What has been the most revolutionary change in the automotive industry in the last decade? You might think Tesla, Chevy Volt or Honda’s FCX Clarity. I don’t think so. It’s been the introduction of  Zipcar. A completely new business model based on human insights and understanding where the world (and each customer) is going. BMW is latching on to that trend by developing a “DriveNow” sharing system in Munich.

While the iPhone was a major disruption, I would argue the App store is the real disruptor by introducing a new, innovative business model. Apple integrated the hardware with a crowdsourcing model for the apps in such a brilliant way, that it was something materially different from just being a phone, but from how phone manufacturers make their money.

The formula for survival: Innovate your business model

Whether threatened by classic disruption or not, companies have a tough time innovating their business models. In fact, they don’t change them significantly. Companies that do manage to adopt whole new business models do it by creating entirely new business units that have new business models. They don’t do it by taking an existing business unit and turning it on its head. So, I don’t expect Honda (and other automotive companies) to get out of the automobile business. But I expect them to start a new unit that focuses on a highly efficient car-sharing system. (And, in the decades to come, I expect all car companies to shift focus from the car-building business to the people-transporting business.)

By exploring new, disruptive business models entire companies will become more resilient to economic changes by better defining and focus the core business. Business model innovation is so important because it allows enterprises to experiment with something that might work out, then filter it back throughout the whole company. It helps brands to better understand where the world is going and what you as a brand need to do to address a specific customer demand, independent from your company’s existing systems and structure. It requires from a brand to understand and focus on where the customer is going, where the opportunity is, and then build the right business system to support that.

Advanced enterprises will be able to compare how different the new business model is from their current one (particularly in terms of margins, overhead, and success metrics), they can get a clear picture of what they will need to do to grasp the new opportunity. Would it be easy because it dovetails well with their current model, or would it require to marshal different resources and processes? Knowing that, if the world really is going that way, then they can be flexible and respond effectively because they’ve already experimented with and built a business model that will take advantage of that shift.

There are many industries ripe for business model innovation

Let’s start with the obvious one: Media. Newspapers need to redefine their business model, not just putting a silly “The Daily” on an iPad. That’s not a disruption, it’s applying the old business model to the new world of content sharing.

Healthcare – how can we take out real cost and create greater value? Healthcare reform didn’t pay any attention to changing the business model. We need to make better sense of all the health data available to us and increase efficiencies.

Defense – we try to fight WWII over and over again. Enemies have changed. Our response needs to change.

Energy – we need better systems that reward people to save energy, give them options in using energy (Should my house be powered by coal, gas or solar energy – with a different price for each energy form) and energy companies need to explore new revenue drivers to get out of the pure consumption model.

It used to be enough to innovate by increments. Product 2.0.

The time is ripe to innovate through bigger dreams. Business Model 3.0

It’s pretty safe to say we’ve reached the peak of the group buying hype. (I’m glad.) While this doesn’t mean the end (or death) of group buying, I believe it will give way to a much more powerful of social shopping: tribe buying.

Group buying sites are all over the place: One day they offer a manicure, next day a whale watching tour, followed by 50% off for a restaurant 35 miles and a finger painting classes for 65% off. The wide variety of deals is interesting in the beginning but tired out my attention very quickly. Other companies saw this as an opportunity and provided more targeted offerings:

• Jewpon, a Groupon buying site catered to Jews
• Gluten Free Deals
• Daily Pride, a site catering to the LGBT community
• BlackBizHookup, a site dedicated to build awareness for black businesses

-

We will see a shift from group buying to tribe buying

All of us have passion points: Running, wine, travel, books, music. These are just a few of mine. You have different ones. The more specific, the better. There’s no reason to fight for my attention when it comes to passion points. I’m always interested. I always want to hear from you. I’m part of a running tribe, a travel tribe. And these tribes will use their collective power to disrupt the usual e-commerce/customer relationship. Platforms will let customers negotiate their own group discounts. Platforms will be able to communicate with brands to message their demands and brands will fulfill them.

Think about a local wine store. They deliver good wine (with a good story) for a great price. They have a loyal customer base. Very soon, they’ll be able to leverage that customer base to go to supplies and negotiate regular group discounts. More interestingly, they can use the power of their customer base to demand special grapes from vineyards. Vineyards and wine tribes can get closer to each other and match up their needs. Runners can band together as a tribe and demand specific shoes from Nike. Fans can band together to ask a band for a special performance. Readers can ask an author to write about a specific topic.

Group buying was an interesting way to increase demand. Tribe buying will turn the whole demand-supply model on its head.

Over the years, quite a few people have asked me what it takes to be successful in the marketing/advertising world. And I always answered “curiosity”. You need to be curious to stay relevant, to understand what people really care about. You need to be curious to understand how humans change behavior. You have to have a basic understanding of anthropology, neuroscience, economics, politics – you name it. While that’s still true, I’ve changed my mind and believe now that being curious is not the most important trait to be successful in marketing/advertising.

The real answer is empathy

Data insights are important. And I’m not arguing against it. But our industry tends to forget about human insights. Data insights fit neatly in a spreadsheet, on a PowerPoint slide. Human insights are messier and harder to obtain. To gather human insights you need to do more than just hearing what people say, you have to feel it. You have to feel the complexities and issues that contribute to changing human behavior. You have to feel how the moment of attention that you grab from people can turn into something deeper and more meaningful. This doesn’t happen by segmenting people or hoarding them into data clusters.

Let me give you an example: There are many people that can tell you all the details about location-based marketing. They know everything there is to know about Gowalla, Foursquare and Facebook Places. They can give you tips how to market in this space, how to stand out. They will give you that tiny bit advantage that will be gone by next week. This incremental benefit that evaporates over night because once anything is successful, marketers will copy it. These people are good at the “What”.

And, there are others, that are good at the “Why”. They will explain to you why people are checking-in. Why people want to connect with others. Why this might be something your brand should consider. They are good at the “Why” because they are empathetic. They can help you make a powerful and interesting difference. And really connect with people.

We need more of them. As we learned during the financial crisis, humans are not very rational. A pure data insights approach will ultimately fail. You need both. Or you’re just talking to a head and not connecting with the heart.

There was a time when influence was pretty much fixed and set in stone. Beyond our little family/friend tribe, we just had interactions with poorly connected individuals and groups. The connections were so poor that we often forgot about them, any move or change in lifestyle made connections disappear for good. (I moved almost 20 times in my life and my old stomping grounds are littered with lost connections.) Influence used to be characterized by repeated interactions with the same poorly connected individuals.

Influence is fluid now

Influence has nothing to do with popularity or fame. It’s also not equal to the nature or form in which we are connected to each other. Influence is about adopting an idea or behavior amongst the people around us and the others around them. Influentials don’t do anything to others, it’s the response of the influenced that counts.

Influence is not important when it comes to life-or-death decisions. When I dislocate my shoulder, I won’t ask my social graph if I should go to the hospital or not. But I will ask my connections if I should buy an Apple or Dell monitor. Or if that certain movie is worth watching. Influence comes down to move the needle between equally good and fundamentally indistinguishable options. And we feel comfortable to ask for advice from fleeting, indirect connections to millions of others and their groups and their connections. These groups and connections change for any decision I’m making. They are not fixed or determined by the number of Twitter followers or Facebook connections.

That’s one of the fallacies of the whole Klout debate: There’s no fixed score of influence. Everything is fluid.