In the Digital War Target has been lacking in headlines relative to its peers (i.e.: Amazon and Walmart). But recently Target's CEO, Brian Cornell, had an interview (see it here: https://youtu.be/dPBZ-Xrdb7Y) to discuss his strategic approach. Part of that approach includes pulling back on moon-shot initiatives and focusing on the core. This includes things like; opening smaller footprint stores in urban centers, store remodeling and fulfillment.
Cornell commented that Target had brought in entrepreneurs that they provided seed money to but he felt that they were “drifting out to another universe” and that he wanted to see shorter lead-times in the payoff to the investment. He also wanted to refocus the investments on the core business with the consumer in mind first.
Is this new approach to innovation more like pitching around the edges?
Should Target have had (and should have) a long-term strategic approach that would have enabled the entrepreneurs they brought in to be tethered to the realities (and constraints) of the Target business today?
How does this compare to Amazon with Lab126? Or Walmart’s Store No. 8?
Should Target be partaking in the digital arms race that both its biggest competitors are eagerly locked in?
Or is Target’s approach more similar to that of the GE vs. Westinghouse rivalry (as a note for readers: Westinghouse was a whir of activity buying and selling businesses that in the end lack a clear strategy. General Electric is still around today).
Facebook opened its first volley in the Content Wars (see: Apple vs Amazon vs Netflix vs AT&T/TimeWarner vs Comcast vs Disney vs FOX vs Verizon/Oath). Okay, it wasn’t THAT big of a shot in its bid to broadcast the Indian Premier League (Indian cricket matches) which it lost out to Rupert Murdoch’s Star. What’s interesting to note is that Facebook was looking at live content. Live content, the rule-of-thumb goes, is highly unskippable. Meaning that Consumers will watch the ads for fear of missing something that occurs. Additionally, the content is something that is preferred to be watched in that moment (no one likes to really see a replay of a game or have to avoid ESPN so as not to see the score of a game that they recorded). It also can be cheaper than building content for sitcoms or movies. Could their bid have been a primer for moving in on NFL broadcast rights that come up next year when Verizon’s mobile rights expire?
Comments
Post a Comment