Branże Archive

0

Five questions to answer before you finalize your media plan

The COVID-19 crisis had a quick impact on advertisers’ media budgets. Those in sectors such as travel and cinema, where consumer spending plummeted, slashed budgets. Those in other sectors, such as consumer packaged goods (CPG), digital retail, and healthcare, rushed to increase and redirect their budgets, hoping to gain market share as consumers flocked online—though some then pulled back, unable to keep up with consumer demand.

The early assumption was that life would return to normal and media teams could revert to their typical budgeting and planning processes. But there are clear indications that consumer behavior has changed for good, with the pandemic accelerating a trend toward online channels that was already in progress. In the space of five months, consumer online buying in the United States grew from around 15 percent to 45 percent for most categories. 1

Much remains uncertain. It is against this backdrop that advertisers are trying to plan for 2021, figuring out how much to budget, how to use that money as efficiently as possible, and how best to position themselves to adjust to whatever the future might hold. If a silver lining exists, it’s that the shift toward digital channels should be making it easier to track media-spend performance with much greater precision. This budget precision is particularly useful when it comes to budget negotiations between marketing and finance, which tend to be protracted given how hard it is to ascertain the budget’s impact on growth. In times of uncertainty, those negotiations are likely to be harder still, with stakeholders pulling in different directions.

While advertisers have made adjustments to their media spend, media planning often still does not reflect the scale of the change in the market or the precision now possible through analytics. Taking old plans and adding or subtracting a percentage, as has often been done, won’t do. In this light, we suggest that marketing leaders focus on answering the following five questions before locking in their media plans for 2021.

  1. Are you spending the right amount for your business ambitions?
  2. Do you have the analytics available to fine-tune your spend?
  3. Are you spending enough on addressable channels?
  4. Do you have the right mix of agencies to move fast?
  5. Are you experimenting enough with strategic publishers?

More: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/

About the authors: Cody Butt is a partner in McKinsey’s Denver office, Jeff Jacobs is a partner in the Chicago office, Craig Macdonald is a partner in the Southern California office, and Priya Rammohan is an associate partner in the Brussels office.

 

0

Business 5.0

Business 5.0 to przyszłość, następny krok w biznesowej rewolucji, nadchodząca zmiana w strukturze firmy, procesach biznesowych i kulturze pracy. Business 4.0 to przeszłość.

Wykorzystanie potencjału – Automatyzacja

Większość firm nie zdaje sobie sprawy z tego, jak dużym potencjałem dysponuje. A nawet jeśli – nie potrafi go  wykorzystać. Przyszłość to automatyzacja (Intelligent Automation – IA), która pozwala na usprawnienie codziennych działań. To wykorzystanie wielu technologii, zaczynając od automatyzacji procesów biznesowych (Robotic Process Automation –  RPA) przez uczenie maszynowe, automatyzację kognitywną oraz wykorzystanie sztucznej inteligencji.

 Rozwiązanie to pozwala na obniżenie kosztów w firmie, wyeliminowanie ryzyka błędów, poprawienie jakości danych  oraz zwiększenie szybkości i jakości obsługi naszych klientów. To także szansa na zaoszczędzenie czasu pracowników, dzięki zastąpieniu ich w rutynowych czynnościach, by ci mogli zająć się zadaniami wymagającymi kreatywności. Automatyzacja umożliwia też oferowanie dodatkowych usług bez zwiększania liczby pracowników. 

·         Wykorzystanie potencjału – Automatyzacja

·         Produktywność i wydajność – Sztuczna Inteligencja

·         Klient przyszłości – zmieniające się potrzeby

·         Wykorzystanie Big Data

·         Przyszłość rynku pracy – ludzie nie roboty

·         Koncepcja Internetu Rzeczy

·         Cyberbezpieczeństwo

Zob np. EY: Usługi doradcze w zakresie inteligentnej automatyzacji

0

McKinsey Survey: Consumer sentiment on sustainability in fashion

While the fashion industry is reorganizing for the next normal after the COVID-19 crisis, European consumers have become even more engaged in sustainability topics. That presents an opportunity for the fashion industry to reiterate its commitment to sustainability. Moreover, now could be the moment to drive less seasonality in the fashion system.

Our survey was conducted in April 2020 across more than 2,000 UK and German consumers. 1 It is part of a firmwide effort to capture consumer sentiment during the COVID-19 crisis.

Sentiment toward sustainability. Amid the shock and uncertainty that the fashion sector is facing during the COVID-19 crisis, there is a silver lining for the environment: two-thirds of surveyed consumers state that it has become even more important to limit impacts on climate change. Additionally, 88 percent of respondents believe that more attention should be paid to reducing pollution. In practice, consumers have already begun changing their behaviors accordingly. Of consumers surveyed, 57 percent have made significant changes to their lifestyles to lessen their environmental impact, and more than 60 percent report going out of their way to recycle and purchase products in environmentally friendly packaging (Exhibit 1).

We strive to provide individuals with disabilities equal access to our website. If you would like information about this content we will be happy to work with you. Please email us at: McKinsey_Website_Accessibility@mckinsey.com

Emphasis on social and environmental commitments

While the industry is reorganizing for the next normal, it should consider that consumers want fashion players to uphold their social and environmental responsibilities amid the crisis. Of surveyed consumers, 67 percent consider the use of sustainable materials to be an important purchasing factor, and 63 percent consider a brand’s promotion of sustainability in the same way. Additionally, surveyed consumers expect brands to take care of their employees, as well as workers in Asia, during the COVID-19 crisis. That highlights the need for brands to maintain ethical commitments, despite the crisis. We strive to provide individuals with disabilities equal access to our website. If you would like information about this content we will be happy to work with you. Please email us at: McKinsey_Website_Accessibility@mckinsey.com

Overall, it is imperative to build trust and transparency with consumers, as 70 percent are sticking with brands they know and trust during the crisis. Of surveyed consumers, 75 percent consider a trusted brand to be an important purchasing factor. However, younger consumers, particularly Gen Zers and millennials, are more likely to experiment with smaller or lesser-known brands during the crisis.

By Anna Granskog, Libbi Lee, Karl-Hendrik Magnus, and Corinne Sawers

More: McKinsey; About the authors: Anna Granskog is a partner in McKinsey’s Helsinki office, Libbi Lee and Corinne Sawers are associate partners in the London office, and Karl-Hendrik Magnus is a senior partner in the Frankfurt office.

0

Allianz: Shipping losses at record low, but Covid-19 impact and political tensions cloud the horizon

  • Safety & Shipping Review 2020: 41 large ships lost worldwide in 2019, down by more than 20% year-on-year and almost 70% over a decade.
  • Number of shipping incidents (2,815) is up, as are claims from machinery issues. Ro-ro vessel safety is a growing concern.
  • Consequences of coronavirus and a sustained economic downturn could threaten long-term safety improvement and trigger an uptick in losses from cost-cutting measures, fatigued crew, idle vessels and weakened emergency response.
  • Rising geopolitical tensions, emissions rules and de-carbonization targets, mis-declared cargo and fire incidents continue to pose risk challenges.

Large shipping losses are at a record low having fallen by over 20% year-on-year, according to marine insurer Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty SE’s (AGCS) Safety & Shipping Review 2020. However, the coronavirus crisis could endanger the long-term safety improvements in the shipping industry for 2020 and beyond, as difficult operating conditions and a sharp economic downturn present a unique set of challenges.

“Coronavirus has struck at a difficult time for the maritime industry as it seeks to reduce its emissions, navigates issues such as climate change, political risks and piracy, and deals with ongoing problems such as fires on vessels,” says Baptiste Ossena, Global Product Leader Hull Insurance, AGCS. “Now the sector also faces the task of operating in a very different world, with the uncertain public health and economic implications of the pandemic.”

The annual AGCS study analyzes reported shipping losses over 100 gross tons (GT) and also identifies 10 challenges of the coronavirus crisis for the shipping industry which could impact safety and risk management. In 2019, 41 total losses of vessels were reported around the world, down from 53 12 months earlier. This represents an approximate 70% decline over 10 years and is a result of sustained efforts in the areas of regulation, training and technological advancement, among others. More than 950 shipping losses have been reported since the start of 2010.

Coronavirus challenges

The shipping industry has continued to operate through the pandemic, despite disruption at ports and to crew changes. While any reduction in sailings due to coronavirus restrictions could see loss activity fall in the interim, the report highlights 10 challenges that could heighten risks. Among these are: 

  • The inability to change crews is impacting the welfare of sailors, which could lead to an increase in human error on board vessels.
  • Disruption of essential maintenance and servicing heightens the risk of machinery damage, which is already one of the major causes of insurance claims.
  • Reduced or delayed statutory surveys and port inspections could lead to unsafe practices or defective equipment being undetected.
  • Cargo damage and delay are likely as supply chains come under strain.
  • The ability to respond quickly to an emergency could also be compromised with consequences for major incidents which are dependent on external support.
  • The growing number of cruise ships and oil tankers in lay-up around the world pose significant financial exposures, due to the potential threat from extreme weather, piracy or political risks. 

“Ship-owners also face additional cost pressures from a downturn in the economy and trade,” says Captain Rahul Khanna, Global Head of Marine Risk Consulting at AGCS. “We know from past downturns that crew and maintenance budgets are among the first areas that can be cut and this can impact the safe operations of vessels and machinery, potentially causing damage or breakdown, which in turn can lead to groundings or collisions. It is crucial that safety and maintenance standards are not impacted by any downturn.”

More: AGCS Marine Risk Consulting

0

Oil and gas after COVID-19: The day of reckoning or a new age of opportunity?

he oil and gas industry is experiencing its third price collapse in 12 years. After the first two shocks, the industry rebounded, and business as usual continued. This time is different. The current context combines a supply shock with an unprecedented demand drop and a global humanitarian crisis. Additionally, the sector’s financial and structural health is worse than in previous crises. The advent of shale, excessive supply, and generous financial markets that overlooked the limited capital discipline have all contributed to poor returns. Today, with prices touching 30-year lows, and accelerating societal pressure, executives sense that change is inevitable. The COVID-19 crisis accelerates what was already shaping up to be one of the industry’s most transformative moments.

While the depth and duration of this crisis are uncertain, our research suggests that without fundamental change, it will be difficult to return to the attractive industry performance that has historically prevailed. On its current course and speed, the industry could now be entering an era defined by intense competition, technology-led rapid supply response, flat to declining demand, investor scepticism, and increasing public and government pressure regarding impact on climate and the environment. However, under most scenarios, oil and gas will remain a multi-trillion-dollar market for decades. Given its role in supplying affordable energy, it is too important to fail. The question of how to create value in the next normal is therefore fundamental.

To change the current paradigm, the industry will need to dig deep and tap its proud history of bold structural moves, innovation, and safe and profitable operations in the toughest conditions. The winners will be those that use this crisis to boldly reposition their portfolios and transform their operating models. Companies that don’t will restructure or inevitably atrophy.

A troubled industry enters the crisis

The industry operates through long megacycles of shifting supply and demand, accompanied by shocks along the way. These megacycles have seen wide swings in value creation.

After the restructurings of the early 1980s, the industry created exceptional shareholder value. From 1990 to 2005, total returns to shareholders (TRS) in all segments of the industry, except refining and marketing companies, exceeded the TRS of the S&P 500 index. Oil and gas demand grew, and OPEC helped to maintain stable prices. Companies kept costs low, as memories from the 1980s of oil at $10 per barrel (bbl) were still acute. A new class of supermajor emerged from megamergers; these companies created value for decades. Similarly, the “big three” oil-field service equipment (OFSE) companies emerged. Political openings and new technologies created opportunity for all.

From 2005 to January 2020, even as macro tailwinds such as strong demand growth and effective supply access continued, the global industry failed to keep pace with the broader market. In this period, the average of the oil and gas industry generated annual TRS growth about seven percentage points lower than the S&P 500 (Exhibit 1). Every subsegment similarly underperformed the market, and independent upstream and OFSE companies delivered zero or negative TRS. The analysis excludes companies that were not listed through this period (including some structurally advantaged national oil companies, and private companies).

Exhibit 1

In the early years of this period, the industry’s profit structure was favorable. Demand expanded at more than 1 percent annually for oil and 3 to 5 percent for liquefied natural gas (LNG). The industry’s “cost curves”—its production assets, ranked from lowest to highest cost—were steep. With considerable high-cost production necessary to meet demand, the market-clearing price rose. The same was true for both gas and LNG, whose prices were often tightly linked to oil. Even in downstream, a steep cost curve of the world’s refining capacity supported high margins.

Encouraged by this highly favorable industry structure and supported by an easy supply of capital seeking returns as interest rates fell, companies invested heavily. The race to bring more barrels onstream from more complex resources, more quickly, drove dramatic cost inflation, particularly in engineering and construction. These investments brought on massive proved-up reserves, moving world supplies from slightly short to long.

Significant investment went into shale oil and gas, with several profound implications. To begin with, shale reshaped the upstream industry’s structure. As shale oil and gas came onstream, it flattened the production-cost curve (that is, moderate-cost shale oil displaced much higher-cost production such as oil sands and coal gas), effectively lowering both the marginal cost of supply and the market-clearing price (Exhibit 2).

More: https://www.mckinsey.com

About the authors: Filipe Barbosa is a senior partner, Scott Nyquist is a senior adviser, and Kassia Yanosek is a partner, all in McKinsey’s Houston office. Giorgio Bresciani is a senior partner in the London office, where Pat Graham is a partner.