The hidden tricks of powerful persuasion

David Robson:

Olson has spent a lifetime exploring the subtle ways of tricking people’s perception, and it all began with magic. “I started magic tricks when I was five and performing when I was seven,” he says.
 
 As an undergraduate in psychology, he found the new understanding of the mind often chimed with the skills he had learnt with his hobby. “Lots of what they said about attention and memory were just what magicians had been saying in a different way,” he says.
 
 One card trick, in particular, captured his imagination as he set about his research. It involved flicking through a deck in front of an audience member, who is asked to pick a card randomly. Unknown to the volunteer, he already worked out which card they would choose, allowing him to reach into his pocket and pluck the exact card they had named – much to the astonishment of the crowd.

Detroit’s Heidelberg Project

Heidelberg Project:

It’s an open-air art environment in the heart of an urban community on Detroit’s East Side. Tyree Guyton, founder and artistic director, uses everyday, discarded objects to create a two block area full of color, symbolism, and intrigue. Now in its 29th year, the Heidelberg Project is recognized around the world as a demonstration of the power of creativity to transform lives.

A Pilgrimage to Albert Kahn’s Abandoned Packard Factory

With Asymcar, we’ve extensively discussed the auto industry’s intransigence while considering likely disruption vectors, including modular manufacturing, the information layer and emerging “transportation as a service” plays.

In Detroit recently, I had an opportunity to explore a bit and muse on Packard, once king of the American car business and now just a distant memory. Packard’s East Grand Boulevard factory was designed by Albert Kahn, “the foremost American Industrial architect of his day”.

Packard’s former market position, architecture and stagnation echoes Asymcar themes.

Aaron Severson:

Between 1935 and 1956, the Packard Motor Car Company went from the top of the heap among American automotive brands to just another independent, struggling to survive on the scraps of the Big Three. This week, we take a look at the Packard Clipper, the “bathtub Packards” of the late 1940s, and how the once-great automaker lost its way. We also examine one of the company’s odder experiments, the 1948 Packard Station Sedan.

At the start of the Great Depression, the Packard Motor Car Company was the default choice for American luxury car buyers. There were cars that were more expensive or more exotic, but Packard had an aura of patrician respectability that no other domestic automaker could match. A big Packard was not a sign of material accomplishment so much as a badge of class status, bolstered by graceful but restrained styling, impeccable quality, and exacting engineering.

.

Detroit Free Press:

1899
The first Packard is built at Packard Electric, founded in Warren, Ohio, by brothers James and William Packard.

1902
Detroit investors, led by Henry Joy, buy controlling interest in Packard Motor Car Co.

1903
Packard moves into new factory, designed by Albert Kahn, along East Grand Boulevard.

1905
Kahn designs Building #10, the first factory ever built of reinforced concrete. He revolutionizes the design of factories nationwide.

1918-19
Packard builds Liberty engines at the plant for U.S. military aircraft.

Late 1920s
Packard becomes the dominant luxury car in the U.S., outselling Cadillac and other competitors combined.

1940-45
Packard builds aircraft and marine engines for the U.S. military and World War II allies. At peak production in 1943, the company has 36,000 employees, almost all at the Detroit plant.

1954
The last Packard is built at the East Grand Boulevard plant; Packard buys out Studebaker, a higher-volume carmaker based in South Bend, Ind., and becomes Studebaker-Packard.

1956
Last Packard built in Detroit, at a facility on Conner Avenue.

Antique Automobile Club

Silverghost: my $.02 tempered with/ adapted from “The rise and Fall of the Packard motor car company” by Ward

1. Packard’s preference to pay stockholder dividends over re-investment in new, more technically advanced product.

2. The failure to merge with other independants as far back as the 20′s or 30′s, when GM (as re-designed by Sloan) and Walter P. Chrysler showed American and the world how to combine strengths and maintain (or gain) market share.

3. Abdicating the Luxury market after the war, being stuck in the middle–largely the effect of the 120 line managers rising to the top.

4. The out-and-out plainess of the 24-26th series cars coupled with their outdated powertrains (see No.1) and the inability of the dealer network to deal on those cars in comparision to their big 3 rivals.

5. (big personal opinion here) is that Packard, as a corporation was “a nice guy” in terms of competition, labor relations, dealership relations, etc. Ford and Chrysler in particular were scrappy individuals when it came to these topics/behaviors, and were not nice guys. It’s always been a cut throat business. Packards were cars built “for gentlemen, by gentlemen” The world stopped supporting that model with their buying habits. I.E. Snoop Dog sells a lot more records than Johnny Mathis these days.

“Ask the man who owns one”.

The Packard Club

The Packard Museum

Abandoned America: The Packard Plant

“Largest Abandoned Factory in the World.

Packard @ Wikipedia

While wondering around the Packard Plant, I remembered an earlier visit to Turin’s Lingotto.

Panorama: Lingotto Pinacoteca Giovanni e Marella Agnelli.

If you go, contact Pat or Kim at Show Me Detroit for a great drive around the Motor City.

Detroit, full of history and urban renewal reminds me of Berlin and vice versa.

Postscript: Fernando Palazuelo purchased the plant via a county tax foreclosure auction for a mere $405,000 in late 2013.

How Millennials are reshaping B2B marketing

IBM:

Millennials—the largest generation since the Baby Boomers—are the new darlings being targeted by marketers. Much has been written about the Millennial consumer: the most educated, most tech-savvy, most connected, thrifty, and socially and environmentally conscious.
 
 These digital natives are the force that’s driving a new era for consumer marketing, one focused on values, transparency, relevancy and engagement.
 But what about business-to-business (B2B) marketing? Increasingly, Millennials are assuming positions at work where they influence purchasing decisions. How do their consumer shopping habits impact their attitudes and approach for researching business products and services and engaging with vendors?
 
 To find out, we surveyed 704 individuals who influence or are responsible for B2B purchasing decisions of US$10,000 or more for their company. They come from organizations large and small, across 12 countries and 6 targeted industries. When we compared the responses of Millennial employees (born 1980–1993) with those of Gen X (born 1965–1979) and Baby Boomers (born 1954–1964), we discovered Millennials’ behavior differs somewhat from their older colleagues, and their consumer practices do effect their B2B purchasing expectations (with a few surprising exceptions).
 
 Millennials, even more than Gen X or Baby Boomers, prize a hassle-free, omni-channel client experience personalized to their specific needs. They want data, speed and trusted advisors who are eager to collaborate.

 
 

Managing Your VP Of Sales: If It’s Painful, It’s Going Well

Scott Weiss:

The most successful tech companies are typically led by their technical, product-oriented founder-CEOs who have very little experience in building a sales organization. Bringing on a sales leader and building a sales organization exercises a completely different muscle for most engineering-heavy startups.
 
 And if you’ve hired right, managing a vice president of sales is meant to be tough work. That’s because the very best sales leaders are extremely demanding. They call out competitive weaknesses, constantly push for more feature velocity, and promise bug fixes or features that get crammed into every release. They stretch everyone to their limit. It will drive you and others in the company bananas.
 
 But if your VP of sales is not periodically at odds with the VPs of product, engineering, operations, finance, etc., then he or she is probably not demanding enough. If done right, this role gives the entire company a reason to work harder as the sales VP reveals and strongly advocates for the customer struggle. That said, the CEO still needs to manage this person tightly. Because once the VP of sales unleashes her or his superpower — being a master negotiator/influencer — inside the company, it can create dysfunction across the team.