Three Benefits of Win Loss You Can’t Ignore – Analytics & Strategy (1 of 3)

There are few revenue-generating competitive intelligence tools more valuable than Win Loss. If done correctly, a Win Loss exercise provides insight into competitive strengths/weaknesses, marketplace innovations, loyalty factors and steps to improving win rates. From a tactical standpoint, Win Loss derived intelligence can show steps to increase a company’s competitive positioning right now.

I know that today’s post will be a pretty strong commercial, but Primary Intelligence has developed sophisticated predictive analytics that crate an unparalleled strategic view. Let me show you what I’m talking about.

Below, you will see an example of a Strength/Weakness evaluation based on data from recent sales opportunities, taken from a win loss study of 50-60 opportunities. Half of the data come from new business that was won and the other 50% come from opportunities that were lost to competitors:


The data are sorted from biggest negative competitive gap (weakness) at the top to the biggest positive competitive gap (strength) at the bottom. The scores are based on a 1-10 scale where 1 is Poor and 10 is excellent.

If you were to make strategic changes in your company based on the data in this table, you would probably look at the weaknesses and evaluate the most effective ways to close the competitive gap.

But, would this make a difference? What would happen if you were to increase your performance in Overall Solution Cost or Understanding Needs by ten percent? (A 10% improvement would mean that you increase your score of 8.1 to 9.1) How much would your win rate increase? Would making improvements in your weaknesses correlate with a stronger competitive preference, or would you be pulling the wrong levers and pouring time and money down the drain?

Traditional intelligence looks at Strengths and Weaknesses
• Should you “fix” weaknesses or accentuate strengths?
• Strength/Weaknesses don’t always correlate with decision making.
• Where is your opportunity to increase win rates and market share?

Can you rely on today’s strength and weakness assessments to point your company to the strongest positioning tomorrow? Does a measurement of strengths and weaknesses provide the foresight to recommend company-changing shifts? Where is the crystal ball that will show the actual gains that might be made on performance changes in your company, product and sales efforts?

Primary Intelligence does this all the time. To show your company where the real opportunities exist, we:

1. Interview recent wins and losses where your company competed head-to-head with specific competitors.
2. Measure your competitive performance in 20-30 specific decision influencers
3. Determine strengths and weaknesses (Not the gap score in the table below. Positive gaps indicate weaknesses. Negative gaps indicate strengths)
4. Use predictive analytics to determine the influencers that, it improved, would result in the greatest increases in market share. (Impact column, explained below)

Impact identifies your expected improvement in market share. For instance, in the chart above (a real-world example taken from one of our clients), if you were to improve your company’s performance in Product Knowledge by one point (In other words, if you improved the 7.7 rating to an 8.7), you would expect your win rate and market share to increase by the impact score of 5.7% (at the 90% confidence level).

And, Product Knowledge is already a competitive strength. Overall, you outperform the competition by 5% in this area. The key may be to make this competitive advantage more consistent throughout the company.

In other words, there are influencers that would provide 2x, 3x and 4x the results of others if improvement were made in those specific areas. This could result in gains of millions or billions of unexpected dollars, based on some potentially simple improvements in the right areas.

This approach takes a lot of the guesswork out of the equation. No espionage required. And, yet, the company makes the biggest gains in increasing its client base.

Effective Competitive Intelligence – Misunderstanding of Your Efforts

In my last post, I started talking again about effective competitive intelligence. Again, my definition of effectiveness is:

– Strengthen your company’s position
• How is our value proposition perceived?
• What is the competition doing?
• Which industry-wide best practices will truly apply?
– Discover new markets
• What is possible with new technologies?
• Where should we steer the company?
– Develop new products/services/solutions
• What problems do our clients experience that we can address?

Do you know what is frustrating?

Lots of things.

That wasn’t very enlightening. In fact, it was fairly useless. But, to salvage the moment, I’ll let you know something that I see much too often.

Over time, a very common frustration in business has always been, “Why doesn’t so-and-so appreciate my efforts?” This thought is not limited to any one department, but has certainly be uttered its share in the intelligence world.

Mostly, the thought is, “I did really great work on this intelligence brief. Why won’t the executives look at it? Why won’t my manager show this off? Why is everyone ignoring my stuff?”

If you have had a similar moment, you’re not alone. In fact, in the intelligence world, this is a very common feeling. I’ll offer a suggestion and you may not like it, but I’m going to place some of the responsibility on your own shoulders.

The primary cause of your problem is that you are not taking the time to understand the world of your target recipients. Your hope is that people will appreciate your work on its own merits. If you build it, they will come. But Shoeless Joe hasn’t wandered through the cornfield to find your ballpark of a brief.

Let’s not take anything away from your work quality. I’m sure that your results were prepared from thorough research and the presentation is first-rate. Unfortunately, that only matters so much. In brief, if nobody can understand your work, the benefit and value are going to be marginalized, at best.

This very topic was the subject of a recent Primary Intelligence webinar. If you want the full scoop, download the recorded webinar presentation HERE.


The most effective thing you can do is start to look outside the needs of the people with whom you are most closely associated. Otherwise, you probably have a view of your company needs that is way too myopic.

If you want product management to understand and appreciate your work, take time to appreciate their specific problems and intelligence needs.

Then, discuss your ability to fill their needs and sell them on the idea of creating an intelligence flow process that appeals to them.

Of course, the final step of the process is to deliver at least according to their expectations. Over-deliver if possible. But that term is so passé. Valuable, but passé.

After you have won a champion or two in your target departments, you can start the process of sharing your pet projects and specialties. Once you have their attention, you’ll start to earn their respect. That’s the time to show what you have done.

Need a little help with the process? Let’s chat. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Using PowerPoint to Distribute Competitive Intelligence

Last post, I shared a video showing some of the most common sins of PowerPoint (PPT) usage. I’m guilty of most and will have my license revoked.

Stories of PPT abuse are not hard to find. Your company may be PPT agnostic, but many companies are forming opinions one way or another. Competitive Intelligence is, by definition, a source of information and sharing information is job #1 of PPT.

But, like anything else, you have to know how to use PPT to maximize its effectiveness. One of the weaknesses of PPT is the fact that it tends to simplify concepts much too easily.

Gettysburg Address – PPT Style
How has PPT changed the way we communicate? Imagine a world with almost no pronouns or punctuation. A world where any complex thought must be broken into seven-word chunks, with colorful blobs between them. Wait. You don’t have to imagine it. You are probably exposed to it regularly. You may even speak fluent PPT.

For a funny example, check out the Gettysburg Address, done in PPT. Click on the link below and then click on “Click here to start.”

Gettysburg Address in PPT

IBM and Sun Talk Business
“Lou Gerstner's remarkable turnaround of IBM from near-collapse began with a briefing he asked for on the state of the mainframe business. Mainframes accounted for more than 90% of the company's profits, which were sinking fast when he took over. Gerstner describes this critical meeting in his book Who Says Elephants Can't Dance, as follows:

‘At the time, the standard format of any important IBM meeting was a presentation using overhead projectors and graphics on transparencies that IBMers called—and no one remembers why—"foils." Nick was on his second foil when I stepped to the table and, as politely as I could in front of his team, switched off the projector. After a long moment of awkward silence, I simply said, "Let's just talk about your business." I mention this episode because it had an unintended, but terribly powerful ripple effect.’

Scott McNealy, a self-styled Chairman of Sun Microsystems, famously declared in 1997:

‘We had 12.9 gigabytes of PowerPoint slides on our network. And I thought, "What a huge waste of corporate productivity." So we banned it. And we've had three unbelievable record-breaking fiscal quarters since we banned PowerPoint. Now, I would argue that every company in the world, if it would just ban PowerPoint, would see their earnings skyrocket. Employees would stand around going, "What do I do? Guess I've got to go to work."’

Regardless of whether the ban was real or its contribution to record-breaking profits a hyperbole, there is something to be said for PowerPoint slide shows in the form of an infomercial getting in the way of having an honest discussion of complex issues and detracting from finding out the truth.” - MarketingProfs

Next time you are called upon to share information, consider the benefits of standing in front of a group and talking. What would happen if there were dialogue instead of slides? Would you be seen as more of a consultant, or would your audience be uncomfortable, not knowing how to react?

Just some thoughts. Let me know what you think as well. (cdalley@primary-intel.com)

Making Competitive Intelligence Effective with Cross-functional Teams (Part 4 of 4)

Finally, the last installment in this rather long thought. Some day, I’ll learn that blogs are about short, concise thoughts. Maybe multi-part installments are better offered in newsletters or other forums. Until then, this is what you get.

On the topic of making Competitive Intelligence effective, I have observed a number of companies over time that have produced extraordinary results through innovative use of the information. It is my experience that these successful companies do the following:

1. Have a commitment to making decisions with intelligence


2. Create a cross-functional team, including leaders from Sales, Marketing, Product Development, Finance and the Executive Board


3. Determine the most effective routes to generating effective competitive intelligence


4. Involve a 3rd-party to provide guidance (This is not a shameless plug. I’ll explain later)


5. Provide a strong voice to evangelize the competitive intelligence


6. Demand accountability of leaders based on their willingness to consider and implement changes based on the intelligence initiatives

In the last few posts, (8/1, 8/6, 8/8) I have talked about the first five points in the bullet list above. I’ll finish up with the sixth point today.

Demand accountability
In his book Good to Great, Jim Collins talks about a Culture of Discipline. He says, “A culture of discipline is not just about action. It is about getting the disciplined people who engage in disciplined thought and who then take disciplined action.

This doesn’t directly speak to accountability, but I believe it is implied. A culture of accountability rests on the shoulders of a culture of discipline.

The expectation has to exist in your organization that intelligent actions will be followed through. High-level authorities in the company should expect reports on intelligence driven initiatives. Middle managers should be willing to report on their teams’ progress. The cross-functional team ought to establish metrics for success. Such metrics might include ROI, market share growth, retained accounts, minimum client profitability, etc… Intelligence can be an integral part of increasing any one of these metrics.

Final thoughts
Before I started this series of thoughts, a little competitive intelligence project seemed so simple. Don’t worry. It still can be. But don’t expect much out of it.

If you are willing to look at the big picture, you’ll see the necessity of incorporating more structure into your competitive intelligence programs.

Author-Christopher Dalley, Primary Intelligence

Making Competitive Intelligence Effective with Cross-functional Teams (Part 3 of 4)

This is the third in a four-part installment of thoughts on making competitive intelligence effective in your organization. Wasn’t sure I had this much information on tap. Then again, I probably don’t have a shortage of words anywhere else in my life. Why should this be any different?

On the topic of making Competitive Intelligence effective, I have observed a number of companies over time that have produced extraordinary results through innovative use of the information. It is my experience that these successful companies do the following:

1. Have a commitment to making decisions with intelligence


2. Create a cross-functional team, including leaders from Sales, Marketing, Product Development, Finance and the Executive Board


3. Determine the most effective routes to generating effective competitive intelligence


4. Involve a 3rd-party to provide guidance (This is not a shameless plug. I’ll explain later)


5. Provide a strong voice to evangelize the competitive intelligence


6. Demand accountability of leaders based on their willingness to consider and implement changes based on the intelligence initiatives

In the last few posts, (8/1, 8/6) I have talked about the first three points in the bullet list above. I’ll talk a little more about the fourth and fifth points today.

Involve a 3rd-party vendor
Eat our own dog food. Drink our own champagne. Breathe our own exhaust. Doesn’t matter how you say it. You live inside your company. Objectivity is very difficult under the best conditions and hardly anyone works under the best conditions.

It is possible to conduct your own intelligence initiative in-house and some types of intelligence (web scraping, financial reports, other factual information) can be done efficiently by your own employees.

But, don’t underestimate the importance of an unbiased voice. This is not a shameless plug for a company like Primary Intelligence. Rather, successful companies I have observed have acknowledged that they have internal biases, agendas, perceptions, etc… and that an objective viewpoint of the marketplace provides value that simply isn’t possible from internal sources.

You might involve a consultant from the beginning of the process. You might contract with a data collection company to gather the intelligence. But, don’t summarily dismiss the benefits that might be brought to the table by a 3rd-party vendor.

Provide a strong voice
Who will be the leader that will preach the necessary changes in the company? Ideally, that voice will come from the cross-functional group. If it is someone else in the company, invite them to become part of the cross-functional group.

Any number of business publications can provide mountains of information on leadership and change management. I’ll leave it to you to find the right voice.

And, if you want to chat, let’s chat. Post a response, call (801-838-9600 x5050) or send an email (cdalley@primary-intel.com)

Making Competitive Intelligence Effective with Cross-functional Teams (Part 2 of 4)

On the topic of making Competitive Intelligence effective, I have observed a number of companies over time that have produced extraordinary results through innovative use of the information. It is my experience that these successful companies do the following:

1. Have a commitment to making decisions with intelligence


2. Create a cross-functional team, including leaders from Sales, Marketing, Product Development, Finance and the Executive Board


3. Determine the most effective routes to generating effective competitive intelligence


4. Involve a 3rd-party to provide guidance (This is not a shameless plug. I’ll explain later)


5. Provide a strong voice to evangelize the competitive intelligence


6. Demand accountability of leaders based on their willingness to consider and implement changes based on the intelligence initiatives

Create a cross-functional team
All too often, research and intelligence is conceived, developed, gathered, ignored and buried in one small corner of one department of a company. The information never gets to see the light of day in areas of the organization that might make very good use of the findings.

In a whitepaper distributed by the Corporate Executive Board (Which I can’t find a link to online anymore. If you would like a copy of the report, email cdalley@primary-intel.com and request the British Telecom case study), one of the most important drivers of success was the fact that British Telecom, the subject of the study) created a Strategic Action Committee comprised of key stakeholders in the company that could work together to act upon the data. Also, a Marketing Strategy and Insight Group, staffed with representatives from Marketing, Product Management, Sales Customer Service, Pricing, Solutions, etc… was responsible for disseminating intelligence to the key internal stakeholders.

Significant strategic business change requires action on the part of most every department in the company. The business change conversation won’t be effective until the every department provides a senior management member to work on this collaborative team.

Determine the most effective routes
The first item of business for the cross-functional team is to decide what needs to be understood. A wish list of intelligence can be created, but eventually, this needs to be pared down to something that can be accomplished and will provide value.

The matrix below may help you categorize your initial intelligence initiatives. Go for the types of intelligence that are easy to generate and that have a high ROI potential, based on the intelligence needs identified by the cross-functional team. (For more thoughts on categorizing ease of gathering intelligence, you may refer to a previous post)




Once you have a group of change agents assembled and an intelligence plan, you are almost ready to move into the field.

In the next posts, I’ll elaborate on the remaining points.

And, if you want to talk, let’s chat. Post a response, call (801-838-9600 x5050) or send an email (cdalley@primary-intel.com)

You Couldn’t Make Competitive Intelligence So Irrelevant if You Tried

If your idea of effective competitive intelligence is gathering a bit of information, consolidating that information into a brief doc (perhaps on an attractive company letterhead) and sending that doc off to a distribution list, please stop reading. Go back to your cube, surf some more web sites and live a happy life.

Pardon me if I’m a little grumpy today, but I have just finished reviewing a company’s CI efforts and have added one more company to the pile of “irrelevant competitive intelligence efforts.”

What do I mean by irrelevant? In this case, the marketing department employs a few “analysts” to gather CI on a few competitors, market conditions and industry developments. These people put a little personal spin on the data and then launch their reports and briefs into different corporate branches through email, an intranet and their SFA tool.

(Yes, there is disdain in my description, but it wouldn’t matter if they increased the quality of their personnel or budget to gather more information.)

The problem here is that the CI program is not making any difference at all in their ability to be more competitive. The data that is collected is better than nothing, but even if it is read, nobody acts on it, provides feedback or seems to value it at any important level of the company.

The intelligence has to make a difference somewhere in the company or the program is simply a money sink that exists because “other companies have a CI department.”

I suppose that there are all kinds of people out there, but I, for one, would be bored out of my skull if I didn’t think my efforts were making a positive difference in the company. If I found myself in that situation, I would do everything I could to change the situation. To be clear, this isn’t a matter of personal ego. Instead, I want to leverage our competitive intelligence efforts to create as much benefit as possible.

Enough of the rant. On Friday, I’ll describe an environment that makes exceptional use of Competitive, Market and Sales intelligence.

And if you want to chat about these thoughts, please leave me a post, call me (801-838-9600 x5050) or email me (cdalley@primary-intel.com)

Secret of Strategy, Competitive Intelligence Style (Part 2 of 2)

Last post, I provided the first in a 2-part series on strategic thinking and preparation. It is my assertion that Competitive Intelligence is too often used for tactical purposes only (sales and marketing) and is not featured in the boardroom for critical decision-making as often as it should be.

While this may not be the case in your company, you should still evaluate how often executives turn to your competitive intelligence programs. Even better, have the executives had a hand in designing the intelligence initiatives? If your executive team has helped create the intelligence programs, odds are good that they are invested in the program. Otherwise, you risk being relegated to the “nice to have” category; at least, from the strategic level.

And, if your company does not use competitive intelligence for strategic decision-making, what can you do to increase the visibility and usefulness of your intelligence initiatives in the boardroom? My first recommendation is to make sure that you personally are thinking strategically. Evaluate your intelligence programs and determine if your current information meets the strategic needs of the company. If your information is too tactical in nature, at best, it will be interesting but worthless at the highest levels.

Without further ado, I’ll let Mr. Lemberg finish his thoughts on Strategic Thinking:

Secret of Strategy - Part 2
Of course you've heard that when you do what you've always done, you'll likely get what you've always got. In this case that means playing the tactical game: coming up with acceptable--or worse--comfortable options and executing them as time permits. Likely, what you'll get is business as usual, and things will be... well, they'll be fine.

But "fine" may not be what you're after, and you are probably reading a series called "How to Create Strategies That Work" so you can do better--perhaps much better...

And if you are willing to take some time and do your homework: the research, inquiry, analysis, synthesis, and the activation of strategy--you can add dramatically more power to each one of your individual tactics, and potentially revolutionize your entire business.

In the beginning of this series I showed you how to start the process of selecting a market-dominating business and marketing strategy.

The first four steps are:
• Set your vision
• Gather environmental and competitive intelligence
• Take stock of your organization's strengths and weaknesses
• Answer the Global Strategy Question

I covered those in The Secrets of Strategy, Part 1. In this article I'm going to cover the next four steps:

• Establish decisive objectives
• Rate and rank your "SWOTs"
• Match your internal and external factors to identify strategic alternatives
• Select the highest-impact strategies for implementation

Establish Decisive Objectives
Strategy is contextual. This means you should not make any kind of strategic decision--choosing strategy A over Strategy B, for instance--without first setting a context with Decisive Objectives.

The word decisive is from the Latin decidere, which means to cut off. Decisive objectives are the goals that cut off irrelevant business opportunities and distracting details. They define the boundaries of your company's efforts and direction, and establish the measures by which you will gauge your success.

This step is to select company-defining goals, the attainment of which will mean your vision has started to become a reality. These objectives or goals should relate to the following:

• In what markets will you do business?
• What market share will you have? Will you be a marginal player with a small percentage, a big player with a significant portion of the market, or will you dominate your market and crush all competition?
• Where will you operate geographically? This question ties back to the issue of market share; you might dominate the market locally but be a small player nationally.
• How much revenue and profit will you earn? Larger revenue goals will have different strategic needs.
• What impact will your business have on your industry, your community, your world?
• How will you exit your business? Will you run the business and eventually pass it on to family members? Will you sell it privately? Will you go public?

These are examples of the kinds of goals which shape your company. The decisive objectives create the context for the strategy alternatives you generate.

Rate and rank your "SWOTs"

Previously, you analyzed your external environment and internal strengths and weaknesses. Now rate and rank the most important factors.

Evaluate each external factor: is it an opportunity to be taken advantage of, a threat to be defended against, or is simply something neutral you can safely ignore? Do the same for your internal factors: are they strengths to capitalize upon, weaknesses which much be bolstered or outsourced, or neutral conditions?

Using your Decisive Objectives as a guide, select amongst the potential opportunities, threats, strengths and weaknesses, those factors you consider critical to the success of your business. (Ignore the neutral factors.)

Group the critical factors into internal and external. Rate each internal factor from .01 to .99 based on its perceived importance to your business. The total should add up to 1.0. Do the same for the external factors.

Select the top five to ten internal factors and external factors for matching.

Match your internal and external factors to identify strategic alternatives

Matching combines each internal factor with an external factor, generating a potentially relevant strategy. A software manufacturer might match an internal strength such as flexibility with an external opportunity of a new law in a related industry, yielding a strategic alternative to reconfigure the software and provide solutions to the new legal requirements.

Or, a duck farmer might match his internal strength of breeding expertise with an external opportunity demanding low-fat, high-protein foods to yield a strategy selling low- fat duck.
Strengths are matched with opportunities to create SO strategies. These are generally your strongest, highest leverage options. Strengths match with threats to create ST strategies. These use your natural assets to minimize external threats to existing revenue streams and your current competitive position. But since the best defense is often a strong offense, you may find yourself reverting to an SO strategy-- typically a better alternative.

WO strategies use external opportunities to reduce the impact of internal weaknesses. Of course, you may simply choose to put your resources into areas of strength and outsource weak factors.

WT strategies are the weakest of all: defensive approaches designed to minimize internal weaknesses or external threats. Sometimes necessary to protect weakening revenue streams, there are often other, more powerful approaches that take better advantage of company strengths.

This process is often called SWOT, named for the four types of internal and external factors. I prefer to call it SOT, since the most powerful options will not pay much attention to weaknesses. In our business philosophy you will gain more ground more quickly by amplifying and exploiting your strengths and outsourcing--or ignoring--the areas in which you are weak.

Select specific strategies for implementation

At this point many people choose to intuitively select which strategies to pursue. Others may prefer to bring rigor to the ranking process. This final step combines your various subjective analyses into a defined framework, giving each strategy a strategic impact score.

Compare your new strategic alternatives to your list of critical factors to find those factors affected by each strategy. For each match, rank the attractiveness of the strategy relative to the factor from 1-4 (1--not attractive, 2--somewhat attractive, 3--reasonably attractive, 4--highly attractive) and multiply it by the factor's rating (.01 - .99). Sum all the scores for that strategy into a total "strategic impact score."

Lastly, select your go-forward strategies based on the highest strategic impact scores.

This is a demanding process with many steps, but it is well worth the effort. The strategies you create will take greatest of advantage of your strengths and opportunities, while protecting your company most effectively against threats and weaknesses. They will provide your company with leverage to make the most of your assets, your competitive position and your markets, all while insuring your strategies are consistent with your company's vision and goals.

Important notice for strategy-minded entrepreneurs:
Strategy creation is a long road to hoe, and goes much more smoothly when you know what questions to ask and in what sequence. To make it easier for you and your senior team, I've created the Growth Strategy Roadmap.

This program of flowcharts, questions, checklists, and detailed processes takes you through the entire progression of evaluating your external and internal environments, and provides all the steps and forms necessary to generate matched options, and rate, rank and select a high-leverage, high-growth strategy.

© Copyright 2004 Quantum Growth Coaching. All Rights Reserved

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Paul Lemberg's clients call him "the unreasonable business coach" because he insists they pursue goals and take actions far outside their comfort zone to make more money than they previously thought possible. To get business coaching, tips, tools and strategies like these, visit http://www.paullemberg.com/execoach.html.

Increasing ROI from Competitive Intelligence Efforts

If you have a CI program, take a minute to measure the ROI of your efforts. Instead of simply building a large library of information, ask yourself the following questions:

• Top-line Revenue
– Will this intelligence create new revenue opportunities?
– Will we take away sales from the competition?
– Will our existing accounts stay longer and be more profitable?
• Bottom-line
– Can we be more efficient or learn best practices?
– Are there better ways to manage our processes?
• Application
– How easily will we be able to act on these data?

If you are able to identify areas where you are directly increase top or bottom-line revenue, you are one of the rare success stories in competitive intelligence. If you are like the majority, you may want to consider some of the following tips:

• Reactive CI does not constitute a program. Develop an intelligence program that helps sales, marketing and product development informed of the competition's movements in the most strategic areas. Ignore all of the other noise.
• Information becomes “must have” when executives depend on it to move forward. Understand the willingness of your executives to use intelligence to make decisions. Determine which types of intelligence are best received. Don't spend time developing programs that produce data that won't be used.
• Do not assume that “stacks of information” are better than smaller quantities of targeted intelligence. Busy work does not equal effectiveness.
• Determine WHAT to investigate before starting a search. If you don't have a goal in mind, you will end up on wild goose chases. Everything begins to look appealing if you don't know what you're after.

Use these tips to work with your manager and executives to create a program rather than a competitive intelligence library.

Competitive Intelligence, Analytics and Your Job

Where can analytics benefit a company in its competitive intelligence program? Can the application of analytics to specific performance areas (vs. the competition) provide a competitive advantage? Such areas include:

• Supply Chain
• Loyalty
• Pricing
• Human Capital
• Product and Service Quality
• Financial Performance
• Research and Development

While many of these areas would seem to be analysis of internal processes, these same techniques can be applied to outside influences as well, including the competitive landscape.

And, nobody has to apologize for categorizing the refinement of internal processes as competitive intelligence. If a company can gain a bigger competitive advantage by studying itself rather than the competition, why wouldn’t you consider this method?


FUNCTION/DESCRIPTION/EXEMPLARS
Supply chain – Simulate and optimize supply chain flows; reduce inventory and stock-outs. (Dell, Wal-Mart, Amazon)

Customer selection, loyalty, and service – Identify customers with the greatest profit potential; increase likelihood that they will want the product or service offering; retain their loyalty. (Harrah’s, Capital One, Barclays

Pricing – Identify the price that will maximize yield, or profit. (Progressive, Marriott)

Human capital – Select the best employees for particular tasks or jobs, at particular compensation levels. (New England Patriots, Oakland A’s, Boston Red Sox)

Product and service quality – Detect quality problems early and minimize them. (Honda, Intel)

Financial performance – Better understand the drivers of financial performance and the effects of nonfinancial factors. (MCI, Verizon)

Research and development – Improve quality, efficacy and, where applicable, safety of products and services (Novartis, Amazon, Yahoo)

(Davenport, Thomas H. (2006), “Competing on Analytics”, Harvard Business Review, page 6)

Some competitive intelligence professionals are taking the lead in this area and expanding their skill set to include predictive analytics and advanced statistics. Others are still working on creating libraries of information and relying on gut feelings and intuition to provide direction to the company.

Watch for graduates to come out of school with advanced degrees in business analytics. They will be in very high demand in the near future. If you don’t understand these concepts, you may be working for a dinosaur. If your company isn’t a dinosaur, you may have to find a job working for one as the highly skilled analytics experts move in.

Sorry about the doom and gloom. But, that’s where I see things heading. I recommend moving ahead of the curve and adding some additional analytic training to your repertoire.

Of course, Primary Intelligence stands ready to put predictive analytics into your Win Loss and Account Loyalty programs right now. If you have a couple of minutes, give me a call and I’ll show you how. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Why Doesn't Competitive Intelligence Flow to Sales?

It has been my observation that most companies perform some type of competitive intelligence. In fact, most have several, if not dozens, of programs. Each research initiative is built to produce information upon which decisions may be based.

It has also been my observation that the production of intelligence is almost always handled by the marketing department, which makes sense. Of course, I am painting in broad strokes, but if you can accept that most analysts, competitive intelligence specialists and market research groups fit under the marketing umbrella, we should all agree on this point.

In fact, in one of our Primary Intelligence internal studies, 89% of companies said that they have a formal competitive intelligence program in place. This is higher than the 78% that have a customer sat program and the 65% that conduct account retention analysis.

But, when we ask the sales reps about the availability and use of competitive intelligence in their jobs, only 56% of sales managers claim competitive intelligence as one of their tools. A higher percentage of sales reps (68%) say that they use competitive intelligence to sell. But, I don’t know the percentage of intelligence that comes from marketing vs. self-generated intelligence. Sales reps and account managers can be very resourceful when it comes to preparing to do their job.

All this seems to beg the question… why isn’t sales organizing competitive intelligence initiatives more often? Why don’t sales managers use competitive intelligence to position more effectively? Why doesn’t the sales department work more closely with marketing?

It is my experience that there is more than one obstacle. But, the most important fact is that the intelligence is delivered in chunks that sales doesn’t want to eat. This fact seems to outweigh the type of intelligence available or any other obstacles that might exist between sales and marketing.

Another important fact to consider is that the competitive intelligence is often commissioned by management and executives, which means that the intelligence is not designed from the outset to satisfy sales nor answer questions relevant to sales.

Both of these problems can be overcome through tighter communication between sales and marketing. Odds are that current intelligence initiatives can be reworked to include a few tidbits for the sales group. Furthermore, marketing can study the current information sources used by sales and mimic those sources to deliver bits and pieces (or full meals) straight to the sales reps.

If the intelligence can make a sales rep 10% more effective (and current evidence suggests that 10% is a conservative figure), how much revenue does your company stand to gain by improving the intelligence communication process? What opportunity is being lost today by not doing so?

Let’s talk about the possibilities and what they mean to you. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Forward-thinking Competitive Intelligence

I read a blog entry about “reactionary competitive intelligence” that you ought to read. It is simple, but makes a strong point.:

Follow The Leader
Have you worked at a company where a significant share of the business strategy is determined by what competitors are doing?

Have you worked on a product plan that includes features based not necessarily on what your customers have asked for, but based on what your competitors already have?

Have you bought ad space in a magazine because that's where your competitors are advertising as well?

Assuming that our competitors know what they're doing is a dangerous game. Assuming your company has the right ingredients and circumstances to match or exceed their success is an equally slippery slope.

Competitive intelligence is critical, and identifying elements of a competitor's business and marketing strategy for further review and testing is a great idea.

But do your own homework. Know your customers, your industry, and your business better than anyone else. Don't just follow the leader. (Matt Heinz, Matt on Marketing)

Does your company culture and leadership support a forward-thinking intelligence strategy? Are you encouraged to scout out a trail to new ground or is your time dominated by reactionary “what just happened” questions?

You can discern your company’s cultural bias easily by answering the following questions for yourself:

-Do competitive surprises throw us into a frenzy or do we hold the course on our own strategy?
-Does our CI strategy remain constant or does it change with the blowing winds of businsess?
-Do we study way to increase business and retain contracts or are we more concerned with knowing trivial facts about the competition?
-Does our company use cutting-edge analytics or do we still make decisions based on gut feeling alone?

If your organization is stable and includes the support of leadership, you are poised to do good work and your efforts will have to match expectations. If not (and if you want to be forward thinking), you are going to have to work very hard to change the current scenario. Otherwise, you risk becoming an order taker with no end in sight. And, those people who bring interesting, but non-impactful, information to the table usually don’t go very far.

And, if that assessment is too harsh, my apologies. But, I have a great deal of respect for those CI professionals that don’t settle for trivialities, but work to find the strategic areas of opportunity for their company. The highest rung on the ladder is reserved for those that have the experience, clout and voice to insist that the intelligence be used in the executive boardroom for decisions.

Let me know what you think. I would like to hear from you (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801.838.9600 x5050)

Competitive Intelligence Needs a Personal Touch

I am a little hard of hearing today after yelling and cheering at the Utah Jazz/Houston Rockets game. What a great game! The crowd was nuts. The players played hard, and (more importantly for Jazz fans) there will be a game 7 on Saturday night.

You may have already seen this, but check out the Google driving directions from New York to London, UK: (click here)

The fun of it is when you consider that these are driving directions. The best part is looking all the way down the list and finding out that the Google people know that you can’t drive across the Atlantic Ocean. However, they have a practical alternative.

This does have a point.

The Google directions are smart enough to tell you that you’re going to have to swim to cross the ocean. Someone at Google had the notion to take a piece of information that was delivered automatically and insert a custom bit of instruction that is either useful or entertaining, depending on your point of view.

If you provide competitive intelligence in your organization, you have to help advise the users on different points. If you leave everything to the reader of the data, it is possible that they will end up in the wrong place with the wrong tools. Use your experience to understand the context of the data and provide recommendations.

One of the worst things that can happen to intelligence is to orphan a report or brief in a department. In most companies, they will suffer from neglect. Very sad, indeed.

And, I think the Jazz will beat the Rockets in game 7. Goooooo JAZZ!

Let me know what you think (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Effectiveness to Greatness – Making the Leap

I just read an article titled, “Dr. Stephen R. Covey Interview, Going from Effectiveness to Greatness, Featuring Jay Abraham.” This conversation seemed to offer a lot of nuggets in a few pages.

The article is not specifically written for competitive intelligence professionals. In fact, at times, it is geared toward the entrepreneur and small business owner, but I’ll share a couple of excerpts from the article in today’s blog. If you want to read the article in its entirety, click here.

In summary, Dr. Covey takes his principles of “7 Habits of Highly Effective People” and promotes a way of thinking and being that moves from effectiveness to greatness. For example:

JAY ABRAHAM: Define Greatness in the organization
DR. COVEY: Well, I would say that a great organization would be one that has sustainable impact on all of its stakeholders for good. That includes the whole supply chain, obviously the customers… And the culture would be extremely empowered to use a lot of initiative in making great things happen. And also, I think another characteristic would be that the people are constantly growing and improving their skills, their knowledge base, and their capacities to become even greater in the future. I think one of the biggest problems is sustainability -- that many people are like cotton candy. It tastes good, and then within a short period of time it just is worthless, essentially, and nothing happens. But to make it sustainable, to me, is one of the great keys.

JAY ABRAHAM: What changes or shifts would you recommend they make to convert their enterprise from tactical, reactive, episodic, to strategic, enduring, and basically a geometric growth machine?
DR. COVEY: I would say a couple of things. One would be I would make sure that I surround myself with people who are different than me -- who think differently, who challenge -- so that you can get the spirit of synergy in producing a strategic plan that everyone gets emotionally connected to. And I would try to get them very involved in this development of this strategic plan so that they really have a clear sense of what the most important goals are, and also what the values are. Because if you have commonality on the values which never change, then you apply those values in getting synergy and developing strategic goals and plans to achieve those goals. Then you’ve tapped into as much wisdom as possible.

JAY ABRAHAM: you talk a lot about the difference between proactivity and reactivity. Can you share…proactive things that great leaders do continuously, predictably, that average, ordinary business owners don’t seem to understand?
DR. COVEY: Well, I would say one proactive thing is that they decide what their mission is, and what their values are in the context of a larger vision. And I think that most reactive people tend to just kind of live out old programs that have been given to them by other people and by other models that they’ve had. I think another thing is that they start investing in people and in the building of high-trust relationships, where the reactive people kind of hope that trust will result. They don’t proactively nourish the relationship.

Another one is they really get invested in the growth and development of people – for instance, the very thing we’re doing here. If they’re learning things from this, they would want to immediately share this with the people around them that might have an interest so that they create a kind of a learning ethic -- not just a hard work ethic, but a learning ethic-- so that people say, “Boy, he’s really interested in my growth and development, and in my career.

I think another one is they set up empowerment agreements with people so that they don’t have to hover over, check up, follow through, and kind of micro-manage people according to the way they normally would clone someone. But they realize that every personality is different, will often take a different tack. But as long as there is a common agreement on the overall strategic purpose and goals, that’s the important thing. And therefore, you allow other people to express themselves.

Reactive people tend to be firefighters that are impulsively running to and fro and trying to solve problems. They almost get addicted to urgency, rather than being addicted to focusing on that which is important, the Pareto Principle, where 80% of the results come from the 20% of the key activities that produce those results. And I think that what I call “Quadrant Two” -- that which is important but not urgent -- is the basic thrust of proactive people…

Most people are drowned by the urgent, and the important often gets neglected because the urgent acts on you. It’s right in front of you. It’s pressing. It’s like a ringing phone. And they get so addicted to it they almost feel guilty if they focus on long term, strategic thinking and listening in depth to other people because they’re frantic. They’re just driven by action and by constantly wanting to make things happen. They don’t take time to reflect, and to gain a deeper understanding of what the real needs are, and to also deeply understand another person and to find out what their voice is... what is unique about that person…that they have certain talents and passion. They don’t do that. They talk more than they listen. They should realize they have two ears and one mouth, and use them accordingly.

(copyright 2006 All Rights Reserved, www.abraham.com)

I know that this post contains a large chunk of information that might not seem applicable at first, but take a look at your position.

-Are you providing information, services or solutions that will make your company more competitive from the strategic and tactical levels?
-Does your department (and those with whom you interact) position itself to be effective (at the least) and potentially great? Does your organization support this type of thinking and growth?
-Are you drowned by the urgent without having time to work on the important?
-Do you have balance in your life that allows you to be great in the most important things?

Print this document. Mark it up with your notes. And, if you are a self-improvement geek, date your notes. Then, next time you read it and mark it up some more, compare the parts that were important during the first read to those that impress you the second time around. You might learn something about the changing priorities and perspectives in your life.

Anyway, I’ll return to the Competitive Intelligence topic in the next post. Thanks for today’s indulgence.

And, if you find a nugget of info that means something to you, place a comment or contact me (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Competitive Intelligence and TOO MUCH DATA!

Ron Sathoff (an associate of mine at Primary Intelligence) brought me the results of a study from Advertising Age. The most interesting chart was called, "What Middle Managers Say About Obtaining Necessary Data" and the responses to the survey were generated from 1,009 US and UK respondents in January 2007.

(Source: Advertising Age, Digital Marketing & Media Fast Pack, Published April 23, 2007, Copyright 2007 Crain Communications Inc.)

If you are a competitive intelligence professional, you have to focus on improving the:

-relevancy of your data
-distribution methods of your data

If you consider that 59% say they can’t find existing information, 45% say that they don’t know what the rest of the company is doing and 40% of the respondents say that other parts of the company won’t share info, you have 144% of the people that are experiencing a problem.

Well, that’s not quite right (and you can see the my statistics training didn’t really stick), but it sure seems odd to me that this many managers are not able to find the information necessary to do their jobs better.

So how does a company overcome these obstacles and distribute information more effectively?

1- Someone in the organization has to understand and coordinate the primary
intelligence-gathering campaigns. Depending on the size of the organization,
this may be a difficult task, but a Director of CI should be able to compile and
update a basic list

2- This list needs to be distributed to different levels of management.
People in the organization need to know what is available.

3- If you have a “librarian” that catalogues the data, it is not enough
to “store” it in convenient places. Reports need to be advertised. Data needs to
be presented. Even an internal company newsletter to managers and execs would
help to serve the purpose. But, nobody can hide behind the excuse, “That report
has been posted to the intranet for months. They should have known.” You have to
innovate to distribute intelligence effectively

4- Road shows – Take data on the road. Summarize reports. Go to
scheduled meetings, whether the meeting is down the hall or down the interstate.

5- Build trust with rogue departments that don’t want to share data.
Find out why they want to hold it so close to the vest and work your way into
their trust

6- Recommend consultants to help departments build in the resident
intelligence. Some data recipients like to read reports and distill the results
into their own recommendations. The majority prefers to get the summary, next
steps and action plan. If this is in your comfort zone, go for it. If not, get
outside expertise.

This is the information age. Companies run on intelligence. They run efficiently and better than the competition when they run on the right data at the right time.

If you are an order taker, stop. You still have to listen, but you have to do more than run projects on an as-needed basis. Take responsibility for your company’s intelligence and make it work for more people.

If you have thoughts, questions or suggestions, contact me (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

A Compliment from a Client on our Competitive Intelligence Services

Today, I'm going to beg your forgiveness, but we received a compliment from one of our clients and it really means a lot to me that they would send an unsolicited comment about Primary Intelligence's services.

"We use several sources of information to identify trends in our target market, including government-collected statistics, and reports from industry analysts and news services. However, the data that provides us the richest insight into the needs of our market is the Win Loss data from Primary Intelligence. It tells us everything -- the good, the bad, and the ugly -- something our customers and prospects won't always tell us directly first hand, which is exactly what we need to run our day to day business as well as develop future strategy."

While this seems like a shameless plug, we are very proud to be a leading provider of intelligence to "a satisfied Fortune 500 customer." (Contact and company names withheld to maintain confidentiality agreements) It isn't every day that someone tells you that you are doing something right.

When you look at your competitive intelligence initiatives, consider discussing your plans with Primary Intelligence. We can help you build your processes. We can fulfill your service needs. We can help you make use of the results.

Let me know how we can be of service (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)

Making Competitive Intelligence Louder than the Corporate Noise

At Primary Intelligence, we just finished working with a company that had very mature competitive intelligence processes in place. The processes provided information that should have helped maintain a competitive advantage in the marketplace. Overall, the builders of the CI program put a lot of work into creating and refining processes that collected the right information.

And, their department just lost most of its funding. New initiatives won’t be added and it will be difficult to preserve much of the status quo. Smart people will soon be working with other companies.

Why?

Because, the CI department never really figured out how to make the results meaningful to the executives. Decisions were rarely influenced (let alone, based on) the results of their efforts.

And, that’s all she wrote. If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there…

This is not a one-time occurrence. And, it is a way of life that is not limited to the Competitive Intelligence, Marketing Research or Marketing departments of the world. In fact, important people in mission-critical roles are dismissed regularly if the perception is that they are not producing results.

What is the take home lesson?

Be seen. Be heard. Be effective and make your presence known. Specifically, in relation to Competitive Intelligence:

1- Push information into the executive boardrooms as often as possible
2- Ask, ask, ask, ask, ask about the current questions that need to be answered for the company leadership
3- Study the way key decision-makers in the company find and read information. Do they prefer raw data, spreadsheets and crude analysis or will they only consume small, polished briefs, one chunk at a time
4- Be a consultant. Present intelligence options and drive the topic of competitive intelligence methods as an agenda item.
5- Be prepared to show case studies of related efforts showing ROI potential in competitive intelligence.

After all this, be prepared to do it over and over. If you want to stay above the noise in the corporation, you have to be a little better organized, targeted and unified than everything else. Otherwise, you will just be static.

Librarians are boring. And, of limited value

This morning, I read an article summary which provides information on establishing a library of Competitive Intelligence.





While it is important to gather information, too many companies settle for too much information and too few results.

Pretty soon, you have a big, dark library of information and a librarian that serves as caretaker rather than consultant or expert.



While a “library” of information needs to be collected to power a CI program, let’s not get lost on the fact that piles of information don’t necessarily mean that you have the power to win more business.

In other words, if an exec approaches the library with the question, “What information in these stacks will improve our win rate by 10% this fiscal year,” how does the librarian answer that question?

And, if there is no answer, what is the value of the library?

For my ideas on how to avoid the “useless librarian syndrome,” check out this webinar and find out how to create ROI with your CI.

Be the Consultant, Not the Waitress

Last night, my family went to dinner to celebrate the birthday of my oldest son. As a family with five children (and two grandmas present), we kept our waitress very busy with requests for drinks, napkins, condiments and the like.

Fortunately for us, our waitress was very patient and kept a smile on her face the whole time, even though she was under some pressure to serve a number of tables in our area. For her efforts, we added some extra to her tip to show our appreciation. Since the restaurant pays very little, the service help usually works very hard to impress the clientele in hopes of increasing their take-home pay.

In my experience, many CI managers work much like our waitress. Hopefully, you are not in the majority here. Too many people expect the CI group to be a passive, order-taking bunch. It is disappointing to see the number of CI requests that come through our company for data that has a miniscule chance of making a difference.

You can’t always say, “No” to CI requests. But, you should have a broader view of the landscape. Start by listening. But, make sure that you understand the actual business problems before anything else. Find out why the requested information is necessary. Relate the business problem to revenue generation, market share or operational efficiencies. (If you can’t, push back.) If there is no plan, what is the likelihood that the information you collect will be used?

Be a guiding force in the types of information that are collected. And, be proactive. Create CI programs that will regularly feed high quality information into different departments.

You aren’t working for tips. Be a strategic thinker, improve the bottom line and make a difference.

Share your ideas with me. Call me at 801.838.9600 x5050.