Early in my career, I supported the computers that ran a machine shop factory. The factory was a large, open room filled with machinery of every sort designed to form, cut and polish metal fixtures. I remember things about that factory. One memory is of the smell of machine oil. Another memory was of the cleanliness of the aisles between the production machines. The primary memory, however, was of the sound. When the factory was running (most of the time), there were all kinds of sounds. Drills, cutters, polishers and packaging machines were operating at the same time. Though it was possible to carry on a conversation in the factory, it was not the best place to hear or communicate important messages. Of course, overhearing conversations was just about impossible.

There were ways to get around all of this noise.

• You could take advantage of the times that the factory shut down. That removed all of the background noise. Unfortunately (if your goal was talking instead of production), this happened very infrequently.
• If you knew exactly who to talk to, you could move close to them and speak loudly. If you were the listener, the right strategy was to focus on the speaker’s words while ignoring the barrage of other sounds.
• If you wanted to “overhear” something, then the only recourse was to become involved in the conversation. That, of course, depended on the acquiescence of the other participants. Thus, you were unlikely to hear much of value accidently.

Conversely, some approaches would only make the problem worse.

• You would not want a goal of hearing everything that was being said in the factory. That would simply complicate the problem of separating an important conversation from the background machine noise. Lack of focus was a sure way to hear nothing of value.
• You would never want to amplify the sounds in the factory. Though this might increase the volume of the speaker’s voice, it would also increase the sounds from the machinery.
• You would not want to encourage people to whisper. Obviously, this made it harder to hear since the level of noise would overwhelm the conversation

Both of these lists could go on and on. They illustrate the common problem that we have of separating the important from the unimportant. The difficulty arises because every important communication is surrounded by background (i.e., contextually unimportant) noise. The world (much like the factory) is full of noise. What we want to hear is typically competing with so much that is unimportant (or less important). Furthermore, sometimes we want to “overhear” or discern things not originally meant for us. The background noise makes that task especially hard.

Thus, we get to the fundamental task in competitive intelligence. That is, targeting the signals that we desire to hear, decreasing the “volume” of the background noise and, finally, interpreting the important signals correctly.

Read the rest of this entry

Competitive Intelligence, Early Warning, Strategy Effectiveness

The archetypical strategy story goes something like this …

“A small gathering of senior leaders is convened at a secluded site. The atmosphere is serious. An important decision is needed. Everyone there knows the competitors. They are attacking. Some of their attacks have been beaten back. As for the others, well, that is why the meeting is so urgent. The leader stands to speak. We must counterattack. Our stockholders and employees depend on our decisions. The organization must be aligned around a common strategy. What is that strategy to be? So many actions, priorities and resources must be congruent with it. It is time to act. Here is what we are going to do.”

When this scenario (or one like it) occurs, some days or weeks later various parts of the organization get their new assignments. Sales must target new customers. Perhaps their incentive programs are adjusted to reflect the new priorities. Marketing must adapt the product line messages to feature new attributes of the augmented product. Engineering must invest in different technologies to support new product features. Meanwhile, competitive intelligence gets new marching orders to track and report on new competitors and markets.

This is top-down strategy development. Sometimes this works spectacularly well.

Read the rest of this entry

business strategy, Competitive Intelligence, Early Warning

One hundred and twenty years ago the scene in the American West would have been familiar. The scorching air would have been thick and dusty. The only street through the town of rickety boarded buildings would be crowded with cowboys and their horses. The one refuge from the oppressive conditions was the local saloon. And that was where you found all manner of folks. The tired cowhands, the frontier entertainers and the bad guys would be there. Everyone knew that the bad guys always came to the saloon looking for trouble. It was not a place for the unprepared or naïve because they were easily recognized and exploited. Winning for the bad guys was dominating the saloon.

Still, there weren’t many options for places to go. It was a given that sooner or later the good guys went there too.

So you might imagine going there with a friend. Ah, your friend. The paragon of truth and justice. A cowboy that was strong and good. He represented all that right about the world and that is exactly what made him a target. Others (the bad guys) could not prosper when he was there and they knew it.

As a friend, how would you prepare him for the saloon so that he could walk out alive?

There are 5 things that you might do.

Read the rest of this entry

business strategy, Competitive Intelligence, Early Warning, senior management

The difference between where we are and someone else is at the moment is a “gap”. The gap could be positive (that is, we are in a better position) or negative (our position is worse). In competitive intelligence, we study gaps (especially the negative ones) because we want to know and explain what our competitors are doing to create a significant advantage for themselves.

(See a video presentation on this topic by clicking here.)

So, we study and communicate the gaps and then we are done?

Nope. Identifying the known gaps (though not necessarily easy) is only the first step in a robust gap analysis process. Here are the 5 steps to comprehensively think through gaps, to create simple tracking methods and to ultimately get to the actions that will close the gaps.

1. Start with the “known” gaps.

“Known” gaps are the ones for which there is general agreement about their identity and significance. For instance, we may know that competitor X is about to introduce their new product which is 20% faster than any product that we have. Since there has been a press announcement, live demonstrations which seem to confirm the claims and an established track record for the competitor, we can firmly believe that the product and the claims for it are real. Furthermore, we know that our customers highly value performance. Hence, this is a gap that is well characterized and is significant to our competitive position.

To assemble a starting list of known gaps, solicit input from the management, business development, marketing and sales teams. For each gap that they identify, make sure that it is specific and well described, that the impact is estimated and each competitor which is better is noted.

There will be some of these gaps which cannot be fully described. These are the “potential” gaps.

2. Create a backlog of “potential” gaps.

“Potential” gaps do not meet the full criteria to be considered as known gaps. There may be information missing about the exact nature of the gap or its impact. Using the preceding example, if we hear that our competitor is introducing a “faster” product sometime in the future, we might conclude that this could be significant to us. However, it could make a large difference if it is 10% faster in three years or 50% faster in six months. Without more information, it is also very difficult to assess the potential significance of the gap. Still, knowing the competitor well may lead us to believe that “where there is smoke, there is fire.” The proper action is to keep track of the potential gap and to assign someone (e.g., the competitive intelligence function) to collect information about it. Then, when the uncertainty threshold is crossed and the evidence is more substantial, the potential gap can be escalated to a known gap status.

How do we look even further back in time to find things that lead to the potential gaps?

3. Make a list of triggers which may lead to gaps.

Triggers are not gaps. Instead, they are events, activities, announcements and such that may signal gaps in the future. Why are they important? They are important because companies rarely operate in a vacuum. Public companies, especially, signal much of what they plan to do through all types of disclosures. If we are attuned to these disclosures, we get hints of future strategic directions. Continuing the faster product example, it is entirely possible that the competitor had made patent filings years before the product was announced. They may have purchased the assets of another company with specific technology competencies. They may be actively making venture investments in small companies with complementary products. In an ongoing business, all of these types of triggers are predictable. A trigger list can serve to organize the monitoring of such triggers. Then, when several of them have “tripped”, it may be reasonable to investigate whether or not a competitive gap is imminent.

Triggers are often driven by broader forces in the market.

4. List the key trends which affect the market.

It starts to get a little fuzzier in this category. Nevertheless, tracking demographic, technology, product, legal and other areas is important. In technology, the broad trends of things getting smaller, faster, cheaper and more communicative is not a revelation to most people. More recently, the trends toward more social media, lowering energy consumption, increasing recycling features and more emerging market support are becoming important. The key to trend monitoring to find the ones that most affect customers (and, therefore, their buying decisions). After an important trend is identified, then it is critical to understand the rate at which the trend is being responded to in the market. The goal is to eventually identify the triggers (see step 3) which more concretely describe when and how competitors might gain some advantage.

How do we maintain all of this information? Simple. Create four spreadsheets and track the known gaps, potential gaps, triggers and trends. Last, establish action plans.

5. Assign actions for all areas.

Known Gaps

Assign each one to a person that must define and execute an action plan to close the gap. This usually must be a manager with sufficient authority and ability to work across organizations because all know gaps must be “significant.” Put another way, these are hard problems to solve but their resolution is critical to a company’s competitive position.

Potential Gaps

Assign these to the competitive intelligence function and require a periodic report to a responsible manager. The goal is to actively determine whether to demote the gap if it is insignificant or to escalate it when it can be fully characterized. The escalation process must be a part of a regular review cycle or it could become ineffective due to its irregular or inconsistent use.

Triggers

Assign these to the outward facing functions of your organization. These may be the business development or product marketing teams. Their responsibility is to look for the specific trigger information and feed it back to a coordinating competitive intelligence function. The CI team then coordinates the evaluation of the triggers and decides when a potential gap has been identified.

Trends

Assign these to the market research team and the technology team. Their mission is to help the organization understand when a trend accelerates to the point where there are specific, compelling market responses occurring. Once the responses are being seen, then triggers are identified for each competitor to understand how they intend to act.

Gap analysis can be a straightforward, organization energizing and fruitful process. The keys are to discriminate the different types of information, assign the responsibilities correctly for each and establish a process of regular review with management.

A more complete treatment of Gap Analysis can be found at http://tinyurl.com/yk8fcq6 or on my website at http://www.jthawes.com.

business strategy, CI techniques, Competitive Intelligence, Early Warning, future focus, gap analysis, management, strategy, Strategy Effectiveness