Strategic renewal for business units

Over the past decade, business units have increasingly taken the role of strategy formulation away from corporate headquarters. The change makes sense: business units are closer to customers, competitors, and costs. Nevertheless, business units can fail, just as headquarters once did, by losing their focus on the organization's priorities and capabilities. John Whitney--turnaround expert and professor of management at Columbia University--offers a method for refocusing companies that he calls the strategic-renewal process. The principles behind the process are straightforward, but its execution demands extensive data, rigorous analysis, and the judgment of key decision makers. However, when applied with diligence, it can produce a strategy that yields both growth and profit. To carry out the process, managers must analyze, one by one or in logical groupings, the company's customers, the products it sells, and the services it offers in light of three criteria: strategic importance, significance, and profitability. Does a given customer, product, or service mesh with the organization's goals? Is it significant in terms of current and future revenues? And is it truly profitable when all costs are care fully considered? Customers, products, and services that do not measure up, says the author, must be weeded out relentlessly. Although the process is a painstaking one, the article offers clear thinking on why-and how-to go about it. A series of exhibits takes managers through the questions they need to raise, and two matrices offer Whitney's concentrated wisdom on when to cultivate--and when to prune.     

R&D comes to services. Bank of America's pathbreaking experiments

At the heart of business today lies a dilemma: Our economy is increasingly dependent on services, yet our innovation processes remain oriented toward products. Indeed, we have well-tested, scientific methods for developing and refining manufactured goods, but many of them don't seem applicable to the world of services. In this article, Harvard Business School professor Stefan Thomke points out the challenges of applying the discipline of formal R&D processes to services: Because a service often exists only in the moment of its delivery to a customer, it is difficult to isolate in a traditional laboratory. And since many services are tailored to individual buyers at the point of purchase, they can't be tested through large samples. As a result, experiments with new services are most useful when they are conducted live--with real customers engaged in real transactions. But live tests magnify the cost of failure; an experiment that doesn't work may harm customer relationships and even the brand. Given such challenges, it's no surprise that most service companies have not established rigorous, ongoing R&D processes, Thomke says. Here the author provides an in-depth look at a five-step process that Bank of America has used to create new service concepts for retail banking. The company has turned a set of its branches into, in effect, a laboratory where a corporate research team conducts service experiments with actual customers during regular business hours, compares results with those of control branches, and pinpoints attractive innovations for broader rollout. The author describes the program's workings, its successes, and the obstacles the bank faced. The effort reveals what a true R&D operation might look like inside a service business, he concludes.     

Don't homogenize, synchronize.

To be more responsive to customers, companies often break down organizational walls between their units--setting up all manner of cross-business and cross-functional task forces and working groups and promoting a "one-company" culture. But such attempts can backfire terribly by distracting business and functional units and by contaminating their strategies and processes. Fortunately, there's a better way, says the author. Rather than tear down organizational walls, a company can make them permeable to information. It can synchronize all its data on products, filtering the information through linked databases and applications and delivering it in a coordinated, meaningful form to customers. As a result, the organization can present a single, unified face to the customer--one that can change as market conditions warrant--without imposing homogeneity on its people. Such synchronization can lead not just to stronger customer relationships and more sales but also to greater operational efficiency. It allows a company, for example, to avoid the high costs of maintaining many different information systems with redundant data. The decoupling of product control from customer control in a synchronized company reflects a fundamental fact about business: While companies have to focus on creating great products, customers think in terms of the activities they perform and the benefits they seek. For companies, products are ends, but for customers, products are means. The disconnect between how customers think and how companies organize themselves is what leads to inefficiencies and missed opportunities, and that's exactly the problem that synchronization solves. Synchronized companies can get closer to customers, sustain product innovation, and improve operational efficiency--goals that have traditionally been very difficult to achieve simultaneously.     

基于保险业务流程的知识管理问题——以团体健康保险新契约核保业务流程为例

保险行业是一个流程导向性的行业,也是一个高度知识密集型的行业。保险公司员工需要在某个专业领域多年的知识积累,包括流程知识、业务领域的技术、复杂问题的应急能力等经验知识,这些都是为了高效地完成工作。而这些类型的知识普遍存在于人们的大脑中,并且具有不稳定易变的特征,所以迫切地需要挖掘这类知识,并进行知识共享。保险公司的运行...     

Entering China: an unconventional approach

Conventional wisdom has it that the best way to do business in China is through an equity joint venture (EJV) with a well-connected Chinese partner. But pioneering companies are starting a trend toward a new way to enter that market: as a wholly foreign-owned enterprise, or WFOE. Increasingly, says the author, joint ventures do not offer foreign companies what they need to succeed in China. For example, many companies want to do business nationally, but the prospects for finding a Chinese partner with national scope are poor. Moreover, there are often conflicting perceptions between partners about how to operate an EJV: Chinese companies, for example, typically have a more immediate interest in profits than foreign investors do. By contrast, the author asserts, WFOEs are faster to set up and easier to manage; and they allow managers to expand operations more rapidly. That makes them the perfect solution, right? The answer is a qualified yes. First, foreign companies will still need sources of guanxi, or social and political connections. Second, managers must take steps to avoid trampling on China's cultural or economic sovereignty. Third and perhaps most important, foreign companies must be prepared to bring something of value to China-usually in the form of jobs or new technology that can help the country develop. Companies willing to make the effort, says the author, can reap the rewards of China's burgeoning marketplace.     

Finding your next core business

How do you know when your core needs to change? And how do you determine what should replace it? From an in-depth study of 25 companies, the author, a strategy consultant, has discovered that it's possible to measure the vitality of a business's core. If it needs reinvention, he says, the best course is to mine hidden assets. Some of the 25 companies were in deep crisis when they began the process of redefining themselves. But, says Zook, management teams can learn to recognize early signs of erosion. He offers five diagnostic questions with which to evaluate the customers, key sources of differentiation, profit pools, capabilities, and organizational culture of your core business. The next step is strategic regeneration. In four-fifths of the companies Zook examined, a hidden asset was the centerpiece of the new strategy. He provides a map for identifying the hidden assets in your midst, which tend to fall into three categories: undervalued business platforms, untapped insights into customers, and underexploited capabilities. The Swedish company Dometic, for example, was manufacturing small absorption refrigerators for boats and RVs when it discovered a hidden asset: its understanding of, and access to, customers in the RV market. The company took advantage of a boom in that market to refocus on complete systems for live-in vehicles. The Danish company Novozymes, which produced relatively low-tech commodity enzymes such as those used in detergents, realized that its underutilized biochemical capability in genetic and protein engineering was a hidden asset and successfully refocused on creating bioengineered specialty enzymes. Your next core business is not likely to announce itself with fanfare. Use the author's tools to conduct an internal audit of possibilities and pinpoint your new focus.     

Aligning incentives in supply chains

Most companies don't worry about the behavior of their supply chain partners. Instead, they expect the supply chain to work efficiently without interference, as if guided by Adam Smith's famed invisible hand. In their study of more than 50 supply networks, V.G. Narayanan and Ananth Raman found that companies often looked out for their own interests and ignored those of their network partners. Consequently, supply chains performed poorly. Those results aren't shocking when you consider that supply chains extend across several functions and many companies, each with its own priorities and goals. Yet all those functions and firms must pull in the same direction for a chain to deliver goods and services to consumers quickly and cost-effectively. According to the authors, a supply chain works well only if the risks, costs, and rewards of doing business are distributed fairly across the network. In fact, misaligned incentives are often the cause of excess inventory, stock-outs, incorrect forecasts, inadequate sales efforts, and even poor customer service. The fates of all supply chain partners are interlinked: If the firms work together to serve consumers, they will all win. However, they can do that only if incentives are aligned. Companies must acknowledge that the problem of incentive misalignment exists and then determine its root cause and align or redesign incentives. They can improve alignment by, for instance, adopting revenue-sharing contracts, using technology to track previously hidden information, or working with intermediaries to build trust among network partners. It's also important to periodically reassess incentives, because even top-performing networks find that changes in technology or business conditions alter the alignment of incentives.     

The why, what, and how of management innovation

For organizations like GE, P&G, and Visa, management innovation is the secret to success. But what is management innovation? Why is it so important? And how can other companies learn to become management innovators? This article from expert Gary Hamel answers those questions. A management breakthrough can deliver a strong advantage to the innovating company and produce a major shift in industry leadership. Few companies, however, have been able to come up with a formal process for fostering management innovation. The biggest challenge seems to be generating truly unique ideas. Four components can help: a big problem that demands fresh thinking, creative principles or paradigms that can reveal new approaches, an evaluation of the conventions that constrain novel thinking, and examples and analogies that help redefine what can be done. No doubt there are existing management processes in your organization that exacerbate the big problems you're hoping to solve. So how can you learn to identify them? Start by asking a series of questions for each one. For instance, Who owns the process? What are its objectives? What are the metrics for success? What are the decision-making criteria? How are decisions communicated, and to whom? After documenting these details, ask the people involved with the process to weigh in. This exploration may reveal opportunities to reinventyour management processes. A management innovation, the author says, creates long-lasting advantage when it meets at least one of three conditions: It is based on a novel principle that challenges the orthodoxy; it is systemic, involving a range of processes and methods; or it is part of a program of invention, where progress compounds over time. So far, management in this century isn't much different from management in the previous one, says Hamel. Therein lies the opportunity. You can wait for a competitor to come upon the next great management process and drive you out of business-or you can become a management innovator right now.     

Artificial life

E-business processes between insurance companies and their private customers allow — in comparison to conventional business processing — savings in administrative expenses up to 30 per cent. However, today’s e-business processes are often described as little transparent and stereotyped. Users, therefore, complain them being far to complex and, as a consequence, do not accept them. Relating to research in the field of customer behaviour, it has been proved that even in e-business processes customers like to be contacted and treated individually. This can be reached by corresponding to the cognitive ability and the personal involvement of each customer. By using those mechanisms information processing becomes ?hospitable‘ or even ?human-alike‘. Chatter-bots simulate human behaviour in e-business processes and will possibly replace personnel in certain areas. Therefore, chatter-bots seem a suitable instrument to introduce successfully e-business processes between insurance companies and their private customers. Two positive consequences could be reached: first, process efficiency could be raised and second, cost-savings in processing could be gained.     

The process audit

Few executives question the idea that by redesigning business processes--work that runs from end to end across an enterprise--they can achieve extraordinary improvements in cost, quality, speed, profitability, and other key areas Yet in spite of their intentions and investments, many executives flounder, unsure about what exactly needs to be changed, by how much, and when. As a result, many organizations make little progress--if any at all--in their attempts to transform business processes. Michael Hammer has spent the past five years working with a group of leading companies to develop the Process and Enterprise Maturity Model (PEMM), a new framework that helps executives comprehend, formulate, and assess process-based transformation efforts. He has identified two distinct groups of characteristics that are needed for business processes to perform exceptionally well over a long period of time. Process enablers, which affect individual processes, determine how well a process is able to function. They are mutually interdependent--if any are missing, the others will be ineffective. However, enablers are not enough to develop high-performance processes; they only provide the potential to deliver high performance. A company must also possess or establish organizational capabilities that allow the business to offer a supportive environment. Together, the enablers and the capabilities provide an effective way for companies to plan and evaluate process-based transformations. PEMM is different from other frameworks, such as Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), because it applies to all industries and all processes. The author describes how several companies--including Michelin, CSAA, Tetra Pak, Shell, Clorox, and Schneider National--have successfully used PEMM in various ways and at different stages to evaluate the progress of their process-based transformation efforts.     

High tech the old-fashioned way. An interview with Tom Siebel of Siebel Systems. Interview by Bronwyn Fryer

There is a growing awareness among corporations that the quality of the customer experience they provide directly affects their bottom line. Many are turning to high-flying software maker Siebel Systems for help in managing those relationships. The young company holds a leadership position in an explosive market-enterprise application software. But customer satisfaction, not dot-com chic, is foremost on the mind of Siebel Systems' founder, chairman, and CEO, Tom Siebel. The buttoned-down Siebel rejects the freewheeling management style and culture that characterize many Silicon Valley companies. As the former CEO of Gain Technology and a former executive at Oracle, Siebel believes in putting customers ahead of technology, discipline ahead of inspiration. In this interview, conducted at the company's San Mateo, California, headquarters, Siebel describes how this obsessive focus on customer satisfaction has been the driving force behind the company's success. He talks about how the organization remains true to its core values: a deep commitment to providing customer satisfaction; responsible fiscal practices that have created a cash-positive business amid today's cash-negative dot-coms; and general professionalism. "The notion of dressing in jeans and a T-shirt to greet the CEO of a major financial institution who just got off the plane from Munich is not acceptable," he says. Siebel Systems rejects the concept of going to war with rivals; instead, the CEO says, the company has forged an ecosystem of partnerships that allows it to support and integrate its own systems with other companies' software products and ultimately ease the customer's software installations. Indeed, Siebel says, the CEO's most important job is to understand what customers need and deliver that.     

Using Goals,Rules and Methods to Support Reasoning in Business Process Reengineering

One step towards a more systematic approach to the design of business processes is to develop models that provide appropriate representations of the knowledge that is needed for understanding and for reasoning about business processes. We present a modelling framework which uses goals, rules and methods to support the systematic analysis and design of business processes. The frame-work consists of two main components—a Strategic Dependency model that describes a process organization in terms of intentional dependencies among actors, and a Strategic Rationale model that supports reasoning during process redesign. Formal representation of these models allows computer-based tools to be developed as extensions to, and eventually integrated with, other tools for supporting information systems development.     

国有商业银行贷款业务流程的理论分析与现实构想

业务流程再造是对现有流程和体系结构的变革，目的在于提高经济运行效率。本文通过对我国国有商业银行贷款业务流程现状的分析，借鉴国外商业银行贷款业务流程的设计，提出我国商业银行贷款业务流程再造的原则，即必须坚持“扬弃”的原则、坚持精减流程的原则、坚持整体设计、分步推进的原则及坚持激励约束配套的原则。在具体运作过程中，应按照不同客户类别分别授权，通过数据清理，分步建立风险评价模型，由不同级别的风险经理与客户经理负责不同种类的客户，最终实现贷款业务的高质、高效审批管理，重构国有商业银行的贷款业务流程。     

国有商业银行贷款业务流程的理论分析与现实构想

业务流程再造是对现有流程和体系结构的变革,目的在于提高经济运行效率。本文通过对我国国有商业银行贷款业务流程现状的分析,借鉴国外商业银行贷款业务流程的设计,提出我国商业银行贷款业务流程再造的原则,即必须坚持“扬弃”的原则、坚持精减流程的原则、坚持整体设计、分步推进的原则及坚持激励约束配套的原则。在具体运作过程中,应按照不同客户类别分别授权,通过数据清理,分步建立风险评价模型,由不同级别的风险经理与客户经理负责不同种类的客户,最终实现贷款业务的高质、高效审批管理,重构国有商业银行的贷款业务流程。     

Thriving locally in the global economy

More and more small and midsize companies are joining corporate giants in striving to exploit international growth markets. At the same time, civic leaders worry about their communities' economic future in light of the impact of global forces on the operation and survival of business. How can communities retain local vitality yet still link their business to the global economy? Harvard professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter addresses that question in this classic HBR article, orginally published in 1995. To avoid a clash between international economic interests and local political interests, globalizing business must learn how to be responsive to the communities in which they operate, Kanter says. And communities must determine how to create a civic culture that will attract and retain footloose companies. The author surveyed five U.S. regions with direct connections to the global economy--Boston, Cleveland, Miami, Seattle, and the Spartanburg-Greenville region of South Carolina--to determine their business and civic leader's strategies for improving their constituent's quality of life. She identified ways in which the global economy can work locally by capitalizing on the resources that distinguish one place from another. Kanter argues that regions can invest in capabilities that connect their local populations to the global economy in one of three ways: as thinkers, makers, or traders. She points to the Spartanburg-Greenville region as a good example of a world-class makers, with its exceptional blue-collar workforce that has attracted more than 200 companies from 18 countries. The history of the economic development of this region is a lesson for those seeking to understand how to achieve world-class status and bring local residents into the world economy.     

Bottom-feeding for blockbuster businesses

Marketing experts tell companies to analyze their customer portfolios and weed out buyer segments that don't generate attractive returns. Loyalty experts stress the need to aim retention programs at "good" customers--profitable ones- and encourage the "bad" ones to buy from competitors. And customer-relationship-management software provides ever more sophisticated ways to identify and eliminate poorly performing customers. On the surface, the movement to banish unprofitable customers seems reasonable. But writing off a customer relationship simply because it is currently unprofitable is at best rash and at worst counterproductive. Executives shouldn't be asking themselves, How can we shun unprofitable customers? They need to ask, How can we make money off the customers that everyone else is shunning? When you look at apparently unattractive segments through this lens, you often see opportunities to serve those segments in ways that fundamentally change customer economics. Consider Paychex, a payroll-processing company that built a nearly billion-dollar business by serving small companies. Established players had ignored these customers on the assumption that small companies couldn't afford the service. When founder Tom Golisano couldn't convince his bosses at Electronic Accounting Systems that they were missing a major opportunity, he started a company that now serves 390,000 U.S. customers, each employing around 14 people. In this article, the authors look closely at bottom-feeders--companies that assessed the needs of supposedly unattractive customers and redesigned their business models to turn a profit by fulfilling those needs. And they offer lessons other executives can use to do the same.     

What working for a Japanese company taught me

In the late 1970s, John E. Rehfeld read everything he could on Japanese business. Most of the discussions focused on interest rates, the education system, and the culture--all very interesting but not very useful. What did these things have to do with day-to-day management? Since then, by working for Japanese companies, he has discovered more than ten Japanese management techniques that have everything to do with running a business. As vice president and general manager of Toshiba's U.S. computer business for nine years and president of Seiko Instruments USA for two, he has seen firsthand how the Japanese manage, and he has applied those techniques in the United States. Using six-month budget cycles, quantifying intangibles, and looking back to see what you could have done better are among the seemingly insignificant practices that combine to have big impact. For example, the author first saw budgeting for 6 months instead of 12 as twice as much work. But he came to appreciate the benefits: managers work harder because they have two deadlines a year, and planning and control improve because managers can adjust their targets to changing conditions more quickly. The author had another change of heart when he was asked to specify how many PCs would sell as the result of a demo program, a task he first thought ridiculous. Though he still thinks such numbers are shaky, he values the discipline of the thought process. These and other techniques, he says, explain much of Japanese companies' success and are tools that managers anywhere can use.     

How process enterprises really work

Many companies have succeeded in reengineering their core processes, combining related activities from different departments and cutting out ones that don't add value. Few, though, have aligned their organizations with their processes. The result is a form of cognitive dissonance as the new, integrated processes pull people in one direction and the old, fragmented management structures pull them in another. That's not the way it has to be. In recent years, forward-thinking companies like IBM, Texas Instruments, and Duke Power have begun to make the leap from process redesign to process management. They've appointed some of their best managers to be process owners, giving them real authority over work and budgets. They've shifted the focus of their measurement and compensation systems from unit goals to process goals. They've changed the way they assign and train employees, emphasizing whole processes rather than narrow tasks. They've thought carefully about the strategic trade-offs between adopting uniform processes and allowing different units to do things their own way. And they've made subtle but fundamental cultural changes, stressing teamwork and customers over turf and hierarchy. These companies are emerging from all those changes as true process enterprises--businesses whose management structures are in harmony, rather than at war, with their core processes. And their organizations are becoming much more flexible, adaptive, and responsive as a result.     

How we built a strong company in a weak industry

When Roger Brown and Linda Mason decided to start a child care and early-education company 15 years ago, they knew about the challenges inherent in the industry: no barriers to entry, low margins, few economies of scale, heavy regulatory oversight--to name just a few. But that didn't stop them. They eventually built Bright Horizons Family Solutions, a company that now has more than 340 high-quality child care centers, serving 40,000 children and employing 12,000 people. How did they do it? Sheer determination helped. But even more important, they developed a business model that took advantage of industry weaknesses. When the couple sat down to hash out a plan for the company, they realized that the key to achieving profitability and creating barriers to entry was to partner with companies. They could achieve higher returns by having those companies build and outfit the centers and, at the same time, boost customer loyalty. Indeed, Bright Horizon's corporate clients came to see the state-of-the-art centers as a way to distinguish themselves in the eyes of current and prospective employees. The high-quality child care attracted the best employees and raised retention rates. Brown's first-person account describes the difficulties the couple and their company faced along the way, including the struggle for funding and a board that questioned Bright Horizons' business model and basic philosophy of good child care. But, Brown says, the commitment to a singular business model and the determination to make strengths out of weaknesses made the impossible possible.     

Finally, a way to put your Internet portfolio in order

Eager to capitalize on the Internet's potential, many companies have allowed scores of on-line projects to bubble up throughout their organizations. The result? More harm than good, as companies find themselves confusing customers, aggravating employees, and wasting bushels of money. In this article, consultant Anthony Tjan explains how companies can do better. By adapting classical portfolio strategy to the digital age, executives can coordinate their Internet initiatives to avoid the needless headaches and spending, he says. Much of the market and industry data that underpin traditional portfolio analysis is unavailable for the Internet space, so Tjan replaces the two criteria used in traditional portfolio analysis--market position and industry attractiveness--with business viability and business fit. Viability captures the available quantitative data about an investment's likely payoff. Fit is qualitative; it measures the degree to which an investment dovetails with a company's existing processes, capabilities, and culture. Using viability and fit to assess their online initiatives, companies can then plot these efforts onto a simple matrix, called an Internet portfolio map. Their location on the matrix will suggest whether each initiative should be invested in, redesigned, sold or spun out, or killed. As Tjan notes, the process of organizing and evaluating new investment options against coherent, meaningful criteria isn't new. In the digital era, what is new are the tools you use. Internet portfolio planning is one such tool.