Click here to load reader

Competing for the Future

  • View
    36

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Text of Competing for the Future

Nikita Jadhav Ankita Kokane Saurabh Dighe Gurunath Satale Pankaj Patil Dipesh Nayak Kunal Bansode

Getting off the treadmillManagers should begin by trying to find answers to questions like: How does the senior managements point of view about the future stack up against that of the competitors? Which issue is absorbing more of senior managers attention? Within the industry, do competitors view our company as more of a ruletaker or rule-maker? What percentage of our advantage- building efforts focus on catching up with competitors versus building advantages new to the industry? To what extent has our transformation agenda been set by competitors actions versus being set by our own unique vision to the future? To what extent am I, as a senior manager, a maintenance engineer working on the present or an architect designing the future?

Among the employees, what is the balance between anxiety and

hope?

The findings suggest that on an average senior

management is devoting less than 3% of the time of its time in building corporate perspective on the future. This should ideally be 20-50% over several months. But if future is not occupying senior managements time, then what is? Its restructuring and reengineering.

To create the future a company must: Change in some fundamental way the rules of engagement in a long standing industry Redraw the boundaries between industries Create entirely new industries Organizational transformation agenda must be driven by a point of view about the industry transformation agenda: How do we want this industry to be shaped in the next five or ten years? What must we do to ensure that the industry evolves in a way that is maximally advantageous for us? What skills and capabilities must we begin building now if we are to occupy leadership position? How should we organise ourselves for opportunities that may not fit neatly in the current business units and divisions?

Competition for Today Vs. Competition for Tomorrow

Market share Vs. Opportunity share.

Business units Vs. corporate competencies.Stand-alone Vs. Integrated system.

Speed Vs. Perseverance.Structured Vs. Unstructured arena.

When you ask managers across the industry whats the secret to making money

in this industry ,do you get more or less the same answer?

Is the industry reasonably concentrated, with fairly stable market-share

position among the incumbents? Alternately, is the industry highly fragmented? Have most of the top management teams spent their entire careers in the

industry? Is the industrys take-up rate for new technology slower than most? Have the leaders tended to rely on high barriers to entry, rather than product

and process innovation, to protect their profitability? Has the basic concept of the product or service remained unchanged for a

significant period of time? Do regulatory issues preoccupy top managers across the industry?

Competing for the industry foresight

The need for foresight Developing foresight The foundation of foresight Empathizing with human needs

Crafting strategic architecture Creating a strategic architecture Committing to the future

Why do great companies failUnparalleled track record

No gap between expectations & performance Contentment with current performance

Accumulatio n of abundant resources A view that resources will win out Resources substitute for creativity

Optimized business sustem Deeply etched recipes Vulnerabilit y to new rules

Success confirms strategy Momentum is mistaken for independent Failure to reinvent leadership

Inability to escape the past!!!

Inability to invent the future..!!!

Strategy as stretch Starting resource positions are a very poor predictor of

future industry leadership. A firm can sit atop mountains of cash and command legions of talented people, and still lose its leadership position. Likewise a firm can sometimes overcome enormous handicaps and successfully scale the heights of industry leadership.

Strategic intent Strategic intent is a term for an animated dream. Strategic architecture is the brain ,strategic intent is the

heart. Strategic intent implies a significant stretch for the organization. Strategic intent also implies a particular point of view about the long-term market or competitive position that a firm hopes to build over the coming decade. Hence it conveys a sense of direction.

Strategy as leverageResource leverage can be achieved in five ways: By more effectively concentrating resources on key

strategic goals, By more efficiently accumulating resources, By conserving resources wherever possible, And by rapidly recovering resources by minimizing the time between expenditure and payback.

Building Gateways to the Future Core Competence Argued that a key challenges in competing for the future. If company wants to capture disproportionate share of profits

from tomorrow's market.

Gateways to the Future Core competencies : the gateways to future opportunities. Competencies that are most valuable are those that

represent a gateway to a wide variety of potential product markets. Core competence : Bundle of Skills & technologies.

ExamplesOrganization Benefit Core competence Sony Pocketability miniaturization

Federal Express

On time delivery

Very high level logistics

EDS

Seamless information flows

System integration

Intercorporate competition Competition for competence E.g. : American Airlines competes with British Airways.

There are several reasons it makes sense to competition for

competence as interoperate competition: First Second Third

The risk of ignoring Core Competencies Opportunities for growth are truncated Spot new opportunity but no competency Company divisionalizes and fractures, competencies weakened Increased dependency Increased competition

The Core Competence Perspective Identifying existing core competencies Establishing core competence acquisition agenda Building core competencies Deploying core competencies Protecting and defending core competence leadership

IDENTIFYING EXISTING CORE COMPETENCIES1. 2. 3.

How strongly your customer is getting influenced Core competence should be difficult to imitate Core competencies should open up good no. of potential markets

ESTABLISHING CORE COMPETENCE ACQUISITION AGENDA

BUILDING NEW CORE COMPETENCIES Consistency of efforts is the Key! Understand which competencies to build Stability of management teams

DEPLOYING CORE COMPETENCIES if an individual somewhere in the organization believes that he or she

Can contribute to one of the high priority projects, that individual can self promote himself or herself onto the team. The team leader may not choose to take the applicant, but if the

skills offered are critical to the projects success, the team leader can ask that the individual be transferred. As one might expect, the existence of such a system helps ensure

that unit managers do their best to keep key people occupied with truly challenging projects. It also ensures that the best people end up working on the biggest

potential opportunities.

DEFENDING AND PROTECTING CORE COMPETENCIES Core competencies do not diminish with use. competencies need to be nurtured and protected.

competence base can be attacked or destroyed by crude

downsizing and delayering activities

When the goal is to create new competitive space, it is usually impossible to know in advance : Configuration of products or service features,

Offered at what price point and Through what channels, will be required to unlock the potential

market.

EXPEDITIONARY MARKETING expeditionary marketing forging new markets before

competitors It acknowledges that failure might take place, but it is a worth

risk taking. It is based on the question of:1.

Whether your business is there to simply serve customers and create new markets? Do your marketing efforts follow consumers wants and needs or does it lead them in new directions?

2.

The practical problem of expeditionary marketing ishow to reduce the time and cost of product iteration . Expeditionary marketing does not imply launching products

that are manifestly unready or inappropriate to the needs of potential customers.

!!Thank You!!