May 17, 2010

52) McDonald’s

wēi  danger

Further to my post on Clover Food Labs last week a couple of my [few] readers have said to me that they love Ayr’s entrepreneurial approach but that it’s unrealistic for larger companies to perpetually prototype and iterate.  Their logic seems to be in line with that of the great Stanford Professor, James March who has argued that it’s incredibly difficult for organisations to simultaneously be explorative (searching for new opportunities) and exploitative (maximizing the payoff from existing opportunities).  With this in mind, shouldn’t large companies stick to building their ‘exploitative’ muscles – extracting value from their existing opportunities until that opportunity is exhausted and them move on to exploration again?

机 jī opportunity

I don’t think so, mainly because in fast-changing markets the exploration would come too late.  In his new book ‘The Design of Business’, Roger Martin makes an eloquent case for the discipline of ‘Design Thinking’ – an approach that we at IDEO use to tackle the challenges our clients present us with.  Rotman explains that design thinking “enables the organization to balance exploration and exploitation, invention of business and administration of business, and originality and mastery”. Perpetual prototyping is one tool used by the Design Thinker to enable simultaneous exploration and exploitation.  It strikes me that McDonalds is an example of a company that manages it – it prototypes relentlessly and it’s certainly big – according to Fast Food Nation, nearly one in eight workers in the U.S. have at some time been employed by McDonald’s.  It prototypes in store but also through the team of Dan Coudreaut, Director of Culinary Innovation. Ideas can come from those in his test kitchen or from franchisees or suppliers, and are prototyped initially in the full size store and kitchen at the head office.  This broad source of inspiration followed by prototyping enables them to trial around 1800 new products per year of which only a handful make it into the stores – but when they do they’re nearly always successful.  It also reduces the risk associated with launching new products by revealing the broader impact, for example Coudreaut tried a product called the McDouble Cruncher which was like a cheeseburger with barbecue sauce and onions. Although it was hugely popular when trialed the team observed that consumers stopped buying quarter-pounders (a core menu item) – not a good thing for margins so it was dropped.

How About…

  • Aiming to be simultaneously in explorative or exploitative phases?
  • Prototyping whatever your company size, increasing the number of ideas that you  can test and reducing the risk of failure?

May 11, 2010

51) Clover Food Lab

wēi  danger

Starting any business is scary.  Starting any restaurant business is very scary.  It’s expensive to set up, there’s legislative hoops to jump through, location and menu are critical (and it’s tough to do market research before making the leap) and quality standards have to be maintained.  Finally, consumers are fickle so even if it’s initially successful you can’t rest on your laurels.  Surely you can only start by jumping in head first at the deep end?

jī opportunity

To the contrary, my colleagues Ryan and Colin (thanks guys) told me about Boston-based Clover Food Labs, a startup that has cunningly overcome these challenges.  Instead of committing to a site and launching a concept blind Ayr Muir has taken a more creative approach.  First, he took a job in Burger King solely to learn.  Once ready to go it alone, he decided to keep location flexible and costs low by opening a food van.  Muir tries different locations and menus with the goal of homing in on the right restaurant format.  Everything that Clover Food Labs does is in Beta (hence Labs) – it has taken some clever design to be so flexible.  For example, the truck itself is a giant whiteboard enabling Muir to edit menus instantly (see the image below).  In addition, Clover is completely open with the public – publicizing the bad stuff (see Muir’s Great Sandwich Disaster post here) in addition to the good stuff.  The open experiment approach seems to be working, I read that the van sells out often and mistakes seem to be less frequent – maybe Muir’s homing in on his restaurant format – it will be interesting to see if he can give up on the flexibility his van yields…

How About…

  • Starting small to learn? And staying in Beta forever?
  • Questioning every sacred cow?
  • Being totally transparent (even the bad stuff) to shorten the feedback loop and create a real dialogue with your consumers?

here’s a photo Colin took of the stall itself – with menu in progress…

April 27, 2010

48) Waitrose

wēi  danger

The big UK supermarkets are increasingly under attack for pressuring their suppliers and destroying the traditional British ‘high street’.  But, for the bulk of UK consumers value, choice and convenience remain the most important selection criteria for their choice of food retailer.  As supermarkets expand (because they address these criteria better than many of the alternatives) they are likely to feel the backlash more, particularly as they grow their high street presence with the rising ‘convenience format’, (stores that are smaller than average and retail a selection of key ranges). For example, in September 2009 Waitrose announced plans to increase its numbers of convenience stores to 300 over the next 10 years after successful trials of the format. Given this expansion Waitrose will surely increasingly feel a backlash from consumers?

jī opportunity

Perhaps not, Waitrose recognizes the importance of engaging with local communities.  Waitrose has always donated a proportion of its profits to charities but its challenge has often been in having consumers value this philanthropy.  Its Community Matters scheme, launched in 2008, tackles this challenge in a smart way. The scheme gives each branch £1,000 to share out between three local good causes each month. Customers vote for their preferred cause using a green token they receive every time they shop and the money donated to each cause is directly proportional to the tokens they receive. I’m always amazed at the time consumers spend to choose the charity they will give their token to – surely a reflection of how engaged they are versus traditional approaches.

How About…

  • Involving consumers in decisions to increase their engagement?
  • Making strategic decisions around what type of social impact will be most valued for your business, e.g. local or global?

here’s the collection box in my local Waitrose – I’m always intrigued to see which charities shoppers prefer…  I also wonder if people tend to default to other shoppers’ choices (and fill the most full section) or try to support the underdog…