Worried about the global economy? Why not look for opportunities instead?

I saw a banner headline on the TV news this morning about the IMF saying that the global economy could be entering a ‘dangerous new phase’. According to the organization’s website there’s a critical need for governments to reduce their debt and deficits while creating an environment for economic growth. This has been the mantra of central banks, politicians and others for the last few years – nothing new here – and while I’m sure there is validity in what the pundits are saying, maybe those of us in business should just get on with the job of taking our respective and each other’s enterprises and nations forward.

Last year, I was asked by a key client to create a workshop on ‘sales prospecting in challenging times’. It proved extremely successful with participants, judging by their feedback and subsequent follow-ups.

*Basically the course covered:

• ·      The fact that more money is made in slumps than in boom times – and the fact that we’re all experiencing a major global economic downturn that looks like it’s going to be around for a lot longer than anyone expected;
• ·      In times like these, individuals and organizations are looking for ways to increase productivity and reduce costs, and asked the philosophical question, “What do you offer that would fulfill such needs/wants/objectives?” and…
• ·      The need to take a medium-to-long-term view on forging relationships to build sales that will increase as times improve – if you’re there for a client in tough times, imagine how that might affect their loyalty towards you when things get better.

In my own business life, I’ve been amazed at the number of current and prospective clients who are actively trying to find ways of utilizing my training/consulting services and currently we’re working through this together. These organizations share my belief that there are plenty of opportunities to grow business, both locally and internationally, and they need to be acted upon sooner rather than later.

Many of those within my network, both clientele and colleagues, see the current crisis as being transformational, with the center of economic power fast moving eastward, most notably towards China and India – expect the former’s currency to evolve into one used in international trade sometime in the future. While this might seem frightening to some, there are a number of us who also see opportunities in this challenging new environment.

I believe that economic growth can be achieved if we, frankly, just get on with the job at hand and let everyone else worry about getting their so-called economic fundamentals right. The world continues to progress and will survive, no matter what the state of the global economy today or a week from now.

As the old Arab proverb says: The dog barks, but the caravan passes on…

Salaam/Shalom/Peace

*There’s a lot more covered in this course, but I wanted to avoid this piece turning into an advertorial!

©2011 visavant, all rights reserved

Palestinians try a different route on the roadmap for peace…

Mohammed Shtayyeh, from Fatah’s Central Committee, recently announced that the Palestinian Authority would seek a UN Security Council mandate to recognize full statehood for Palestine sometime next week. This could be a major turning point in a conflict that has remained unresolved for decades, and while it is already anticipated that the US will veto the proposal, I believe it could be a major game-changer in the Middle East.

By having official UN recognition of statehood, Palestine would have an alternative route to resolving its relationship with Israel. It is important, however, that the Palestinians also understand and accept the responsibilities that go with accession:

• ·    Israel’s right to exist will remain a cornerstone to the peace process;
• ·      Hamas will need to officially recognize its neighbor and bring its followers under control – the group hasn’t won the war against the Israelis, but now has an opportunity to win the peace. While currently is an unpalatable request to make to Hamas, it’s an imperative if progress is to be made;
• ·      Accept that all of Palestine’s objectives may not be met immediately, especially the return of East Jerusalem as its eventual capital;
• ·      Be prepared to be responsible for any attacks on Israel by their own people, and like any country, accept its neighbour’s right to retaliate, either diplomatically or, at worst, militarily. This would include the will to put Palestinians on trial within Palestine for crimes committed elsewhere;
• ·      It saying that, Palestine also needs to be recognized as having the right to defend itself against outside aggressors, albeit within internationally acceptable limits;
• ·      Work out how to effectively govern two geographically and (currently) politically separated areas, i.e. Gaza and the West Bank. It is doubtful that Israel will cede any of its territory to connect the two, at least not in the foreseeable future;
• ·      Figure out where the heck they will put the Palestinian diaspora if a large number of those living overseas decide to return. Israel has the same issues with its own population growth and there’s only so much land to go around, with neither side willing to give up any to their opposite number;
• ·      Seek a long-term, diplomatic solution to the question of possible compensation for land taken by the Israelis since the time of the establishment of the country in 1948.

Not surprisingly, Israel has also been vocal in its opposition to the Palestinian’s UN plans, which is understandable. By Palistine being formally recognized it could potentially wrest control of the Roadmap to Peace away from Netanyahu and the Knesset, meaning that they might be put under pressure to make more concessions – and at a significantly faster rate – than they would have done otherwise, if at all. Both the questions of illegal settlements in the West Bank and the future of East Jerusalem will be forefront of any negotiations and will ultimately need to be addressed.

I look forward to seeing what President Abbas has to say on Friday, when he is supposed to detail what the UN request will include.

The Palestinian/Israeli conflict is complex – read the last century’s history of the region to learn more – and there are no simple solutions. However, it’s time for a solution to be found and next week’s action by the Palestinian Authority at the UN might be a positive step.

I have a number of Palestinian friends (and other Arab colleagues across the Middle East) who would like to see a fair and just peace between Palestine and the Israelis, and who are very keen to see both sides working together towards a common future. I sincerely hope this becomes a reality – sooner rather than later.

Salaam/Shalom/Peace

10 years on from 9/11 Islam's fundamentalists have lost the war

Ten years after a group of Muslim fundamentalists’ dramatic attack on the US, it appears they have lost their war. This is not a triumph of Western ideology over a rather perverse interpretation of Islam, but a sea change in the Muslim world itself. Add to that the level of interest generated in understanding the faith outside of Islam and perhaps readers can understand how I could make such a bold claim.

Let’s look at the facts: Everywhere the so-called Arab Spring has taken hold, not one of the protest groups has called for a fundamentalist Islamic state, based on the Iranian or any other model, to be created. On the contrary, the drive in places like Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Syria and Libya is for a more open, secular society. Many commentators, including Yours Truly, have noted the young people taking to the streets in protest at the corruption and injustices imposed by their existing governments are also openly questioning the role Islam should play in a modern society. This is diametrically the opposite view of those who want to impose a rather medieval view of their faith.

In addition, the 9/11 attacks motivated a lot in the West to learn more about Islam to try to understand the motivation behind what would traditionally be seen as murder by a religion that strongly states that innocent lives should not be taken. What the fundamentalists have achieved is opened others’ eyes to the Muslim faith beyond what might be purported by mainstream Western media.

The most dangerous thing for these madmen in their war against the Developed World is if their supposed enemy has a thorough understanding and appreciation of Islam and overtly demonstrates respect and tolerance towards it, something the Muslim Prophet (p.bu.h.) advised his followers to do, especially with regards to Judaism and Christianity.

All this means is that these fundamentalists’ message of hatred towards the ‘Infidel’ will, ultimately, increasingly fall on deaf ears – it’s hard to have an enemy who shows kindness towards you.

As for the West, it needs to respect the young Arabs’ desire for self-determination and give them support and guidance when asked for it. Let them create their own version of democracy that fits their culture, traditions and aspirations.

A decade on from that tragic day, I remain optimistic that, given the chance, a new dawn of what I would call “the real traditional Islam”, one based on tolerance of others’ beliefs and a desire for the common good, grounded in the positive messages from Muslim holy books and one’s local traditions, but with an interpretation that’s relevant to a globalized, 21^st Century world.

I’d strongly suggest that those who oppose such a view, in the name of Islam, may want to reconsider their position, as the tide of change is definitely going in the opposite direction!

Salaam/Shalom/Peace

2011, the year social media flexed its muscles

This year has witnessed one of the most significant social changes in perhaps a century. The so-called Arab Spring that has or is trying to topple regimes across North Africa and the Middle East, and the recent rioting in London and Philadelphia, have all used a common form of communication – social media – and governments are at a loss to understand it, let alone come up with effective ways to control the flow of information through these sites.

Look at what happened in Egypt when the likes of Facebook were blocked. One clever protester set up an account on a Muslim dating site, disguised (virtually) as a woman, in order to send coded messages to his colleagues regarding protest activity. This particular individual had tens of thousands of friends in regular communication via this medium!

Then there’s the posting of still and video images, uploaded from cellphones, of protest action and government responses on the likes of YouTube. This has opened a window of reporting to countries where mainstream media’s reporting has been banned or severely curtailed. However, media is still trying to figure out how to handle these reports, as their authenticity and accuracy can’t be independently verified.

Concerned governments have tried to block access to these sites, often without success. I recall Iran’s protesters accessed remote servers in other countries in order to keep the flow of information and communications open. As soon as the Iranian Authorities blocked one overseas server, another would pop up from elsewhere in the world. This game of Cat & Mouse went on for months, and served as a model for others in the region to use.

Some governments have also tried to post misinformation to confuse those protesting against them with virtually no success, such is the mistrust by the local population. This means that those in power either need to find more effective ways to quell dissent or acquiesce to the demands of their citizens. Time will tell which road they choose.

What started out as a vehicle for sharing one’s lives with others, linking friends and family and business networking, has become a tool for good or evil, depending on who’s using it and how it’s used. No matter what, it’s changing the face of societies, worldwide.

Export or die!

The title of this piece refers to the catch-cry of the British Motor Industry some 65 years ago. Back at the end of WWII, the UK’s motor vehicle manufacturers put a serious effort into exporting their products, globally, especially to the Americas, Australasia and elsewhere in order to re-start the country’s economy, almost destroyed by the then-recent conflict.

I believe the Export or die philosophy is relevant today, especially for SME-level businesses in the USA, where the nation’s economy needs some serious action to get things going again and people back into jobs.

At the start of this decade, during the economic downturn that occurred after the dot-com boom went bust, I wrote an article in a small, Northwestern US business newspaper about how much of the world wanted to ‘buy American’, and the difficulties they faced trying to do so. This desire for US goods is still there today; why?

• ‘Made in USA’ still offers a perceived guarantee of perceived consistent quality and reliability in many global markets;
• Because of the huge domestic market and the ability to make things in large volumes, US-manufactured goods are often surprisingly competitive, internationally. This is especially true for niche manufacturers. In fact, these companies might find that they’ve got global markets they didn’t even know about just waiting to buy their goods and services!
• As a global trend-setter, products and services from the USA often have an in-built prestige about them. Many consumers in other lands love to be seen with the latest and greatest – best of all, it doesn’t have to be made in Asia. Many American-made goods from smaller-sized enterprises could and should be perceived as being just as desirable as the latest offerings from the multinationals;
• Add to that, the Internet offers global access to American goods and services like never before.

So if that’s the case, then why aren’t more SME-level American companies getting into international markets? My observations are that:

• American SMEs have little understanding of the global marketplace, the downside of its having such a large local economy;
• A lack of belief that a small business can compete, internationally. I can’t recall how many times American businesspeople are shocked when I tell them about how New Zealand, a nation of SMEs, competes globally without subsidies. In fact, my adopted homeland’s plastics moulding industry is competitive, internationally; it’s therefore safe to say that its US-based counterpart would be equally so;
• American SMEs seem to have a fear of the unknown when it comes to exports;
• While the US Department of Commerce and other agencies have sone pretty good export programmes, I believe that SME-level exporting is still very much a low-profile activity for these organizations;
• The American banking system is archaic by world standards when it comes to handling international transactions. I remember the Letter of Credit for an export order for a Middle East client having to go through THREE different US banks for the transaction to be completed, as only one of these institutions was set-up for international business! Compare that with my ability at the time to go to the local branch of any of the banks I dealt with in NZ to do a foreign exchange transaction…

Many business media commentators in the USA have said that it’s the SMEs that will create the jobs that will help pull the country out of the nation’s worst recession in living memory. However to grow businesses, they’ll need customers, and those may not be found within the local economy. This is why I suggest that Federal, State and Local Governments should begin promoting export development far more proactively than it has done in the past, especially in the fast-growing economies of Latin America and Asia.

It’s all there for the taking, there are export development programmes, all kinds of advice and assistance available for exporters, and an infrastructure of US Embassies and Consulates in place around the world ready to help – all it needs is American small business owners to believe it’s possible for them to succeed in a global economy.

(c)2010 visavant, all rights reserved

Why is the essence of marketing so hard to understand?

In the more than three decades I’ve been involved in marketing, either as a hands-on marketer, a marketing consultant or as a trainer of the topic, it amazes me how many businesspeople get the concept completely wrong – what I usually get from other marketers, in effect, is promotion, which is an activity of the overall marketing process, but not marketing in itself.

It’s even scarier to think how many of the respondents hold MBA degrees in Marketing! What were they being taught at university? Frankly, I’m afraid to find out the answer…

Rather than dealing with an academic description of what marketing is (google Stanton’s definition, if you really, really need one), I wanted to talk about the essence of marketing, which involves one or both of the following four-letter words, repeatable in all company:

• NEED
• WANT

It amazes me how many marketers seem to ignore these two simple words. Unless one understands what the core need or want of a target market, how can one satisfy that need or want with the appropriate product or service? To whittle Stanton’s definition down to the basics, marketing is about getting paid for offering a product or service that satisfies a client’s needs and/or wants. Without understanding this, marketers are, for all intents and purposes, product pushers, and nothing more.

In my work, I constantly ask people about what their companies or organizations offer, and I usually get something about what their company does. What I try to do is get my clients and workshop participants to turn their thinking around and ask themsevels: "What does our product or service do for our customers?”

For example, I recently had coffee with a couple of colleagues, and one of them, an ambitious young insurance agent, said he was having difficulty in working out how to get clients to buy his product range.

The guy is very much client focused, as opposed to being focused on how much commission he makes – in other words, he’s in the business for the long-haul and wants long-term clients; a good thing, in my opinion.

My first question to him was what was he offering his clients. After a few goes at answering the query, he finally said, “I sell comfort.”

“Yes”, I answered, “you’re selling comfort, plus security, and peace of mind.” Just understanding what his offerings did for his clients, emotionally, opened his eyes to how he might be able to approach his customers in the future.

By understanding their needs/wants for ‘comfort’, he could tailor his offerings to meet them, and allow for changes in insurance coverage and investments as his clientele’s future requirements changed. This should build-in the potential to maximise client value at the beginning of the relationship, giving him an advantage over his competitors who are only interested in selling product to make commissions, short-term. It’s sure a heck of a lot easier to sell to a happy customer than constantly troll for new ones, the latter being the usual case in the Insurance Industry, I’m told.

This is why understanding the essence of what one’s products and services offer to fulfil the client’s needs and wants is the key to successful marketing.

In case you’re wondering, how do I define what my businesses do? We’re knowledge merchants, and how that knowledge is sold, its cost and in what form, is based entirely on the specific needs, wants and expectations of a particular client.

Copyright 2010, visavant, all rights reserved

Iran - It's showdown time!

According to the wider general media, the current conflict between Iran's fundamentalists and the country's more moderate groups may, yet again, be coming to a head. As much as many of us outside the region would like to see the Moderates' protest become a catalyst for social and political reform, I believe that the protests planned for the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution will only serve to harden the current regime's hard line.

What saddens me is that all this may have been avoided almost a decade and a half ago, when a more progressive Iranian government wanted to reengage the country with the West, openly admitting that the so-called revolution had not been as successful as originally imagined. The response from many Western countries, most notably the USA, was to reject these overtures out-of-hand. Frankly, I think the American reaction was a completely ignorant position, and was based upon that country's then rather conservative Congress wanting to punish the Iranian government for deposing the Shah in 1979 - it's the same idiotic mindset that's been used against Cuba for almost half a century (my favourite part of the latter is the threat of sanctions against any country that trades with the island state, which would include a number of European and Latin American countries whom the US considers strategic allies!).

Had the West responded positively to Iran's desire to reconnect, this traditional centre of Middle Eastern culture and political power would still be run by more progressive individuals. By forcing it back into isolation, it provided a catalyst for the Fundamentalists' return to power, and all the fun and games the rest of the world is having over Iran's nuclear programme.

One can only hope that the reformists in Iraq will continue their protests in a positive, constructive and peaceful manner and that the regime in Teheran will eventually listen to their concerns. Islam is an inclusive faith that traditionally preaches tolerance and openness, and perhaps those in power in Iran need to remind themselves of that.