Playboy Outsourcing Operations? Times must really be tough!!

Playboy Enterprises Inc. recentlly announced that they will be outsourcing most of their operations to American Media Inc. in a 5-year partnership deal.

Apparently it's not party time anymore at the company Hugh Hefner started (partly with money loaned by his mother). In fact they have seen their margins erode progressively over time. They netted out $2.3MM profits on revenues of $331MM in 2006 (0.7% margin), in 2007 they made $4.9MM in profits on $340MM in revenues (1.4% margin). To put their operating profitability in perspective, consider this- Playboy operating profits in '07 were $10MM, giving an operating margin of 2.9%. Bauer Consumer Media, publishers of FHM magazine had operating profits of £65.4MM during the 12 months to 31 March 2008 on revenues of £313.1MM- a 20.9% margin. So they do need a revamping of their operational strategy. Especially given the manual intensive nature of the publishing business, the economies of scale AMI can bring to the table may reeally unlock the profit potential at this controversial yet iconic brand. I guess they are hoping that AMI, which has a score of successful magazine titles in their portfolio can help them improve operational effectiveness.

Review of "The Shift Index 2009: Industry Metrics and Perspectives” (Deloitte.com Article)

I came across this report from Deloitte “The Shift Index 2009: Industry Metrics and Perspectives” (published November 4, 2009) that takes a deep dive look at Corporate performance across a broad group of industries including Aerospace& Defense, Financial Services Consumer Products and Retail, Technology, Media, Telecommunications, and Automotive. In spite of the vague and cryptic nature of the content, I think there is some real value in going through this (that is if you have the patience to digest a 208-page manuscript- someone should talk to the authors about the need to be succinct when producing content for web-publishing).


The key theme of this rather lengthy report is that Return on Assets across public companies is down 75 percent and corporate performance metrics currently utilized across businesses may not be appropriate.

The report then proposes that there is a “Big Shift” in underlying economic and behavioral trends the convergence of which is the fundamental driver of this performance erosion. The report then goes on to dissect how this so-called Big Shift is playing out across these different industries.

The report further proposes a “Shift Index” to quantify this phenomenon along three dimensions (quantified by 3 other indices- I suppose they need to make it complicated to sound sophisticated!):

Foundation Index: As defined by the report “The Foundation Index reflects new possibilities and challenges for business as a result of new technology capability and public policy shifts.” Put simply this is the infrastructure that has redefined business processes including digital infrastructure, and asynchronous and integration of geographically disparate resources that optimizes productivity. This metric is apparently evaluated at economy-level and therefore not analyzed by industry. Not sure why this would not differ across industries in an economy?

Flow Index: Defined by the report as “the Flow Index, is characterized by the increasing flows of capital, talent, and knowledge across geographic and institutional boundaries.” Translation- this basically builds on the Foundation Index- which is a more static perspective of resources. The Flow Index emphasizes the fact that Knowledge, Technology and other resources are in a constant state of flux and emphasizes the ability to constantly tap into evolving reservoirs of these resources to replenish current resources (not surprisingly- in the spirit of complicating concepts in pursuit of sophistication the report looks at two additional metrics within the Flow Index- Inter-firm Knowledge Flows and Worker Passion metrics).

Impact Index: If the descriptions on the previous two metrics were a bit vague, this one borders the esoteric. “…the Impact Index reflects how well companies are exploiting foundational improvements in the digital infrastructure by creating and sharing knowledge— and what impacts those changes are having on markets, firms, and individuals.” From my humble view-point, I think this is basically a measure of how well companies leverage their abilities around the previous two indices to create competitive advantage- I can buy that.

All in all I think there is some very useful information in this report, as to the effort required to go through this article to get to that information- to tweak a quote from a well-known movie "the juice may be just about worth the squeeze". If you are looking for specific analysis for the industry vertical of your interest, I would recommend going through the corresponding section of the report- what I have summed up above should save you some time on the rest of the material.

Note: This is an independent and unsolicited review of publicly-available material and neither the writer of this commentary nor this website takes any credit or liability for the original material being reviewed in this commentary. Please use your judgment in considering this review.

Riding out the Recession with Lean Business Strategies

Businesses in the present economy are under pressure as the pace of revenue growth slows down to a crawl, compressing profit margins as revenues barely exceed fixed costs. Of course you can still drive growth through share gains and lower costs by targeting jobs for elimination, but when industry growth is nonexistent, your competitors will protect market-share fighting tooth and nail. Also there’s only so many jobs that can be eliminated without cutting into the core of the organization. Here are some measures that can be taken to tighten the organizational belt and drive austerity within the organization- some old ideas and some new.

Internal Impact: Reinforce your core and increase operational agility

Drive Operational Efficiency:
Leverage matrix relationships and pool resources across functional groups. Also evaluate the opportunity of creating smaller multifunctional “SWAT” teams that can rapidly deployed to tackle complex one-time assignments across the organization. Protect cash reserves to compensate for credit paucity during recessions- don’t over-leverage. Acquisitions may seem very attractive during recessions as valuations are low, but acquisitions add a lot of burden on the company in the integration process during a time when corporate energy needs to be conserved- bite only as much as you can chew!

Focus on competitive advantage:
Every firm at some point started with some competitive advantage that enabled them to enter a market effectively and when times get tough, it becomes critical to leverage this inherent expertise. This also offers the surest opportunity for growth- by simply taking your competitive advantage to newer markets, rather than trying to get into markets where you have peripheral or no expertise. Bring the game to where you have an advantage.

Streamline your Product Portfolio:
Innovation is critical to growth, but depending upon the industry, only about 30% of all innovations have the ability to drive incremental growth (without cannibalizing core business). New product trials to identify successful innovations consume precious resources that are critical to corporate health during tough economic times. Plants are masters at evolving through tough environmental conditions and provide us a valuable lesson in growth- you can only grow if you survive. In bad weather, plants conserve resources and do not produce flowers, fruits or seeds. These are critical for it’s proliferation, but consume precious energy in producing, which is better used in staying alive. Take a realistic look at your innovation portfolio, rank them by short-term probability of success and take the top 25% or fewer to trial.

Enhance existing product features:
Leverage customer data and market research to understand what product features are the most valuable to customers and enhance core portfolio. Remember when resources are scarce then innovation needs to be efficient.

External Impact
Maximize Customer Value Proposition
Understand what customer need your product serves and try to maximize the product’s ability to serve that need. This goal determines the focus of internal impacts 2, 3 and 4 above. For instance if functional benefits are the primary need your product serves then minimize packaging and other peripheral costs and increase the functional offering. If quality not quantity is the key benefit your customer derives out of your product, then quantity not quality is what needs to be adjusted to protect margins.

Retention rather than acquisition focus
In most industries, acquisition costs are very high and there is a net negative cash flow of replacing an existing customer with a new customer when factoring these acquisition costs. If there is a moderate to high degree of customer turnover, your marketing dollars are better spent on retention rather than acquisition.

Protect core market
Your core market segment and is what drives your main cash flow and your core customers are the most loyal. It is easy to take this for granted as corporate leaders focus on making their mark on newer areas of growth, but when faced with economically challenging times, the castle needs to be protected from competitive incursions. This is also your most familiar grounds from which to weather out economic storms.

Satisfy broader range of existing customer needs
This is probably the lowest hanging fruit and also the most important in all of your external opportunities available. During economic hardships every single of your customers are trying to stretch their dollars and if there are innovation opportunities available to fulfill multiple customer needs with fewer products, these should be capitalized.

Return on Product Innovation: Measuring your Innovation Pipeline

Innovation is a critical growth driver for most industries, but more so for industries that are mature. Growth industries are less reliant on an ongoing pipeline of innovations because the full potential of the existing portfolio hasn’t been maximized yet, penetration can be further increased and new markets can be expanded into, where success with existing products can be replicated. Products and brands in mature industries on the other hand are characterized by a lack of differentiation outside of price- barriers to entry are low, which increases the number of market players, pushing marginal profits down. In such an environment, innovation provides a strong differentiating factor, allowing a brand to lower dependency on price as a competitive lever.
So if you are responsible for the strategic planning for your firm and not in an early stage industry, you need to be thinking about your innovation pipeline and it’s not enough to say you have a department for innovation- in most industries only 1 in 10 innovations succeed. So you not only need to have a team in place that has a network reach both inside and outside the organization that allows ideas to funnel up, but you need to also have the right metrics in place to evaluate the performance of your innovation strategy vis-à-vis your industry. A study by McKinsey (McKinsey Global Survey Results: Assessing innovation metrics, October 2008) suggests that a large percentage of executives even at companies that actively pursue innovation don’t formally assess innovations at all.
One way to evaluate innovations is using Return on Product Innovation (ROPI) measured through in-market tests (in-market tests are also risky because your competitors can copy it and bring to market faster than you, stealing your thunder). For ‘breakthrough’ innovations that you are planning to take straight to the market without first testing, ROPI can be estimated as ‘one-year out ROPI’, ‘two-year out ROPI’ and so on. At the end of year 1, forecasts can be used to estimate breakeven time for ROPI to turn positive and marketing ROI can be used to evaluate opportunity to optimize marketing strategy to improve ROPI.

ROPI={[Dollar Sales-Cannibalized Sales]/ [Fixed Cost + (Variable Cost*Units Sold)]-1}*100

Fixed costs can include development or other one-time costs related to production, variable costs are usually ongoing production, marketing and distribution costs. You need to deduct cannibalized sales, because these are sales you would have gotten even without the innovation. This equation can be modified for any custom inputs particular to your industry or the nature of innovation. For instance, if estimating ROPI for an in-market test then using the full fixed cost for development is not fair and should be factored down based on the ratio of size of market tested vs. the total market-size.

Evaluating Market Expansion Strategies: Vertical or Horizontal?

With the recent turmoil in the Economy, deals and opportunities are soon to follow as astute business persons hunt for opporunities for consolidating their position by moving into spaces vacated by fallen players. Easiest venues for expansion are horizontal, as they encompass your core area of expertise and help topline growth. Cost efficiency benefits are critical components in evaluating a horizontal expansion opportunity. Horizontal expansion strategies can be further broken out into geo-demographic expansion versus channel expansion strategies, but all these still entail doing what you are good at in new venues. Efficient marketing and distribution networks are important to the success of horizontal strategies.

Vertical expansion on the other hand is a trickier proposition as it entails venturing into an area you are only familiar with but lies outside your core competitive advantage, but done correctly will significantly impact your bottomline. Synergy benefits are very important for vertical expansion opportunities. Operational excellence too can go a long way in making a vertical expansion strategy very successful.

Industry lifecycle is also a big determinant of the feasibility of one versus the other. Growth industries make horizontal expansion very attractive and important for market leadership, whereas for mature phase industries horizontal expansion may not offer as much ROI as margin improvement through vertical expansion.