"call out the conventional supply chain model as “dead.” The same report downgraded Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger parent PVH for the first time in eight years. Although Calvin Klein sales increased by $876 million since 2013, profit declined over that period by $20 million. PVH’s inventory turns hit all-time lows, while total inventory hit all-time highs. Sales growth based on higher inventory risk, the analysts argued, is no longer acceptable.Recordo:
...
As an alternative, they offered a new thesis: speed = value. Cowen demonstrates that even modest change in speed equates to gross margin improvement, a model which can be projected across the sector and to clothing and accessories.
...
Supply chains must move faster if they are to be more responsive to accelerating changes in demand. More important than cutting weeks of time out of the design-to-delivery calendar is building a link between retail supply flexibility and market value. Citing work by Warren H. Hausman of Stanford University, the critical metric is capital based on process innovation that reduces finished goods’ lead times from months to weeks.
The source of being fast is supply flexibility in the first mile of the supply chain, in contrast to last mile logistics. This means upstream management to delay – or postpone -- finished goods commitments. The impact of this strategy is to reduce or remove fashion uncertainty and exploit much shorter working capital cycles.
...
Speed, in summary, is not an operational challenge in sourcing alone. It is a firm-wide cultural commitment to speed decision-making, to be responsive to trends and to synchronise and share value across partners."
"value is always co-created in markets because value is phenomenologically derived and determined by a service beneficiary (e.g., customer) through the use of a market offering. This view on value differs from traditional economic measures of value. In particular, Vargo et al. (2008) discuss two measures of value that have been deliberated since the time of Aristotle – value-in-exchange and value-in-use. Whereas value-in-exchange represents the nominal amount for which something can be exchanged, value-in-use represents the value derived through integration and use, or application, of an available resource. Vargo et al. (2008) point toward the need for conceptualizing “value-in-context,” which they propose as an extension of value-in-use because it centers on value derived through use, but influenced by a particular context (e.g., time, place and social setting). In this way, value is always contextual because it is based on a phenomenological perspective and influenced by time, place and social surroundings, as well as other environmental factors, including access to other internal and external resources."Trecho lido em mais uma caminhada matinal em "The context of experience", Journal of Service Management, Vol. 26 Iss 2 de Melissa Archpru Akaka, Stephen L Vargo e Hope Jensen Schau.
"Figure 3.1 shows a typical scenario of how the combined effects of commod- itization and buyer concentration, common in many industrial sectors, can over time lead to margin erosion. It begins with a steady decline in the differentiation of the core offer. In other words, the firm’s customer-value proposition begins to lose its uniqueness and, with it, most or all of its differentiating power. Customers view all competing products alike and dismiss any vendor claims to the contrary. When combined with buyer concentration, i.e. when a growing share of sales is generated from a declining number of large customers, the consequences of commoditization can be dramatic: a loss of control on prices (when the seller is no longer a price setter but a price taker), in addition to losses in supplier identity, customer loyalty and brand equity. The scenario’s negative impact on margins and profitability is all too predictable.Trechos retirados de "3 Countering Commoditization: Value-added Strategies and Aligning with Customers" de Kamran Kashani
.
Countering commoditization begins with a re-examining of the core business and its customer-value proposition. When all customers appear to look alike and the firm’s value offer has a one-size-fits-all quality to it (both features of many commoditized markets), it is time to ask a couple of fundamental questions: beyond the lowest price, what do the customers really value and how could the commoditized offer, product or service, be redefined to better reflect the often unarticulated needs of its customers?"
"The vast majority of leaders I meet believe that their job is to ensure perfect execution. Mistakes are verboten. Failure is unacceptable. And so we use our considerable experience (and energy) to run our teams like well-oiled machines. There’s only one problem: they are not machines. They are complex, adaptive systems—human systems—in an age of rapid change. By focusing on execution, we limit the potential for growth in the system. By making ourselves indispensable, we make our teams and organizations less resilient. In complexity, our job isn’t perfection, it’s building a culture that is always learning. And that requires letting go. Of course, clients often respond that they can’t trust their teams to make decisions and take action. I remind them that one of two things is true: either they’re wrong and their teams are capable of far more than they realize, or they’re right and they need to make an immediate change. What is not okay is to linger in a state of distrust and second-guessing."Em linha completa com a Parte I.
"many retailers still only refresh their store formats in three- to five-year cycles. That’s an eternity in today’s world, where consumer demands and behavior are changing rapidly. Furthermore, traditional format redesign is a costly, multiyear effort that involves overhauling several departments or even the entire store. It carries significant risk, because retailers have no guarantee that the redesign, once it’s complete, will generate the desired results. It could turn out to be a tremendous waste of time and money."
"Wthout focus a company cannot achieve an execution culture. As mentioned previously, unfocused companies pursue too many objectives and have too many initiative. During the workshops conducted with senior managers, I asked them to list their company's top three objectives. There was never unanimous agreement. If top management is not dear about the initiatives on which to focus the company's efforts, then staff will never know where to invest their time. ... the greater the number of strategic objectives and priorities, the more unfocused are the employee. Alternatively, the more focused is top management, the clearer employees and departments are about what they need to do on a daily basis. When priorities cascade down the organization, the result is often a distorted focus — and frequently a significant distortion.Um dos temas que há muitos anos me apoquenta, ao lidar com as iniciativas estratégicas... a falta de foco, a falta de fogo no rabo, iniciativas que se arrastam no tempo, iniciativas que não têm qualquer prioridade sobre a gestão corrente do dia-a-dia:
...
Another significant consequence is that lack of focus leads to lack of discipline in executing organizational objective. Focus imposes discipline because staff at any level know what to do at any point.
...
A final sign related to lack of focus and execution culture is when companies brainstorm the same ideas again and again."
“The vast majority of leaders I meet believe that their job is to ensure perfect execution. Mistakes are verboten. Failure is unacceptable. And so we use our considerable experience (and energy) to run our teams like well-oiled machines. There’s only one problem: they are not machines. They are complex, adaptive systems—human systems—in an age of rapid change. By focusing on execution, we limit the potential for growth in the system. By focusing on execution, we limit the potential for growth in the system. By making ourselves indispensable, we make our teams and organizations less resilient. In complexity, our job isn’t perfection, it’s building a culture that is always learning. And that requires letting go. Of course, clients often respond that they can’t trust their teams to make decisions and take action. I remind them that one of two things is true: either they’re wrong and their teams are capable of far more than they realize, or they’re right and they need to make an immediate change. What is not okay is to linger in a state of distrust and second-guessing."
"Shoe retailer Shoes of Prey toppled over like Bambi in heels last week. And no wonder, because according to chief executive officer Michael Fox, the founders trusted what their customers told them.O artigo fez-me recordar vários postais ao longo dos anos sobre o tema:
.
In outlining the reasons Shoes of Prey failed, Fox pointed to a yawning gap between customer intent and actual behaviour: “While our mass market customer told us they wanted to customise …what they were consciously telling us and what they subconsciously wanted … were effectively polar opposites.”"
"the fundamental difference between success and failure depends on which projects top management decides to invest in and how those projects are executed.
.
In other words, finding ways to achieve the strategic goals is what today is known as 'strategic planning,' while 'strategy execution' is the method used to achieve those goals. The three most important elements of successful strategy execution are:
- Identifying the company's core competencies that will differentiate it from the competition.
- Selecting and prioritizing the initiatives that will exploit those core competencies and create sustainable growth via the company's strategic plan.
...
- Organizing company resources so as to optimally execute the chosen strategy.
Once a company's structure and resources are aligned to its chosen strategy, the key question is whether the organization is focused enough to deliver the intended result. If the answer is no chances are that the strategy will not be successfully executed. This will be discussed later, but successful strategy execution is not so much about how well the strategy is defined; instead, success depends on project selection, effective organizational alignment, relentless execution and focus.
...
Being unfocused means that strategy objectives have not been clearly articulated or communicated to the entire organization. Often, there are too many objectives or even worse, the objectives are not prioritized. Top management wants to do too many things and does not involve employees in the strategy formulation. Thus, employees neither understand nor buy into the long-term mission.
...
If the strategy is poorly executed, the financial objectives will be difficult to achieve. Unfocused companies typically generate significant costs over the years. They often run too many projects, not recognizing that projects are expensive and consume both financial and staff resources. In addition, they frequently lack a clear, transparent and objective project selection process (or investment committee). Investment decisions are made on partial information and the tendency is to start all projects whose business case 'looks good on paper."
"Lembro-me frequentemente desta história pela sua eloquência na ilustração de como decisões, quiçá bem-intencionadas, podem produzir efeitos devastadores e até contrários ao propósito que as motivam, quando não se estudam bem os problemas e todas as relações envolvidas, quando não se consideram todos os efeitos directos e indirectos. E espero que quem está encarregado de pensar políticas públicas não a ignore."
"“Todo o nosso investimento, nos próximos dois anos, vai centrar-se no digital. Este é um setor muito dinâmico, onde têm aparecido imensas marcas novas que, graças aos marketplaces ou às redes sociais, facilmente se dão a conhecer ao mundo”Trechos retirados de "Laranjinha prepara entrada na Amazon a partir de 2020"
...
“Os mercados onde somos mais fortes são aqueles que fizemos há 20 anos, pelos meios tradicionais, e onde contamos com clientes fiéis. Mas queremos dar-nos a conhecer a outros mercados pela via digital, o que obriga a investir milhões para se aparecer nos motores de busca. As grandes plataformas globais é que o conseguem”, explica.
...
Internacionalizar a marca com lojas fora de Portugal não está no horizonte. “Aprendemos que a gestão de lojas fora de Portugal é muito complicado, a não ser que se tenha um parceiro local”, diz Luís Figueiredo, que pretende, sim, reforçar o investimento na participação em feiras fora da Europa."
"I have developed a matrix that illustrates this situation (Figure 4.2). The x-axis refers to the dimension of the business, either run-the-business or change-the-business. The y-axis represents both the front/core activities of the business and the support activities. For simplicity, I assume that most of the strategic growth projects are launched by the front side of the business — which is not too far from reality if we consider that research and development (R&D), business development, marketing and corporate are the departments that launch most of these growth initiatives — while the functions are more involved in cost-reduction projects (including performance improvement and system automation). Management has to make sure that the distribution of its resources is totally aligned and reflects the strategic objectives, in which case the chances are high that the strategy will be successful."Interessante que todos as quatro iniciativas da empresa caem no quadrante inferior esquerdo... ou seja, as iniciativas estratégicas ainda que relevantes não são verdadeiramente estratégicas uma vez que são apenas "run-the-business".
No, you can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometime you find
You get what you need
"And thus we close with a paradox: In the future, brand will no longer matter — except when it does. If a product’s story is compelling enough to truly differentiate, then that story will continue to resonate. If it doesn’t, it won’t."
"for many of today’s industrial vendors the ability to create value is less than matched by the power to capture it, because in commoditized markets the customer is the driver in an unbalanced distribution of bargaining power. The consequences for suppliers can be serious: declining prices and margins, inferior returns on investment, and the risk of falling into a ‘commodity trap’ where the pressure on profitability leads to reduced investment in product (or service) innovation, which in turn leads to further loss of differentiation and even greater pressure on prices and margins. Few marketers can escape this vicious cycle with their shirts on.Dois exemplos da concentração nos inputs e não nos outputs.
.
Can industrial companies counter commoditization and avoid falling victim to their ever more powerful, hard-bargaining customers?.
The answer for a growing number of companies is an affirmative one. These firms have learned that while core product advantages erode and pressure on prices never lets up, they can still do profitable business by pursuing value-added strategies including aligning themselves with key customers. Put differently, these companies have discovered profitable opportunities in stretching beyond their core products by offering customers compellingly differentiated values. They have thus successfully countered commoditization.
...
Consider the following examples.
- SKF, the world’s largest ball-bearing manufacturer, ... to maintain their production machinery, reduce or eliminate downtime and maximize plant yield.
- ...
- Raisio Chemicals, a major supplier of chemical compounds ... developing new products, upgrading paper quality and improving printability. The company offers its important customers access to its technical staff and facilities, including a unique pilot coating machine and a newly built printing plant, for testing and experimentation."
"In 1997 and 1998, olive oil was the most adulterated agricultural product in the European Union, prompting the E.U.’s anti-fraud office to establish an olive-oil task force. (“Profits were comparable to cocaine trafficking, with none of the risks,” one investigator told me.) The E.U. also began phasing out subsidies for olive-oil producers and bottlers, in an effort to reduce crime, and after a few years it disbanded the task force. Yet fraud remains a major international problem: olive oil is far more valuable than most other vegetable oils, but it is costly and time-consuming to produce—and surprisingly easy to doctor. Adulteration is especially common in Italy, the world’s leading importer, consumer, and exporter of olive oil. (For the past ten years, Spain has produced more oil than Italy, but much of it is shipped to Italy for packaging and is sold, legally, as Italian oil.) “The vast majority of frauds uncovered in the food-and-beverage sector involve this product,” Colonel Leopoldo Maria De Filippi, the commander for the northern half of Italy of the N.A.S. Carabinieri, an anti-adulteration group run under the auspices of the Ministry of Health, told me.Criar uma bitola privada de qualidade, autenticidade e origem do azeite.
.
In Puglia, which produces about forty per cent of Italy’s olives, growers have been in a near-constant state of crisis for more than a decade. “Thousands of olive-oil producers are victims of this ‘drugged’ market,” Antonio Barile, the president of the Puglia chapter of a major farmers’ union, told me, referring to illegal importations of seed oils and cheap olive oil from outside the E.U., which undercut local farmers. Instead of supporting small growers who make distinctive, premium oils, the Italian government has consistently encouraged quantity over quality, to the benefit of large companies that sell bulk oil. It has not implemented a national plan for oil production, has employed a byzantine system for distributing agricultural subsidies, and has often failed to enforce Italian laws and E.U. regulations intended to prevent fraud. The government has been so lax in pursuing some oil crimes that it can seem complicit. In 2000, the European Court of Auditors reported that Italy was responsible for eighty-seven per cent of misappropriated E.U. subsidies to olive-oil bottlers in the preceding fifteen years, and that the government had recovered only a fraction of the money."
"Quando um mercado está comoditizado, quando há um excesso de oferta face à procura, qual é a primeira regra que os incumbentes poderosos seguem?Ontem apanhei isto no Twitter:
.
Conluiarem-se com os governos para criarem barreiras à entrada ou à permanência dos concorrentes mais pequenos. Em vez de comprarem esses concorrentes, em vez de subirem na escala de valor, em vez de melhorarem face a esses concorrentes, em vez de seduzirem melhor os clientes..."
"As the world becomes increasingly price-competitive, successful companies will need to become ever more vigilant in targeting markets for profitability, not just volume growth.Trechos retirados de "Integrating Marketing and Operational Choices for Profit Growth" de Thomas Nagle e Lisa Thompson.
...
When working with the client, keep it simple. He said, “Don’t waste too much time overcomplicating the topic of customer value. Just ask the cli- ent this: ‘Do you know how much it costs your customers not to be doing business with you’?”
“When you join a Legacy Organization, the default assumption is that you don’t have the right to do anything unless you are given permission. This stems from a theory of control that believes the best way to eliminate risk is through compliance. It all starts innocently enough. In the early days, everyone scrambles to get the business off the ground. If they succeed, the established enterprise attempts to protect itself by standardizing approaches, policies, and structures—it discovers and mandates the one best way. Over time, red tape builds up until hardly anything interesting can be done without three different approvals. Only very senior managers and people willing to lose their jobs are able to act freely. The rest of the workforce, unauthorized to solve their own problems, develops a sense of apathy and learned helplessness. Engagement dips. Mistakes are made. And more red tape is wrapped around the handle. Stories of mistakes and failures create a culture of fear. The sense at the bottom is that leadership doesn’t trust anyone. The sense at the top is that even more compliance is needed—that everything must be specified.Trechos retirados de “Brave New Work” de Aaron Dignan.
...
Evolutionary Organizations ensure that everyone has the freedom and autonomy to serve the organization’s purpose. The default assumption here is that you can do anything, unless a specific policy or agreement prohibits it. We’re starting from a position of trust. Rather than centralizing power in a few senior positions, we aim to distribute authority as much as possible to teams and individuals at the edge, where the action and the information are. Teams take full responsibility for their work and their way of working. If something is causing tension or stopping them from achieving their purpose, they can attempt to change it, whether it’s a line of code or a massive equipment purchase.
...
How many people in how many roles lack the authority they need to do their jobs well? In a dynamic and fast-changing world, preventing people from using judgment and making decisions is just too slow. A client recently told me the story of an initiative that required sixteen individual sign-offs before proceeding. This is our addiction to control masquerading as “risk management.” What firms like this fail to recognize is that the true risk they face is that bureaucratic immobilization will make them irrelevant.”
""Amazon will go bankrupt," he continued. If you look at large companies, their lifespans tend to be 30-plus years, not a hundred-plus years."Já agora recordar outros números de 2008:
...
The average US public company is dying younger than ever, around age 30,
...
Another startling statistic: Reeves says 32% of companies won't exist 5 years from now, whether they're acquired or they flat-out fail."
"Remember that 96% of all business start-ups in the US fail within 10 years"Uma sociedade que deseja e valoriza o apoio extra-mercado a entidades que operam no mercado não pode aspirar a tirar o maior partido das vantagens do mercado.
