2 | Planning

Implications of a $300 House

How would the world change if you could build a house for $300? Who would benefit? What would it require? Could it affect your organization?

There is a movement afoot to “bring together people, institutions, and businesses in a ‘creation space’ to turn this idea into a reality and test it out in the field.” Before you dismiss it, check out the Web site devoted to the concept by clicking here.

A lot has been written lately about serving customers at the bottom of the pyramid. Grameen Bank has been doing this since 1976 when Muhammad Yunus pioneered the idea of microfinancing with the goal of helping to eradicate poverty. Today, the bank has more than 7.5 million customers.

That’s the promise of the bottom of the pyramid: millions to billions of potential customers. When you factor in the opportunity to do well by doing good, this market is appealing to many companies.

Whether or not it appeals to you, you will want to consider the impact it may have on your organization. To figure out a way to make low-cost, low-tech, green houses that homeowners can build themselves out of local materials, innovation must take place. Breakthrough processes must emerge. New ways of thinking must take root. How will they reshape the construction industry? What will they mean to the companies that supply that industry? How will they challenge governments and education?

A lot of companies are busy devising…

4Oct2010 | Steve George | 1 comment | Continued

Challenge Your Assumptions

In yesterday’s article about AtlantiCare, I listed its strategic challenges and talked about how similar they are among healthcare organizations. While there may be differences in the challenges other organizations face, one that keeps appearing on most lists is the effect of the economy.

According to economists, the recession has ended. Business is looking up for many companies even if they are slow to rebuild their workforces. So what does mean for your future?

One of the critical elements of effective strategic planning is the quality of the information that feeds the process. You can develop the most elegant and comprehensive plan on the planet and deploy it to everybody in your organization but it will fail if the plan is based on faulty or incomplete information. The Baldrige Criteria ask how you collect and analyze information about your opportunities and threats, major shifts in relevant areas, and your long-term sustainability. The point in the process when you collect and analyze this information and discuss it as a planning team is the best time to challenge your assumptions.

One such assumption is that the end of the recession means that the economy will get back on track and business will return to whatever was normal before the bottom fell out. That’s an important assumption to challenge because it’s probably wrong. Sure, there may be some pent-up demand for consumer goods from people who were cautious about their spending…

21Sep2010 | Steve George | 0 comments | Continued

Sustainability Forces Wheel

Sustainability Forces Wheel

In strategic planning, the quality of the plan depends on the quality of the information collected and analyzed to guide the plan. The Baldrige Criteria ask how you collect and analyze information about your strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats; early indications of major shifts in technology, markets, products, customer preferences, competition, or the regulatory environment; long-term organizational sustainability; and your ability to execute your strategic plan.

The goal is to build a sustainable organization that can survive change in whatever form it takes. Andrew Winston has created a tool to help navigate the forces that may affect your organization’s survival. He calls it the Sustainability Forces Wheel.

In “A New Tool for Understanding Sustainability Drivers” (HBR, July 13, 2010), Winston describes the three rings that make up his wheel and his idea to “spin” the wheel to line up different forces on each ring, which could then spur discussion among leaders about what that combination might mean for their organization. For example, he looks at the issues that currently line up at 9:00: “Consumers increasingly want to know what’s in products and where they come from; technology is enabling more data on a product’s origins; and there’s no denying the rising concerns about chemicals and toxics in our bodies and our children’s bodies. If your company operates in the consumer products world, how are you handling this trifecta of concerns?”

From a Baldrige standpoint, your strategic planning process should…

13Jul2010 | Steve George | 1 comment | Continued

The Most Important Question in Strategy

One of the key issues in strategic planning is not directly addressed by the Baldrige Criteria. It occurs during the strategy development phase of the process as participants analyze relevant data and information about factors that will shape the plan and then use their analysis to agree on what should be in the plan. Coming to agreement can be a contentious debate, one opinion competing with another, with decisions made based on who ranks the highest or makes the best argument or outlasts opposing views.

It’s not the best way to chart a course.

Roger Martin is Dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto. He has facilitatestrategic planning sessions. In “My Eureka Moment with Strategy” (HBR, May 3, 2010), he tells the story of a planning session with ten mining company executives that “quickly descended into adversarial position-taking and I could tell it was going nowhere.”

He stopped the descent by asking the executives a different question. Instead of one person making his case and everyone else telling him why he was wrong, Martin asked the executives “to specify what would have to be true for the option on the table to be a fantastic choice.” Instead of competitors, they became collaborators. Each had expertise to contribute to the cause. They discussed five options and what had to be true for each to make it the best choice, and they agreed at the end…

6Jul2010 | Steve George | 0 comments | Continued

Revolutionary Thinking

The ability to disrupt your industry is something you want to possess but fear someone else may already have. The Baldrige Criteria address disruptive change indirectly in several places by asking about any changes taking place that affect your competitive situation, what your key strategic challenges and advantages are, how you identify potential blind spots, and how your planning process detects early indications of major shifts in technology, markets, products, etc.

Having systematic processes in place to answer these questions may help you spot a disruptive change in time to counteract it but none of the questions really explores your processes for developing your own disruptive change. A recent post by Umair Haque on HBR provides an interesting perspective on this subject, using Apple as an example, by explaining “How to Challenge Your Industry Dogma”:

  • Challenge products. Offer an alternative that gets people to rethink what such a product can be used for, as Apple has done with the iPad.
  • Challenge strategy: Find an area that your competitors are ignoring and become the best at it, as Apple has done with the design of electronic gadgets.
  • Challenge distribution. Look for innovative new ways to distribute your products or services, as Apple did with iTunes.
  • Challenge business models. Companies protected how their products are used until Apple introduced a new business model: The App Store gives software developers a huge market for their new products, making Apple’s products more valuable as…
14Jun2010 | Steve George | 0 comments | Continued

Planning for 2035

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), which is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Energy, reported today that world energy consumption is expected to increase by nearly 50% by 2035. Asia in general and China and India in particular will account for most of the increase. Together, they accounted for 20% of total world energy consumption in 2007. Their combined energy use more than doubles by 2035 while world energy consumption by the U.S. would decline from 21% in 2007 to 16% in 2035, although actual consumption would increase.

Where is that energy going to come from? Who will control the sources? How much will it cost? How will it affect your organization? How will it affect consumer needs, governments, healthcare, and education? Since the increase will be steady for the next 25 years, the impact will be felt along the way and not just in 2035. Your strategic planning process should consider that impact.

Of course, any increase in energy usage means an increase in carbon dioxide emissions, which is a key cause of global warming. The EIA predicts such emissions will jump by 43%.

How will global warming affect your organization? How will it affect your customers, employees, and suppliers? Your strategic planning process should consider this, too.

The EIA’s report is based on the assumption that current policies are unchanged. That seems to be a safe bet, at least until we’re faced with an…

26May2010 | Steve George | 0 comments | Continued

Be Prepared

I haven’t referred to a Rosabeth Moss Kanter blog for a couple of months so it’s time for a Kanter fix. She’s a professor at Harvard Business School and the author of several popular business books, which is an accomplishment in itself. This week she reflects on the volcano in Iceland in “Surprise! Four Strategies for Coping with Disruptions” (HBR, April 19, 2010).

Her four strategies are:

  • Backup. Even in a recession, it’s a good idea to build some overlap and redundancy into your organization to make it easier to respond to disruptions. “Great companies stress efficiency but build in slack and cross-train their people,” she writes.
  • Communication. If you’ve developed systems to spread information virally, such as through social networks, you can keep the communication lines open and fast when disruption occurs.
  • Collaboration. “Human relationships, commitment, and resiliency help companies recover quickly,” writes Kanter. She points to the efforts of Continental Airlines employees during the power outage that closed airports in the Northeast in 2003 and the creative solutions they came up with to keep their planes flying while other airlines were grounded.
  • Values and Principles. I’ve talked about this a lot on Baldrige.com because it’s a common characteristic of Baldrige organizations. Guided by a shared vision and clear values and standards, “people know the right thing to do without being told and without waiting for permission.” An empowered workforce can act much quicker during a disruption than employees who…
19Apr2010 | Steve George | 0 comments | Continued