-{-_-}-

Following my most recent work blog post, I thought I’d add in a ‘StringTheory’ strategy.

First of all here’re some books that will be of interest if you liked the Engine blog post:

The Innovators dilemma – Looks into how disruptive innovation can damage great firms by changing the game in a way they failed to foresee

The Singularity is near – A film based on this book is now out, if the only reading you enjoy is this blog. It’s about intelligence becoming enhanced by the union of humans and machines  

The Physics of Star Trek – Basically put is Star Trek physically possible...... most technologies/technologists appear to have been inspired by the show as it is

Below is a screenshot from Blade Runner that’s set in the year 2019. Could LA look like this in 8 years?

I’ve shown this image as I wanted to make the point of how important SCI-FI is. From SCI-FI’s inspiration for the books above and its huge ambition for progress. LA is unlikely to look like the above in 8 years but it’s something that Philip Dick could imagine in the book the movie was based on Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? That other SCFI ‘imagineers’ could then design visually (Ridley Scott, Hampton Fancher and David Peoples).  

Although SCI-FI still has a bit of a stigma attached to it:

As of late though SCI-FI and what was once considered geeky has become more socially acceptable, as Hollywood has promoted it into the mainstream. Making millions from Marvel and DC comic books I read as a kid (something I didn’t promote around school).

The strategy here is simple. Embrace SCI-FI, embrace your inner geek. This doesn’t mean move into your parent’s basement and watch back to back Star Trek episodes, it just means embrace imagination and the fantasy of what could be, so you can “invent the future”.

An example of the difference in mindsets is highlighted in Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel. 

 See you in the future. Where I hope you have a SCI-FI head on your shoulders.
   



Read More …

In the beginning there were commodities as the basis of the agrarian economy, the industrial revolution changed this as commodities became a raw material to manufacture goods. Goods have now become commoditised, with no care of who the goods were manufactured by. This has been reflected to the service sector with the sole care being price.

The shift that is now occurring away from this is towards an ‘Experience Economy’. The buying criteria for consumers are now being rendered by ‘Authenticity’.

As we begin to work smarter to create free time for ourselves to fill with experiences, the cost of this ‘free’ time will thus grow in value as we are driven to work longer and harder.

In 1972 Geoffrey Hoyle's book predicted what life would be like in 2010, it has now been reprinted with the title amended to 2011.

Among predictions of “vision phones” and “doing grocery shopping online”, one of the drastic wrong predictions in the 19th century from the industrial revolution was that as we became more mechanised it would go a bit further to earning us a life of leisure.

Hoyle's three day week for 2010 has failed to materialise. "People are going to have to work very hard. It's gone the other way. People are working seven days a week. I'm very pessimistic now," he says.

We have been unable to use mechanisation and technology to truly make our lives easier. If anything they have made our lives more complex creating more demands upon ourselves acting as the catalyst to escape this and create authentic life experiences.

When attempting to create more free time in this experience economy remember the value of free and how you can best appreciate it.
Read More …


Before you know it, it's crept up on us again. Christmas is back - and with it comes the usual glee of xfactor singles, Macauly Culkin's single annual TV appearance, secret Santa - a traditional office party essential and all the while the anticipation and wonderment of why the excitement of Noel hasn't quite kicked in yet.

It's also a time that generosity is at an all time high. I cant think of many other times i would buy an Xbox 360 with the intention of giving it away.

Arguably moreso in 2011 than in other recent years, the world has seen events unfold to which our charity motor should also be in fifth gear. The economy has gone to s**ts (technically speaking, of course), war has ravaged the Middle East, floods in The Asian subcontinent have left thousands of children to sleep hungry and famine in East Africa has reached shocking new levels. 

With shopping at a high, and Oxford Street becoming a Londoners nightmare, I've been thinking carefully about the construct of Christmas. Giving (and sometime moreso, recieving) Presents are great but who exactly who we are giving to in this 'season of giving'? Friends? Family? Loved ones? Sure, Why not. But who is the actual winner of Christmas, and is it who we are made to believe?

Heres some food for thought.

Whilst we wake up on the 26th of December, broke, hungover and surrounded by the latest  technology and clothing which we think we really needed, there is a small slither of a segment who will wake up truly having being given to. These folk will wake up having a new few digits in their bank accounts and a substantial more to come a week later in the new year. The opposite holds true for the vast majority of us.

 I am indeed talking about the top 1% at the top of the consumer food chain. Whilst we are giving, they are receiving. Each £1 we spend is filtered up the capitalist hierarchy till it reaches their pockets. In return, we, the 99% are given next years eBay collection to store in our closets for most of the next 12 months. 

Meanwhile, whilst our money goes upwards, the bottom 1% continue to have nothing.

Imagine now, if each Christmas our money was spent downwards to those we recognise need a helping hand. Instead of ipods and handbags we bought blankets and food for the homeless. Instead of wrapping paper we invested in educational books for those kids ridden in poverty, or if we traded in one bottle of expensive champagne to instead invest towards clean water in an East African village.

What a difference that would make. Our money would do a lot more than what it does right now - Simply speaking, making the rich richer, and the poor (who are made to believe they need to buy, buy and buy on Christmas) a lot poorer.

So folks, whilst presents are great - and this christmas, you should of course buy for your loved ones and hope to receive too. But whilst you look left and right at who to buy for, send one thoughts upwards as to who you are really giving to and one thought downwards as to who you really needs to receive, and try to put those odd few pennies of your christmas budget aside for a good cause of your choice and really make Christmas the season of giving.

Merry Christmas and a very happy new year!
Read More …


Often people find it’s better to avoid predicting the future in case  you  end up looking foolish: “Next Christmas the iPod will be dead, finished, gone, kaput” – Sir Alan Sugar, 2005

“We’ll kill spam in two years” – Bill Gates, 2004

“We stand on the threshold of rocket mail” – U.S. postmaster general, Arthur Summerfield, 1959

“Britain doesn’t need telephones” – Chief engineer at the Post Office, Sir William Preece, 1878

With the speed that technology is evolving it’s becoming even harder to know what is going to happen next week, let alone in the next 10 years. But we need not accept defeat.

When predicting the future, the singularity can assist us.  By practicing predictions from accelerated feedback loops, we can begin to grasp a tighter understanding of future events. Accelerated feedback loops were especially helpful for the development of the mobile web following the fixed line, with smart devices leading to a digitally responsive generation producing comprehensive records of their lives’ activities.

With this in mind, I predict that within the next ten years we’ll be tracking our lives end-to-end with a multitude of personal sensors – think Nike+ – and openly sharing the information. The opportunity for data gathering from this would be huge, making the loyalty schemes of today appear insignificant.

Here are a few feedback loops for you to explore:

WiFi body scales – WiFi blood pressure – Mass market sensors – Life achievement apps – Life achievement visualisations – Rewards for being active

If you’re thinking this all seems rather Orwellian, let me try to convince you otherwise.  I believe with an enhanced understanding of our lives, we will be better equipped to seek out the things that make us happy, and avoid those which cause us pain.  

As stated in Good to Great, the best businesses find concrete numbers to judge and manage themselves by, why then, not apply this to our lives?

However, I’m also inclined to agree with Alan Kay that “The best way to predict the future is to invent it”.
Read More …


As you’re reading this the chances are you have or will take the red pill.


The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. Taking the blue pill ends your relationship with the changing world. The red pill allows you to stay in Wonderland and see how deep the rabbit-hole goes.

The reference to the “The Matrix” reflects the decision millions of people make on a daily basis when “digitising” their life. The online world, after all, is a second life where there are no boundaries. A world in which you may behave differently to offline. You need to be more careful online though as actions become increasingly trackable and in the most part recorded for eternity. The decision to take the red pill should therefore be a conscious one.

This point is being made as a lot of people using online tools don’t realise what equations are being used to interpret behavioural data. Looking back at how Dunnhumby grew to its current strength, working with Tesco to form what we all know as the Tesco Clubcard, is a small form of this. Following the trial of Tesco Clubcard in 1994 the first response from Tesco's then-Chairman Lord MacLaurin was "What scares me about this is that you know more about my customers after three months than I know after 30 years."

Imagine the exabytes (equal to one quintillion bytes – that’s 19 digits) of data that currently aren’t being analysed to produce killer insight like the supermarkets weren’t doing prior to 1994. The potential that can be gained from this is nothing less than game changing. Taking the red pill now becomes more serious within life, as a lot like “The Matrix” once it’s taken there is no going back. Would you stop using Tesco Clubcard because you don’t like them knowing everything about you? It’s unlikely because you get benefits from this relationship.

As the internet becomes more entrenched within our lives, so too do business relationships with us (especially digital natives), and the data’s value increases exponentially. This is the reason why, when I was speaking to a Marketing Manager at a Business Intelligence Symposium last week, he made the statement that O2’s data is more valuable than their brand.

In a world where everyone has taken the red pill, entering a digital world, effective use of data can be pictured by imagining how online game achievement systems can be applied to the ”real world” e.g. recognising when somebody walks in to a shop and rewarding them for their visit. Welcome to the Matrix (skip to 21mins)
Read More …


Since joining Fuel and speaking to friends, family and colleagues about my new role, I‘ve noticed a certain amount of “data distancing”. Even for so-called “diagonal thinkers”, data can be seen as scary stuff, and it’s not surprising considering the outdated image data has in this digital and visual age. This is changing though, with new terms such as “Infomagination”, research carried out by UCL shown here and the World Wide Web Consortiums’ Linked Data project shown here.

I’m by no means a mathematician as a new edition to this award winning team, with my past comfortably lying in strategic marketing. It’s just the opportunity Fuel has within the marketing space, supporting clients and enhancing creativity, is too big to miss. My data epiphany was sparked by the awesome series back in January that was The Virtual Revolution, demonstrating the impact of the web and its might as an empowerment tool. Particularly poignant for me was the idea that whilst this empowerment is deemed to be free, it does bide by the laws of economics, and there is certainly a cost attached. Whilst the exchange isn’t monetary, we are paying with our privacy and that is arguably more valuable.

The Fuel of my excitement:

The web based processing power of “the cloud”, mass adoption of smart devices and the growing development of augmented reality is bringing business intelligence to a new level. It’s leading to a deeper relationship between company and consumer and the ability for companies not just to understand consumers better but react to their behaviour in real time to optimize performance  and with mobile accessible data solutions.

Google’s Eric Schmidt talks frequently of “Consumer Nowness” and  “Mobile First” and that is no surprise considering  that in many European countries there are more mobile phones than humans, with the Mobile web (last estimates I saw) growing 8 times faster than the equivalent fixed line web. When developing this it’s the data that drives the change becoming intertwined with your day-to-day like threads in a fabric.

Undoubtedly it’s an exciting time in digital. I however, am more excited by what lays beneath the surface of this and that is the much misunderstood world of data. Via this exchange of privacy and soaring adoption the “infomagination” can be developed to enhance market understanding. The untrackable is becoming trackable. The technology allows for it and is putting an end to the above the line stranglehold.
Read More …

Presentation looking at getting more from what you've got.





Read More …


Read More …



The perception of the world has certainly changed as we have become to perceive it differently from:


to ‘The Blue Marble’:



Business understood this changed perspective as it became possible to do so via IT, transport and economic advancement. Building global empires taking advantage of what can't be found in their own back yards from cheaper land and labour to raw materials.

The strategic thinking behind globalisation doesn’t only apply to large scale organisations. This is the fists in a series of posts demonstrating how to use this ‘flat world’ in ways you perhaps may have never considered.



#1 Get yourself a virtual assistant

Whether in your personal or professional life I’m sure there are a lot of things you’d rather not spend your time doing. Why not not do it and spend more time doing what you do want to do.

As a lot of things that end up consuming a lot of time are web based this can be done via globalising your work load. Taking advantage of what big business has been doing for years.

Think about some time consuming tasks you could assign for fun (i.e. I’m going to assign the task of SEO for this blog), below are some sites to check out to get started:

US and Canada:

India:

Get in touch with how you get on, or if you’d rather not get your VA to do it for you.



Read More …

There’s a lot of information out there on the web. It’s not organised very well though. Data is certainly something that fuels the drive to present information more clearly e.g. Microsoft Pivot. We have surpassed the desktop, laptop and notebook to get more powerful portable information access through phones and tablets, with the filtering of information being made possible through the social web. Having said this there is still a lot more that can be done to increase the relevance of information and that is what we will now explore.

When augmenting our vision (when the technology is strong enough) eyeglasses can work in the opposite way to what Kal-El wore glasses for (that’s Kryptonian name for you non-geeks out there); as opposed to concealing special ability they enable it.


We are still learning more about the human eye e.g. some women can see four ranges of colours rather than three, known as a tetrachromat. This is something that augmented reality could enable as part of its iVision store (can you see what I did there).

Asking the question “How will it affect our personal information from the social web?” I see on par with asking – “Why do we wear clothes?” It’s not really because we want to keep warm, because that would infer that some days (as I’m British - most likely when I’m abroad) you’d come to the decision that it was too hot for clothes and that going commando would be the most comfortable option. But most of us wouldn’t do that. Clothes are therefore more about keeping some things hidden from people, as we live in a society of secrecy. This is similar to our discretion online when we choose to share some updates etc with some people and not others. However, this is something that we are moving further away from as the publication of personal information accelerates and can be related directly to you offline by augmenting our vision. From the 1st generation apps via phones and tablet interfaces/cameras and what I see as 2nd and 3rd generation that’s made possible through eye glasses and contact lenses that allows for permanent augmented vision; what will then become more important to you?, Your online presence or offline?, Or perhaps more accurately there will be no distinction between the two.

What I see for AR 2nd and 3rd generations:

Augmented reality can enable bionic vision giving us. Imagine on from top selling iPhone Apps like Angry Birds, buying augmented apps such as “tetrachromat” or “zoom for the eye” that mean you will be more enhanced than your fellow man.

There is the possibility to move on from what the internet allowed for shared thinking to shared sight, overlaying imagination with perception. Next time on the tennis court I’d love to get my hands on an augmented app that allows me to see what Roger Federer’s shot selection would be.

When it comes to our personal info I don’t want to see us ending up living in a penopticon. Having allowed for us to enhance the way we see the world, the downside is we may all be naked, unaware what way people are seeing us, using something like Recognizr or a successor.

We have had eye glasses since the 13th century. It’s time to knock things up a notch and use the data better, just let’s hope not to create a police state.

What are your views feel free to post them for all to see below, if not then it’s assumed you’re not in favour of becoming ‘naked on the web’:

Happy viewing.
Read More …

This is a strategic frame of mind. Simple really. If you think of most situations – A business idea you have, a girl you see at a bar, an athletic feat you wish to achieve, the concept is to gun for 10*. If you think medioca you’re going to meet a hell of a lot of competition, there are 6.7billion people in the world and most people aim or keep on track for mediocracy. There are a lot of reason for this; all I know is I do everything I can to gun for 10. Hopefully I can share my story one day, in the mean time here are a couple of stories I’ve used for motivation over the years and great examples of gunning for 10.

Alex Tew ‘Earning a million before university’


I’ll kick things off with Alex Tew. I found out about his million dollar home page almost as soon as it launched in 2005, the site could have been created with the most basic HTML understanding and it completely relied on the fact it was the first of its kind (which isn’t always a good thing). The concept of selling one million pixels to fund his upcoming fees at the University of Nottingham went on to earn $1,037,100, it was clearly no more than a fad, as a 16year old I saw no real reason to get excited about it.

What I didn’t see when I read the original FAQs when the first few had been sold to family and friends was that this kid was gunning for 10. He managed to generate some impressive PR and it went viral to generate enough traffic to excite advertisers, not before too long I saw him on Richard and Judy. If I remember rightly this was near the end of the auction session and he was selling his last 1000 pixels in an auction that came to reach $38,100. He set the objective of making a million before he went of to University; he gunned for 10 until he achieved it.

I checked out some recent news articles before writing this and it’s been mentioned more times than once that Alex Tew is one of the most annoying men on the internet. The strategy of simplicity is annoying, but it’s the complex way in which he implements his ideas that attracts investment and in turn made him a million, he goes with an idea and guns for 10 successful or not.

Mystery ‘becoming the best pick up artist in the world’


Your probably more likely to know this guy if you’ve read The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists or watched The Pick-Up Artist on VH1. A lot of the reasons why people’s PUA strategy flops at the first hurdle are that they don’t gun for 10. Like business if you don’t believe in your idea you haven’t got a chance, this will be the same in any set. Even if you’re game is as simple as Alex Tew’s one million dollar home page, if you give it your all with confidence and determination it will pay off.

Mystery aka Erik von Markovik was a guy that was a total flop when it came to women, depressed he could never find any girls interested in him. He therefore set a life time goal to become the best PUA in the world. This was achieved by intense devotion to PUA studying social dynamics among other psychological disciplines in order to use and learn in the field, gunning for 10 every time. After being a student of Neil Strauss the author of The Game he released his own book The Mystery Method: How to Get Beautiful Women into Bed receiving great acclaim earning millions in the process, particularly through his training boot camps, similar to the VH1 series.

He has scientifically broken down the art of the pick up and trained many others in the process to prove his worth. This is through a hell of a lot of work.

Both Alex Tew and Mystery are examples of setting a massively outlandish goal from less than desirable circumstances, which assisted them to push forward as hard as possible to achieve the outcome desired.
The strategic lesson from this is whenever implementing an objective, gun for 10, never look back and you never know you just might pull it off.

*Gun for 10 – To go for the best, the most ambitious feat comprehendible at the time in order to avoid meritocracy.
Read More …

The business world is changing. This change excites me as the balance between corporatocracy and the world in which it resides begins to strive for equilibrium; something I want to believe is possible in my lifetime. New design concepts such as Cradle to Cradle demonstrate the power of changing years of bad practice (the book itself is a polymer ‘not a tree’ and aptly is the name of the first chapter).

The business world however is fixed in its ways to out of date strategy, a reason why the graph below from MIT presents what it does with a very shallow view of the benefits. This is also why very few business schools in the world teach sustainability.


The path many businesses make is reflective of their leaders understanding of sustainability, the problem being there is a lot of old school business out there. This is unfortunately brushing up on the next generation not looking past the low hanging fruit opportunities. From shows such as The Apprentice, showcasing “Britain’s brightest business prospects”, with their money hungry attitude and ill conceived and implemented ideas that have never had any form of motivation behind them other than to achieve short lived profit maximisation.

In the western world this is mainly due to the short term financial pressures placed upon companies. In the eastern world financial value is placed over longer periods of time, this makes it easier to place value upon environmental pursuits as longer term investments (a reason why their P&L’s are getting increasingly stronger). Within a lot of businesses due to this short term frame of mind I find it hard to see who’s in control, the business owner or the corporation, it’s a destructive model.


Although there is a drive for change i.e. M&S Plan A, Nike Considered, Interface, Patagonia, BloomEnergy and Saatchi and Saatchi S. From leaders such as Adam Werbach that can see past ‘greening business strategy’. There currently isn’t even close to a 50/50 trade off with an anthropocentric approach much more likely than ecocentric. There needs to be an understood meaning of what sustainability means, as The BCG found, every business survey revealed no company agreed on establishing a single definition, ranging from environmental goals, economic, societal and political implications.


This agreement isn’t currently happening as ‘the market’ doesn’t place value upon truth and honesty of a businesses environmental impact, this will change though as the triple bottom line and transparency becomes central to operation. As the hot online start ups are demonstrating i.e. Facebook, YouTube, Mozilla,
WordPress and the concept of Foursquare. All of these help frame the businesses of the future with their common goal of sharing information easier, demolishing hierarchical business practice.

Paul Hawken’s recognises business and industry as one of the major culprits of the decline of the biosphere and the only institution powerful and persuasive enough to lead the world out of its ecological decline. There is a lot of strategic opportunity here and it’s not going to slow down any time soon, past the realms of ‘improved company or brand image’.

Success in business is all about gaining a competitive advantage. What The String Theory presents here though is this doesn’t apply that closely to the sustainability USP, but instead that sustainability is about striving together (as is the Latin meaning of competition – competere) to gain greater benefits from a less focused anthropocentric approach. This is where the striving together of sustainable strategy will begin to produce the best in class with longer term thinking and healthier operating businesses, gaining cost and differentiated advantage.

The link between development and environmental degradation can then be weakened for future generations. The fact is if you don’t join the movement you’re be left in the dust.

The Stone Age didn’t end because we run out of stones.

Read More …

I love business strategy. It started at A-level, from then I began to set myself strategic challenges. This post will demonstrate a strategic challenge I set myself at University. I wondered how easy it would be to fundamentally change a product (segments and motivation for purchase) without changing the core product at all.

At the time of thinking this I was a bit of a Red Bull fiend so applied the question towards Red Bull UK in the form of a massively edited 15,000 word report(available upon request).

The idea I would like to share is a reactive flanker strategy for market share growth within the saturating energy drink market, increasingly under threat from sports drinks. It builds off the Ogilvy and Mather Lucozade messaging as the dominate sports drink brand “Lucozade = science + passion” developing Red Bull’s “extreme” messaging to “Energizing hydration anywhere”.

In order to do this the flanker strategy needed to penetrate the conventional sport market, developing away from the extreme motivation without damaging its current customer base.

The output was:



Without changing Red Bull’s ‘off the shelf’ offering Red Bull 50/50 is an instructional brand that sits on a sales promo vehicle. Giving away free sport bottles to dilute a Red Bull 250ml can with 250ml water (give it a go).



Even if you don’t like this solution the 50/50 brand would be alongside the equivalent of 25% of Red Bull’s inventory (in the UK) on sports bottles acting as an ambient media vehicle achieving the challenge: 


Read More …

I’ve been waiting for Moneyball to come out for a long time.

It’s a lot more than a baseball movie/ book.
It’s a story of taking on the most powerful organisations within an industry, employing a different strategy and succeeding.

Its stories like this that spurred my interest in business as something that’s there to be changed. It denotes how it’s always vital to do things differently, to create progress and change the playing field.

In the case of Moneyball the different way of thinking is Sabermetrics (coined by statistician Bill James). As with any new strategy though it takes a brave individual to take the academic research and put it into practice, the guy that did this was Billy Beane the GM of The Oakland Athletics

Billy Bean had a massive problem in 2002 as his team The Oakland A’s had a payroll of approx $41mm Vs comp such as the New York Yankees who had $125mm to spend in the same season. 

The scene that really sums up the concept is when Billy Beane needs to replace one of their top players Jason Giambi (that they lost to the Yankees in 2002 for $120mm over 7 years).

The Oakland A’s scouts had put together a perspective list of replacements for Giambi. However the scouts were placing value on players in the same way every other team did with stats such as batting averages and runs batted in.

Sabermetrics looks at value differently; therefore Billy Bean didn’t want to look at the scout’s choices as they were demanded by other teams driving their value up. The Sabermetrics method of analysis used different measurables such as Base Runs and Runs created, therefore finding value in players that others couldn’t see, with a lower cost and greater ROI.

The scouts were taking this route as they weren’t approaching the problem correctly. They thought the problem was that they needed to replace Giambi. The main problem however was that there were rich teams, there were poor teams and right at the bottom of the pile were The Oakland A’s, it was an unfair game.

As Billy Beane knew with their payrole they couldn’t replace Giambi. He figured out they might be able to recreate him, in the aggregate (collective to form the total). To make things worse alongside Giambi two other top players were also being lost; Damon and Isringhausen.

Jason Giambi on-base percentage was 477 (irreplaceable), Johnny Damon on base 324 (replaceable) and Jason Isringhausen 291 (replaceable). Add them together you get 1092, divide by 3 you get 364. So instead of focusing on one replacement for Giambi the thinking was to look at the collective to get three ball players to equal an average on base percentage of 364.

The Players Billy Beane then focused on were selected via the on base percentage, player cost and their ROI. The selection being; Jeromy Giambi who had problems with weed and strip clubs, David Justice an old veteran who’s legs had gone and Scott hamberg who had nerve damage and could no longer throw a baseball. At least that’s how the scouts would perceive them.

The scouts didn’t understand the choice.

The game didn’t understand the choice.

The numbers added up and the decisions became legendary.

The game changed. 
Read More …