GOGORO - 新的GOGORO2能比原本多110%的距離,現在應該也該增加在創新上了 by Chris W. Hubbard

 
Chris_Hubbard_Gogoro.jpg
 

Translation by Jerry Chan - 2017年6月6日

5月25日,Gogoro - 台灣電動速可達品牌主持了一個現場新聞發布會,做了一些“重大公告”,我一直很期待這次活動,作為Gogoro的車主,早期採用者和粉絲,我對這品牌及其創新能力感到極大興趣。

我可以誠實地說,到目前為止,我很享受大部份我的Gogoro給我的經驗。 我寫了一篇鼓勵人們購買的文章 。 這是一個相當讚的速可達。 在設計和整體質感方面,他們沒有走捷徑。 我也喜歡這樣的感覺,藉著騎Gogoro,我一直在做一些有益於環境的事情。 我也在我的Gogoro車主評價中討論了這一點。 不幸的是,我不得不承認我也經歷了相當多的挫折。

我非常希望在以後的活動中能夠解決一些挫折感,並且會看到有關品牌,商業模式和車款的一些創新更新。 我希望他們能夠更新我對品牌的信念。 我希望看到他們正在聽我這樣的人的跡象。

我聽到的是他們推出了新款價格較低、較為經濟的Gogoro 2。在許多方面,它比原來的Gogoro更好。 他們給了一個更大,更舒適的兩人座位。 它具有更緊湊的觸控螢幕。 它可以在台灣任何機車店提供服務 - 而不是只能在非常昂貴的Gogoro維修中心服務。 它與原來的一樣快,但在電池充滿的情況下則可以有110%更遠的距離。 雖然台幣400的月租費只能跑100公里左右(399資費跑150公里),但新的Gogoro 2車主每月將獲得499的無限公里,這是一個更公平的交易。

新的Gogoro 2似乎是一個聰明的商業舉措。 我認為他們會賣更多的這個版本。 雖然我的許多朋友認為新的設計不那麼有吸引力,但實際上我並不恨它。 我覺得看起來不錯。只是看起來較平庸與廉價,最終來說這是是大多數人喜歡的要點 - 平庸與價格低廉。 這倒是讓我有點失望了。

發表會結束後,我認為有四件事情關係到這品牌以及我與gogoro的關係:

1. 忽視了我作為車主的擔憂。
2. 我的昂貴機車已經貶值了。
3. Gogoro正在做他們需要做的事來維持經營。
4. 好奇為什麼像Gogoro這樣的公司不能完全實現創新。

我會跳過前三個,討論第四個更重要的話題 - 創新 - 因為它不僅僅是Gogoro,而在於所有正在尋求創新的台灣品牌。

公司,品牌或組織通常需要6項才能真正創新。

1. 一種非正統的,獨特的方法
2. 擁抱多元化的能力
3. 多樣,開放和創造性的文化
4. 對消費者或客戶的同情
5. 執行和實際採取行動的能力
6. 有自信和大膽的能力

Gogoro正在做兩件事情真的很好。 首先,他們在產品,設計和溝通方面顯然採取非正統和獨特的方法。 他們的設計思想和產品呈現與世界上最受矚目的品牌,包括蘋果一樣好和引人注目。 第二,他們有信心且大膽。 到目前為止,它們有信心和一套大膽的思考和決心去做他們所做的事情。

其他要點我反而覺得他們可能不是做得很好。 如果Gogoro可以將Gogoro2的里程提高到110%,那麼為什麼他們不能同樣用在創新上呢?

我可能錯了,但我會認為,作為台灣公司,他們可能不擅長多元性。 他們可能有一兩個外國人在行銷部門工作,但我認為98%以上的員工是台灣人。 我可以明白,台灣不是美國。 但是,當您在組織中只產生一種類型的思考時,很難創新。 如果你想創新,你需要有不同思維方式、想法、生活方式和態度的員工來滿足你的工作環境。 這也是為何賈伯斯將激發出好的想法歸功於去印度和其他國家旅行。

第二,我聽說Gogoro試圖為員工創造一個具有創造性的工作環境。 但我也聽說,雖然看起來很有創意,但文化缺乏創意真實性。 您可以在世界上創建最好的辦公室,但如果您的人不參與,而且您不鼓勵實際的創意文化,則只是廣告,不會轉化為創新。

Gogoro部分聽取了客戶的意見。 但是,由於 - 我覺得 - 他們仍然把我們視為客戶,而不是一個使用者社群,它不能為我們啟發真正的同情,這意味著他們不明白什麼是真正驅使我們對這個品牌的需求和感覺。 如果一個品牌不了解,那麼就不能創新。

GOGORO正在採取行動,但也許不是正確的。 當然這是我的意見

Gogoro在我看來仍然是一個很好的產品,我仍然會推薦它。 然而,這些日子來,我的建議更多來自於更清潔的空氣,更安靜的社區,而不是我對品牌的熱愛。 另外,市面上真的沒有其他的機車讓我很喜歡。 如果你想要一個好的,快速,可靠的電動機車,現在只有一個選擇 - 在台灣就是這樣。

我還是對這品牌有希望。 我希望他們與Gogoro2做出正確的決定,並且他們的銷售足以使業務活躍和蓬勃發展。 我希望他們的成功轉變為更好地照顧的能力,更加著重用戶的需求。 我希望在接下來的幾年裡,他們能夠將創新提升110%。

2 Paragraphs On - Smelling good. by Chris W. Hubbard

I've always believed in the importance of smelling good. I've been known to use this example: You could be one of the most attractive people in a room, dressed in the finest or latest fashions, but smell bad, and that's the main memory you will leave with people—"something about that guy was a little foul, but his shoes were nice." Alternatively, if you smell amazing—in spite of your looks or character flaws—you have a pretty decent chance of being remembered as an appealing, quality person. When you smell good, people not only treat you more favorably, but a positive impression of you will be burned into their memory forever. Science backs this up.

The sense of smell is closely linked with memory, probably more so than any of our other senses. Bad smells were designed to repulse us because they could be a sign that something could be seriously wrong and a threat to our own health. Pleasant smells ensured us relative cleanliness and safety. Because of this, how you smell can either increase or decrease your social value—whether you feel it's fair or not—permanently. Some even believe that the best way to find your perfect match could be through the nose, such as this fascinating new dating site that uses smell instead of looks to find you a date. 

 

IF YOU LIKED MY POST, PLEASE FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER BECAUSE IT WILL ENCOURAGE ME TO WRITE MORE. THANKS, CHRIS.

 

 

 

Philosophy & Branding - The brand which is unexamined is not worth having by Chris W. Hubbard

Do you have a good brand?
How do you know it's good? 

Have you ever thoroughly examined your brand in order to determine if it’s as good as you say it is? If you haven't, then Socrates—one of the founders of western philosophy—would have said that your brand isn't even worth having. A brand not worth having doesn’t sound so good.

Socrates was a 5th-century Athenian philosopher who developed a powerful form of argument—often referred to as the Socratic or dialectic method—which was inevitably used as the starting point for the development of the scientific method and all of western philosophy. If such a powerful method could improve science and philosophy, perhaps it can be used to evaluate brands as well.

Here's what the Socratic method might look like in this scenario:

Even though Socrates never wrote any books, or defined any theories of his own, he did ask a LOT of questions. It was this style of relentless questioning, that led to the creation of a new way of examining what we think about ourselves, and our perceptions. He was the first philosopher to focus almost exclusively on this type of self-examination of ideas and values.

How often is your brand honestly and relentlessly examining it's ideas and values—asking difficult questions to uncover the real way people within the brand think about themselves, their products and communications, and the actual brand perceptions that exist in the marketplace? How often are you digging into the disconnects between the way you see your brands versus the way others actually perceive them.

Most brands are too scared to ask questions that threaten to disturb the comfortable branding bubbles built and supported around them. And yet, without "going there" most brands will never really achieve the type of success genuinely desired for them.

Socrates believed that understanding who we are right now—honestly and authentically—is the first and most important task. His central concern became the examination of life, and his method of direct and ruthless questioning of people's most cherished beliefs made him the enemies who ultimately sentenced him to death.

The fear that many of us feel within our organizations—about asking too many questions, or revealing wrong, displeasing information—is real and valid. Start to imply your brand is in trouble, or that it's not as grand as is claimed, could—in many organizations—cost you your job. But that only reveals a bigger, more dangerous fear—the fear of the real.

For Socrates, understanding reality was a process of questioning the meaning of essential concepts that we use every day but have never really thought about. For example, what is the real meaning of the word brand? Is it even useful or meaningful anymore? Is there a better word we could be using to communicate the modern meaning? 

This type of questioning, Socrates believed, would reveal real meaning, and our own lack of knowledge or ignorance. Only this would help us to eventually achieve true peace-of-mind by allowing us to do the right things; as opposed to simply living—or branding—according to false perceptions or deep-rooted working culture.

 

Socrates was one of the first philosophers to evaluate what it meant to "be good." He believed that virtue was the most valuable possession and that no one actually desires to be, or do bad. According to him, anyone doing "the wrong thing" would actually be acting against their conscience and eventually feel uncomfortable about it. Since we all strive for peace-of-mind, "the wrong thing" isn't something we do willingly. People do the wrong thing, simply because of a lack of wisdom or knowledge.

It's hard to think there are any brands out there intentionally trying to be a "bad brand." Brands don't try to do "the wrong thing", or be unsuccessful. Bad brands become this way, simply by means of perceptions they are unaware of.

Socrates concluded that there is only one good: knowledge. And only one bad: Ignorance.  Which is why we must continuously examine our lives—and brands—in search of new knowledge that helps us to reshape perceptions. Otherwise—according to Socrates—they just aren't worth having.

IF YOU LIKED MY POST, PLEASE FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER BECAUSE IT WILL ENCOURAGE ME TO WRITE MORE. THANKS, CHRIS.