Быстрее. Или качественнее. Или всё же - эффективнее.

Не обязательно быть пионером, но надо быстро перенимать инновации. Если раньше, чтобы скопировать чужую новинку (продукт, услугу) в химии, например, требовалось несколько лет, сейчас это делается за 5-6 месяцев, а в более динамичных отраслях - за несколько недель или даже дней. Когда каждый знает, что делают другие, – даже если вам удалось вырваться вперёд – через некоторое время конкуренты всё равно вас настигнут. Сегодня те, кто способен быстро выводить свою продукцию на рынок, побеждает более медлительных, а завтра, может быть, они станут опережать и «гигантов».

В последнее время большинство собственников и руководителей предприятий всё чаще приходят к выводу, что нет универсальных критериев и показателей. Ни «прибыльность», ни «рентабельность», ни «широкий ассортимент», ни «качество персонала», ни «количество клиентов», ни «качество их обслуживания», ни даже пресловутая «доля рынка» не определяет успешность фирмы (тем более в долгосрочной перспективе!).

Сегодняшние покупатели хотят получать товары и услуги более высокого качества, дополнительные услуги, ориентированные на потребителя, возможность возврата и гарантии – и всё это по более низкой цене. Сотрудники хотят иметь творческую работу и достойную оплату собственного труда. Инвесторы хотят видеть отдачу от инвестиций, партнёры хотят, чтобы фирма учитывала и их выгоду. Акционеры рассчитывают на дивиденды. Руководитель компании сам решает, какие требования акционеров, инвесторов, покупателей, сотрудников, партнёров и в какой мере он сможет выполнить, обеспечивая функционирование и развитие бизнеса.

Для этого нужно уметь считать, что даёт компании каждый сегмент рынка, отдельный клиент, товар, канал сбыта и регион, – чтобы сосредоточить усилия на наиболее выгодных клиентах, товарах и каналах (возникает ключевое понятие «эффективности»).

Как говорил один крупный западный бизнесмен «Когда скорость перемен, происходящих вне компании, превышает скорость перемен, происходящих внутри неё, конец близок». Пока рынки были локальными и менялись медленно, рабочие работали, а менеджеры думали. Сейчас рынки стали глобальными, правила изменяются быстро. Нужны «резервуары идей» (не случайно идеи называют «валютой будущего»).

Игорь Альтшулер

Член правления АКУОР (Ассоциация консультантов по управлению и оргразвитию)

http://www. cfin.ru/managem

 

APPENDIX

EXTRACTS FROM THE BOOK

By Bill Mascull

“KEY WORDS IN BUSINESS”

The book that provides stimulating input

To language training in business and management English

Management Strategies

Restructuring

diversified core business profit center focus assets non-core assts sell off sell -off spin off spin- off dispose of disposal

A group containing many types of business is diversified. Group’s basic business activity, perhaps the one it originally started with, is its core business Separate business activities may be viewed as profit centers,each responsible for generating profit   Businesses are often encouraged to concentrate or focuson their core activities and to sell off, spin off, or dispose of non-essential assets. These assets are often referred to as non-core assets.   A sale of assets in this way is referred to as a sell-off, spin-off, or disposal. A spin-off can also refer to a business that has been spun off

Since talking over at Nokia two years ago, Mr. Ollila has set about completing the company’s transformation from a sprawling industrial conglomerate to a group focused on telecommunications and electronics. More than 60% of group sales is accounted for by its telecommunications divisions

Plessey’s non-telecommunications activities split into 23 businesses, self-contained profit-centers, each with a manager bearing full profit responsibility.

The Adelaide Steamship group yesterday announced plans to sell many of its assets and concentrate on the core business of retailing. The sell-off could include Adsteam’s controlling stake in Markheath Securities and its substantial holdings in the Australian wine, timber, food, processing and real estate industries.

TSB has been shedding non-core assets for the last two years to concentrate on its main banking and insurance business.

After a promise to shareholders that it would return to its core photographic and health businesses, Eastman Kodak is to spin off its $4 billion chemical subsidiary, the tenth largest in the united States, by the end of the year.

Mr. Simons said he had no plans to sell off large numbers of Gateway stores. ‘If there are to be disposals,’ he said,’ they will be in handfuls rather than large numbers.’

divest divestment pull out of restructuring rationalization

If a company sells a business, it divests itself of that business. Divestment refers both to the action of selling a business and to the whole process of selling businesses in this way. If you pull out of a business activity, you abandon it, perhaps as part of a programme of restructuring or rationalization: reorganizing a business with the aim of making it more efficient and profitable

 

Turnover fell by 9% to ₤1.97billion mainly because of divestments. The group said a further 17 non-core businesses had been sold during the year, and the disposal programme was now complete.

The next restructuring move is likely to be the sale of Nokia’s 80% holding in Nokia Tyres, a move signaled by Mr. Olilla last month.

Mr. Araskog ruthlessly hacked back the sprawling ITT empire, not only selling off most of the businesses acquired by Mr. Geneen, but even pulling out of the telecommunications business on which the group had been built. Rationalization, however, did not succeed in transforming ITT’s lackluster financial performance.

Re-engineering delayering downsizing rightsizing lean flat

Middle managers are now most often mentioned in the context of re-engineering, delayering, downsizing or rightsizing: all these expressions describe the recent trend for companies to reduce the numbers of people they employ, often by getting rid of layers of managers from the middle of the hierarchy.   An organization that has undergone this process is lean and its hierarchy flat.

 

 

To compete harder, companies are being forced to cut costs. Companies are sweeping away layers of management. (Texaco, an American oil company, has trimmed 11 layers to five.) This means that most companies will need fewer, brighter executives, not hoards of mediocre middle managers.

Whether it’s called ‘ re-engineering’, ‘ downsizin g’ or ‘ delayering’, the goals are the same: to eliminate tiers of middle managers in order to delegate responsibility to those actually running factories, designing products or dealing with customers.

Louis Gerstner, the new head of IBM, told aggrieved shareholders he would do everything to restore the computer giant to health. More staff cuts (‘ right-sizing’) were needed, he said, strategic priorities must be defined and commitment to customers must be redoubled.

Wedekind was also told to bring in some lean management, a nice expression for the tough task of cutting staff from 156 to 92.

A flat organization, with a small number of management levels, should give more opportunity for decision-making at all levels.

Empowerment

Empower empowerment

Organizations say that they are eliminating middle levels of their hierarchies so as to empower ordinary workers and employee.   This process of empowerment is designed to give them the authority to make decisions that were previously taken by middle managers

Empower your people. Don’t command and control. Let them use their own initiative and entrepreneurial spirit.

… empowerment, an ugly transatlantic neologism which suggests that ordinary workers want, enjoy and benefit from being empowered. Of course, with power comes responsibility, and it is not clear that workers who warm to the former are equally happy about the latter. Also, the empowerment of one group usually means the disempowerment of another group, frequently the former’s bosses.

Mergers & Acquisitions

Launching a Bid

take over takeover takeover bid takeover target launch a bid hostile bid acquire make an acquisition

There is excitement when Company X is attempting to gain control of Company Y in a takeover bid, perhaps by increasing its holding or stake in Company Y if ot already owns shares in Y.   Company X makes or launches a bid against Company Y, the takeover target. If Company Y does not want to be taken over, the bid is hostile Other ways of saying that one company is taking over another are to say that one company is acquiring another or making an acquisition.

Medeva, the fast-growing pharmaceuticals group, rose 19p to 224p on the news that it has made another acquisition in America. Medeva is to buy Adams Laboratories, a Texas drugs manufacturer, for $77.2 million.

TT group, the packaging company, has launched its second hostile takeover bid in little more than a year, with a ₤6.8 offer for Magnetic Materials Group, the magnetic components manufacturer. TT won a long-running bid battle for Crystalate last August. The 37p share offer is equal to the price paid by TT on Tuesday for a 9.4 per cent stake, bringing its total holding in the target company to 16.2 per cent. This compares with a market price of 41p before and after the announcement of the bid. Magnetic’s board rejected the bid as ‘derisory, unsolicited, unwelcome, and totally inadequate’.

 

Bid types. In the last example above, Magnetic’s board rejected TT’s bid as ‘derisory. Unsolicited, unwelcome, and totally inadequate.’ Match these adjectives, and others describing takeover bids, to their meanings.

 

 

abortive unsought

contested unwanted

derisory fought against

If a bid is inadequate it is insultingly low

sweetened not enough

unsolicited unsuccessful

unwelcome improved