Alexis de Tocqueville observed that it is easier for the world
to accept a simple lie than a complex truth. Hannibal knew the same thing 1,000
years earlier. Today, if your company is in a serious jam, this human weakness can
be very useful.
Even at the best companies things occasionally go wrong. You've
messed up. Taken your eyes off the ball. And of course the competition is right
there to exploit your faltering. That's the other CEO/general's job. Exploit your
weakness. If he or she's really good or has good spies (the legal kind—we'll cover
them briefly below and in detail some other time) they may know you're in trouble
even before you do! That's a tough opponent for sure. The clock's ticking even louder
than normal.
So you're losing customers, maybe not many yet, but there's talk
of a better way than yours out there. You don't have much time and you are behind
the development curve. Things are grim. What do you do?
After kicking Development's rear you can do what IBM did when
computer architect Gene Amdahl jumped ship in September of 1970 to start Amdahl.
You generate "FUD". In fact FUD victim Gene came up with the term. It
stands for the "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt". IBM salespeople would skillfully
plant FUD in the minds of prospective Amdahl customers. IBM knew Amdahl was brilliant
and his starting another mainframe company could easily cause IBM serious problems.
So they put the word out, via back and side-channels, that Amdahl's computers were
somehow risky. It worked. Once again IBM made IBM the "safe" choice. "Why
take a chance? Why change? Stick with us. We'll take care of you.” The fact was
Gene's computers were cheaper and faster but IBM successfully created a dark, foreboding
cloud over them. This slowed Amdahl down and provided protection to IBM.
Microsoft has made an art form out of FUD (the term is frequently
used in the tech arena) in their battles to fight the very real threats of Linux
and Open Source. In fact Microsoft even discusses its value in leaked internal memos
as a tool in the Linux and Open Source wars.
Finally, in the beginning, many people believed, and some still
do, that Larry Ellison's move to buy PeopleSoft was just elaborate FUD. The idea
was that if PeopleSoft became a part of Oracle, PeopleSoft software would wither.
The object, of course, was to inhibit the purchase of PeopleSoft products (another
moral is to 'never mess with Larry, but that's another story). And it worked.
The point is it doesn't
take much 'Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt' to freeze the use of a corporate checkbook,
especially for a "risky" resource. And that's the object here.
FUD is particularly useful for the large company battling a smaller
one, because to established customers the "new small guy" generally feels
a bit risky anyway. The majority of the readers of this newsletter are in positions
of importance in large companies, many of them multinationals (the balance largely
entrepreneurs). As we all know big companies are seldom as nimble as small ones.
This can give the small company a tactical advantage. They can occasionally get
a technically superior product or service out quicker than you can. Plus, as we've
detailed previously, a smart small company can show up where you don't expect them—where
you are somehow weak—and have no, or insufficient, in-place defenses against them.
This allows the small guy to gain a foothold in your territory (what Sun Tzu called
"Ground"). It's David taking a swipe at Goliath. Again.
So, what do you do? Your product (software, drug, widget) is
late. The “why” is secondary even though you can dial that into more FUD ("Our
new drug is still 6 months out but it'll be a revolution. Why start your patients
on something new only to have to change them later for something better?").
What you really need to do, RIGHT NOW, is slow down the competition before they
get share because it's too expensive getting it back, and sometimes you can't. Especially
if what they are selling really is better—hey, it happens. Never forget, a little
bit better is often enough to induce customer flight.
Now is a time that FUD can be very useful. And yes, we could
discuss the ethicalness of FUD till the next equity holder's meeting but if we ask
them don't we know what the answer is likely to be? And they are the owners. They
want the maximum return possible and it's our job to provide them with it to the
maximum degree that is legal. Just don't go over the edge. Happily you don't really
have to.
You don't even need to lie here to win, folks. All you have to
do is create any or all of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. And there are lots of ways
to do that. One of the simplest is by asking the right question. If you discern
they are a credible new threat, find out what the David company fears most. To find
out, cruise social media. It's u-n-b-e-l-i-e-v-a-b-l-e what you can turn up following
a competitor’s loquacious employees chatting, sometimes anonymously, about what
their company is up to. We frequently monitor social platforms for clients and it's
scary what employees freely divulge. Read a couple of levels below the line in their
press releases. Talk with their suppliers, new customers, old employees. And finally
just put yourself in their shoes—what would you be afraid of? You're in the same
business. You probably know what he or she sweats the target customers might find
out. That’s what you toss into the spin machine, plant the seeds to slightly disorient
and leave the rest to the imagination of the David's potential new customers (your
existing and targeted ones). Never forget
that refuting takes a lot more resources than asserting. Ask any Presidential
campaigner.
Think about it...
