THE STORY
In the early 1970s, there was a fellow named Robert Taylor,
who owned a small soap company, called Minnetonka.
Taylor came up with the idea to sell liquid soap in small dispensable pump
containers. Although a great idea, there was no way to patent it. After all,
liquid soap and pump dispensers already existed.
This caused a dilemma. If the Minnetonka liquid-soap-in-a-pump
idea was successful, then larger, more established soap companies could legally
steal his idea and use their scale and clout to put him out of business. So
even if the idea was great, Minnetonka would probably not be able to benefit
from it, right?
Maybe not.
Taylor got bold. He decided to corner the market on pump
dispensers. By raising $12 million dollars—more than his company's net worth—Taylor
ordered 100
million of the pump dispensers from the only two companies that
manufactured them in the U.S. An order of this size gobbled up the entire
manufacturing capacity for these two manufacturers for at least a year, and
maybe two. That gave Minnetonka plenty of time to establish itself in the marketplace
without any real competition.
It worked. Taylor’s product, called SoftSoap, was a huge hit
and owned the category because competitors couldn’t get their hands on an
adequate supply of pumps.
In Taylor’s second smart move, he sold the business to
Colgate-Palmolive for $61 million around two years after introduction. This
would be about the time Taylor’s control of the dispenser manufacturers’
capacity was running out and anyone could enter the market—which they did,
causing SoftSoap to dramatically lose market share (which hurt Colgate-Palmolive,
not Taylor).
Companies hate it when they have no competitive advantage.
Without an advantage, there is no advantage to exploit. Without an advantage, anyone
who wants to can copy your business model and directly compete against you. Barriers
to entry and exit fall. A price war begins and usually only the largest and
best financed survive. Profits are minimal.
So to avoid this, firms try to build competitive advantages.
The problem is that firms tend to focus on finding their competitive advantage
within the product or service they are selling. After all, that is what people
are buying—it is what the money is paying for, right? So firms try to create uniqueness
into their product which cannot be easily imitated, using tools like patents
and unique capabilities.
My favorite story in this regard was when General Mills
introduced Frosted Cheerios cereal. In designing the product, General Mills did
not just take their regular, oat-based Cheerios and put frosting on it. Instead,
General Mills made the frosted Cheerio out of a secret blend of multiple
grains. Was this done to make it tastier? No. Was this done because it would
make it more desirable to customers? No.
The new formulation, according to General Mills, was done to
make it harder for private label competitors to accurately imitate the product.
It was done to create a small internal advantage, which I doubt will have much
impact on the imitators.
Sometimes, the best advantages come from not from internal
formulations, but from actions taken external to the product.
SoftSoap did not have any internal advantages. It had no
exclusivity to the idea of putting liquid soap in pump dispensers. In fact, it
was at a major disadvantage, because Minnetonka was a small player competing in
a marketplace controlled by giant consumer products companies.
So instead of looking internally, Minnetonka looked
externally. It decided to create its advantage in the upstream supply chain. By locking up the supply of pump bottles,
Minnetonka created an external advantage. It prevented copying by competition
not by making its product unique, but by making it impossible for competitors
to get their hands on a key ingredient from a third party.
So, when looking for your competitive advantage, don’t just
look internally at your product or service. Be like Robert Taylor and look for
external ways to create that advantage.
The principle here has to do with control. If you control access
to a scarce asset, you have a competitive advantage. This type of external control
can create even stronger competitive advantages than internal product
uniqueness. As we saw with SoftSoap, control of the external supply of pumps
overcame no real internal advantage. And we also saw that Taylor was smart
enough to sell the business before the effect of that external control was
lost, since once that control was lost, so was SoftSoap’s value.
Upstream Control
One place to look for that external control is upstream in
the supply chain. That is what SoftSoap did. It went upstream to control the
supply of pumps.
Another example would be Apple. They have been accused
multiple times of using a similar tactic. Sometimes, they’ve been accused of
locking up the supply of key electronic components needed by their competitors
(their equivalent of soap pumps). Other times, they have been accused of
locking up the shipping capacity from key technology manufacturing centers in
Asia to the US, thereby making it difficult for their competitors to ship their
products to the US in time for Christmas. Either way, the external control by
Apple gives them a competitive advantage.
Downstream Control
Another approach would be to control the downstream capacity
in a supply chain. For example, I remember talking to someone at Andersen
Windows shortly after they signed the deal to be the exclusive replacement
window vendor for Home Depot. Although Home Depot is not the only outlet for
replacement windows, it is one of the largest and most powerful distributors in
the space. By being the only replacement window available at Home Depot,
Andersen Windows had no direct competition inside Home Depot. That is an
important downstream competitive advantage.
GE did something similar with its appliances. GE made solid connections
with most of the major home builders in the US. As a result, they locked in a
number of deals to be the vendor of choice for appliances which come with a new
home. Other appliance manufacturers were frozen out. The ones buying these new
houses could pick which GE appliance they got, but not appliances from other
brands. This was a big competitive advantage.
And Apple plays in this space as well. By owning the largest
distributor of digital music (the iTunes site), it controlled how the entire digital
music industry evolved (to Apple’s benefit). Having only Apple products in the
cool Apple stores is a similar example.
And then there is Microsoft. Microsoft would probably not
exist today if it hadn’t structured the deal the way it did for selling its first
product (MS-DOS) product to IBM. Normally, in these types of deals, IBM would
have owned distribution rights the operating system they commissioned. But Bill
Gates took a lower fee in exchange for controlling distribution rights to MS-DOS.
This allowed Microsoft to sell the operating system to every other PC
manufacturer, creating the de-facto standard and a lock on PC software for
decades to come.
Promotional
Control
Another scarce external resource can be
advertising/promotional capacity. If you lock up all the key promotional capacity,
you can weaken competition’s ability to get the word out about their offering.
You see something similar with consumer electronics manufacturers, who try to
get massive publicity just before a competitor’s new product launch, in order
to minimize the competitor’s ability to create buzz in the promotional marketplace.
Now, one might think that in today’s internet culture, it is
harder to create promotional control. But think about this. If you lock up all
the relevant key words on Google, you can lock up the ad space on the search
engine and freeze others out a key source for getting clicks to their site.
Looking internally at what you offer is not the only place
to seek competitive advantage. Controlling access to external factors can also
create competitive advantage. In many cases, this external control can be a
more powerful advantage than anything you can do internally. Therefore,
consider external control when designing your competitive strategy.
In the end, who do you think got the biggest benefit from their competitive advantage efforts—SoftSoap with its external control of supply, or General Mills with its internal control of a slightly (perhaps even inperceptively) modified recipe for the Cheerios hidden under the flavor blast of frosting?
I am in control by your write up! thanks for sharing..
ReplyDelete