I see that some companies don’t operate with optimal-sized plants and they have over-capacity problems for many years. They have extra spaces within or around the factory. They try to get quick information from people about what type of products or sectors they have to invest. This approach surprises me!
Have you been surprised by high-impact competitive events and changes in the past five years?
The nature of the changes are so fundamental it’s difficult to foresee an industry where it’s not some combination of a significant threat or a significant opportunity, or both. Of course when changes start to accelerate they will tend to do it pretty quickly and so the time to feel urgency now.
Do you have a ?
A few organizations can actively utilise peripheral vision of the marketplace such as time, money, the size of the team and organization, the environment and culture.
Do you have sufficient investment in innovation management and R&D skills?
They always ask people how they can use these extra spaces and what type of new products they can produce there. On the other hand they don’t have sufficient investment in innovation management, R&D activities and skills. I see that they don’t have the necessary experience, knowledge and the right skills in these areas.
Do you make a long-term sector analysis and healthy disengagements?
I have to say that these companies are not making long-term sector analysis. Now they have over capacity and they don’t know what they can do. They only visit fairs in their field and asks their friends and professionals what area they can invest. This is a simple way and they will fail in making healthy disengagements.
Do you stay on top of competitive intelligence?
Today’s business world is increasingly unpredictable and business cycles keep shortening. We can only create transient competitive advantages for a certain period.
Therefore leaders/managers should continuously scan the environment with 360 degree vision, alert for opportunities and threats from local and global markets. Of course benchmarking against the past is valuable but we have to examine the present and future to truly benefit from the periphery (direct competitors and other possible threats) in a competitive sense. The threat can emerge from any part of the world. I know that there are excellent improvements in technology and internet to access to valuable information to review and digest. I see that many companies are away from this point. They focus today’s issues and profits!
Do you foster strategic agility?
Some companies know their problems and they put the issues in the cold room. Because they have some growth and profitable business today. Normally they should spark change routinely and continuously and establish a sense of urgency for the change.
Do you seek to recruit, retain and benefit from the skills and insights of talented people?
The war for talent! I see that these companies see the talented people as a cost. Today they have a profitable business. They only keep their company and profits. They apply short-termism. If there can be a threat to their business they aim to solve it tomorrow or at that time. On the other hand some companies keep their best skills and if there is a need they hire best talents. They focus to develop and implement short and long-term marketing and innovation strategies in local and global markets. I like this phrase “Having the right team playing on the field is the fundamental difference between victory and defeat”.
McKinsey’s definition of talent is the best. “Talent is the sum of a person’s abilities… his or her intrinsic gifts, knowledge, experience, skills, attitude, intelligence, judgment, character and drive. It also includes his or her ability to learn”.
Do you keep your effective leaders/managers?
I see that some companies don’t keep their well experienced leaders/managers who have excellent knowledge and highly valuable skills (including emotional intelligence) after a certain age. This age is 63 in the USA and some other countries it is 49. This is the short-termism. Such companies can fail in the long-term.
Do you believe you always know best?
I think that this is the biggest trap for company owners and leadership level. They need other effective people’s input. Challenged and robustly debated ideas involving many people’s views are often the strongest in today’s highly competitive business world. An effective change management can be obtained by the individuals making up the organization understanding, accepting and adopting the change.
Do you think that companies should work with a diverse range of excellent skills?