The shift of our business models

Purpose, not only utility.

If you want to be a brand in the outdoor sector today because you have left the product status behind you, you need a purpose. This has even been demanded for those brands that have established themselves as value components of others and are called "ingredient brands" in the technical language. They too, previously driven by clear technological advantages, would no longer be able to do without a creation of purpose and value. The power women on the speaker list, one "Futurist" and the other "Sharing Specialist", thought of the industry's company representatives at the European Outdoor Congress in Interlaken, Switzerland, as provocations intended as "shakers of mind". Not the more would be the future, but the better, said one, without sharing as a new mindset, outdoor companies would soon be a past history in Europe too, said the other. The motto of the congress, "Redefining Boundaries", had set the framework for something like this.

 It was my premiere at this congress. Just one year in the industry and with the Oberalp Group also a member of the Association of the Outdoor Industry (EOG), I was curious about these two days. Therefore a retrospective.

 It is reassuring that the outdoor industry is dealing with important topics that are worth being on the agenda of every other industry and every other congress. There is no doubt that even in this industry, the customers of the future will ask more and more what a product of a particular brand is for a statement to the world and consumers, and at the same time assume that it meets the technical requirements one can expect from it. With technology and function, it is hardly possible to make the difference that determines the purchase, despite all efforts and good reason. What has already taken its place in other industries for a long time - the electronics and automotive industries are good examples of this - is also reaching our entire sector with great speed. If Adidas is currently fearing his archrival Nike with his commitment to "Parley for the Oceans", ingredient brand expert Tomas Vucurevic is right when he says: "An ingredient brand that significantly influences the purchase decision for the end product can also be a pure movement because the customer sees a value in it“. So GORETEX? also has to think about the purpose of what it has so far been enough to guarantee watertightness and to give VIBRAM a higher meaning to its rubber compounds? Yes, that's the export's opinion. What is a challenge for ingredient brands must be a must for all other brands in our sector. "Customers don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it" - "Why" founder Simon Sinek puts it better in a nutshell than any other speaker. Brand means wanting to define oneself about something and thus making a statement about oneself - and not buying a benefit for an overpriced rate. Anyone who buys PATAGONIA? for their outfit wants to say something different about their personality and their understanding of values than when they buy Quechua from Decathlon. Whoever chooses our performance brand DYNAFIt wants to be perceived differently than when he chooses our aesthetic brand SALEWA - we develop these brands for different lifestyles and mountain mindsets. But to be honest: from the pure benefit point of view, both brands are perfectly interchangeable. The claim to be the only solution in the world is long gone, despite good sounding advertising promises. You can say it with confidence - but the customer no longer believes it. On this point, the various speakers provided confirmation of what is already known.

 All other findings of these two days are quickly summarized. For the future it is no longer about ?more“, but about a "better", believes Anne Skare Nielsen. Which she's right about - because saturated markets can no longer be about more. From the various studies we could see that Generation Y ticks differently than the post-war generation, and Generation Z, which has not yet been considered, would respond even more radically. Having things in one's possession is going to be a downgrade over having things available at all times. The fashionable term of the time is "Sharing Economy" and describes a change in society's pyramid of values that has already taken place. Whether we already take it as seriously as we would all have to, however, is more than doubtful.

For this to happen, customers would also have to talk about the stage of our congress. During the entire two days of the congress, there was too little or no mention of this: that there were customers who were anonymously described in studies and who lectured on their changes in behaviour by experts. They had no voice at this congress. None of the speakers belonged to the age group that was talked about and none of the outdoor customers could simply report on their manifold experiences with our industry, called "costumer experience" in the modern term. Apparently, we fall into the trap of "self-referencing" in our industry and stew all our findings in our own juice. I find this highly dangerous, because it would prove that we did not take the changes in society seriously enough. It would not be a question of us, as suppliers and brands in the outdoor industry, having to meet the wishes of our customers and certainly not taking them as the criterion for our developments. Nevertheless, it is imperative of time that we have to talk to each other rather than about each other. Customers who are not given a voice will give it to themselves.

Not only at this industry congress - it is my experience with many others as well - the necessary and helpful inputs from other industries came too short. Our own sector is too much of a benchmark, even if it has been proven that disruptive ideas and solutions mostly come from outside or from lateral newcomers. The exception was the input from university/scientist Marcus Dapp, who introduced us to his truly new way of thinking about a new currency. Blockchain technology could lead to new currencies that have already become public under the name "Cryptocurrency". Why shouldn't we pay for our products in the future with other methods than those established by states? Why shouldn't a Salewa jacket be paid for in the future to a certain quota with social commitment accepted by a peer group? Such inputs are beneficial to our industry because they take place outside the topics we deal with on a daily basis: supply chain, material research, customer experience, warehouse management ...

 The three big questions that I take away from these two days invested in Interlaken are:

1)    Will we in the industry and as a company seriously and consistently deal with the observable change in society that is taking place, which is leading to changes in customer behaviour and demands new business models?

2)    Will we listen enough to our customers and not want to confront their messages with explanations that transform our point of view into a truth to be believed by the customer?

3)    Will we and our industry be able to move from a product/benefit/technology-oriented mindset to a sense/identification/brand-oriented world that will scrutinize many of our success patterns?

This requires courage and consistency. You can do it step by step, but not without a conviction. It is not possible with the notion that one must do it because there is no other way, but with the pleasure of being allowed to do it because it is possible. However, if I had to draw the conclusion from the numerous discussions during the congress breaks, I remember more worry-oriented statements ("it has become more difficult") than future-oriented statements ("we look forward to change"). What I have learnt so far in my previous professional tasks is that change takes place only and exclusively in a climate of pleasure and joy. In this context, the mood at our congress was too gloomy for me, which was also expressed in declining numbers of participants, historical ones said. And one more thing on the fringe: What was offered by the congress catering during the congress intervals and in the evening had nothing to do with the conclusions and future perspectives tromboned from the stage. I would answer the defence of our EOG that there would be no influence on the congress catering service provider with the following statement: The Customer Experience is a single one. As we have heard from the stage speakers every day. By the way: The fact that the main speeches were given by girls, I found extremely promising, should it not have been coincidence, but conscious decision. I would assume that.

 Christoph Engl

CEO Oberalp Group