Aug 23, 2023 | Strategy
The libraries written about strategy, the advice, templates, ‘revolutionary’ ideas, and all the rest, have made ‘strategy’ a cliché that means little to most of those trying to run a small business.
How do you get the time to understand, let alone implement all the sage advice given?
The absence of an explicit strategy, something against which you can measure the impact of decisions being made, means you are always at the mercy of immediacy.
Decisions are almost always taken in the absence of full information, and therefore lack certainty. The best we can do is consider probabilities, based on data, domain knowledge, and experience. Having an unambiguous strategy which is understood by all who need to make operational and tactical decisions, irrespective of the level and type of those decisions, removes at least some of the uncertainty. Importantly, it also gives you a means to measure the impact of the choices being made.
The presence of an explicit strategy offers a framework against which to measure any decision being contemplated. This applies equally to the ‘corner office’ decisions, as it does to the operational decisions daily on a factory floor, or office.
‘Will this choice deliver a result that adds to the achievement of the long-term goal?
When the answer is ‘yes’: proceed, with the appropriate due diligence. When the answer is ‘No,’ irrespective of how attractive the opportunity appears in the short term, you should not proceed.
So, how do you fashion a robust strategy?
There are many tools and templates around that will help the thought processes. However, relying on them to give you the answers is a mistake. The best they can do is prompt the questions that need to be answered. Developing a robust strategy, requires a measure of ‘Strategic thinking’, not an easy skill to develop.
Such thinking evolves from consideration of the interaction of the capabilities and aspirations of your business, those of the opposition and potential opposition, and trends in the marketplace likely to impact demand, supply, and how it is satisfied.
‘Strategic thinking’ should not be a once in a year exercise, as it often is. The most successful enterprises find ways to build such thinking into their every-day activities. While the strategic objectives should not change much, they are the core of long-term resource allocation choices that drive the direction of the enterprise. The means by which they are achieved can change as the conditions and context of the market evolve.
As a framework for such thinking, the following six questions should be regular agenda items, and subjected to critical analysis on an ongoing basis.
- Which markets are we focussed on, and spending resources to reach?
- Which products and services are we delivering to customers?
- How are we going to deliver those products to customers, and receive payment?
- Why would a customer buy from us and not someone else?
- What are the few capabilities at which we need to excel to be able to deliver unique value in that market?
- How do we improve operational and financial performance over time?
Each of these six questions have many layers that a diligent and strategically aligned management will pursue.
Success, as well as failure, generally comes incrementally, bit by bit. However, both are also compounding, each outcome building on the back of the previous. Having a framework against which to measure the outcomes of decisions, and then adjust and/or double down quickly, makes a huge difference to the long-term outcome.
Decisions all compound until reversed, and as Einstein observed: ‘Compounding is the most powerful force in the universe.’
To simplify even further, every operative in an SME should ask themselves 3 simple questions every day, as they make the daily tactical choices necessary to get the work done.
- To whom will this action add value?
- How will it add that value?
- By what means do we get a return from that value?
There, Strategy development in a blog post.
Header credit: a very old cartoon by Hugh McLeod before he became famous and corporatised.
Aug 21, 2023 | Analytics, Management
Volume, flow, and capacity utilisation are drivers of each other, a symbiotic relationship articulated by Wrights Law.
A product with significant volume that is easy to schedule through a factory, and because of those volumes, has ‘well-oiled’ and efficient operational processes, generally delivers profit.
Years ago, I did a product profitability exercise on a range of products that were marketed by the company for which I worked at the time, Dairy Farmers Ltd. The parameters I used were based on the gross contribution to fixed overhead after promotional costs. These I calculated from the standard costing model being used at the time. Also weighted into the calculations were the complexity of the operational scheduling imposed by the products, and the ratio of gross contribution to the calculated capacity of the individual production lines, including downtime measures like machine availability.
The most profitable product in the range in both dollars and percentage was 300gm sour cream in cartons. It was a product that had significant and easily forecast volumes, so raw material procurement was simplified, predictable, the operational processes were ‘well-oiled’, and we had some pricing power in the supermarkets. There was very little wasted capacity or product failure in the manufacturing processes. Wrights law at work, and after a bit of thought, it made absolute sense that it would be the most profitable.
The second most profitable product in the range in percentage terms was a surprise to everyone, including me. A relatively small volume product, ‘Buttermilk’ in 600ml cartons. At the time there was no competitive product, so we had considerable pricing power, the volumes were highly predictable albeit modest, the ingredients simple and always available, and we could run the product immediately after sour cream with just a change in carton size which we could do ‘on the run’, the first few cartons acting as the ‘clean-up’ after the sour cream. There was effectively no downtime, no ‘start-up waste’ product, no added labour, few inventory costs, and no promotional costs. The capacity utilisation of buttermilk was virtually 100% of the capacity allocated by the arithmetic that combined volumes required and theoretical throughput rate and delivered margin.
Sadly for Dairy Farmers profitability, the supermarkets realised there was a profit pool they were not accessing. They introduced house brand products manufactured by a competitor who had idle capacity and took a marginal cost approach to the price at which they were prepared to sell the product to use that capacity. The volumes of both sour cream and buttermilk products fell quite quickly, while the operational costs per unit increased markedly.
Wright’s Law works in reverse as well.
The header is of Theodore Paul Wright 1895 – 1970
Aug 14, 2023 | Communication, Customers, Marketing, Small business, Social Media
When my kids dropped a piece of toast, or bread on the floor (almost always spread side down) we used to invoke the ‘3 second test’. This was simply that the bugs took three seconds to wake up and realise there was a feed nearby, so if it was retrieved inside that time, it was OK to eat.
Same with a website, almost.
We are all busy, our attention is stretched beyond reasonable limits, and we have no time to waste. So, when your potential customer is researching, or just loitering on the web, you have perhaps 3 seconds to engage them, such that they have a closer look.
In those 3 seconds, you must communicate three things if you are to get them to pay you any of their scarce attention:
- What problem you solve.
- Who do you solve it for. In effect, a written ‘elevator speech’, what you do and why they should listen.
- Call to action. What you want them to do next.
Pretty obvious?
Give yourself 3 seconds to look at most websites, and ask yourself those three simple questions.
How does yours fare?
PS. For my readers outside Australia, ‘Vegemite’ is a spread for bread and toast we Aussies are brought up on, which the rest of the world thinks looks and tastes like old axle grease.
I bet every ‘Matilda’ has it almost every day!
Aug 9, 2023 | Change, Operations, Strategy
Almost every SME I visit or work with needs to one degree or another to be moving down the path towards ‘digitisation’.
For some, this means considering how the sudden appearance of LLM trained AI will impact on their competitive position, for others, it is still how to write a simple excel macro, and move bookkeeping from Mavis in the corner to a cloud package.
Just what does ‘digitisation’ mean?
For most of my clients it means automating some or all of the existing processes driven by bits of unconnected software and spreadsheets, liberally connected by people handing things over.
It is usually a real mess, and the evidence of incomplete solutions, misinformation, and shattered hopes lie everywhere.
The world is digitising at an accelerating rate, so keeping up is not only a competitive imperative, it is a strategic challenge. To survive you must evolve at least the same rate, just to keep up.
On of my former clients is a printing business, an SME with deep capabilities in all things ‘printing’ that enabled the company to be very successful, in the past. Their capabilities are terrific, highly competitive, if we were still in 1999.
If I use them as a metaphor for most I work with, there is a consistent pattern.
They do not see digitisation as an investment in the future, rather it is seen as an expense. This means that the challenges are not considered to be strategic. There is no consideration of the application of digital to their product offerings, beyond the digital printing machines, services beyond those that made them successful 20 years ago, and their business models, beyond what is demanded by the two biggest customers, who between them deliver well over 35% of revenue.
They have not considered digitisation of operational processes, beyond a 20 year old ERP system, which has not been updated in any meaningful way for a decade, and they still only use a portion of the capability. The reason for this is simply a lack of internal capability and awareness, and the lack of cash to invest for the long term.
They have not modified their organisational and operational culture. No digitisation effort can succeed without the support of an operating culture that encourages ongoing change. Organisational processes can be modified by decree, but they will not stick. It takes everyone in the boat to be pulling in the same direction, in unison, to make the forward progress proposed by the digitisation nirvana. This takes leadership, and a willingness to be both vulnerable internally, and a strong ability to absorb the stuff from outside. You need to ‘get out of the building’ not to smell the roses, but to see the lie of the land, and understand where the opportunities and challenges are hiding.
The recognition of the critical necessity of change is where you get given one point out of a possible 10. The other 9 are reserved for taking action. A daunting prospect for most.
Following are the 5 steps necessary to become ‘match fit’.
- Map the existing operational processes so you know what you are changing. The starting point!
- Map and change the mindset of the people, so everyone understands the extent of the challenge to the business, and to them personally. This will prove very tough for some, so expect push-back.
- Take small and incremental steps along a path that all understand leads to a digital future, which means that a lot of collaborative planning has been done. Look for some low hanging fruit where early wins are likely.
- Ensure that there are the necessary opportunities for all stakeholders, but particularly employees to grow and change with you. Those that choose not to, also choose to work elsewhere. There are no free rides.
- Ensure the resources of time and money are allocated uncompromisingly to the long-term outcomes. It is just too easy to put aside something that is important but not urgent for something that may seem to be urgent, but is not important to the transformational effort.
Most need outside help to get this done. Usually that help in the early stages is not found amongst software vendors who have a dog in the fight. It is amongst those who have ‘been there, done that’. It will also be a resource hungry beast, but assuming you feed it, and you have the right mix of project management and technical capabilities, the investment will generate returns quickly, just not tomorrow.
Header cartoon credit: Tom Gauld
Aug 7, 2023 | Analytics, Leadership
We all need to become ‘knowledge workers’ say the pundits, who generally fail to define just what that term means, and how we achieve it.
Most would simply apply some added practical training and education, and bingo, knowledge, but I suspect it is more complicated than that.
Knowledge is way more than just education and training. It is also the wisdom of experience, domain familiarity, networks of people who can be called upon, and a capacity to make connections in non-obvious ways. It is intangible, as individuals, we have no physical stocks of knowledge, although we do now have relatively unlimited access to its sources.
The value of knowledge is also very hard to define, if not impossible, and it is not of much value when it stays in one place. Its value is highly contextual. It is of little obvious use having an expert in genetics when you are struggling with a problem of commercial governance. However, when you dig deep enough, you often find there are lessons to be learnt from other domains that can be applied, and in the process of digging, you learn.
The real value of knowledge is when it flows from one to another, and on to many, then, magically, it grows, evolves, and is put to uses not previously considered, creating even more value.
Therefore, the definition of a knowledge worker should be more like ‘Builds, shares, and leverages data for use beyond their domain’.
Improvements and alternatives encouraged.
