Pizza, Fried Chicken and Grandparents in Taiwan
| By Mike Tenbusch - Dec 31, 2008 10:15:45 PM ET |
Comments |
Mail to a Friend
Categories: Education, Volunteerism, Advocacy, Giving, How I Live United, Other, The LiveUnitedSEM Network
Categories: Education, Volunteerism, Advocacy, Giving, How I Live United, Other, The LiveUnitedSEM Network
Dave Brandon, CEO of Domino's Pizza, tells a story about his company's efforts to add franchises in Taiwan. They did all of their research and opened their stores, but market penetration was well off projections. They couldn't figure it out. Parents loved the pizza. Kids loved the pizza. But not enough people were ordering it.
Brandon states, "We studied and researched it. We studied and researched it. And nothing changed. Finally, we realized that grandparents in Taiwan often lived with their children and grandchildren, and they were exercising veto power over the pizza choice. Turns out, grandparents didn't like pizza too much, but they do like fried chicken, so now all of our stores in Taiwan also sell fried chicken."
Domino's retains their distinct flavor and feel in every one of their 3,000 international stores, but they do add local delicacies, like fried chicken in Taiwan or seafood in Japan, to adapt to local tastes.
This story struck me for a couple of reasons. The leadership of Domino's was clear that it was going to sell some pizza. When everybody is clear about what the vision is, they can research and study and research and study when things don't go right.
My experience in the nonprofit world is that we are often unclear on what the vision is, and we rarely have time to research and study to make our product better.
It seems to me that we are selling a product akin to a middle-class passport--ultimately, we are either changing conditions or influencing choices in a way that helps people break out of poverty. But instead of having and sharing that vision, we create programs, despite the fact that we all pretty much agree that programs don't change people. People change people. I think we should be more clear about what our vision is, and hold ourselves accountable for achieving that vision.
Also, nonprofit leaders rarely have time to research and study ways to make their vision stronger because they often spend so much time tinkering with and tailoring programs to meet the needs of various funders. The constant hustle to create programs, raise cash and then create new programs leaves very little time for reflection and incentivizes change to meet funders' requests, not the organization's essential functions.
I asked the leader of one of our funded partners recently, "Did you write the program for the grant, or did you write the grant for the program?" In my mind, the former is a recipe for disaster--showing a reflex for funding instead of a reflection for improvement. He asked, "Which one's better?"
I love being at the United Way because our role is to be a general contractor for social change. Our success lies in having a really good product to sell, while also researching and studying when we need to sell fried chicken to grandparents at the same time.
Brandon states, "We studied and researched it. We studied and researched it. And nothing changed. Finally, we realized that grandparents in Taiwan often lived with their children and grandchildren, and they were exercising veto power over the pizza choice. Turns out, grandparents didn't like pizza too much, but they do like fried chicken, so now all of our stores in Taiwan also sell fried chicken."
Domino's retains their distinct flavor and feel in every one of their 3,000 international stores, but they do add local delicacies, like fried chicken in Taiwan or seafood in Japan, to adapt to local tastes.
This story struck me for a couple of reasons. The leadership of Domino's was clear that it was going to sell some pizza. When everybody is clear about what the vision is, they can research and study and research and study when things don't go right.
My experience in the nonprofit world is that we are often unclear on what the vision is, and we rarely have time to research and study to make our product better.
It seems to me that we are selling a product akin to a middle-class passport--ultimately, we are either changing conditions or influencing choices in a way that helps people break out of poverty. But instead of having and sharing that vision, we create programs, despite the fact that we all pretty much agree that programs don't change people. People change people. I think we should be more clear about what our vision is, and hold ourselves accountable for achieving that vision.
Also, nonprofit leaders rarely have time to research and study ways to make their vision stronger because they often spend so much time tinkering with and tailoring programs to meet the needs of various funders. The constant hustle to create programs, raise cash and then create new programs leaves very little time for reflection and incentivizes change to meet funders' requests, not the organization's essential functions.
I asked the leader of one of our funded partners recently, "Did you write the program for the grant, or did you write the grant for the program?" In my mind, the former is a recipe for disaster--showing a reflex for funding instead of a reflection for improvement. He asked, "Which one's better?"
I love being at the United Way because our role is to be a general contractor for social change. Our success lies in having a really good product to sell, while also researching and studying when we need to sell fried chicken to grandparents at the same time.
Comments are closed for this post.