One way to find fresh undefended high ground is by creating it yourself through pure innovation. Dramatic technical inventions, such as Gore-Tex, or business model innovations, such as FedExâs overnight delivery system, create new high ground that may last for years before competitors appear at the ramparts.
The other way to grab the high groundâthe way that is my focus hereâ is to exploit a wave of change. Such waves of change are largely exogenousâthey are mostly beyond the control of any one organization.
Related Quotes
First, spot the similarities. Over time, the strategies of incumbents tend to converge. A useful exercise is to overlay the business models of companies in the same industry and then look for areas of overlap. Wherever you see competitors doing the same thing, ask yourself, âWhatâs the shared assumption behind this policy or practice?â and then, âWhat would happen if we challenged that belief?â For centuries, innkeepers assumed you had to own rooms to offer guests a bed for the night. Airbnb inverted this belief and now has more than six million listings across the world.
Second, focus on what hasnât changed. What aspects of your strategy have remained stagnant for years or decades? Over time, legacy practices, like wallpaper, become invisible. Your job is to question whether those 12 13 taken-for-granted practices still make sense. For example, though it endured a lot of pushback from traditional carmakers, Tesla challenged the long-held practice of selling cars through independent dealers. The companyâs sleek stores, often located in luxury shopping venues, offer customers a hassle-free buying process. Tesla understands that the best orthodoxies to challenge are those that degrade the customer experience.
Third, go to extremes. Pick some parameter of performanceâprice, choice, availability, speedâand ask what would happen if we aimed for a 10X improvement? Fifty years ago, a retired physician, Dr. Govindappa Venkataswamy, launched an epic quest to eradicate unnecessary blindness in India. Millions of his compatriots had cataracts but couldnât afford corrective surgery. How, Dr. V. wondered, could he reduce the cost of surgery by 90 percent or more? For inspiration, he looked at the fast-food industry. âIf McDonaldâs can sell millions of burgers,â he thought, âwhy canât [we] sell millions of sight-restoring operations?â Today, Dr. V.âs network of specialty hospitals, the Aravind Eye Care System, performs half a million cataract surgeries annually.
It is not easy to hold this kind of quality leadership for three big reasons. First, no one will believe you have the longest-lasting trucks until they have already lasted a long time on the road. Itâs a reputation that takes a while to earn and can be lost quickly. Second, designing a very high-quality piece of machinery is not a textbook problem. Designers learn from other designers over time, and the company accumulates these nuggets of wisdom by providing a good, stable place to work for talented engineers. Third, it is usually quite difficult to convince buyers to pay an up-front premium for future savings, even if the numbers are clear. People tend to be more myopic than economic theory would suggest.
None of this improvement came from a deep entrepreneurial insight or from innovation. It was all just managementâjust undoing the accumulated clutter and waste from years of entropy at work.
In the same way, a good business strategy deals with the edge between the known and the unknown. Again, it is competition with others that pushes us to edges of knowledge. Only there are found the opportunities to keep ahead of rivals. There is no avoiding it. That uneasy sense of ambiguity you feel is real. It is the scent of opportunityâŚ
Similarly, we test a new strategic insight against well-established principles and against our accumulated knowledge about the business. If it passes those hurdles, we are faced with trying it out and seeing what happens.
Given that we are working on the edge, asking for a strategy that is guaranteed to work is like asking a scientist for a hypothesis that is guaranteed to be trueâit is a dumb request. The problem of coming up with a good strategy has the same logical structure as the problem of coming up with a good scientific hypothesis. The key differences are that most scientific knowledge is broadly shared, whereas you are working with accumulated wisdom about your business and your industry that is unlike anyone elseâs.
A good strategy is, in the end, a hypothesis about what will work. Not a wild theory, but an educated judgment. And there isnât anyone more educated about your businesses than the group in this room.
The problem is that there might be better ideas out there, just beyond the edge of our vision. But we accept early closure because letting go of a judgment is painful and disconcerting. To search for a new insight, one would have to put aside the comfort of being oriented and once again cast around in choppy waters for a new source of stability. There is the fear of coming up empty-handed. Plus, it is unnatural, even painful, to question our own ideas.