Tesla: to Recall or Not to Recall?

By Automotive, Autonomous, Connected, Electric, Shared Vehicles, Service Lifecycle Management (SLM) No Comments

NHTSA issues a recall for Tesla Model S. Elon Musk: “the word ‘recall’ needs to be recalled.”

The back and forth between Elon Musk and NHTSA about Tesla Model S fire incidents and other safety related issues continues. Musk maintains that the recent software update to change the Tesla Model S ground clearance in order to reduce the likelihood of debris damage, of the type that might have led to battery damage and fire, is not a “recall.” Tesla initiated the software update voluntarily, before NHTSA completed its investigation and ruled in on this issue. At some point during NHTSA’s investigation, Musk twitted: “the word ‘recall’ needs to be recalled.”

Musk is, of course, correct that Tesla is able to reduce the headache to consumers and the cost that are associated by recall campaigns by updating the vehicles software over the air, an technique referred to as firmware-over-the-air, or FOTA.

However, a campaign (this is NHTSA’s formal term for ‘recall’) to rectify a design flaw or a quality defect is still a recall, especially if required by NHTSA and is subject to the TRAED Act of 2002.

On January 13, NHTSA issued a recall order number 14V006000t to address overheating charging plugs in Model S. Tesla will issue an over-the-air update to reduce the charging current, and will mail owners a replacement charging adapter equipped with an internal thermal fuse.

Again, Tesla is demonstrating the use of technology to improve the efficiency and efficacy of archaic practices used in the automotive industry. But a recall is still a recall, and even Tesla isn’t immune against design and quality issues that might require a recall campaign from time to time.

How To Win Without Differentiation

By IT Strategy No Comments

All companies are trying to differentiate their products and services from those of the competition. They believe that strong differentiation is a necessary part of the business strategy to create and grow a market, because, the logic goes, if their products or services are just like the competitors’, why would the customer buy from them? How will they attract and retain buyers?

I am frequently asked to provide market assessments, conduct SWOT analyses and help companies formulate a go-to-market strategy that would differentiate their product or service offering from the competitors and tell it in a credible and compelling way. The problem is that many companies do more or less the same thing, the same way, in the same market, and that they are unable to credibly differentiate their offerings from other companies.

In an HBR article titled You Can Win Without Differentiation, Freek Vermeulen discusses the question of differentiation. Vermeulen argues that when companies are unable to differentiate their offerings effectively, the only option they have is to drop prices and hope to make up some of the loss by increased sales volume, a tactic that is easy for the competition to match. While both consumers and suppliers are very sensitive to pricing, a differentiation and competitiveness strategy based on price alone is fragile, especially when there is ample supply of competitors and substitutes. In this kind of zero-sum competitive game, the ultimate winner of price wars is the consumer.

I believe there are other options for product companies to consider before lowering prices and engage in fierce price competition. For instance, product companies should certainly compete on quality, warranty coverage, delivery terms and service levels. In this type of differentiation, the buyer can make a reasonable comparison between features, functionality, warranty terms and pricing.

However, if you sell services rather than products, this is not as straightforward. Vermeulen uses the example of management consulting firms, such as McKinsey and Accenture, where there is no simple and obvious way to articulate and differentiate their capabilities and make a succinct, credible and reliable connection between capabilities and business outcome. Furthermore, the skills, capabilities and services these firms sell are common commodities across the industry and therefore do not form an effective barrier to entry.

DifferentiationWhen value differentiation is too vague and difficult to demonstrate, price competitiveness does not work. Potential buyers seek other ways to drive their decisions, and, as Vermeulen points out, they rely on other factors, such as the seller’s brand, status in industry, and prior relationships. In other words, the buyer switches from assessing and comparing features and costs to differentiating based on the brand’s credibility and trustworthiness.

This is where I see many companies, especially software and professional services vendors, struggle. It appears to be especially painful for companies transitioning from providing a general set of enterprise IT tools and services and wanting to ride the momentum of new technologies such as cloud computing, big data and mobility, and apply them task-specific functions in vertical industries.

Establishing credibility in vertical markets can be difficult. The buyer’s functional leadership and the employees need to have trust in the vendor to have deep understanding of their process and appreciation of the subtleties of day to day operation.

So here are some suggestions:
Don’t

  • Don’t assume that your experience and tools can be easily transformed from one business segment to another. Some do; most don’t. Take the time to develop a detailed credible business case that you can deliver.
  • Don’t oversell technical wizardry. Buyers of enterprise software and services consider your product roadmap and long-term commitment to the space as much as they do to your product features and engineering skills.
  • Don’t try to prove industry knowledge and demonstrate empathy by highlighting the industry’s poor performance which you are going to turn around over night. Your audience already knows this all too well. Focus on the solutions.

Do

  • Develop deep expertise and position in your target industries and business functions. Not through “desk research” and generic stories, but rather by demonstrating successful implementations, publicizing customer case studies that are real, specific and credible, and becoming an industry insider.
  • Focus on establishing and nurturing long-term strategic relationships with your key customers.
  • Seek partnerships with systems integrators and service providers, especially in industries that are complex and narrowly focused, as these often have a culture that is difficult for outsiders to penetrate.

One last parting thought. The strategy you use to define and demonstrate your company’s differentiation to potential buyers is not necessarily the one you discuss with Wall Street and industry analysts.  This is a subject for a future blog post. In the interim, you can review another HBR article by Todd Zenger: Strategy: The Uniqueness Challenge.

Further Reading:

 

 

Electric Vehicles Sales in 2040: Meager 2%

By Automotive, Autonomous, Connected, Electric, Shared Vehicles, Manufacturing No Comments
By 2040, Sales of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles will amount to a meager 2% of overall car sales

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2014 (Early Release Overview)

By 2040, Sales of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid vehicles will amount to a meager 2% of overall car sales, according to a new forecasting model from U.S. Energy Information Administration. Main reasons: falling energy price and improved fuel economy and cleanliness of gasoline engines, which will further improve by micro-hybridization in nearly 50% of vehicles sold in 2040.

 

The Mission of Tesla

By Automotive, Autonomous, Connected, Electric, Shared Vehicles One Comment

Tesla is taking unprecedented steps in response to media frenzy and consumer concerns about Model S catching fire as a result of damage to its battery pack. As Musk points out in his blog post titled The Mission of Tesla, the rate of fire incidents in gasoline cars is much greater than Tesla’s record thus far. Nevertheless, the company is taking a number of steps to confirm the root causes of these fires and is already taking measures to reduce the likelihood of these extremely rate incidents.

Even more astounding is Musk’s announcement that Tesla will amend its warranty policy to cover damage due to a fire, even if due to driver error. This is truly unprecedented. Sure, Tesla’s brand and electric vehicles technology always invite criticism (too often from the uninformed “I am not an automotive engineer but…” types) and should be explained and defended repeatedly. But to my recollection, no other OEM, and very few manufacturers of other products, ever stood so firmly behind their brand to offer warranty coverage for damage caused by the driver.

 

Survey: Are Drivers Ready to Trust Driverless Cars?

By Automotive, Autonomous, Connected, Electric, Shared Vehicles, Telematics No Comments

A recent study commissioned by carInsurance.com found that most Americans would not give up Driverless Cars Survey 1driving even if autonomous cars were available today. While one fifth of the 2,000 licensed drivers surveyed said they would gladly turn over the keys, most still have concerns about the skills and capabilities of a computerized chauffeur.

The distrust in autonomous driving technology does not seem to waver despite the frequent headlines that showcase Google’s self-driving cars and Tesla’s highly computerized electric cars. The drivers responding to this survey prefer to be sitting in a driverless car made by one of the traditional OEMs like Ford, GM or Toyota: with or without a human drive, it’s still a motor vehicle.Driverless Cars Survey 2

These data points show that even if driverless cars were available today, the convenience of autonomous driving isn’t going to be enough to overcome the technological concerns of the general public. However, when presented with the option of significantly lower insurance rates for autonomous – and safer – cars, those surveyed had a change of heart. More than a third of drivers said an 80% discount on car insurance rates would make purchase of an autonomous vehicle “very likely,” and 90% said they would at least consider the idea.

Now the question is: what will those ex-drivers do with the additional free time? Not, much, it seems. Driverless Cars Survey 3More than a quarter will text or talk with friends and 10% will just sleep.  Only 7% will use the time to work.