Mary Schmidt Marketing Troubleshooter

As I mutter to myself every month when paying the bills.

Interesting Strategy + Business article re a new Booz Allen Hamilton study looking at R&D spending. Turns out spending big bucks doesn’t guarantee revenue results. Of course, any of us who have worked with some of the top innovators know that a lot is done in the labs that is never commercially viable - and shouldn’t be expected to do so. Otherwise, you kill innovation. When I worked in product development at NEC back in the 80s, I saw things that have yet to make it to market - and may never do so. You’ve got to fail a lot in order to to learn - for example - “how not to make a light bulb” as Thomas Edison, holder of over 1000 patents, so famously responded to questioning about his thousands of attempts before success.

As the article notes, “The myth that higher R&D spending translates into competitive advantage has been around for decades.”

Folks, it’s a long way from the lab to the marketplace - a patent does not a product make. You can patent anything, including, for example, a pet umbrella, which actually isn’t as silly as it sounds. But, is it different enough from the regular umbrella that people will buy it?

Taking it a step beyond R&D - spending big bucks on high-gloss marketing also doesn’t guarantee success. Ask any of the big companies who’ve spent billions and billions over the years on ad campaigns and such - and are still fighting toe-to-toe for customer mind share and shelf space. Does anybody really care if Coke wants to buy us a Coke? Or, that Cindy Crawford loves Pepsi? Both companies also spend tons on top secret R&D to come up with yet more flavors and brand extensions. Some work, some don’t. And so it goes.