Três regras que as empresas deviam seguir

Um texto que me dá muito gosto referir aqui, "Three Rules for Making a Company Truly Great":

"we undertook a statistical study of thousands of companies, and eventually identified several hundred among them that have done well enough for a long enough period of time to qualify as truly exceptional. Then we discovered something startling: The many and diverse choices that made certain companies great were consistent with just three seemingly elementary rules:

1. Better before cheaper - in other words, compete on differentiators other than price.
2. Revenue before cost - that is, prioritize increasing revenue over reducing costs.
3. There are no other rules - so change anything you must to follow Rules 1 and 2.

The rules don’t dictate specific behaviors; nor are they even general strategies. They’re foundational concepts on which companies have built greatness over many years."

Em linha com o que procuramos fomentar e motivar, aqui e nas empresas:

"1. Better Before Cheaper Every company faces a choice: It can compete mainly by offering superior nonprice benefits such as a great brand, an exciting style, or excellent functionality, durability, or convenience; or it can meet some minimal acceptable standard along these dimensions and try to attract customers with lower prices."

Nem de propósito, ainda ontem voltei a usar esta figura:

Qual é a pergunta a que a sua empresa se dirige? Ao desempenho ou ao barato?

"We don’t mean to suggest that a company can afford to ignore its relative price position, any more than one that competes through low prices can afford to ignore product or service quality. We mean only that in most cases, outstanding performance is caused by greater value and not by lower price. Companies seeking sustained, exceptional profitability should pursue strategies that are consistent with this rule and avoid those that aren’t."

Em linha com as lições do Evangelho do Valor, da superioridade do numerador face ao denominador de Marn e Rosiello e da originação do valor de Larreche:

"2. Revenue Before Cost Companies must not only create value but also capture it in the form of profits. By an overwhelming margin, exceptional companies garner superior profits by achieving higher revenue than their rivals, through either higher prices or greater volume. Very rarely is cost leadership a driver of superior profitability.
.
There’s nothing startling about the notion that higher prices can lead to higher profits, but we were impressed by the range of contexts in which companies have built businesses on this idea.
...
Just as you can lower prices while adhering to better before cheaper, you can drive out inefficiencies and lower your costs while following the revenue-before-cost rule. But don’t try to achieve a profitability advantage through cost leadership."

  E, por fim:

"3. There Are No Other RulesThis rule underscores the uncomfortable (or liberating) truth that in the pursuit of exceptional profitability, everything but the first two rules should be on the table. When considering all the other determinants of company performance—operational excellence, talent development, leadership style, corporate culture, reward systems, you name it—we saw wide variation among companies of all performance types. There’s no doubt that these and other factors matter to corporate performance—how could they not?—but we couldn’t find consistent patterns of how they mattered."

Esta é a minha experiência:

"The first step in making use of the rules is to get a clear picture of your company’s competitive position and profitability formula. Our experience shows that many senior leaders lack that clarity, (Moi ici: Ás vezes é doloroso, está-se de fora, tem-se uma visão distanciada e consegue-se ver o que o gerente não consegue... o mundo mudou e a empresa continua a ser gerida e conduzida com o pensamento obsoleto que fez dela um sucesso num outro tempo... nem se consegue arranjar uma brecha para lançar a semente de um pensamento diferente... confia-se em mais uma artimanha, em mais um sacrifício, em mais um torcer das regras ou fechar dos olhos e não se sai disto) primarily because companies tend to put too much emphasis on comparing their present selves with their past selves and too often declare victory if they’ve improved. What they forget is that you compete only with your current rivals. Benchmarking may help, but in many instances it devolves into a comparison of single dimensions—Is our product more durable?
...
Here’s how to put the rules into operation: The next time you find yourself having to allocate scarce resources among competing priorities, think about which initiatives will contribute most to enhancing the nonprice elements of your position and which will allow you to charge higher prices (Moi ici: Como aprendi há pouco tempo a verbalizar; preferir o lucro por unidade de produto em vez do lucro por referência de produto) or to sell in greater volume. Then give those the nod.
.
If your operational-effectiveness program is mostly about cutting costs, whereas your innovation efforts are mostly about separating you from the pack, go with innovation. But if pushing the envelope on operations is about delivering levels of customer service way above your competition’s, whereas innovation seems geared to doing the same for less, then your operations folks deserve the additional care and feeding."