Aug 11, 2009 | Demand chains, Management, Strategy
Technology has multiplied the potential for information flows through a value chain, but often human behavior hampers it as individuals use the available information to enhance their own position. This happens internally, but is even more prevalent in the interactions between firms, as individuals seek to enhance not only their own position, but the perceived negotiating position of their firm.
A key metric to look at when assessing the health of a value chain is the exchange of information between firms. The actual measurement will usually be a combination of hard & soft data such as joint strategic planning, shared KPI’s, availability of data when needed and in a useable form. A technique I have sometimes found useful is an adaptation of an HR practice, do a “360 degree” performance assessment on the available information amongst those who come into contact with it, and have a use for it.
Another of those paradoxes that exist in human relations, elicited by the information exchange in supply value chains:
Why is it that the passionate exchange of information that occurs on social networking sites is rarely replicated in a value chain?
It seems odd to me that people who are willing to share sometimes pretty personal stuff on a networking site are unwilling to share information of a non- personal nature in a commercial situation, even where the commercial case for the exchange is clearly made.
Such information exchange is a pre-requisite of creating a demand chain from a bog standard supply chain.
Aug 4, 2009 | Demand chains, Innovation, Operations
The impact of current behavior of all who are engaged in an alliance on the perceptions and expectations that will drive the evolution of the alliance into the future is pervasive.
Success breeds expectations of more success, and failure breeds blame and retribution. Any alliance has its setbacks, so the latter influence often brings alliance development to a shuddering halt. Those engaged in addressing the challenges of alliance evolution for the first time often do so from the perspective of the types of assumptions made by economists and accountants, that of rational behavior.
Anyone who has spent any time dealing with a number of alliances has seen evidence that much of what goes on cannot be explained by using assumptions of rational behavior, it is far more influenced by what may be seen as irrational behavior, until a social psychologist becomes involved, then many actions become predictable as the vagaries of behavior are factored in.
I have previously noted the impact of an apparently irrational need for revenge demonstrated by Ernst Fehr an economist at the University of Zurich, in a game widely known as the “trust game with revenge” in which an apparently irrational need for what can be termed revenge, is demonstrated to be a hard-wired behavior.
This apparently irrational drive for revenge, in this context of alliance development is often just a minor bit of “pay-back,” for perceived slights and misbehavior, but it has brought many nacent alliances to an end.
Aug 2, 2009 | Demand chains, Innovation, OE, Operations
Standard project management tools are designed to manage a sequential series of activities typified by a building project. They do this very well, as the work flows are dependent on the completion of previous work that is done to well understood, almost generic specifications.
They are far less useful when they are set up to manage processes that rely on the production of information for their success, where iteration between different activities are required, such as those in a product development project or a value chain development and improvement process.
This leads to the conclusion that when developing such a project that requires the production of information to be successful, spend a bit more time in the planning stage to map the flows of information, particularly where there are known dependencies, as well as the work flows. This added investment of time in the planning stages typically yields huge returns during the implementation.
A simple question, asked over and over, can help:
“What do I need to know from other tasks before I can complete this one?”
Jul 26, 2009 | Demand chains, OE, Operations
I recently wrote about the productivity of working capital, and my view that the productivity of the capital was a revised calculation that all businesses should consider.
Clearly, the best way to increase the productivity of the capital required to run the business, is to reduce the cycle time of processes in the business. Use inventory quicker, collect debts quicker, increase the throughput productivity of operational assets, reduce those activities that do not add to the customers experience.
All of those factors are internal to the business, and mostly we are pretty aware of them.
The emerging opportunity increasingly recognised by successful enterprises is the necessity to increase the collaboration between the sequential value adding points in a demand chain, by reducing the transaction costs that occur between firms in the chain. In effect, “Lean” for the supply chain, by reflecting the customers demand patterns back through the chain.
This is the core of the success of Toyota over 40 years, and as the world recession recedes, the enterprises tht emerge from the chaos will be different to those that went in, and there will be a far greater focus on transaction costs through the chain.
Jul 22, 2009 | Demand chains, Management, Sales
Customer focused has become a cliché, it appears in a wide range of material, usually it seems, written by people who have never interacted with a customer in their lives.
So how do you measure customer focused? Here are some basic things you need to know before the expression will be more than a cliché:
- We know the characteristics of a loyal customer, not just the social economic, but the behavioral drivers they experience
- We understand the relative value of our value proposition to different types of customers.
- We measure customer profitability over more than just one, or one periods transactions.
- We know why we lose customers, and actively manage the loss of unprofitable customers.
- We know how much it costs to attract, and retain profitable customers.
- We know where we sit on a customers “value curve” the trade-off customers make between the relative cost and utility of our products, Vs the opposition.
- We set out to measure the “advocacy” of our customers for our products.
- We collect data from non customers who use opposition products, and we understand them, and the attraction of the oppositions offer Vs ours.
- Everyone in the firm recognises that it is not just sales people who have the responsability to serve customers, but everyone in the firm has a role in providing that service, from the CEO to the cleaner, and they all rely on continued customer support for their employment.
When you are well advanced in all of the above, you will be reasonably able to call yourselves “customer focussed”
Jul 21, 2009 | Demand chains, Management, Marketing, Operations, Sales
How long will it take for the politicians in this country to forge an acceptable compromise amongst all the interests in the carbon debate, and take meaningful action.? Probably forever, and we will end up with the proverbial camel after all the compromise, and that will suit nobody.
Enter the game-changer!
Wal-Mart, the biggest retailer in the world by far, turning over more than $US450 billion, more than most countries, has changed the game. Last week, they announced they would put carbon footprint information on display labels for all products sold in their stores. Suppliers will be required to assemble the information from their supply chains as part of their trading relationship with Wal-Mart
No recommendations, just the information, and consumers can make up their own minds.
The implications are mind-boggling.
In one decision, by one company, the nature of the debate about climate change has been turned from one seeking a political, emotional and academic compromise to a very simple choice for the Wal-Mart supply chains, do it or face deletion from their largest customer. Multi-national suppliers, Colgate, P&G, Unilever, Mars, and many others, will suddenly have another marketing lever to use in their marketing activities, across the world. Suddenly, weasel words in media grabs from pollies are even less meaningful than they usually are.
In Australia, Woolworths follow closely the steps taken by Wal-Mart, and what better way to put added pressure on its arch-rival Coles.
Suppliers to Woolies had better get ready!
