Congratulations! We have taken the first step toward reinventing IndyCar to achieve mass market acceptance. Please read our completed Vision Statement below and take a moment to think about its implications. Keep in mind that "IndyCar" is a working title for the series that competes at Indianapolis in May.
"IndyCar shall be the clear number-one choice among auto racing consumers in the United States. At its core is the Indianapolis 500, an iconic American institution that shall transcend the sport of racing and be a worldwide automotive celebration."
Mission Possible
We must now forge a Mission Statement. This is the first derivative of our vision; it describes the activities that must be done at all times if we are to activate our Vision and inspire a New Day Rising for IndyCar and the Indianapolis 500.
Again, I refer you to this concise summary of the difference between Vision and Mission from the Minnesota Department of Health. I suggest that we begin by proposing words that convey what IndyCar must do in order to be the "number-one choice among auto racing consumers in the United States." We do not need great detail with regards to product attributes. Those issues will be addressed soon enough, when we establish our Product, Place, and Price offerings in our Marketing Plan.
Mission is about core organizational purpose. We might also want to incorporate a Values Statement with our Mission. Management Consultant Carter McNamara provides a brief synopsis of Vision, Mission and Values here.
Allow me to present a few words that might get us started.
- Innovation
- Competition
- Entertainment
- Value
- Unique
- Efficient
- Profit
The words that we choose to incorporate in our Mission and, possibly, Values Statements shall be central to our next task, the Marketing Plan. It is there that we shall begin to attack the details. Therefore, I ask that you present not only the essential words, but also the underlying ideas that make those words important.
Discuss.
Roggespierre
This is excellent work, "R." In my experience the vision and mission get mingled together and the aspiration element tends to trouble those developing mission statements because they know in their hearts "we ain't there." That stewing produces a lot of time wasting. I like the list of key words. Each one is important either because it is essential to the sport or it is essential to formulation of a marketing strategy. "Unique" is one that I find people gloss over unless their feet are held to the fire. Invariably they have trouble identifying attributes that are truly unique as opposed to offered by only one or two other businesses. If even one other entity provides it, it is not unique to your enterprise. On the other hand, if the point of debate represents a lucrative space or category, then it can seized if you have sufficient resources to overwhelm your competition. For example, ALMS has done a better job tying their sport to emerging sustainable tech than IndyCar, but they operate on such a microscopic stage they can be subsumed by a series that includes the sizable platform that is the Indianapolis 500. Finally, I'd like to suggest that one word is missing from your list: relevance. I have more thoughts and will contribute as this dialogue unfolds.
ReplyDeleteOK, I'll try one:
ReplyDelete"IndyCar will appeal to auto racing consumers by providing a uniquely American product driven by organic, competitive innovation. The series' ultimate proving ground will be the Indianapolis 500. However, the stature of each series race will be significant, allowing IndyCar to cultivate a multifaceted tradition."
I don't think even I'm exactly satisfied with this, but hopefully it provides a decent start for discussion.
Tom C,
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point about the term "unique."
I think certain attributes have historically been unique to Indy racing. It has certainly been the only major form of auto racing that has showcased the advancement of open-wheel cars via an oval track paradigm. I think.
Incidentally, how about some values?
Values we can maybe agree on:
American drivers - The sport must be configured to both attract and financially support American drivers whose only offering is their talent.
Financial Sustainability - costs of competition must not be prohibitively higher than the value of the product.
Competitive Innovation - measurable "forward progress" (i.e. "It's a new track record") has traditionally been a major hallmark of Indy racing. Without this feature the sport loses the very thing that makes it unique.
Indycar needs more HP and more speed. The safety precautions should be state of the art; if the cars were going 240 mph in the past without Safer and Hans, they can go faster now with the new safety tech. Indycar should use the best racing technology available, with a minimal number of restrictions, height, weight, length, fuel economy, etc. The fastest racing series on earth would be the selling point.
ReplyDeleteMission Statement:
ReplyDeleteThe IndyCar Series is committed to providing a superior auto racing product for the avid and casual fan alike that is compelling, entertaining and fun to watch. We strive to continually grow our fanbase by making every interaction a fan has with IndyCar an exciting, enjoyable and memorable experience.
-John
So, some values that probably will need to be debated:
ReplyDeleteOpen rules (i.e. innovation vs. on-track parity) - How do we balance the need for innovation with the reality of financial disparity among teams? How can the rules be open enough that a less well-funded team can "get lucky" and produce a surprising result, but not so open that the best-funded teams are completely untouchable?
Upon further review, maybe that's something that should be left alone until later...
But THIS next concept seems extremely important for informing the rest of the project:
"The Pursuit" - IS IT OVER? Has the last track record been set, or will uncharted speed once again be a hallmark of this style of racing? "The pursuit" vs. "The show". How can it not be either one or the other?
This is vitally important because if we determine that we will no longer be chasing faster speeds, the sport will really need to be reinvented. "Innovation" must be redefined in some compelling way, or we will be stuck right where IndyCar is now: hoping for a good show.
And along those lines,
Safety - what is the standard? How do we define what is "safe" and "unsafe"? Is running cars at 240 "unsafe" and cars at 225 "safe"? Balancing safety against competitive innovation in such a way that neither side dominates will be necessary. (One could argue that competitive innovation used to trump safety - and safety clearly trumps competitive innovation now)
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI agree. I think people generally underestimate the effect 13 years of running below the threshold at Indianapolis has had on the popularity of the sport.
John,
I like the idea of the casual auto racing fan being courted - AFTER the avid auto racing fan. The 500 remains an awesome event at which to bring casual and non-fans. I have and will continue to invite my non-fan friends to the race, because the sheer magnitude of the event is compelling.
But as long there is a palpable feeling of discontent from die-hard fans regarding the fundamental direction of the sport, it's going to be extremely difficult to draw casual fans for races outside of Indianapolis (where the racing product itself takes center stage). Without enthusiasm in the inner circle, how can we expect to effectively reach out? The people that care need to be able to say "Here's what's great about IndyCar racing. Here's why you should check it out."
I think we are getting the cart ahead of the horse, but since it is on the table here is my take on “Safety” and “Records“.
ReplyDeleteTo address the “Safety” and “Speed Records” is important, and very vexing; “Safety” has to start with the spectators, and IMS design as it now stands is unable to protect fans if speeds exceed 230 MPH. A race car getting airborne WILL EITHER END UP IN THE STANDS OR MAJOR PARTS WILL!
Tony Renna died during a tire test in October 2003, while traveling in excess of 230 he crashed in turn three, and from reports a huge number of parts rained into the stands and if people had been there--death and injury were a certainty.
The insurance available defines the limits.
So if “new track records” (meaning new track speed records) are to be a goal, we have to solve the problem of cars in the stands.
Killing a driver is bad news, but less onerous than killing fans.
Kill a hand full of fans and watch the press crucify the sport.
Perhaps we, if we are creative, can have “new track records” not for total speed but for other things, like high stretch speed records, but within the confines of acceptable lap speeds. (Of course if we had three wheelers we could have new track records for them--only joking).
NASCAR faces this same problem and I firmly believe that unless Daytona and Talladega change they will see a car in the stands. Ask any driver or better yet ask Carl Edwards.
So we either redesign the Speedway, (much higher walls, or bullet proof glass in the corners, or both), or accept that the “old lady” has reached her limit for lap speeds.
osca
To interject,
ReplyDeleteI think the merits of all the various elements need to be looked at individually but until we develop a holistic model or focal point, we won't know how those elements synthesize.
There's an old sales/marketing axiom concerning 'features, functions and benefits,' that I'm trying to apply to all these elements. An element like 'speed' would be a function, for example:
Feature - higher hp motor
Function - faster cars
Benefit - excitement for fans
Or we could look at the driver element:
Feature - American drivers
Function - Relatability to fans
Benefit - Greater enjoyment for fans
I get caught up in the features and functions of a product all the time, but those aspects aren't what people buy, it's the emotional benefit the customer pays for. Take a product like hair shampoo: its feature is the chemical formula and its function is to make hair clean and shiny. But people aren't really buying a product to make their hair clean and shiny, they're buying the emotional benefit of feeling better about themselves.
At this stage I'm thinking we need to focus and define the emotional benefit IndyCar provides, more so than how we're planning on providing it. We're asking customers to expend time and money to attend a race and/or the time and effort to find and watch a race on television, and for that expenditure they need and emotional ROI. The market isn't rejecting IndyCar per se, it's choosing not to invest the time and money in the product because the emotional benefits for doing so are not there.
I feel the emotional benefit IndyCar provides to its customers needs to permeate the entire strategic process and all the decisions down the line need to reflect and be guided by how the customer will benefit emotionally.
-John
Citius, Altius, Fortius, (Faster, Higher, Stronger) It is human nature to seek the best, the greatest, the most perfect, excellence in all aspects of endeavor.
ReplyDeleteFormula One has cords attatched to the wheels of their cars, and to the most dangerous parts in order to keep them from flying at spectators or into other cars. Indycars can be made safer for the fans.
Cosworth or Honda could build a 1200 HP car that could go 250 mph with existing technology, and air force style pressurized suits could protect drivers from G-forces.
Nascar will face problems in the future as manufacturers and fans question the relevance of carburated engines and outdated technology.
A good breakthru product, Ipod or flat screen TVs, can attract customers even if there is no existing demand. Hopefully racing fans would be attracted to the fastest, most hi-tech race cars. The IRL could build a demo car and let the drivers test it and help to calibrate it, and see how the people like the idea.
And now we're off to the "money is no object" races...1200 HP...250 mph...most hi-tech race cars...redesign the Speedway...competitive innovation...all for a money-losing series?? Oh, that's right, this will be different, hugely appealing to legions of new fans. Except, like the last series, there is no apparent public demand for the thing.
ReplyDeleteAnyone want to estimate the upfront cost of any/all of this? And where's the money coming from in these economic down times? More TEAM money from the IMS bank?
Gentlemen (I assume you're all men),
ReplyDeleteWe are not ready to discuss product attributes because we have not established why this product should even exist. Some, primarily Rocketman53, have argued that it should not. Frankly, the empirical evidence supports their position.
I might have made a mistake when I published my list of words, many of which in fact were first presented by some of you.
Our goal at present is not to conceive of what might and how to achieve the attributes that I have presented. Rather, it is our job to define why those attributes are must be achieved in order to serve whom (customers).
Nobody enjoys picking through the details more than I. However, we must have something that shall guide us as we engage in those discussions.
I invite you to read the new entry regarding the Preamble of the Constitution. It is, perhaps, the best Mission Statement of which I am aware.
It is not a mere introduction to the base law of the land. It is its justification, it's reason.
That is what we seek.
Best Regards,
Roggespierre