Aug 10, 2010 | Communication, Management, Small business
Sitting around many board and advisory tables over the years, I have observed that those that are successful follow what I have started to call the rule of thirds. Actually, there are four rules, but the first is generic to all meetings: have an agenda, follow it, take minutes, allocate a specific time to end, and follow up. The other three relate to the manner of organization of the agenda and are:
1/3 review the financials, the past period, and coming periods, with particular emphasis on cash generation.
1/3 Consider the immediate issues, gain agreement on actions, outcomes and timetables,
1/3 Consider the longer term issues, all those things that will not impact on the immediate performance of the business, but are in the medium to long term critical for survival.
Most board meetings tend to spend considerable time on the first, a bit on the second, and little on the third, but organizing the time allocated, and being disciplined about the manner in which the time is spent will pay dividends.
Aug 9, 2010 | Change, Innovation, Marketing, Strategy
Perhaps I am dreaming, but there appears to be a “nudge” (not yet a trend) amongst the manufacturing firms I talk to towards a review of the cost/benefit of overseas sourcing of manufactured products.
At the end of the spectrum where ownership of IP, and innovation are important, firms appear to be reconsidering the value of “off-shoring” recognising that keeping the processes that create value closer to home, where they can be developed, and leveraged with a more sensitive hand over the long term is better than taking a short term cost benefit.
This is not to say that there is any real future for commodity manufacturing in a high cost environment like Australia, apart from the very few areas where we should have a natural advantage, wool processing for instance, but there is a rich future for the development of sophisticated, market sensitive, innovation led manufacturing, so long as we are able to grasp the drivers of that success.
Aug 8, 2010 | Management, Marketing
Watching the current federal election campaign from both major parties, it seems they both should go back to marketing 101, and consider what it takes to engage with those to whom you want to sell something. Both to my mind are failing badly to create a brand that has a proposition that is attractive to those who take the time to consider their “purchase” rather than just buying the same one they bought last time.
From a different perspective, I had the pleasure of meeting with a couple of NSW shadow ministers with a group of business people last week. Their problem is that although the current NSW Labor government is so on the nose that is seems inconceivable that they will be reelected, very few in the electorate know anything about the alternative, and they have great difficulty gaining any media traction, so unlike their Federal counterparts, their problem is awareness, and how do they generate it, not that the product appears to be in tatters.
Aug 6, 2010 | Personal Rant
The accepted “cabinet” processes, where robust, non-personalised debate occurs in camera leading to a conclusion, hopefully based on a combination of qualitative and qualitative data, followed by all members supporting the final determination appears to be gone in our political sphere. It seems that both sides of politics, at all levels, leak like sieves, and sensible analysis and debate has been replaced by dumb, self serving, short term “policy” development.
What has gone wrong?
My view, the whole structure, both major parties and their support structures have allowed their sense of “mission” and “purpose” to erode. They no longer know why they do what they do, beyond the motivation to gain and hold power on both a party and personal level.
They say you get the politicians you deserve, and it would be easy to dismiss the whole lot as self-serving power hungry grubs, but that would in most cases be wrong. I am sure there are good people on both sides. It is the structures, processes and prevailing culture that prevents the delivery of a quality outcome to Australians, combined with a profound lack of leadership. If Australia was a business, shareholders would be clamouring for change, and the authorities would be calling in the corproate investigators.
It is up to us to demand the changes.
Aug 5, 2010 | Communication, Social Media, Strategy
Access to information before anyone else has it is Gold, access at the same time as everybody else is just staying in the game, essential, but it will never be a winning edge.
A small advantage at some point, can be built into a substantial advantage quickly as the value of the unique information enables leveraging before it becomes common, and the access/leverage equation scales up with use.
Information is only of value when it is used, pretty obvious, but often missed, and the more it is used, the greater the value, unlike physical assets that depreciate with use.
