"For decades, businesses have sought technology, features, and optimizations to maintain or increase an advantage over their competitors. But the value of investing solely in these things has reached an end. The experiences people have with your products and services is the real differentiator, a strategy that must be explored and embraced in our changing world.
...
In the 20th century, in addition to an emphasis on computerization and globalization, business management focused heavily on optimization. The early days of business management began with economic theory and the work of Fredrick Taylor, who performed time and motion studies in factories to scientifically examine and select the most efficient working methods....If we fast-forward to the latest trends in business management from the past decade, you’ll see the same focus on optimization in the popular Six Sigma and Business Process Reengineering (BPR) practices."
A nossa velha busca neste blogue, à procura de um Ananias capaz de abrir os olhos a gente colada à mentalidade do século XX, resgatar os habitantes de Magnitograd de um mundo a laranja e branco, onde a eficiência reina e a resposta intuitiva é, reduzir custos, para se ser mais competitvo.
"....Because techniques of operational efficiency such as Dell’s lean, supply chain management have become increasingly well-known and easily practiced, they’re no longer the big competitive advantages they used to be. Aiming to be better at an activity that everyone else has mastered isn’t a strategy. Strategy is about tradeoffs—purposefully choosing tactics different than those used by your competition. Strategy means saying no to some activities so you can excel at others. And the result of these strategic tradeoffs is products and services that are clearly distinguished in customers’ minds, with meaningful differences that can’t easily be replicated by others. .Today, as the benefits of organizational efficiency have decreased, businesses are looking for new approaches to create value for customers and for themselves. The narrow focus on the bottom line—and all the post-profit savings that were created by being efficient—has changed to a focus on the top line, where revenues can be increased by finding new customers and defining new offerings."
No final dos anos 80 do século passado, enquanto membro de uma equipa de 6 jovens engenheiros encarregados de tratar do aprovisionamento de válvulas, bombas, manómetros, reservatórios e pouco mais, para uma extensão da nossa fábrica, aprendi a lição muito rapidamente:
- Recolher as especificações do item do caderno de encargos da casa-mãe;
- Redigir e enviar um fax pedindo proposta (ainda não havia e-mail);
- Receber as propostas, estudá-las e pedir esclarecimentos;
- Redigir mapa comparativo das propostas;
- Justificar escolha e enviar para a chefia directa.
O método era espectacular, recordo-me de comparar bombas centrífugas e perceber que a bomba mais cara, mesmo que fosse dada, ao fim de um ano era mais cara dado o elevado consumo energético. O que me atazanava a cabeça era quando uma proposta fugia do esquema e apresentava atributos que mais nenhuma outra apresentava. Não apresentam porquê? Não têm? Não consideram relevante? Será que têm? Devo contactá-los a pedir para complementarem a informação?
"It’s the marketing MBA’s favorite tool. It gets rolled out at meeting after meeting in all of its analytical, bean-counting glory: the dreaded feature matrix, a document created by some assistant-of-something who compiled a list of all of the companies that might be considered competitors, cataloged all of their products’ “features,” and tallied the results in a giant matrix.It’s a very logical, thorough approach. By comparing you to your competitors apples-to-apples and oranges-to-oranges, you find where you’re ahead, where you’re lagging, and where you’re absolutely not represented. Unfortunately, the typical response is to focus on the deficient or missing “features.” That makes sense: who would want to face the new VP when he’s smoldering over the competitor’s market-leading Automated Configuration Wizard that you don’t even have a response to? The natural response is to seek parity with your competition."O que estava na base da justificação da minha escolha? (passo 5 acima).
Recomendava a proposta com o preço mais baixo... É aço inox 316 SL? É! É de 14 polegadas? É! É de borboleta? É!..... Se é tudo igual, o que é que diferencia as propostas? O preço!!!
"But what is parity? It’s sameness. It’s removing differentiation between you and the competition. It’s looking only to your competitors for what defines your offering. From your customer’s viewpoint, if you’ve reached parity with your rivals then there’s no discernable difference between you and anyone else. The experience can become so banal and impotent that it either ceases to exist, or only the negative aspects of the experience (usability issues, for example) are notable. Avoid the pitfall of parity. Avoid the feature wars, vying to have more bullet points on your packaging and spec sheets than your rivals.Different is good. Competitive strategy is based on doing things differently than your competitors, and demonstrating the worth of those differences to customers."E voltamos a Youngme Moon e ao seu "Different" e ao perigo da satisfação dos clientes se tornar num enorme nivelador
"So if reaching parity—being as good as others—is a bad idea, isn’t being the best a great idea? Maybe not. Striving to be the best at everything, to be the best in your industry, can be an all too common misstep. The problem with this thinking is that you can’t be the best at everything, and besides, being the best depends entirely on who’s doing the judging."Porter, como recorda recentemente Joan Magretta, aconselha a fugir da batalha por ser o melhor. Aconselha antes abraçar o desafio de ser diferente!!!
"Strategies of parity are low value and short-lived. Strategies of delivering new offerings for novelty’s sake won’t survive much further than the infomercial. These approaches center on features and technologies rather than focusing on the one thing that really matters—the experience. But even though experience matters to everyone, we almost always losesight of it in product development.…to the customers the experience they have is the only thing that matters. Customers rightfully have little appreciation for the technical workings of a product. Beyond the interface, everything else might as well be magic. Think about a light switch. You flip a switch; a light turns on. How many of us care how it works? Or you put things in the refrigerator, and a day later, when you take them out, they’re cold. Magic. You pick up a handset, press seven or ten digits, and are talking to someone far away. Magic."A experiência é o produto!
.
Trechos retirados de "Subject to Change" de Peter Merholz, Todd Wilkens, Brandon Schauer e David Verba.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário