quinta-feira, maio 30, 2013

Mas claro, eu só sou um anónimo engenheiro da província (parte IV)

Parte I, parte II e parte III.
E volto ao artigo "Three rules for making a company truly great", de Michael E. Raynor e Mumtaz Ahmed, publicado pela Harvard Business Review do passado mês de Abril, referido neste postal "Três regras que as empresas deviam seguir":
"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.
Nonprice positions, as we’ve said, are typically associated with higher prices or greater volume. Conceptually, companies that don’t focus on price could still drive profitability through lower costs, but we never saw this. Arithmetically, a low-price position (cheaper before better) could drive sufficient volume to keep asset utilization high enough to secure superior profitability (revenue before cost), but we never saw this, either.
Our research shows that companies with lowerprice positions tend to rely on lower costs to achieve profitability.
The rules are especially powerful when it comes to dealing with those dreaded financial ratios that govern so many lives and lead so often to pathological consequences. In ratios such as ROA, cash flow return on investment, and economic value added, the numerator is some measure of income and the denominator is some measure of assets. When customers are no longer willing to pay for your latest innovation and income starts to decline, it’s too easy to try to make those ratios go up by shrinking the denominator. Many managers have long felt that this is a mistake, but they do it anyway, misled by the equally compelling intuition that cutting costs has faster, more dramatic, more predictable consequences.
companies don’t become truly great by reducing costs or assets; they earn their way to greatness. Exceptional companies often, even typically, accept higher costs as the price of excellence. In fact, many of them have developed quite a taste for spending and investment.
These organizations put significant resources, over long periods of time, into creating nonprice value and generating higher revenue. Point out that when successful companies are led astray by the seeming certainties of short-run cost cutting or disinvestment, they are more likely to destroy what they most want to enhance." (Moi ici: Leio isto e recuo a 2006 e ao bom "velho" Gertz/Baptista, ou a 2008 e aos que queriam apostar na Linha Maginot para combater a guerra anterior)
Ou preços superiores ou volumes elevados.
Volumes elevados são para as multinacionais deslocalizadas.
Preços superiores são para quem aposta em nichos.
Pessoalmente acredito que, porque se sobre na escala de valor, se cresce na dimensão. O crescimento é uma consequência da subida na escala de valor, como a tal metalomecânica que cresceu 30% em emprego. Não creio que seja o crescimento prévio que leve à subida na escala de valor.
E também nisto estamos de acordo, caro Bruno.

1 comentário:

Unknown disse...

absolutamente de acordo!