• Unique customer experiences is a key output of innovation. 15 of the most innovative firms get this status because they designed unique customer experiences that create loyalty. Breakthrough products is still the main manifestation of innovation.
• Developing a deep understanding of customers is firms' best performing innovation capability. This finding is worrying. So, most executives think their firms know their customers well enough to be able to innovate through breakthrough products or services, or through applying a differentiated business model. I've seen too many (dis)satisfaction surveys where customers don't feel understood by the companies they hold products from to believe that executives are wrong here.
• A risk-adverse culture is the main obstacle to ROI on innovation. The other primary obstacles are lengthy development times, difficulties selecting the right ideas to commercialize, and lack of coordination internally. A quarter mentioned they don't have enough customer insight -- obstacle number 5. Huh? So, managers believe that getting deep understanding of customers is the best performing process behind innovating, but a lack of customer insight is a key reason why innovation is not happening. Sounds like research and marketing don't have lunch together!
• Customer satisfaction is the number one measure for innovation success. Second is percentage of sales from new products or services and third overall revenue growth.

Download the full report here.

The stock market these days is looking about as appetizing as a plate of warmed-over head cheese. At the same time, the real estate market is making the head cheese look good. So as a result, many businesses are cutting their expenses, particularly in marketing.

Yes, as a devoted reader of this blog, you know they're making a mistake... With the competition scampering and cowering like Dick Cheney during a terrorist attack, now would be a strategically killer time to invest in a full-on marketing offensive.

But, alas, you have no choice. Most of your cash is going to gas-up your SUV, and the car dealership guys break into hysterics whenever you ask about trading it in.

So a cutting we go -- but where? Do you use your handful of ad dollars to hype your best selling products? Or do you try to rescue products that just aren't moving?

This question crossed my mind the other day when I saw a big, expensive ad in the L.A. Times offering a great deal on a Hummer. Considering that consumers are now clamoring for small cars, is GM being smart or have they completely lost it? Of course, you know I've got an opinion, but let's have some fun and apply a little methodology...

One framework you can use here is the classic Boston Consulting Group Matrix, which has been taught to flocks of MBA students everywhere for over 30 years, but you get to learn it here free. (Is this blog a bargain or what?) The BCG matrix uses the criteria of market growth rate and market share to analyze product portfolios and allocate financial resources. It consists of a 2x2 matrix with four categories apparently named by a 3-year-old:

1. Question Marks: products with low share of a high-growth market
2. Stars: products with high share of a high-growth market
3. Cash Cows: products with high share of a low-growth market
4. Dogs: products with low share of a low-growth market

Theoretically, most products pass through all four stages as they mature, starting out as question marks and ending up as dogs. Some products can also sit right on a border between categories. (Note: I use "products" here, but you can also use the matrix to analyze brands or entire businesses.)

Now, if you've got time on your hands and really want to impress your boss, you can treat the crossbars of the matrix as an X axis and a Y axis, with your products relatively positioned within each box. However, doing so could lead to a marathon discussion over whether a product should be positioned a little bit higher or lower and possibly to the right a bit... in other words, the dreaded paralysis by analysis. So unless you're getting paid by the hour, I recommend sticking to a simple 2x2 matrix.

Once you put all of your company's products into their respective categories, you then consider these rules:

1. Stars: invest your marketing dollars in these since they could become dominant market leaders
2. Cash Cows: milk these to provide the cash to invest in your stars and a few question marks
3. Question Marks: invest in the most promising of these as well -- but only a few
4. Dogs: cut the leash and let these go to the highest bidder for some much needed cash

To illustrate, imagine that you're Coca-Cola. Your portfolio might look something like this:

• Question Mark: your energy drink brand (Full Throttle)
• Star: your bottled water (Dasani)
• Cash Cow: your namesake soft drink (Coca-Cola)
• Dog: your sweetened juice drink (Hi-C)

As Coca-Cola's CMO, you would use income from Coke to invest primarily in Dasani and Full Throttle, while looking to sell off Hi-C to some private equity fund with too much cash on its hands.

But before you rush off and start reallocating your dinero, consider these caveats...

Caveat #1: Markets change with the economy and other conditions -- sometimes very quickly. What if consumers make a massive shift from bottled water to tap water, as many municipal governments are doing? Dasani is doomed. Or what if Tiki Bar TV uses Hi-C as a drink mixer, making it a hip and trendy drink amongst geeks overnight? Your dog is now a star...

Caveat #2: One company's dog is another company's cash cow (or better). Some investors have struck gold by buying another company's dogs. In 2003, Nike bought troubled Converse for only $305 million (less than what the movie "Iron Man" earned in two months). Nike then marketed Converse through retailers (such as Target) where it would not allow its own brand to be sold. In 2007, Converse earned $550 million. With Nike's resources and marketing ingenuity, this old dog learned a few tricks.

What matters most is what makes sense for your business. For example, some companies might prefer to have cows over stars, because cows require less advertising and innovation. They're also less risky. So don't just rely on the BCG Matrix alone to make your decision -- it's just a start. Keep an eye on market trends, and consult a marketing expert about what you might be able do with the product.

Back to GM. As we all know, SUV's were stars just a couple of years ago, while small cars were dogs; now, because of evil gas prices, SUV's are barking while small cars are shining. So by advertising the Hummer, GM put their money into a dog. According to the BCG Matrix, that's not the best possible use of their limited resources. But of course, without bad decisions, GM wouldn't be GM now, would it?

image credits:
head cheese: Methyl Lives, Creative Commons
BCG Matrix: Netmba.com, Creative Commons

* The critical role of knowledge management in gathering, discussing, and disseminating new ideas from both inside and outside the firm

* Innovation can't be limited to a separate group, like an R&D lab; it has to be everyone's responsibility and be built into everyday ways of working

* Diverse teams generate better ideas

* The most critical element of an innovative culture is trust between people that will enable them to share ideas freely

* Survey respondents fall into two management styles: managed (planned, systemic) and open (radical, discontinous initiatives that have no obvious connection with past successes; balancing the consensual and the anarchic).  Of the top 20% of performers in their survey, 75% displayed the open style; of the top 5%, all displayed the open style.

If you've read my book GROUP GENIUS, you know that I wasn't surprised by any of this.  But what is surprising is that this knowledge has been around for so long, for at least ten years, and the majority of companies still aren't paying attention.  If we all get together in ten more years for another "future of management" conference, it would be pretty depressing if nothing in the corporate world has changed.

Expert consultants to the report included: Mark Brown and Dominic Swords of Henley Management College; Scott Isaksen, Brian Dorval, and Ken Lauer of the Creative Problem Solving Group at Buffalo; Gerard Puccio of the Center for Studies in Creativity; and Chris Dewberry of Birkbeck College.  The report originated in the U.K. and has a distinctly U.K. flavor (or "flavour"?) but the findings are valid in every region.

I recently came across a book called Globality---Competing with Everyone From Everywhere For Everything.

The book is about, as you might guess, the global economy.

The three authors are from something called the Boston Consulting Group. 

Contract with these people and they will help compete all the time, everywhere, and against everybody.

Isn't that just the life you want to live?

In the dust jacket of this book you read the following---

"Globality is a business and economic force that, like a giant tsunami,, is rapidly crashing over world markets--for better or worse---and is intensifying with incredible power and speed."

These authors say this tsunami is coming "for better or worse."

Who exactly does a tsunami help? Funeral home operators? People competing against others who are dead or crippled after the tsunami?  

If you go to the Boston Consulting Group's webpage, you see that it is a top company for working mothers. 

It's flex-time if you work for BCG, and a tsunami for others.

Below you see a picture of people who survived a tsunami. Maybe the deal is that simple survival will make you a winner.

For many, just getting by will be all that is left.

Majalah Bussiness Week (BW) baru-baru ini mengeluarkan daftar 25 Perusahaan paling inovatif tahun 2008. Untuk menentukan perhitungan ini, Bussiness Week dibantu oleh Boston Consulting Group (BGC). Nilai perhitungan yang dilakukan BW-BCG, 80% nya berdasarkan pada jawaban responden, 10% berdasarkan laba saham dan 5% sisanya berdasarkan revenue 3 tahun terakhir dan margin growth.

Muncul di urutan teratas perusahaan paling inovatif tahun 2008 adalah Apple. Membuntuti Apple di perinkat kedua adalah Google (menurut saya lebih cocok di peringkat satu). Sebenarnya lima daftar teratas tidak berubah dari tahun 2007 lalu. Nama baru yang mencuat ke atas adalah Tata Group (India) dan Nintendo. Kuda hitam lainnya yang tengah menanjak adalah General Motors, berkat konsep mobil terbarunya yaitu electric Volt.

Berikut urutan selengkapnya 25 perusahaan paling inovatif tahun 2008:

1. Apple
2. Google
3. Toyota Motor
4. General Electric
5. Microsoft
6. Tata Group
7. Nintendo
8. Protec & Gamble
9. Sony
10. Nokia
11. Amazon.com
12. IBM
13. Research in Motion
14. BMW
15. Hewlett-Packard
16. Honda Motor
17. Walt Disney
18. General Motors
19. Reliance Industries
20. Boeing
21. Goldman Sachs
22. 3M
23. Wal-Mart
24. Target
25. Facebook

India's two leading conglomerates, Tatas and Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Group, have made it to the league of the world's 25 most innovative companies, riding on the cheapest commercial car Nano and an aggressive growth path, respectively.

In the list of world's 25 most innovative companies released here on Friday, Tata group is ranked at the sixth position, while Reliance Industries is at 19th spot. The list, published in the April 28 edition of BusinessWeek magazine that hit the newsstands on Friday, has been compiled by the US financial publication in collaboration with Boston Consulting Group.

Both Tata and RIL have made it for the first time to the annual list which is topped by Apple Computer, the maker of iPod music players and Mac personal computers. Apple is followed by Internet search giant Google, Japanese auto major Toyota, industrial conglomerate General Electric (GE) and software behemoth Microsoft in the top five.

About Tata group , BusinessWeek said that "Mumbai-based conglomerate jumps onto our list for the first time, fuelled by its paradigm-busting 2,500 dollar 'Nano' car for the masses".

"The car, from its Tata Motors unit, is the world's cheapest, thanks partly to a distribution model that sells the auto in kits to entrepreneurs who assemble them for buyers."

About RIL, it noted that "the Indian petrochemicals giant made it onto our list this year thanks to fans of its aggressive growth. "But its ambitious plans to reach into grocery retailing, which is dominated in India by small shopkeepers who have rebelled against corporate entrants, have faltered," it added.

Above news courtesy: TimesofIndia

+++

Philip Evans, Director of the US-based Boston Consulting Group - and internationally regarded expert on media convergence told The Australian that "major audience disintegration for free-to-air TV could occur within a handful of years."

 http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23420452-643,00.html

Students looking at the effects of new internet technologies on the production and consumption of FTA TV might like to pull out and evaluate Evan's reasons for predicting a decline:

- TV's lack of interactivity for FTA consumers and lack of feedback for FTA producers

- Use of Cable TV in 85% of US households already

- Gov't policy protection only "slowing" impact of technological change

- Key FTA media outlets like BBC are already redefining themselves as "content originators" with many distribution channels (not just "broadcast")

For Evans, "the key for free-to-airs, in particular, is to stop being a prisoner of their distribution channels: "If they can do that, then they can carve out a very different future."

L'exploit di Milano. In particolare a Piazza Affari, secondo i consulenti di Bcg, nel quadriennio 2002-2006 gli strumenti finanziari che replicano gli indici (non solo Etf, introdotti in Italia nel 2002, ma anche fondi azionari e obbligazionari passivi) hanno registrato una crescita annuale composta (Cagr) delle masse gestite pari al 142 per cento. Inoltre, i 187 Etf quotati attualmente sul listino milanese hanno visto incrementare il controvalore degli scambi di quasi il 50 per cento, passando dai 17,5 miliardi di euro del 2006 ai 25,8 miliardi di quest'anno (gennaio-ottobre 2007). Il clone più scambiato nel 2007 è stato il Lyxor DJ Eurostoxx 50 (Societe Generale): il controvalore registrato (dati al 30 ottobre) è stato di quasi 3,7 miliardi di euro.

Americani campioni di Etf. Lyxor Asset Management, assieme agli Etf Ishares di Barclays Global Investors (Bgi), si colloca ai primi posti in Europa nel settore. Ma è Bgi che detiene lo scettro a livello internazionale con 382 miliardi di dollari di masse, seguita da State Street Global Advisors. Da segnalare che sono gli investitori Usa i più innamorati del prodotto. Negli Stati Uniti, a fine settembre, i patrimoni gestiti superavano i 530 miliardi di dollari contro i 125 miliardi (sempre in dollari) dell'Europa e i 38 del Giappone.

Sforbiciata ai costi. A monte di tale «innamoramento finanziario» vi sono di certo i bassi costi. Niente gestori da pagare e dunque commissioni meno onerose. Nel report elaborato dall'analista di Morgan Stanley, Deborah Fuhr, emerge che le commissioni totali annue degli Etf oscillano fra 0,07% e 1,11% contro una forchetta ben più larga dei fondi tradizionali (0,39%–1,91%). A Milano, i «cloni» hanno costi annui tra 0,16% e 0,9 per cento.

Altri motivi del successo. A sostenere la crescita, secondo Fuhr, vi sarebbero altre cause. Tra queste, il costante aumento del numero di Etf nei portafogli degli investitori istituzionali (fondi pensione, banche, compagnie): l'anno scorso erano 2.200 e il numero è destinato a crescere. Scelta agevolata dalla miriade di prodotti specializzati che sono di volta in volta lanciati dalle principali società del settore. Gli investitori istituzionali hanno, però, le competenze interne per valutare pro e contro: gli Etf, come qualunque altro strumento finanziario, non sono immuni da rischi. Da qui la necessaria attenzione dei risparmiatori al momento dell'acquisto. Sui mercati non ci sono regali. Neanche a Natale.

(tratto da articolo del Sole 24Ore del 15 dicembre 2007)

Iniziamo pure il nuovo anno così come l'abbiamo chiuso, ricordandoci quanto sia importante non perdere di vista i costi di gestione del patrimonio, ma ovviamente anche i rischi degli strumenti finanziari in cui investiamo. Sui mercati finanziari il "Sacro Graal" non esiste, anche se effettivamente è molto facile da vendere (ai risparmiatori)..... o forse no?

BUON ANNO!

jetzt aber zu wesentlichen. die berater erzählten ein wenig über das unternehmen, seine werte, die organisation in drei teile und den bearatungsansatz "collaborative business experience", also die enge zusammenarbeit mit dem kunden auf dem projekt. kann man aber alles auf der homepage des unternehmens nachlesen. außerdem wurde das hauseigene schloss bei paris angepriesen, dass als zentrum für fortbildungen genutzt wird. bei capgemini wird besonders wert darauf gelegt, dass die berater nur vier tage die woche beim kunden sind und den fünften tag im homeoffice oder büro arbeiten. der übliche berater blues also. nach meinen insiderinformationen zu folge soll ein berater bei capgemini 45.000 euro einstiegsgehalt verdienten (stand: dezember 2007). recht wenig also, bei einer schufterei von 50-60 stunden in der woche (nach angaben von capgemini) mehr zu einstiegsgehältern gibts bei mosworld. capgemini will in den nächsten jahren deutlich wachsen. also sind die chancen eingestellt zu werden gar nicht so schlecht. viel erfolg!

zum case: es handelte sich um einen internationsalisierungscase im diensleistungsbereich eines oem. das beispiel war vereinfachend einem echten projekt nachempfunden wie es capgemini beim kunden wirklich durchgeführt hat. zum einen sollte herausgefunden werden welche dienstleistungen ins ausland verlagert werden sollten, zum anderen wohin sie verlagert werden sollen. über den case will ich hier gar nicht mehr verraten. nur so viel sei gesagt: mit dem üblichen squeaker insider dossier für bewerber bei unternehmensberatungen ließ er sich nicht lösen. die teilnehmer wurden in zwei gruppen aufgeteilt, für den case gab es dann drei stunden bearbeitungszeit, die lösung wurden vor allen vorgetragen. hierbei versuchten es einiger egozentrische gruppenteilnehmer auch die arbeit von einzelpersonen innerhalb der eigenen gruppe zu torpedieren. kam nicht so gut an! anschließend wurde von den beartern die lösung des case präsentiert und ein gruppenfeedback gegeben.

alles in allem für mich ein gelungener tag. die beater waren nett und freundlich und beantworteten viele fragen. während der ganze veranstaltung gabe es kaffee, getränke und buffet. im anschluss gab es außerdem ein abendbuffet mit einem glas champagner. aufgefallen war mir, dass die berater uns während der ganzen veranstaltung oder dannach nicht das branchenübliche "du" anboten. das hatten früher oder später alle beratungshäußer bei denen ich zu gast war gemacht. die berater wirkten distanziert, aber trotzdem sehr professionel. als kritikpunkt sei vermerkt, dass die auswahl der teilnehmer in zukunft etwas anders ablaufen sollte (siehe oben), damit einige in höhstem grade ungeeignete personen der veranstaltung fernbleiben.

No Brasil, são 13 empresas: Vale, Petrobrás, Embraer, Gerdau, Votorantim, Braskem, Sadia, Perdigão, Natura, Coteminas, WEG, JBS-Friboi e Marcopolo. Destas, APENAS UMA É ESTATAL.

Todas as demais são empresas privadas.

Duas delas (Vale e Embraer) foram privatizadas (na época de FHC). Que foi criticado (ainda é, até hoje), chamado de "privatista"; muita gente, por pura falta de conhecimentos, acreditou quando o PT colou a pecha de "privatista" no picolé de chuchu (Alckmin) nas últimas eleições. O PT usou e abusou da burrice de muita gente, que simplesmente nunca entendeu o que foi a privatização - e, por alguma razão obscura, acha que é algo parecido a "entregar o Brasil" ao "poder imperialista" ou bobagem que o valha.
Cadê os bitolados defensores da estatização ?

Será que a Vale do Rio Doce constaria desta lista se ainda fosse estatal ? Será que aqueles mentecaPTos ainda querem reestatizar a Vale ?

More than anything else, students who will graduate in 2008 from the six Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) want to become management consultants. That’s the finding of the Nielsen Campus Track B-school Survey 2007, a survey of 349 students from the IIMs who will graduate in 2008.

The Boston Consulting Group Inc., McKinsey & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. are among the preferred employers at the IIMs. However, McKinsey was considered a “dream company” by 40% of the respondents.

I dont find the above results surprising. Consulting and Finance is where the money is and with more and more FIIs and their liquidity chasing the stocks in the ever booming BSE Sensex, almost all the investment banks have setup shops in India. And they are slowly but surely muscling out the traditional FMCG, Pharma, Manufacturing, Auto, Retail sector giants and offering better growth options and more money for the students.

These are probably the only times when i would want to go back to school. Heh

+++

Jack Lowe, president of the Dallas ISD Board of Trustees; Marcia Page, President and CEO of the Foundation for Community Empowerment; and representatives from Boston Consulting Group will also attend.