Monthly Archives: June 2017

ui a dit que le rapport annuel d’activité devait être un " pensum " et réservé aux initiés ? Sûrement pas Groupe BPCE qui, avec Havas Paris, lance à la place une nouvelle littéraire. Une nouvelle forme de narration et d’illustration, pour tout dire en divertissant. Sérieux ou non, ne surtout pas s’abstenir ! Après avoir reçu une enveloppe contenant la carte de visite d’un inconnu, Eva Brunold est suspendue aux rendez-vous fixés par un certain Charles Langley. Ce mystérieux individu qui semble tout connaître de la jeune fille la pousse à reprendre le flambeau de son père, un nez mythique de l’univers de la parfumerie, et la guide dans les méandres de l’entreprenariat et du monde du business. Lui distillant une seule certitude : « tout est possible et l’existence n’est jamais figée à condition d’en affronter les mystères ». Tel est le scénario alléchant de « L’Intrigant monsieur Langley », la dernière nouvelle de Jean-Pierre Montal, aussi auteur de « Les années Foch » (éditions Pierre-Guillaume de Roux) et de la biographie « Maurice Ronet-Les vies d’un feu follet ». Sauf que cette fois-ci, cette nouvelle très réussie est publiée par une maison d’édition très particulière : Groupe BPCE, et pour une mission tout aussi inattendue : métamorphoser le rapport d’activité. Un document on ne peut plus incontournable quand on est rien moins que " le deuxième groupe bancaire français ", mais il faut bien le reconnaître, absolument pas glamour -même si l’esthétisme est soigné- ni vraiment passionnant sauf pour les férus de chiffres, de pourcentages ou encore pour les experts des bilans et perspectives. Or, en explorant ce nouveau territoire de la narration littéraire, Groupe BPCE accompagné de son agence, Havas Paris, a toutes les chances de rendre le rapport annuel divertissant donc très attractif, et ainsi de captiver un public très élargi (au-delà des actionnaires, des institutionnels ou des investisseurs) tout en lui servant pourtant 33 innovations et solutions financières parmi toutes celles déployées en 2016 allant de l’appli de paiement sans contact Apple Pay en passant par la plateforme de financement solidaire Espace Dons ou le Coût de L’+xpat, destinée aux expatriés... En effet, au fil des 67 pages, l’intrigue à suspens se déroule tout en dévoilant son lien avec la stratégie du groupe et ses faits marquants de l'année. Une occasion de découvrir les autres établissements du groupe comme Banques Populaires, les Caisses d’Epargne, Natixis, le Crédit Foncier ou encore la Banque Palatine.

"Your margin is my opportunity." This aphorism favored by Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos is the lens through which we should evaluate Amazon's intention to buy Whole Foods. After the announcement on Friday, investors were harsh on grocery stores and big box retailers -- but it's not their margins in which Amazon sees an opportunity. This modern conglomerate is not primarily going after the stores, but the products on the shelves. Grocery stores are a notoriously low-profit-margin business. Kroger, which had $115 billion in revenue in its most recent fiscal year, showed a net profit of just under $2 billion, for a profit margin of under 2 percent. Costco, with its lucrative membership revenue stream, earned just $2.35 billion on revenue of $118.7 billion, also a profit margin around 2 percent. There's a reason e-commerce has had a difficult time disrupting this business. And location matters in the grocery business. Households don't want to drive 30 minutes to get a gallon of milk and a dozen eggs. As a result, grocers fight for prime locations and are loath to surrender them. As an extreme example of this, consider my neighborhood. Nearby, there used to be a Harris Teeter. When Harris Teeter exited the Atlanta market, Kroger bought its lease. Kroger eventually closed the store to focus on other locations, but has continued to pay the lease, which expires next year, in order to prevent other grocers from coming in to compete. If geography matters in grocery, and everything we know about the business suggests it does, then for Amazon to gain significant share in this industry Whole Foods will be only the first of many large grocery store purchases. Some may be collateral damage, but it's not the mass grocers that have the most to worry from Amazon buying Whole Foods. It's the higher-profit-margin consumer packaged-goods companies. In its most recent fiscal year, Procter & Gamble earned a juicy $10.5 billion on $65.3 billion in revenue. Colgate-Palmolive earned $2.4 billion on $15.2 billion in revenue. There were already questions about how robust the "moats" of these companies were -- the barriers to entry for potential competitors -- and the Amazon-Whole Foods merger would show at least one barbarian can make it over the gate. The entrenched consumer packaged-goods companies have large market shares based on an economic and distribution model that is breaking down. Until now, if you sold the most product you could benefit the most from economies of scale, allowing you to lower prices or expand profit margins. And if you earned the most money you could spend the most on mass marketing and buy up all the shelf space at grocery and big box stores. Upstarts would have to overcome three daunting challenges: higher production cost per unit, low brand recognition and difficulty getting shelf space. But that's changing, in part because of Amazon. With its Amazon Basics brand, Amazon is already gaining significant market share in diapers and batteries. They could extend the Amazon Basics brand to other categories, and push that out to Whole Foods stores. In food, Whole Foods has already created the “365” private-label brand. That’s another vehicle for Amazon to attack high-margin major brands. An Amazon-Whole Foods marriage would merge some of the aspects of e-commerce and brick-and-mortar retail. Using its sales data, Amazon can curate the products it sells in Whole Foods stores, where shelf space is a constraint. Maybe that means Procter & Gamble products, maybe that means low-margin Amazon Basics brands, or maybe it means emerging brands that are more popular and/or cheaper than some of the current market leaders. Other grocers like Kroger, Safeway and Wal-Mart might have real estate that Amazon-Whole Foods doesn't, but they're going to be watching every decision by Amazon-Whole Foods, just to stay competitive.

I was recently honored to be one of the thought leaders interviewed for SAP’s “Focusing Forward with IOT” report. Along with the other technology leaders included in the study, I believe the Internet of Things (IoT) holds huge potential for society, especially when it comes to customer experience (CX). The fact that the IoT can help businesses gain so much information about their customers is incredibly exciting to me. But how they begin to use that information to transform the customer journey is where the real power of the IoT lies. If you’ve shopped anywhere, or purchased anything, in the past few weeks, you know there is still much room for improvement in the CX sphere. Most companies right now are somewhere in the middle of their digital transformation—starting to implement chat bots, trying out smart beacons, creating apps to fit their customers’ mobile lifestyles. I’m not going to lie: CX is a bit messy at the moment. As we try to create omni-channel experiences in the midst of change, it’s going to be. But I have all faith that things will settle down for the better in the next few years, and that’s where the IoT comes in. The IoT is the strongest tool we have to bring coherence to our omni-channel CX strategies. For one, it has the power to show us what customers really want, when, and how they want it. Second, it holds tremendous potential for engaging customers 24/7—where they work, live, eat, and move. There has never been a more exciting time to work on creating a powerful and consistent CX. The following are a few ways the IoT can help you build an airtight customer journey.

C’est l’estimation du SNPTV. Les TF1 et autres M6 espèrent un changement de réglementation d’ici à la fin de l’année. Une technologie permettant de diffuser, comme sur la Toile, des tranches de pubs différentes selon les catégories de téléspectateurs ? Les opérateurs de télévision estiment qu'une telle publicité « segmentée », si elle était autorisée en France, pourrait faire croître le marché de la pub télé d'ici à 2022 de 200 millions d'euros s'il était possible de géolocaliser les téléspectateurs, ou de 80 millions d'euros si ce n'était pas le cas. « Sur un marché de la pub télé total de 3,2 milliards, il s'agit d'une opportunité, même si ce n'est pas un eldorado », explique Virginie Mary, déléguée générale du Syndicat national de la publicité télévisée (SNPTV) qui les représente. Des sommes néanmoins bienvenues compte tenu du déplacement de la publicité vers le Web, aujourd'hui en particulier chez Google et Facebook. Et sachant qu'il y a un risque que la pub télé chute lourdement si elle ne s'adapate pas, même si le média télé résiste encore bien aujourd'hui. A l'heure actuelle, même si les groupes de télé multiplient les tests, notamment en télé de rattrapage, cette technologie reste interdite en France sur les chaînes nationales alors qu'au Royaume-Uni par exemple, des acteurs comme Sky et Virgin en sont à s'allier pour offrir une masse critique de téléspectateurs optimisant la publicité segmentée (on dit souvent « adressée »). Un décret de 1992 stipule qu'à l'exception de France 3, les contenus doivent être les mêmes à tout moment sur tout le territoire.

La start-up a été rachetée pour un peu plus de 300 millions de dollars, après une ascension fulgurante.Elle va conserver son autonomie, son management et ses équipes, basées pour la plupart dans l’Hexagone. Son application a moins de deux ans mais Zenly fait déjà partie du Top 10 des start-up françaises les plus chères de l'Histoire. Juste derrière Seloger, Kelkoo, Neolane, Meetic et Dailymotion. La société a été rachetée, fin mai, par Snapchat, pour un montant légèrement supérieur à 300 millions de dollars. La transaction a été faite pour les deux tiers en cash (pour environ 200 millions de dollars) et le reste en actions Snap. La société californienne devrait conserver la marque et l'application en parallèle de son service Snap Map, lancé cette semaine et qui était déjà dans les cartons depuis plusieurs mois. Une stratégie qui serait similaire à celle de Facebook avec Instagram et qui montre que Snap veut se diversifier avec plusieurs produits et marques, calant ainsi son modèle de développement sur celui imaginé par Mark Zuckerberg. L'idée aurait séduit les deux fondateurs de Zenly, Alexis Bonillo et Antoine Martin, qui rêvent de créer un géant mondial des applications grand public, d'origine française. Croissance exponentielle L' histoire de Zenly rappelle celle de plusieurs autres success stories : une start-up qui développe une technologie de géolocalisation depuis 2011, sans en trouver réellement l'application, puis un pivot salvateur et une croissance exponentielle. A l'origine, Alexis Bonillo et Antoine Martin travaillaient sur Alert.us, un produit permettant aux parents de localiser leurs enfants en temps réel. Trop anxiogène, le service ne rencontre pas son public, mais les deux jeunes entrepreneurs sont persuadés qu'ils tiennent là la technologie capable de « cracker » la question de la géolocalisation, sur laquelle même les géants Google ou Facebook se sont cassé les dents. Ils persévèrent et lancent finalement une application sociale , sur laquelle on peut partager son emplacement avec ses amis. Fin 2015, l'idée séduit Xavier Niel, qui investit via son fonds Kima Ventures, aux côtés d'IDInvest et de quelques business angels. En quelques semaines, l'application atteint le million d'utilisateurs actifs, puis les 2 millions l'été dernier pour dépasser aujourd'hui les 4 millions (28 % en France, 12 % en Corée du Sud, 8 % au Japon...). Les grands événements, comme l'Euro 2016 ou les festivals de musique, créent des pics d'utilisation : Zenly résout les difficultés à se retrouver au milieu d'une foule.

Le plus Innovant : Sébastien Imbert, chief digital marketing officer de Microsoft "La France a inspiré 80% du social media management chez Microsoft" Microsoft France a mis en œuvre une gouvernance globale du social media management à partir de 2013. Le plus Stratège : Olivier Delabroy, directeur de la transformation numérique du groupe Air Liquide "Notre centre d'opération pilotera nos 22 usines françaises à distance" La solution Connect d'Air Liquide doit permettre d'accélérer ou de diminuer le rythme de la fabrication en fonction des commandes des clients. Le plus Transformateur : Anne Browaeys, directrice générale marketing, digital et technologies du Club Med "Nous avons lancé un projet de réalité virtuelle 360 degrés" Club Med propose à ses clients de vivre une expérience immersive au sein de 15 de ses resorts. Le plus orienté Data : Julien-Henri Maurice, chief digital officer de Bazarchic "Notre marketing prédictif en temps réel a enclenché un cercle vertueux" L'e-commerçant délivre des emails en temps réel à partir de cookie-matching pour booster le ROI de ses campagnes. Prix Spécial du Jury : Amélie Oudéa-Castera, chief marketing et digital officer d'Axa "Nous avons déployé notre application MyAxa dans 11 pays" Ce nouveau service permet de simplifier la gestion de ses contrats et d'avoir accès à tous ses services depuis un mobile ou une tablette.

Despite industry buzz around robotics for retail, many consumers aren’t particularly keen on the idea of interacting with robots while shopping. More than half say they’d rather stick with humans. Despite industry buzz around robotics for retail, many consumers aren’t particularly keen on the idea of interacting with robots while shopping. More than half say they’d rather stick with humans, according to data from the June 2017 UPS Pulse of the Online Shopper study. Retail robotics were among the top trends that emerged at the National Retail Federation’s Big Show earlier this year, with robots being developed for both warehouse tasks and front-of-store activities. But even if retailers are ready to experiment, the UPS study suggests consumers might not be.

UBER CEO TRAVIS Kalanick resigned late Tuesday night from the company he cofounded in 2009. While he’ll remain on the board of directors, Kalanick's departure comes after months, if not years, of reports of a toxic workplace culture, cutthroat business tactics, and the occasional public embarrassment. It's not clear who will replace Kalanick. But what is clear is that this person will have a lot to correct. Here's a timeline of many, many upheavals that led the $69-billion startup to this crisis point. August 2013: On August 16, a group of Uber drivers file a class-action lawsuit in federal court in which they claim they have been misclassified as independent contractors. This issue cuts to the core of Uber's business model, which depends on drivers not being official employees. The drivers in the suit ask for employee benefits, including mileage and tip reimbursement. The case drags on for three years. In 2016, Uber agrees to a $100 million settlement, but the court declined to approve it. Currently, the case is stayed until at least the fall of this year. December 2013: On New Year’s Eve, an Uber driver runs into a family in a San Francisco crosswalk, killing a 6-year-old girl and seriously injuring her mother and brother. The girl’s family sue Uber, but the ride-hailing giant fights back. According to Uber, the driver wasn’t covered by the company insurance at the time, because while he did have the Uber app open and was waiting to book a ride, he hadn’t actually accepted a fare and had no passenger in the car—meaning he wasn’t technically working for Uber at that moment. The incident raises serious questions about how and when ride-hailing companies like Uber can be held liable for damages. In the aftermath, Uber faces pressure to overhaul and bolster its insurance policies. February 2014: As Uber becomes more successful, the profile of its headstrong CEO, Travis Kalanick, rises. In a GQ profile of Kalanick published in February 2014, a reporter suggests that Kalanick must be finding more success with women since Uber is doing so well as a company. Kalanick’s response: “Yeah, we call that Boob-er.” This comment presages his sometimes troubling relationship with women. January 2014: In January, Valleywag and Techcrunch confirm that NYC-based Uber employees routinely and deliberately ordered thousands of rides from competitors Gett and Lyft, only to cancel them later, in order to mess with their operations. June 2014: Large-scale taxi driver strikes crop up, the biggest of which are staged in London, Berlin, Paris, and Madrid. A global protest movement begins. A year later, in June 2015, Paris cabbies show their dislike of Uber by burning tires and overturning cars. July 2014: The company attracts a lot of criticism for its use of dynamic or surge pricing—a scheme in which Uber's fares can rise dramatically when rider demand is high. Users especially criticized Uber when surge pricing kicked in during emergencies, like Hurricane Sandy. In July 2014, Uber finally addresses the issue, promising New York’s attorney general that it would limit the cost of hailing a car in the event of a crisis. August 2014: The Verge reveals a secret internal project at Uber called Operation SLOG, dedicated to luring drivers away from Lyft, and gathering intelligence on Lyft's operations. October 2014: Forbes reports that Uber has a “God View” and a “Creepy Stalker View”—a GPS trick that could track any user’s location information while they are on the go. The revelation prompts an outcry from the public, but Uber doesn’t yet act on it. Then, in November, a BuzzFeed news reporter says she’d been tracked on her way to a meeting with a general manager of the company. Eventually the company agrees to pay a $20,000 fine after an investigation from New York’s attorney general. November 2014: Then senior vice president of Uber Emil Michael suggests at a private dinner that Uber hire a team of opposition researchers and journalists, with a million-dollar budget, to dig into the personal lives of its critics. BuzzFeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith reports the incident, which makes the national news. The comment follows years of accusations that Uber has routinely and vindictively targeted journalists who write negative pieces about the company. Michael is eventually forced to apologize. December 2014: India’s Delhi region bans Uber’s car-hailing service in the wake of explosive allegations that an Uber driver raped a female passenger. More questions are raised about whether Uber’s driver background checks are thorough enough. May 2015: Uber hires away dozens of Carnegie Mellon University scientists to bolster its self-driving-car effort, reportedly leaving one of the world’s top robotics institutions in a crisis. February 2016: A man who drove for Uber is accused of killing six people in a Kalamazoo, Michigan, shooting spree, which prompts more concerns about Uber’s background check process. June 2016: BuzzFeed publishes a report that raises new questions about how much Uber drivers really make. According to the piece, drivers could be barely earning more than an hourly retail employee. In 2017, the crises have come so fast they’ve piled up on one another. We lay them out here by day. January 29, 2017: The #DeleteUber hashtag campaign goes viral after Uber users—including many celebrities—balk at what they consider is the company attempt to profit during a taxi strike protesting Donald Trump’s immigration ban at New York City’s JFK Airport. Also in January, Uber agrees to pay $20 million to the US government to resolve an FTC complaint that it misled drivers about potential earnings. February 19: In late February, former Uber engineer Susan Fowler publishes an explosive blog post in which she accuses Uber of fostering a misogynistic corporate culture. A few days later, Google autonomous driving spinoff Waymo files a lawsuit claiming Uber boosted its self-driving program by stealing Waymo's trade secrets. February 20: Uber brings in former US attorney general Eric Holder to conduct an independent assessment of Uber’s culture. February 28: Senior executive Amit Singhal leaves after he fails to disclose a sexual harassment allegation filed against him at his previous company, Google. March 1: Bloomberg publishes an embarrassing tape of Kalanick swearing at an Uber driver. March 3: The New York Times reports on an internal tool called Greyball, which uses data collected from the Uber app to make it impossible for certain individuals to use Uber—including law enforcement officers. March 24: The Information reports five employees, including Kalanick, visited a karaoke bar known for offering escort services during a trip to South Korea three years ago—and that a female employee who was on the trip complained to human resources about it. June 6: The law firm Perkins Coie completes an investigation of 215 staff complaints going back to 2012, which leads to the firing of 20 employees. June 7: Uber fires an executive who reportedly illegally obtained the private medical records of the alleged victim of a rape in India in 2014, and showed those records to Kalanick and his second-in-command, Emil Michael. (The victim has since sued Uber for violating her privacy.) June 12: Emil Michael agrees to leave Uber. June 13–14: Eric Holder’s report comes out. It's damning, and includes recommendations to limit Kalanick's responsibilities at the company, appoint an independent chairman, and create an oversight committee on the company board. One day later, Travis Kalanick agrees to take an indefinite leave of absence from the company. A member of Uber’s board of directors, David Bonderman, also resigns after he makes an unsavory joke about women at a company all-hands meeting. Bonderman had interrupted fellow board member Ariana Huffington when she said it was a good thing that the ratio of women on Uber’s board had increased from 14 to 25 percent. “Actually, what it shows is that it’s much more likely to be more talking,” he said. June 20: Uber launches “180 days of change,” a PR campaign aiming to rehabilitate the company’s embattled public image—starting with a promise to let riders tip drivers on the platform. June 21: Travis Kalanick resigns as CEO after pressure from five big Uber investors, including venture capital firms Benchmark, First Round Capital, Menlo Ventures, and Lowercase Capital, and the mutual fund Fidelity Investments.

IN A RECENT episode of HBO’s Silicon Valley, Richard, the show’s protagonist startup founder, and Monica, one of his investors, stroll through the aisles of a bountiful grocery store that looks not unlike Whole Foods. “You do realize I am literally the only person in this grocery store actually buying stuff for myself?” Monica says to Richard. The camera cuts to zombified contract workers wearing branded T-shirts for delivery startups like Instacart, Postmates, and TaskRabbit. Grown men and women grab items off the shelves, hunch forward to consult their smartphone apps, and repeat. The satirical message: This is the future Silicon Valley wants. Society is inching ever closer to Mike Judge’s fictionalized universe, although, in the real-world version, all those delivery startups might get displaced by Amazon. That’s the image that came to mind Friday, when the online shopping behemoth announced plans to acquire Whole Foods for $13.7 billion. The announcement sent a shiver through the startup landscape, but there’s even more at stake in the retail sector, which is already in bad decline. Wall Street investors, spooked by the shadow of CEO Jeff Bezos, sent the stock prices for traditional retail chains—Walmart, Kroger, Target—tumbling down. Venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya predicted this kind of land grab, or something like it, a couple of years ago, at an investment conference, when he called Amazon the most incredible company in the world: "We believe there is a multitrillion-dollar monopoly hiding in plain sight," he said. For amateur observers, Amazon acquiring Whole Foods was the first glimpse of how that monopoly might take shape. Whole Foods is a high-end household name brand with 460 locations. What if Bezos could use the tactics and economies of scale that helped Amazon dominate online markets to become just as indispensable in the bricks-and-mortar business? In groceries, no less, a staple everyone needs? Big moves by Amazon tend to incite paranoia, in large part because, after two decades, Bezos has made good on his promise to build the best “everything store” on planet Earth. Whole Foods’ consumer citadels in upscale neighborhoods will undoubtedly enhance Amazon’s dominance in logistics. The move certainly seemed tectonic to delivery startups like Instacart, whose value depends on being better than Amazon at delivering perishable goods the "last mile," or to a consumer’s door: in a statement to reporters, the company said, “Amazon just declared war on every supermarket and corner store in America." And because Amazon now competes in such a dizzying array of categories, predictions about what the acquisition could bring ran amok. Will Amazon offer Prime membership at Whole Foods, making participation in the program even more irresistible (or mandatory, even)? Will the company test out dynamic pricing of food, like it has with Amazon Books? Will the effect on competition officially make Amazon a monopoly?

Bien sûr, les start-up sont créatrices de valeur. Mais n'oublions pas que notre territoire est également riche d'entreprises traditionnelles, tout aussi utiles et dynamiques. Jusqu'au sommet de l'État, les start-up françaises sont au centre des préoccupations de nos dirigeants politiques. Récemment, Emmanuel Macron s'est engagé dans une opération séduction à destination du monde des start-up et du numérique. L'idée : faire de la France une «nation start-up». Ce faisant, la «nation France» est plurielle, riche d’entreprises, petites, moyennes et grandes. Pour certaines, en pleine mutation. Pour d'autres, offrant des «services publics» indispensables au bon fonctionnement du pays. Alors pourquoi concentrer l'attention sur les seules start-up ? Incantation et contemplation Que la nation, dans ses institutions, ses administrations et les services publics qu'elle porte, prenne la route de l’agilité et de la frugalité des start-up est une bonne nouvelle (en n’oubliant pas de mettre, comme beaucoup de start-up pour lesquelles c'est un trait caractéristique, l’usager au centre...).