Comments

I was just telling another blogger about this "fascinating article that was related in September HBR titled, 'All Strategy Is Local.' By "local", they meant either "in the literal, geographic sense of being limited to one product or a handful of related ones" (i.e. specialized)."

And then I come here - thanks so much for the snippets as it's not online! I bought the current issue at newstand just for this article.

I think this 'All Strategy is Local' idea ties into the hyperlocal, microbrand, niche, long tail, less is more, little guy memes that are bouncing around the blogosphere.

I have a new services idea and it works even if the ENTIRE size of the market is only fifty prospects in the Bay Area. Very hyperlocal, very niche.

And very much a fingerprint.

"If everyone feels comfortable with your idea, it isn't an idea. It's an imitation. Push beyond that toward the edge [echoes Seth Godin's advice in Purple Cow too], toward something like a fingerprint - something so distinctive it resonates powerfully with a few." - Harry Beckwith, What Clients Love

Posted by Evelyn Rodriguez at September 2, 2005 1:17 PM

I don't see why big can't be combined with decentralized management. Virgin's business model seems to have cracked it. They're a vast conglomerate leveraging their brand locally in tons of industries. Worth a case study all to itself.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 2, 2005 4:08 PM

From my blog:

Thursday, August 11

Boomtown

["...According to the current projections of the Census Bureau, world population will increase to nearly 8 billion people by the end of the next quarter century, and will reach 9.3 billion people, a number more than half again as large as today’s total, by 2050..."

How will this affect our society and systems? Will we be able to cope with demands for resources, infrastructure, space, etc.? How will our culture respond to inescapable high density developments? Are we prepared? ]

Relating to this "Value of Vast" discussion, I have had a gut feeling for years now that as our population grows, supply to it will eventually be provided on a local [supplier] rather than global [supplier] basis. Whether that occurs because of economic considerations of large businesses or by demands by local/campus consumers, I have a funny feeling that we might begin to see a dramatic shift in our lifetime.

Posted by Tom O'Leary at September 2, 2005 5:24 PM

Hi Noel - I think the reason Virgin business model works is quite simply down to two words - Richard Branson

Yep ... I really do believe it is that simple.

Do the most robust research and complex academic case studies you like and in my book it will all be traced back to those two words.

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 2, 2005 5:27 PM

Trevor, I agree. He is an outstandiing businessman and an excellent leader. He gives hope to others. However, as good as Richard Branson is, even he doesn't have a monopoly on leadership, though he is one clever example of it.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 2, 2005 5:35 PM

I personally think the vast is bad for business and bad for a strong economy. I'm not really talking so much about how the Walmart model swallows up the small independents and creates a generic market in its path. That dynamic has been chrononicled and debated again and again. I simply don't think vast is a rock solid organizational model. To me vast requires tremendous resources to be able to maintain and also creates an organization with limited ability to change course.

Vast with diversification has less risk but vast within a single market (i.e. retailing) creates a ship that has limited ability to maneuver when an iceberg appears. (iceberg = new process, technology shift, etc) From an total economy standpoint, I feel much more comfortable with an economy with many watertight compartments that can be closed off if we strike the iceberg. It reduces our chances of sinking and provides more stability to reduce the chance of capsizing.

I'll stop with the nautical metaphors since I am neither a professor of economics nor a sailor!

Posted by Walter White at September 2, 2005 6:08 PM

...I should substantiate my 'gut' a bit by adding that there are a couple of factors that I think will impact global product/service providers in the not too distant future:

1. A growing trend of self-sufficiency and support for local/organic creation-consumption of products and services, and

2. A cultural shift away from habitual mass consumerism towards a more conscious, holistic, reclyclable, non-disposable, community-focused, quality-enriched lifestyle

...as we grow bigger (meaning our population), we will start to live smaller (i.e. locally)

Posted by Tom O'Leary at September 2, 2005 6:21 PM

I think we have to re-define what we mean by 'local.'

I know many people in America, Africa, Australia and various other parts of the planet - thanks to virtual conversations - much better than than I know my 'local' neighbours in my street in England.

My network of such contacts is therefore 'local' to me even though geographically covering thousands of miles and many cultural divides.

Maybe 'local' nees a new definition in the dictionary. Any suggestions?

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 3, 2005 7:11 AM

It's just one more business theory by people that teach it and have little practical experience. We can go back over the last three decades and pick out the flavor-of-the-month theory. What do you say we hire these guys to actually run a business? Wouldn't that be interesting?

So Greenwald and Kahn think that WalMart's operating advantage is a limited one? These same authors, co-authored a book entitled "Competition Demystified - A Radically Simplified Approach to Business Strategy". In it they state that there are only three sustainable competitive advantages: Demand, Supply and Economies of Scale.

"Economies of scale. If your operating costs remain fixed while output increases, you can gain a significant edge because you can offer your product at lower cost without sacrificing margins."

So which is it? Economies of scale and buying power are a significant advantage or not?

Every public company must grow (and become large someday?) or it won't withstand the quarterly analyst dance. Some can manage the size (i.e. GE) and some implode.

They state that "WalMart's overseas returns are less than half its domestic returns." Gee, you think that might be due to a complexity of factors such as wages, disposable income, local preferences for local providers thus putting pressure on prices, etc. It could be a myriad of things.

I will agree that delivering value is local, be that geography or market. Maybe WalMart isn't delivering the service or product value in some markets regardless of its price advantage. Just a theory; maybe I'll write a book!

Posted by Jeff at September 3, 2005 9:24 AM

Some great comments Trevor. I agree with the need to redefine local. I am lucky enough to work in a truely multicultural department (a technical support centre covering Europe). There are big differences in the way we approach things(customer problems) even in individual teams depending on the customers region.

Richard Branson is a very interesting case. A number of the Virgin brands were sold off a while ago - but it is interesting to see how people perceive him as still being the leader of companies he has nothing to do with.

I saw a very interesting documentary about him a few years back. It talked about much of his success is knowing his own limitations. He knows he is a figurehead, entrepreneur, deal maker and not a good manager so he leaves the actual running of the businesses to more boring types!

I strongly believe that success is often down to self awareness about what your strengths and weaknesses are and acting accordingly - Mr Branson is a very good example of that.

Posted by PaulH at September 3, 2005 11:13 AM

Brilliant comments Paul and thanks for your definition of 'the new local'

As regards Sir Richard I am a great fan and what you say about his legacy still being seen as fundamental to organisations that are no longer anything to do with him underlines the awesome success this man has created and led.

I love his honestly and simplicty. He is an extremely shrewd man who has not been 'screwed up' and restrained by attending boring management teaching sessions that you and I have attended and fallen asleep during!

Sir Richard is very much his own man and is a great example of a humble and yet focused successful leader in my view

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 3, 2005 11:59 AM

Thanks Jeff for exposing an apparent contradiction in Greenwald and Kahn's conveniently changing world view. Most of what's been coming out of the HBR for some time now has been rubbish, something along the lines of:

"Hey guys, millions of people are reading us. Let's write as pompously as possible and everyone will think we're intelligent."

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 3, 2005 1:01 PM

Tom: I too think that there will be a shift towards self-sufficiency, sustainability, and a more holistic lifestyle in general. If history is any indication, we will cycle away from materialism and consumerism. I doubt it will be like the late 60s and 70s but I do sense a growing need to have a sense of community and more fulfilling lifestyles among the people I interact with. Trevor - your observation of the need to redefine local is huge. The shift from a geographically based definition of local to one of common interest (witness this blog) allows us to be both local(geographic) and global(common interest) at the same time. I'm sure the pursuit of this question and its impacts would make a worthy dissertation in some sociology program somewhere. A most excellent observation!

Posted by Walter White at September 3, 2005 8:15 PM

Thanks very much Walter ... the new local is a subject I am passionate about.

If I had enough time I would write a paper .. I'm very happy to contribute to more discussion on this .... AN IDEA!!!! maybe some of us regular TP contributors can collaborate on writing something ... how about we call it 'Defining the New Local'

Comments please

Posted by Trevor at September 4, 2005 2:18 AM

I enjoyed Tom Peter's article, and it reminded me of another article about Small Island Marketing:

http://www.invisiblegold.com/Support/articles/island/

The trend toward micro-markets seems to point towards a greater success path with a neo-local approach, which connects to more a more personal touch, a higher attention to quality of life, and a deeper richer relationship than is possible with a huge company that has to outsource its support to a machine "touch or say 1", or a team in Bangalore or both.

Just a thought. Thanks to Tom Peters for his blog, and to those who write interesting comments. I like the idea of seeing a "Defining the New Local" article.

Harold

Posted by Harold Shinsato at September 4, 2005 3:20 PM

What is different about the "New Local" (Trevor could be on to something here)and the the dot.com promise of "mass customized"?

Recall the promise of one-to-one that the web and the mountain of personal information about us could be used to deliver a personal, custom experience.

Don Peppers and Martha Rogers coined the term 1-to-1 in the late '90s. They are still very CRM-focused. Trevor, is that where your thoughts are heading?

http://www.1to1.com/

Posted by Jeff at September 4, 2005 3:44 PM

Thanks Harold and thanks Jeff - great comments

Jeff - My 'thoughts' are fairly unstructured at this stage - Annie would probably say; 'So what's new?' :-)

I just feel - without being to complex about all this - that the 'new local' is simply about 'relationship building' across the planet (through technology) rather then a 'physical' or 'geographic' definition as it has been for the last many centuries.

I have virtually 'met' hundreds of interesting people through blogging for instance. (I have 'met' no un-interesting people by the way :-))

I may never meet most of these folks but it 'feels like' they are 'next door' - therefore 'local' to me

I am keen to develop my thinking on this and I want to create more discussion - I also think I might be on to something with this Jeff.

I am not always the best 'completer finisher' but I am always happy to prompt discussion and keep it going.

I look forward to more comments about this.

Maybe interested folks can collaborate with me writing a paper from Tom Peters regular bloggers - supported by Tom himself of course - How about it Tom?

Posted by Trevor at September 4, 2005 4:30 PM

You're on to something Trevor. Do you remember the writings of some writer much earlier in the previous century who lamented that he felt more anguish at the loss of his cat than of the loss of many thousands of lives on another continent.

What happens as The New Local changes this dynamic? How much of the physical-local feelings of sadness and devastation happened when we in this country learned about the loss of all the lives after the Tsumani, was in fact due this phenomemon of the "New Local", and the rise of the Global Village. Maybe it was a bias that so much of the American Media's focus immediately after the Tsunami disaster was on the pain of a few Americans and Westerners than the pain of the multitude of the natives. But showing Americans and Westerners being impacted also made it much more personal to us, in a way that only the New Local enables.

The Industrial Revolution led to assembly lines, mass markets, mass consumption, huge cities, and mass alienation that has culminated in technologies that have made it easy to disconnect personally from our neighbors, and as a result has manufactured an intense need for real personal connections.

People were required to have close ties with their biological families and their local neighbors in the agrarian and pre-agrarian past. The disruptions from industrialism and the information age created a huge disconnect from many of those traditional social bonds.

But the new communication technologies today also make it easy and attractive to connect one-to-one with those closer to us in the geometry of a spiritual-mental space map than of the earth map of longitude and lattitude.

Maybe it is the new local that can save the planet (and our careers/businesses) - as it makes it possible for a very personal compassion and relationship to those we connect with around the globe.

But I don't think there's much hope for creating those kinds of interpersonal connections, or a real sense of the new local, by looking at a pseudo personalized screen manufactured by a process running on a grid driven-database, I don't care how many teraflops were used, or terabytes were consumed in the making of that so called personalized webpage.

Maybe strategy will really need to be local, or "new local", whatever that turns out to be.

Posted by Harold Shinsato at September 4, 2005 5:12 PM

I really endorse the idea of a shift towards self-sufficiency, sustainability, and a more holistic lifestyle in general. I am fully aware of business (economies) life cycles; what is born will die (clearly, unless biotechnology and nanotechnology get it its way). What worries me the most is the lack of greater (formal and informal) “systems of solidarities” (e.g. insurers, re-insurers). They cannot pay for an incurred “loss” if there are not (i) Capitalistic firms (frictionlessly) and (ii) if Solidarity is not brought into action (pragmatic solidarity to make the core business get the “financials” soundly). I really support these values. How do we, as an example, build infrastructures (tangible and intangible ones) for almost 7 billion (demanding) souls? Here’s, to me, the “catch”. Maybe a “Catch 22”. I believe we must apply the best of values, the highest of ethics, but we also need that the developing world to get entrepreneurially rolling to have the “purchasing empowerment” to interrelate with the rest of the “already-spinning” world. Otherwise, and truly respecting everyone’s POVs, I don’t know how we will get it right. YOU CAN BUY “MATERIAL THINGS” AND AT THE SAME TIME YOU MUST (NOTE THE WORDS “YOU MUST”) ENRICH YOURSELF INTELLECTUALLY AND SPIRITUALLY. Evidently, just buying “stuff”, without the CONCURRENTLY ENHANCEMENT OF THE INTELLECT AND THE SPIRIT, WILL BREED ---NOT SO METAPHORICALLY SPEAKING--- “BRAINLESS CONSUMERS”. This must change. It’s absolutely necessary for most everyone to get “advanced risk management” empowerment. You may have the idea (US$1) and the plan (US$ 1 MN), but you have to have the risk management capabilities plus the entrepreneurial ability (US$ 1 BN). It’s not only because the “ups and downs” of global economy; also because of those “ups and downs” of global climate, global ecosystems, global politics, global societies that rest on the pervasive concerns (“life/death” environments) of the “un-incorporated”. To “re-imagine” is not to get stalled; it is about getting better and better at manufacturing (tangibles and intangibles) and simultaneously becoming aware about how to get/provide the pre-conditions (the fittest possible framework) for others to responsibly take part in the “better sides” of globalization with sustainability and adaptability. Any betterment of the mind and the spirit WITHOUT WORLDWIDE SOLIDARITY WILL PRECLUDE THE VIABILITY OF THIS CIVILIZATION.

Posted by Andres Agostini at September 4, 2005 5:36 PM

Trevor:

I would be willing to collaborate on a "new local project" - perhaps it could gain some ground from a general discussion on the topic, followed by a general distillation in editorial form to put the ideas presented into an article of some sort. -W

Posted by Walter White at September 4, 2005 10:53 PM

Harold - I really like this. "But the new communication technologies today also make it easy and attractive to connect one-to-one with those closer to us in the geometry of a spiritual-mental space map than of the earth map of longitude and lattitude" I am amazed by the rapid progression of these technologies - and the pace is only accelerating!

Posted by Walter White at September 4, 2005 10:57 PM

"Defining the New Local" it is! viagra uk without prescription

Walter - I love the idea of a general discussion - something of a brainstorm really - then a distillation.

I think we could develop a really powerful article from all the experience and creativity that we have from our friends and colleagues in TP Blog.

The 'ownership' of the article is by all of us - I love co-operatives!

So far it seems like we have Walter,Paul H, Harold, Jeff and myself as collaborators - hopefully there will be more.

Shall we wait and see what comments we get over the next few days and then begin to pull an article together?

Posted by Trevor at September 5, 2005 3:09 AM

One hundred million people shop for groceries at Wal-marts every week.

If Wal-mart, was to partner with FedEx, UPS, and old USPS, to deliver your small packages to their store/market, not at your front door, and when you paid for your food at the counter by debt card, a clerk steps up and hands you the package, just like your next door neighbor. It would make Wal-marts a feel lot more local.

You could get your, used books from Amazon, or that dress from Ebay, at one half Wal-mart's cost, handed to you in the store by your neighborhood Wal-mart employee.

And I read HBR at the local library, reading the abstracts sometimes give the best ideas, before getting into the article.

Posted by Mike Reardon at September 5, 2005 4:54 AM

There was a time when the HBR put out interesting material. In my opinion, that time has long since gone. Now it's a masthead with a majority of its contributors pitching half-baked sensational theories hoping they'll become the latest fad, with a lucrative sideline selling training courses. I get regular e-mails from them (or at least used to before voicing my opinion!). I scan the summaries, but very rarely bother to study the full articles anymore. Pretty sure I'm not missing anything interesting.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 5, 2005 5:30 AM

Thanks Jeff - good article - they are just not in touch with 'local' sesitivity are they?

I recently had a bad experience with Vodaphone and can relate to some of the stuff in the article. In my case the main problem I found was they really did not want to know in the local store and everything was blamed on 'head office.'

They are really not in touch with the customer.I don't think it is necessarily the fault of the staff in the local stores - it is more a problem of central control methinks.

Why oh why do large organisation just not get it. THE STAFF AT THE FRONT LINE KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS ALL THE TIME is my mantra!

I love the discussion Jeff - keep 'em coming.

'Defining the new local' is keeping me alert! :-)

Posted by Trevor at September 5, 2005 6:43 AM

Trevor, hope you don't mind my saying that what might be more interesting than a new definition of local is information on how existing companies go about pitching their product or service to a likely market, after they've identified it. What are the best ways to create a buzz for say a small or mid-sized company with a product or service? I know they have to do it, and I know it has to have a local focus, but what is it they do (or have done), from soup to nuts, to build it?

I guess it all depends on what business you're in. I'd settle for some examples or stories from people who've travelled that road, maybe dodged a few swamp holes, as they did it. I've got a couple of stories too that I'd be happy to share in return.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 5, 2005 8:05 AM

Hi Noel - hope you are well.

Yep - absolutely agree with you - it depends entirely on what market you are in.

But then does it?

I don’t expect I will ever see a real human being who actually works for Amazon.com but they provide me a very 'local' responsive service from my own front room when I want a book. In fact Amazon service is usually better (I know there are exceptions!) than the 'real' local bookshop because you never hear those 'downer' words 'out of stock' from Amazon. The book is usually with me in two days and I have not had to go out in the rain paid to park my car and walked half a mile in the rain to the bookstore.

I wonder if anything is that special that it is immune from the technological revolution and the re-definition of what we mean by a local market.

Soups and nuts?? ...mmmm that is a tricky one ... I accept that soups and nuts don’t taste the same ‘virtually’ ... but I would probably be surprised by the way technology has made my corner shop down the road more responsive to their customers ..Yes even the availability of their soup and nuts!

I very much hear what you say but I still like the idea of pursuing joint interest with anyone interested in working with me in ‘Defining the New Local’

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 5, 2005 8:27 AM

viagra 100mg prices

What I mean by soup to nuts is learning about everything a successful company has done to create a buzz for their product or service. An A-Z if you like or a comprehensive case study.

Sometimes, it's also useful to read about problems companies are having and see what people suggest as ways to solve those problems. Some of the Sunday papers feature a small or mid-size business experiencing difficulties or challenges, like planning to expand their operations by entering new markets or trying to grow an existing one. Several experts in various business areas are invited to give their advice and often I learn a lot from some of what is suggested.

Perhaps it is that I am not understanding the purpose of defining the new local too well, seeing it as more of an intellectual exercise (which may not be your intention) and think that more could be learned by hearing from people who have taken advantage of it and how they went about doing it.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 5, 2005 12:34 PM

I am interested in both is the answer Noel.

viagra for sales in india

I am simply interested in thinking about and writing about a new definition of local. As with all articles readers will take away whatever they want to take away - nothing for some no doubt.

I am fascinated how technology is making human beings a much smaller and accessible family around the world and the consequences of that for our work and thereby our lives.

I really don't want to make this complicated.

Frankly I am not clever enough to have a complex intellectual debate. My original thoughts were that we can discuss the concept of re-defining local and then a few of us collaborate in writing something. It seems that Jeff, Harold, Walter and Paul H are interested in doing something jointly and I think I would just like to see us write something and let us see where that takes us and what it can be used for.

If it is just an intellectual exercise then that is fine with me. If it develops to something else then that is fine with me too. At this stage I haven’t thought any deeper or further ahead than that.

If nothing comes from it then so be it - I just want to explore the redefinition of local.

The best things I have ever been involved in have usually been symbolised by the lack of deep soul searching rather than because of it. Serendipity is more scientific than science sometimes. :-)

Lets keep this achievable, simple and pragmatic would be my view – but I am open to other views.

Posted by Trevor at September 5, 2005 3:32 PM

viagra in the states

Trevor, don't mind me. It's a fine idea. I was thinking that a useful starting point in trying to define it might be what successful companies are doing or have done to take advantage of it. Maybe from hearing their experiences will come a helpful definition of what it is we're dealing with and how to make the most of it.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 5, 2005 4:08 PM

Trevor et al:

I did a quick brainstorm of thoughts on the subject of "the new local" and here is what I came up with as a suggested framework for an article on the subject. It is being presented for discussion as a starting point.

1) Definition - explain the need to define the concept of local - no longer a geographic definition but also and simultaneously a state of mind that can span the globe.

2) Examples of what "local" is - this would be a number of illustrations that reinforce the need in the first section.

3) Describe and predict the implications of the "new local" in terms of how it will/does impact:

a) individuals
b) communities
c) business
d) consumers
e) governments
f) international relations
g) other

4) A summary which attempts to tie it all together

We could approach each question one at a time and in order to provide focus, then do the distillation (editing) process at the end. What do you think?

Edit/suggest away. -Walter

P.S. We could also invite Tom P. take a whack at it on one of his transatlantic flights - I'm sure he'd have 50 slides in one trip!

Posted by Walter White at September 5, 2005 4:55 PM

Fantastic Walter - well done.

I hope we get lots of responses - I will start giving it some thought.

Wouldn't it be great if we could get the great man to head it up?

Let's make it buzz :-)

Trevor

Posted by Trevor at September 5, 2005 5:45 PM

Trevor, Walter, Noel - there's another article in this months HBR written first hand by one of the people behind the Outback Steakhouse chain. It's not one I'm familiar with in my quiet part of the UK so I can't say how much is self-publicity and how much is "this really works". But what is fascinating is how they appear to use clear ethical and behaviour standards in conjunction with cash incentives to create a pretty uniform environment in which staff are motivated / encouraged / required to treat their customers in a personal and friendly way. They're selling a pretty uniform menu served in pretty uniform restaurants against stiff competition, but they're trying to make it a personal experience everywhere. And if their management structure is as lean as they say, then WOW!

Take a look and see how they seem to be addressing the "new local" idea.

viagra 50 mg drug prices

P.S. I agree with most of the comments above about HBR (my take: they over-intellectualise just about everything they touch and they make the obvious sound like the greatest ever insight) but I also approach it with the aim of trying to get at least 1 good idea from it, even if their pompous tone does make it hard work each month!

Posted by Mark JF at September 6, 2005 6:55 AM

Read the HBR summary and Outback's annual report. They've got flat earnings so I'm betting the article is mostly PR, suggesting that they're soon going to look to raise additional investment to fund their next restaurant theme idea and a plug in the HBR might help to prepare the ground with all those institutional investment readers, maybe even bring in a few new customers.

Here's something Harold Geneen said about the restaurant business:

"I'm on the board of a restaurant chain and I know a lot of people in the trade. And nobody ever knows if a particular restaurant or its theme will succeed. It helps to find a good location and hire a motivated staff, of course. But even then, a restaurant can fail. You can summarize the industry in four words: Some work, some don't."

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 6, 2005 7:58 AM

Noel - your (understandable) antipathy towards the HBR is at risk of blurring your ability to look at the case study and pinch a few good ideas. Their business model may or may not be ideal but a lot of their principles are darned good. Maybe some restaurants work and some don't, but the application of certain guidelines sure makes one outcome more likely than the other. Go on, force yourself, read the article!!!

Posted by Mark JF at September 6, 2005 10:26 AM

Ok then - lets spend some time on the first question - What is the new definition of "local?"

Dictionary.com defines local as:

Of, relating to, or characteristic of a particular place: a local custom; the local slang.
Of or relating to a city, town, or district rather than a larger area: state and local government.
Not broad or general; not widespread: local outbreaks of flu.
Of or affecting a specific part of the body: a local infection.
Making all possible or scheduled stops on a route; not express: a local train.

Clearly, all these definitions are related to geography or area. The new local, as previously pointed out, includes states of mind or views created through communications linkages. Blogs would be an example of a virtual community which resides on a server in a specific location but actually has residents/participants from all around the globe.

What are some other/better ways to describe the new local?

PS- Mark do you have a link to the article you referenced or is it only available to subscribers?

Posted by walter white at September 6, 2005 10:46 AM

Mark, you might be right. I'll do my best to find a copy of it and if I fail, I would like you to know that I have some very good excuses:

I'm cheap.
None of my pals subscribe anymore.
There are no newsagents within a 100 miles that would carry it.
I have a bad back.

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 6, 2005 11:57 AM

Walter / Noel - it's only available to subscribers, I'm afraid. C'mon Noel, this ranks up there with, "Sorry Sir, the dog ate my homework"!!!

Posted by Mark JF at September 7, 2005 3:03 AM

: )

Posted by Noel Guinane at September 7, 2005 5:15 AM

Hi Walter

How about something on these lines as a starter

Local - a 'community' of interest that is not restricted geographically. It may be psychologically local or a virtual/technological local. Geography is not an issue.

viagra australia paypal

We don not seem to be getting any comments - so far Walter - what do you think about it? - shall we carry on and wait for more comments?

The snag is TP posts are soon 'old' and people probably do not return to this page.

Trevor

Posted by Trevor Gay at September 8, 2005 7:07 AM

Like Tom Peters., I haven't been very impressed with the type of things the Harvard Business Review has concentrated on these last few years. Much more interesting to me is Strategy + Business. But the recent article "All Strategy is Local" is an exception and in many ways goes to the heart of a growing debate between local and central ... a debate that the Internet is involved with as well as things like relief efforts after Katrina.

I am reminded of a fascinating article in HBR in 1998 in the midst of all of the rising dot.com and globalism enchantment. It was by Michael Porter and called "Clusters and the New Economics of Competition." An abstract from HBR: Today's economic map of the world is dominated by what are called clusters: critical masses - in one place - of unusual competitive success in particular fields. Clusters are not unique, however; they are highly typical - and therein lies a paradox: the enduring competitive advantages in a global economy lie increasingly in local things - knowledge, relationships, motivation - that distant rivals cannot match. Untangling the paradox of location in a global economy reveals a number of key insights about how companies continually create competitive advantage. What happens inside companies is important, but clusters reveal that the immediate business environment outside companies plays a vital role as well. This role of locations has been long overlooked, despite striking evidence that innovation and competitive success in so many fields are geographically concentrated. " See a reprint of the article at ...
http://polaris.umuc.edu/~fbetz/references/Porter.html

The current "All Strategies Are Local" plays on this important article of Porters. However, I think it goes beyond this by saying that "strategy" is local while Porter (if I might suggest) said that many leading industries are concentrated geographically.

Any other comments?

I'm going to have to start glancing at the HBR more if they begin publishing stuff that is actually worthwhile again.

John Fraim, President
The GreatHouse Company
Columbus, OH

Posted by John Fraim at September 10, 2005 9:05 AM

MarkJF: Don't accuse me of being a subscriber! I always buy it at a news stand, have been for years. Big airports, for obvious reasons, are a good bet.

Posted by tom peters at September 10, 2005 9:24 AM

Trevor:

I actually made a reply to you last post late last week but upon my return from a short trip it appears that it didn't complete the process. I would suggest that perhaps we continue this particular issue on your blog or perhaps on a backpackit page. Tom's site is so rich and the volume of new comments make it very difficult to concentrate on a single topic for very long. You would just need to point those who expressed some interest in this idea to the appropriate place. I'm still game!

Posted by Walter White at September 11, 2005 3:08 PM