While new insights on business often trigger emotions of creativity, rarely do they translate into any actual practice. This is because new information is fragile and does not impact the mind until firmly embedded in the neuro-structure. Another reason for this is that each day, the volume of new information is so immense, that the brain cannot keep up with the constant noise, so ends up not following up on those bright ideas. To rectify these two faults, a leader can adopt the role of an architect instead of being a taskmaster. For this to happen, business intelligence gained must actually be recorded somewhere, ideally using visuals to ensure embedding into company DNA. One needs to be strict with oneself so that these commitments may be followed up. Probing questions must periodically be posed so that the eureka moment may get churned up eventually. The leader must take notice of the team members’ deadlines. Them getting missed is a clear sign of faulty execution.

Source: https://www.strategy-business.com/blog/Four-Secrets-for-Turning-Insight-into-Execution?gko=c7e01

Uploaded Date:28 November 2017

While enormous chunks of data are now available to every business manager, instead of simplifying lives, many end up complicating the. Data warehousing and subsequent analysis can only be useful if the concerned manager knows how to use the same. That is why, traditional managers who manage under hierarchical conditions are getting replaced by modern ones, more comfortable with real-time data in front of them. The former, have an army of subordinates who are expected to help them, but instead end up acting as mirrors, so the leaders only hear what they want to. Information at such places stays trapped within silos. The newer breed though uses data-generated feedback and leading to increased cross-functional collaboration within agile hierarchies. Strategies however need not be developed keeping in mind safe hypothesis. Once the business idea gets validated, the investment naturally rises.

Source: https://knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/strategy-as-hypothesis-5216

Uploaded Date:28 November 2017

Business leaders often lament that up to two-fifths of the potential value of the corporate strategy drafted gets lost in faulty execution. This “Plan-then-do” approach was first popularized by GE in the 1970s but is not practical now due to the “cone of uncertainty” that has exponentially gone up. Strategy and execution now need to be thought of simultaneously just as practiced by Bain. This approach may best be termed as “Decide-Do/Refine-Do”, which implies a constant improvisation even between work. For companies that have solved this conundrum, five lessons have been understood to be followed by them. For a start, such companies do not see strategy as a plan, but more of as a vision which is evergreen. Strategy for them is more of a direction that pervasive. Such firms value flexibility as they know that obstacles are constant but need to be manoeuvred against. For them, strategy is not a bond to be wedded with, but a portfolio of complementary options. Another crucial point where such companies differ from the masses, is they create mechanism to respond to crises and are proactive against them, just as Caterpillar was well-prepared to for the 2007 financial crisis. These companies also believe in constant testing, learning and then going back to the drawing board to further improvise as gaming firm Caesars does.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/11/5-ways-the-best-companies-close-the-strategy-execution-gap

Uploaded Date:24 November 2017

Traditionally, businesses have viewed strategy and its execution as two different aspects. Most business leaders have been pigeonholed into either the ‘visionary’ or ‘operator’types. However, this has led to certain problems as attested the strategy arm of business consulting behemoth PwC’s study that says that less than a tenth of the leaders are good at both strategy and its execution. The ideal leader though is one like Starbucks’s Howard Schultz. He had a certain vision for how Starbucks stores ought to be perceived by the people, but ensured that by regularly communicating to the personnel and investing in them, even during die situations such as the global financial crisis. So more than the independent parts of strategy and execution, it is the combined part that truly builds the organization, and for that three steps are needed to be fulfilled. First of all, the corporate strategy needs to be designed keeping in mind the value to be added to customers’ lives, specific capabilities helping them excel or how to react during disruption. After this, due diligence has to be paid to convert the lofty ideas into practices to be followed on everyday basis. The last hurdle of executing the strategy has to be done through important levers along the way. Employees must be able to deal with cross-functional challenges, be able to scale up operations and be able to leverage their innate capabilities.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/11/how-to-excel-at-both-strategy-and-execution

Uploaded Date:23 November 2017

While business success stories abound, there are certain companies that have been shortlisted for their incredible comebacks. These were all leading players within their respective industries, went down due to various turmoil, but have now come back through strong corporate strategy and innovative measures being adopted. The first such is HSBC, which rectified its too complex structure by selling off certain divisions and creating a lean structure based around a digital outlook. Instead of diversifying much as most pharma companies have been, Bristol-Myers Squibb simply focused on items they were renowned for. Boston Scientific too streamlined its hierarchy, became future-oriented through its innovative approach and focused on increased collaboration. Nokia meanwhile has rebranded itself as a giant in telecom infrastructure. Another Finnish company UPM-Kymmene has diversified away from newsprint and bulk paper to newer categories. Goupe PSA, the mother company behind Opel, Peugeot and others has trimmed its portfolio but increased its digital marketing efforts. Olympus suffered immensely due to smartphones and health care reform in its camera and medical imaging businesses, so rebounded leveraging its traditionally strong areas. Japan’s Ajinomoto survived by developing speciality products for other customer segments while Lanxess spread its tentacles by collaborating with Saudi company Aramco. Australia’s Qantas did well by focusing on customer service while Spain’s Acciona simply made the move to countries such as Mexico, India, Chile and USA as these are high-growth markets.

Source:https://www.bcg.com/publications/collections/comeback-kids-successful-turnarounds.aspx

Uploaded Date:21 November 2017

Reputation risk has been identified at the Asia Risk Report by Strategic RISK as the greatest threat, even more than cyber-attack or natural disaster. The impact that reputation risk has gets multiplied due to effect on intangibles as highlighted at INSEAD’s Risk Breakfast Series. That is why the RL Expert Group has developed a reputation equity that comprises of the risks and opportunities. Even Standard & Poor has included reputation among its risk management assessments for companies. Business consulting provided by the Reputation Institute along with AIRMIC has created a framework for reputation risk classification and management. This includes five factors which are – risk identification, reputation assessment, reputation prioritisation, mitigation and reputation performance measurement. The same policies need to be adopted across the organization, as AXA has proactively ensured. This is also effective in fending off reputation damage as done successfully by the International Olympic Committee.

Source: https://knowledge.insead.edu/leadership-organisations/getting-boards-into-reputation-risk-management-4472

Uploaded Date:21 November 2017

Traditionally management consulting professionals would import best practices from various industries and replicate in others in order to create a semblance of consistency and scale. Now that most of them are tasked with driving digital transformation, the concept of best practices of best practices needs to undergo a revision. This is because the rapid evolution of technological upgrades means that it is not possible to stick to single practices for more than a certain time period. Business innovation is now a combination of imagination and experience. Personal experience is no longer enough as one needs to get constantly updated to the latest, often disruptive trends in business. Consultants now need to be able to offer a wide range of services at each level of the value chain. One-size-fits-all tendencies no longer yield the results, so tailored solutions need to be devised.

Source:https://www.strategy-business.com/blog/Best-Practices-Are-Dead?gko=212eb

Uploaded Date:16 November 2017

While all companies have their defined mission statements, taglines and a corporate strategy to boost, few are properly executing the same. Nokia for example goes by the tagline “connecting people”, as it was a mobile phone behemoth in the 1990s and 2000s. Yet, Nokia’s own game fell badly post the launch of the first iPhone by Apple and subsequent forays by others into smartphones which were able to connect people far more than Nokia’s feature phones were. Similarly, many companies in the long run have failed to truly execute their enshrined purposes. The first way to do so, is simply to know one’s purpose as all of Elon Musk’s companies- SpaceX, Tesla and previously PayPal- seem to be good at. Then they should target at achieving the golden mean which is the middle point between excess and deficiency as stated in Aristotle’s philosophy. A sense of agility or corporate plasticity needs to be developed where the company is in a position to tweak itself depending on the needs and circumstances. Finally, the operationalization needs to be led proactively by people from the very top.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/11/the-best-companies-know-how-to-balance-strategy-and-purpose

Uploaded Date:15 November 2017

Future-facing companies are those that are geared up towards the latest transformative business innovations. This is typically easier than at start-ups than large corporates with an established hierarchy and a history of work following older processes. Even the most innovative of companies are often saddled with working in business environments that are only slowly catching up. Most management tools for example were created some time back and many aren’t conducive to day’s pace of work. Such future facing companies have been known to carry certain unique characteristics. These companies keep a balance between its corporate strategy and the future possibilities so do not stay rooted to any single idea. Instead of focussing on a single line of work, they explore a portfolio of businesses. They often curate a thesis on the coming times to stay ahead of the curve. A proper framework in created to fit in all innovation sin a matrix like structure. Even the investment decisions are taken keeping in mind the upcoming innovations. These are even incorporated within the accounting procedure. Instead of having levels of hierarchy and related bureaucracy, they have a lean structure. The teams created are cross-functional to enable exchange of vital ideas. The pattern of working is open while collaboration is encouraged. The leadership too is flexible and agile. In addition to being leaders, they remain individual contributors setting an example.

Source:https://www.forbes.com/sites/tendayiviki/2017/08/08/the-10-characteristics-of-a-future-facing-company/#5e312b7418b5

Uploaded Date:27 October 2017

There are six notable ways in which business leaders address the issue of sustainability. The first of them is within the Resources frame. This ponders, often with dire predictions whether the resources available will remain resilient enough against the growing tide of population growth. Water security and soil fertility must remain top of the agenda. The Time frame addresses whether the pollution problems can be solved by 2030, which is the deadline for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. The Value frame adherents try to bring sustainability within the broad framework of the corporate strategy. In addition to the now widespread philosophy of the Triple Bottom line they have also initiated the concept of “People, Planet and Profit”, as embraced by Puma. Al Gore has been one of the biggest supporters of this thinking. The Abundance frame school of thinkers look at upcoming exponential changes such as AI, Robotics, IoT and autonomous vehicles with a lot of optimism. Key adherents to this school include Google X, Singularity University and XPRIZE Foundation. Design framers on the other hand blame all our sustainability issues on poor design. Finally, the Moral frame adherents believe that the spotlight needs to be turned on nature having its own rights. They feel that in MBA courses, business ethics and environmental studies need to be more than mere footnotes.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/10/the-6-ways-business-leaders-talk-about-sustainability?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter_daily&utm_campaign=dailyalert&referral=00563&spMailingID=18302410&spUserID=OTY0OTMwNTk5NwS2&spJobID=1121123502&spReportId=MTEyMTEyMzUwMgS2

Uploaded Date :21 October 2017

With digital transformation becoming imperative, companies are appointing board directors to ensure this transition smoothly. Four categories of such transformative leaders have been identified. The first of them is the Digital Thinker who has limited hands-on experience but understands the broader picture from the corporate strategy point of view. Then there is the Digital Disruptor who is the opposite, a hands-on technology person but with little managerial experience. The third type is the Digital Leader, a person who hails from a traditional industry but has overseen its transformation to the digital age. The Digital Transformer is similar to the third category though lacking the seniority, but with greater digital astuteness. The fourth category is one that starts at the lowest level, and that is where most companies are nowadays starting so as to reengineer entire processes and not just from the board level. This produces a more end-to-end strategy.

Source:https://hbr.org/2017/07/the-board-directors-you-need-for-a-digital-transformation

Uploaded Date:21 October 2017