Archive | Marketing models RSS feed for this section

Who are you and why?

10 Aug

Who do you believe in? The church? Your teacher? Your partner? Your shrink? The internet? The new God on the block is the limbic system. A part of your brain controls some very essential behaviors: finding food, self-preservation, lust, laughter. Neuroscientists and marketing people love the limbic system.
Up to 95 percent of all our purchases are supposedly linked to some action going on in the limbic system. The decision to buy a Stella instead of a Carlsberg is linked to the concentration of cortisol, dopamin and testosteron in our brain.
Based on research on the limbic system the wise guys from Nymphenburg, a marketing company, identified seven new archetypes: 1: adventurer (3 % of the population), 2: performer (6 %), 3: disziplined (10 %), 4: conservative (24 %), 5: harmonizer (32 %), 6: connoisseur (13 %), 7: hedonist (11 %).
Take a look at the model and ask yourselves: where am I?

Change hurts

14 Sep

Our little graph shows the process of change.
Nothing changes without movement. Movement causes friction. Friction causes pain. So no real change will take place if we don’t accept any pain as part of the change-process. This is true for large scale transformation of societies, and it’s true for personal development. So the question is not: how to change. The question is: Are you willing to take some pain?
Typically the announce of a new, say, Head of Marketing leads to lots of movement (hiring new ad agency, re-positioning etc), it stirs a lot of water, but you won’t expect a lot of pain. And therefore: also no real change. On the other end: endless meetings lead to a lot of pain but often no movement, because no one is willing to make a decision.

Marketing Strategy

12 Mar
Abell D.F. 1980    

Abell D.F. 1980

We don’t know if this works in real life but it helps when you turn vague ideas into business ideas to check them out in a real market. Here some examples, seen from our perspective (correct us, if we are wrong, it’s quite difficult to come up with comparable examples).

  1. One product in one market: segment concentration (e.g. most of the “we make exactly these screws for exactly this machine-companies”)
  2. One product in different markets: specialized in a certain product (e.g. Nintendo, not any longer for kids but for 30+ doing exercise or with using it in the kitchen as e-recipe-book)
  3. Several products in one market: specialized in a certain market (e.g. Apple pods, ipod classic, ipod touch, ipod nano)
  4. Several products in several markets: selective specialized (e.g. swiss health insurance company Helsana with its spin-offs Areosan, SANSAN, progrès, etc)
  5. Market coverage (e.g. copyright societies lika GEMA, SUISA)

Restart From Scratch

2 Mar

Starting from scratch to be innovative?

Starting from scratch to be innovative?

We found this model at a lecture by Martin Kupp, the brilliant member of the faculty of the EMST (European School of Management and Technology). Don’t be put off by the complexity of the model’s layout. It works! Likes this: Most consumers expect more and more from technic devices. That’s why industries incrementally improve products like computers. What does that mean: they use a lot of research and development but the improvements are marginally. That’s expensive. Low profit margin. Small room for innovations. So sometimes you have to do something different to find something different. When Apple introduced the Apple II, it’s perfomance was ridiculously bad compared to IBM-Computers. Apple II-performance was lower than what consumer expected. Why did they still do it? They could grow easily from there on: because it is easier to grow from 0 to 10 than from 10 to 11.

Hype cycle

14 Nov


(click on pic to enlarge…a little bit)

Thanks, dear reader Jens Woinowski, indeed it would have been a good idea to combine The Chasm with The Gartner Hype Cycle as one of 50 topmodels in our book. Anyway now you have it online and you can comment on it. 
The hype cycle tries to predict the beginning of corporate marketability of technological innovations. Maybe it also predicts the time you gonna marry – but that’s our interpretation. The model cuts a new technology roughly into five periods in its life cycle (altough real time is phased differently and individually):

  1.  Technology Trigger — the procuct is on the market and you hear the buzz all over the place. Kind of a breaktrough in visibility. Comes along with: „Have you checked this out? It’s great!“
  2. Peak of Inflated Expectations — The hype is on top, but more and more people uncover that the product or services is just half-baked. Comes along with: „It’s great, but…!“
  3. Trough of Disillusionment — the technology fails to meet expectation and becomes boring for early adaptors. There’s hardly any press about it, but still, people use it. Comes along with: „It would be great, but they should change this and that!“
  4. Slope of Enlightenment — press stopped covering the technology, but some businesses take time to experiment with it or they invest in it. The feature becomes more practical. Maybe 2.0 version. Comes along with: „I use it, but in another way.“
  5. Plateau of Productivity — now it’s a real benefit for the users. The technlogoy is accepted and maybe even broadly spread (within it’s purpose to serve). Comes along with: „I knew it!“

Our little drawing shows parts of the the 2008 issue (german). Compared to 2006 (german), Web 2.0 went from “peak” to “disillusionment” – just as the market researchers of Gartner predicted.