Comunicar com clareza!

“When you’re the CEO or the founder of a company . . . you’ve got to say ‘This is what we’re doing,’ and then you have to model it. Because if you don’t model it, no one’s going to do it."
...
For sound decision making, esprit de corps, and superior performance, top-line goals must be clearly understood throughout the organization. Yet by their own admission, two of three companies fail to communicate these goals consistently.
...
Leaders must get across the why as well as the what. Their people need more than milestones for motivation.
...
In other words: Key results are the levers you pull, the marks you hit to achieve the goal. If an objective is well framed, three to five KRs will usually be adequate to reach it. Too many can dilute focus and obscure progress. Besides, each key result should be a challenge in its own right. If you’re certain you’re going to nail it, you’re probably not pushing hard enough.
...
Keep in mind, though, that it’s the shorter-term goals that drive the actual work. They keep annual plans honest—and executed.
Clear-cut time frames intensify our focus and commitment; nothing moves us forward like a deadline. To win in the global marketplace, organizations need to be more nimble than ever before. In my experience, a quarterly OKR cadence is best suited to keep pace with today’s fast-changing markets. A three-month horizon curbs procrastination and leads to real performance gains.”

Excerto de: Doerr, John. “Measure What Matters: How Google, Bono, and the Gates Foundation Rock the World with OKRs”.

Acerca de KPI

Esta semana, em dois projectos relacionados com indicadores usei um disclaimer que sinto necessidade de afirmar. Gosto de usar indicadores (KPI), sou um fã do balanced scorecard (BSC). No entanto, sei que estas ferramentas, KPI e BSC, foram criadas nos Estados Unidos para empresas muito grandes, à escala multicontinental e geridas por pessoas que não tarimbaram ao longo da escada hierárquica na mesma empresa. Assim, um CEO pode chegar ao topo de uma empresa sem nunca ter trabalhado nela previamente. Nesses casos ter KPI é fundamental, já quando se está a falar de uma PME, muita da informação trazida pelos indicadores é pressentida pelo empresário quando escuta o ruído de fundo da empresa. Mesmo numa PME, apesar de tudo, recomendo o uso de alguns KPI, quer para monitorar algo que não é tão visível ou urgente, quer para esticar o nível de desempenho de uma organização para lá dos limites actuais da sua zona de conforto, quer para facilitar o feedback menos subjectivo, quer para facilitar a a aprendizagem de relações de causa-efeito.

Ao ler esta provocação, "Gerir sem KPIs", pensei nestas outras leituras da manhã, "How to Cure a Bad Case of Metric Fixation" e "A timely reminder that using data to make decisions can go very wrong"

Indicadores e e estratégia

Esquema da primeira folha que vai animar a reunião de hoje:

O balanced scorecard.
A importância de indicadores relacionados com a estratégia.
O que ter em conta ao desenhar uma estratégia.
Diferenciação e perceber quem são os clientes-avo.
Curva de Stobachoff.

Objectivos e indicadores

Para um fã do balanced scorecard isto não podia passar despercebido

"Setting goals is critical. Goals provide direction, help you focus, prioritize your time and energy, and ensure that you can objectively prove you've advanced the company's agenda.
.
But just any goal won't do. Research shows that goals are not only important but also that the level of specificity and difficulty matters. Goals that are both clear and challenging drive higher levels of performance.
...
Objectives are the "big picture." They answer the questions "Where do we want to go?" and "What do we want to do?" Also, objectives are where Google encourages its employees to stretch themselves, be ambitious, and embrace uncertainty. If you don't get nervous or feel a little uncomfortable after setting a goal, then you haven't reached high enough.
...
Key results should answer the question, "How will we gauge ourselves to see If we're getting there?" They should focus on making the objective achievable and quantifiable, and lead to unbiased grading..
Google suggests three key results per objective. Key results, per Google, "express measurable milestones which, if achieved, will directly advance the objective.
...
When writing key results, make sure that you're describing desired outcomes not just listing a bunch of action steps.[Moi ici: Recordar a praga dos Planos de Actividades]
...
Consider making objectives visible to the entire organization. Google includes everyone's goals on their internal directory. I love this idea. I'm sure that by being transparent, teams uncover synergistic objectives that lead to increased collaboration. Also, if I'm being honest, I would be much more motivated to write great goals if I knew that the whole company would see them."

Trechos retirados de "Everyone Hates Setting Goals. Here's How Google Makes It Easier for Its Employees"

Acerca dos indicadores

"Here are some rules of thumb for what makes a good metric—a number that will drive the changes you’re looking for.
.
A good metric is comparative. Being able to compare a metric to other time periods, groups of users, or competitors helps you understand which way things are moving. “Increased conversion from last week” is more meaningful than “2% conversion.”
.
A good metric is understandable. If people can’t remember it and discuss it, it’s much harder to turn a change in the data into a change in the culture.
.
A good metric is a ratio or a rate. Accountants and financial analysts have several ratios they look at to understand, at a glance, the fundamental health of a company.[5] You need some, too.
...
A good metric changes the way you behave. This is by far the most important criterion for a metric: what will you do differently based on changes in the metric?"

Trechos retirados de "What Makes a Good Metric?"

Indicadores

Para alguém como eu, que aprecia o papel e a utilidade dos indicadores na vida das organizações, eis um artigo interessante, "5 Questions You Must Answer to Measure Your Business Well":

"Regardless of the measurement you need to answer five things about it:
.
1. What’s the measurement’s purpose? Know the significance of the metric and what you’ll change in your business based on the numbers you measure.
.
2. What data source will you use? Different sources of data can yield different results.
.
3. How will you calculate the metric? Define a formula, especially for complex measures.
.
4. How frequently will you measure? Measuring takes effort. Be efficient and only measure as frequently as you need to.
.
5. Who will review the measure? Define the stakeholders who are going to receive the reports."

Recordar os monumentos à treta, again

A propósito de "Infarmed. Ida para o Porto não estava no plano estratégico aprovado em setembro pelo ministro" fui consultar o referido Plano Estratégico 2017-2019.

Plano interessante, com uma estrutura interessante. No entanto, a meu ver, padece de uma falha importante... não encontrarão nenhum número que permita no final de 2019 avaliar se o Plano Estratégico foi eficaz ou não.

Olhando para cada um dos objectivos estratégicos e para cada um dos resultados esperados... não ser encontra nem um número, nem uma meta. Por exemplo:

Objectivo estratégico 2 - Conformidade do mercado e gestão do risco que tem como um dos seus resultados:

• Melhoria na gestão de risco na introdução de terapêuticas inovadoras

O que será ter sucesso com este objectivo estratégico?

O que significa, em que é que se traduz uma melhoria na gestão de risco na introdução de terapêuticas inovadoras?

Ainda e sempre os monumentos à treta... e de que falamos quando falamos de balanced.

Melhorar as hipóteses de execução

Um texto interessante e a merecer reflexão, "Is Execution Where Good Strategies Go to Die?"

"what determines whether execution brings life or death to your strategy? It’s not what you think. It’s how you think. The mental models that inform strategy are usually different from those that determine implementation. To close the strategy-execution gap, leaders have to close several other, smaller gaps.
.
First, the thinking styles of the people who create strategy are often different from those of the people who implement it.
...
strategy is usually developed by people who have a big-picture orientation, while execution is often done by those with a detail orientation. Furthermore, strategy is usually done by people who are focused on ideas and connections, while implementation is done by those who focus on process and action.
...
The second gap is a result of the connection between participation and ownership. ... Often stakeholders are kept out of the strategy process out of concern that they will slow things down or compromise the quality of the outcome. But this is a shortsighted view. By involving stakeholders earlier, you give them a sense of ownership that speeds things up when it comes time for execution. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that diversity will actually improve the quality of the strategy. And it’s far more likely the strategy will stick to its flight plan, because those responsible for its execution will have a stake in defending it.
...
The third gap between strategy and execution is in the narrative around the strategy. The strategy itself may be sound, but what matters for execution isn’t what is said but what is heard. Strategy is inherently about creating something new or getting somewhere new. But the way humans are wired, it’s difficult to process something that is completely unrelated to what we already know. A good narrative helps people move from the past to the future.
...
The fourth gap between strategy and execution is in measurement and metrics. [Moi ici: Isto para um praticante e adepto do balanced scorecard não tem espinhas ...] This, too, is a reflection of mental models. You only measure what you can see. And your mental models determine what is visible or invisible. I consistently see measurement as an afterthought in strategy development. The assumption is that financial measures like cost and revenue are sufficient metrics to measure progress. But that would be like a coach only tracking points on the scoreboard. You need metrics that tell you how well your game plan is being executed — metrics that all of your players can organize around.
...
Execution doesn’t have to be the place good strategies go to die. As you are developing your strategy, take into account the thinking styles and mental models of the people who will be responsible for its execution. Involve them to generate a sense of ownership and to tap into their collective wisdom. Craft a narrative that connects the past to the future. And design metrics that focus attention and motivate behavior around what will really make the strategy successful."

Recordar um monumento à treta

No final do congresso ou reunião em que o actual primeiro ministro foi nomeado líder do partido, uma  actriz fez uma declamação sobre vítimas da violência doméstica. Desde então o número de vítimas da violência doméstica não parece que tenha diminuído.

Sempre que o tema é aflorado recordo um texto que escrevi em Junho de 2007, "Mais um monumento à treta - parte II" e que deve continuar tão ou mais actual que nunca.

Cativações e cascata de problemas

Há dias dei comigo a relacionar as cativações governamentais com o comportamento de um responsável fabril.

Qual o papel de um responsável fabril? Atingir objectivos e resolver problemas. Quando um responsável fabril aparece junto da gerência com problemas esta responde-lhe:

- Pago-lhe para resolver problemas não para que me venha trazer problemas para eu resolver.

Assim, mês após mês, os recursos vão diminuindo e o responsável fabril vai fazendo o seu melhor para conciliar o aumento da produção com a diminuição de pessoal e de manutenção.

Então, um dia, o dique não aguenta mais e uma cascata de problemas surge para cobrar dividendos.

Nessa altura, a gerência vai olhar para os números e vai despedir o responsável fabril com justa causa argumentando que a fábrica está ingovernável e que ele é o responsável. E quando o responsável fabril argumentar que a gerência também é responsável esta vai perguntar por evidências, por relatórios, por avisos. Como o responsável fabril interiorizou aquela resposta inicial "Pago-lhe para resolver problemas não para que me venha trazer problemas para eu resolver." nunca pôs a boca no trombone.

Claro que no caso da política o importante vai ser conseguir realizar as próximas eleições antes da cascata de problemas se manifestar.

"Gaming the system" - está-nos no sangue

"What determines what a company can do actually is less what an executive thinks ought to be done,  but rather that decision right there makes determines what this happens, and that determines what this is.
.
This is actually more powerful, and an executive decision, I think and it's interesting that these metrics we assume that that's the way it should be done but we never think about it just as a general rule.
.
When we decide we're going to measure it this way, people, all of us, cheat and try to game the system so that the the metric goes up"

Trecho retirado de "Harvard Professor – Clayton Christensen The Process of Strategy Formulation and Implementation"

"They cannot be one size fits all"

"Most managers understand they must overcome the “not invented here” syndrome. Companies hoping to embrace open innovation must also learn how to translate those very organization-specific problems or questions into something abstract and general so that they can leverage the wisdom of the crowd.
.
But besides having great ideas, companies also need to adopt portfolio business models to capitalize on those initial insights. They cannot be one size fits all: Big companies get into trouble because they want to have a set of uniform or unified KPIs across all the business units.
.
Next, decision making needs to get pushed down to the people on the ground. Once you have this portfolio of businesses running different models, there’s no way central headquarters has the knowledge to make all the decisions and run the enterprises using command and control. You can run a factory that way, but not a complex portfolio of businesses."

A caminho de Mongo, com ofertas cada vez mais customizadas, com ecossistemas cada vez mais diversificados, com tribos cada vez mais apaixonadas, a vida não vai ser fácil para as empresas grandes que terão de lidar com portefolios cada vez mais diversificados, cada um com o seu conjunto de KPIs.

Trecho retirado de "Howard Yu Disrupts Disruptive Innovation"

A importância dos indicadores não-financeiros

Para um fã do BSC isto é óbvio:

"Principle 4. Include Nonfinancial Targets
.
Our final recommendation is to incorporate targets that are not directly related to sales and profits in any CEO performance contract. Although the research we base this article on didn’t explicitly measure the effects of nonfinancial targets, it’s clear that many of them are hard to game. To begin with, it often takes a significant amount of time for the results of decisions related to them to become apparent. Investments in employee training, for example, may not translate into employee productivity for a while. Additionally, many nonfinancial metrics, such as brand, reputation, and sustainability rankings, are set by outside agencies and so are hard for managers to manipulate.
...
Creating a compensation package that adheres to the four guiding principles is not easy for a board. Directors need to debate multiple metrics (financial and nonfinancial alike), align them with the company’s strategy and values, [Moi ici: E relacionar com Bruce Jenner e os salami slicers] calibrate them with the risk appetite of the firm, and select an appropriate peer group to use as benchmarks. But this is ultimately what a board is there to do. If it uses executive compensation packages as a way to reinforce the company’s competitive strategy and manage its risks, so much the better. Not only will it be more effective at communicating the strategy and rationale for top management pay with shareholders but it will also ensure that senior managers execute against the right objectives. Remember: Executives will do their best to hit whatever goals are set. So set targets that work for the corporation."

Trechos retirados de "Comp Targets That Work"

"algo não bate certo nesta abordagem"

Muitas vezes, ao auditar, ao rever sistemas de gestão da qualidade encontro esta situação que, confesso, não me agrada nada.

Comecemos por uma empresa que pode ser representada desta forma:

Depois, com base na abordagem por processos, uma das técnicas mais subaproveitadas nos sistemas de gestão da qualidade e nas intervenções estratégicas, a empresa pode ser representada como um conjunto de processos interrelacionados e interactuantes:

A cada processo pode ser associado um ou mais indicadores. Assim, a empresa identifica objectivos de desempenho para cada um dos seus processos:

Olhando para o conjunto dos processos:

Então, a empresa considera o somatório dos objectivos processuais como os seus objectivos da qualidade.

No meu modelo de abordagem a este tema, uma coisa são os objectivos processuais, outra são os objectivos da qualidade. Os objectivos da qualidade podem coincidir com os objectivos de alguns processos mas na verdade são meta-processuais, são mais estratégicos.

Por exemplo, imaginem uma empresa que vos mostra os seus objectivos processuais como sendo os seus objectivos da qualidade. Depois, durante o aprofundar do contacto com a administração da empresa percebe-se que um dos seus grandes desafios para 2017 é o lançamento de uma marca própria. Então, percebem que esse objectivo mobilizador e sentido profundamente pelo número um da empresa não faz parte dos objectivos da qualidade. E percebem que algo não bate certo nesta abordagem.

Processos, clientes e finalidade

Recordar "Acerca dos processos":

"Jobs Theory changes not only what you optimize your processes to do, but also how you measure their success. It shifts the critical performance criteria from internal financial-performance metrics to externally relevant customer-benefit metrics.
...
Keeping what matters in focus is challenging for any organization, especially with the forces at play as a company grows.
...
“It’s so tempting for parts of the organization to start looking at other things. In our kind of business, you get all this data about ‘conversions’ and ‘retention,’ and so on. We got seduced by that.” It is, to be sure, easier to focus on efficiency rather than effectiveness. Most businesses are very, very good at that. Creating the right metrics is hard. But so important."

Estes trechos e o do postal anterior acima referido estão em linha com a abordagem que seguimos há mais de uma década de focar o desenho de um processo na sua finalidade, de concentrar o processo no palavrão usado por Hammer, a teleologia. Dessa forma medir a eficácia torna-se muito mais simples.

• (Abril de 2007) A importância do cliente-interno e a sua relação com o cliente-externo
• (Fevereiro de 2008) Procedimentos vs fichas de processo 
• (Julho de 2009) Começar pelo fim, para fugir aos rituais ocos
• (Janeiro de 2012) "the art of focusing on what’s important and ignoring the rest"

Trechos retirados de "Competing Against Luck: The Story of Innovation and Customer Choice"

Um livro que comprei em 2003 no El Corte Inglês em Lisboa, "The Agenda: What Every Business Must Do to Dominate the Decade" e de onde nunca esqueci:

Planear a monitorização e avaliação

"Planning, monitoring and evaluation are at the heart of a learning-based approach to management. Achieving collaborative, business/environmental or personal goals requires effective planning and follow-through. The plan is effectively a “route-map” from the present to the future. To plan a suitable route you must know where you are (situation analysis) [Moi ici: Desempenho hoje] and where you want to go [Moi ici: Desempenho futuro desejado, as metas] (establish goals and identify outcomes). Only then can appropriate action plans be developed to help achieve the desired future.

Planning and monitoring as a roadmap
However, because the future is uncertain, our action plans must be adaptive and allow continually for “learning by doing”.
...
there are two sets of monitoring plans needed. Results monitoring focusses on whether you are getting where you want to go, [Moi ici: Indicadores de resultados, indicadores de consequências no balanced scorecard. Perspectivas financeiras e de clientes] while process monitoring focusses on how efficiently you are geting there.[Moi ici: Indicadores da perspectiva interna e da de recursos e infraestruturas e plano de actividades das iniciativas estratégicas] Indicators in this regard may be either qualitative or quantitative, and a combination of the two is often best. An evaluation is like a good story, it needs some (qualitative) anecdotal evidence to put the lesson in context, and some (quantitative) facts and figures that reinforce the message.

.
Motivation for change = understanding + ability + imperative ()
...
Worldwide there is a trend towards an increased use of indicators to monitor development and track progress. Indicators quantify and simplify phenomena, and help us understand and make sense of complex realities. To be most meaningful, a monitoring and evaluation program should provide insights into cause-and-effect relationships between environmental or socio-economic stressors and the anticipated ecosystem responses and subsequent social and economic outcomes."

Trechos retirados de "Planning monitoring & evaluation – closing the loop"

"uma extraordinária ferramenta de visualização e de comunicação da estratégia"

Sou um fã do mapa da estratégia, por isso, não podia deixar passar:

"For too long strategy has been the like the keys to the executive washroom. Those who have the keys know what the strategy is. Unfortunately, those who have to execute it have no clue.
...
Using the Balanced Scorecard approach allows executives to summarize the strategy in a strategy map, an outline typically including four perspectives: financial, customer, process, and learning and growth.
...
A strategy map identifies the top 25 financial, customer, process, and organizational objectives – kind of a cockpit view of the strategy. It’s a Google maps version of strategy – how to go from point A (people and processes) to point B (deliver customer success and financial benefits).
...
The map can then be converted into 3-4 strategic themes – customer excellence, performance excellence, innovation, globalization, etc. These tend to be the most common ones. Not only can the Strategy Map be shared, but the key strategy themes can also be shared.
.
An agenda can then be built around reinforcing this message with the wider organization. Training programs can be designed to enforce the themes, external speakers can be brought in, awards can be created to drive behavioral change to communicate and deliver the strategy, case studies of successful firms with similar themes can be created. These are all very effective ways of communicating strategy within an organization.  Sometimes it’s not just the employees within an organization that crave a clear communication of strategy – it’s also investors, boards, and even suppliers."

Esta é também a minha experiência, uma extraordinária ferramenta de visualização e de comunicação da estratégia.
.
Trechos retirados de "Communicating Strategy is as Simple as Creating a Map"

BTW, há que comentar o exemplo de mapa da estratégia incluído no artigo. Tenho várias críticas a fazer. Penso de forma diferente.

Mudar de indicadores

E recordo as surpresas que às vezes apanho em empresas maiores de encontrar chefias intermédias que não querem indicadores, que acham que se mede muito, que se mede demais...

"Companies in industries facing change have to change their key metrics, often before the new reality is clear.
...
Know your metrics and the behaviors they drive. Everyone at your company should understand which metrics drive the business, and what behaviors they encourage. ... “Everyone needs to know how each metric fits into the big picture…why and how we’re measuring something, and how it’s relevant to performance.”[Moi ici: Esse é o grande poder do mapa da estratégia com as suas relações de causa-efeito]
...
Prioritize metrics that reflect value to customers, rather than simple volume or efficiency.
...
Many traditional commodity or product-focused industries, such as mining, oil and gas, or chemicals, tend to focus on the volume of product purchased and shipped: tons, barrels, liters, etc. This is an obvious metric, but it biases a company toward decisions that reinforce the commoditization of its own offerings. Focusing on them means that new business concepts — ones that might decrease the volume sold but replace it with value-added services or services that better align customer and supplier incentives — can be easily missed.[Moi ici: Quando uma PME interioriza que tem de subir na escala de valor, que tem de formular uma estratégia não assente no custo/desconto, às vezes é difícil conseguir a energia e o empenho das chefias para mergulhar bem fundo em busca dos novos indicadores relevantes. A tentação é saltar logo para a acção.]
...
Conquering the tyranny of metrics requires ongoing experimentation and iteration.
...
Changing the ways we measure success means changing how we define success. Waiting until the market has already changed means playing catch-up. Given how companies construct themselves around optimizing against their metrics, waiting until market shifts are obvious often means waiting until it’s too late."

E a sua empresa, há quantos anos não muda de indicadores? E a estratégia mudou?

Trechos retirados de "Don’t Be Tyrannized by Old Metrics"

Cuidado com as fantasias do Excel

Há os políticos que escrevem cenários para uma década mas que não duram 6 meses.
.
Há os comentadores que sonham com políticos cheios de certezas e cheios de conhecimento privilegiado que indicam o caminho único para o futuro
.
Depois, há os que como este anónimo engenheiro da província têm medo dos Grandes Planeadores, os Grandes Geometras, e preferem a humildade do fuçar, a alternativa do concreto, o reconhecimento do anything goes, o MacGyver versus Sandy. Economia não rima com ciência newtoniana, é tudo transitório

Por tudo isto, gostei muito de "When Strategy Becomes Fantasy":

"Ironically, when managers think they have all the answers, strategy can turn into fantasy.
.
Many organisations have an obsession with certainty, a must-know attitude to strategic initiatives.
...
Companies, therefore, often end up dedicating more energy towards maintaining the illusion of pursuing a strategic aspiration than actually trying to make a strategic aspiration real.
...
As a strategic aspiration moves from an idea to the active pursuit of that idea, a feedback loop starts to form. This feedback loop generates data about the feasibility and worthiness of the aspiration. Feedback is also produced about the organisation’s delivery capabilities. People in leadership roles can be receptive to this data or they can manipulate, normalise and post-rationalise the data.
...
Inevitably, the inherent uncertainty in a strategic initiative means that true understanding of the underlying business problem is going to emerge as the project progresses.
.
But from my observations, the unearthing of this uncertainty threatens fragile ego-identities. The more fragile the egos in positions of power, the more fertile the soil for a shared fantasy to take hold, i.e the more defended and narcissistically oriented the people in leadership roles, the more vulnerable the company is to fantasy usurping a reality based pursuit of a strategic aspiration.[Moi ici: Acabo de me lembrar de Weick e da genial estória do oficial húngaro nos Alpes que salvou os seus colegas porque tinha um mapa ... dos Pirinéus. Outro exemplo do fuçar, do começar pela acção.]

...
A shared fantasy’s best ally is the belief that no one has time to think. [Moi ici: Estão a ver onde isto nos leva? Indicadores para quê? Reunir para quê?] It is almost a dead giveaway that a group is entrapped in a shared fantasy if they are running from meeting to meeting, fire fighting, exhausted and mentally unavailable.
...
Reflection brings awareness to one’s situation, which for some companies can be very painful. As Ronald Heiftz says, “There is no such thing as a broken system. The system is working for someone.” Bringing greater awareness into an organisation participating in a shared fantasy means going against the system that is “working for someone.”
...
Without maintaining time for reflection, I believe the strategy realisation process will likely succumb to the grips of fantasy and ultimately fail. Worse, the path to failure will likely be one of significant suffering."

O artigo é muito mais rico e extenso e merece uma ou duas leituras integrais, para começar.

Acerca de um BSC

Mão amiga fez-me chegar esta foto do BSC da Continental em Lousado.

Empresa com uma proposta de valor baseada no preço. Daí que não admira que na perspectiva interna os indicadores tenham a ver com:

• custos relacionados com setups;
• produtividade à maneira clássica: quantidade por homem hora;
• custos de não qualidade.

E que na base do BSC, naquilo a que chamo "recursos e infraestruturas" incluam indicadores sobre:

• absentismo; e
• flexibilidade e polivalência dos trabalhadores.

Na perspectiva clientes incluem os indicadores de resultados:

• nº de reclamações;
• índice de disponibilidade/flexibilidade e inovação

Normalmente, as empresas com que trabalho são mais do que a Continental em Lousado que é só um centro produtivo. Nas empresas com que trabalho a perspectiva clientes avalia três temas:

• estamos a ganhar clientes? (Lousado só produz)
• estamos a satisfazer os clientes?
• estamos a conseguir manter os clientes? (Lousado só produz)

Este BSC é típico de uma unidade produtiva, sem trabalho comercial que dependa de si, e com uma proposta de valor clara: o preço. O seu BSC seduz por ser muito enxuto. Quando o negócio é preço, a empresa tem de se contratar no seu interior (excelência operacional).