Economic downturn and IT Strategy

2009-08-28T16:23:00.001-07:00

Information technology and business solutions must provide higher-quality services for a lower cost. It must empower the business to grow again, to expand, and to prosper. The economy will always rebound after it has turned down. There is now a sense of urgency to come up with innovative ways to make it leaner, faster, and meaner. Not only is there a greater demand on technology groups but they are now also more accountable to the stakeholders and business community. Companies must make strategic investment in IT when the economy is at its lowest point for this is the only way the economy can come back out ahead of its competition. The business may even risk losing ground to other players who may make the first move to innovate, and this new innovation may be too big, catching up would be too hard.

IT is really the enabler of business growth, productivity and efficiency.

Job Search Strategy

2009-08-28T14:16:00.001-07:00

A great way to track your progress is to set up some folders and Google Spreadsheet documents. I'll tell you how to name them and how to track your progress. But the reason I recommend Google is because you can access Google docs from anywhere you are. You don't have to worry about carrying or syncing your work when you travel or away from your primary computer. I also highly recommend buying an iPhone and using some of the apps to track your self and to continuously check your email and the job boards.

The folders are as follows:

1. Target Companies
2. Active Jobs
3. Your Network list
4. Advertised jobs
5. Recruiters lists
6. Followups
7. Weekly plan
8. Resumes and Cover letters

The Nation's Utility Challenges

2009-08-27T10:55:00.000-07:00

There are many challenges that the utility industry is facing today. First there is a pervasive recession which puts pressures on those in this industry because the customers are under pressure. Then there are political and regulatory pressures from the government. For instance, the utilities companies need to develop smart grid and intelligent utility features. These companies have been working on developing smart grids for the past 20 years, but the progress has been slow. Finally, there is the AMI Advanced Metering Infrastructure that is being put in place.

The American Recover and Reinvestment Act ARRA is providing stimulus funding for projects like smart grid development, demand response methodologies, energy efficiency engineering, renewable development, clean-coal development, and retrofitting homes and businesses with new technologies. Its important to note that there is no national grid. The US currently only has regional grids which are loosely connected with one another.

These are not easy requirements to address. Some CIOs report that these requirements needed many months of preparation. But there is nearly $47M of stimulus funding going to eight projects in seven States. Almost $12M are going to Massachusetts-based superconductor projects. And an additional $615M is going to smart grid demonstrations.

The bright side is that 84% of companies say that they already have a plan to develop smart grids, though many companies have difficulty differentiating a new smart grid from a glorified version of their old grid. The development plan inevitably involves integration of varied and variant data types and data feeding solutions. Integration is arguably the most challenging thing to do.

Northwestern Energy says that the benefits of executing the plan include improving asset utilization, eliminating operating reserves, reducing operating costs, improving reliability of metrics, increasing customer confidence and convenience, and conserving energy. Courtesy of Warren Causey, Sierra Energy Group.

2009-08-25T08:04:00.000-07:00

Today's analysis: AMD long, Tiffany's buy before Friday, Sears sell, Dell sell. Short NASDAQ. Sell Ford.

Michael Dell made a ton of money today. Ben Bernanke will serve another term.

2009-08-25T07:23:00.000-07:00

IP Management of Nike and the adidas Group

General Company Background
The adidas Group (FRANKFURT: ADS) is the name of the multi-brand company that includes brands such as adidas, Reebok, and TaylorMade Golf, Maxifli golf balls, and Rockport brown shoes. Today, the adidas Group's principal activities are producing and marketing of sports goods. Products sold under the brand names adidas and Reebok include footwear, apparel, and sport accessories such as bags and balls. TaylorMade-adidas Golf offers a full range of golf equipment, golf apparel and golf shoe, and Rockport offers dress and semi-casual footwear known for their light weight and comfort. The adidas Groups has its world headquarters based in Herzogenaurach, Germany, with regional head quarters across the globe, including Canton MA, Portland OR, Indianapolis IN, Lancaster England, and Hong Kong, though Canton MA is still considered the World headquarters for the Reebok brand. The adidas Group has operations in Europe, North America, Asia and Latin America. The adidas AG Company in 2006 acquired Reebok International Ltd. for for $3.8 billion. Reebok International Ltd. at the time include the Reebok, Rockport, Ralph Lauren Footwear, and Greg Norman Golf brands, but now with the acquisition by The adidas Group both the Ralph Lauren Footwear and Greg Norman Golf brands have been sold. The adidas Group is the world’s second largest supplier of sportswear in the world. The Group has approximately 25,000 employees worldwide and generates sales of about EUR 9.5 billion. The adidas Group has about 25% of the athletic footwear and apparel market share.

Nike, Inc. (NYSE: NKE) is a major American supplier of athletic shoes, apparel, Nike Pro, and sports equipment. Nike markets its products under its own brand as well as Nike Golf, Air Jordan, Team Starter, and subsidiaries including Bauer, Cole Haan, and Converse. Nike is the largest sportswear supplier in the world. Nike Inc. has approximately 26,700 employees worldwide and generates sales of about US$15 billion. Nike has about 40% of the sports footwear and apparel market share.

Nike and adidas Patents
The adidas Group now has a total of 157 issued patents with the US Patent Office by the adidas brand and 2 issued patents by the TaylorMade brands. It also has 373 patents with the USPTO by the Reebok brand and 119 issued patents by the Rockport brand. It should be understandable that Reebok has twice as many patents issued as adidas does with the USPTO because adidas is a German company and would primarily file in Germany. The total number of patents currently owned by the adidas Group is 649.

Now comparing this to Nike, we see that the Nike brand has a very large 2135 issue patents. This is a staggeringly large number of patents when compared to the whole of the adidas Group. Nike has 3 ½ times more issued patents than the adidas Group. Cole Haan has about 5 issued patents and Converse has 49 issued patents with the USPTO.

Some conclusions may be drawn after taking into account the classifications described in ‘Edison in the Boardroom’. These conclusions may be collaborated with Nike’s superiority over the adidas Group is sales, revenue, popularity or market share, its actions to protect its IP, and the number of patents it has been issued in the USA. It seems that not only is Nike at a higher level than adidas Group in its management of its IP, but it is also more effective at carrying out the tasks necessary to master the lower levels. Yet some of these findings may suggest that the adidas Group may be better at managing its IP as a cost center and profit center than Nike, and many even suggest, alternatively, that adidas is at a higher level in their management of IP than Nike. I will begin analyze these level in some detail below.

A Level 1 Defensive company seeks to create a large number of patents for their portfolio, and enables patents to be generated and maintained, and allows its people to innovate. Clearly, Nike has done a great deal of this with its two thousand issued patents, much higher than adidas’ number. The costs must be very high to maintain these patents, and it must have taken a great deal of innovation to generate so many patents. A Level 1 Defensive company also ensures that their company is protected from theft and unauthorized use. Clearly, Nike has does this in their filed law suit against adidas over the Nike Shox patent. Nike is the more effective Level 1 Defensive Company than adidas is, based on this information.

A Level 2 Cost Control company aims to reduce the cost of their IP portfolio and refine the list of patents in their portfolio. The adidas Group seems to be more effective in this level than Nike is. First, and most importantly, as I already stated in the Company background above, the adidas Group sold off a number of divisions in order to focus on its IP and effort into a specific area, namely, sports footwear and apparel and golf. The adidas Group sold Solomon which focused on Snowboarding. It also sold the Greg Norman Collection and the Ralph Lauren Footwear divisions, both of which were more fashion oriented brands and had little to do with sports performance. Secondly, the fact that adidas has fewer patents issued may imply that they were more careful in their choice of what to allow into their portfolio.

A Level 3 and Level 4 Company are defined as a Profit Center and Integrated strategic organization. This kind of company wants to get immediate value from the IP and wants to use IP in a tactical way instead of a strategic way. In addition, this company wants to always extract strategic value from its IP and integrate awareness of the importance of its IP throughout the organization. I have seen evidence in both companies that show they are both dedicated to using IP as a Profit Center and as an integrated force. Both are heavily involved in tactical and strategic licensing to promote immediate or future value from marketing and promotions. Both adidas and Nike rely on their employees to dress and act in a manner that exemplifies their IP, including their patented technology, their company colors, their names and logos, their copyrights and trademarks. They are both heavily involved in sports licensing through sports avenues, sports events, football, soccer, hockey, basketball, cricket, and golf leagues and tournaments, as well as fashion icons, actors, and actresses.

The highest Level 5 Visionary Company has an objective to look to the future and to welcome destructive technologies and an embedded culture of IP and IA management. In fact, both Nike and adidas are staking everything in the future and always welcome new sports and markets to break into with innovative and radical technologies and fashions. In fact, the culture of IA management permeates throughout both corporate headquarters. Yet the superior performance of Nike over adidas and Reebok may suggest that it has been a more successful Visionary in this industry. The success of Michael Jordan and his footwear line attest to Nike’s victorious vision: “Just do it”. Yet the new adidas Group’s two slogans of “Impossible in Nothing” (adidas) and “I am what I am” (Reebok) may just be enough to outpace Nike in vision and victory in the coming years.

Nike Shox
Nike Inc. has sued the Adidas Group for patent infringement on 19 separate patents that make up the Nike Shox technology. This patent infringement stems for the more than 19 separate patents that protect the new idea for Nike Shox. The Nike Shox’s cushioning system is said to have taken more than 16 years to develop and is said to put a substantial amount of its revenues back into technology research to get this done. So understandably, Nike is not happy that adidas Group has come out with a technology that looks similar to, and uses similar techniques, as its Shox technology to maximize performance.

This filed suit by NIKE, INC., Plaintiff, v. ADIDAS AMERICA INC. D/B/A ADIDAS INTERNATIONAL, ADIDAS SALOMON NORTH AMERICA, INC., and ADIDAS PROMOTION RETAIL OPERATIONS INC., Defendants. (Civil Action No. 9:06-CV-43), claims that adidas has infringed on specifically two of its 19 patents that make up the Shox system, USPTO 6,487,796 and 6,298,314. See the pictures of the shoes in the appendix below. The claims will be heard by a jury now that the court has conducted a Markman hearing to determine the construction of the suit:

1. Discrete vertically-projecting, columnar support elements
2. Cavities that are of resilient and compressible material
3. A heel plate underlies at least a portion of an arch of the foot
4. Definitions related to movement of the person, from initially taking a step to the point when the step ends

I agree that this is a good first step by the judge to set the ground works. This may enable the jury to analyze the law suit with the intention of determining if adidas Group infringed upon Nike’s Shox. The adidas argument may be that it the Nike Shox and the adidas technology were only stimulated by a common set of studies that take into account consumer fashion and performance preferences. Both versions of the “shock” feature attempt to improve the bounce of the sneakers and the stability of balance during jumping and running. Both technologies also improve cushioning of sneakers during high duress. The jury will need to come to its own conclusions based on the evidence of the shoes in front of them. Compare the pictures of the Nike versus adidas sneakers below. Based on the outcome of other similar cases in the past, and those we discussed in our discussion boards, my prediction is that the jury will be split over whether or not adidas infringed upon Nike’s patent, and that adidas and Nike will settle the matter themselves with some fee paid out by adidas to Nike.

----------------------------------

Appendix 1 Nike Shox

----------------------------------

Appendix 2 adidas Kevin Garnett signature shoe

HSG Blog - Business Blog

Economic downturn and IT Strategy

Job Search Strategy

The Nation's Utility Challenges