Skip to content

Page 13 of 82

Search Results

  • Sensing the Future Before It Occurs

    GE global software chief William Ruh discusses the combined power of analytics and sensors.

    Learn More »
  • Success as the Source of Failure?: Competition and Cooperation in the Japanese Economy

    Will the Japanese business system survive the current recession?

    Learn More »
  • Is Your Company Ready for Open Innovation?

    Without successful implementation, the benefits of open innovation strategies will not materialize.

    Learn More »
  • 'Greening' Transportation in the Supply Chain

    The country's largest corporations have hit a road bump on their way toward factoring sustainability into their transportation choices. Despite pressures from customers and investors--and the prospect of evervolatile energy costs--just 9% of Fortune 500 companies include environmental goals in their public documents. A study of those 44 companies reveals some of the best practices that can help a business go the distance, ultimately working with its partners to rethink its entire transportation infrastructure. Companies must demonstrate three distinct levels of integration before they can embed the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions into their transportation strategies: establishing a foundation (acknowledging the problem), changing internal company practices (building an environmentally aware culture) and impacting supply chain practices (such as better vehicle utilization or more efficient routing). Within these categories, the tactics need to be measured by carefully calibrated metrics that can track both environmental and financial progress. As employees begin adapting their own decision making to the new priority--by, for instance, choosing videoconferencing instead of traveling--executives should spread such success stories, reinforcing the institutional preference.

    Learn More »
  • When Bad People Rise to the Top

    Observers are often amazed when executives with impressive track records are mysteriously transformed into corrupt and tyrannical monsters once they become chief executive officers. In truth, these executives often had serious character flaws that were either hidden or ignored for years. Corporate boards and search committees are not likely to detect personality problems of promising CEO candidates simply by examining their resumes or by conducting standard job interviews. This raises the question of how corporate boards or CEO search committees can penetrate the facade of an upwardly mobile executive who is, in reality, a wolf in sheep's clothing. What danger signals do these individuals exhibit and what measures can be taken to reduce the likelihood of hiring a dysfunctional CEO? The author identifies eight potential danger signals including: an obsession with acquiring prestige, power, and wealth; a proclivity for developing grandiose strategies with little thought toward their implementation; and a fondness for a data-driven management style that overshadows or ignores a broader vision. Even sterling CEOs occasionally exhibit one or more of the danger signals described here. Potentially bad CEOs, however, usually possess several of these characteristics, and they exhibit them repeatedly. There is no ideal method for selecting a CEO, and there may be no executive position that provides a true test of a person's fitness to assume the top job, but there are several ways that a company can limit its risks when deciding on a CEO. Boards are usually cautious when looking at CEO candidates from outside the organization. They are more likely to be lulled into a sense of complacency, however, when considering an internal candidate. Some suggestions for screening prospective CEOs include disregarding the time-tested rule that past success is a predictor of future success, performing a thorough background check that focuses on a candidate's integrity and interpersonal skills and using experience-based interviews to test CEO finalists

    Learn More »
  • Understanding and Managing Complexity Risk

    In the past, companies have tried to manage risks by focusing on potential threats outside the organization: competitors, shifts in the strategic landscape, natural disasters or geopolitical events. They are generally less adept at detecting internal vulnerabilities that creep into organizations and other human-designed systems. Indeed, as companies increase the complexity of their systems -- products, processes, technologies, organizational structures, legal contracts and so on -- they often fail to pay sufficient attention to the introduction and proliferation of loopholes and flaws. Ericsson, Barings Bank and Comair are but a few examples of companies that have suffered disastrous breakdowns in their complex internal systems. A crucial thing to remember is that the possibility of random failure rises as the number of combinations of things that can go wrong increases, and the opportunity for acts of malicious intent also goes up. Build new applications on top of legacy systems, and errors creep in between the lines of code. Merge two companies, and weaknesses sprout between the organizational boundaries. Build Byzantine corporate structures and processes, and obscure pockets are created where bad behavior can hide. Furthermore, the enormous complexity of large systems like communications networks means that even tiny glitches can cascade into catastrophic events. In fact, catastrophic events are almost guaranteed to occur in many complex systems, much like big earthquakes are bound to happen. So, without the benefit of perfect foresight, how can businesses uncover and forestall the fatal flaws lurking within their organizations? There are three complementary strategies: (1) Assess the risk to make better-informed decisions, such as purchasing an insurance policy to cover the risk; (2) spot vulnerabilities and fix them before catastrophic events occur; and (3) design out weaknesses through resilience. These ideas have been around for years, but researchers have recently had to reinvent them in the context of extremely complex, interconnected cascade-prone systems.

    Learn More »
  • Mastering Strategic Movement at Palm

    Whether you’re a startup taking on industry giants or a giant moving into markets dominated by powerful incumbents, how do you compete with opponents that have size, strength and history on their side? To prevent opponents from bringing their full strength into play, successful challengers use what authors David B. Yoffie and Mary Kwak of Harvard Business School call judo strategy. Judo strategists avoid head-to-head struggles and other trials of strength, which they are likely to lose. Instead, by relying on speed, agility and creative thinking, they develop strategies that make it difficult for stronger rivals to compete. Judo strategy is most effective when three core principles & #8212; movement, balance and leverage & #8212; are used in combination. But at different stages of competition, a single principle may play a particularly important role. In the early days of a business, for example, before the contours of the competitive landscape have been fully defined, movement typically takes center stage. The authors use Palm Computing (now Palm Inc.) to illustrate judo strategy’s core principle of movement at work. The company dominated the handheld computing market less than a year after shipping its first electronic organizer in early 1996, despite competition from the most powerful software company in the world. Microsoft marshaled masses of money, manpower and marketing muscle behind its own handheld operating system. But year after year, Palm remained far ahead. By mastering the principles of judo strategy and learning to implement them through specific techniques, other companies can emulate the way Palm competed with a stronger opponent. The authors came to that conclusion after studying companies as varied as Juniper Networks, Intuit, Frontier Airlines and Charles Schwab. They caution, however, that judo strategy is not a rigid formula to be followed step by step. Depending on the nature of their competition, companies will combine and implement the principles in different ways. But the basic tenets hold: Stay out of competitors’ sights by deliberately acting harmless (like a puppy dog), define the competitive space to establish the game, and follow through fast to build a big lead before competitors learn how to respond.

    Learn More »
  • Fall 2024

    Our fall 2024 issue highlights the need for personal and organizational resilience amid global uncertainty.

    Learn More »
  • Leading Confidently in Uncertain Times

    From supply chain disruptions to market volatility, uncertainty is the new constant. Learn how exceptional leaders cut through the noise to make confident decisions and guide their teams forward.

    Learn More »
  • Balancing Green

    An expert on business strategy offers a pragmatic take on how businesses of all sizes balance the competing demands of profitability and employment with sustainability.

    Learn More »