constancy and valour our only shield.”

    The opportunity to fight back is limited because the Luftwaffe has faster, more agile planes, but also the element of surprise; you just can’t see the buggers coming soon enough or even see them at all in the dark skies. This, as a core issue, extends well beyond the white cliffs of Dover. Every single military mind is working hard on an early detection system, because the advantages of knowing here the enemy is at any given moment would prove to be a new massive leap ahead.

    Both the US and the British Governments are working on a new technology known as a magnetron. Without going into too much detail, it is a simple device that creates radio waves that bounce back when they hit something. The problem is the first magnetrons don’t generate much power and therefore have very limited ranges. Called in to make improvements is a small company called Raytheon, a company that just happens to employ a clever guy called Percy Spencer.

    Spencer is accredited with effectively turning the tide of the war, and the bombardment of London. He creates an improved way to produce the copper tubes for better scalability of manufacturing, to get this new technology into the aeroplanes of the Allies. He also changes the fortunes for Raytheon, which goes from a turnover of $1.5 million prior to the war to $180 million by 1945.

    The new system reverses the German fortunes and is officially called radio detection and ranging, or the more marketable ‘RADAR’. The lives radar saves are, of course, hard to count. First, Hitler has to call off the invasion, and the bombardment, seeing as the Allies now know exactly where the Germans are.

    In modern times, I doubt anyone would want to get onto a plane without radar. The downside, of course, is if you are on the other side. Especially in the case of Hiroshima, which felt the blunt edge of radar’s capabilities, when it directed the Enola Gay.

    The story for radar does not actually end there. B2B marketing efforts for radar actually failed in the early days. Raytheon struggled to get into large commercial applications such as ferries. It was Percy Spencer, again, who transformed what The New York Times described as “the mythical death-ray by giving accurate precision, so that the death stroke may be delivered” into one of the most indispensable household items ever.

    Fiddling about with a magnetron, he noticed that a chocolate bar melted in his pocket. He went a step further, and popped some popcorn. This led to what everyone with an ounce of mischief has done at some time: he blew up an egg with what he patented as ‘microwave cooking’.

    The road to consumer homes started with B2B marketing. This amazing new cooking method that heated the water molecules in food, but hardly touched moisture-less containers did not come cheaply. Standing at two metres tall, the first microwave oven didn’t sit neatly on top of a kitchen cupboard, and sold for the equivalent of $34,000 in today’s money. Large restaurants, cruise ships and hotel chains pioneered the development of the microwave oven. Potato chip manufacturers

    also played a large part, cutting down production time from days to minutes for drying freshly fried chips.

    It took until 1975 for microwave ovens to become a true consumer item. Prior to that, the core technology had existed within military applications, then commercial for 30 years before cracking consumer markets. War, what is it good for? For more than 350 million of us, it at least means warming up that coffee you forgot within an ad break.

     
  • Make all the right or wrong move, just adapt

    5:29 pm on December 21, 2011 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , ,

    On my recent trip to Singapore my experience in the loo left me with inspiration for this article. I’ll leave it to you to decide if that is a good or bad thing, but, suffice to say, I’ll take my ideas anywhere I can get them.

    Faced with a row of cubicles, I noticed that the one on the end had a special sign, ‘Mind the step, squat pan and hose inside.’ I even stuck my head in to check if it was a prank. You see, I have had experience with one of these set-ups in Malaysia. Dropping the kids off to the pool took about 30 minutes. Without too much detail, I can tell you that being faced with a hose and hole presented some challenges and it took considerable time to nut out a way to achieve what had been in times past a reasonably straightforward exercise. My wife thought I had been kidnapped and after the explanation and detailed blow-by-blow account I gave, she wished I had.

    Flash forward, and there I am in Singapore, and I see the sign, and my mind goes back to that fateful day. As I rejoice in modern plumbing and stunning porcelain, I can’t help but wonder what idiot would choose a hole and hose over a modern day stock standard bog. You sit reasonably well on the great white throne, you have paper to get the nasties, and it is all ferried off into a great void at the press of a button. Beats the crap out of a 5000-year-old technique.

    The only person who would choose such an outdated manner is certainly either a gymnast with questionable standards of hygiene or someone who simply cannot adapt to new and improved means. They will forever risk God knows what disease and huge inconvenience all because they lack the ability to adapt. And, hence, are doomed to pay the consequences.

    There are plenty of companies that have the same trait (come on, admit it – brilliant segue).

    Never has there been so much choice or range of options of industries available for the modern day B2B marketer. A guy called Eric Beinhocker from McKinsey Global Institute worked out that a city the size of New York offered over 10 billion different types of products. Each of those products needs to be manufactured, moulded, stitched or delivered in some manner. That’s a lot of machinery, IT, logistic systems, R&D, circuit boards and raw materials to feed the beast.

    But not all companies who service the industrial bases that generate these 10 billion things are winners. Companies come and go, and one of the big reasons for the latter is the failure to adapt or the failure to have a crack. With consumers gorging themselves on choice, the technology, innovation and manufacturing players are in a continual struggle to survive, just keeping up with the onslaught of changes, trends, new competitors and new competitive techniques.

    I remember Business Week ran an article, ‘Oops! Who’s excellent now?’ (I think it was in the mid-80s), where it lampooned the book, In Search of Excellence. The book had presented 43 companies that were kicking butt. In just a few years, however, 14 were in serious crisis, such as Atari.

    A little bit closer to the present, can you recall these companies? Pullman, Anaconda, International Harvester? These had all at one stage inspired the same sort of ‘wow, aren’t they big, they can’t fail – ever’ sort of gushing we have for Walmart or Microsoft. Companies such as Westinghouse Electric or American Brands existed in the exact same space as GE and P&G, and once were dominant players, yet could not ride the wave like GE or P&G.

    When you look at their corporate histories, each of the ones who fall off the perch have a clear moment in time when they cocked up and failed to adapt to a new world or simply lacked the risk-taking attitude to experience failure. In high growth industries, the attrition rate is incredibly stark. The US automotive industry started with a real bang, with over 2000 companies starting up. Today, it’s only thanks to the US taxpayer that any currently exist.

    All this banging on about failures may have you thinking that failure is a bad thing. It is for the guy who cops it in the face, but, for the overall economy, failure is terrific and vital.

    Our system is built on the bodies of the fallen, because surviving is extraordinarily difficult, but those who do take risks, do deliver either a learning outcome or the glimpse of a good new idea. And it is made more so by those who don’t or can’t adapt. Even for those who believe they are adapting, however, the future is of course still very uncertain.

    It is not enough to just be good at what you do; you have to be one of the best, and the margin for error is slim. Think of elite athletes, who all train as a hard as each other, and who all want to win, but, at the end of the day, not everyone gets onto the national team or takes gold.

    Look at the computer industry to see how this works. I can’t think of a more vibrant type of market in history. It has spawned massive wealth and generated a multitude of failures. Right from the start, with the switch from vacuum tubes to transistors to integrated circuits, each of those transitions saw the obliteration of entire industries and their companies, with the birth of new industries and companies taking their place.

    Even those who show great innovation can be whizzed off in the blink of an eye. Xerox created the first personal computer, the Alto, and it got nailed. Then ZX Spectrum, BBC micro and the Japanese MSX standard all had a go at the big time. It was IBM, of course, that picked up the candy, only to have that pinched by failing to see what Bill Gates saw, that the power of PCs was all in the operating system. IBM hasn’t made a PC for years.

    Now Microsoft has been belted, with Google winning the quest for search engines (for the time being), and cloud computing/open source software could easily wipe out a lot of Microsoft’s value overnight. Oh, and if Steve Jobs can keep himself together long enough, Apple is back and biting hard. Throughout all of this history, the failure to adapt has meant certain death for many, while the innovators have managed to inspire new directions and morph into other entities. It has been one of the most spectacular mash-ups of stealing, buying, borrowing and generating new ideas.

    What are the lessons for the B2B marketer? Well, let’s be honest. All of the aforementioned companies would have had MBAs, experts, corporate leaders and a bunch of smart people. Did any of this save their collective bacon? No, it didn’t. I’m sure they had forecasts, analysts, experts and brilliant board members, who together completely failed to see where their future was heading.

    If you take a step back, and look at the big picture, wild success is indeed built on the failure of many others. And companies fail in many different ways. They all scheme, think, plan and strategise, but the majority will fail, with a few hitting the jackpot. This presents perhaps a bit of a ‘you’re damned if you do, damned if don’t’ kind of feeling.

    But the reality is the highest death rate is the domain of those who don’t adapt. Just as Transitron stuck to transistors, and failed in every way to look in a completely different direction, which happened to be where Intel came from. Conversely, perhaps Intel needs to be nervous about new super computing power coming from bacteria, or the black crusty bits you find in cornflakes.

    Those who do have a crack and don’t fear failure, stand a far better chance of evolving with change and surviving or at least having the forward momentum to jump into another market. It’s not enough to do an Intel, by blasting open an opportunity and then cruising, because today’s rooster can become tomorrow’s feather duster.

     
  • How to make international B2B advertising work - Part 3: more solutions

    9:30 am on December 9, 2011 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , International advertising,

    This is the final instalment of a three-part series. If you missed the last two, I urge you to at least skim read what you’ve missed, in order for this one to make more sense.

    This month, we are going to look at the planning required, another challenge, plus a bit at the end dealing with confrontation – all this in the space of a few pages, so I’d better crack on with it. Last week, we finished with discussing the implementation of an international B2B advertising campaign. What follows is a summary of how to get everything going within a nine-week production cycle. You can easily follow this nine-week plan, to avoid last minute rushing and subsequent errors (see Fgure 1).

    Many things can go wrong during these nine weeks. To minimise the risks, you and your agency should operate as a team to get the job done, and have constant contact to make sure the project is on track. Work with these factors to greatly enhance the chances of not experiencing any major dramas or Mr Cock-up coming to dinner.

    ✒ All parties must receive extensive briefing – at least in writing and whenever possible, in person. The briefing includes campaign background, strategies, creative execution, production and media logistics.

    ✒ Every subsidiary must make available a dedicated main contact person, plus at least one back-up contact person.

    ✒ A specialised international media agency should be appointed to handle all negotiations, bookings, material distribution and follow-up.

    ✒ Throughout the process, an absolute respect for schedules and deadlines is a requirement. Once approved, final copy and final insertion schedules should not be changed.

    ✒ The entire production schedule cycle should be, if possible, simultaneous for all language versions of the same ad (or series of ads).

    Last week, we looked at three challenges: strategic, creative and logistics. The fourth challenge is the nasty one, where emotions can run high, and lot of huffing and puffing occurs.

    THE POLITICAL CHALLENGE

    How do you make everyone agree on a coordinated multinational campaign in the first place? And how do you resolve (a) who should do what part of the work – headquarters or subsidiaries – and (b) where the money should come from – headquarters’ budgets or local budgets (or both)?

    THE SOLUTION

    Hire a group of heavyset gentlemen (preferably of eastern European descent), equip them with various blunt instruments…

    Kidding! (Even if the temptation does exist.) This is the trickiest and most elusive obstacle facing international B2B advertising, because of the politics that will arise and frustrate all concerned. Most international companies have complex, multilayered or matrix organisations, with worldwide and regional headquarters, lines of business centres and national subsidiaries forming intricate structures. On various levels, groups and individuals have developed different agendas – overt as well as hidden – for marketing communications. A centralised approach therefore affects and, in some cases, upsets the subtle balance of power between central and local levels. In the worst case, headquarters may find subsidiaries resisting the centralised programs – even to the point of refusing to implement them nationally.

    COORDINATION VERSUS ADVERTISING NEEDS

    The main issue to be resolved is how much coordination is really appropriate. By analysing three main aspects of an international program – who owns the project, whose ad executions are accepted and who controls the process – three principal scenarios emerge: the ‘firm’, ‘flexible’ and ‘free’ coordination levels. Each is characterised as (see Figure 2)…

    But in order to determine what degree of coordination is most appropriate, it becomes necessary to look at the actual advertising needs, as defined in terms of the purpose, time span and geographical coverage of a particular campaign. Again, three main categories can be identified, which can be characterised as ‘position’, ‘product’ and ‘price’ for advertising (see Fgure 3).

    A BALANCED MODEL

    These two dimensions – coordination level and advertising need – can be combined to form a cohesive model for balancing the political tension usually associated with international advertising programs (see Fgure 4).

    In most global companies, long-term balance between central and local forces is best achieved and sustained along the diagonal line through 1, 5 and 9. This is where both global and national interest are best served, while the overall advertising resources are being utilised in the most efficient way. Even in the ‘ideal’ slots of the model, however, some basic requirements must be met in order to overcome the main political barriers.

    Position/Firm

    Make sure the campaign budget is entirely owned by headquarters and incremental to any and all existing budgets on the subsidiary level.

    Product/Flexible

    Make sure the budget incentives offered to the subsidiaries for using the headquarters’ ads are adequate. Also see to it that the selection of available headquarters’ ads is adequate.

    Price/Free

    Make sure the local ad budgets are adequate.

    FACING THE INEVITABLE CONFRONTATION

    The politics can be unbelievable when it comes to coordinating an international B2B advertising campaign – they are never to be taken lightly. The single most detrimental factor is confrontation between central and local parties. Confrontation gets going when:

    ✒ The funding issues are not clear and the subsidiaries feel they are being taxed for advertising they never asked for and can’t influence

    ✒ Local ad professionals and agencies see their own ideas being replaced and kick up a stink, and

    ✒ Headquarters attempts to police the subsidiaries by letting them know when their advertising is below standard or in breach of regulations.

    If confrontation cannot be avoided, the system will deteriorate over time. In my experience, the best results are achieved by observing the following cause and effect relationship:

    ✒ Subsidiaries will buy into a centrally coordinated advertising campaign only if they have a viable ownership of the campaign

    ✒ A sense of ownership can only come from the subsidiaries’ active involvement in the campaign hence the importance of internal communications)

    ✒ This involvement requires physical participation throughout the program development, and

    ✒ Participation starts with the national input sessions, through which the subsidiaries can help build the strategic foundation of the advertising, but they should also be invited to acknowledge the communications strategy and the creative execution, and to supervise local language adaptations and national media selections.

    Figures 1-4

     
  • How to make international B2B advertising work - Part 2: the solutions

    9:30 am on December 2, 2011 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , centralising marketing, decentralising marketing, , ,

    Last month, I shared my painful experience of dealing with a person who had nutmeg for brains, and wanted to decentralise their international B2B advertising, because ‘all business is local’. If you didn’t read it, then I can assure you that what I wrote was full of amazing insights, wit and a dash of sarcasm, and bordered on being a religious experience for the reader (yes, that was actual feedback).

    To sum up last month’s article: to decentralise your international B2B advertising to pander to vocal locals, you are more stupid than the stupidest duck in the world, and please don’t take it personally, I say that with a very respectful voice.

    This month, we are going to look at three challenges, which typically confront the smarter sapiens who want to centralise their international advertising, but, more importantly, how to deal with them.

    THE STRATEGIC CHALLENGE

    How do you develop a message that’s equally relevant to audiences in a dozen countries or more? And how do you locate and characterise those audiences in the first place?

    THE SOLUTION

    A very powerful tool for ensuring that your international advertising is strategically and tactically relevant everywhere is to conduct input sessions with your subsidiaries in multiple geographical markets – in addition to similar sessions held at headquarters. There is no better way to develop an in-depth understanding of the geographical similarities and differences between markets. The national market input should cover topics such as:

    ✒ the national business objectives

    ✒ the characteristics of major market segments – size, potential, growth, trends

    ✒ the buyer characteristics and typical buying patterns

    ✒ the main competitors and their behaviour locally

    ✒ your own market share, position and image in the main market segments

    ✒ your various opportunities and obstacles in these segments

    ✒ the role of marketing communications in your marketing mix, and

    ✒ your target audiences and how to reach them.

    In addition to these input sessions, external market intelligence may also be needed; for example, in the form of local focus group sessions, interviews with customers, trade editors, business analysts etc. When all national market input has been consolidated, the conclusions should be acknowledged by headquarters and the local organisations – before any advertising is conceived.

    THE CREATIVE CHALLENGE

    How do you make sure that your ads are as effective everywhere, and that they don’t trip over cultural differences and other peculiarities when crossing national borders?

    THE SOLUTION

    Avoiding the many potential creative pitfalls in international advertising is, more than anything, a question of the experience on the part of the agency and the creative team.

    There are, however, a number of rules of thumb – the ‘don’ts’ in international creative execution…

    Don’t Use Translators

    Use local copywriters. It is more important to capture the core message and the rhythm and tone of an ad, than to translate every single word. The goal is to make each ad appear and feel like a national original in every country where it runs. Think ‘transcreation’ rather than ‘translation’.

    Don’t trust the local copy

    Even the best copywriter can misunderstand the subject or parts of it. Also, your local subsidiaries may attempt to distort the agreed ad message in order to pursue strictly local purposes. Always make rough translations back at headquarters.

    Don’t use play words and idiomatic expressions

    Very few travel well; most become meaningless in translation.

    Don’t be funny

    More often than not, humour travels poorly.

    THE LOGISTICAL CHALLENGE

    How do you physically produce ads in X different languages that you don’t speak, and run them in Y different local media you’ve never heard of?

    THE SOLUTION

    The logistical aspects of centrally coordinated advertising are twofold – on the one hand those concerning the physical production of ads and, on the other, those relating to the media placements. Overall, the execution, production and media implementation of an international B2B advertising campaign will involve, at a minimum, the following parties…

    Your own worldwide and regional headquarters

    They make all the policy decisions concerning the campaign. They approve communications strategies and tactics. They also approve creative execution, production schedules and budgets, as well as final media plans.

    Your national subsidiaries

    They co-approve communications strategy and creative, as well as media selections and insertion schedules. They also approve local copy and final mechanicals.

    Your trusted supplier of creative communications

    This most likely will be a dedicated B2B advertising/marketing communications agency. They would be the hub for all execution and production logistics – producing all the ads, in all languages and with the responsibility for all scheduling and quality control.

    Local copywriters for all languages

    They create local copy in cooperation with national subsidiaries. They can either be affiliates of your lead agency or your own local agencies.

    The international media agency

    They formulate overall and per country media objectives, define media strategy and propose media candidates in all countries. They negotiate rates and discounts, and book actual pace. They deliver materials for all publications and are responsible for insertion and follow-up.

    Next week we are going to look at the planning and to-do lists for pulling it off – which will hopefully provide another moment of rapture…

     
  • How to make international B2B advertising work

    9:30 am on November 25, 2011 | 2 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , B2B Advertising, , , , , ,

    The Challenges

    Let’s set the record straight or, as Dr Phil puts it, ‘Let’s get real’. I’m pretty sure I have grouched on this before, but jeeze, why do people have this innate need to make simple things very hard? I mean, let’s face facts: B2B marketing and advertising is not exactly at the same difficulty level as, say, splitting an atom, repairing eyesight or making sure your socks always match after they get washed.

    Despite abundant evidence about a proven method within marketing, however, you will always have someone with a PhD in avoiding the bleeding obvious wanting to buck the laws of sheer logic. Recently, I had one of these fly in the ointment/ spanner in the works type of people barge into my fragile sanity, so you can take this as my manifesto for common sense, for not turning the simple way, into the simply nuts way of getting things done.

    As you can see from the title, this is all about international B2B advertising, something that can be difficult to execute. The bee in my bonnet, however, is based on having someone get in my face about wanting to decentralise the marketing communications for a company because ‘all business is local’.

    The debate about whether to centralise or not to centralise is about as engrossing as discussing the colour of orange juice. There is no debate. The answer is simple: centralisation is the way to go – period.

    I’ve been involved in projects where companies have had a decentralised approach and realised after many years that they have been wasting a lot of resources to achieve little. You also create small kingdoms, where people protect their turf and fight tooth and nail not  to give it up.

    Projects, which normally require one person, suddenly need to be duplicated around the world, with a staff of a dozen or so doing their own thing and, without strong leadership or direction, they do a pretty bad job at it. Before you know it, you have brands, logos, different versions of the corporate logo, different corporate profiles – in fact, different everything running amok like a pack of caffeine addicted toddlers. Trust me, centralisation is the way to go.

    The reason why decentralisation raises its ugly head is that locals get extremely vocal about the fact that their market is very special and, therefore, they should be doing their own thing, for their market, because it is so different. Well, that may be true, but only in the sense that the local market does have variations in it that do need to be accounted for.

    The key to really nailing local markets, however, rests with the sales force. They are the ones who have to work with local nuances and differences, and cope with the fact that all business is local. The actual advertising and marketing communications can be tweaked and changed, but certainly the wheel does not need to be reinvented again and again.

    Starting with a strong and well-constructed corporate profile, you have the ability to guard against small kingdoms rising, but still provide freedom for local needs. For example, in the US, doctors run around in white coats, but Australian doctors wear ‘normal’ clothing. Therefore, you would provide the local market with images that reflect the local norms. But they would still use the main templates and concepts of the marketing communications and branding.

    Coordinating International Advertising, and the upsides

    Companies will advertise in a whole range of trade magazines, which reach global  and local audiences. The best approach to this is to create centrally and implement locally. This requires leadership from the central corporate to understand how to coordinate these global campaigns.

    First, you must determine the similarities that characterise your key geographical markets. Then, based on these similarities, you develop one campaign to address all the markets. Then, you implement that campaign nationally in every market, using local languages and local media.

    Working this way is a great opportunity to generate some very powerful benefits for the company. You can save a lot of money. Simply put, you pay for creating and executing ads in one place, rather than 10 or 20.

    You can be more cost-effective – spending less on producing your message, and more on exposing it to your target audience. By paying less for creation and execution, more of your total budget becomes available for buying media space.

    The average quality of your advertising will lift worldwide. Every subsidiary, even the smallest and poorest one, can suddenly elevate itself to running ads created by the best of breed – in creativity, photography, illustrations etc – that money can buy.

    Finally, you can streamline and control your image and market position everywhere. Internationally consistent campaigns will make your company appear as one and the same across the world – not 10 or 20 different companies.

    The challenges to do so

    I have found that there are four major challenges associated with coordinating international advertising. Each of these has different relevance from company to company; however, each of them can make life very difficult for a B2B marketer. But, as with any challenge, they can be overcome by thinking and acting decisively.

    Before we look at the challenges (which will appear in next month’s edition) and how to overcome them, these are the things you have to have in place from the beginning, in order to avoid potentially a lot of mucking about:

    ✒ Have a clear vision – make sure that everyone involved (both centrally and locally) keeps clear sight of why you’re all doing what you’re doing with your advertising; e.g. why the centrally coordinated approach is better for you as a company.

    ✒ Constant attention to detail – logistically, international B2B advertising can be a very complex system; it won’t operate by itself, it requires close and constant supervision, and it tolerates very little neglect

    ✒ Tenacity! – it takes patience, diplomacy, trust and an open mind throughout the  organisation in order to build consistent expectations of your international campaign; and, to make the system work smoothly

    ✒ Management support – over time, a system for centrally coordinated international advertising can only work if senior management is convinced that it should; and will make sure it does.

    Next let’s look at how to deal with those four key challenges, in a manner that won’t have you resorting to physical violence.

     
    • Andrew Clarke 10:29 am on November 27, 2011 Permalink

      Small kingdoms – perhaps they do need violence. Really good read – look forward to reading more.

    • Matt Pepper 9:50 am on November 28, 2011 Permalink

      How much money will this post save companies? After 20 years in marketing, it is amazing to see the same old problems come around again and again.

  • Big boys' games

    9:30 am on November 18, 2011 | 2 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , ,

    Oooooh, imagine the wonders of hooking up with a big boy. You know, one of those massive multinationals, who, despite their power and size, lack the very innovation you can deliver. Thus with one order, you can raise your sales by a staggering 30 percent. The global marketplace is opened up like a ripe clam, and you have a ready-made sales force that can bolt on your brilliant solution to its established customer base.

    Sounds like a match made in heaven. Well, welcome to a common hell for the little guy.

    Perspective is critical. You have to stop looking at all the pluses from your end, and think about what your small bananas mean to the 2000-pound gorilla who already has a whole plantation. A common misconception is that big players are looking for new things to gain an advantage. The reality is, they are working at such a scale, that new things are a threat. Changes represent a massive risk of upsetting a huge apple cart, and often the margins for large players are so skinny, they make Paris Hilton look disastrously obese.

    The tantalising allure of playing with the big boys is very hard to resist. The upside seems so tremendous, that the downside is often overlooked. Often times, it is better to say to the big boys that all empowering word – ‘no’ (you can also add ‘sod off ’, if the occasion demands it).

    Let’s consider some examples of the games big boys play.

    Game One: Rope-a-dope

    Off you head to the US to meet with a large player (“Gee Mike, can you believe it! They will meet with us! This could be huge!”). Your offering is perfect, you know it is, and you are pretty damn sure that they know it is, otherwise, why would they meet you?

    The meetings go very well. Chad, Bob, Tex and other people with single syllable names nod in agreement with you, as you explain your technology, how it works with their stuff, how the market needs a thing like yours, and the terms of licensing.

    You have made a promise to yourself not to offer an exclusive. But the charm is switched on and they start to discuss the volumes, the reach, the market scope and their ability to deliver. You hold out, so they ask for a reasonable time-frame, seeing there is technical risk from their end.

    You have the agreement in place, with specified targets for them to reach, and it all feels like money in the bank. Now let’s fast-forward 12 months. You and your technical team have been tied up feeding a massive range of requests, and troubleshooting. Your big global partner has not sold a thing under the licence agreement. This game is played to tie up good IP (intellectual property) so competitors don’t have access, and so that they can also get a lower price out of you by hobbling your resources, time to market and leading you on for as long as possible to hopefully make you go broke. Then they have a fire sale on what’s left.

    That licence agreement you have is worthless; actually it’s worse than that, it can be the trigger that annihilates you. Because if you want to go legal, don’t you think they have a team of lawyers who make Jack the Ripper look like a sissy? For them legal costs are not legal costs. It is allocated as a cost for acquiring and crushing the competition. Competition to them is anything that does not bear their name.

    Game Two: Collectors

    This is not as sinister as Game One. In fact, the intentions can be very good. The problem is big players like to add stuff like collectors, just for the sake of having it. Let’s say you gain a big player who has a vast distribution network. So the thinking is, while the sales guys are talking to customers, they can sell your bit too. Well, the downside is that salesmen often stick to what they know.

    If there is any form of training required, you will struggle. Especially if you have a mismatch on the sales process required. For example, one small high-tech company had an advanced product for the irrigation industry. They snagged a big deal with one of the world’s largest suppliers of irrigation equipment. Match made in heaven, right? Wrong!

    The sales staff were used to selling millions of bits and pieces to farmers, stuff like pipes, clips, hoses etc. This highly advanced technology product required an explanation of agronomy, the setting up of test sites and a cost per unit that far exceeded what the salesmen normally sold. The result was pathetic sales volumes that nearly drove the company to the wall.

    Game Three: Gimp Maker

    A slight variation on Game Two, except you do actually get stuff sold, but at an increasing cost. This is also known as the ‘Walmart effect’.

    You gain a first order! Yay! Now you have to deliver. The first year is a blur. So are the second and third. Increasingly, the demands from your big boy grow and grow to the point where at least 30 percent of your business rests with them. Soon they start having conversations about streamlining, decreasing costs, making the partnership more ‘efficient’.

    They cheerfully send their own experts to your business to work out where savings can be made. Suggestions, if not taken, turn to threats; a 30 percent to 60 percent chunk of your business has a gun to your head. Not only that, but you have invested in systems to service them, a lot of time and resources.

    As you slowly but surely give in, their share of business grows with you, but the profits are going the other way, as you get squeezed to produce more with less, and told to get back into your box once they have ‘had their way with you’ at review time. Those first three to five years seem like a dream. Now at year 10, you can’t recognise your own company, and the activity at reviews has you walking with a gait akin to a cowboy who just rode for 24 hours straight.

    Before looking at the big boys, consider all your options, including being patient and growing slowly. Chasing that big white whale can end in tears, and it can be very hard to think like the big boys do. When you are small, sometimes you have to accept that some things are out of your league.

     
    • Mike Hancock 10:43 am on November 20, 2011 Permalink

      Wish we had read this about 24 months ago. You really have to be careful about who you connect with. We had a major distributor, and the whole deal was bad – wasted a lot of time and money for no results.

    • Sarah Morgan 9:30 pm on November 21, 2011 Permalink

      Enjoyed the article, especially the “Gimp maker” reads a lot like what you can get a Bunnings deal. How many companies have gone to the wall? Has the overall economic impact been positive or negative with small companies joining with big companies? Any research on this?

  • SMEs in big hunting fields

    10:32 am on November 11, 2011 | 2 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , ,

    It’s a cruel catch 22. You have a brilliant technology or service that will save the world, yet you have no size to play with the big boys. You know with a burning conviction that, if given the chance, you will deliver the next best thing since sliced bread… with a great dollop of marmalade.

    The problem is – you’re too small, and that seems to be the catch for everything. You lack capital, human resources, clients, reputation, exposure and credibility in the market. And, because of all that, no one wants to know you.

    What is an SME to do?

    First, you can make yourself look bigger. This often comes down to your own psychology, how you choose to think of yourself. If you think small, you will be small, look small and stay small.

    On the other hand – think big, act big, look big, become big. On your side is the internet. Even the smallest can take on gigantic proportions, thanks to various options on the internet. A website can generate exciting appeal, but don’t go using the same sort of ‘small time’ language and content, such as plastering the owner’s picture everywhere, or showing that you only have a few staff members.

    With something that is well-designed and uses images that express size, and copy language that says leadership, you can generate big impressions, to make yourself more attractive to deal with.

    A case in point was a client who needed to work with Hollywood studios. Its animation and graphics are at the high end, and used with the big name blockbusters. A key to getting Hollywood execs to take an interest was ensuring that its website, a first point of call, didn’t announce its smallness.

    I often get the question, “How do I make myself look more ‘corporate’?” I think the right question is, “How do I make myself look bigger?” When you get right down to it, a clean and simple use of design, with a strong and simple logo can do wonders for an SME wanting to look big. Or, at the very least, as attractive as possible for others to deal with.

    Restaurants are a terrific benchmark

    When you go out to eat, on a spur of the moment sort of thing, where are you more inclined to go? Let’s say you have a hankering for Indian, and you go down to the restaurant district, spot an Indian restaurant and it is empty. Next door, the Italian joint is bursting at the seams. Where will you eat?

    Often, you’ll pick the busy restaurant, especially if you’re in a foreign land. A restaurant that is empty looks and feels dangerous; you’re exposed somewhat, but also there is a huge connection at work here. Full equals safe, because, logically, that restaurant has the best to offer, that’s why everyone goes there.

    Therefore, empty equals danger, because no one is there.

    As a company you need to do the same. You need to fill seats as it were, by ensuring that the company has all the appearance of being highly popular, busy, with a bustling trade. Otherwise others will perceive you as a threat, dangerous even.

    You achieve this by having customer case studies on your website, and by updating your website at least twice a year. Make sure you are listed in business directories, sponsor industry events, get involved with industry events and create events that you sponsor. And there is a key difference here!

    Many go down the path of putting on a customer event, where they hold centre stage. Well, guess what – customers do not care about you, OK? Customers care about themselves, so cater for that. Make an event that educates or inspires them, and then sponsor it, along with others. So the star of the show is the concept or theme you select, and your brand is there, associated with success.

    The fact is: winners work with winners. And you have to look at what resources you have available to nurture that human need. Ever heard of guilty by association? Well, that can be a very positive thing. By associating yourself with winners and success, the ‘natural’ conclusion people will draw is: your brand is a winner.

    There are a number of ways to do this.

    First, get the best people you can, and when you get them, pay them well. Also, if you are small, attract the best advisory board you can and, if needed, offer equity in exchange for them helping you reach milestones. If you are slightly larger and can look at a board, again, get the best you can.

    Take a good look at your industry, and what the potential is. It’s funny that many SMEs are fighting tooth and nail, holding on to all their cards for dear life, not sharing anything with anyone, when the reality is, there is plenty of business for everyone.

    For example, the global water industry is valued at a trillion dollars. That’s a fair sized market. So, if you are in that industry, and are small, why not look at who you can collaborate with, even those you think of as competitors? Alone, you’ll struggle to really crack it, but with strong partners, you multiply your opportunities and also can deliver a bigger and more valued package.

    The other thing that hurts is lack of money. Large corporations and government, as a matter of policy, often won’t consider you if you don’t have enough capital. The simple reason is if you go broke, what do they do? Or, if you make a mess, who will pay for the clean-up?

    Again, here is where you need to consider partnerships, or get a big sponsor to back you. Sometimes, you need to bite the bullet and understand that you won’t get there, unless it is holding hands with a giant.

    It worked for Bill Gates, and he came from a garage.

     
    • James 7:51 pm on November 11, 2011 Permalink

      Terrific reality check. But to get SME’s to work together is not easy – different agendas – different personalities of the founders.

    • Cristina 8:20 pm on November 11, 2011 Permalink

      Really enjoyed your article. Running a small innovative business myself, I have experienced the struggle to grow because the lack of resources. There are no easy solutions, but this article strengthened my confidence that it is possible.

  • Intelligent design for B2B brands

    4:39 pm on April 24, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,

    I’m a really lucky guy. My wife you see has terrific taste, perhaps not with whom he chose to mate with, but when it comes to fashion, interior design and other girly stuff, she’s brilliant. My good fortune is not having to think about where things go, or what to buy, or even how to dress myself. Subsequently, our home earns praise (was once even featured in Country Collections), and my surroundings are in a word – cosy. And I didn’t have to spend a nano-second of fretting about things. Oh, and she’s “Swedish.” Ha!

    Left to my own devices, the garden would look like a cross between the Sahara and a Shetland pony bordello. I would leave the house clothed in nothing more than a tastefully placed banana peel, if there were not laws against such things. I enthusiastically admit I don’t have much in the way of “taste” (except in who I chose to mate with!), so I thank my lucky stars that I have someone around who knows all that “taste” stuff, and I get the benefits.

    But I can recognise good taste, I can spot good or bad design from a mile away. And in the world of B2B branding, more often than not, you see examples of third world style, trying to sell new world technology. The real issue is, those who live with poor corporate design can’t recognise the disaster they preside over, and don’t know how to fix it or even if they should.

    To hang things onto “taste” is a risky business, because you avoid the real issues that good design must address with B2B branding. Branding should never be a matter of taste; it has to be a matter of function. Before a truckload of designers out there prepare to Photoshop my image with a dwarf and a cheese platter for global publication – let me explain.

    If you begin B2B design for an industrial brand or what is better known as a corporate profile, with the position of what “I like” or “he likes” you open a Pandora box of nonsense. Personal taste is completely irrelevant, and creating design assets for a technology or innovation based company with preferred styles, means you are off course before you have taken a step.

    You know you have reached this point when you start-up “fashion shows” to decide what look and feel you want. When your decision-making about design is based upon gaining a lolly shop of choices, to pick and choose as you would a shirt, based upon personal taste, you have crossed the bridge of silliness and heading the town of “baseless ideas.” You’re asking for big trouble when you get a committee together, to dissect, poke holes in and garnish opinion in the hope of gaining “buy-in”, when what you really opening up is an expensive and time consuming exercise in raising more doubt than making a decision to benefit the business. As far as decision making goes, you need a benevolent dictator, who can take accountability for the brand.

    There are a number of crucial questions you have to raise. Perhaps most important is, “sod my own preferences, what does the customer want?” And when looking for the answer, throw into the mix these questions, “how does this compare to the competition? Do we have a brand strategy to follow? How can we increase the perceived value of the brand? And lastly, “Are we determined to stick with our decision for design, the look and feel of the company to become a true corporate profile?”

    You also have to give thought to the value of great design. B2B brands create no value when the look and feel of the company is not nurtured. The business case for caring about your corporate profile is that you’ll attract the right type of customer, employee, investor, channel partner and generate the right type of perception for the business. The value of this varies greatly between companies and industries. But even if you can’t see the immediate value, don’t you want to cover all your bases and do all things well?

    When you establish a corporate profile it must be strong enough to maintain the core value of the brand, but flexible enough for ideas to flourish. So therefore you can conceptualize centrally and implement locally through your normal sales channels.

    There are a few milestones that I strongly recommend are followed, in order to make the process as easy and pain free as possible. You’ll need to have people with skills and understanding of B2B branding strategy, design and creative ideas. So therefore briefing is vital – better the brief, less the pain if those you have to help are competent.

    For the sake of the exercise I’ll assume that you have a brand strategy, and are ready to put some skin onto a sound structure. What follows are the typical steps to take, so that you gain a quality result, without wanting to blow your brains or anyone else’s brains out.

    Step 1 – Mood Board
    A mood board is a first interpretation of the brand and brief, using colours, visual and text. It’s an exercise that establishes that everyone is on the same page.

    Typically a mood board is just one A3 page, presenting the key assets required for building a corporate profile. This allows everyone to agree to a “mood” or a taste of what is to come. For example, you would have an image, and ask the question, “Does this style of image suit the brand?” If so, then when it comes to actually sourcing images, this will be the benchmark.

    You would have a pallet of colours, and again, are these the right combination of colours? Same with fonts and so forth. Once established and agreed to, then you want to see how to use these assets.

    Step 2 – Style guide
    A.K.A – Corporate visual identity, program, brand manual etc. Whatever the tag – the result is the same, to establish rules for branding and examples of real-life, so that everyone knows the rules, how to use and benefit by them.

    There are priorities that need to be addressed, because you must be draconian in some areas and loose as a goose in others. The point is to make sure that brand core values are implemented, but that there is freedom to enjoy strong creativity, that matches the needs for the brand. So the components of a style guide are:
    Logo: Its dimensions, colours, use and variations (if any). This is then set in stone. No messing about!

    Fonts: These are very important. Strong brands can be recognised just by a font. And different fonts have very different personalities, such as,

    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Verdana)
    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Palatino)
    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Baskerville)
    GNM Engineering – brilliant ideas (Bank Gothic)

    Colours: Select a range of colours and again, stick with them. It might be one or it might be 5. But it is vital to stay with a primary colour/s and if desired some supporting colours. You need to be aware of how these colours translate with PMS, RGB, Web and other production methods such as signage. It can be difficult to get exact matches for different production methods.
    Images: An image library is a worthwhile pursuit, to generate around 50 or so images that can then be used for internal and external communications. However, here you can be a bit lax, because you would not want to prevent a great idea going ahead, just because you need to use an image sourced elsewhere. Also the way you present diagrams, graphs and other illustrations should follow a set format.
    Creative concept: Great brands often have a great idea pushing them along. Creative concepts can change and evolve over time, but each one must be working to the brand strategy. Within your style guide, present what your creative concept is and the assets that go with it.
    Copy style: When you articulate the company and write about the company, what sort of copy style is to be used? I like to see style guides authored in the way that will reflect the real world use of language.
    Application to corporate communications: Present the templates for business cards, letterheads, signage, email signatures and so forth.
    Application to marketing communication campaigns: What will an advert look like, or an exhibition, website, Direct mail and so forth. This is not to say that all advertising forever and a day, must look like this – but take this moment to present some inspiration!

    Once you have established a corporate profile, you must make it someone’s responsibility to police it, and be the authority on what is and isn’t allowed. This person must have accountability and authority to make sure that the brand is built, and built well.

    And leaves personal taste out of it.

    Cheers,

    Kimon

     
  • Hey buddy, how much for the brand?

    9:59 am on April 4, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , ,

    Damn good question! Exactly how much can you sell a brand that represents technology, innovation or engineering for? In the world of B2B, there are untold riches within a small accounting term called “Goodwill.”

    Goodwill is something that kicks into gear when a company is sold, and shareholders want money not just for assets and profit performance but also anything intangible (all the stuff not nailed down). This is the very nature of goodwill and normally is applied to the perceived loyalty of a company’s customers. It is with this loyalty, that the link and case can be made for selling the brand as you would with any other asset.

    A B2B brand is built using a variety of different methods, media, creative ideas and customer experiences. Each of these things on their own carries different values and contributes in different ways. When used together and orchestrated, you can generate significant value in monetary terms for the brand to be valued as an asset.

    Companies, products or services that are enhanced beyond functional purposes, with a brand built and managed correctly will generate an experience and add a layer of desire. It is this layer of desire that is the reason why customers are prepared to pay a premium for one industrial brand over another.

    For those creating, managing and living with B2B brands, the key question is, “if the business was placed on the open market, how much would someone pay for the logo, the name, the trademarks and everything else you have used to build the brand?”

    Managing directors tend to go a bit green when they think of this because it hits them that during years of existence they have placed little emphasis on the branding. Rather they have been serving a market, and not building anything extra into the customer relationship, that can eventually be a valuable asset and sold.

    All that time and opportunity has been squandered, because the business could be swallowed up, and no-one would care. Certainly the buyer won’t pay for something that has no market value. It is indeed a sobering thought.

    Look at it from a buyer’s perspective

    Imagine you are the head of a Venture Capital firm and decide that you want to buy IBM, GE, Siemens or CISCO. Having done all the due diligence would you just walk away from the brand? Hardly! You’d dramatically devalue the purchase, and future viability of the company to generate a handsome return, if you didn’t have the right to use the brand.

    Now think about your company, and give serious consideration to how desperate would a buyer be to use your brand, and therefore multiply the EBIT evaluation, to secure the rights to the brand.

    Goodwill extends beyond loyalty to include other intangibles, which enable a company to earn super profits, you know – the fun type allowing earnings over and above what could be expected from tangible assets.

    By accepting the concept of goodwill as an asset is to confirm that here is something an organisation controls to provide future benefits.  And if goodwill can be sold with the company, then as an asset, goodwill can be assessed at any time.

    Typical intangible assets can include people (key staff), special company procedures (ISO 9000 or other quality systems), distribution agreements (which keep the product in and the competition out) and patents (which give a product protection over a finite number of years).

    All these intangible assets have a value. Sadly, what is often missing is the brand because little is understood about the subject in engineering, science, technology and innovation companies – it is not core business.  As you are about to discover, a lot of money has been missed out on by B2B organsations.

    Capitalising brands – lessons learned

    Those smarty-pants in the B2C world caught on how to generate significant wealth for companies by capitalising their brands. Essentially this means that they had separate valuations made for their brands. This enabled these brands to be taken out of goodwill and labeled as an identifiable asset on the balance sheet. The key to this was demonstrating on the balance sheet the performance of brands, in terms of sales, market penetration, and ability to command a higher price than competitors.

    This approach made it easy to identify performing brands, and then treat them as something that could be removed from the company and sold separately to a new owner, who in turn would have a core component for a profitable business.

    Grand Metropolitan was one of the first companies to recognize this potential in 1988. They arrived at an assessment totaling an eye popping £565 million for their brands, such as Smirnoff Vodka, which it had acquired.

    Then in November of that same year Rank Hovis McDougall capitalised its internally created brands, Bisto, Hovis and Mr Kipling, placing a value on them of £678 million.  Here is the fun part. The company’s net assets at the time were valued at only £300 million.

    Now out of the world of breakfast cereals and shampoo, what about B2B? It really is not difficult to understand that if you spend the resources to create ownership of a perception, which directly leads to strengthening the business performance of the company, that perception (brand!) is worth something.

    Conversely, not investing will mean you gain nothing.

     
    • Anton Baron 10:05 am on April 4, 2010 Permalink

      Very well written. With permission I want to use this in my local market (France). The bean counters and marketers alike overlook the value of a brand. Which is odd really when there is abundant evidence from many other B2B brands, which do demonstrate value by helping to make sales easier. Have not come across an article like this before where it is all neatly summed up. Great!

  • Who has the keys to the B2B marketing green machine?

    2:54 pm on March 28, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , ,

    Currently debate rages about carbon tax, carbon emission schemes, capture and storage and what it all means to Australia. Ignorant old farts like Wilson Tuckey (who won’t be around in 20 years) find it easy to score cheap points on a completely redundant level, by arguing about issues that are not issues at all.

    In December we had COP 15 – the climate change showdown for global leaders in Copenhagen. Mixing in with ladies who smoke cheap cigars in cafes, the world will attempt to draw a line in the sand about the cost of carbon, and where it will apply. If you are worried that you are more confused about carbon emissions than a hormone imbalanced teen, then don’t be. Fact is corporate Australia has really yet to get a grasp on the issues, evidenced by how many lack governance at a board level on the issues. Trust me, this will rapidly gain massive importance.

    From the outset, I want to declare I am apolitical, so the above shot at Wilson Tuckey has nothing to do with being in a different political camp. You have to take it in the true context, people like him are ignorant old farts, and it serves them a good purpose. Ask Wilson; he’s been a star at this for over 40 years. The fact is I have zero political alliance. I cheer for the guy who will give me the most and not destroy too many things in the process.

    Being apolitical, means you suffer double the frustration in situations such as climate change. At least if you had an alliance, you don’t tend to see all the dumb things that your team does. We who drink apathy like fine wine have an average life expectancy of 5, due to hardened arteries, blood pressure and continually getting bowled over by stupidity, which can graze the knees and cause infections.

    Most frustrating of all is the off topic strategy with politicians raising the spectre of job loses, and economic hardship, and that now is not the time to make economic changes to account for carbon. It’s off topic, because it simply does not need to be discussed. The facts are in – we the world are moving to a carbon economy. Australia – are you ready or not?

    For anyone who has been to central Queensland, you’ll see that the coal industry has really cashed in. The infrastructure is incredible; money is not an object for these guys with export value topping $25 billion, that’s 30% of our trade. As business owners, they have to determine how their business will move ahead, based upon the prevailing conditions, just like the rest of us.

    The current public debate is focused on how to protect this big daddy from carbon pricing. Forgetting that it actually has nothing to do with us the producer, it’s our customers who will determine the future for coal exports. Japan has announced that they will reduce greenhouse emissions by at least 50% by 2050. That’s important to know, because Japan buys nearly 50% of our coal. Moving ahead, the carbon price for coal in Australia can be anything, because for Japan, our coal will be more than worthless, it will be jolly expensive for them. The same goes for the EU, who wants even tougher cuts, between 60 to 80% by 2050. They buy $3 billion worth of exports, but that will decrease rapidly as they (and Japan) go nuke, gas, renewable. I don’t know why everyone is worried about China, they account for just 2% of our coal exports.

    In short, by way of illustration, our customers have discovered that drinking beer makes them fat, and are switching to bottled water. Meanwhile we bicker about how to protect beer, and not think about how to make the best-bottled water possible.

    What does this have to do with B2B marketing? Well the most alarming aspect is wasting time about discussing the coal industry, and not putting into place the needed things to supercharge our economy with the green machine as the world makes carbon “da bomb.” I’m talking about things such as realistic pricing for carbon, water and recycling, to generate commercial grounds for home-grown technology and innovation to flourish.

    For anyone who has to market cleantech or water solutions, it is an uphill battle due to the fact that in Australia we are:

    1. Very stupid
    2. See point 1

    Compare our attitudes, forward thinking, policymaking and enlightenment, to other parts of the world, we look like the drunken Uncle at a wedding who staggers into the party at inappropriate times. The debate about coal illustrates this in all its horrific detail.

    Take for instance water. What would a smart country do, if they continually suffered from drought, had encouraged water crazy industries like dairy and had no clue about the predictability of weather? Would they price water so low that the need to change rampant and wasteful consumption had no commercial grounds?

    There exists right here, so many innovative means to conserve, save, use, store, create and recycle water, you would literally drown. But locally these technologies don’t get a shake, because the commercial grounds don’t exist. Why spend $20,000 to save $2,000 worth of water? It’s only the truly innovative customers who want to do the right thing, which takes this type of offer up, because it’s not the cost, it’s the volume of water they care about. Unfortunately there are not many of these customers about. If the price of water was raised to realistic levels, a lot of innovation would be unleashed.

    We also have the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) which allows just about anything to be thrown down the drain, save plutonium tainted soap. Again if we have tougher regulations, then recycling innovation would be unleashed.

    So the discussion about carbon must focus upon how to embrace this new economy, this new technology revolution. Jobs will get created in new and more advanced sectors then digging great big holes. We need to establish a carbon framework now and begin to live with it, in order to meet the immense global demand for cleantech.

    It’s a tactic that Google has employed, recognising that they are currently exposed to carbon pricing due to their energy hungry data centres. While they and no-one else knows exactly what the cost will be, one of the world’s most innovative companies has taken upon itself to begin living with carbon taxes.

    The opportunity is for countries that have reliable, renewable and low carbon emission means of generating energy to court the big boys such as Google to set-up shop. Anyone who is still tied to coal and other hydrocarbons will wind-up like the guy who’s pants are too short, socks too white and has a stain mark near the crotch. No one will want to be their friend.

    Australia does have a healthy beginning for home-grown cleantech and water solutions. We need to have more than just a grant program. We need to have the environment in which they can market – by leading the way with carbon emissions trading and tax, raise the price of water and have a tougher EPA.

    The green machine exists. It is ready to play a role in a new global boom. Has anyone seen the keys?

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
esc
cancel