Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Life is full of trade-offs. So, apparently, is business.

This morning, as part of Arv Malhotra‘s “Managing Innovation Processes” class, we had accomplished tech journalist Kevin Maney speak as a guest lecturer. Maney is author of the recently released Trade-Off, and presented the book’s namesake framework to us. Essentially, Maney has identified two conflicting forces in business: fidelity, which he defines as the total experience of something; and convenience, or how easy it is to get or do something. All products in today’s economy, he argues, can only be high in fidelity or convenience — not both.

Take music. A U2 concert offers consumers high fidelity — the music, lights, 360 degree stage, the bragging rights to friends — but generally low convenience, like traffic, parking, ticket price, even Bono espousing Africa. On the other side of the spectrum sit MP3s, iTunes and iPods. These are low cost and extremely convenient. But they offer mediocre fidelity: the sound quality isn’t great and there are no liner notes or cases to display proudly on your bookshelf.

Now, consider the compact disc. It sits smack in the middle of this spectrum. While it offers higher sound quality than MP3s, it is less convenient and provides significantly lower fidelity to consumers. Maney argues that these types of products — those trying to offer high fidelity and high convenience, end up doing neither. They fall into the “Fidelity Belly.” And there they die.

He can probably explain the concept better.

The “Trade-Off” was an interesting idea to discuss in class. Much of what we learn at Kenan-Flagler is about competitive cost advantage (essentially, Maney’s convenience) and product differentiation (his fidelity). Why can’t companies do both though? It was suggested that there are limitations on both companies and consumers. For example, as Starbucks tried to take its high fidelity coffeehouse experience to the masses, it stumbled not only because of operational growing pains (company-induced) but also marketing/brand challenges (consumers began questioning exclusivity).

There are big lessons to be learned here. Today’s companies can use the Trade-Off lens in two ways: to identify innovation and new product development opportunities and also to remain focused and disciplined at playing their own game.

Those that fail to do so run the risk of becoming obsolete.

Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Much has been made about social media marketing. (A Google search reveals 114 million hits.)

There’s a lot of promise for what social media might offer companies in the future. Right now, however, there tends to be a lot of hesitation and confusion. Increasingly, companies are realizing the importance of maintaining a blog, Facebook and Twitter presence. But it is the rare company that has sought to truly engage customers online in a meaningful and creative manner.

We briefly touched on this topic last quarter in Valarie Zeithaml‘s “Services Marketing” class. Wanting to dive deeper into the realm of social media marketing, it became the topic of my final paper. In it, I’ve summarized the strategies in which today’s managers can leverage social media to achieve three key business objectives: customer acquisition, customer service and customer retention. More generally, I’ve also recommended that companies:

• Monitor the online conversation and empower employees to take action
• Respond quickly to consumer complaints and praise
• Utilize reviews and consumer-generated content as “intelligence”
• Stay honest

114 million pages on the Internet? Make that 114,000,001.

Chapel Hill, North Carolina

As a Second Year student planning on starting a business, I’ve started to shift my academic focus at Kenan-Flagler toward those classes that will directly provide me with the tools necessary to successfully do so. One such class I’m taking now is an Entrepreneurship course offering, Innovation & Product Development, taught by Prof. Barry Bayus.

Throughout the quarter, Barry has walked us through the new product development process, providing best practices on conducting market research, identifying voice of the consumer, translating needs into specifications, brainstorming ideas and designing new products.

Concurrently, we have been working in small teams on an innovation project for mobile phone giant Nokia. The project has allowed students to directly apply all that we are learning in the classroom to a real business case.

My team has developed a product called the Family Tree. It’s a mobile phone docking unit, targeted at seniors, that integrates and simplifies communication and printing capabilities. Here’s the pitch that we developed and just sent to Finland for review by company executives.

With luck, look for the Family Tree on store shelves by next spring!

Or at least we hope so.

UPDATE: Here are the other team entries to see how we stacked up.