The Art of War for the Enterprise

The Art of War for the Enterprise:

The Key Elements of Agility and Innovation in Business

Author: Richard PlattFormer Intel Corporate Innovation Program Manager and

The Senior Instructor for Innovation MethodsCONTACT INFO | EMAIL: [email protected] | PHONE: (503) 805-7612

mailto:[email protected]

10/16/07 Property of Strategy + Innovation Group LLC 2

Author: Richard Platt | All Rights Reserved

Using the Analogy of Warfare?Competition: The struggle among organisms for food, space

and other vital requirements (Webster’s Dictionary)Put another way: Competition is the wrestling for resources

or having desired relationshipsSurvival Analogies in the Animal Kingdom explain the

mechanisms but not the Rules / GuidelinesWarfare as the ‘Ultimate Competition’

Hard to refute, is there a better one that works?The argument against the use of Warfare Analogy is based on Utopian ideals and being PC; not practical, or usefulThere are Rules, Guidelines and Principles for Warfare and Non-Rules “All’s Fair in Love and War”Who Wins dependant on…Who is the most Adaptable

Where do you find a rules for Adaptability in an ever changing environment?

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Lets not have Political Correctness or even personal bias stop us from being profitable. If we are to succeed in business we need to be able to tear down our own biases and move beyond the rhetoric of those who don’t have to deal, or refuse to deal with realities of business and life.



Best Fit Model for AdaptabilityBusiness can be described as Darwinian –

“Survival of the Fittest” – Adaptability

Most Adaptable (Fastest, Biggest, Smartest, etc…)

The benefits of being “Alpha” of their species: Get to eat 1st

Procreate 1st

Garner the largest amount of resources, etc…Competition for Resources and Survival

Hindsight is insufficient. Essential to have an effective way to look toward the future, and create it. - Got to have tools to do this

Presenter

Presentation Notes

This is about being able to see things analogously, an aspect of creative out of the box thinking. Thinking analogously and learning is another aspect that many animals can’t emulate or do. Adaptability also means being able to Innovative.



There are multiple battlegrounds:Primarily in the mind of the customer AND then in the

marketplace:Market share and influence in the mind of the customer– harmonizing with customers needs/wantsCompeting against a ‘brother’ company in the innovation space – out innovating your competitorCompeting against a ‘brother’ company in the core competency space – known as Red OceanThere are multiple others…..

Business Warfare is about Winning ‘Hearts and Minds’ & Gaining

Competitive Advantage

Source: Adapted from the Book – “Customer Chemistry” -- http://www.inc.com/resources/inc500/existingcustomers.html

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Winning in business is about winning hearts and minds (of customers), not just beating the competition



Data: The Hard TruthFortune 500: 46 year period (on average)

1970 – 1983: 1/3 fell of the list or out of business30 companies left the list every year; 6% turnover / year

Forbes 100: 70 Year period1917 – 1987: 61 companies no longer existed

Average of 1 company / year disappeared

S&P 500: Originally 90 top companies, expanded to 500 in 19571997: 74 companies remained of the original 500Avg. Mortality Rate: 10 companies / yearAvg. Life Span: steadily decreased from 50 to 25 years

“By 2020, > ¾ of the S&P 500 will consist of companies that don’t exist today.”

Key Question: Why?

Source: “Business Model Warfare” article by Langdon Morris • May 2003

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Langdon Morris studied The Fortune 500, The Forbes 100 and The S&P 500: Fortune 500 list beginning in the year it was first created, 1955, through 2001 to identify the companies that were on the list one year but not the subsequent year. These are the living examples of what we might call the relentless progression of competition. Found that over this span of 46 years, an average of 30 companies per year left the list.(2) In some years there were more departures, in some years fewer, but the overall trend showed consistent turnover of about 6% each year. A study by planners at Shell found that by 1983, one-third of the companies listed among the 500 in 1970 had not only fallen from the list, but had gone out of business altogether.(3) The Forbes 100: In 1917, Forbes magazine created its own list of the largest 100 US companies. By 1987, 61 of those companies no longer existed. Over the seventy year span, in other words, an average of about one company per year disappeared. Of the remaining 39 original companies, 18 were still large enough to remain on the list in 1987. However, of the 18 companies, only two had managed to perform better than the overall stock market during the 70 year period. While the combined annual growth rate (CAGR) of US public companies from 1917 to 1987 was 7.5%, the 18 surviving companies managed a combined average of only 5.3%. The S&P 500 list provides a third reference point. In 1957, the S&P listing of 90 top companies was expanded to 500. By 1997, only 74 of the original 500 companies remained, an average mortality rate of more than 10 per year.4 But a more detailed analysis shows that the rate of mortality has been steadily increasing, with far more companies failing as the end of the century approached. The average life span of an S&P 500 company has steadily decreased from more than 50 years to fewer than 25 today.



A Sobering Yet Clear PatternProjecting forward its likely that only about

1/3 of today’s major corporations will survive as significant businesses for the next 25 years.

“Most will die or be bought out and absorbed because they are too slow to keep pace with change in the market.”

Source: Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan. Creative Destruction. Currency Doubleday, 2001. P. 14.

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Clearly doing what was done in the past is not helping business forge ahead competitively to survive. What about all of those employees lives who are going to be disrupted because management doesn’t know how to address the problems that they face now and who knows what the future challenges will be. If Monkeys use tools to get food, I’ve even seen Blue Birds use tools, there are of course other examples from the animal kingdom, go to your local zoo and see what happens with animals and the things that they use in their cages. Which begs the question if animals use tools to get food, fight with one another, etc...what is our problem as humans about why we don’t learn better to adapt and use other tools?



A Change ConspiracyThe three most critical market factors are:

Accelerating ChangeIncreasing CompetitionIncreasing Complexity

Resulting in drastically compressed planning and execution horizon for every company requiring faster responses throughout company

Root Cause Issue: Adaptability

Source: Business Model Warfare by Langdon Morris • May 2003

Presenter

Presentation Notes

I don’t think that anyone can refute these issues, what’s the root cause then? – rhetorical question Managing for Adaptability: Not understood / Poorly practiced, even as the pace of change continues to accelerate



Poor Habits Contribute“Change, is the common condition, not stability”

observed more than 60 years ago by economist Joseph Schumpeter...the very nature of market evolution to weaken some

companies while creating opportunities for others.

Instinctive habit of management is to look backwards to the past to guide a course into the future.

In an era characterized by a “Change Conspiracy”, this approach cannot succeed.

“This misplaced focus is usually only evident in hindsight, when market share, jobs, or stock value have already been lost.”

Source: Business Model Warfare by Langdon Morris • May 2003

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Schumpeter also coined the term “creative destruction” Source: Business Model Warfare by Langdon Morris • May 2003: Military leaders are familiar with this problem. They refer to it as “preparing to fight the last war.” Such preparations, even fully implemented with rigor and discipline, consistently fail. Whether it’s armored knights slaughtered by the crossbow, France’s Maginot Line (a 20th century monument to backward thinking), the Polish horse cavalry that rode out to face Hitler’s blitzkrieg, the American army reduced by Viet Cong guerrilla fighters, or civilian aircraft hijacked and turned into guided missiles, the history of warfare and of business is the history of innovations that render past strategies ineffective.



戦略法The Way of Strategy



Getting Grounded on the Basics

Highest Form of Competing: “Winning without Fighting” a.k.a. getting the true Win-Win.

Harmonizing with customer’s needs is KEY

Compete where your competitor is NOT. You need tools for this: using “Blue Ocean Strategy” (BOS) is one of the bestCol. John R. Boyd developed O-O-D-A LoopsObserve – Orient – Decide – Act same approach martial

artists use and based in part on the AOW

Framework on unfolding competitive awareness that provides a capability to look at the landscape while adapting to changes real time

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Based in part on “The Art of War” and other authors on warfare and competition with deep research into the field of decision making in the domain of warfare. Agility, Speed and Quality of decision making in the disciplines of business [and war fighting]



What OODA Loop speed really means

Implicit Guidance & Control

Know what to do

Act

And be able to do it

Unfolding Interaction

With Environment

Action (Test)

Feedback

Decide

Decision (Hypothesis)

Feed Forward

Feed Forward

Feedback

While learning from the

experience

Observe Orient

Feed Forward

Observations

Unfolding Circumstances

Outside Information

Unfolding Interaction

With Environment

Quickly understand

what’s going on

Implicit Guidance & Control

Cultural Traditions

Genetic Heritage

New Information Previous

Experience

Analyses & Synthesis

Source: Adapted from presentation by Chet Richards author of “Certain to Win”; http://www.belisarius.com/index.htmli

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In order to consistently and effectively defeat competitors or opponents, you must sequentially move through the OODA cycle whether you are aware of it or not. It is a mental framework and a model that can be used to dissect compressed timeframes in a logical and sequential manner. But as simple as it is to see and show it has many nuances that Boyd pointed out in order to make it a useful tool for winning. You can read more in the backup of the presentation. IF action is flowing smoothly and (nearly) instantaneously from orientation, as it should the vast majority of the time, then the speed that counts is the speed to reorient in response to changing external and internal conditions. That speed is symbolized by the Intel core duo chip. There is no case where slower is better. You may not take any action (that is, no action may flow from your current orientation), but your internal processor should always be faster than those of your competitors. Note that in the “incorrect” concept of the OODA loop (the O to O to D to A variety), speed and accuracy of decisions will tend to trade off. That is, you improve one only by shortchanging the other. This doesn’t happen in the OODA loop that Boyd actually drew.



OODA and Agility of the EnterpriseAgility is a time based strategy for operational success and notbased on size.Agility is a relative concept, not an absolute concept.Agility is an important attribute for project success, large or small.• Rapid prototyping projects and then refine by iterating (Read

“Serious Play” by Michael Schrage)• Recommend Rule Developing Experimentation (Blue

Elephants) application

Agility depends on organizational culture.

Source: “What Lessons Can the Agile Community Learn from a Maverick Fighter Pilot?” article by Steve Adolphhttp://www.belisarius.com

What Determines OODA Speed?• Ultimately Culture & climate of Trust encourages people to

use their initiative to further the goals of the organization• In such a climate, people solve the technical problems

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Agility is a time based strategy for operational success and is not based on size. A project is agile if it is able to execute its reorienting and action-taking cycle faster than the changes occurring in its environment. Agility is a relative concept, not an absolute concept. An agile project is one that works its OODA loop more quickly than changes can occur in the environment. A large slow moving project is agile if it can respond and shape changes in its environment in a timely manner. A small quick moving project may not be agile if it cannot stay ahead of and shape changes in its environment. Agility is an important attribute for project success, large or small. If we cannot execute our OODA loops more quickly than the changes are occurring in our environment, then the result will probably be that our project will get further and further behind, internal purpose and harmony will break down under the stress, and failure is likely. Agility depends on organizational culture. The talents that reduce our cycle time—unity and trust, skill and experience, mission, and focus—are cultural. Agile methodologies were created with the intention of unleashing these talents but a methodology cannot compensate for the lack of these talents in an organization.



Operating Inside Their OODA Loop“It’s like they’re moving in slow motion.” —Boyd describing “operating inside opponents’ OODA loops.”

“It’s like you’re commanding both sides.” — typical impression of a successful cheng / ch’i operation.

cheng - “orthodox, expected”

ch’i - “unorthodox, shocking, irregular.”

Operating inside an opponent’s OODA loop, (decision making process) makes it easier to set up and exploit cheng / ch’i situations

Source: Adapted from presentation by Chet Richards author of “Certain to Win”; http://www.belisarius.com/index.htmli

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Cheng – Orthodox – Expected – Red Ocean Strategy – Head to Head competition – “Bloody” and is the price you pay to be in the business that you are in Chi – Unorthodox – Unexpected – Blue Ocean Strategy – Go where your competitor is not competing against you. Where you will get the advantage and outflank them. This is also where you shape the market when you deeply understand some of the other underlying elements of Boyd’s Cycle, see backup for more on that.



Proof of OODA Loops in Action

Toyota Production and Development Systems are 2X faster than most of their competitorsApple iPod + iTunes combination and taking advantage of Napster’s failure with stakeholders (Recording Industry)Dell’s supply chain is shorter (in time) than its competitorsHonda – Yamaha War: 18 month war

Honda had 2X the # of designs in the marketplace (testing in themarketplace) – out innovated YamahaYamaha left with 12 months of unsellable inventory – they lost

A time-compressed company does the same thing as a pilot in an OODA Loop … It’s the competitor who acts on information faster who is in the best position to win.

A time-compressed company does the same thing as a pilot in an OODA Loop … It’s the competitor who acts on information faster who is in the best position to win.

George Stalk, Jr. & Tom Hout, “Competing Against Time”, 180-181.

Source: Adapted from presentation by Chet Richards author of “Certain to Win”; http://www.belisarius.com/index.html

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Steve Jobs in my opinion is one of the few CEO’s with a more clear understanding of competition than any other CEO that I’m aware of, few CEO’s have a design / user centric mentality, in fact no other CEO in the Fortune 500 has that background. Best example of this is that he saw the opportunity with Napster tanking and went to work on taking advantage of the opportunity. There were MP3 players already in the market but Steve combined Apple’s ability with being a Design / User Centric focused company by making the iPod player a far more aesthetically desirable product and then combined that with the iTunes platform and the industry relationships that he had w/ Disney and others, and then went and engaged with them that he didn’t yet have a relationship with. Result: a winning combination. This clearly demonstrates an awareness that many companies don’t operate under. He’s a real competitor no doubt about that.



Way of Strategy Summary1. Rigorously assess ALL environmental factors

Use OODA or something else that works?

2. Determine your company’s competitive stanceCompetitor focused (fast follower) or customer focused?

3. Find your Gaps – determine what you provide is effective and what is not

Find out your technical shortcomings ASAP and solve quickly

4. Find out what the customer wants (explicitly and implicitly)Get into the Mind Of the Customer (MOC) – there are tools for this

5. Incorporate findings from above and rapidly Prototype different Strategies (Virtual is cheapest and fastest)

Investigate – Propose – Iterate – Learn – Refine – Deploy



革新法The Way of Innovation


Author: Richard Platt | All Rights ReservedCorporate Infrastructure Barrier or Enabler of Innovation?

Innovative Concept

For the Innovator:Get your track shoes on to

run the “corporate gauntlet”For Corporations:

This isn’t a system its “trial by fire”

This is what passes for an Innovation Pipeline in most companies today

Decisions made at mid- level, made even more

difficult across silo’d orgs, which then turns it into a

political discussion

Snr Mgmt expects the mid-level mgmt to vet good from bad ideas before it gets to them

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The corporate structure and its immune system (MOST companies have it): Majority of new concepts surviving the “Corporate Gauntlet” is having senior management sponsorship, funding and protection Corporate Structure can be innovation expediter or limiter Known Issues / Common Barrier: - Any New concept / idea is going against: Already committed resources Established Product Life Cycle and processes Established Plan Of Record (POR) commitments to current platforms New concepts and options stifled / ignored Organizational and personal agendas of decision makers in a constrained resource environment ANALOGOUS STORY: The Story of Clint Eastwood and Sandra Locke in the film “The Gauntlet” -- where the status quo of corruption in the Phoenix police department was going to be upset if the prostitute was allowed to testify in court. The old “worn out”, drunken cop (Eastwood) was not expected to stand up let alone face the attack of his fellow officers in completing his mission to deliver his charge to the court in Phoenix.



Impact to Speed & Efficiency

Impact of a corporate structure on innovation:

Corporation NOT setup to Integrate or Effectively Exploit innovation opportunities

Even profitable ideas don’t make the cutPolitical element enters into decision making (away from data driven decision making)Inadequate / Insufficient / No resourcingMomentum and Speed of implementation slowed or stoppedSiloed efforts (not-holistic)

RESULT: Few new Strategies to enable corporation in new markets or profitability. Bureaucracy rules, if the ones at the top are the only one’s with good ideas

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Example of How a Corporate Innovation Infrastructure is supported within the presentation: “Analysis of a Corporate Innovation Strategy”



What is Industrial Innovation*? …something that people VALUE and are willing to pay

for (it’s about providing jobs a.k.a. as solving problems)

* A.K.A.: Commercial Innovation Source: David Verduyn (c2c-solutions Inc) - All Rights Reserved

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The End Result and What you’re Shooting for is: increased value in the form of new or improved functionality, reduced cost, a price increase (good for the seller), a price decrease (good for the buyer), better margin for the seller, or some combination of these. Instead of focusing on the selling model as most companies are want to do, This is the Buying Decision Model – Get this right and you can now be in a position to Win customers away from your competitors. According to this definition not every new or different idea qualifies as an innovation. In fact only a small percentage qualify. Innovative ideas, by definition, create value for their users and valuable competitive advantage for their owners, along with economic rewards. However, even innovations that does not have much impact on the market can be significant and be critically important if it focuses on the bottom line (increasing margin) a.k.a. “Protecting the Castle”. Especially if they happen to help a company keep up with or surpass its competition. In this context innovation can be used to defend, to block competitors from gaining share even as it can also be used to attack. – I’ve personally seen this done at some companies.



Why is Industrial Innovation Important?Technology and Service Based Business commoditize over the long run…Global Competition Drives Down the PriceInnovation (Value Provided to Customer) is the fighter of Product and Service Price Deflation -- this is where Margin Lives!!Innovation is actually a Core CompetencyUNDERSTAND: strategy and Innovation are inexorably tied together. Strategy pulls everything together, without it innovation is rudderless over the long term

Other Reasons:Aging Product / Service Lines Business Decline Customer DefectionBureaucracy of Large Enterprise

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Eroding Margins – Globalization, can’t fight it, better join it



Systematic Innovation Methods

All brands, logos and trademarks remain the sole property of their respective ownersAll brands, logos and trademarks remain the sole property of their respective owners

…improves an engineer / problem solver’s ability to get to fundamental root cause, along with suggesting innovative solutions to solving problems

1/3 of Top 25 Most Innovative Companies (BusinessWeek) use Systematic Innovation Methods, and ½ of the Top 10 of thoseCompelling results show these have been used to help tough solvetechnical problems enhancing innovativeness of world class companies

Companies Now using Systematic Innovation Methods:

Presenter

Presentation Notes

BusinessWeek mapped the most innovative companies, what Dave Verduyn and I did was map why they were innovative, see next slide for that.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.gizmodo.com/images/SamsungLogo_01_300.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/index.php&h=225&w=300&sz=3&tbnid=2XzwzBk-DjQJ:&tbnh=83&tbnw=111&hl=en&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsamsung%2Blogo%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-36,GGLG:en%26sa%3DN

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.elszo.hu/whirlpool-logo.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.elszo.hu/akciok.htm&h=163&w=300&sz=10&tbnid=smP4kF4xs38J:&tbnh=60&tbnw=111&hl=en&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwhirlpool%2Blogo%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-36,GGLG:en%26sa%3DN

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://uploads.2tm.it/uploads/1/20/allegato/pf.siemens.20050111.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.2tm.it/portfolio_all.aspx&h=180&w=300&sz=8&tbnid=JpJg1wq6Y98J:&tbnh=66&tbnw=111&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsiemens%2Blogo%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-36,GGLG:en

http://www.company.ferrari.com/cgi-bin/test.dll/ferrari/scripts/home.jsp?language=ENGLISH

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cs.northwestern.edu/~watsonb/support/pgcom_logo_top.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cs.northwestern.edu/~watsonb/support.shtml&h=61&w=123&sz=8&tbnid=pULj0RiVsb4J:&tbnh=41&tbnw=84&hl=en&start=8&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dproctor%2Band%2Bgamble%2Blogo%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-36,GGLG:en

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.seattleu.edu/scieng/engpc/stdntprj/ME051/Boeing_logo_r.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.seattleu.edu/scieng/engpc/stdntprj/ME051/&h=148&w=200&sz=4&tbnid=zQPbyxsTqCoJ:&tbnh=73&tbnw=99&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dboeing%2Blogo%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-36,GGLG:en

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.mtech.edu/career/images/Shell_logo.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.mtech.edu/career/Corporate%2520Supporters.htm&h=227&w=262&sz=4&tbnid=iPQnnI4oLs4J:&tbnh=92&tbnw=107&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dshell%2Blogo%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-36,GGLG:en



Systematic Innovation Methods Mapped to Problems

Property of: Richard Platt (Strategy + Innovation Group LLC) and David Verduyn (c2c-solutions Inc)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Note: This work is the combination of the experience of both myself and Dave Verduyn, combined about 25 years of experience using the tools and methods and the types of problems that they’ve been most effective solving. The list of tools are the most widely used systematic innovation methods combined into a single matrix mapped to the most typical of problems faced by an enterprises and technical personnel. This version of the matrix only partially shows the # of problem statements, there are 15 typical problem statements in all so far to date (9/30/07).



What Methods Increase Speed and Growth?

New Product Development (NPD) investments should impact:

Speed to marketProfitability

Accelerating NPDStudy of 233 Manufacturing firms9 different NPD Acceleration approaches:

Used by Permission. Original presentation by SBTI – Sigma Breakthrough Technologies Inc



1st What Type of Competitor Are YouWhat type of a competitor are you?

Pioneer ? Creates new markets, new-to-world products …

Fast Follower ?Studies markets and enters when they ramp-up …

General ?Core business area competitor, #1, or #2 in market ownershipCan be both pioneering and fast following

Do you fit in one category, or does each NPD team need to be classified by their goals?


Presenter

Presentation Notes

I could only use 1 of the slides for this presentation but it makes a # of different points when you get to the next slide. If you want more contact me or Joe Ficalora the VP from SBTI who shared these findings with me.



9 ApproachesSupplier Involvement (SCI)Lead User Involvement (LUI)Acceleration of activities and tasks (AST) Reduction of parts and components (DFA)Training and Rewarding Employees (TRE)Implementation of support Systems and Structures (SST)Stimulating Cross-Functional Cooperation (XFC)Customer Emphasis (VOC)Simplification of organizational structure (SOS)


Presenter

Presentation Notes

Question is which ones of these were the most effective in reducing time to market and time to profitability.



-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Speed Beta

Prof

itabi

lity

Bet

a

SCI LUI AST DFA TRE SST XFC VOC SOS

Key Results: Pioneers, Market CreatorsPioneers have emphasis on either speed or profitability, NPD teams must choose their approach carefully if pioneering


Bureaucratic structures can’t get speed

Matrixed groups help but still won’t overcome internal politics

which slows speed

Listening to the customer / user is both speedy and more profitable

No structure for innovation, reduced

profitability

Anything that increases speed

is goodness

Increase speed of supplier response

Bureaucratic structures can’t get speed

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Rsq for Speed was 0.72 total, Rsq for Profitability was 0.62 Significant at p<0.05 for any beta >0.2 LEGEND SCI Supplier Involvement - LUI Lead User Involvement - ASTAcceleration of activities and tasks (AST) - DFADesign For Assembly (Reduction of parts and components, and process optimization with design) – TRE Training and Rewarding Employees (TRE) – SST Implementation of support Systems and Structures (SST) - XFC Stimulating Cross-Functional Cooperation - VOC Voice of the Customer (Customer Emphasis) – SOS Simplification of organizational structure



Opportunity-driven Business Development Summary on Moving with Speed

Fastthinking

Fastdecision-making

Fasttomarket

Sustainingspeed

Technology Trend Forecasting & road-mapping

Anticipating by looking for problems

Spotting trends

Apply Systematic Innovation Methods

Putting every idea through the “grinder” – letting the best idea win

Setting guidelines

Reduce Time-To-Decision

Getting rid of bureaucracy

Shuffling portfolios

Rule Developing Experimentation

Constantly reassessing

Launching a crusade

Reduce Time-To-Market (Rapid Prototyping)

Owning competitive advantage

Getting suppliers to move fast

Staying beneath the radar

Institutionalizing innovation

Simplicity

Boundarylessness

Self-confidence & growth attitude

Financial flexibility

Business Process Mgmt System

Managing the innovation pipeline

Staying close to the customer

Adapted from “It’s not be big that eat the small…It’s the fast that eats the slow”, J.Jennings & L.Haughton Source: www.1000ventures.com

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Something not on my resume is that I’m a certified Ten3 business coach, which is where this slide was originally adapted from, obviously I’ve updated it with additional knowledge and experience having worked through many of these issues. Something that I can say with pride about my previous employer and my last manager supported. Keep learning to become the best at what you do.



SummaryThere are Rules, Guidelines and Tools for Effectively and Efficiently Competing (Winning)

Increase Speed of Decision Making and Shorten the Time To Process

Aggressively cut wasteful time consuming processes - You gain a valuable commodity

Disciplined and Systematic Approach towards Innovating is done by “Best-In-Class” companies, no process, limited results (at best)

Increase Value for Customers / Users – You get increased shareholder value as a Result

CONTACT INFO | EMAIL: [email protected] | PHONE: (503) 805-7612

mailto:[email protected]

BACKUP



Other Corporate Systematic Innovation Users

Automotive

Aerospace

Consumer Goods

Microelectronics

Medical Technology

Petroleum

Optics/Electronics

Chemical

All brands, logos and trademarks remain the sole property of their respective owners



Innovation AssumptionThere aren’t any decent metrics for InnovationInnovation = Growth

1. = Change = Measure Profitability over timeBoth lagging and leading indicators are available

Qtr-to-Qtr profitability and growth measures & targets“Real Options Theory” used as predictive tool for profitability of a project

2. = Change Over TimeMeasure 1st and then you can actually begin to see where your process isn’t working

TTP – Time-to-ProductivityTTM – Time-to-MarketTPT – Through Put Time of Cycle

You only get results from what you measure and “…you cannot manage what you don’t measure.” – Andy Grove

Presenter

Presentation Notes

This is best approached as a mathematical problem. What is the best tool for Rates of Change: Calculus; mathematicians, chemists, bankers, economists, quality and reliability folks and many others who look at rates of change know this Reason why you don’t see this more often is senior Management is NOT really focused on or really being held accountable to these particular targets, so you don’t have a process

The Art of War for the Enterprise

Business

Transcript of The Art of War for the Enterprise