Företagskulturens betydelse för lönsamheten

Posted in Aktuellt, Customer care / Kundvård, Executive Team / Ledningsgruppsarbete, Fact Based Management, Leadership / Ledarskap on March 2nd, 2016 by admin

Sex steg till en lönsam företagskultur

En stor del av ett företags lönsamhet går att härleda till företagskulturen, skriver Talent Management-experten Sofie König.

Ju längre in i kunskapsekonomin vi kommer, desto viktigare blir väl fungerande och presterande medarbetare som företagets främsta konkurrensmedel. De flesta företagsledare håller med i teorin men fokuserar ofta i praktiken mest på att utveckla strategier och produkter.

När det kommer till kritan så är det är alltid medarbetarna som gör den stora skillnaden. Och skillnaden består av handlingar och beteenden som formar företagets kultur. Kulturen får sin näring av att alla medarbetare på företaget aktivt bidrar till företagets utveckling. Kulturer, liksom människor, är föränderliga och behöver ständigt utvecklas och vårdas för att fortsätta vara starka.

images (8)Det som särskiljer de framgångsrika företagskulturerna, det vill säga de företag som präglas av motiverade och högpresterande medarbetare och nöjda och lojala kunder, starka varumärken och god lönsamhet är tydlighet. Tydlighet kring varför företaget finns, vilka värderingar som råder och vart företaget är på väg. De ser visionen och kulturarbetet som en tillgång och en ständigt pågående arbetsprocess för att fortsätta vara framgångsrika. Där lägger de sitt fokus.

En stor del av ett företags lönsamhet går att härleda till just företagskulturen. Harvard professorn Jim Heskett har funnit att så mycket som hälften av skillnaden i rörelseresultat mellan företag i samma bransch kan hänföras till effektiva kulturer. Varför det?

Engagerade och motiverade medarbetare är mer benägna att stanna kvar i en organisation vars kultur och värderingar ligger i linje med medarbetarens egna värderingar. Detta leder till färre externrekryteringar och fler internrekryteringar, vilket i sin tur resulterar i lägre lönekostnader för talanger, lägre rekryteringskostnader och lägre utbildningskostnader. Det i sin tur leder också till högre produktivitet, färre förlorade affärer och högre omsättning per anställd.

En högre anställningskontinuitet i sin tur leder till bättre kundrelationer som bidrar till ökad kundlojalitet och lägre kostnader för marknadsföring.

Det finns några indikatorer för företagsledningen att ha koll på för att säkerställa att företagskulturen är värdeskapande:
– Personalomsättning bland företagets högpresterare
– Nöjda kunder
– Rekommendationer
– Åtgärder kring innovation/ständiga förbättringar
– Ökad eller minskar produktivitet
Om något av detta börjar försämras är det hög tid att se över värderingar och beteenden i syfte att utveckla företagskulturen, så att den bättre stödjer företagets affärmål och därmed bidrar positivt till lönsamheten. Hur säkerställer ni kontinuerlig utveckling av er företagskultur?

Sofie König har en magisterexamen i ekonomi och har arbetat med marknadsföring inom många stora företag, som SAS, Kanal 5 och Telia. Hon är en av grundarna till eWork och har mångårig erfarenhet i frågor som rör marknadspositionering, företagskultur, arbetsgivarvarumärke och målstyrning från framför allt snabbväxande och innovativa tillväxtbolag inom branscher som online marknadsföring, retail, Business Intelligence och konsultbranschen. I dag arbetar Sofie med Talent Management på Stardust Consulting.

6 användbara steg till att utveckla en mer lönsam företagskultur:
1. Få en engagerande och motiverande vision på plats.
2. Gör en kulturanalys för att veta var vi står just nu. Vilka värderingar, beteenden och attityder råder i er organisation
3. Identifiera och ta fram själva värdegrunden.
4. Omsätt värdeorden som tagits fram i arbetet med värdegrunden till konkreta beteenden
5. Införliva värdegrunden i företagets olika processer och aktiviteter
6. Följ upp!

Källa: Realtid.se, 2 mars 2016
Länk
Läs mer om Sofie König här
Hur följer ni de indikatorer som beskrivs ovan? Läs mer om hur 3S kan stödja ert arbete med att utveckla en värdedrivande organisation via Fact Based Management här.

Fact Based Management!

Posted in Aktuellt, Fact Based Management, Försäljning / Sales on June 3rd, 2015 by admin

1331db08-332e-4964-910f-9147163a842c-medium

For more reading about Facts about customers, market and competitors …

The four global forces breaking all the trends

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Executive Team / Ledningsgruppsarbete, Fact Based Management, Strategy implementation / Strategiimplementering, Technology on May 21st, 2015 by admin

The world economy’s operating system is being rewritten. In this exclusive excerpt from the new book No Ordinary Disruption, its authors explain the trends reshaping the world and why leaders must adjust to a new reality.

GT 2In the Industrial Revolution of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, one new force changed everything. Today our world is undergoing an even more dramatic transition due to the confluence of four fundamental disruptive forces—any of which would rank among the greatest changes the global economy has ever seen. Compared with the Industrial Revolution, we estimate that this change is happening ten times faster and at 300 times the scale, or roughly 3,000 times the impact. Although we all know that these disruptions are happening, most of us fail to comprehend their full magnitude and the second- and third-order effects that will result. Much as waves can amplify one another, these trends are gaining strength, magnitude, and influence as they interact with, coincide with, and feed upon one another. Together, these four fundamental disruptive trends are producing monumental change.

1. Beyond Shanghai: The age of urbanization
The first trend is the shifting of the locus of economic activity and dynamism to emerging markets like China and to cities within those markets. These emerging markets are going through simultaneous industrial and urban revolutions, shifting the center of the world economy east and south at a speed never before witnessed. As recently as 2000, 95 percent of the Fortune Global 500—the world’s largest international companies including Airbus, IBM, Nestlé, Shell, and The Coca-Cola Company, to name a few—were headquartered in developed economies. By 2025, when China will be home to more large companies than either the United States or Europe, we expect nearly half of the world’s large companies—defined as those with revenue of $1 billion or more—to be headquartered in emerging markets. “Over the years, people in our headquarters, in Frankfurt, started complaining to me, ‘We don’t see you much around here anymore,’” said Josef Ackermann, the former chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. “Well, there was a reason why: growth has moved elsewhere—to Asia, Latin America, the Middle East.”

Perhaps equally important, the locus of economic activity is shifting within these markets. The global urbanGT 3 population has been rising by an average of 65 million people annually during the past three decades, the equivalent of adding seven Chicagos a year, every year. Nearly half of global GDP growth between 2010 and 2025 will come from 440 cities in emerging markets—95 percent of them small- and medium-size cities that many Western executives may not even have heard of and couldn’t point to on a map.1 Yes, Mumbai, Dubai, and Shanghai are familiar. But what about Hsinchu, in northern Taiwan? Brazil’s Santa Catarina state, halfway between São Paulo and the Uruguayan border? Or Tianjin, a city that lies around 120 kilometers southeast of Beijing? In 2010, we estimated that the GDP of Tianjin was around $130 billion, making it around the same size as Stockholm, the capital of Sweden. By 2025, we estimate that the GDP of Tianjin will be around $625 billion—approximately that of all of Sweden.

2. The tip of the iceberg: Accelerating technological change
The second disruptive force is the acceleration in the scope, scale, and economic impact of technology. Technology—from the printing press to the steam engine and the Internet—has always been a great force in overturning the status quo. The difference today is the sheer ubiquity of technology in our lives and the speed of change. It took more than 50 years after the telephone was invented until half of American homes had one. It took radio 38 years to attract 50 million listeners. But Facebook attracted 6 million users in its first year and that number multiplied 100 times over the next five years. China’s mobile text- and voice-messaging service WeChat has 300 million users, more than the entire adult population of the United States. Accelerated adoption invites accelerated innovation. In 2009, two years after the iPhone’s launch, developers had created around 150,000 applications. By 2014, that number had hit 1.2 million, and users had downloaded more than 75 billion total apps, more than ten for every person on the planet. As fast as innovation has multiplied and spread in recent years, it is poised to change and grow at an exponential speed beyond the power of human intuition to anticipate.

Processing power and connectivity are only part of the story. Their impact is multiplied by the concomitant data revolution, which places unprecedented amounts of information in the hands of consumers and businesses alike, and the proliferation of technology-enabled business models, from online retail platforms like Alibaba to car-hailing apps like Uber. Thanks to these mutually amplifying forces, more and more people will enjoy a golden age of gadgetry, of instant communication, and of apparently boundless information. Technology offers the promise of economic progress for billions in emerging economies at a speed that would have been unimaginable without the mobile Internet. Twenty years ago, less than 3 percent of the world’s population had a mobile phone; now two-thirds of the world’s population has one, and one-third of all humans are able to communicate on the Internet.2 Technology allows businesses such as WhatsApp to start and gain scale with stunning speed while using little capital. Entrepreneurs and start-ups now frequently enjoy advantages over large, established businesses. The furious pace of technological adoption and innovation is shortening the life cycle of companies and forcing executives to make decisions and commit resources much more quickly.

3. Getting old isn’t what it used to be: Responding to the challenges of an aging world
The human population is getting older. Fertility is falling, and the world’s population is graying dramatically. While aging has been evident in developed economies for some time—Japan and Russia have seen their populations decline over the past few years—the demographic deficit is now spreading to China and soon will reach Latin America. For the first time in human history, aging could mean that the planet’s population will plateau in most of the world. Thirty years ago, only a small share of the global population lived in the few countries with fertility rates substantially below those needed to replace each generation—2.1 children per woman. But by 2013, about 60 percent of the world’s population lived in countries with fertility rates below the replacement rate. This is a sea change. The European Commission expects that by 2060, Germany’s population will shrink by one-fifth, and the number of people of working age will fall from 54 million in 2010 to 36 million in 2060, a level that is forecast to be less than France’s. China’s labor force peaked in 2012, due to income-driven demographic trends. In Thailand, the fertility rate has fallen from 5 in the 1970s to 1.4 today. A smaller workforce will place a greater onus on productivity for driving growth and may cause us to rethink the economy’s potential. Caring for large numbers of elderly people will put severe pressure on government finances.

4. Trade, people, finance, and data: Greater global connections
The final disruptive force is the degree to which the world is much more connected through trade and through movements in capital, people, and information (data and communication)—what we call “flows.” Trade and finance have long been part of the globalization story but, in recent decades, there’s been a significant shift. Instead of a series of lines connecting major trading hubs in Europe and North America, the global trading system has expanded into a complex, intricate, sprawling web. Asia is becoming the world’s largest trading region. “South–south” flows between emerging markets have doubled their share of global trade over the past decade. The volume of trade between China and Africa rose from $9 billion in 2000 to $211 billion in 2012. Global capital flows expanded 25 times between 1980 and 2007. More than one billion people crossed borders in 2009, over five times the number in 1980. These three types of connections all paused during the global recession of 2008 and have recovered only slowly since. But the links forged by technology have marched on uninterrupted and with increasing speed, ushering in a dynamic new phase of globalization, creating unmatched opportunities, and fomenting unexpected volatility.

Resetting intuition
These four disruptions gathered pace, grew in scale, and started collectively to have a material impact on the world economy around the turn of the 21st century. Today, they are disrupting long-established patterns in virtually every market and every sector of the world economy—indeed, in every aspect of our lives. Everywhere we look, they are GT 1causing trends to break down, to break up, or simply to break. The fact that all four are happening at the same time means that our world is changing radically from the one in which many of us grew up, prospered, and formed the intuitions that are so vital to our decision making.

This can play havoc with forecasts and pro forma plans that were made simply by extrapolating recent experience into the near and distant future. Many of the assumptions, tendencies, and habits that had long proved so reliable have suddenly lost much of their resonance. We’ve never had more data and advice at our fingertips—literally. The iPhone or the Samsung Galaxy contains far more information and processing power than the original supercomputer. Yet we work in a world in which even, perhaps especially, professional forecasters are routinely caught unawares. That’s partly because intuition still underpins much of our decision making.

Our intuition has been formed by a set of experiences and ideas about how things worked during a time when changes were incremental and somewhat predictable. Globalization benefited the well established and well connected, opening up new markets with relative ease. Labor markets functioned quite reliably. Resource prices fell. But that’s not how things are working now—and it’s not how they are likely to work in the future. If we look at the world through a rearview mirror and make decisions on the basis of the intuition built on our experience, we could well be wrong. In the new world, executives, policy makers, and individuals all need to scrutinize their intuitions from first principles and boldly reset them if necessary. This is especially true for organizations that have enjoyed great success.

While it is full of opportunities, this era is deeply unsettling. And there is a great deal of work to be done. We need to realize that much of what we think we know about how the world works is wrong; to get a handle on the disruptive forces transforming the global economy; to identify the long-standing trends that are breaking; to develop the courage and foresight to clear the intellectual decks and prepare to respond. These lessons apply as much to policy makers as to business executives, and the process of resetting your internal navigation system can’t begin soon enough.

There is an urgent imperative to adjust to these new realities. Yet, for all the ingenuity, inventiveness, and imagination of the human race, we tend to be slow to adapt to change. There is a powerful human tendency to want the future to look much like the recent past. On these shoals, huge corporate vessels have repeatedly foundered. Revisiting our assumptions about the world we live in—and doing nothing—will leave many of us highly vulnerable. Gaining a clear-eyed perspective on how to negotiate the changing landscape will help us prepare to succeed.

Source: McKinsey.com, April 2015
By: Richard Dobbs, James Manyika, and Jonathan Woetzel
About the authors: Richard Dobbs is a director of the McKinsey Global Institute and a director in McKinsey’s London office, James Manyika is a director of the McKinsey Global Institute and a director in the San Francisco office, and Jonathan Woetzel is a director of the McKinsey Global Institute and a director in the Shanghai office.
Link

Hur levererar man i linje med ägarnas förväntningar?

Posted in Aktuellt, Board work / Styrelsearbete, Executive Coaching, Executive Team / Ledningsgruppsarbete, Fact Based Management, Leadership / Ledarskap, Strategy implementation / Strategiimplementering on May 12th, 2015 by admin

I arbetet med styrelser och ledningsgrupper blir det allt mer uppenbart hur viktigt det är att både styrelsen och den operativa ledningen (VDn med sin ledningsgrupp) har en samsyn vad gäller bolagets kort- och långsiktiga målsättningar, strategi för framgång, marknadsförutsättningar samt kund- och marknadsförutsättningar.

150310 (4)   PS svJust samsynen mellan styrelse och operativ ledning är av avgörande betydelse. Men också samsynen (”alignment”) inom styrelsen (t.ex. ordförande vs. övriga ledamöter) och ledningsgruppen (t.ex. VD vs. övriga ledningsgruppsmedlemmar).
Sverige ligger idag långt framme i arbetet med att utveckla styrelsearbetet. En avgörande faktor är att styrelser i mycket hög grad genomför årliga styrelseutvärderingar. Baserat på resultatet tas beslut om hur styrelsens arbete kan effektiviseras ytterligare. Baserat på konkreta fokusområden och väl definierade mål följs sedan utvecklingen upp på årlig basis.

Hur fungerar det då i svenska ledningsgrupper? Jag kan konstatera att det är ganska klent ställt med faktabaserade utvecklingsinsatser. Väldigt få ledningsgrupper arbetar med regelbundna (årliga) kartläggningar av sitt arbete och mycket av arbetet sker följaktligen mycket traditionellt och slentrianmässigt. Och det trots den ökande betydelsen av ledningsgruppens effektivitet.

Känner du igen dig? Har du en känsla av att ni skulle kunna få ut mer kraft och engagemang i ledningsgruppens arbete? Eller vill du veta mer om hur du kan utveckla din ledningsgrupp eller styrelse och hur en styrelse- eller ledningsgruppsutvärdering går till?

Tveka inte att kontakta mig för ett förutsättningslöst möte.

Hard facts about sales!

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Fact Based Management, Försäljning / Sales on March 29th, 2015 by admin

Sales

The dawn of marketing’s new golden age

Posted in Aktuellt, Customer care / Kundvård, Fact Based Management, Försäljning / Sales on March 4th, 2015 by admin

Science has permeated marketing for decades. Fans of the television drama Mad Men saw a fictionalized encounter when an IBM System/360 mainframe computer physically displaced the creative department of a late-1960s advertising agency. In reality, though, the 1960s through the early 1990s witnessed a happy marriage of advertising and technology as marketers mastered both the medium of television and the science of Nielsen ratings. These years gave birth to iconic advertising messages in categories ranging from sparkling beverages (“I’d like to buy the world a Coke”) to credit cards (“American Express. Don’t leave home without it”) to air travel (“British Airways: the world’s favourite airline”).

Until recently, marketers could be forgiven for looking back wistfully at this golden age as new forces reshaped their world into something completely different. These new trends include a massive proliferation of television and online channels, the transformation of the home PC into a retail channel, the unrelenting rise of mobile social media and gaming, and—with all these trends—a constant battle for the consumer’s attention.

mafö 3The resulting expansion of platforms has propelled consistent growth in marketing expenditures, which now total as much as $1 trillion globally. The efficacy of this spending is under deep scrutiny. For example, in a survey of CEOs, close to three out of four agreed with the following statement: marketers “are always asking for more money, but can rarely explain how much incremental business this money will generate.”

Chief marketing officers (CMOs), it appears, don’t disagree: in another recent survey, just over one-third said they had quantitatively proved the impact of their marketing outlays.
Paradoxically, though, CEOs are looking to their CMOs more than ever, because they need top-line growth and view marketing as a critical lever to help them achieve it. Can marketers deliver amid ongoing performance pressures?

In this article, we’ll explain why we think the answer is yes—and why we are, in fact, on the cusp of a new golden age for marketing. At the core of the new era are five elements that are simultaneously familiar and fast changing. The first two are the science and substance of marketing. Leading marketers are using research and analytics to shed light on who buys what, and why; who influences buyers; and when, in the consumer decision journey, marketing efforts are likely to yield the greatest return. That understanding, in turn, is making it possible for marketers to identify more effectively the functional benefits that customers need, the experiences they want, and the innovations they will value.

But this isn’t just another missive on the power of big data. Organizational simplicity is fueling speed, and story is pulling things together while inspiring both the customer and the organization. Happily, the story just seems to get better as creative minds express themselves through digital means, and it then echoes and expands through social media and user-generated content. As you’ll see, the emerging new rules for marketing extend well beyond data and analysis, crucial though those are, and even transcend the marketing organization itself.

Science
Advances in data, modeling, and automated analysis are creating ever more refined ways of targeting and measuring the returns on marketing investments, while generating powerful new clues about why consumers behave as they do. Long gone is spending guided mostly by intuition and focus groups. Instead, organizations are seeking greater precision by measuring and managing the consumer decision points where well-timed outlays can make the biggest difference.

Big data is a term that’s often used to describe this transition. But it’s not just big data; it’s also big research. A major consumer company investigating the decision journey for its products recently undertook a consumer study, collected through online surveys, on a massive scale and at a speed that would have been unimaginable in the days of mall-intercept interviews. The project, which involved more than 10,000 surveys over the course of a month, uncovered material differences between how the company and consumers were thinking about the category, while also explaining what drives choice at each stage of the journey. These insights are now being used to change brand strategy, product-portfolio design, and marketing campaigns. The potential impact runs into billions of dollars in additional revenue.

While much recent marketing science has played out in the measurement and targeting of advertising and promotion expenditures, many consumer companies are increasing their focus on in-store behavior: how promotions, traffic flows, and physical engagement with products affect sales. Capturing and analyzing data on such issues has become more feasible in recent years thanks to low-cost sensors that can be embedded in products, as well as the ability to capture and analyze huge amounts of unstructured data from store videos—and even to track shoppers’ eye movements.

The impact goes beyond marketing and product teams. Marketing science is boosting the precision of real-time operating decisions. At a major hospitality company, marketing analysts are able tomafö 1 get a read on the performance of a particular property or category over a weekend and then drill down on individual customer segments to assess how to make improvements. If the data show that a profitable segment of weekend travelers are shortening their stays, the company can create special offers (such as late checkouts or room upgrades) to encourage repeat business.

Or consider how one industrial-products company revamped its highly fragmented portfolio of more than 500 SKUs sold to customers in a diverse set of industries. Prices varied widely even for the same products, without any clear reasons as to why, hindering efforts to manage margins. An analytical tool that could scan 1.3 million transactions helped the company redraw customer segments, identify products with opportunities for pricing flexibility, and recommend new prices. Ultimately, it reset about 100,000 price points.

More scientific marketing means that CMOs and other senior leaders need enhanced analytical skills to exploit data possibilities more fully and stay ahead of the whirl of developments. One CEO we know believes it’s time to create a position—marketing technology officer (MTO)—that’s rooted both in technology and domain knowledge. Knowing what can be automated, when judgment is required, and where to seek and place new technical talent are becoming increasingly central to effective marketing leadership. That is intensifying the war for specialized talent as traditional marketing powerhouses bid against high-tech companies for needed skills.

Substance
As more advanced marketing science and analytics take hold, they are making it increasingly natural for marketing to go beyond messaging and to shape the substance of the business, particularly the experiences of customers, the delivery of functional benefits, and the drive to develop new products and services. Armed with information about customers and a company’s relationships with them, the CMO is well-positioned to help differentiate its products, services, and experiences.

That’s good, because digital innovation, transparency, and customer-centricity have raised expectations across the board. In automobiles, as sensor technologies proliferate and onboard computing power increases, consumers are now starting to expect that collision-avoidance and digitally-enabled safety systems will become part of manufacturers’ offerings. (Luxury carmakers already are making sophisticated safety options part of their marketing story.) In retail, brands like H&M, Topshop, Uniqlo, and Zara have harnessed the consumer’s desire to have it all by bringing mass-market prices to the colors, fabrics, and designs of high fashion. Simultaneously, Amazon and other digital players are pressuring brick-and-mortar retailers, which are responding both by retooling their supply chains to enable faster restocking and one-day delivery and by creating new advertising messages around the in-store pickup of online orders.

Marketers are well placed to help their organizations meet the rising bar by, for example, making the case for customer-care initiatives and for consistency in the customer experience. A better one became the heart of a marketing campaign at European energy supplier Essent, a subsidiary of RWE. To ensure that the company delivered on the promise, the CEO named the chief of marketing to lead the initiative. Among the successes: making customer onboarding less cumbersome by cutting process steps from seven to two. Marketing also took the lead in efforts to create new products that customers wanted. The CMO led a cross-functional team of sales, IT, and product development to produce Essent’s smart, Internet-connected E-thermostat, for instance. Some of its functionality was cocreated with customers.

Similarly, marketing has taken a leadership role in designing and setting standards for Daimler’s highly digital customer-experience brand, “Mercedes me.” The digital platform provides customers with automated appointment booking, personalized financing, a chance to cocreate ideas, access to maintenance data from sensor-enabled automobile diagnostics, and even quick access to Daimler’s car-sharing and taxi services—for use on business trips, for example. (See “Marketing the Mercedes way” for more on the role of marketing at the company.)

These efforts and many more like them are extending marketing into the guts of the business, and most would not have been possible just a few years ago. The power of today’s digital tools and the scientific approaches they make possible are not only enabling a more substantial role for marketing but also giving it opportunities for real-time impact.

Story
Even as marketing reaches new heights with technology-enabled measurement, the importance of the story hasn’t diminished. But ways to tell it are morphing continually as the stuff of storytelling encompasses richer digital interactions, and mobile devices become more powerful communications tools. In this world, creativity is in greater demand than ever.

Google’s “Dear Sophie” advertisement is an example of the modern art form. It tells the story of a father writing to his daughter as she grows up, with the narrative demonstrating how Google search, Gmail, and YouTube can be new channels of human connectivity.

(For more on how Google seeks to connect, see “How Google breaks through.”) P&G’s “Pick Them Back Up” spot for the Sochi Olympics (part of the ongoing “Thank You, Mom” campaign) is another moving story. It dramatizes the moms who were there for their kids throughout the years of hard training, who picked them up when they fell, and who deserve celebration as the unsung heroines. It’s hard to watch these commercials and not tear up, at least a little.

mafö 2Chanel’s recent launch of the new No. 5 perfume offers a good window on how stories are evolving beyond traditional video. Over a decade after their first collaboration, creative chief Karl Lagerfeld has again partnered with film director Baz Luhrmann to produce a short film on a woman whose lifestyle embodies the brand. Their latest effort—“The one that I want”—stars model Gisele Bündchen and features the perfume, along with clothing and other Chanel products. Beyond the film itself, a series of YouTube videos extend the campaign with shorts on the making of the film, interviews with Luhrmann on both projects, behind-the-scenes footage from Chanel’s studio, and more.

All of this is designed to amplify the lifestyle message of the fragrance’s launch in a way that traditional TV or print couldn’t accomplish.

New media also dictate that marketers relinquish control of the story as digital interactions with customers become more frequent. Customers want to interact with stories and modify them on social media. Following the kinds of story rules that once made board members and CEOs comfortable is no longer feasible. Social-media programs are consuming a larger share of many marketing budgets. A number of major consumer companies are using interaction centers to monitor and participate in social-media conversations as they develop, sometimes including the promotion of discussions on corporate social-media channels.

Agency-management issues also are an important piece of the puzzle. Talent scarcity, evolving digital storytelling, and perceived institutional rigidities have opened new debates about the best ways to access creativity. Some companies, like Chanel, are enhancing their control over the story with supplemental digital content. Other global marketing leaders are bringing in-house more of their story muscle, particularly when it involves lighter message content for social media. Agencies are responding. Many are acquiring more digital talent and working to break down silos to overcome perceptions that they are actually geared to bigger productions and may lack the digital and story skills to handle new content in an agile, integrated way. All this is very much in flux, suggesting that leaders who aren’t asking fundamental questions about the roles of (and fit between) agencies and internal marketing teams stand the risk of being left behind.

Speed
In a digital economy, marketing is no longer a “batch” process but a continuous one. Consumer preferences change with stunning velocity, as do the dynamics of markets and product life cycles. This culture of urgency means that marketers need a new agility, plus the management skills and organizational clout to bring other functions together at a higher clock speed.

How speed is achieved, of course, will vary by company and industry. A number of CMOs we know are setting the terms of how functional units should collaborate and spelling out what the entire organization needs to know to get new products to market at a stepped-up pace. In these cases, marketing becomes the glue across the organization, providing oversight and coordination.

To speed up its digital tempo, Nestlé’s marketing organization launched digital-acceleration teams. These specialists train business units and functions in the skills needed to be effective in digital marketing and social communications. Nestlé’s country units have adopted the approach, as well, allowing them to adapt the digital training to local market conditions, while adhering to core, company-wide standards.

At Google, lead times for new products are continually shrinking. Internal teams are attuned to putting products in front of consumers and then, in real time, to bringing back insights in a cycle of testing, learning, and iterating. Marketers are central to this process: they work to develop close relationships with product-development teams in order to inject their knowledge of user needs into how products are developed. That helps create a vision of the product from the user’s eyes, and one that engineering teams are eager to create. Achieving that shared vision between product developers and marketers is a key element of speed in formulating new products and features. The time-to-market benefits of better information and more fluid collaboration extend to a wide range of companies, sectors, and business functions. Consider, for example, how data and collaboration are increasing the speed and agility of B2B sales teams. (For more, see “Do you really understand how your business customers buy?”)

Simplicity
Complexity is the enemy of speed, which is a big reason why a number of leading marketers are reforming their organizations. Too often, expanding geographic footprints, product proliferation, and new arrays of channels and digital specialties have led to complex hierarchies, silos, communication gaps, and redundancies. But these can be tamed.

mafö 4For example, one telecommunications company realized that a cumbersome organizational structure was getting in the way of delivering the top-notch customer service that the CEO had designated as a strategic priority. He created a unit combining existing call centers and a newly formed social-media customer-care group. The leader of the unit reports directly to him. Proximity to the top of the company allows the new team to collaborate more smoothly across the organization, while signaling the importance of the customer experience.

Many consumer marketers are using technology to reduce complexity. They are embracing internal social-media platforms to encourage the generation and sharing of ideas, which helps speed up problem solving across the organization. Daimler, meanwhile, reorganized its marketing and sales departments around the idea of the “best customer experience.” It created a new customer-experience function bundling several headquarters functions into one that maps the entire customer journey, with the goal of locking in a consistent brand experience throughout the world.

Simplifying working relationships with advertising and other media agencies is another goal for many marketing organizations. Trade-offs abound: specialist agencies have expertise in new digital-content formats and delivery channels, but they aren’t always full-service shops. Larger agencies offer more services, but the strengths of many still lie in traditional media. Marketers building teams of employees with strong skills in digital content and delivery are bringing more activities in-house, but bulking up can create complexity and slow things down. And of course, simplicity can’t come at the expense of great creative output.

In our work with global marketers, including many leading-edge practitioners, we are seeing significant progress in each of these five dimensions. As you think about the implications of science, substance, story, speed, and simplicity for your organization, we suggest that you ask yourself five questions:
1.Are we taking advantage of the science of data and research to uncover new insights, or are we working off yesterday’s facts, assertions, and heuristics?
2.Do we fully exploit the power of marketing to enhance the substance—that is, the products, services, and experiences—we offer our customers, or are we just selling hard with a “me-too” mind-set?
3.Do we have a clear brand story that echoes through cyberspace, or do we feel that we aren’t quite capturing hearts and minds?
4.Have we created simplifiers within our organization, or have complex matrices become a logjam?
5.Are we faster or slower to market than our competition?

Although this may seem like a lot to handle, the rapid changes and fast-breaking opportunities facing marketers in the 21st century suggest to us that the best ones will have good answers to all of these questions. In our opinion, those that do will not only enjoy above-market growth, they will define the next golden age of marketing.

Source: McKinsey.com/insight, March 2015
By:Jonathan Gordon and Jesko Perrey
About the authors:Jonathan Gordon is a principal in McKinsey’s New York office, and Jesko Perrey is a director in the Düsseldorf office.
Link

How to drive change successfully

Posted in Aktuellt, Fact Based Management, Leadership / Ledarskap, Strategy implementation / Strategiimplementering on November 2nd, 2014 by admin

Build a change platform, not a change program

It’s not you, it’s your company. Management Innovation eXchange founders Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini believe that continuous improvement requires the creation of change platforms, rather than change programs ordained and implemented from the top.

Transformational-change initiatives have a dismal track record. In 1996, Harvard Business School professor John Kotter claimed that nearly 70 percent of large-scale change programs didn’t meet their goals and virtually every survey since has shown similar results. Why is change so confounding? We don’t think the issue lies with an understanding of its building blocks—Kotter’s classic eight-step change-management model is still a helpful guide. The problem lies in beliefs about who is responsible for launching change and how change is implemented.

change 2The reality is that today’s organizations were simply never designed to change proactively and deeply—they were built for discipline and efficiency, enforced through hierarchy and routinization. As a result, there’s a mismatch between the pace of change in the external environment and the fastest possible pace of change at most organizations. If it were otherwise, we wouldn’t see so many incumbents struggling to intercept the future.

In most organizations, change is regarded as an episodic interruption of the status quo, something initiated and managed from the top. The power to initiate strategic change is concentrated there, and every change program must be endorsed, scripted, and piloted before launch. Transformational change, when it does happen, is typically belated and convulsive—and often commences only after a “regime change.” What’s needed is a real-time, socially constructed approach to change, so that the leader’s job isn’t to design a change program but to build a change platform—one that allows anyone to initiate change, recruit confederates, suggest solutions, and launch experiments.

The problem with change management

Three intertwined assumptions limit the efficacy of the traditional model of change:
Change starts at the top. This mind-set implies that executives have the sole right to initiate deep change and are best placed to judge when it is necessary. Truth is, executives are often the last to know. They are insulated from reality by layers of managers who are often reluctant to sound an alarm. By the time an issue is big enough and unavoidable enough to attract the scarce attention of the CEO, the organization is already playing defense. That’s why most change programs are, in fact, catch-up programs. Moreover, risk-averse executives are seldom willing to launch a company-wide change program that ventures beyond the safe precincts of best practice. The result: change programs that are too little, too late.

Change is rolled out. When change is imposed from above, with both ends and means prescribed, it’s rarely embraced. Traditional change programs fail to harness the discretionary creativity and energy of employees and often generate cynicism and resistance. Senior executives talk about the need to get buy-in, but genuine buy-in is the product of involvement, not slick packaging and communication. To be embraced, a change effort must be socially constructed in a process that gives everyone the right to set priorities, diagnose barriers, and generate options. Despite assertions to the contrary, people aren’t against change—they are against royal edicts. The alternative: change that’s rolled up, not rolled out.

Change is engineered. The phrase “change management” implies that deep change can be managed, like a large-scale construction project or an IT overhaul. But if change is truly transformational—if it breaks new ground—it can’t be predetermined. Think for a moment about how our lives have been changed by the social web—Facebook, Pinterest, Snapchat, Twitter, and all the rest. No single individual or entity invented the social web. It emerged, in all its weird and wonderful variety, because the Internet is a powerful platform for making connections and because thousands of entrepreneurs were free to develop new business models to harness that power. When change programs are engineered, the solution space is limited by what people at the top can imagine. A change platform, by contrast, gives everyone the right to suggest strategic alternatives. The advantage: options that are diverse, radical, and nuanced.

Reimagining the model for change
Management literature is rich with case studies of bottom-up, spontaneous change and of product and business innovation sparked by the efforts of frontline activists.3
Inspiring as such stories are, however, few of these efforts effect systemic change across an entire organization. Internal activism and small wins don’t easily scale. Neither do they address the core management systems, processes, and cultural norms that dictate how large organizations run.

The challenge is to tackle deep change for tough systemic issues in a way that avoids the pitfalls of traditional change programs. Put another way: how do you create platforms for sustained company-wide conversations that can amplify weak signals and support the complex problem solving needed to address core management challenges?

We believe that three shifts in approach are necessary:
From top-down to activist-out. Transformational change conventionally starts at the top because companies haven’t enabled it to start anywhere else. To make deep change proactive and pervasive, the responsibility for initiating change needs to be syndicated across the organization. For instance, it was a small group of trainee clinicians, young leaders, and improvement facilitators in Britain’s National Health Service who developed and ran NHS Change Day 2013—the biggest improvement effort in the history of the NHS. Internal activists, multiplying their impact through social media, spawned a grassroots movement of 189,000 people who pledged to take concrete action to improve healthcare outcomes. When Change Day was repeated this year, the number of pledges exceeded 800,000. Change Day has enabled everyone to be a change leader and improved the care of patients.

From sold to invited. Transformational change cannot be sustained without genuine commitment on the part of those who will be most affected. This commitment is best achieved by bidding out the¨Change 1 change program’s “how” to everyone in the organization. Consider the approach that fast-growing medical-device company Nuvasive took to reengineer its supply chain. Instead of appointing a task force of senior leaders, the CEO invited the entire company to “hack” the customer-fulfillment process. Associates from around the organization, supported by a small coordination team and volunteer coaches, eagerly contributed to a process that generated a common view of the problem (from the front line up), a set of shared aspirations for world-class performance, and a portfolio of new initiatives to achieve it.

From managed to organic. Psychologist Kurt Lewin’s seminal “unfreeze-change-freeze” model still guides how most leaders think about change. But in a world that’s relentlessly evolving, anything that is frozen soon becomes irrelevant. What we need instead is constant experimentation—with new operating models, business models, and management models. Not freeze and refreeze, but “permanent slush.” This approach means placing less emphasis on building a powerful project-management office and more on building self-organizing communities that identify, experiment, and eventually scale new initiatives. At Cemex, the global cement and building-materials company with revenue of $15 billion in 2013, self-defined communities generate and implement thousands of change initiatives each year. For example, the ReadyMix Network, which brings together specialists from more than 50 counties, was instrumental in developing the company’s first global brands and related value-added services, which now account for a third of Cemex’s total revenue. The lesson? Change comes naturally when individuals have a platform that allows them to identify shared interests and to brainstorm solutions.

Change platforms take advantage of social technologies that make large-scale collaboration easy and effective. But they are qualitatively different from the idea wikis and social networks commonly used today. The difference isn’t primarily about specific features; rather, it’s in the encouragement individuals are given to use the platform to drive deep change. Specifically, effective change platforms:
•encourage individuals to tackle significant organizational challenges; that is, those that are typically considered beyond an employee’s “pay grade” or sphere of influence
•foster honest and forthright discussion of root causes and, in the process, develop a shared view of the thorniest barriers
•elicit dozens (if not hundreds) of potential solutions rather than seeking to coalesce prematurely around a single approach; the goal is first to diverge, then to converge
•focus on generating a portfolio of experiments that can be conducted locally to help prove or disprove the components of a more general solution, as opposed to developing a single grand design
•encourage individuals to take personal responsibility for initiating the change they want to see and give them the resources and tools necessary to spur their thinking and imaginations

Guiding a process of socially constructed change is neither quick nor easy—but it is possible and effective. The biggest obstacles to creating robust change platforms aren’t technical. The challenge lies in shifting the role of the executive from change agent in chief to change enabler in chief. This means devoting leadership attention to the creation of an environment where deep, proactive change can happen anywhere—and at any time—and inspiring the entire organization to swarm the most pressing issues.

Source: McKinsey.com, October 2014
By: Gary hamel and Michele Zanini
About the authors: Gary Hamel is Visiting Professor of Strategic and International Management at the London Business School. He cofounded the Management Innovation eXchange (MIX) with Michele Zanini, who serves as its managing director.
Link

Strategy execution – The scary statistics

Posted in Aktuellt, Executive Team / Ledningsgruppsarbete, Fact Based Management, Strategy implementation / Strategiimplementering on March 11th, 2014 by admin

Those of you who follow my blog are well aware of the difficulties in quickly enough transform adopted strategies to concrete activities. And that despite the fact that just a quick strategy implementation is a key to success in today’s competitive market.

Here is some additional information that reinforces my belief that most companies have a great potential in developing this work:

Most organizations suffer a major disconnect between strategy formulation and its execution.
Boss
And while it’s more pronounced in larger enterprises because of complexity, smaller organizations need to make sure they do something (anything!) to remove the barriers to execution.

Unfortunately, the research doesn’t bode well for most of us. Consider the following:
– 90% of well-formulated strategies fail due to poor execution.
– 60% of typical organizations do not link their strategic priorities to their budget.
– Two-thirds of HR and IT organizations develop strategic plans that are not linked to the organization’s strategy.
– 85% of leadership teams spend less than 1 hour per month discussing strategy.
– Only 27% of a typical company’s employees have access to its strategic plan.
– 70% of middle managers and more than 90% of front-line employees have compensation that is not linked to the strategy.
– Most devastating, 95% of employees do not understand their organization’s strategy.

BOTTOMLINE: Strategy must be managed explicitly, like any other major process in an organization. In most organizations, this process either does not exist or is incomplete. However, 70% of organizations that used a formal process to manage strategy out-performed their peers.

Source: Six Disciples, 5 March 2014
Link
For more reading about strategy implementation – click here.
For more information about how we (3S) help our clients to implement their strategies mote time and cost efficient than their competitors.

Sju saker som iPhone dödat på sju år

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Digitalisering / Internet, Fact Based Management, Technology on January 11th, 2014 by admin

När Steve Jobs presenterade iPhonen för första gången på Mac World i januari 2007 så räknade han med att ha en procent av mobiltelefonmarknaden ett år senare. I dag har iPhone nästan 13 procent av den globala marknaden, men framför allt så har den revolutionerat vår syn på vad en telefon är.

På vägen dit har den dessutom slagit ut ett antal fenomen som vi hade vant oss vid. Här är sju saker som dött på grund av smartphonen:
Papperstidningsläsandet i lokaltrafiken
I begynnelsen var kvällstidningen, sedan kom Metro men nu är det smartphonen som helt dominerar uppmärksamheten för kollektivresenärerna. Det lyssnas, läses, spelas och pratas och de som sitter och läser papperstidningar på väg till och från jobbet kan nu mer räknas på ena handens tumme.

Den enkla digitalkameran
En gång i tiden var Canons IXUS den coolaste kameran man kunde ha i fickan. Nu ligger de enkla digitalkamerorna och skräpar i byrålådor runt om i landet och ingen orkar ha en kamera som inte ens kan ladda upp bilder på Instagram.

MP3-spelaren
När iPod lanserades revolutionerade den musikvärlden och gjorde piratnedladdning till ett begrepp. Men det visade sig att MP3-spelarens tid på jorden skulle bli blott en blinkning. Efter smartphonerevolutionen är marknaden för den lilla portabla spelaren i stort sett utraderad. 13 år efter premiären är det svårt att övertyga någon om varför den behövs.

Väckarklockan
För tjugo år sedan var det tre saker man var tvungen att skaffa när man flyttade till sin första lägenhet: telefonabonnemang, prenumeration på alarmmorgontidning och en väckarklocka. Hur skulle man annars komma upp på morgnarna? Idag är det svårt att förstå varför man behöver en fristående apparat vars enda funktion är att få sovande att vakna.

radioTransistorradion
Att lyssna på radio var som helst var drömmen när Texas Instruments och I.D.E.A. tillsammans skapade den första transistorradion för konsumentbruk 1954. 60 år senare har alla smartphoneanvändare världens alla radiostationer i handen. Och när de analoga sändningarna släcks ner i Sverige om några år kan din gamla apparat möjligen användas som dörrstopp

Den tryckta vägkartan
Kartor är snygga, men handen på hjärtat: är det inte förbaskat skönt att slippa kämpa med att försöka vika ihop en kvadratmeter stor vägkarta i en trång bil? Med GoogleMaps tillgänglig i mobilen får du dessutom reda på hur långt du har kvar, exakt var du är och var närmaste vägkrog ligger.

Bordsskick
Det fanns en tid då det faktiskt kunde uppstå pinsamma tystnader i sällskap som åt tillsammans restauranger. I dag kan vi alltid fly till Facebook,dinner Twitter eller Omni när vi inte har något att säga varandra. Tystnaden är inte längre pinsam, den är ett tillfälle att se vad andra vänner håller på med. Tyvärr har det skett på bekostnad av det artiga i att vara här och nu med sitt sällskap.

Källa: Resume.se, januari 2014
Av: Krsiter Berntsson
Länk

Att öka er produktion (eller motsvarande) med samma eller mindre resurser?

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Fact Based Management, Leadership / Ledarskap, Strategy implementation / Strategiimplementering on November 15th, 2013 by admin

Känner du igen frågeställningen? Det borde du göra. En undersökning som vi just genomfört med 250 chefer visar att drygt 70% ser att man under de kommande åren måste öka sin produktion ( eller motsvarande) med samma, eller minskad, personalstyrka.

engagedHur ska detta gå till? Ja, ett sätt är ju genom ytterligare effektiviseringar av arbetet. Ett annat är att helt enkelt få varje medarbetar att leverera mer. Det bästa sättet här är med största sannolikhet att öka varje enskild medarbetares engagemang.
Min erfarenhet är att det i de allra flesta organisationer redan finns den kompetens som krävs för att kunna öka effektivitet / produktion / leverans med 10-30% genom att säkerställa ett ökat engagemang! Steg ett är att företagsledningen inser detta och som en konsekvens väljer att rent affärsmässigt fokusera detta område.

Bara 16 procent av svenskarna är engagerade i sina jobb visar en global undersökning från Gallup (läs mer nedan).
Då uppkommer genast följande frågor:
1. Hur viktigt är det med ett högt engagemang i just Din verksamhet?
2. Hur ser engagemanget ut idag i er organisation?
3. Hur vet ni?
4. Hur mäter ni detta?
5. Hur belönar ni (eller tvärtom) de chefer eller delar av organisationen som är framgångsrika i detta?
6. Hur utvecklar ni ett ledarskap som fokuserar just detta område?
Trots att de flesta företagsledningar jag arbetar med säger att “det är av avgörande betydelse för vår framgång att vi har ett mycket högt engagemang hos alla medarbetare” har man vare sig tydligt definierade mål, mätsystem på plats eller incitamentsystem kopplade till detta “så avgörande” område.
Slutsatsen är att det är en mycket svag koppling mellan strategi och genomförande (beslut och operativa konsekvenser).

Vi (3S) är specialiserade på att hjälpa våra uppdragsgivare att faktabaserat definiera, målsätta, mäta och följa upp de områden som är avgörande för affärsmässig framgång på dagens ytterst konkurrensutsatta marknad. I de allra flesta uppdrag är just området ”engagemang” en nyckelfråga.
Om Du känner igen Dig i denna situation och skulle vara intresserad av en förutsättningslös dialog kring hur just ni kan ytterligare öka er effektivitet genom ett stärkt internt engagemang hos alla medarbetare är Du välkommen att ta en direktkontakt med mig.

Läs mer om hur det står till med engagemanget på svenska arbetsplatser här:

Så många av dina kollegor struntar i jobbet
Bara 16 procent av svenskarna är engagerade i sina jobb. Det är ändå långt mer än i många andra länder, visar en global undersökning från Gallup.

Gallup delar upp de anställda i tre kategorier; engagerade, inte engagerade och aktivt urkopplade.
De engagerade är kollegorna du gillar. De samarbetar, är entusiastiska och letar ständigt nya vägar att nå bättre resultat. Och de är de enda människorna i en organisation som skapar nya kunder. I denna grupp återfinns bara 16 procent av de anställda i Sverige.
De oengagerade är svårare att upptäcka eftersom de inte stör. De kommer till jobbet och dödar tid i väntan på lunch eller rast. Det här är den stora gruppen av anställda, för Sverige är siffran 73 procent.
Övriga är de aktivt negativa som mer eller mindre är ute för att skada företaget. De upptar chefernas tid, orsakar fler olyckor, producerar med sämre kvalitet och är mer sjuka.

De svenska siffrorna är något bättre än genomsnittet för den 19 undersökta länderna i Västeuropa. I snitt är 14 procent engagerade, 66 procent likgiltiga och 20 procent negativa.
Utbildning ger ofta jobb som skapar tillfredsställelse och engagemang hos den allställde. Men det gäller inte alltid. Lite oväntat visar undersökningen att européer med högre utbildning inte är mer engagerade än lågutbildade.
Det förklarar Gallup med den höga arbetslösheten gör att många utbildade inte får kvalificerade jobb och i stället är missnöjda med sina enklare arbetsuppgifter.

Inställningen till arbetet skiljer sig mellan regioner i världen. I botten kommer Asien, mycket beroende på att kineserna verkar vara minst intresserade av att jobba. Nästan sju av tio kineser bryr sig inte om jobbet, hela 26 procent är så likgiltiga att de snarare förstör sina kollegors ansträngningar.
Kinesernas ointresse för jobbet är genomgående, oavsett vilken typ av jobb eller utbildning man har visar studien där anställda över 18 år har intervjuats.
Kinesiska bolag som vill vinna anseende hos konsumenterna har en del att jobba på, bara 4 procent av anställda inom försäljning och service intresserar sig för jobbet.

Mest intresserade är de anställda i USA och Kanada där 29 procent är engagerade. Näst bäst är Australien och Nya Zeeland med 24 procent.

De anställdas inställning till jobbet sätter också spår i bolagens siffror, hävdar Gallup. Företag med högst engagemang hos personalen har också högre produktivitet, tjänar mer och är omtyckta av kunderna. Dessutom har de lägre frånvaro och färre olyckor än de i botten.

Gallup uppskattar att oengagerade medarbetare kostar USA varje minst 450 miljarder dollar varje år. Tyskland går miste om minst 151 miljarder och Storbritannien 83 miljarder.

Gallup granskar återkommande de anställdas inställning till sina arbeten . I den senaste undersökningen från åren 2011-2012 som nyligen presenterades ingår enkätsvar från 230.000 anställda i 142 länder.

Källa: Di.se, 15 november 2014
Länk