|
Copyright 2002, 2003, Robert S. Cascaddan, MBA |
|
This article was also Published in the February 2003 Issue of Cycle Scene Magazine |
“Attracting a New Generation of Riders to the Sport of Motorcycling”
“Disruptive Technology = Revolutionary Changes”
A Qualitative Analysis
By
Robert S. Cascaddan, M.B.A.
The weight of motorcycles can be intimidating to new
riders. On the other hand, low weight
improves acceleration, braking, and handling.
Rigidity is less important on a lighter bike. Low weight is also fun.
In the July 2001 issue of Bike there was an
article entitled “Slide Club” about rear-wheel steering by Grand Prix
motorcycle racers. Most of the racers
in the article feel that sliding the rear of the bike isn’t necessarily faster,
but that it gives them a better feel for traction. In addition, some of them like to slide the rear because it is
fun. Sliding is a popular subject among
Super Motard (also known as Motard, Super Moto, or Supermoto) riders, as
well.
Sliding is gaining attention in other circles. Following a Southern California exhibition
of “drifting” by a group of drivers from Japan, Import Racer expects
“drifting” to explode in popularity and has published a 2003 annual entitled Drifting. Today, “Sport Compacts” are popular with the
same young demographic once attracted to the adrenaline rush of acceleration
found in motorcycles and fast cars.
Even magazines like Hot Rod, Car Craft, and Popular Hot Rodding
have begun to shift their focus from outright acceleration to handing and now
regularly feature articles about cars they term “G-Machines” for their handling
prowess. The focus is changing from
outright speed, to sliding and the fun involved in cornering – as well as
sliding exhibitions that bear more than a passing resemblance to stunting.
Stunting is also receiving press. Primedia, publishers of Sport Rider and
Motorcyclist, recently published a single-run magazine about the Sportbike
Stunt Scene, entitled “Super Streetbike.”
The first issue was so successful, that a second issue is due to be on
store shelves the first week of September.
The first issue of the magazine relates Sportbike Stunting to Freestyle
Motocross. Freestyle Motocross has boosted
the popularity and public acceptance of Motocross – increasing sales of Motocross
Motorcycles. There are those who argue
that Sportbike Stunting is bringing new people into the sport and improving
public acceptance of Sportbikes.
Professional stunt riders prefer Sportbikes for their stability when
stunting. Amateur stunt riders,
however, tend to prefer Super Motards for the ease with which stunts can be
performed.
An increasing number of ex-Sportbike riders say that Super Motards,
which are light by Street Bike standards, share a Dirt Bike’s riding position,
and maximize the rider’s control for tight corners and stunting, are more fun
than Sportbikes. Super Motards are
basically Dirt Bikes or Dual-Sports that have been converted to run 17-inch
rims and Sportbike tires or “racing wets,” as well as a large diameter front
disk brake. A popular variation on the
Super Motard theme has less suspension travel and a lower seat-height. Examples of this variation are the KTM
Duke and ATK 600 Dirt Track
Motard. Super Motards are very popular on the
Continent of Europe and are gaining popularity in England, as well as the
United States. In the time since Don
Canet, Road Test Editor of Cycle World, created the Super TT Series, the popularity
of Super Motards has begun to take off.
Nation-wide, there are now 7 Super Moto series in the United States,
including 6 regional series and the AMA Red Bull Supermoto
Championship.
Under the emerging paradigm, motorcycles will be significantly lighter and there will be a revolution in handling. Motorcycles will become easier to control while sliding. Sliding around corners will become commonplace. Stunting will also become common. This is the direction the market will develop, but exactly how the market will develop in this direction we do not know. To find out, we have to follow the clues, pursue the opportunities, and adapt as the market develops. (To read about a very interesting set of these clues, read “Disruptive Technology = Revolutionary Changes”)
Traditionally,
Market Research has centered on collecting data. Potential customers are polled.
Focus groups are held. Potential
customers are asked what they want. The
data is then compiled and analyzed.
This process works well for analyzing an existing market. It does not work, however, if the market
does not exist yet, or has not been developed. According to The
Innovator’s Dilemma:
Markets that do not exist cannot be analyzed: Suppliers and customers must discover them together. Not only are the market applications for disruptive technologies unknown, at the time of their development, they are unknowable. The strategies and plans that managers formulate for confronting disruptive technological change, therefore, should be plans for learning and discovery, rather than plans for execution.[1]
Learning Organizations use the following techniques to consistently
innovate and redefine the basis of competition in their industry.
Experimentation uncovers markets that exist, but have
not been recognized and developed. Such
markets can often be important clues in the development of new markets. Built to Last refers to this approach
as “try a lot of stuff and keep what works.”[2] Experimentation is accomplished through use
of low-cost probes, of which there are two types. The first type of probe is a random probe. This type of probe is used to look for
undiscovered opportunities. The second
type of probe is a probe to test a theory about the market. This type of probe is used to test the
company’s understanding of the market’s needs.
Both types of probes should be used.
Competing on the Edge cautions “…remember that your best guess
will probably be wrong. Don’t spend too
much time trying to predict what you can’t.”[3]
Failure is an important part of success. R.W. Johnson, Jr., Former CEO of Johnson
& Johnson is quoted as saying “failure is our most important product[4].” Inaction means death when the market
changes.
1. Develop many types of low-cost probes. Vary the time frames of probes. Create short-term and long-term probes and
allow them to emerge from many parts of the business.
2. Be sure to choose some probes that have a chance of
failure, especially small failures, because people learn more effectively from
small failure than from successes.
3. Pick some probes that require implementation followed
by a measurement of results. People
learn more from hands-on activity and concrete feedback than from blue-sky
thinking.
4. Use more probes when your marketplace is particularly
volatile.
5. If you must use big probes, whenever possible break
them into a series of smaller options, or opportunities to learn.
6. Place more probes into the most likely future.
7. Pick some random probes. Random probes are the most likely to reveal the unexpected, the
unanticipated, and the previously unknown.
They are the most likely to surprise you and as such, to be the most
valuable – especially when the marketplace is uncertain.
8. Build on the results of your probes to shape the next
strategic moves.
9. Do not probe endlessly in a particular area. At some point, commit to one course of
action.
Developing new markets requires navigating the unknown. Changing the basis of competition in existing markets also requires navigating the unknown. This requires interaction with the market and improvisation. The interaction and adaptation in improvisational comedy provide a powerful metaphor for improvisation in the business world.
In improvisational comedy there is no script, there are no right answers. An “offer” is supplied from somewhere. Sometimes the audience supplies it. Sometimes it is on a strip of paper. Sometimes one of the actors on the stage supplies it. What is important is what is done with it.
An offer can be accepted, or an offer can be blocked. Blocking an offer kills that offer. It is a denial of the offer’s reality and value. An offer can be blocked by saying “no,” then dropping the subject, by ignoring the offer, or by saying “yes” and implying “so what?” Accepting the offer is pursuing an opportunity. The actor can accept the offer by saying “yes” and continuing to develop the offer. The actor can accept the offer by saying “no, but…” and using the offer as a launch pad to develop something new. Each line of dialog becomes an offer for the next person in the interchange. Each new offer builds upon the last and further develops the story. Improv works because the actors accept the offers they are given. If they block the offers, the scene dies. In Improv, when an offer gets blocked, it is usually because the actor has a “shadow story.” The actor has planned ahead what he thinks the story will be. When the offer does not fit his shadow story, he is unable to see it as an opportunity. Instead, he discounts or blocks the offer because it does not fit his shadow story. Companies do the same thing. When they are not actively looking for offers (opportunities) they miss opportunities that do not fit “inside the box.”
The
“Practices of Improv”
There
are four “Practices of Improv” that are critical to success.
Being
Present
The first
Practice is “Being Present.” In the
case of a company that wants to innovate, this means being physically present
with potential customers and actively looking for opportunities. It also means being present in the market
with new offers that potential customers have the opportunity to accept,
reject, or otherwise react to.
Being
Fit and Well
The
second Practice is “Being Fit and Well.”
Adapting to the market requires employees to change the way that they do
things. For a company to “Be Fit and Well,”
it needs to have prepared its employees to embrace change, not resist it. Being Fit and Well also means that the
company can afford to be flexible, test the market, and adapt. It also means that the company can do these
things quickly. This requires cutting
the flab out of the product development and production processes – reducing
lead-time, as well as the cost of trying something new. This often involves streamlining approval
processes, empowering subordinates, and putting all of the people required to
develop and approve a new product together in a team. Being Fit and Well also requires the ability to effectively
communicate new offerings to the target market in a short time frame.
A
company that can develop a new product in half the time and for half the cost
can develop a product, use it to test the market, develop a second product
using what it learned by testing the market, and get the second product to
market in the same time, and for the same cost that it takes another company to
develop a single product. The faster,
more efficient company is able to develop products with more timely and higher
quality information about the market.
The faster, more efficient company is also able to react more quickly to
changes in the market.
Accepting
Offers
The third Practice of Improv is “Accepting
Offers.” This requires actively looking
for opportunities, as well as clues that might lead to the discovery of hidden
opportunities. In many cases, the
opportunities may be hidden and the visible offers may look like
dead-ends. If these offers are blocked,
the hidden opportunities will never be found.
Accepting and pursuing all offers can lead to hidden opportunities. Accepting all offers requires a company and
its employees become conscious of blocking.
Offers are usually blocked because an actor has a “shadow story” to
which he is trying to make the scene conform.
Co-Creating
The final Practice of Improv is “Co-Creating.” Co-Creating is a product of the first three Practices of Improv. Under this scenario, the company and the potential customer share “ownership” of the product that is developed. The company gets a product that the customer is more likely to buy. The customer gets a product that fills his needs.
Accept
an Offer. Read Disruptive
Technology = Revolutionary Changes
[1] Clayton M. Christensen, “The Innovator’s Dilemma; When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail” (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997) 143.
[2] James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras, “Built to Last; Successful Habits of Visionary Companies” (New York: HarperBusiness, 1997), Chapter 7.
[3] Shona L. Brown and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, “Competing on the Edge; Strategy as Structured Chaos” (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1998), 157.
[4] “Built to Last; Successful Habits of Visionary Companies”, 140.
[5] This Section is quoted directly from: “Competing on the Edge; Strategy as Structured Chaos”, 156.
[6] Concepts of Improv taken from BA 507, Improv and Business Communication, taught by Brad Robertson, Collaborative Partner, On Your Feet.