Car Rental Industry: From Fleet Lessors to Second-Hand Car Producers

September 18, 2025 By in Strategy, Corporate Transformation, Business Model Innovation
This entry is part 2 of 2 in the series Business Model Innovation

Background

For decades, the car rental industry saw itself primarily as a service provider. Cars were simply depreciating assets—bought, used, and eventually sold once their service life was over. Profitability depended on utilization rates, rental pricing, and operational efficiency.

But over time, the industry experienced a profound business model innovation: large rental companies began to see themselves not only as providers of rental services, but also as mass producers of second-hand cars.

This reframing changed the economics of the sector, reshaped supplier relationships, and redefined fleet management practices.

The Strategic Reframe

Old frame:

  • Cars = inputs, depreciating assets.

  • Value derived mainly from maximizing rental days.

  • Resale considered secondary, often after cars had been “sweated” to the end.

New frame:

  • Cars = inventory in a two-stage model: rental + resale.

  • Value derived from lifecycle economics, not just rental income.

  • Resale value became as important as rental utilization.

Continue reading →

The Future of SMEs: Unlocking Global Growth with AI

September 11, 2025 By in Business Model Innovation, SME
This entry is part 3 of 3 in the series SME's Rising

For decades the advantage of large corporations was not only capital but also access to “better brains.” They could afford strategy consultants, marketing agencies, research labs, and legal teams. SMEs, by contrast, had to rely on intuition and grit.

Artificial intelligence is changing that equation. By compressing the cost of strategic, creative, and analytical expertise, AI is dismantling the corporate moats that once protected big business. For the first time, SMEs can access world-class capabilities at startup budgets — and compete globally on equal footing.

Continue reading →

SMEs’ Exponential Growth: Riding Technology Disruptions

September 9, 2025 By in SME, Business Model Innovation
This entry is part 2 of 3 in the series SME's Rising

 

Every major wave of technology has arrived with the same gloomy forecast: SMEs would be crushed, jobs would disappear, and only large corporations would survive. From e-commerce to cloud, from logistics platforms to AI, the narrative was always that disruption favoured the giants.

History shows the opposite. Each disruption did not kill SMEs — it fuelled their growth. Far from being sidelined, SMEs used technology to multiply their reach, revenues, and profits.

This is the overlooked story of how SMEs turned “death knells” into exponential growth.

Continue reading →

The SME Globalisation Stack: From Search Engines to AI

September 8, 2025 By in SME
This entry is part 1 of 3 in the series SME's Rising

For much of modern history SMEs were locked into their local markets. A craftsman in Jaipur could only sell at the bazaar, a boutique in Barcelona could only advertise in local papers, and a family-run food producer in Nairobi could only distribute within city limits. Global reach, professional marketing, and sophisticated operations were the preserve of large corporations with deep pockets.

Technology has changed that, layer by layer. Each wave of innovation has removed one constraint — marketing reach, payments, logistics, operations, credibility, capital, and now intellectual firepower. The result is what we can call the SME Globalisation Stack: the technologies that have made it possible for SMEs to compete globally without ever becoming “big.” Continue reading →

From Police to Partners: How Business Functions Can Unlock Management Value

September 1, 2025 By in Leadership, Management
This entry is part 2 of 2 in the series Authority = Accountability

In many organisations critical functions such as Risk, Legal, Compliance, HR, and IT are designed to protect the enterprise. Their role is to enforce standards, prevent missteps, and uphold integrity. Yet often these departments are experienced not as partners in value creation but as obstacles, policing business activity rather than managing it.

This distinction between policing and management is not semantic. It cuts to the heart of whether a company views its governance functions as enablers of business value or as veto powers that stifle innovation. Continue reading →

Rethinking RACI: Empowering Innovation by Redesigning Governance

September 1, 2025 By in Management, Project Management, Executive Insight
This entry is part 1 of 2 in the series Authority = Accountability

Governance That Blocks Progress

The RACI model — Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed — was created to bring role clarity to complex projects. But in modern organizations, particularly those navigating innovation, digital transformation, or strategic initiatives, it often has the opposite effect: it introduces confusion, slows progress, and embeds shadow vetoes.

Worse still, RACI disempowers the very executives it’s meant to support. By separating accountability from authority, embedding informal veto points in the name of consultation, and distributing responsibility without granting decision rights, RACI can make even senior leaders feel like process managers rather than outcome owners. It fosters caution over courage, consensus over clarity, and bureaucracy over boldness.

At its core, RACI assumes good faith, clear lines of authority, and efficient decision-making. But in practice, especially in politicised or siloed organizations, it can lead to blurred responsibility, hidden power dynamics, and performative accountability. Continue reading →

From China+1 to No Safe Haven: Tariffs and the Geography of Risk

August 31, 2025 By in Analysis
This entry is part 4 of 4 in the series Tariffs

For years, U.S. companies sought to hedge their supply chain exposure to China by pursuing a “China+1” strategy: diversifying production into countries like India, Mexico, and Canada. The logic was simple: if tariffs or politics made China risky, alternative partners could provide stability. But recent policy shifts show that diversification is no guarantee of safety. When tariffs follow firms from one geography to the next, the entire premise of supply chain resilience is called into question.

India: From Partner to Target

India has been positioned as the great beneficiary of China’s tariff troubles. U.S. imports from India doubled over the past decade with pharmaceuticals, communications equipment, and apparel leading the surge. The doubling of U.S. tariffs on Indian goods to 50% shows how quickly a diversification partner can become a target.

The official rationale was geopolitical: India’s continued purchase of Russian oil. The economic reality is that U.S. firms who moved production to India now face the same higher costs they sought to escape. Consumers pay more. Exporters face retaliation. Supply chain resilience turns into renewed vulnerability.

Complicating matters further, this week Xi Jinping rolled out the red carpet for both Vladimir Putin and Narendra Modi in Beijing. The summit was framed as a coordinated response to Trump’s tariff and foreign policy shocks. The symbolism was striking: India, once seen as the natural counterbalance to China in supply chain diversification, is now engaging more closely with Beijing.

If India and China find common cause in resisting U.S. tariffs, even while remaining rivals in other areas, the logic of “China+1” weakens. What was meant to be a hedge against Chinese political risk may no longer offer independence. Instead, diversification to India risks becoming exposure to a broader bloc of countries aligned against U.S. economic leverage. Continue reading →

Commercial AI: Where the Real Value Will Emerge

August 30, 2025 By in Strategy, Business Model Innovation

 

Much of today’s AI debate is framed as humans versus machines. That framing misses the point. Like the internet and cloud before it, AI will settle into the background as infrastructure. The real commercial opportunity will not be in the raw models themselves but in the systems, trust mechanisms, and legitimacy markets built around them.

1. From Novelty to Infrastructure

Every technology begins as spectacle then sinks into the background. The internet was once a revolution. Today it is assumed infrastructure. Cloud computing went the same way. AI will follow.

The winners will not be those selling “AI” as a standalone product, but those embedding it into workflows. Think of:

  • AWS turning compute into platforms and services.
  • Bloomberg embedding raw data into analytics and trader workflows.
  • SAP integrating processes through ERP systems.

AI will commoditise surface outputs like text or images. The margin will shift to higher-level services that reconfigure compliance, logistics, research, etc.

2. Trust Becomes the Scarce Commodity

When content is cheap to produce then credibility becomes expensive. The internet’s information flood elevated Google, the FT, and The Economist—brands that could filter, signal, and maintain trust.

Continue reading →

Global Hubs & SMEs: From Hosting Giants to Hosting Intelligence

August 29, 2025 By in SME, Strategy, Business Model Innovation
This entry is part 8 of 8 in the series Gen-AI Erodes Business Models

For decades, global financial and commercial centers defined themselves by their ability to host the largest companies. New York, London, Tokyo, and Hong Kong became magnets for multinationals because they provided what those firms needed: access to capital, legal frameworks, professional talent, and international connectivity.

The implicit goal for cities and countries was clear: attract the giants, and the rest of the economy will benefit.

But the rise of generative AI (GAI) challenges this model. If AI truly breaks down the moats that once protected big companies, then the focus of global centers may shift dramatically from hosting giants to hosting intelligence.

Continue reading →

Tariffs, Theatre, and the Cost of Over-Bluffing

August 28, 2025 By in Strategy, Negotiation
This entry is part 3 of 4 in the series Tariffs

America’s tariff strategy in the late 2010s illustrates a classic problem in game theory: over-bluffing. Repeated announcements of new duties, backed by hard deadlines, unsettled trading partners and jolted markets. Yet as deadlines were repeatedly extended, exemptions carved out, or last-minute deals struck, the shock value wore off. What once looked like leverage began to resemble theatre.

The problem is not unique to Washington. In negotiations of all kinds credibility is built on the careful use of uncertainty. A threat or promise must leave the other side unsure enough to adjust. Overuse erodes credibility while failure to vary tactics makes you predictable. Game theory helps clarify why.

As previously explored in The Bluff: An Important Strategy Tool, bluffing is not dishonesty. It is the disciplined use of randomness to keep opponents from exploiting predictability. The poker player who occasionally raises with a weak hand is not lying; they are preserving uncertainty. The executive who withholds their “final price” is not deceiving; they are protecting optionality. Bluffing becomes powerful only when calibrated.

Over-Bluffing: When the Threat Loses Force

In poker over-bluffing occurs when a player raises aggressively with weak hands too often. At first opponents may fold, wary of risk. However, once they recognise the pattern they start calling more frequently. The bluff, over-applied, becomes a liability.

U.S. tariff policy followed the same arc. The first wave of announcements carried real weight, extracting concessions from partners. The cycle of delay and dilution made the pattern obvious. Governments and businesses learned to discount the threats. Over-bluffing had drained credibility, leaving Washington with less room to manoeuvre in later rounds of negotiation.

The lesson: a bluff works because of uncertainty. Once it becomes predictable, it loses all force.

Continue reading →