Articles

Whether a manufacturer's direct sales via the Internet help or hurt its retail partners depends upon the pricing strategy it employs.

Many companies leave risk management and business continuity to security professionals, business continuity planners or insurance professionals. However, the authors argue, building a resilient enterprise should be a strategic initiative that changes the way a company operates and increases its competitiveness. Reducing vulnerability means both reducing the likelihood of a disruption and increasing resilience. Resilience, in turn, can be achieved by either creating redundancy or increasing flexibility. Redundancy is the familiar concept of keeping some resources in reserve to be used in case of a disruption. The most common forms of redundancy are safety stock, the deliberate use of multiple suppliers even when the secondary suppliers have higher costs, and deliberately low capacity utilization rates. Although necessary to some degree, redundancy represents pure cost with no return except in the eventuality of disruption. The authors contend that significantly more leverage, not to mention operational advantages, can be achieved by making supply chains flexible. Flexibility requires building in organic capabilities that can sense threats and respond to them quickly. Drawing on ongoing research at the MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics involving detailed studies of dozens of cases of corporate disruption and response, the authors describe how resilient companies build flexibility into each of five essential supply chain elements: the supplier, conversion process, distribution channels, control systems and underlying corporate culture. Case examples of Land Rover, Aisin Seiki Co. (a supplier to Toyota), United Parcel Service, Dell, Baxter International, DHL and Nokia, among others, are offered to illustrate how building flexibility in these supply chain elements not only bolsters the resilience of an organization but also creates a competitive advantage in the marketplace.

Global sourcing is an advanced but complex approach to sourcing and supply management. The authors use survey research to gauge the extent to which companies are currently practicing global sourcing, which involves integrating and coordinating common items, materials, processes, technologies, designs and suppliers across worldwide buying, design and operating locations. In a sample consisting of supply executives primarily from large North American-based multinationals -- particularly manufacturers, the majority of survey respondents said their companies practice some form of international purchasing, a less integrated and coordinated approach than global sourcing. However, more than 70% of managers surveyed said that their companies plan to use global sourcing in the future. The authors identify a set of features common among companies that excel at global sourcing. The features cluster into seven broad characteristics: executive commitment to global sourcing; rigorous and well-defined global sourcing processes; availability of resources needed for the global sourcing initiative, including access to qualified personnel and budgets; information technology systems that support data analysis on a worldwide level; organizational design features that support the initiative, such as an executive committee that oversees global sourcing; structured approaches to communication, such as regular strategy review sessions; and methodologies for measuring savings from global sourcing.

For boards dealing with an embattled CEO, doing nothing may pay off in the long run.

By analyzing 50 cases of successful sustainable enterprise in developing countries, the authors developed a conceptual framework they call the Sustainable Local Enterprise Network model. Analysis of the 50 cases revealed that examples of successful sustainable enterprise in developing countries often involve informal networks that include businesses, not-for-profit organizations, local communities and other actors. These networks can lead to virtuous cycles of reinvestment in an area's financial, social, human and ecological capital. Successful SLENs, the authors found, require at least one business enterprise to ensure the network's financial sustainability and serve as its anchor; however, that anchor role may be played by a cooperative or a profitable social enterprise launched by a non-governmental organization. While multinational corporations were sometimes part of the SLENs studied, entrepreneurs, nonprofits and sustainable local businesses were more common. Using a number of examples from their research, the authors describe how SLENs operate. Examples include networks involving Honey Care Africa Ltd., a honey company based in Nairobi, Kenya, which aims to promote rural development through beekeeping, and Grameen Shakti, which sells solar energy systems for homes in Bangladesh. The authors conclude with recommendations for fostering the development of SLENs, such as setting up training programs in sustainable entrepreneurship in developing countries.

Organizations must return to cultivating strategic thinking, not just functional achievements.

In a recent survey, 72% of board directors indicated that their performance ought to be evaluated. Yet only 21% of the boards of public companies actually conduct such assessments. Part of the problem is that organizations often don't know how best to implement a board self-evaluation procedure, so many simply avoid the practice. Others have implemented the process only to become frustrated because it took so much time and produced so few results. To investigate the different self-evaluation practices used, the authors studied eight boards that have engaged in the process for at least two annual cycles. They found two high-level variables in the protocol for self-evaluations: the structure of the data-collection methodology (low versus high) and the confidentiality of data (unimportant versus important). These dimensions define quadrants of four different approaches to self-evaluation: informal, legalistic, trusting and systematic. Each approach has important implications for a company's board rating, directors and officers insurance and various other issues.

The practice of pushing product by building inventory in anticipation of demand has fallen out of favor in recent years. Many companies prefer to build product only in response to actual demand. This permits firms to avoid costly supply and demand mismatches. Given how successful product-based firms have been with this approach, it is only natural to wonder how it would apply to service firms. Some argue that services cannot be inventoried. Yet this view relies on an extremely narrow definition of inventory as finished product waiting for customers. In practice, the authors say, inventory also serves as a way to store work that functions as "service inventory." As with physical inventories, service inventories allow firms to buffer their resources from the variability of demand and reap benefits from economies of scale while benefiting customers. By using the correct form of service inventory, companies have the opportunity to offer better quality, faster response times and more competitive pricing. Using examples from the travel, hospitality and insurance industries, the authors discuss how service firms can use inventory as a strategic lever in designing and managing service offerings.

The growing popularity of mobile hand-held devices is opening up intriguing new possibilities for what the authors refer to as "brand in the hand" marketing. Because individuals can be, and often are, connected anytime and anyplace, mobile marketing can be used to collect data through the wireless Internet to determine not only the exact location of a consumer at a given time, but also why that individual might be there. With that information, more meaningful or relevant advertising messages or promotions can be delivered to the consumer on a mobile device. Before companies rush into this new marketing arena, though, they need to understand some fundamental issues. How does mobile marketing differ from traditional approaches? When should a company pursue a "brand in the hand" initiative? Does mobile marketing have to be integrated within an overall marketing strategy and, if so, how? Moreover, how should companies address privacy issues? These are of particular concern, in part because of the personal nature of mobile devices.

Asking customers about their wants increases the probability that they will be dissatisfied.