อนาคตของการบริหาร : The Future of Management

(From the writer : Gary Hamel; the future of manegement- http://discussionleader.harvardbusiness.org/hamel/excerpts/)

In a world where strategy life cycles are shrinking, innovation is the only way a company can renew its lease on success. It’s also the only way it can survive in a world of bare-knuckle competition.

In decades past, many companies were insulated from the fierce winds of Schumpeterian competition. Regulatory barriers, patent protection, distribution monopolies, disempowered customers, proprietary standards, scale advantages, import protection, and capital hurdles were bulwarks that protected industry incumbents from the margin-crushing impact of Darwinian competition. Today, many of these fortifications are collapsing:

• Deregulation and trade liberalization are reducing the barriers to entry in industries as diverse as banking, air transport, and telecommunications.

• The power of the Web means upstarts no longer have to build a global infrastructure to reach a worldwide market. This has allowed companies like Google, eBay, and MySpace to scale their businesses freakishly fast.

• The disintegration of large companies, via de-verticalization and outsourcing, has also helped new entrants. In turning over more and more of their activities to third-party contractors, incumbents have created thousands of “arms suppliers” that are willing to sell their services to anyone. By tapping into this global supplier base of designers, brand consultants, and contract manufacturers, new entrants can emerge from the womb nearly full-grown.

• Incumbents must also contend with a growing horde of ultra-low-cost competitors—companies like Huawei, the Chinese telecom equipment maker that pays its engineers a starting salary of just $8,500 per year. Not all cut-price competition comes from China and India. Ikea, Zara, Ryanair, and AirAsia are just a few of the companies that have radically reinvented industry cost structures.

• Web-empowered customers are also hammering down margins. Before the Internet, most consumers couldn’t be sure whether they were getting the best deal on their home mortgage, credit card debt, or auto loan. This lack of enlightenment buttressed margins. But consumers are becoming less ignorant by the day. One U.K. Web site encourages customers to enter the details of their most-used credit cards, including current balances, and then shows them exactly how much they will save by switching to a card with better payment terms.

• In addition, the Internet is zeroing-out transaction costs. The commissions earned by market makers of all kinds—dealers, brokers, and agents—are falling off a cliff, or soon will be.

• Distribution monopolies—another source of friction—are under attack. Unlike the publishers of newspapers and magazines, bloggers don’t need a physical distribution network to reach their readers. Similarly, new bands don’t have to kiss up to record company reps when they can build a fan base via social networking sites like MySpace.

Collapsing entry barriers, hyperefficient competitors, customer power—these forces will be squeezing margins for years to come. In this harsh new world, every company will be faced with a stark choice: either set the fires of innovation ablaze, or be ready to scrape out a mean existence in a world where seabed labor costs (Chinese prisoners, anyone?) are the only difference between making money and going bust.

Given this, it’s surprising that so few companies have made innovation everyone’s job. For the most part, innovation is still relegated to organizational ghettos—it is still the responsibility of dedicated units like new product development and R&D, where creative types are kept safely out of the way of those who have to “run the business.”

Today innovation is the buzzword du jour, but there’s still a yawning chasm between rhetoric and reality. If you doubt this, seek out a few entry-level employees and ask them the following questions:

1. How have you been equipped to be a business innovator? What training have you received? What tools have you been supplied with?

2. Do you have access to an innovation coach or mentor? Is there an innovation expert in your unit who will help you develop your breakout idea?

3. How easy is it for you to get access to experimental funding? How long would it take you to get a few thousand dollars in seed money? How many levels of bureaucracy would you have to go through?

4. Is innovation a formal part of your job description? Does your compensation depend in part on your innovation performance?

5. Do your company’s management processes—budgeting, planning, staffing, etc.—support your work as an innovator or hinder it?

Don’t be surprised if these questions provoke little more than furrowed brows and quizzical looks. Truth is, there are not more than a handful of companies on the planet that have, like Whirlpool, built an all-encompassing, corporatewide innovation system.

***************************

All of these links, you will gain a detailed understanding of The Future of Management

1)This is Thai version : http://www.gotomanager.com/books/details.aspx?menu=books,new&id=921

2)The FOM Expanded : http://www.managementlab.org/files/u2/pdf/publications/future_of_management.pdf

3) The Future of Mangement tool kit : http://discussionleader.harvardbusiness.org/hamel/flatmm/miw_tool.pdf

ICE -Innovation, Creativity, Entrepreneurship @ CapitaLand

In 2007, 10 ICE Camps were conducted. 400 participants came from Australia, China, Japan, Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore to network and generate ideas.

For CapitaLand, innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship are key success factors that will differentiate the Group from its competitors. With this in mind, the ICE (Innovation, Creativity, Entrepreneurship) programme was started in 2006 to be the ‘entrepreneurial glue’ that harnesses CapitaLand’s real estate strengths – deep market and real estate domain knowledge, financial engineering skills, strong management bench and robust balance sheet – into one powerful whole. This Group-wide initiative aims to tap on the innovative spirit, creative energies and enterprising mindsets of all staff. In 2007, 10 ICE Camps were conducted. 400 participants came from Australia, China, Japan, Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore to network and generate ideas. A total of 350 ideas were submitted to ICE Berg, a platform that rewards staff when they contribute their ideas. The objective of the ICE Camp is to equip participants with the framework and process to generate, evaluate and market ideas. The ideas can cover products, services, processes, business models and management practices – anything that can improve performance. Members of the senior management attend a presentation session at the end of the second day to consider these ideas and to help shape the ideas into something that can be implemented. Besides ICE Camps, ICE-related events were conducted to promote networking in a fun setting and to stimulate learning beyond the classroom. These included sessions with “ICE personalities” like The Ascott Group President and CEO Jennie Chua and visits to companies known for having an “ICE tradition” like IKEA and 3M. From:http://www.capitaland.com/export/htmlgalleries/AnnualReport2007

CLIMB:CapitaLand Institute of Management & Business.

CLIMB @ CapitLand

PROPERTY giant CapitaLand has opened its own business school at a heritage building in Sentosa.

Yesterday, chief executive Liew Mun Leong also used the venue to launch a book that is a compilation of nine years of e-mail messages to his staff, written mostly on Sundays.

The developer spent $10 million to renovate the building, which used to house a museum of rare stones. It leased the building earlier this year for a period of 10 years for Climb, short for CapitaLand Institute of Management & Business.

Climb has started offering learning and development programmes for the group’s staff - about 8,900 globally, of whom 1,400 are in Singapore.

Started last year, Climb has six full-time staff and previously conducted its courses at various locations, including hotels.

Mr Liew, who is involved with some of Climb’s programmes, yesterday launched his book, Building People: Sunday Emails From A CEO, with President SR Nathan, who also officially opened Climb.

The book contains some of the e-mail that Mr Liew has written to his staff in past years - an activity which he described in his book as enjoyable and relaxing.

An e-mail sent in 1998 carried the message: ‘Don’t take everything from the table. Leave something for your partners, too.’

Another, sent in 2001 and titled ‘There are no fat CapitaLand executives’, addressed the group’s ‘keep fighting fit’ culture.

Mr Liew ended it with: ‘So get out, you lazy bones and get going. It is all about discipline and then habit… Have fun doing it!’

 

Source: The Straits Times 23 Nov 07

http://sgpropertypress.wordpress.com/2007/11/24/capitaland-opens-business-school-as-ceo-launches-book/

Bangalore In 2025

Bangalore In 2025: Global Innovation Hub ...or Backwater?

by Navi Radjou on September 10, 2008 10:58 AM : at  Harvard Business Publishing

http://discussionleader.hbsp.com/radjou/2008/09/bangalore-in-2025-global-innov.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-LISTSERV-_-SEPT_2008-_-GLOBALBIZ

Last week, I attended at Stanford University a fascinating event hosted by the World Economic Forum (WEF). WEF had invited me to join some of the world's foremost innovation experts to address crucial questions surrounding three key topics: geographical innovation clusters, innovation talent, and collaborative innovation. WEF plans to use our suggestions to help structure the discussion among global CEOs who will attend their annual Davos meeting in 2009.

Participants were asked to debate how high-tech clusters like Silicon Valley, Taiwan's Hsinchu Science Park, and Bangalore will evolve in coming decades. Two teams (for this post, I will name them "Pollyanna" and "Cassandra") were formed to envision the future of Bangalore by unfolding two contrasting scenarios: a positive scenario and a gloomier one. By projecting ourselves into 2025, both teams were asked to look back and identify the driving forces - i.e., crucial business/policy decisions (or lack thereof!) made over the past 17 years (2008-2025) - behind our respective scenarios.

I led the Pollyanna team. We envisioned Bangalore in 2025 as a global innovation hub not only in IT, but also in clean energy, bioengineering and medical devices (e.g., next-gen pacemakers), and even space technology. We credited this superstardom enjoyed by Bangalore in 2025 to the diversification strategy of Bangalore's policy-makers who, in 2009, smartly decided to place big bets on emerging non-IT technologies like clean tech.

My optimistic team "recalled" the rise of a new-generation of pragmatic politicians during the 2010s who massively invested in education and infrastructure, thus swelling Bangalore's talent pool and making high-tech manufacturing finally viable in the region for multinationals. In addition to aggressively promoting India's "tech brand" abroad, these visionary politicians also partnered with MIT and Stanford to set up new multi-disciplinary research universities in Bangalore. These R&D institutions were allowed to spin off their cutting-edge technologies into startups.

We also gave much credit to the "returnees" - thousands of US-resident Indians with PhDs and MBAs who, from 2012 onward, returned en masse to Bangalore to launch startups and run research institutions. These New Argonauts, as Berkeley Professor AnnaLee Saxenian designates them, were instrumental in accelerating the inflow of scientific knowledge, business acumen, and VC capital from the US to Bangalore. These entrepreneurial professionals helped forge strong social networks both within India, as well as with their Western partners. By 2020, many of these returnees became billionaires in India by scaling up their clean tech and bioengineering startups into multinationals. By 2025, they had become India's Bill Gates and serve as new role models for the Indian youth.

After my team's dream session was over, we were asked to mingle with the Cassandra team and hear their version of Bangalore's future. They described a gloomier scenario whereby by 2025, Bangalore would become the backwater of the global innovation markets. How come? Having placed all its development eggs in the IT basket, the city had become an IT services sweatshop that peddles its white-collar services to the highest Western bidder. There is no real innovation happening in Bangalore as high cost of housing combined with nightmarish traffic congestions had kept both prospective investors and PhD-armed scientists at bay. Starting in 2008, political leaders who formed the successive coalition governments spent more time jockeying for power than investing in vocational education and reforming universities to promote industry-academy cooperation. The result? By 2020, Indian IT vendors like Infosys and multinationals like IBM and Cisco had relocated their headquarters and R&D operations to business-friendly Indian cities like Chennai and Hyderabad.

Now, let's return to September 2008. As Yogi Berra put it well: "It's hard to make predictions, especially about the future." I personally can't forecast which scenario is more likely to play out for Bangalore in coming decades. Irrespective of what scenario unfolds, here are three hard truths that policy-makers in Bangalore must face (and hopefully react to):

1) Human infrastructure will become more critical than physical infrastructure. While building a world-class airport in Bangalore is important, it won't be frequented by investors if they can't find enough qualified talent in the city! And multi-lane highways and efficient ports are useless if they interconnect biotech campuses and clean tech factories that remain empty due to an acute skills shortage. To paraphrase Sam Pitroda, Chairman of the National Knowledge Commission, who also attended the WEF event, Bangalore's future success hinges on much it invests in blackboards as much as in roads.

2) Competition from Chennai and Hyderabad will heat up. While Bangalore steals the limelight as India's IT hub, other South Indian cities like Chennai and Hyderabad are quietly upping the ante by multiplying incentives for domestic and foreign tech investors. Take Chennai, for instance. Dubbed as the "intellectual capital" of India, Chennai boasts the largest number of engineering colleges in the country. Its progressive politicians exploit the region's above-par infrastructure to attract huge manufacturing investments from tech giants like Nokia. Watch out Bangalore: now Chennai aims to become India's nanotech R&D and manufacturing capital.

3) The software industry alone won't create enough employment. The Bangalore cluster is way too skewed towards the software and services sector, which can't absorb fast-enough the millions of young workers entering the labor market each year (the entire Indian software industry is expected to directly employ only 2.3 million workers by 2010). Bangalore has got to diversify and place bets on new technologies like clean tech and bioengineering, and beef up its manufacturing infrastructure. Otherwise, it will not only lose its innovation crown but will also face social unrest fueled by massive unemployment. 

Talent Management's ROI

From: The Daily Stat, Harvard Business Publishing Daily Stat: October 6, 2008 Talent Management's ROI  McKinsey research finds that multinational companies that do a better job of managing their people -- for instance, by making it easier for managers to rotate among jobs in different countries -- do better financially. McKinsey asked more than 450 global executives how many talent-management best practices their companies used and then ranked the companies accordingly. Those in the top third had profits per employee 39% higher than those in the bottom third. The top three global talent management practices associated with financial success:  1. Ensuring global consistency in management processes  2. Achieving cultural diversity in global setting  3. Developing and managing global leaders  SOURCE: "Why Multinationals Struggle to Manage Talent," The McKinsey Quarterly, May 2008

Cultural Capital

Cultural Capital in the C-Suite By Frank Brown
The corporate world is in an extreme state of flux. The sub-prime crisis, the incredible rise of parts of the developing world, developments in forgotten places like Africa and other factors are changing the game.

At the same time, the markets continuously scrutinize the short-term performance of companies and CEOs. Can we make any suggestions about the future from all this? What emerging trends will be critical for lasting leadership in the coming years?

Global experience and a worldly perspective will become increasingly important for corporate leaders as the marketplace evolves. Consider Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Renault and Nissan. He successfully operated a French and Japanese company in parallel over the last several years—a feat due, in no small part, to his understanding of the people in the organization and what it takes to effect change in their cultures. He also has a great appreciation for talent and makes a genuine effort to really get to know his team.

Another good example is Sam Palmisano at IBM. He once ran IBM Japan, speaks Japanese and is highly credentialed in the Asian community. His global perspective and ability to operate across geographies helped build IBM’s business in Asia.

American companies are slowly starting to appoint more non- U.S. leaders and those with a more worldly perspective. NYSE CEO John Thain, for example, is an American and veteran of U.S. capital markets, but his role in bringing together NYSE Euronext is a great global credential. Citi CEO Vikram Pandit is of Indian descent and, while spending the bulk of his career in U.S. capital markets roles, has a worldly perspective due to his background. However, there is still a pressing need to infuse more cultural capital into the C-Suite.

CEOs will continue to be challenged and expected to operate with a deep understanding of other cultures and business environments. An example is the recent opportunity Citi had to get a much-needed investment from Abu Dhabi. The two executives reportedly most involved in this transaction were leaders who had spent time in the Gulf and knew the people and the environment very well.

As Dean of INSEAD, the international business school, I constantly emphasize the importance of developing transcultural leaders with acute insight into their global marketplace who are as comfortable doing business in Mumbai or Tokyo as in London or New York. It will also be essential for U.S. companies—which tend to have boards comprised predominantly of U.S. nationals—to begin populating their boards with more culturally diverse members.

The issue of succession needs to be addressed, as well. Obviously this wasn’t a priority at Merrill and Citi, and it hurt those organizations during their crises. It is incumbent on boards of directors, analysts, auditors and others involved in the corporate sector to challenge management to plan for succession and to advance diverse leaders to the upper ranks to create options for eventual succession. Any leader who surrounds him or herself solely with white Anglo males going forward will have some pretty difficult questions to answer.

As our economy becomes more global, the need for corporations to develop leaders who can navigate risk, expand into new markets and operate with an international perspective has never been more apparent. Corner offices will increasingly be filled with leaders from all over the world, and the DNA of management will change to reflect the type of transcultural leadership that has proven to drive lasting results for corporations.

Frank Brown is the dean of INSEAD, a leading international business school with campuses in Europe and Asia.
Issue Date: April/May 2008, Posted On: 4/22/2008 :Fromhttp://www.chiefexecutive.net/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&AudID=35BDBBC785BB48B3AA51BD3622DBD145&tier=4&id=BB0CDFE7917A42E69B8E3E5B07F4A384