By Paul Gillin, Advisory Board Member, Society for New Communications Research of The Conference Board Shortly after my first book was published in 2007 I received a request to speak at a conference put on by a group called the Society for New Communications Research (SNCR). I had never heard of the organization, but any […]

The complexity of the world around us has increased considerably. All of us not only cope with the immense complexity around us every day, but we thrive in it. We have developed sophisticated internal mechanisms to enable us to do so. However, when it comes to dealing with complexity in business context, very often we find ourselves using methods and vocabulary from the past. In this blog, I will explain three strategies that are crucial for dealing with complex problems. But first off, for the sake of common understanding let’s define what complex problems are. Complex problems are characterized by a large number of interacting variables and a large number of unknowns, and we cannot convert them into determinate problems in a feasible time frame. The three strategies that help us design our way out of complex problems are as follows:

Framing
Old management textbooks tell us that the first step to solving a problem is to ‘define’ it. But as we see from its definition, we cannot actually ‘define’ a complex problem. Instead, we ‘frame’ a workable problem out of a complex situation. One notable difference between framing and defining is that, unlike defining, framing has a personal angle to it, which means a designer or a team frame a problem based on their worldview, and there is no absolute right or wrong. The below video underlines the importance of framing in dealing with complex problems.

Satisficing
If the problem we are dealing with is really a complex problem, then an optimal solution is unlikely. An optimal solution is unlikely because we cannot completely understand the system. No matter how much data we collect, there will still be information gaps. So in order to forge ahead with developing a solution, we use our hunches and make assumptions. As an outcome, we do not seek an optimal solution, but we seek a better solution than the existing solutions.

Learn and Pivot
The lean start-up movement made the term, ‘Learn and Pivot’, a buzzword in business circles. It is definitely the way to go when developing new offerings. Interestingly, it is also the way to go when dealing with complex problems. In the video below, Dave Snowden explains how the appropriate approach for dealing with complex problems is ‘Probe-Sense-Respond’, which basically is another way of saying, ‘Learn and Pivot’. What ‘learn and pivot’ means for companies, in the context of dealing with complex problems is that, they should look at their offerings as an experiment to further their understanding of evolving customer needs and changing competitive environment.

The above three strategies clearly underline the significance of human thinking in dealing with complex problems. No doubt our computers are becoming smarter by day, but in the end, they are only meant to assist us. Our future, as ever, is in our hands!

What is your take on dealing with complex problems? What do you think about the strategies that I have identified? I would love to know your views.

To stay tuned with me  Follow @nbhaskar888

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Global Press Institute was honored to receve a grant from The Case Foundation’s Social Citizen Be Fearless competition last month.

GPI met with members of The Case team and other nonprofit organizations at the Facebook Campus last month for a day-long dialogue sponsored by the foundation’s Social Citizen initiative. In the end, two organizations went home with a $5,000 grant after participants each presented their commitment to fearlessness in honor of the foundation’s new campaign to ignite a more fearless approach to changemaking.

Stay tuned for more blogs and videos about GPI’s commitment to fearless changemaking!

By Vanessa DiMauro, CEO, Leader Networks, and Advisory Board Member, Society for New Communications Research of The Conference Board Today’s announcement of the merger between SNCR and The Conference Board is incredibly exciting news! For the past 10 years, the SNCR Fellows have become a cohesive cohort of academics, thought leaders and practitioners working together […]

By Alice Korngold, Co-Editor, Giving Thoughts Blog, and Author, A Better World, Inc.: How Companies Profit By Solving Global Problems… Where Governments Cannot, and Myung Lee, Executive Director, Cities of Service More than half of the U.S. population lives in cities. Municipal services, therefore, are determining the quality of life for many Americans. At the […]

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Global Press Institute founder Cristi Hegranes was among 14 people to be named an Emerging Innovator by Ashoka Changemakers and American Express today.

Hegranes will join 14 other top innovators from across the U.S. — including Sombit Mishra of QMedic and Barbara Bush of Global Health Corps — for a 2-day innovator’s bootcamp in New York City in May. Ashoka Changemakers and American Express said the winners were, “Pioneers with solutions to some of the world’s most critical challenges in areas such as health, urban planning, economic empowerment, and citizen access to technology.”

Hegranes founded GPI in 2006 and has grown the organization into one of the world’s foremost producers of professional, feature news content from the developing world. GPI employs 133 women in 26 countries.

If your brand is taken over by another company or your company takes over other brands, either as a stand-alone buy or as part of a broader merger and acquisition, what aspects of your current brand should stay as they are and what might you look to change?

Many brands find themselves caught in a change of ownership. Sometimes there is no choice in what is left alone. For example, if a company is acquired by a major power brand, the chances of other brands remaining within the stable are small. If, on the other hand, either the acquirer or the acquired runs a house of brands, there are a number of things to weigh.

Six aspects for deciding what to do with the brand(s) you have:

1. The Circumstances Of The Sale – was the brand flourishing or declining when the sale took place? A strong brand could of course be a key reason for the sale, in which case customers should see as little change as possible. If on the other hand, the brand was weak or weakening, then a change of ownership is a good opportunity to revamp the strategy for that brand (to align with the intentions of the new owner) and perhaps to rebrand to clearly signal this shift.

2. The Equity Of The New Owner’s Brand – this too is all about sending the right signals. For companies looking to visibly expand their presence through acquisition, the lesser brand is likely to change, or at least align, with the new owner. If on the other hand, the new owner is running a managed portfolio (where brands look independent and live or die on their ability to hit their goals) or the owner’s own brand is not visible to consumers (or is meaningful only to investors), then things should probably be left as they are. That can mean making hard decisions about which brand is best suited to the consumer-facing environment, supplanting ego for recognition. Too many brands in my view try to marry brand names through dual branding. While they may believe they are achieving the best of both brands, my personal view is that they are compromising all ways round.

3. The Make-up Of The New Brand Portfolio – When companies with similar product lines join forces, it’s critical that the new portfolio is streamlined and cohesive. That in itself may be a reason to change or keep the brand as is. To decide which brands stay and which go: Discard, sell or merge redundant brands, Identify the brands that contribute the most to your purpose (make these the core of your portfolio), Where you have two strong brands in one category, assign different parts of the market to each brand and reposition accordingly.

4. The New Target Audience – companies looking to use acquisition to change or expand their customer base will need to consider very carefully which brand is most likely to be most attractive to the target audience looking ahead. The opportunity here – and it’s generally an underplayed one in my experience – is to draw the customers of the lesser brand into the fold of the future brand by presenting them with a clear and inspiring vision of how they stand to benefit. Too often, this doesn’t happen. Companies talk about their perspective of why change is important, using phrases and reassurances that are tired, irrelevant and hollow. No-one cares about the fact that you’re bigger or that you have this much in assets. That means nothing to consumers. At all.

5. The Wider Market Environment Post-Sale – what has the sale of the brand done to the dynamics of the competitive landscape? If, for example, the brand is now part of a bigger group with a strong market position, that change has not only potentially enhanced the standing of the brand under new owners but also weakened the relative position of others. Or the change may have stiffened their resolve to compete more vigorously. In which case, will the current brand, under the new arrangement, be strong enough to compete meaningfully in this new environment? It could well be. Or it may require a shift in brand architecture – for example, from a stand-alone brand to an endorsed brand – in order to better meet the new dynamics that have been created.

6. The People Behind The Brand – Who will your people rally to? So often, companies just impose brand change on the culture without enough consideration for what their people stand to lose or gain psychologically from the shift. They focus on the corporate restructure at the expense of the emotional restructure. By failing to leverage the legacy of the existing brand, or the excitement and strength of the new, they often lose the transformational opportunity that a change in brand ownership represents.

What you will do with the brand(s) you acquire is a critical consideration for every company looking to take over another’s assets. You have after all probably paid good money for them. Understanding the value they have, and the value they could have, or will never achieve, is vital to turning balance-sheet goodwill into margin-enhancing brand equity. Too often, companies make decisions after the brands themselves have been acquired and based on policy or structure rather than carefully thinking through ahead of time how they can achieve the greatest emotional impact in their markets and for their customers, current and future.

The Blake Project Can Help: We have extensive experience helping organizations make key decisions that help ensure successful mergers & acquisitions.

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

One big question regarding the US economy is whether wage growth is accelerating. You might think that this is a pretty straightforward question to answer, but it’s not. There are many measures of wage growth, and they don’t all point in the same direction. For example, we can compare the year-over-year wage growth in recent […]

Here’s something we learned last week in LA: Blink, the best-seller from TED favorite Malcolm Gladwell, will be made into a feature film, adapted/directed by Stephen Gaghan (“Traffic”), and starring Leonardo DiCaprio. Gladwell will stay involved as executive producer. We’re great fans of Blink — and, let’s face it, just about anything Gladwell writes — so we were curious to hear what he had in mind for the movie. He tells us, “It takes a single character from Blink — Silvan Tompkins — and fashions an entirely new story around him, about what it means to be someone who can read other people’s thoughts.” Our snap judgment says: Success.

By Alex Parkinson, Senior Researcher and Associate Director, The Conference Board The Conference Board has been brimming with excitement since we entered 2016. Not only is it the year of our centenary—The Conference Board was founded in 1916 as the National Industrial Conference Board—but we’re also welcoming a groundbreaking organization to the fold: the Society […]