Tag: commerce

May 28, 2009   Posted by: Loraine Fick

Q&A with Mark Gottfredson, Bain & Company

fishingluresIn today’s post, we talk to Mark Gottfredson about product complexity and customer choice.

Emcien: It’s natural for companies to add products and features to keep customers happy. What are the downfalls?

MG: The challenge of adding complexity is it’s the most natural thing in the world. Marketing comes up with new ideas for products or configurations to get the next bit of market share or a little bit more share of wallet. But most companies aren’t so good at retiring products; they don’t have a similarly robust process for taking things out of the catalog that no longer sell, or sell only small amounts. They don’t do a good job of balancing.

Most decisions we make are based on incremental economics. Each decision makes sense in its own right, but the costs of complexity tend to grow systemically. You can’t tie them to a single product decision. Take tinted windshields, for example, that you can sell as an option for $120 and 40% of customers will buy. Assuming the costs of tinting the windshield including inventory impacts, etc., are $9, it will always make sense to add the option. By itself, it is a rational decision, but when coupled with hundreds of other decisions, we end up with dozens of options like power windows, 13 exterior colors, 10 interior colors, 7 different radio and speaker combinations, etc. Eventually, the vehicle can be made in 10 billion different ways, and you don’t know what the next order will be. Since you can’t effectively forecast anymore, you get frustrated and buy a $50 million forecasting module to try to manage all the complexity. You have difficulty balancing your lines, build inventory and increase supply chain costs. Unfortunately, when most companies finally decide to reduce complexity, they “cut off the tail” of low-running options or SKUs. But they don’t remove the systemic costs, and they don’t see any benefits.

Emcien: Companies often overestimate the value buyers place on having many choices. What are the downsides?

MG: Go to a banking website like Citibank or Bank of America. The site describes itself as a full-service bank that has all the items you could want. There are long lists of products like credit cards with different reward programs, as if to say, “We have a lot of products. Surely there’s one here for you. Good luck finding it.” High complexity is a priori evidence that you don’t know what your customers want.

Emcien: When do fewer choices mean higher sales?

MG: When you understand customers. Dell understands customers well. Dell’s website is Spartan; there are just a few choices. If you choose a desktop, up pops three computers: high, medium and low cost. These three configurations are what your segment – home, professional, government – wants. You can customize each one, but you’ll make it as expensive as the next higher model, so then you switch to that and you’re still buying a standard configuration. Every time I have seen complexity reduction done right, sales have increased.

Emcien: How do overoptimistic sales expectations help to spread complexity?

MG: What happens is sales looks for a gimmick that gets them the next sale. Many manufacturers think whatever’s thrown over the wall from product management and sales must be good to go. And sales thinks more is better! Engineers love to engineer; they’ll give you complexity. Most firms build complexity systematically into operations, and then they build systems to handle the complexity, and that’s high cost.

Companies should think about what business would be like with a zero-complexity baseline – how they would operate if they offered just one product or service. The purpose of zero-based thinking isn’t to eradicate complexity; it’s an exercise to reimagine the business with the optimum amount of complexity.

Mark Gottfredson is a director of Bain & Company’s office in Dallas, Texas, which he founded in 1990. Over the past 26 years, he has advised chief executives and top-level managers in a wide range of industries. Currently, he serves as the Global Head of Bain’s Performance Improvement Practice and is also a leader in the firm’s business strategy, airline, financial services, manufacturing and energy practices.

Comments Off