某著名咨詢公司企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略培訓(xùn)資料

1、the concept of strategy hendersons central ideas.real unitcostcumulative experience(85% slope).profitmarket sharethe experience curvethe value of market sharethe corporate portfoliorelative market sharemarket growthcash usingcash generatingrelative market sharemarketgrowth-3-icon standardizationport

2、ers central ideasentry barrierseconomies of scaleproprietary product differencesbrand identityswitching costscapital requirementsaccess to distributionabsolute cost differences: proprietary learning curve access to inputs product designgovernment policyexpected retaliationsupplier powerinput differe

3、ntiationseller switching costspresence of substitutessupplier concentrationimportance of volumecost relative to total purchasesthreat of forward integrationindustry rivalry industry growthfixed cost / value addedintermittent overcapacityproduct differencesbrand identityswitching costsconcentration &

4、amp; balanceinformation complexitydiversitycorporate stakesexit barriersbuyer powerbargaining leveragebuyer concentrationbuyer volumebuyer switching costsbuyer informationability to backward integratesubstitute productspull-throughprice sensitivitysubstitution threatrelative price/ performance of su

5、bstitutesswitching costsstrategic advantagestrategic targetbroadnarrowlow costdifferentiationbroadcostfocus costbroad differentiationfocusdifferentiationthe value chainsuccessive stages of value-addedjockeying for positionamong currentcompetitorsthe industrythreat ofnew entrantsthreat ofsubstitutepr

6、oducts bargainingpower ofcustomersbargainingpower ofsupplierssources: porters writings-4-icon standardizationstructure versus behaviorwhy structural segments matterthe premises of traditional competitive theorystructural segments can be identified objectivelythey can be measuredthey are stablethey d

7、ifferentiate among competitorsdifferences in structural segments explain differences in profitsthe value of dominating structural segments can be specifiedthe method for dominating structural segments can be specified-5-icon standardizationdifferences between bcgs and portersconcepts of strategybcg:

8、the missionaryprescriptiverefutablespecificchallenginggeneralizing from the isolated experimentporter:the schoolmandescriptivetautologicalgeneralresonatingsynthesizing from multiple instances-6-icon standardizationthe structural paradigm of strategy contentsegment positioningweproductswhite space(pr

9、e-empt)(identify)disputed spaceenclosed space(consolidate)theytheytheyproducts.cumulative experiencecost. . .experience curvemultidimensional scalingsupply curveab ccostmarkets-7-icon standardizationthe structural paradigm of managementadditivitythe performance of a system can best be understood ana

10、lytically, as the sum of the performances of sub-units. through disaggregation of profitability and of the value-chain relying largely on accounting measures of performanceorganizations should be designed using: markets where information exchange is of low value or low cost hierarchies where informa

11、tion exchange is of high value and high costhence the philosophy of decentralized profit centers and corporate control including the analysis of shareholder value by business and the apparent nullity of corporate strategyhence, also, the emphasis on accountability and individual motivation-8-icon st

12、andardizationthe structural paradigm of changedesignstrategy formulation is a process of controlled and conscious thoughtstrategy is formulated by the ceo (or by a small group)strategy is simplestrategy should be uniquestrategy emerges from this thought process fully-formedstrategy should be explici

13、t and articulatedimplementation occurs only after formulation is complete -9-icon standardizationchallenges to the structural paradigmscounter-exampleshonda, motorola, nec, wal-mart, and dozens of others:scored spectacular reverses against corporations practicing/exemplifying the three standard para

14、digmsrarely have explicit strategies, except at the crudest levelattacked competitors head-on instead of segmenting away from themdeliberately mismatch goals against current strengths & weaknessesformulate strategy incrementally among middle management, rather than through an elite and deliberat

15、ive processevolve continuously in response to success or failurep&g, gm saturn, and dozens of others:attempted big attacks, and failed-10-icon standardizationchallenges to the structural paradigmsseven trendsexhaustion of the incremental advantage from structural playsvarietydemanded at any poin

16、t in time smaller segmentsoffered through time briefer segmentsfaster technology changeglobalizationredefines market shareinformation technologies permit finer understanding and greater flexibilityimplementation gapbcgs own practicerejection of the machine bureaucracy -11-icon standardizationthe new

17、 paradigm: behavior the new locus of competitive advantagethe key competitive advantage lies increasingly with behavior, rather than structureless: factor cost, product, segment, location-what you haveand more: innovation, speed, quality, customer response, understanding customer needs-what you doan

18、d the behavior that results from the strategy becomes indistinguishable for that which formulates it timeabcdabc dcostthe global pharmaceutical industrystructural drivers of profitability?economies of scaler&d expenditure1520251051500250035004500sales (average 1985-1989)returnon sales(%)upjohnsk

19、cibabmpfizerlillymerckglaxo152025105350250r&d expenditure (average 1985-1989)returnon sales(%)upjohnskcibabmpfizerlillymerckglaxo450550500400300l ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l051015202530024681012l ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l051015202530024681012the global pharmaceutical industrybehavioral drivers of profit

20、abilitydrug development timeability to identify high potential compounds returnon sales(%)returnon sales(%)average time from us ind to nda filing (index)average clinical gain of drugs externally licenced (index, as rated by the fda)upjohnskcibapfizerlillymerckglaxobristol meyersupjohnskcibapfizerlil

21、lymerckglaxobristol m-14-icon standardizationthe global pharmaceutical industrycompetitive positioning in capabilities space external innovativeness index1squibbcibamerckpfizerbristolskscheringupjohnglaxorochelilly1. average innovativeness (as rated by the fda) of licensed drugs approved by the fda

22、in the 1980s.2. time from u.s. ind filing to nda filingthe global pharmaceutical industrycompetitive positioning in capabilities space-80%-60%-40%-20%0%20%40%60%02468101214l ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ldevelopment time2 (as a % from average)-15-icon standardizationstructure versus behaviorwhy cap

23、abilities matterthe premises of new competitive theorycapabilities can be identified objectivelythey can be measuredthey are stablethey differentiate among competitorsdifferences in capabilities explain differences in profitsthe value of building capabilities can be specifiedthe method for building

24、capabilities can be specified-16-icon standardizationthe behavioral paradigm of strategy contentcapabilities-based positioningweproductswhite space(pre-empt)(identify)disputed spaceenclosed space(consolidate)theytheytheycapabilitiescapabilities-17-icon standardizationthe behavioral paradigm of manag

25、ementnetworkinformation technology enables nodal information flowsteams are more effective than markets and hierarchiesempowerment is worth more than accountabilityshared purpose (vision) is worth more than controlthe informal organization is more valuable than the formalthe performance of a system

26、must be understood holisticallysystems dynamics, not accounting analysisassets may be additive, but capabilities are multplicativethe role of organization is to facilitate the flow of knowledge among nodes-18-icon standardizationthe behavioral paradigm of changelearningthe world is too complex and t

27、oo fast moving for centralized, deliberate strategies to be feasible or valid for longemployees at all levels need and expect challenge, responsibility and freedom to innovatethey need to own the strategy adaptation needs to occur:continuously, not continuallyat all levels of the organization, not j

28、ust the topin response to events, not abstracted from themstrategy formulation and implementation are continuous and mutually modifying-19-icon standardizationstructural versus behavioral paradigms segment positioning competitive advantage is achieved in product/market spaceadditivity the performanc

29、e of an organization is the sum of the performances of its partsdesign strategy and implementation are separate processesstructuralstrategymanage-mentchangebehavioralcapabilities positioning competitive advantage is achieved in capabilities space network the performance of an organization depends on

30、 its behavior as a systemlearning thought, action and experience are intertwined, not sequential -20-icon standardizationan exampletime based competitionsegment positioning tbc cannot be understood as a new segmentadditivity the problem addressed by tbc arises from managing each value-added step or

31、function separately design tbc cannot be implemented through a grand plancapabilities positioning but it can be understood as a new capability network but the oe methodology comprises managing the system as an integrated wholelearning but it can be implemented through collaboration and incrementalis

32、mstructuralbehavioralstrategymanage-mentchange-21-icon standardizationan analogythe advent of mechanized warfare 1916-1936from:static, positional, defensiveinfrequent, major assaults concentration of strengthpreparatory logisticsfront line numberscentralized staff planningdeterministic planningfunct

33、ional divisionsto:mobile, tactical, aggressivecontinuous operationssurprise, speedbattlefield logisticsintelligence, technologyfield commandimprovisational joint operations-22-icon standardizationbcgs consulting method identify key capabilities & competences required in the businessmeasure the c

34、lients capabilities and competences map the competitive space identify how trends will change the map develop the strategy specify the platforms required to enable the strategyassess the current platforms in relation to the ideal build the new platforms-23-icon standardizationbcgs consulting method

35、identify the key capabilities & competences required in your businessthose that your organization is pursuing-beliefs auditthose that competitors are pursuing-competitive assessmentthose that customers value-focus groups, market interviews measure your capabilities and competences your performan

36、ce versus the best competitors-benchmarkingtheir value to the customer -behavioral research, conjointrelation of capabilities to profitability-profitability analysis-24-icon standardizationbcgs consulting method map the competitive space strategic mappingdimensions of the space (capabilities, compet

37、ences, products, markets)relative positioning (competitive advantage)value potential (where the paying customers are) identify how the map will change trends analysisdemand-side: trends in capabilities expected/ valued by the customersupply-side: trends in technologies that enable new capabilitiesco

38、mpetitive and regulatory trends-25-icon standardizationbcgs consulting method develop the strategy strategic analysisfocussing on, or investing in, or leveraging offa current capability or a competence or a product/market positionto achieve a new capability or competence or product/market positionth

39、at offers a desired combination of profit and growth specify the ideal platforms required by the strategy platform specificationdefine a small list of required platforms, one per capabilityspecify the content of each separately, in terms of:-information systems, -human resource management policies,

40、-organizational structure, -common culture, -systems dynamics (ie. internal process flows) and -shared vision-26-icon standardizationbcgs consulting method assess the current platforms in relation to the idealidentify gapsset priorities build the new platform acquisitions, alliances corporate develo

41、pmentinternal restructuring change managementlearning by doing oeinformation systems it architecturemeasures of progress in gaining capabilities capability metrics diagnostics: organization information oe culture human resources-27-icon standardizationan agenda for the futuresome hypotheses to testcapability differences explain variations in company or industry profitability more than do structural differencescapability differences are more stable than structural differencesall capabilities can be measuredcapability differences determine (and therefore predi