新興市場創新的五個原則

Whiteboard Session: 5 Principles for Innovation in Emerging Markets
艾弗沙.歐摩 Efosa Ojomo
瀏覽人數:598


影片載入中...
思考消費者的「待完成工作」。

今天,我想與大家分享我的五項主要研究見解,這些見解讓我相信,企業—更具體地說是創新,是最佳工具,能協助我們在貧窮國家創造財富和繁榮。每個經濟體,無論貧富,其實都由兩個不同的部分組成:消費經濟和非消費經濟。消費經濟具有以下特徵。你會想到經濟中存在競爭者。

你會想到人口統計特性,包括可支配所得、年齡等。市場已經存在。人們有收入可以花費,而且通常已經有供應鏈在服務那個市場。非消費經濟則非常不同。競爭其實就是變通的解決方法,對吧?

民眾的收入通常不高,因此必須想出變通做法。確實不存在既有的競爭。至於人口統計特性,這裡也真的沒有人口統計資料,對吧?你不會真的去考慮非消費經濟中的市場區隔,這真的是看不見的。不存在既有市場。其實,當你告訴別人你要追尋非消費經濟時,他們會覺得你是不是瘋了?這些人根本沒錢,不可能買得起這一種產品。

所以,非消費經濟的另一個特徵,就是缺乏收入。也沒有供應鏈去服務這個市場,因為既有供應鏈服務的是消費經濟。這將我們帶到下一點,也就是我們採用哪一種類型的策略。策略有兩種主要類型,推式與拉式。仔細思考就會發現,推式策略追求的是消費經濟。

市場已經存在,你實際上只是試圖搶奪市占率,公司A、公司B、公司C、公司D。非消費經濟非常不同。創新者必須開發出一些產品和服務,可讓非消費者納入他們的生活,因此這是非常不同的策略。想想優步與這種策略的關係。許多人把這項創新拉進自己的生活之中,因為它為我們完成了某項特定工作。

這帶出我的下一個觀點。「待完成工作」理論,是由哈佛商學院教授克里斯汀生和同事建立的。第一層是那項工作。我這裡所謂的工作是什麼意思?工作在我們的生活中出現,我們必須使用產品和服務,來幫助我們完成那些工作。

例如,我必須把東西從波士頓寄到威斯康辛,再寄到佛羅里達,我必須使用美國郵政,對吧?我也可以使用聯邦快遞、優比速,或任何其他快遞服務。其中有關功能的部分,是公司必須把產品從波士頓送到佛羅里達。公司給我的感覺如何並不重要。

他們若是把產品從波士頓寄到東京或牙買加,就沒有完成這項工作。每項工作當中也包含情感的部分。這就是顧客對你的產品或解決方案的感受。很多人可能不喜歡搭飛機,這不是因為航空公司沒有把我們帶到目的地(也許你是要飛去過感恩節或聖誕節),而是因為整個飛行的體驗,也就是它讓你留下的感受,對吧?

也許他們執行了那項工作的功能部分,但情感部分,很少人真心期待望通過機場的安檢線。有些產品很好地完成功能部分的工作,讓你真地感覺良好,但不知何故,也許是因為其他人若看到你使用那個產品,會被別人看輕。所以你不會很興奮地向其他人展示,自己正在使用那個產品。這是第一個部分。

第二個是體驗層次。本質上,就是體驗、購買和使用,顧客在體驗產品時的感受。「待完成工作」理論的第三層次是整合。你在這裡開始思考如何整合資源,以及組織必須制定哪種流程,才能提供可協助人們完成工作的體驗。

最後一件事是,如果你能把所有這些事情都做得很好,突然間,你自己就會成為一個品牌。你變成一個動詞,像Google之類的動詞。讓我們接著談下一點,因為我已說了很多有關整合作業的事情,那麼何時該整合?何時不該整合?

你必須問自己三個主要問題,然後再決定是否要整合,或模組化,或者把營運作業外包。第一,價值鏈的這個部分是否可以規格化?換句話說,如果你可以和同事一起坐下來,為另一家公司製定規格,這一項就可打勾,對吧?如此你就可以將某些營運作業模組化或外包。

其次是問,這是否可以驗證?你能否驗證他們是否正確制定了規格?若是如此,你就可勾選第二項。最後是問,這是否可以預測?你能否每次都指望這家公司為你提供解決方案?如果你能對所有這些問題回答「是」,你幾乎就等於有條件可外包。

這不意味你應該外包,但你可以這麼做。如果其中任何一個問題的答案是「否」,你就一定要把那項營運作業放在公司內進行。我要談的最後一點是,當你能夠做到這一點,就是真正在創造市場,而不是利用既有市場。該創造市場還是利用既有市場,這沒有對與錯的策略,你只需要了解一些事情。

你若是採取利用市場的策略,就應了解,必須有人先創造出這個市場,這意味某人已經從創造市場的所有辛勤工作中獲利,而你要去爭取市占率,而不是真正創造出市場。你要考慮的第二件事情是,如果你選擇利用某個市場,那麼你就要—我的意思是,你必須知道會有競爭,因為如果你知道某個地方存在一個市場,而且這些人愈來愈富有。

你猜怎麼樣?別人也都知道這一點。如果你在分析師的報告中看到這一點,你猜怎麼樣?其他人也可以看到。因此競爭會很激烈。我最後要談的是,如果你真的要採取創造市場的策略,在新興市場、在較貧困的國家創造市場,你其實也是在創造那個國家下一波的中產階級。

這個策略在我研究的所有富裕國家中都有效。在美國,你有像亨利.福特這樣的企業家,像辛格這樣的企業家,或是像圖鐸這樣的企業家,他們在美國創造的市場,其實也建立了美國的中產階級。

(劉純佑譯)


Today I'd like to share with you five main insights for my research that make me believe business -- and more specifically innovation -- are the greatest tools that can help us create wealth and prosperity in poor countries. Well every economy, rich or poor, is really made up of two different segments -- the consumption economy and the nonconsumption economy. The consumption economy has the following characteristics -- when you think about competitors in the economy, they exist.

You think about demographics. You think about things like disposable income. You think about age groups and so on. A market already exists. People have income to spend and there typically is a supply chain that already serves that market. The nonconsumption economy is very different. The competition really is workarounds, right?

People typically don't have a lot of income and so they have to create workarounds. There's really no established competition. The demographics -- there's really no demographics here, right? You don't really think about a segment in the nonconsumption economy -- it's really invisible. There's no existing market. In fact, when you tell people that you're going to go after the nonconsumption economy, they're going to be like, are you crazy? Those folks don't have any money. There's no way they can afford this particular product.

And so another thing that characterizes the nonconsumption economy is a lack of income. There’s also no existing supply chain that can serve that market because the supply chains that exist are serving the consumption economy. And that brings us to our next point, which is what kind of strategy we employ. Now there’s two main types of strategy -- push versus pull. And when you think about it, the push strategy goes after the consumption economy.

There's already a market and you're really just trying to steal market share -- company A, company B, company C, company D. The nonconsumption economy is very different. Innovators have to develop products and services that nonconsumers can pool into their lives and so a very different type of strategy. Think about how Uber came into the picture. And many of us just pulled that innovation into our lives because it performed a particular job to be done for us.

And so that then leads me to my next point. Now the job-to-be-done theory was developed by Professor Clay Christensen at Harvard Business School and some of his colleagues. The first layer is the job. So what do I mean by the job? Jobs arise in our lives that we need to hire products and services to help us accomplish.

So one example is I needed to send something from Boston to Wisconsin and to Florida and so I have to hire the USPS, right? So I could have hired FedEx or UPS or any other courier service. The functional component is the company needs to send the product from Boston to Florida. Now it doesn't matter how the company makes me feel.

If they send the product from Boston to Tokyo or to Jamaica, then they’re not doing the job. Now there's an emotional component, as well, to every job. Now this is how does your product or solution make the customer feel. Now many of us may not enjoy flying -- and not because they don't take us to our destination -- maybe it's you’re going for Thanksgiving or Christmas – but it’s because of the whole experience. How does it make you feel, right?

So they might perform the functional component of the job, but the emotional component, very few people like really look forward to going through the TSA line. Now there’s some products that do the job functionally well. They actually make you feel good but somehow just because other people might see you and you may not -- they may think less of you as you use the product. You're not too excited to show people that you use the product and so that's the first one.

The second is the experiences layer. Essentially, as experiencing and purchase and use that the customer feels as they experience your product. The third layer in the job-to-be-done theory is the integration. This is now where you start to think about how you integrate your resources and what kinds of processes your organization needs to create in order to fulfill the experiences that help people get their job done.

Now the last thing is if you’re able to do all these things really well, all of a sudden, you become a brand in yourself. You become a verb really, like Google this and so on. Let's move on to the next point because I've talked quite a bit about integrating operation and so when should I integrate? When should I not integrate?

Now, there are three main questions that you need to ask yourself before you make a decision on whether or not integrate or to modularize or outsource your operations. The first is this component of my value chain specifiable? In other words, if you can sit in a room with your colleagues and develop specifications for another company, then that's a checkbox, right? And so you're on your way to possibly being able to modularize or outsource some of your operations.

The next is this verifiable? Are you actually able to verify that they got the specifications right? Now if that's the case, then you've got another check box by that. And the last is this predictable? Can you count on this company giving you this solution every single time? If you're able to answer yes to all these, then it's almost like you kind of have a license to outsource.

It doesn't mean you should but you have a license. Now if you said no to any of these, then you absolutely have to bring the operation into your company. Now the last thing I'll touch on here is when you're able to do this, this is where you actually create markets and you don't exploit markets. There's no right or wrong strategy in terms of whether or not you should create or exploit existing markets, you just have to understand a few things.

If you go after a strategy that exploits markets, understand that somebody had to create that market first, which means someone has already profited from all the hard work of creating the market and you're fighting for market share, as opposed to somebody who actually creates the market. Now the second thing that you want to think about, is if you're going after an exploit market, then you're going to be – I mean you have to be aware of competition because if you know that there's a market that exists somewhere, these people are getting richer.

Well, guess what? Everybody else knows. If you read it in an analyst report, well guess what? Other people can read, as well. So competition is going to be fierce. Now the last thing I'll touch on is if you actually dedicate a strategy to create markets in emerging markets, in poorer countries, then what you're also doing is creating the next wave of middle class folks in that country.

That strategy has worked in all the rich countries that I've been researching. In the US, you had entrepreneurs like Henry Ford, entrepreneurs like Isaac Merritt Singer, entrepreneurs like Friedrich Tudor, who created markets in the US that actually was able to create middle class in the country.



艾弗沙.歐摩 Efosa Ojomo

哈佛商學院研究員


本篇文章主題打造品牌