The likelihood that an industry leader will lose its top position within five years has doubled since 1972, say McKinsey consultants S. Patrick Viguerie and Caroline Thompson.
Marketing is becoming more analytic and less creative. That's why, HBS professors Gail McGovern and John Quelch assert, more companies are finding it makes sense to outsource many marketing functions.
Customer Strategy Solutions, a California-based developer of order fulfillment systems, is facing a shakedown. Six months after the firm's CEO, Pavlo Zhuk, set up a software development center in Kiev, local bureaucrats say the company hasn't filed all the tax schedules it should have. Moreover, Ukrainian tax officials claim that the company owes the government tax arrears. Zhuk is shocked; he and his colleagues have done everything by the book. This isn't the first time Zhuk has encountered trouble in Ukraine. In the process of getting the development center up and running, a state-owned telecommunications utility had made it difficult for Zhuk to get the phone lines his company needed. Senior telecom manager Vasyl Feodorovych Mylofienko had told Zhuk it would take three years to install the lines in his office--but for a certain price, Mylofienko had added, the lines could be functioning the following week. Even as the picture of rampant bribery and corruption in Ukraine becomes clear, Zhuk still doesn't want to pull out. Of Ukrainian descent, he has dreams of helping to modernize the country. By paying his programmers more than they could make at any local company, he hopes to raise their standard of living. And yet, he isn't sure he can keep compromising his principles for the sake of the greater good. Should Customer Strategy Solutions pay off the Ukrainian tax officials? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0503A and R0503Z are Alan L. Boeckmann, the chairman and CEO of Fluor Corp.; Rafael Di Tella, a professor at Harvard Business School; Thomas W. Dunfee, the Kolodny Professor of Social Responsibility and a professor of legal studies at Wharton; and Bozidar Djelic, the former finance and economy minister of Serbia.
Most professional women step off the career fast track at some point. With children to raise, elderly parents to care for, and other pulls on their time, these women are confronted with one off-ramp after another. When they feel pushed at the same time by long hours and unsatisfying work, the decision to leave becomes even easier. But woe to the woman who intends for that exit to be temporary. The on-ramps for professional women to get back on track are few and far between, the authors confirm. Their new survey research reveals for the first time the extent of the problem--what percentage of highly qualified women leave work and for how long, what obstacles they face coming back, and what price they pay for their time-outs. And what are the implications for corporate America? One thing at least seems clear: As market and economic factors align in ways guaranteed to make talent constraints and skill shortages huge issues again, employers must learn to reverse this brain drain. Like it or not, large numbers of highly qualified, committed women need to take time out of the workplace. The trick is to help them maintain connections that will allow them to reenter the workforce without being marginalized for the rest of their lives. Strategies for building such connections include creating reduced-hour jobs, providing flexibility in the workday and in the arc of a career, removing the stigma of taking time off, refusing to burn bridges, offering outlets for altruism, and nurturing women's ambition. An HBR Special Report, available online at www.womenscareersreport.hbr.org, presents detailed findings of the survey.
During the past 20 years, the real price of most consumer goods has fallen worldwide, the variety of goods and the range of sales channels offering them have continued to grow, and product quality has steadily improved. So why is consumption often so frustrating? It doesn't have to be--and shouldn't be--the authors say. They argue that it's time to apply lean thinking to the processes of consumption--to give consumers the full value they want from goods and services with the greatest efficiency and the least pain. Companies may think they save time and money by off-loading work to the consumer but, in fact, the opposite is true. By streamlining their systems for providing goods and services, and by making it easier for customers to buy and use those products and services, a growing number of companies are actually lowering costs while saving everyone time. In the process, these businesses are learning more about their customers, strengthening consumer loyalty, and attracting new customers who are defecting from less user-friendly competitors. The challenge lies with the retailers, service providers, manufacturers, and suppliers that are not used to looking at total cost from the standpoint of the consumer and even less accustomed to working with customers to optimize the consumption process. Lean consumption requires a fundamental shift in the way companies think about the relationship between provision and consumption and the role their customers play in these processes. It also requires consumers to change the nature of their relationships with the companies they patronize. Lean production has clearly triumphed over similar obstacles in recent years to become the dominant global manufacturing model. Lean consumption, its logical companion, can't be far behind.
Much has been written about the qualities that make a great manager, but most of the literature overlooks a fundamental question: What does a great manager actually do? While there are countless management styles, one thing underpins the behavior of all great managers. Above all, an exceptional manager comes to know and value the particular quirks and abilities of her employees. She figures out how to capitalize on her staffers' strengths and tweaks her environment to meet her larger goals. Such a specialized approach may seem like a lot of work. But in fact, capitalizing on each person's uniqueness can save time. Rather than encourage employees to conform to strict job descriptions that may include tasks they don't enjoy and aren't good at, a manager who develops positions for his staff members based on their unique abilities will be rewarded with behaviors that are far more efficient and effective than they would be otherwise. This focus on individuals also makes employees more accountable. Because staffers are evaluated on their particular strengths and weaknesses, they are challenged to take responsibility for their abilities and to hone them. Capitalizing on a person's uniqueness also builds a stronger sense of team. By taking the time to understand what makes each employee tick, a great manager shows that he sees his people for who they are. This personal investment not only motivates individuals but also galvanizes the entire team. Finally, this approach shakes up existing hierarchies, which leads to more creative thinking. To take great managing from theory to practice, the author says, you must know three things about a person: her strengths, the triggers that activate those strengths, and how she learns. By asking the right questions, squeezing the right triggers, and becoming aware of your employees' learning styles, you will discover what motivates each person to excel.
If company leaders were granted a single wish, it would surely be for a reliable way to create new growth businesses. Business practitioners' overwhelming interest in this subject prompted the authors to conduct a three-year study of organizational growth--specifically, to find out which growth strategies were most successful. They discovered, somewhat to their surprise, that even companies in mature industries found rich new sources of growth when they reconfigured their unit of business (what they bill customers for) or their key metrics (how they measure success). In this article, the authors outline these and other moves companies can make to redefine their profit drivers and realize low-risk growth. They offer plenty of real-world examples. For instance, once a conventional printing house, Madden Communications not only prints promotional materials for customers but also manages the distribution and installation of those materials on-site. Its revenues grew from $10 million in 1990 to $133 million in 2004, in an industry that many had come to regard as hopelessly mature. The authors also suggest ways to identify your unit of business and associated key metrics and recognize the obstacles to changing them; review the key customer segments you serve; assess the need for new capabilities and the potential for internal resistance to change; and communicate to internal and external constituencies the changes you wish to make in your unit of business or key metrics.
Companies try all kinds of ways to improve collaboration among different parts of the organization: cross-unit incentive systems, organizational restructuring, teamwork training. Although these initiatives produce occasional success stories, most have only a limited impact on dismantling organizational silos and fostering collaboration. The problem? Most companies focus on the symptoms ("Sales and delivery do not work together as closely as they should") rather than on the root cause of failures in cooperation: conflict. The fact is, you can't improve collaboration until you've addressed the issue of conflict. The authors offer six strategies for effectively managing conflict: Devise and implement a common method for resolving conflict; provide people with criteria for making trade-offs; use the escalation of conflict as an opportunity for coaching; establish and enforce a requirement of joint escalation; ensure that managers resolve escalated conflicts directly with their counterparts; and make the process for escalated conflict-resolution transparent. The first three strategies focus on the point of conflict; the second three focus on escalation of conflict up the management chain. Together they constitute a framework for effectively managing discord, one that integrates conflict resolution into day-to-day decision-making processes, thereby removing a barrier to cross-organizational collaboration.
The success of Dell--it provides extraordinary rewards to shareholders, it can turn on a dime, and it has demonstrated impeccable timing in entering new markets--is based on more than its famous business model. High expectations and disciplined, consistent execution are embedded in the company's DNA. "We don't tolerate businesses that don't make money," founder Michael Dell tells HBR. "We used to hear all sorts of excuses for why a business didn't make money, but to us they all sounded like 'The dog ate my homework.' We just don't accept that." To double its revenues in a five-year period, the company had to adapt its execution-obsessed culture to new demands. In fact, Michael Dell and CEO Kevin Rollins realized they had a crisis on their hands. "We had a very visible group of employees who'd gotten rich from stock options," Rollins says. "You can't build a great company on employees who say, 'If you pay me enough, I'll stay.'" Dell and Rollins knew they had to reignite the spirit of the company. They implemented an employee survey, whose results led to the creation of the Winning Culture initiative, now a top operating priority at Dell. They also defined the Soul of Dell: Focus on the customer, be open and direct in communications, be a good global citizen, have fun in winning. It turned out to be a huge motivator. And they increased the focus on developing people within the company. "We've changed as individuals and as an organization," Rollins says. "We want the world to see not just a great financial record and operational performance but a great company. We want to have leaders that other companies covet. We want a culture that makes people stick around for reasons other than money."
Saying that networks are important is stating the obvious. But harnessing the power of these seemingly invisible groups to achieve organizational goals is an elusive undertaking. Most efforts to promote collaboration are haphazard and built on the implicit philosophy that more connectivity is better. In truth, networks create relational demands that sap people's time and energy and can bog down entire organizations. It's crucial for executives to learn how to promote connectivity only where it benefits an organization or individual and to decrease unnecessary connections. In this article, the authors introduce three types of social networks, each of which delivers unique value. The customized response network excels at framing the ambiguous problems involved in innovation. Strategy consulting firms and new-product development groups rely on this format. By contrast, surgical teams and law firms rely mostly on the modular response network, which works best when components of the problem are known but the sequence of those components in the solution is unknown. And the routine response network is best suited for organizations like call centers, where the problems and solutions are fairly predictable but collaboration is still needed. Executives shouldn't simply hope that collaboration will spontaneously occur in the right places at the right times in their organizations. They need to develop a strategic, nuanced view of collaboration, and they must take steps to ensure that their companies support the types of social networks that best fit their goals. Drawing on examples from Novartis, the FAA, and Sallie Mae, the authors offer managers the tools they need to determine which network delivers the best results for their organizations and which strategic investments nurture the right degree of connectivity.
In the 1990s, Hewlett-Packard's PC business was struggling to turn a dollar, despite the company's success in winning market share. By 1997, margins on its PCs were thin, and some product lines had not turned a profit since 1993. The problem had to do with the PC industry's notoriously short product cycles and brutal product and component price deflation. A common rule of thumb was that the value of a fully assembled PC decreased 1% a week. In such an environment, inventory costs become critical. But the standard "holding cost of inventory" accounted for only about 10% of HP's inventory costs. The greater risks, it turned out, resided in four other, essentially hidden costs, which all stemmed from mismatches between demand and supply leading to excess inventory: component devaluation costs for components still held in production; price protection costs incurred when product prices drop on goods distributors still have on their shelves; product return costs that have to be absorbed when distributors return and receive refunds on overstock items; and obsolescence costs for products still unsold when new models are introduced. By developing metrics to track those costs in a consistent way throughout the PC division, HP has found it can manage its supply chains with much more sophistication. Now, each product group chooses the supply chain configuration that best suits its needs.
Customer Strategy Solutions, a California-based developer of order fulfillment systems, is facing a shakedown. Six months after the firm's CEO, Pavlo Zhuk, set up a software development center in Kiev, local bureaucrats say the company hasn't filed all the tax schedules it should have. Moreover, Ukrainian tax officials claim that the company owes the government tax arrears. Zhuk is shocked; he and his colleagues have done everything by the book. This isn't the first time Zhuk has encountered trouble in Ukraine. In the process of getting the development center up and running, a state-owned telecommunications utility had made it difficult for Zhuk to get the phone lines his company needed. Senior telecom manager Vasyl Feodorovych Mylofienko had told Zhuk it would take three years to install the lines in his office--but for a certain price, Mylofienko had added, the lines could be functioning the following week. Even as the picture of rampant bribery and corruption in Ukraine becomes clear, Zhuk still doesn't want to pull out. Of Ukrainian descent, he has dreams of helping to modernize the country. By paying his programmers more than they could make at any local company, he hopes to raise their standard of living. And yet, he isn't sure he can keep compromising his principles for the sake of the greater good. Should Customer Strategy Solutions pay off the Ukrainian tax officials? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0503A and R0503Z are Alan L. Boeckmann, the chairman and CEO of Fluor Corp.; Rafael Di Tella, a professor at Harvard Business School; Thomas W. Dunfee, the Kolodny Professor of Social Responsibility and a professor of legal studies at Wharton; and Bozidar Djelic, the former finance and economy minister of Serbia.
Customer Strategy Solutions, a California-based developer of order fulfillment systems, is facing a shakedown. Six months after the firm's CEO, Pavlo Zhuk, set up a software development center in Kiev, local bureaucrats say the company hasn't filed all the tax schedules it should have. Moreover, Ukrainian tax officials claim that the company owes the government tax arrears. Zhuk is shocked; he and his colleagues have done everything by the book. This isn't the first time Zhuk has encountered trouble in Ukraine. In the process of getting the development center up and running, a state-owned telecommunications utility had made it difficult for Zhuk to get the phone lines his company needed. Senior telecom manager Vasyl Feodorovych Mylofienko had told Zhuk it would take three years to install the lines in his office--but for a certain price, Mylofienko had added, the lines could be functioning the following week. Even as the picture of rampant bribery and corruption in Ukraine becomes clear, Zhuk still doesn't want to pull out. Of Ukrainian descent, he has dreams of helping to modernize the country. By paying his programmers more than they could make at any local company, he hopes to raise their standard of living. And yet, he isn't sure he can keep compromising his principles for the sake of the greater good. Should Customer Strategy Solutions pay off the Ukrainian tax officials? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0503A and R0503Z are Alan L. Boeckmann, the chairman and CEO of Fluor Corp.; Rafael Di Tella, a professor at Harvard Business School; Thomas W. Dunfee, the Kolodny Professor of Social Responsibility and a professor of legal studies at Wharton; and Bozidar Djelic, the former finance and economy minister of Serbia.
For the last five years, America Online (AOL), Yahoo!, and Microsoft have been battling to grab market share for their instant messaging (IM) service. Each company has its own software and network to deliver the service, which allows users to write online, real-time text messages to other users on the same network. Although IM began as a small venture in 1996 by four Israeli engineers, it has ballooned into one of the largest means of online communication. The number of IM users has grown 30% faster in its first five years than that of e-mail when it was first launched. Today, almost half of all North American online households use some version of IM. Despite the large number of IM users, the three major providers--AOL, Yahoo!, and Microsoft--have not earned any significant profit from offering their services. Each firm offers its IM service for free and many questions remain as to how any company will one day capitalize on its millions of users. Some looked to the possibility of developing IM as a corporate technology tool, allowing co-workers to send messages securely to one another, and efforts were already underway to make this a reality. Firms have also made significant efforts to establish a common protocol for IM that would enable users to communicate across different networks. But competition has hampered progress, forcing analysts to wonder whether consumers will continue to tolerate using multiple IM programs to reach friends on different networks.
In February 2003, President and CEO Nick Lazaris faces critical decisions on Keurig's launch of a new consumer coffee brewing system. Keurig has successfully sold single-cup brewing systems through commercial distribution channels and is now expanding to the lucrative consumer segment. However, a meeting with key strategic partners six months prior to launch raised questions about the product design. This prompted the Keurig management team to revisit its decisions on product design, pricing, and the marketing plan. With six months to launch, what should the company do?
Focuses on whether world-renowned product design firm IDEO's new customer service fits with the firm's strategic position and organization capabilities. Over the course of IDEO's 13-year history, an increasing share of revenues are a result of "Phase 0" projects--preliminary strategic explorations of future product possibilities for various client firms. Describes a specific Phase 0 project in order to explore the challenge of managing these strategic, intangible services in the context of IDEO's successful history of generating award-winning tangible product designs. A team at IDEO's Boston office worked with mattress manufacturer Simmons to discover unmet customer needs and identify new product line opportunities. Describes the challenges and questions facing the Simmons project team as well as critical and operational questions facing IDEO. Examines these issues through the eyes of the head of the Boston office, who wonders how to evaluate Phase 0 projects.
Teams often collapse over personality issues. This case explores such a collapse, in the context of an MBA student learning team. Students can explore personality differences, analytical strategy, gender, ethnicity, and race issues. Joann Moyer, an MBA student facing her first year exams, is anxious and conflicted at what she perceives as personality conflicts among her team members. In the (A) case, she prepares to confront the other people in her group. The (B) case reveals that the team actually has process issues around their learning frameworks and that many of the team's problems revolve around that and not personalities. The business world requires people to work together successfully, and good learning teams learn to cultivate the skills necessary to do so.