Product development is tough, without the added challenge of responding to an ever-changing client expectations.
To manage this process, almost all literature (and consultants - surprised??) preach adoption of New Product Introduction process - a holy grail to manage the inherent complexity of a new product development/launch.
The idea is to break down the complex process in to its components, put in place multiple toll-gates to ensure bad ideas get filtered out, and then the idea moves from conception to reality thru this birth canal.
In reality, product becomes a by-product of the process.
This, of course, is disastrous to consumer focussed firms. Compare Motorola/Nokia to Apple, as you will see what the end results looks like
The basic problem here is the same that afflicts all assembly-line production system - over specialization that takes away the big picture and kills creativity.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Healthcare providers - beware
Making health care more affordable is the key to making the US system sustainable.
Life, as we know it, in Healthcare provider industry, is going to change soon. And we are NOT talking about the healthcare reform act passed recently by the Congress.
Most Hospitals/Healtcare providers today lose money on standard Medicare and Medicaid services with all profits coming from private insurance payers.
The model has served quite well over the past seven decades – private profits subsidizing public healthcare cost, with support from tax payers to cover the rest. However, this model is increasingly becoming untenable and has started to fray, with full unraveling only couple of decades away, if that.
The basic challenge is changing demographics. As Baby boomers retire in large numbers and high structural employment over the short term, the tax-payer funded healthcare cost payment system will simply implode.
For Healthcare providers, the trends are ominous – they will face an increasing percentage of the client from Medicare/Medicaid pool (rising from current 45% to 65% over next 20 years) while the average reimbursements from tax-payers declining. The resulting situation will blow a hole in their balance sheets.
While there are 3 key strategic challenges facing the US healthcare industry:
1. Economic distortion due to employer funded insurance market that directly reduces individual incentives to self-ration healcare i.e. moral hazard;
2. Lack of Transparent data on cost and effectiveness of various healthcare providers, treatment options and medications
3. High administrative cost due to lack of uniform data exchange standards
the one challenge that Health care providers can tackle/solve on their own for their own financial well-being is reducing the administration cost.
The days of simply passing on the cost to private insurance payers ($100 for Kleenex tissues, anyone?) are rapidly coming to an end.
Life, as we know it, in Healthcare provider industry, is going to change soon. And we are NOT talking about the healthcare reform act passed recently by the Congress.
Most Hospitals/Healtcare providers today lose money on standard Medicare and Medicaid services with all profits coming from private insurance payers.
The model has served quite well over the past seven decades – private profits subsidizing public healthcare cost, with support from tax payers to cover the rest. However, this model is increasingly becoming untenable and has started to fray, with full unraveling only couple of decades away, if that.
The basic challenge is changing demographics. As Baby boomers retire in large numbers and high structural employment over the short term, the tax-payer funded healthcare cost payment system will simply implode.
For Healthcare providers, the trends are ominous – they will face an increasing percentage of the client from Medicare/Medicaid pool (rising from current 45% to 65% over next 20 years) while the average reimbursements from tax-payers declining. The resulting situation will blow a hole in their balance sheets.
While there are 3 key strategic challenges facing the US healthcare industry:
1. Economic distortion due to employer funded insurance market that directly reduces individual incentives to self-ration healcare i.e. moral hazard;
2. Lack of Transparent data on cost and effectiveness of various healthcare providers, treatment options and medications
3. High administrative cost due to lack of uniform data exchange standards
the one challenge that Health care providers can tackle/solve on their own for their own financial well-being is reducing the administration cost.
The days of simply passing on the cost to private insurance payers ($100 for Kleenex tissues, anyone?) are rapidly coming to an end.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Evolution of Corporations
However, before we even get to the question about outsourcing and free-trade, we need to understand the drivers of the same. And the trail begins with the basic question – what is a corporation?
Corporations, a legally defined term that enables group of individuals (capitalists) to pool their risk capital and organize for economic benefit (usually with limited personal liability – a great legal innovation), are the foundation of any modern capitalistic economy/society. Capitalism is the engine for growth over the past 300 years and has utterly transformed not only economies but also society at large – political, cultural, leisure, etc.
Besides lifting billions of people out of poverty, (today, a regular middle class person in the western world lives in greater luxury than medieval kings/monarchs), it has enabled the political freedom that we take for granted, as it has freed the power from land-ownership (which is limited and controlled by force) to ideas and risk-taking, that is open to anybody.
However, Corporations itself has morphed into their current form in three separate phases/evolution.
The first phase/evolution of corporations was in form of trading companies. Given the high risk and high capital requirements for international trading in the 17th century, capitalists pooled their risk capital to finance trade and share the profits. In this phase, corporations were essentially a vehicle to pool and distribute risk. Risk and equity was shared by everybody involved – the capitalists, the ship owner, the merchants, the captain and the crew. While capital got the lion’s share of the rewards, the rewards were nonetheless distributed to all parties and the corporation did no other function expect to enforce these rules.
The second phase/evolution of corporations was in form of organizing to produce/deliver products/services. As the agrarian economy transformed into industrial society in the 18th century while advances in naval technology and naval warfare reduced the risk of trading/piracy, risk capital was required to produce and deliver the goods and services. This led to the longest and greatest long-term economic boom ever, creating the middle class that would not only work for these corporations but also be the consumers for the goods and services. Corporations became the dominant form of organizing economic activity and had profound impact on all facets of life in the society.
The third phase/evolution of corporations is only now emerging. Corporations, especially the Fortune 500 firms, are now organizing ideas rather than actual delivery of product/services that these ideas produce. This is the essence of the Knowledge society/economy.
The new model is quite profound in the terms of how a corporation is managed/run and what kind of people/talent it attracts. The skills valued in the second model is now increasingly drawing lower value and productivity, with consequent declining wages or outsourcing of the same. This is not simply a cost-reduction driven move to increase profits – the market is increasingly rewarding the ability to innovate instead of simply deliver a product. The difference between the fortunes of Apple and Motorola is an excellent case in point
And US economy is leading this transformation. However, transition is painful - Broken down by income groups, the top income groups are facing unemployment rates less than 5% (full employment) while the bottom 2 groups are facing employment rates in excess of 25% (Depression era rates).
Corporations, a legally defined term that enables group of individuals (capitalists) to pool their risk capital and organize for economic benefit (usually with limited personal liability – a great legal innovation), are the foundation of any modern capitalistic economy/society. Capitalism is the engine for growth over the past 300 years and has utterly transformed not only economies but also society at large – political, cultural, leisure, etc.
Besides lifting billions of people out of poverty, (today, a regular middle class person in the western world lives in greater luxury than medieval kings/monarchs), it has enabled the political freedom that we take for granted, as it has freed the power from land-ownership (which is limited and controlled by force) to ideas and risk-taking, that is open to anybody.
However, Corporations itself has morphed into their current form in three separate phases/evolution.
The first phase/evolution of corporations was in form of trading companies. Given the high risk and high capital requirements for international trading in the 17th century, capitalists pooled their risk capital to finance trade and share the profits. In this phase, corporations were essentially a vehicle to pool and distribute risk. Risk and equity was shared by everybody involved – the capitalists, the ship owner, the merchants, the captain and the crew. While capital got the lion’s share of the rewards, the rewards were nonetheless distributed to all parties and the corporation did no other function expect to enforce these rules.
The second phase/evolution of corporations was in form of organizing to produce/deliver products/services. As the agrarian economy transformed into industrial society in the 18th century while advances in naval technology and naval warfare reduced the risk of trading/piracy, risk capital was required to produce and deliver the goods and services. This led to the longest and greatest long-term economic boom ever, creating the middle class that would not only work for these corporations but also be the consumers for the goods and services. Corporations became the dominant form of organizing economic activity and had profound impact on all facets of life in the society.
The third phase/evolution of corporations is only now emerging. Corporations, especially the Fortune 500 firms, are now organizing ideas rather than actual delivery of product/services that these ideas produce. This is the essence of the Knowledge society/economy.
The new model is quite profound in the terms of how a corporation is managed/run and what kind of people/talent it attracts. The skills valued in the second model is now increasingly drawing lower value and productivity, with consequent declining wages or outsourcing of the same. This is not simply a cost-reduction driven move to increase profits – the market is increasingly rewarding the ability to innovate instead of simply deliver a product. The difference between the fortunes of Apple and Motorola is an excellent case in point
And US economy is leading this transformation. However, transition is painful - Broken down by income groups, the top income groups are facing unemployment rates less than 5% (full employment) while the bottom 2 groups are facing employment rates in excess of 25% (Depression era rates).
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Outsourcing: Beneficial or Harmful to US?
So lets tackle what is a very controversial topic.
Many barrels of ink has been spilled on both side of the debate, although admittedly more on the cons side in the past few months. Amongst the top few reasons for opposing, restraining or even rolling-back Outsourcing and Global trade is the mercantilist trade/currency policies followed by the largest trading partner (China), collapse of the middle class in America due to outsourcing of service jobs to India / manufacturing jobs to China and un-sustainable trade deficits.
These issues/challenges highlighted are valid and true. There is no denying the fact that China is following a mercantilist trade and currency policy that depresses its currency by 40% (estimated by most respected economists), thereby not only exacerbating trade deficit with US but also ‘stealing’ export income of other countries. During the go-go growth years, people complained but accepted this as everybody was growing. Now that we are saddled with slow-to-nonexistent growth for the next few years (if not the decade), this is rapidly becoming a worldwide diplomatic issues with potentially ugly consequences.
Further, the great recession has exposed the decimation of the middle class in America. Easy money and loose credit camouflaged the reality of declining real wages and increasing disparity in wealth over the past decade, which has now come spectacularly undone. Loss of manufacturing and service jobs, for long the mainstay of the middle class in US, is creating economic havoc in an economy that depends on consumer spending and political system that encourages everybody to have the American Dream of ever-rising prosperity with each generation. The fall-out of this will be extremely consequential and potentially nasty
Unsustainable trade deficits, primarily a function of the first 2 factors, introduces another challenge to the policy makers. Ever increasing trade deficits, supported by ever increasing re-investments by trade surplus countries, creates easy money outside the control of feds and distorts credit pricing in the economy. This was the primary fuel of the enormous credit bubble that led to the current great recession and certainly needs to be tamed/controlled going forward.
Many barrels of ink has been spilled on both side of the debate, although admittedly more on the cons side in the past few months. Amongst the top few reasons for opposing, restraining or even rolling-back Outsourcing and Global trade is the mercantilist trade/currency policies followed by the largest trading partner (China), collapse of the middle class in America due to outsourcing of service jobs to India / manufacturing jobs to China and un-sustainable trade deficits.
These issues/challenges highlighted are valid and true. There is no denying the fact that China is following a mercantilist trade and currency policy that depresses its currency by 40% (estimated by most respected economists), thereby not only exacerbating trade deficit with US but also ‘stealing’ export income of other countries. During the go-go growth years, people complained but accepted this as everybody was growing. Now that we are saddled with slow-to-nonexistent growth for the next few years (if not the decade), this is rapidly becoming a worldwide diplomatic issues with potentially ugly consequences.
Further, the great recession has exposed the decimation of the middle class in America. Easy money and loose credit camouflaged the reality of declining real wages and increasing disparity in wealth over the past decade, which has now come spectacularly undone. Loss of manufacturing and service jobs, for long the mainstay of the middle class in US, is creating economic havoc in an economy that depends on consumer spending and political system that encourages everybody to have the American Dream of ever-rising prosperity with each generation. The fall-out of this will be extremely consequential and potentially nasty
Unsustainable trade deficits, primarily a function of the first 2 factors, introduces another challenge to the policy makers. Ever increasing trade deficits, supported by ever increasing re-investments by trade surplus countries, creates easy money outside the control of feds and distorts credit pricing in the economy. This was the primary fuel of the enormous credit bubble that led to the current great recession and certainly needs to be tamed/controlled going forward.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
So, why is it so difficult to build effective and efficient processes?
It seems quite simple, after all - Establish workflow, Establish rules, Implement the same leveraging technology,Train people and voila; you are ready to go.
Reality, unfortunately, is however messy.
To begin with, lets examine the first step - Establish Workflow. If only this was as simple as it sounds.
Work flows not only needs to contend with common-sense rules but also with the political map of every organization. Who gets to decide on what and why? What are the exceptions to these workflows, and why?
How do you establish workflows when you have an extended organization spanning multiple locations, even countries? How about time zone differences and the ineviable delays it will introduce?
What about firms with additional complexities? Multiple product lines, multiple suppliers, multiple sales channels, etc.?
Finally, not all workfows exists within the firm's boundaries. It extends to customers, distributors and suppliers as well. The need to include them stems from Strategic reasons to Regulatory. But then, how do we coopt them into 'our' workflows? And, in parallel, how should we conform to 'their' workflows?
It seems quite simple, after all - Establish workflow, Establish rules, Implement the same leveraging technology,Train people and voila; you are ready to go.
Reality, unfortunately, is however messy.
To begin with, lets examine the first step - Establish Workflow. If only this was as simple as it sounds.
Work flows not only needs to contend with common-sense rules but also with the political map of every organization. Who gets to decide on what and why? What are the exceptions to these workflows, and why?
How do you establish workflows when you have an extended organization spanning multiple locations, even countries? How about time zone differences and the ineviable delays it will introduce?
What about firms with additional complexities? Multiple product lines, multiple suppliers, multiple sales channels, etc.?
Finally, not all workfows exists within the firm's boundaries. It extends to customers, distributors and suppliers as well. The need to include them stems from Strategic reasons to Regulatory. But then, how do we coopt them into 'our' workflows? And, in parallel, how should we conform to 'their' workflows?
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Processes that help to Scale
How, how do we really get to the elusive Scale? what enables some (a select few) organizations to grow sucessfully while most firms simply stall a some point in their growth trajectory?
The secret sauce is of course - processes. Robust processes help firms execute, simplifies routine decision making, eases information flow and enables large organizations respond quickly to threats and opportunities. Done right, processes reduces average cost of operations, thereby confering the 'economy of scale'
Most processes can be categorized into 4 main sections:
The secret sauce is of course - processes. Robust processes help firms execute, simplifies routine decision making, eases information flow and enables large organizations respond quickly to threats and opportunities. Done right, processes reduces average cost of operations, thereby confering the 'economy of scale'
Most processes can be categorized into 4 main sections:
- Customer Operations
- Enterprise Operations
- Supplier Operations
- Corporate Operations
Thursday, December 25, 2008
How to Scale
Sacle. The most potent force of nature. And business.
All living organisms strive to attain advantage of scale - either thru physical size or through numbers.
Business organizations follow the same urge. All mature industries are dominated by few - handful - leaders, who account for most of the industry revenue and profits.
So, how should challengers approach? How do the challengers surmount the potent force called Scale?
This should be an interesting discussion
All living organisms strive to attain advantage of scale - either thru physical size or through numbers.
Business organizations follow the same urge. All mature industries are dominated by few - handful - leaders, who account for most of the industry revenue and profits.
So, how should challengers approach? How do the challengers surmount the potent force called Scale?
This should be an interesting discussion
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)