With worries about world economies falling back again, we could reflect on how we got in this mess, and some questions for Strategy.

Recessions usually start, I hear, in the corporate sector – falls in consumer or public spending then follow those business reversals, rather than the opposite. It can also be shown that an industry can fall into big cycles with no variability at all in underlying demand growth. If this happens in one sector, then both the boom and the bust infect other sectors, making the problem still worse, and a recession ensues. This was a topic at a small conference, featuring iconoclastic economist Paul Ormerod, back in February – here is a rather basic [sorry] recording.

If we are so smart at developing strategy, how come so many companies failed to see that their over-heated markets were no basis for what turned out to be gross over-expansion? If a general recession is the sum of down-turns in many sectors, then this strategic error was nearly universal –in retail, banking, telecoms, transportation, raw materials, real-estate … Strategic incompetence in, say, US subprime lending or Northern Rock is rather clear, but similar if smaller errors must have been happening all over.

So, as a strategy profession, where did we fail? Did we not provide the tools for management to prevent these mistakes? Did we ourselves fail  – or did we indeed warn of the emerging problem but get ignored? Or did some of us actually do pretty well [I think Canadian banks largely avoided the crisis, for example]?

Then, what are we doing now to help strategic recovery of the businesses we support, and hence of the economy? Have we helped design smaller but more powerful business strategies – or are companies stuck with crude cost-cutting instead? Recessions are often a great time for strong companies to pick up weaker rivals or cheap assets, or steal business – which if widely done should speed the recovery – so are we playing our part to make that happen?

Perhaps we need much more of the smart strategy modeling at Boeing?

www.strategydynamics.com

I see strong 2nd quarter profits at Boeing,  just after hearing their strategy VP explain their heavy use of strategy models. Their industry model led them not to cut production after a 2009 collapse in orders, in spite of screams from analysts that they should do so to cut costs. Reminds me Airbus used a similar model way back in 96 (also in link above) to spot that a massive jump in orders was fluff, and to be cautious about adding capacity. (Back then, Airbus could only supply part of the market, so they couldn””t have captured Boeing””s 98-9 peak deliveries).

Message here – you can””t do strategy with 2×2 boxes, Vision statements and spreadsheets – you need rigorous and powerful models of your business and its environment. And this is not just for big boys and girls - my friend Warren Farr who runs RSC, a regional distributor of heating, ventilation and air-con equipment, built a strategy model of his market. This told him a market slow-down was not a normal cycle but a fundamental shift to an era of lower demand. Competitors kept expanding, believing growth would return – Warren held back and banked the cash. When competitors failed, he bought up cheap capacity and failed businesses, putting RSC into a strong position – much to the delight of employees who would otherwise have lost their jobs.

www.strategydynamics.com

A smart-arse student glibly stated ”Culture eats strategy for breakfast” – a remark attributed to Peter Drucker. A quick Web-search finds this quote often admiringly repeated. But it”s an example of something way too common in management – outrageous statements that sound great but are just nonsense.

We don”t need to list out all the endless cases of companies with hugely strong cultures that just messed up trying to do something strategically dumb. We probably have no idea how many more there have been, simply because they failed and died. What we do know is the huge number of successful businesses that do perfectly fine, thanks, with no particularly strong or unique culture – just a strong strategy and professional execution.

I look forward to any new strategy book, so was thrilled to get “Good Strategy: Bad Strategy” by Prof Rumelt who McKinsey call ”strategy”s strategist”. Big disappointment!

“Bad strategy” apparently shows up as ”fluff”, failure to face challenges, mistaking goals for strategy, or choosing bad objectives – all common enough, maybe, but these are not any kind of strategy. There are plenty of actual strategy mistakes that repeat endlessly across industries and throughout time, but do not get a mention.

The “good strategy” principles offered are not wrong, but seem to follow a random walk around a variety of concepts – many of which, in the absence of clear instruction, themselves qualify as “fluff”. Plenty of anecdotes to show examples of good and bad, and reasonable-enough principles to follow, but no clue how to actually do what the examples show or how to enact the principles.

Prof Rumelt is no doubt a brilliant strategist, but no-one reading this is going to understand what to actually do to design and implement a strong strategy.

Great to see serious Strategy courses on offer, rather than superficial MBAs. The Vienna University Masters in Strategy, Innovation and Management Control is a recent case that will include a complete module on dynamics. Tilburg and Maastricht are other good examples. Even if you do not want to take such a course, the content shows what a professional competence in strategy should cover.
There are some others, but I do not see anything in N America.

The last three briefings have gone into the issue of interdependence between resources , and have brought us to the point where we now have the essential elements needed to describe an entire business and its performance…
What are they?
Continue reading »

Back in 1999 I got booed for saying the dot-com boom was mostly hot air, after which the NASDAQ dropped from 1000 to 200. The Economist now warns of a 2nd bubble,with private equity and big corporates falling over each other to throw cash at anything web-ish. Many of the new ventures will be great, but most will fail, due to poor understanding of whether business models are viable – which needs a sound system-model of the business.
As noted before, certified analysts are not required to understand anything about the link from strategy to performance, so we can be sure disasters will follow, as we see the NASDAQ drive up from 300 to 600 …
For a route to sound strategy and business models, see www.strategydynamics.com.

We have discussed how resources drive or hold back each others’ growth rates, and the idea that the level of a resource may affect its own development.

A particularly common framework arises when the saturation of a limited opportunity combines with word-of-mouth between already active customers and potential customers. This captures well how new products diffuse into a market, a process first set out by Professor Frank Bass1 hence the framework’s title.

Continue reading »
The flows in and out of a resource (the rates at which it grows or declines) depend on existing resourcesmore sales people should lead to customers being won more quickly, for example.

There are two special cases of this dependency that are both very common and important…
What are they?

Continue reading »
What makes strategy dynamics so powerful?
Continue reading »
© 2012 Talking about strategy Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha