Can you summarize your company's strategy in 35 words or less? Would your colleagues express it the same way? Very few executives can honestly say yes to these simple questions. The thing is, companies with a clear, concise strategy statement - one that employees can easily internalize and use as a guiding light - often turn out to be industry stars. In this article, Harvard Business School's Collis and Rukstad provide a practical guide for crafting an effective strategy statement and include an in-depth example of how the St. Louis-based brokerage firm Edward Jones developed one that has generated success. Any strategy statement must begin with a definition of the objective, or the goal that the strategy is designed to achieve. Since most firms compete in a more or less unbounded landscape, it is also crucial to define the scope, or domain, of the business. Perhaps most important, companies need to have a clear sense of advantage - that is, the means by which the business will achieve its stated objective. Defining the objective, scope, and advantage requires trade-offs. If a firm pursues growth or size, profitability will take a backseat. If it chooses to serve institutional clients, it might ignore retail customers. If it derives its competitive advantage from scale economies, it will not be able to accommodate idiosyncratic customer needs. Before developing your strategy and crafting your statement, you'll want to carefully evaluate the industry landscape. This includes segmenting customers and identifying unique ways of delivering value to the ones the firm targets. It also calls for an analysis of competitors' current strategies and a prediction of how they might change. The key is to find the sweet spot where the firm's capabilities and customers' needs align in a way that competitors cannot match.

Problem customers can cost your business lots of money, but quickly ejecting them may not be the best way to relieve the burden. Mittal, of Rice University, Sarkees, of Penn State, and Murshed, of Towson University, explore the ins and outs of customer divestment. Using real-world examples, the authors show how deciding to end a relationship with a customer segment or individual can increase profitability, improve employee morale, address capacity constraints, and bolster a business strategy. However, divestment also comes with potential downsides for various constituencies, including employees and remaining customers, both of whom may wonder whether they're next. In addition, ethical and legal consequences - and the risk of bad publicity - always loom. Before you rush to action, say the authors, walk through their five-part customer divestment framework. First, reassess the context of present customer relationships, looking beyond simple profitability. You may find that the most productive option is to educate customers rather than drop them. In some cases, if you renegotiate the value proposition with them, both of you will win. In other instances, you'll want to migrate customers to other subsidiaries or providers, as long as the move is undertaken - and perceived to be conducted - in good faith. If it becomes necessary to terminate a customer relationship, use a direct, interpersonal approach. No business can afford to squander its customer base, so divestment should not be boiled down to determining merely who is profitable and who is not - the strategic consequences are too weighty. In the end, the decision about whether to divest might prove to be the toughest customer of all.

These days, boards are working overtime to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley and other governance requirements meant to protect shareholders from executive wrongdoing. But as directors have become more hands-on with compliance, they've become more hands-off with long-range planning. That exposes corporations and their shareholders to another - perhaps even greater - risk, say professors Lorsch, of Harvard Business School, and Clark, of Harvard Law School. Boards are giving the long term short shrift for a number of reasons. Despite much heavier workloads, directors haven't rethought their patterns of operating - their meetings, committees, and other interactions. Compliance has changed their relationship with executives, however, turning directors into micromanagers who closely probe executives' actions instead of providing high-level guidance. Meanwhile, the pressure to meet quarterly expectations intensifies. Directors need to do a better job of balancing compliance with forward thinking. Boardroom effectiveness hinges most on the quality of directors and their interactions, the authors' research shows. Directors must apply their wisdom broadly, handling compliance work more efficiently and staying out of the weeds on strategic issues. Using their power with management to evangelize for long-term planning, they must take the lead on discussions about financial infrastructure, talent development, and strategy. Reserving sacrosanct time for such discussions, as Philips Electronics' board does at annual retreats, is an effective practice: After one recent retreat, Philips decided to exit the semiconductor business, where it was losing ground. Individual directors also must not shy away from asking tough questions and acting as catalysts on critical issues, such as grooming a successor to the CEO. In short, directors must learn to lead from the boardroom.

Work fills most executives' lives to the brim, leaving insufficient time for their families, their communities, and themselves. But Wharton professor Friedman suggests that, rather than view the problem as a set of trade-offs, executives use their leadership talents to benefit all four domains at once. The idea is to design experiments - small, short-term adjustments to their daily routines - that incorporate and mutually benefit the various aspects of their lives. If an experiment works out, everyone wins - employer, employee, family, and community; if it doesn't, it simply becomes a low-cost learning opportunity. Over time, the combination of small gains and lessons learned can lead to larger-scale transformation. The "Total Leadership" process involves identifying what's important to you, identifying what's important to everyone in your life, using those insights to creatively explore possibilities for experiments, and then selecting and implementing a few at a time. Drawing on decades of experience, Friedman has distilled nine categories of experiments that offer a manageable, systematic approach to the daunting task of conceiving projects with four-way benefits. In one such experiment, an executive might raise money for a charity her company sponsors by running a marathon with her son, thus simultaneously gaining greater visibility at work, spending more time with her family, giving back to the community, and improving her health. To move toward the goal of becoming a CEO, another executive might join the board of a nonprofit agency in his neighborhood together with his wife. Friedman suspects that there are far more opportunities for simultaneous benefits than people realize. They are there for the taking. You just have to know how to look for them and then find the support and courage to pursue them.

When a market or an industry goes into hypergrowth - that steep part of the S-curve where market share is usually determined - established companies may be at a disadvantage. Often they labor under organizational legacies that hamper their ability to respond to lightning-quick opportunities to increase their share. Izosimov, the CEO of VimpelCom, rode the hypergrowth wave in Russia's cell phone market and came out ahead. He offers five rules to help other companies survive a similar ride. Sell first and ask questions later. This is the time to capture as many new customers as possible - while making sure that you can actually deliver the promised products and services. Your business model doesn't have to be perfect at the outset, though; you can refine it as you go along. Don't try too hard to innovate. Of course you must understand the technological trends in your business, but your focus should be on the systems and solutions critical to your growing customer base, not on the strategic implications of future killer apps. Organize like McDonald's. Standardized organizational structures, technologies, and business processes allow your people to hit the ground running in new markets. In VimpelCom's case it would have been cheaper to start by piggybacking on local systems - but customer satisfaction would have suffered. Push decisions out to the front line. You simply can't afford decision paralysis during hypergrowth. Ceding operational decisions to those who have to deliver the performance saves time, triggers entrepreneurial behavior, and may even raise the quality of job candidates. Foster a can-do culture. Action-oriented companies - where people move on quickly from solutions that aren't working, communicate freely, and don't fear failure - will do best during hypergrowth. To foster such a culture, reward people for their successes and for implementing new ideas.

Amp Up, a wildly popular electronic-music game, is the brainchild of KMS's cherished programmers, who now spend their time trying to keep customers dazzled with upgrades. But a couple of start-ups have ripped off the idea using their own code - which is open source. Now they're demanding that KMS float with the rising tide and join the open-source community. How could the company make money without its IP? And why should it try? Four experts comment on this fictional case study in R0804A and R0804Z. Jonathan Schwartz, the CEO of Sun Microsystems, says that if KMS is confident it knows what its customers will want next - and if it's content with a small corner of the market - it should stay proprietary. But it will pay a reputational price. Eric Levin, the executive vice president of Techno Source, suggests that KMS take a middle path: license its software to third-party companies and add features to promote community building. This approach could fund itself through royalties or fees and would allow KMS to approve or veto third-party products. Gary P. Pisano, of Harvard Business School, points out that an open-source strategy could increase Amp Up's rate of improvement, enhance users' satisfaction with the game, and reduce KMS's development costs. But if the company stops competing on the basis of its code, it had better be sure of the strength of its downstream capabilities. Michael J. Bevilacqua, of the law firm WilmerHale, warns that KMS risks greater liability for intellectual-property infringement if it joins the open-source community, where code carries no guarantee that it doesn't infringe on someone's IP rights and providers offer no indemnification.

Amp Up, a wildly popular electronic-music game, is the brainchild of KMS's cherished programmers, who now spend their time trying to keep customers dazzled with upgrades. But a couple of start-ups have ripped off the idea using their own code - which is open source. Now they're demanding that KMS float with the rising tide and join the open-source community. How could the company make money without its IP? And why should it try? Four experts comment on this fictional case study in R0804A and R0804Z. Jonathan Schwartz, the CEO of Sun Microsystems, says that if KMS is confident it knows what its customers will want next - and if it's content with a small corner of the market - it should stay proprietary. But it will pay a reputational price. Eric Levin, the executive vice president of Techno Source, suggests that KMS take a middle path: license its software to third-party companies and add features to promote community building. This approach could fund itself through royalties or fees and would allow KMS to approve or veto third-party products. Gary P. Pisano, of Harvard Business School, points out that an open-source strategy could increase Amp Up's rate of improvement, enhance users' satisfaction with the game, and reduce KMS's development costs. But if the company stops competing on the basis of its code, it had better be sure of the strength of its downstream capabilities. Michael J. Bevilacqua, of the law firm WilmerHale, warns that KMS risks greater liability for intellectual-property infringement if it joins the open-source community, where code carries no guarantee that it doesn't infringe on someone's IP rights and providers offer no indemnification.

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Thanks to a variety of online social applications -- including blogs, social networking sites like MySpace, user-generated content sites like YouTube and countless communities across the Web -- people are increasingly connecting with and drawing power from one other. In fact, customers are now beginning to define their own perspective on companies and brands, a view that's often at odds with the image a business wants to project. But organizations need not be on the defensive. Indeed, some savvy executives have already been turning this groundswell of customer power to their advantage. To investigate how, the authors interviewed managers and employees at over 100 companies that were rolling out social applications. From this research, they developed a strategic framework that businesses can use to implement social applications in a number of departments, including research and development, marketing, sales, customer support and operations.

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. Vigilant leaders are those who make a practice of being abundantly alert and deeply curious so that they can detect, and act on, the earliest signs of threat or opportunity. They seek to nurture equally vigilant employees by modeling such behavior and by providing incentives for managers to look for -- and interpret -- weak signals. While such icons as Andy Grove and Jack Welch exemplify vigilant CEOs, the trait remains in short supply. That is a conclusion the coauthors reached after surveying 119 global companies about their overall capacity for diligence. Among their findings: Just 23% of the businesses were run by CEOs who tried to pick up weak signals from the periphery. Most leaders, they theorize, rise to the top by demonstrating superior operational skills. To help leaders recognize and develop the habit of vigilance, the researchers examine in detail the three traits that characterize vigilant executives: focusing externally, applying strategic foresight and encouraging exploration by others. They also capture such leaders in action and provide examples in which a distinct lack of vigilance has led companies such as The Coca-Cola Co. to "miss the boat" by overlooking big opportunities. Companies like General Electric Co. and Johnson & Johnson have instituted systematic programs to instill employees with the qualities of vigilant leaders. The CEO of Denmark-based Novozymes A/S is curious, fast and enterprising, an attitude he nurtures in his workers. Organizations may encourage vigilant leadership by hiring specifically for it or by openly rewarding displays of it. Whatever strategy CEOs choose, the authors find that it is critical for them to set an example. After all, it is only through vigilance that companies can avoid hidden dangers -- and discover opportunities ripe for innovation.

Many companies have established technology-based platforms or virtual customer environments to partner with their customers in innovation and value creation. In pursuing such initiatives, most companies seem to focus primarily on customers' innovative contributions, paying less attention to customers' interaction experiences in the VCE. But the VCE experience has more profound implications--particularly for customer relationship management. In this article, the authors offer a framework to help companies understand and evaluate customers' VCE experience profile. The authors describe five customer roles in innovation and value co-creation: product conceptualizer, product designer, product tester, product support specialist and product marketer. Each role has something to offer. However, depending on the customer innovation role, the nature of the customer interactions and the technologies used in the VCE will vary. The VCE customer experience has four components: the pragmatic experience (its ability to provide information), the sociability experience (how it promotes group discussion), the usability experience (defined by the quality of the human-computer interactions) and the hedonic experience (relating to mental stimulation and entertainment). Drawing on examples from Microsoft, SAP, Samsung, BMW, Volvo and Ducati, the authors suggest strategies and practices to enhance customer experiences in VCEs and ensure favorable outcomes in terms of innovation management and CRM. Designing and implementing the right system can help companies improve innovation and CRM. Therefore, managers should view their VCE initiatives as an integral part of their overall innovation and customer strategies. What's more, the costs of implementation can vary widely. Therefore, companies need to be careful about selecting and implementing a portfolio of strategies and practices that meets the needs of the types of customer they want to engage in value co-creation.

Eager to grow through innovation, companies are looking to customers to guide them toward unmet needs. But these entities often end up with vague, unusable -- or even misleading -- customer input. Why? The authors studied 10,000 customer need statements from many industries and discovered that companies have not even established a definition of what a customer need is or how user input should be standardized in terms of structure and format. Too often, companies ask customers to react to potential solutions, rather than zeroing in on their expertise: the "job" they need to accomplish with the product or service, and at which steps that experience could use improvement. By deconstructing the job, companies can identify opportunities that are universal and long-standing. In addition, the authors say, companies can collect data that fits their innovation strategy. What the authors propose is a disciplined process for gathering customer requirements that will then be addressed by innovative ideas. They outline the six characteristics that a useful customer statement must possess, including measuring value strictly from a user's perspective -- and not from the factors the company believes should form the basis for the customer's evaluation. The most helpful statements also prompt a clear course of action, specifying what dimensions of the "job" need improvement, such as its sluggish pace or inconsistent quality. The authors set forth six rules for eliciting feedback that will yield the right raw data to craft customer statements that resonate across company functions, so that departments can unite around a single growth strategy. Finally, they define the two broad categories of customer requirements -- job statements and desired-outcome statements -- and link which type works best for different innovation strategies. For CEOs, the authors' message is forthright: Successful innovation is about process, not just the result of brainstorming good ideas.

This note first documents the facts around the sustainability of competitive advantage. It then observes that the demise of a previously successful strategy, in the first instance, often comes from some change in the external environment. It, therefore, characterizes the types of change that can lead to strategic decline. But external change alone should not mean the end of superior performance since the skilled strategist ought to be able to adapt to such changes. The final part of the note looks inside the firm to examine why managers often fail to respond adequately to external threats and explains why it is valuable to study the causes of strategic decline.     

Individuals enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid, known as dual eligibles, are among the highest-cost beneficiaries in the US. Commonwealth Care Alliance, a small nonprofit insurer and care delivery system in Massachusetts, operated under a public demonstration program designed to provide comprehensive coverage and care for the elderly dual eligible population. Led by Dr. Robert Master, Commonwealth Care Alliance worked with its contracted providers to implement and support a care delivery model that could allow as many members as possible to live independently outside of nursing homes. The case examines Commonwealth Care Alliance's insurance and care delivery approaches amidst a changing policy environment and various resource constraints. This case can be used to teach: Approaches to value-based insurance and care delivery; Insurance and care delivery considerations for underserved, high-cost populations; Evolution and structure of US Medicare and state Medicaid programs and demonstrations; and payer and provider reimbursement models.

Spreadsheet supplement for case 908N01.

Wall Street's darling, Google Inc., offered more than a pretty financial picture. Poverty, communicable diseases and climate change - some of the world's largest problems - were also key interests of Google's cofounders. By applying innovation and significant resources, Google's cofounders hoped that their efforts in these areas would one day eclipse Google itself in worldwide impact. On February 22, 2006, Google Inc. announced the appointment of an executive director of the newly created Google.org. With one per cent of Google Inc.'s equity and profit as seed money, Google.org's mandate was to address climate change, global public health, economic development and poverty. Although charity by successful entrepreneurs was not unusual, this press release signaled a new organizational form, a for-profit philanthropic company. The new executive director's task ahead was unprecedented. How could he leverage the company's for-profit status to make the biggest impact possible with the resources trusted to Google.org? What decision-making criteria should be used for strategic investments? How would he measure Google.org's success?

The case centers around the strategic planning retreat of MacTara Limited (MacTara), the largest wood products company in Nova Scotia. While there are some very good opportunities for the company in some sectors, like wood pellets for fuel (high demand for inexpensively priced renewable energy sources), the Canadian lumber industry as a whole is not attractive at this time (distortionary effects of the Canadian-U.S. softwood lumber dispute, low price of lumber, sales denominated in the free-falling U.S. dollar, inflexible cost structure, etc). The fact that MacTara is a somewhat vertically integrated company - from construction lumber, to chips for paper mills, to fuel pellets made out of wood waste - makes planning very difficult because the health of each sector impacts on the prospects for the others. Company executives need to find a way to make all the various pieces of the business fit together into a profitable whole while they still have money and time. The Canadian lumber industry is in crisis and the eastern Canadian industry is ripe for consolidation.

The case illustrates the challenges of growing sustainably by tracking the 30-year journey of a quintessentially Canadian chef, environmental champion, and strong advocate of slow food, seasonality, local sourcing and artisan food production. Set in mid May 2007, the case decision has Toronto-based Jamie Kennedy pondering several expansion options for Jamie Kennedy Kitchens, a corporation with three main ventures. Jamie Kennedy Kitchens' annual revenues were more than $7 million and earnings before taxes of 6.7 per cent in an industry typically averaging 3.2 per cent were testimony of the growing appeal of organic food and wine pairings. With influential cook-books, global accolades, rave reviews by acclaimed food critics, and a fast growing base of satisfied customers, Jamie Kennedy was well positioned for growth. Yet Jamie Kennedy grappled with the implications of growth for the core pillars of his business. The case explores the trade-offs between financially profitable growth and Jamie Kennedy's determination to stay true to local sourcing and cooking with seasonal ingredients and his environmental values. The case asks students to anticipate growth alternatives and articulate their points of leverage or disconnect with Jamie Kennedy Kitchens current business model, as well as Jamie Kennedy's cuisine and personal values.

At the time of the Mekong Corporation (Mekong) and the Vietnam Motor Vehicle Industry (A) case, product 9A96H002, some analysts felt that the Vietnamese automotive market was about to expand substantially. By 2007, the industry's capacity had increased enormously to nearly 150,000. However, the domestic sales had only expanded to approximately 40,000, and exports were negligible. This (B) case examines the government's interventionist policies that stimulated the expansion of production capacity while restraining vehicle sales. A key element was the continuation of very high import tariffs and other taxes that maintained a protected market for domestic manufacturers. In this context, Mekong continued to operate successfully. This case encourages students to consider the appropriate role of government in stimulating economic development, as well as appropriate corporate strategy in a protected market.

A newly appointed operations manager was expected to provide his expertise in the planning, launch and ongoing operations for three corporately-owned Part King stores, the first of which was scheduled to open in December 2005. The operations manager wondered if moving to a corporate model made sense at all or whether it was better to retain the franchise structure that was already in place. He was particularly concerned about how best to motivate the managers of a corporate-owned store given that they did not share in its ownership. Were there some components of the control system that was currently in place in the franchise store model that would also be appropriate for the corporate-owned store model that was in the works? Were there some components of the existing control system that needed improvements as well?

Since the mid-1980s, Sona Steering Systems (later renamed as Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd) has been a competitive player in the Indian auto component industry. The firm has made remarkable progress in competitiveness through numerous initiatives over the past two decades. Starting as a single-source supplier of simple mechanical steering systems, the firm has systematically improved competitiveness, evolving into a capable Deming Prize-winning firm with capabilities across the industry value system. By November 2005, the firm had many customers and, for some of them, had designed entire systems to their specifications. This case provides a context for identifying Sona Koyo's sources of competitiveness through two important concepts. The versatile yet simple assets-processes-performance (APP) framework is used to identify relevant factors of competitiveness, while the concept of the "competitiveness journey" is introduced to examine different contexts, scenarios, strategies and initiatives as well as company performance. The case builds on analysis of data and insights culled from professionals at different levels of the company, up to the chairman.