WHEN PASSION IS NOT ENOUGH

Last Saturday, my professor texted me, enjoining me to listen to the radio where he is being interviewed for his prize winning and critically acclaimed masterpiece, “Setting Frameworks: Family Business and Strategic Management”. I did turn on the radio and listen to him briefly before being interrupted with work. During that short time, I heard him saying that “Passion and dreams aren’t enough to make a business succeed (for entrepreneurs). You need good management in terms of planning and control.” I had to agree wholeheartedly with his statement for I personally experienced the truth of such words. I grew up listening to elders (not only my parents) that the secret to success lies in hardwork, determination, patience, perseverance, and most importantly, dedication. “You only reap what you sow” was the popular phrase of that ethics of hardwork. In fact, the Chinese has a word that embodies all the aforementioned noble qualities and that is, “Pha Phiyaa”, meaning to fight and struggle. They even immortalized it in the Fookien pop song, “Ai Phiyaa Jia eh Ya” (Success can only be attained through struggle). Passion is the indomitable spirit that drives people to excel, to achieve feats deemed miraculous, to sustain their effort in spite of reverses and to continue down a path that many laughed as foolish, crazy, and impossible. And for some people, passion is what they lived for. Passion and ideals are so many times that seized me when I was a lot younger but often times things don’t turn up what you hoped for. And the rewards received seemingly don’t commensurate with the amount of effort you’ve poured into. That is when I realized that there is more to success than simple passion alone. Wisdom gathered through learning and experience is equally critical to success. As my professor pointed out in his interview, 90% of start – ups eventually fail not because of the lack of passion, or the lack of hardwork and perseverance neither was capital an issue. Rather it is the lack of foresight and planning that ultimately did them in. In life as in business, passion is important but not the only ingredient to success. If we compare passion to an adventurer who took his boat to the unknown ocean in search of El Dorado, then wisdom is the sun of the day and the moon and the stars of the night that tells our journeyman the time of the day (therefore the tide), the season of the year (and correspondingly the direction of the wind blowing), and the direction we are to take. To possess only passion is like going to the sea without a map or a knowledge of the stars. Though valiant and heroic in facing the perils of the unknown, one often either ends up at the ocean floor or in a distant land far, far away from the paradise that one sought. Conversely, to wield only wisdom without passion is like a landlubber looking at the moon at night in the safety of the shore speculating what the moon looks like at it’s other side from a place beyond the horizon where the sea meets the sky. A landlubber can’t go to places even if he wishes to. Passion is not enough nor is wisdom. You need both to succeed.

WHAT CRIME DID SHE COMMIT TO DESERVE A FATE MOST FOUL?

I read this news item the other day from a local Chinese newspaper. It tells a story of a 15-year-old girl in China. She was abandoned by her birth parents in a grassy lot when she was just a newly born baby. She was later found by a villager, an old lady who in turn gave baby to her son and daughter – in – law to take care of whilst they try to find the young girl’s parents. 15 years has since passed and the baby girl is now a teenage girl. The hopeless search for her parents became a distant murmur and what was once a temporary arrangement of care by her foster family became a permanent bond of family. The foster parents treated her as if it was their own. So much so that even without a formal adoption, the young girl was given the adoptive parents’ surname. Then one day, the little girl discovered her true biological parents and began secretly meeting with them and then she ran away from her foster home and stayed at her true parents’ home. Her foster parents frantically searched for her but when they found out that she had returned to her biological parents, they gave her up and let her go albeit grudgingly. Perhaps hoping that she now finally found her peace. That is until 28 days later, the foster mother learned through a neighbor’s daughter that her “adopted” daughter looked pale and ill at school. Concerned, she went to see her “daughter” only to discover that she wasn’t really ill but was actually starving. The teenager’s biological parents never gave her enough money for sustenance during the day when she was in school. Pitying her, the foster mother took back the “daughter” and at same time, the foster parents sue the biological parents for child support claiming that they abandoned their daughter in the first place and that they didn’t really adopted the young girl but was forced to feed her. Furthermore, the foster parents claimed that the biological parents weren’t really financially incapable to feed the girl since the biological parents have an orchard and 2 fish pens to boot. The biological parents refused claiming that it was the foster parents’ “freewill” to feed their daughter and the latter are not constrained to do so especially if the foster family’s financial strait doesn’t warrant it. As the lawsuit got ever so heated, things took a nasty turn. The act of “betrayal” by the girl in leaving her foster home in favor of her biological parents has left a deep scar in her relationship with her foster family. She wasn’t “accepted” anymore like before. Things got to a head when she decided to go back again to her biological parents, which proved to be the last straw for the foster parents. As a result, the foster family formally disowns her. This time legally. The biological parents on the other hand didn’t take in the young girl either claiming that she was in cahoots with her foster parents to extort them. The biological father even used the analogy of “the dog doesn’t bite the hand that fed her but does it’s master’s bidding” to bolster his claim. And so with this, the young girl is now an orphan not because her parents are dead but because nobody wanted her at all. Poor girl. What did she do to be punished with such a terrible fate? I couldn’t help but felt incensed at it. Incensed at the injustice of it, incensed at the fact that parents could forsake a defenseless and helpless child! I felt even more outrage that a parent would compare their daughter to a dog! Is a person of one’s own flesh and blood be no better than that of a dog? How could people be some cruel to such an innocent child? How could this thing happen in the first place? As my anger simmers down and my logical self returned to the fore, I began to try to figure out how things like this come about. And my logical deduction has led me to the conclusion that they are all guilty of crimes and that they are mere victims of the system as well, all of them are. China is world’s most populous country with more than a billion people and sometime in the early part of it’s communist history, the government has tried to curb the country’s population growth rate through it’s one child policy. So drastic was it’s policies and so ruthless was it’s implementation that China has manage to successfully “tame” their population growth. The population control was not only an outgrowth of practical necessity to curb population size but also as a result of the dire economic necessity prevailing at that time and the geopolitical scenario as well (China was surrounded by the USSR and US allied states at that time and that a simple trade embargo of food supply by the two blocks would trigger widespread famine and chaos if population growth was left unchecked and eventually allowed to outstrip it’s food supply). However, to many Chinese families, having a direct male descendant is of paramount importance more important than one’s life. For without a male descendant, the family line becomes extinct and this is considered a very grave and highly unforgivable offense against the ancestors. Limiting the offspring to only one child increases the risk of extinction of the family line (should something bad happen to the male offspring) and that fate of extinction became sealed once that only child was born a girl. Abortion and infanticide particularly of baby girls became widespread as a result of this policy (in fact, China’s sex ratio is out of balance with more men than women whilst the global sex ratio is slightly in favor of women) and the young girl of this story could had become one of the statistics if not for that kind old lady who found her and gave her to her foster parents. Having said this, the “crime” of the true biological parents is that they made a choice, a terrible choice; a choice that is forced upon them both by the law and by tradition and made with no other viable alternatives. Still, the biological parents could have made amends to their daughter who was thought to be lost but was again found but they didn’t. Years of separation prevented the healthy establishment of a true parent – child bond. They could have worked for it but they chose not to and for that, they are doubly guilty. The foster parents although laudable in their acts of kindness are also guilty of crimes. They are guilty of being poor and hence, the unnecessary incident of asking for child support from the biological parents. They felt that they are being cheated and they wanted compensation for all their trouble, a trouble that they unquestionably assume 15 years ago or was it? They are also guilty of being human, easily hurt by the betrayal of someone so close and dear to them but couldn’t come to terms to forgive the ones who hurt them. To err is human, to forgive divine. They are humans, not saints. They are the young girl’s foster parents not her true parents. They could choose to feed her, shelter her, heal her but aren’t really obliged to do so. And this they lately realized rather coldly. And how about the young girl? What crime does she commits as to deserve such dastard fate? Her crime was that she was born a girl and a human being at that. If she were born a boy, nothing like this would ever have happened but as fate would have it, she was the poor baby girl. She was only human to long for the truth, to long for her true parents, to long for her true parents’ love. With that, she made the grave decision of hurting the persons who truly cared for her. I could only lament for her and at the same time felt little and helpless as well. Oh fate! How cruel is thy joke!

The Day The (Book)Worms Feast

Last Sunday was a double header, for there are 2 book fairs held simultaneously. One is the Chinese Book Fair held at the local Chinese School (Philippine Cultural High School) and the other is the Book Fair held at the World Trade Center at Pasay. For one whole week, I was looking forward for the events last Sunday but unfortunately, I missed the Chinese Book Fair. It happened that they’re open till noon that Sunday and it’s their last day as well. I only managed to get there at around 2pm. Blame that on the “catch up” sleep I usually had every Sunday morning for missing the book fair. Apparently, the old adage of “the early bird gets the worm” or more succinctly, “the early (book)worm gets the books” is never been true in this instance. Too bad, I was looking forward to buying some Chinese history books from the fair, i.e., the ones I didn’t manage to buy in China. Well, I guess I had to wait till next year. Anyway, I did manage though to visit the other fair and boy, oh boy! The place is teeming with “worms” errr bookworms to be exact. It seems to me that I’m not the only one who loved books. Well, the place to me was like a paradise. In particular, Islam’s version of paradise, a paradise where I was surrounded by a harem of 30,000 women except that instead of women I had books. Speaking of women, books are like women. You don’t judge them by it’s cover but what’s inside just like a book. However, the difference between a woman and a book is that one cannot sleep with a book (although I do sleep with my books beside my pillow). And second, books don’t talk back while women don’t stop talking. Anyway, I was so deeply mesmerized by the whole event that I got “dazed” to the extent that I almost didn’t recognize my friend and fellow blogger, Jaz Chan, who was also there to shop for some books (incidentally, Jaz kept a very interesting blog, www.jazchan.blogspot.com. I highly recommend that you visit her blog). I spent about 3½ hours browsing through every book in the shelves per publisher stalls (miraculously, my eyes nor my feet didn’t buckle under the intense punishment I put on them). In particular, I trained my eyes on history books and business books. I got a few nice picks along the way but I didn’t get to buy all of them because they are way, way, way to expensive. Most of the books I chose had a price tag of 4,000 pesos upwards! Not that I couldn’t afford the price or that I’m not willing to spend that much rather I felt that price doesn’t commensurate with “value” of the book. You see I have this intuition that I could buy a similar book for “less” or that the book doesn’t really offer anything interestingly new from what I already knew (but I still want to buy it for my collection if the price is right). As a result of this nit picking, I finally settle down and purchase 4 books that day for a total of 4,000 ++ pesos. They are:
1. “Peripheral Vision: Detecting the Weak Signals That will Make or Break Your Company” by George Day and Paul J.H. Schoemaker; Harvard Business School Press.
2. “Designed to Win: Strategies for Building a Thriving Global Business” by Hiroaki Yoshihara and Mary Pat McCarthy; McGraw Hills.
3. “Philippine Labour Migration: Critical Dimensions of Public Policy” by Joaquin L Gonzales III; De La Salle University Press, Inc.
4. “Chinese Traders in a Philippine Town: From Daily Competition to Urban Transformation” by Norbert Danhaeuser; Ateneo De Manila Press.
Another 4 more books added to my growing library; Another 4 more books added to my long list of books to read; And 4 more books added to my wealth….

POSTSCRIPT
My Professor, Elfren Cruz won the National Book Awards’ Best Book in the Business and Economics Category Prize last August 31. The award given by the Manila Critics Circle is in recognition of my professor’s seminal work, “Setting Frameworks: Family Business and Strategic Management.” Congratulations to my professor for winning such a prestigious award. As an added bonus to winning the award, he now joins his wife as a National Book Award recipient, probably the only husband and wife tandem to receive such a distinguish award. His wife, Neni Sta. Romana – Cruz is a National Book Award recipient for Children’s literature. Having said that, I can’t wait to see him come up with his second book if he ever plans on writing one. I wonder what topic will he write then but rest assure, the title will definitely have the word, “framework” (his column in BusinessWorld is titled, “Frameworks”). We had a joke in MBA, if it is about frameworks, it got to be Elfren (Cruz). “ )

And I Cried (A Teacher on Her First Term)

By Irrah Mari Nightlark

I got this email from a friend of mine and a fellow MBA. She is currently teaching at undergrad school. She didn’t write this story but this might as well reflect her experience as a first time teacher.

I preferred to be known as a terror teacher than one whom my students would love now and forget later. As a student, I've had quite a few teachers myself. Those who gave me sleepless nights and scared me out of my sweaters AND TAUGHT ME THE BEST LESSONS IN LIFE were actually the ones who inspired me to teach.

And so I dreamed... to become a teacher. Early in my adolescent stage, I vowed to take up masteral studies to make sure I'd be prepared for this thankless task. As I joined the corporate world, I had trainees under me (both students and co-employees). I was in heaven each time one would return to share the good news of getting a job, a promotion or a recognition. After a decade of corporate teaching, I knew it was time for the real thing.

I believed... I finished my masters after seven (7) itchy years. And I made it through. Now, the next hurdle was how to get into the academe. It was one elusive dream. It was like killing a chicken, only you never did it ever in the past. Was I to pluck all its feathers, throw it in a caudlron with boiling water, or was I to bang it against the wall and pray that it would land a fried chicken on my plate?

My first day was horrifying. I left my things in the classroom and went back to the faculty room to get chalk or a whiteboard marker. Upon returning to the room, I saw two students reading through my book... including insertions! It was enough to me that they opened the book to see who owned it... but to leaf through notes I inserted? It was a violation of my privacy. And I'd hate it when one didn't respect mine.

I had the most absurd experiences.

Student: Miss, do you have handouts?

Me: It depends. Why? (just to get the cat out of the bag... and jump out it did)

Student: So, Miss, if you don't have hand outs, does that mean I have to take down notes?

Me: Will I dignify your question? (was so tempted to say stupidity)

Student: (rushing in late) Miss, so where are we now?

Me: We've been in the classroom for the past thirty minutes discussing? (sarcastic)

Student: Oh sorry, Miss. I just wanted to know.

Me: Maybe if you came in thirty minutes early, you wouldn't be asking me that question?

Student: Why, Miss?

I give pop quizzes within the first fifteen minutes of my class. Since it starts art 745. The quiz would be from 745 to 800. Grace period ends at 8, was hoping this would motivate them to be punctual. Would you believe this? I would give a pop quiz at the end of my lecture (10 items usually), then I would give the same quiz as a pop quiz for the following meeting --- and my recycled quizzes would even get lower marks?
As I saw their grades declining, I made them manage the class. We made it our KRA or our deliverables. You commit to it, you give me better grades. And they vowed they would... they didn't, majority of the class had lower marks in their pre-finals than in their mid-terms.

I told them they had to submit at least one written project for their pre-finals. But those who would ask for additional work to raise their grades are encouraged to do all four projects. There were two who didn't even make one. And they were the two lowest performers of the group.

My final exam? Look at how I wanted them to pass. I made a grid on which questions during the midterms did most of them get correctly. From this, I made 20 multiple choice questions for Test 1. Then, I gave a "diagnostic exam" just before the start of the second half of the term. I took the very same exam questions for matching type and just jumbled the order. This became Test 2. I gave "three easiest questions" for essay. This became Test 3. --- only one perfected Test 2. But not one of them got to perfect the exam.

One of them, not knowing the answer to essay 2 (which was supposed to be the easiest question) wrote this answer:

"Our Father, in heaven, holy be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your Will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sinned against us. Do not lead us to the test, but deliver us from evil. Amen."

As I wrote the grades in their class cards, I wrote with teary eyes knowing 5 of twelve failed. And when I was to transfer grades into the Final Grading Sheet (FGS), I stopped to cry for the first student who got a failing grade in my alphabetical listing of students. As I continued, I took a deep breath and continued entering the grades. This, I told myself, was to make sure I would not be swept by their pleading later.

Of the five who failed, only three came to pick up their cards personally. Of course I expected that they'd contest their grades. And while I had the documents to support my action, I still dreaded having to meet their pleading eyes.

I showed one of them how I tried to pull her grades up by giving bonuses. After raising her grades by almost 11 points for pre-finals, her midterms just didn't contribute enough to give her an over all passing grade. She pleaded three or four times stating I was the only one who failed her, unknown to her that as another teacher consoled me as I was distressed over failing her, he revealed to me that the same student failed in his class too.
And our reasons and observations were the same.

The other one was in total disbelief. But he later gave up the fight.

The other one, well, he was one of those boys who browsed through my books on the first day. While he was forgiven for his action, he didn't give enough output to raise his grades. A few hours after he got his card, I received a text from him telling me he would do anything just to get a 1 (equivalent to 70). In my mind, all I could say was... I gave you four projects to do it... you only did one haphazardly.

One of those who didn't come, the one with the lowest grade sent me a message... "Miss I just want to know my standing so that I could get an adjustment form if I failed in your class." And this student of mine, never even submitted a single assignment, did not pass any of her quizzes, was always late and would leave the room at exactly 830 pm sharp (to go to the washroom, to take a call, to pay, to do an adjustment, whatever!) each and every meeting PUNCTUALLY.

I know now why some teachers are just plain aloof to the point of being crabby. I know now why... why some are "ruthless"... why some are eaten alive.

....I survived.

Next term please.

A TALE OF 2 “OLD” CUSTOMERS

Saturday’s are collection days. Until recently, I almost always am in charge of collection of the Divisoria area every Saturday but now, I do it only occasionally, my brother is the one handling the task now. Today is one of those “occasional” days wherein I do the rounds instead of my brother. Like most Saturdays, nothing much happened as the task is pretty much routine except that today, I got to meet up with 2 of my previous customers by accident, i.e., I just happened to pass by their storefronts and strike up a conversation. The first “ex – customer” used to be one of my major customer about 3 – 5 years ago. Nowadays, we don’t have any transactions or deals going on as they switch to a low – priced competitor and I retaliated by selling to their most nagging competitor, which I hitherto been refraining to sell back then. Anyway, like in all business dealings, our conversations touch on the usual sales talk and personal matters. I began the conversation by offering them my products and proposing to them the terms and conditions that I am willing to offer to them. Unfortunately, they rejected it saying it wasn’t enough. Inevitably after a series of banter, our conversation drifted into talking about “old times”, when the economy is good and the mutually beneficial and profitable cooperation we had. And along the way, it then turned to their kids, which I knew personally. I was surprised or more accurately “shocked” to learn that their youngest son is just two years away from graduating from college. Dang! When we were having dealings back then, the young boy was just finishing grade school and now, he is almost through with college? Was that a long time ago? Or was time flying past me so fast that I didn’t realize it was that long ago already? Regardless, I felt so old after hearing the news. I know that I’m not young anymore but until today, I realize that I’m old already and no longer the wonder boy that I was years ago (actually it is more like more than a decade ago). I feel so old. After the chitchat, I visited another of my “old” customer, a very “old” one indeed. This second “old” customer of mine was my father’s customer and I came to know them during my stint as a sales agent for the area during my high school years. Anyway, we don’t have any dealings for something like a decade already and I was there in response to an inquiry by the “son”. When I enter the store, I was again surprised to see the “mother” or the wife of the owner during my earlier stint. She looked pretty old from the last I remembered. She gained weight, her face has more wrinkles, a few strand of white hair are also visible, and her motion is cumbersome. Actually, I shouldn’t be surprised about what I saw, for people age and they physically grow old eventually but nonetheless, the imagery stuck with me. It is not the fact that the person I knew is older than what I had pictured in my mind but rather, it is how things has changed over the years that struck me the most. When I was young and a novice, they are in their late forties to their early fifties. They looked “big” and “formidable”. They’re also confident and in “control”. To me back then, they seemed “powerful” and I was nothing but an inexperienced fumbling young man. They possessed such “power” that they could ignore me and they did ignore me at times back then. Even so, I had no choice but to go back to them. I had to. I need to. I need to make a sale. Today however, things are totally different and the roles are reversed and her physical state said it all. I was no longer the young inexperienced novice but an imperious, confident not – so – young man and she was no longer half as threatening as she was before. The balance of power has shifted. I don’t need them anymore. I could have just walk out of the door and ignore them as I did for the last 10 years. I didn’t do just that however. Ever the gentleman, I maintained my cordiality towards her. Besides, she reminds me of my mother who is just as old. I came out of the store wondering what would I be like a few years from now. Would I be like her? Maybe a couple of years later, I would be an overweight (I’m now slightly overweight) old guy slumping on a chair behind a descript desk at the back of the office and standing in front of me would be a brash, young, arrogant bastard who think he is the king of the world and is trying to pull a fast one over me. Would I be “powerless” again? Would I become “old”? Is that going to be my fate? But I never believed in fate before, not by a long shot.

QUOTING GRANT

I’ve bought this magazine, “Great Commanders” about a month ago. The magazine talks about the exploits, the battles and it’s significance in the course of the war, the leadership, and the command philosophy of great Generals and famous Commanders. In every issue, the magazine focuses on one particular general and in this particular issue, the person in question was no other than the great civil war general, Ulysses S. Grant, who later on went to become the president of the United States. Well, being an amateur military historian, I cannot contain my enthusiasm and immediately began to earnestly “study” about the General. After reading the articles, my impression of General Grant was that of an aggressive military leader who believes in the dictum, “offense is the best defense”. His strategies are strikingly simple and rather “straight to the point” creating an impression of boldness, daring, and decisiveness on the battlefield. In short, he is willing to take risk and doesn’t dilly – dally as most generals do at that time. This is the main reason for his success. Upon further analysis, his simple, straight – forward strategic orientation are rooted in his thinking. In particular, 2 of his quotes coming from his experience in the battlefield showed this kind thinking and had struck me the most. The first one is about the encounter with an enemy who had fled upon his approach to the former’s encampment and before any armed confrontation could happen. At that time, Colonel Grant had just assumed command of a volunteer militia unit after a hiatus of several years from active service. He recall the experience on the event in his memoir, stating:
“As we approached the brow of the hill, which it was expected we could see Harris’ camp, and possibly find his men ready formed to meet us, my heart kept getting higher and higher until it felt to me as though it was in my throat. I would have given anything then to have been back in Illinois, but I had not the moral courage to halt and consider what to do; I kept on. When we reached a point from which the valley below was in full view I halted. The place where Harris had been encamped was plainly visible but the troops are gone. My heart resumed its place. It occurred to me at once that Harris had been as much afraid of me as I had been of him. This was a view of the question I had never taken before; but it was one I never forgot afterwards. From that event to the close of the war, I never experienced trepidation upon confronting the enemy, though I always felt more or less anxiety. I never forgot that he had as much reason to fear my forces as I had his.”
The second quote on the other hand was given to a brigadier after the Union army suffered reverses on the battlefield. Here, General Grant scolded the distraught brigadier with these words:
“Oh, I’m heartily tired of hearing about what Lee is going to do. Some of you always seem to think he is going to turn a double somersault and land in our rear and on both of our flanks at the same time. Go back to your command, and try to think what we are going to do ourselves, instead of what Lee is going to do.”
From these quotes, one would realize that often times we tend to “second guess” our opponent’s intentions unknowingly that our opponents are doing the same. Furthermore, in our “obsession” to “second guess” our opponent, we tend to become mere “reactors” to the situations rather than as initiator and controller of events. We tend to focus on the analysis of the situation trying to figure out a way to “mitigate” the pending yet “changeable” outcome whence in fact, the best solution to the problem was to take it by the horn. We tend to sacrifice initiative in favor of security, or more accurately, false security. However, practically speaking, it is still important that we “second guess” our opponent’s intention because if we don’t we might end up losing control of the event that we intend to gain in the first place. But this “second guessing” shouldn’t come at the price of initiative and control. By initiative, it means that we don’t let our opponent dictate what is going to happen next rather that we should be creating what will happen next. In my conclusion, there should come a point wherein we have to decide if further “accumulation” of information for analysis and evaluation is still practicable as an input in our decision making or we have to decide now even with the limited inputs so as not to give up control of event. Time is of the essence and we have to take risk. Although these quotes are made by General Grant in relation to his experience in the battlefield, it can no less be applied in situations outside the military sphere, specifically in the broader management decision making. Though the marketplace is decidedly less “bloody” than the battlefield, it however has its tense and “heart – pounding” moments. And it is here that Grant’s thoughts could be useful in gauging risk taking and bidding time. There was this term I learned from Mintzberg and that is “paralysis by analysis”, which is in essence similar to what General Grant was saying all along albeit in a more general context. Paralysis by analysis refers to the indecision of a leader in situations where the analyses are inconclusive. No conclusion, no decision, no moves, period. It can also refer to the fact that with “over” analysis, we tend to be overwhelmed by the gravity of the situation and balk at making a move. Frozen with fear leading again to no movements. What we ought to learn here is that situations may not be what we thought to be since there are a lot of constantly changing variables in play that our mind cannot conceive, which would drastically alter the outcome and one such variable is the opponent’s or competitor’s trepidations. Aside from that, indecision makes us a sitting duck to the conspiring events and to our competitor’s/opponent’s machinations thereby losing our initiatives to play the events to our advantage. However, to forgo analysis and instead purely rely on “instinct” is also unwise for according to Mintzberg, there is such a thing as “extinction by instinct”. Not everyone possesses a superior instinct and instinct is not grounded on facts but on unconscious gut – feel or for most people, emotion, which would be pretty unreliable during confusing uncertainty, i.e., one may cower when the going gets tough. The best way to make a decision is to analyze up to a certain degree, trust your instinct, take risk, siege the initiative, and improvise. That however, is easier said than done. And it is in this situation that we had to refer to Grant’s quotes.

TO BE OR NOT TO BE

Sometime last November, during my mentor’s book launching party, my mentor, Professor Elfren Cruz approach and asked me if I’m interested to help him realize the creation of the De La Salle University – Graduate School of Business – Alumni Association. Because he was my mentor and I couldn’t refuse him, I immediately said yes without thinking. Thus began my foray into this alumni “thing”. I began my foray with a December attendance to the DLSAA meeting, the umbrella alumni organization of DLSU, my alma matter and there I saw and understood what an alumni association is really about and the difficulties associated with “job”. Then followed a meeting with my mentor during a fellowship night this year where we discuss the “vision” of the proposed alumni association. Prior to that, I was tasked to assemble a group of alumni “volunteers” to get the balls rolling. Unfortunately, it was an arduous task filled with disappointment. Many like the idea of an alumni association but none are willing to work for it. It was really a dismal revelation. I figured that I had to “dig deeper” in order to get it to work. Eventually, I was able to clobber together with the help of my professor and fellow alumni, a core team of 15 – something people dedicated to the task. We held meetings every month with me presiding over. It was basically a talking group with each member eagerly contributing ideas on how to build the organization, how to attract members, and what projects to do. However, nothing really came out of it because we don’t have funds to start with. My professor was really vague about the funding source. Second, we are also caught up with the mess that is the structural change that the university is undergoing and hence, the question of “status” of this proposed organization. Specifically, I was told that we will be a chapter within DLSAA first (which is why I was made to attend the DLSAA meeting in the first place), then this was changed into a semi – independent organization under the DLSAA wing, and finally, as a totally independent organization exclusively for GSB. Anyway, the talking group kept on growing as my peers and I were calling up former classmates and friends to join the group (it now has around 30 members and growing). In fact, I went as far as digging up my class directory lists and called up my classmates and friends. Again, we encountered difficulties. It turns out that most contact info listed in the directories is related to work such as corporate emails, office numbers. A few had listed their cell phone numbers, residential numbers, and personal emails. Most of the people I’ve looked for had already transferred to a new job, which makes their corporate contact info obsolete. Others with listed personal contact info had either already changed their numbers, or are no longer using their emails, or had moved out of the country, or got married and thus changed their contact info as well. It came to pass that I only managed to get in touch with a dozen people more or less out of a list of around 200. Pretty tough. Another difficulty we’ve experienced is that of the generation gap. I mean I was able to call up alumni who have been one time or the other my classmate and that spans around a decade or so but we weren’t able to get in touch with the “older” alumni or those who graduated in the 60s – late 80s. Anyway, growing impatient with the slow progress, my professor decided to make a definitive move by calling a mini – general assembly with himself calling up his former students but which only a few arrived. At any rate, the meeting got a stormy start. One of the attendees was a former student council officer and at the onset, she is decidedly political, discrediting people and posturing herself as the “one”. Well, she manages to earn the ire of just about every participant in the room that day. One of the contentious issue back then was the election officers, which during my “talking days” were never touch because what is the point of having a “king” without a “kingdom” i.e., there wasn’t an organization in the strictest sense for there are no members yet. However, it now seems even that didn’t deter some people from “grabbing” power and credit. It came to past that I got so pique and dismayed by the political noise going on that I started to become “scarce” during meetings though I was also pre – occupied with work related problems. It was only recently, after the conclusion of my work – related problems that I began to be active again with the cause and I announced that to my peers through the email group. And to my surprise, things change dramatically during my absence. An election was scheduled this coming September with calls for recruitment of an initial 100 members. Second, the coordinator of the group, a school staff appointed by my professor the “help” out created a parallel email group without my knowledge. She didn’t even invited me to the new mailing group. I don’t know what I did to her but she was cutting me off the loop. Apparently, as one of my peers says, she seems to favor the “politician” a.k.a., the former student council officer. Thirdly, my mentor was no longer part of the loop also. He has “devolve” the task to the coordinator because he is too "busy". My mentor is staunchly against an election of officers this early but apparently he was “convinced” to agree to the idea by no less than the Dean. It happens that with the “structural realignment” of the university, the Dean became “unduly” interested with the formation of a separate alumni organization, one that he could control I guess. The group coordinator was the Dean’s PR person. So the situation is, we are going to have an election this September to elect a set of officers for a GSB backed alumni organization and all hell began to break loose. When my announcement of returning to active duty was sent, I was surprised to get calls from my peers professing their “vote” for me! The funny thing is I wasn’t even campaigning! It turns out that politics have begun to rear their ugly head and as early as now, there are 4 other “wannabes” (not including me) vying to be the first. They all kept on talking but no concrete moves or actions were made at all towards the goal of realizing the formation of an alumni association. This is the reason why some of my peers wanted me to lead because I was “seen” to be doing something about it. It is too frustrating actually to learn all of this development. I don’t really oppose an election right now but I just think it isn’t right at this time. I mean, as I said the core members are mostly my batch mates and we all belong to the same “generation” of graduates. Older graduates, many of them with high standing in business and society aren’t there in the group. It is the “old generations” that has money and influence and they should be the ones running the show while “youngsters” like me should be “making money” and earning our feathers in the cap. Youngsters like me should be helping out the established guys run the organization and not seize it for our own. By doing so, we would be alienating the “older generations” in the organization and this would be detrimental in the long run since we need their connections, standing, and money to function effectively. But hey, this is politics, nobody cares about the outcome until they are in charge. On the other hand, I also understand the wisdom of an election of officers for this would create a formal structure with an identifiable leadership and a solid backing from the university. This would provide legitimacy, credibility, and authority that would help in attracting members and hence, the formation of the organization. It wasn't an idea to be dismissed outright. Well, it is at this point that I am faced with a dilemma. On one hand, I want to run for the leadership of the organization. I would be a hypocrite not to admit that I desire the empty vanity of the post. But on the same length, I don’t want it either. For one, the post entails great responsibility and takes up too much time and effort, something that I found out during my “talking days” and which I can’t afford to provide. Second, my mentor is out of the picture and from the way things are, I was being forced out from the picture too. If I get elected, I doubted if I could get any support from the university much less cooperation. Third, the issue of funding is of paramount concern. Although the university is providing the seed capital, the organization would definitely need more and as the leader of the organization, the expectation is high that one should provide “cover” for any shortfall to make the endeavor a success. Given that, it is only logical that I shouldn’t be getting myself involve in the mess. After all, politics isn’t my forte. I would rather stay home reading a good book rather than play politics with a bunch of power – hungry, do nothing, try to look good politicians. With these “justifications”, I shouldn’t feel anything at all with the coming election, not the least bit interested. In fact, as a testament to this care – free attitude, I didn’t campaign at all neither I make any effort in recruiting. However, I had this sense of unease lately as September nears. I felt I should join in the fray not only because of my own hypocritical lust for vanity but also because of my sense of responsibility. I don’t owe my mentor anything now to see the task through as he himself is out of the scheme but I felt responsible to the my peers for I invited them to join in the group in the first place. They are there because of me. I felt that I would be abandoning them especially those peers in the talking group. We had met a couple of times. We had spent time, effort, and a few pennies in trying to draw up a coherent plan. To not be able to realize those plans would tantamount to declare that what we did for the last 6 months or so are a waste of our time. I would be the person responsible for the failure (if I didn’t run and realize them) because they look up to me to make it happen in the first place (other people may lead but they may not be adopting those plans). Furthermore, as recent activities or inactivity suggests, nothing is really moving without somebody taking the lead. Election dates and venue haven’t been set. There is no registration. No announcement in relation to that has been made. Nothing whatsoever that would make an election work. Nothing so far that I could see (or perhaps, I wasn’t able to see it because I’m out of the loop) to suggest that there will be an election at all (even though the rumor mills is going on full throttle about this). Something has to be done and all eyes are on me because I was the one who recruited most of my peers into the group and I was the one calling the meetings all the time until recently. Funny, I prided myself in being able to make decisions and stick to it. But now, I’m in a quagmire as to what to do. Should I run or not? As Shakespeare would say in one of his plays, “To be or not be, that is the question”. And yes, it is a tough one.

AND THEN THERE IS 8

Yesterday, the International Astronomical Union finally gave their verdict on the status of Pluto. They voted to downgrade Pluto from a planet into a class of heavenly bodies known as “dwarf planets” (for more info see www.astronomy2006.com) along with Xena, Charon, and Ceres. In short, we now have 8 instead of the long held 9 (regular) planets orbiting our sun. I guess its time to change our long held facts. Funny, how a small group of so – called experts could in one swoop change our long held “facts” just like that. Of the 2,500 astronomers who attended the convention, only 300 showed up to vote. 300 “experts” telling 7 billion people about what the universe should look like. Does the job title, Astronomer, really wield that much say? In ancient Greece, such act would be considered an act of tyranny. Anyway, having 8 planets instead of 9 had it’s advantages. One could say that such a move is tantamount to a cost cutting measure. For one, instead of adding 3 more pages to textbooks and encyclopedia about the other “dwarf planets” (Xena and the gang) complete with pictures and details if Pluto were retained. Publishers could now just simply ripped off the page on Pluto and still make sense and money. NASA could save billions because they don’t have to launch 3 more space probes to explore the 3 new planets if it were declared as such. Lastly, we could save money in building our model solar system now that Pluto is gone. Cost – cutting and I thought that only happens in business. Little did I realize that it could apply to science as well.

8 OR 12? WHAT MAKES A PLANET?

The International Astronomical Union has opened their annual conference in the Czech Republic’s capital, the Prague last August 16. One of the most talk about or widely followed topic during the meet is the proposed definition of a planet. You see a planet used to be simply defined as any spherical heavenly object that revolves around the sun. That definition however was put into question as technological advances allow astronomers to view the sky more accurately than before. Sometime in 2003, scientists discovered a spherical object much farther away from Pluto, the supposedly “last” planet in our solar system, revolving our sun. What complicates the matter is, the object was found to be larger than Pluto. So the question that begs to be answered was, “is it a planet?” That heavenly object was named UB313 or Xena, after the mythological Greco warrior – princess. In due time, scientists were able to discover other spherical objects revolving the sun and some of them are actually way bigger than Pluto but smaller than our moon. So again the question, are they planets as well? Two rival camps had since sprung up in relation to this question. One camp maintains that Pluto is a planet and therefore any spherical object that is larger than Pluto and revolves a star should be considered a planet. The other camp on the other hand believes that Pluto shouldn’t be a planet at all and it’s inclusion in the first place was a mistake brought about by our limited technology back then. Their premise is that Pluto is too small, smaller than our moon. It is in fact a ball of ice orbiting our Sun in outer fringes of our solar system. This therefore makes any spherical heavenly object revolving a star that is “Pluto – like” should be struck out as a planet. The former argument in favor of Pluto would result in the addition of 3 more planets in our burgeoning solar family, namely, Charon, formerely Pluto’s moon, Xena, and Ceres, which used to be an asteroid in the asteroid belt in between Jupiter and Saturn. On the opposite end, the latter argument would trim the planet list to 8 from the original 9. So what is the fuss all about? Well, it is the implication of this new planet list. On the lighter side (and somewhat comical one), if you are a believer in astrological prediction of which I am definitely not. The addition of 3 new planets should theoretically fine-tune their prediction, which therefore means that one would be able to find their soul mate at the exact time and place as written in the stars. The removal of Pluto shouldn’t be that bad, for a soothe sayer could make Pluto as a scapegoat for their earlier “mis-predictions” since Pluto shouldn’t be in the equation in the first place. Teachers, educators, and textbook publishers would have to revise what they teach to schoolchildren incorporating this latest definition of a planet starting perhaps next year. The implication of this momentous change was the creation of a generational shift much like the generational difference between Baby boomers and Gen Xers. Imagine this, schoolchildren taking up astronomy class next school year would be taught that the solar system is made up of 8 or 12 planets instead of 9 that we all used to accept. By then, we would call these kids and kids after them as Generation 8 or Gen 12 and people before them including old timer like me, Gen 9ers. Science fiction authors, movie and TV producers and even game publishers would have a hey day with remakes incorporating this newfound definition. Imagine Star Trek’s United Federation of Planets having 12 Sol system member planets instead of 9. And instead of fearing a Martian invasion, we should also worry about invasion of Amazons from the planet Xena. But kidding aside, seriously speaking, as a science enthusiast and a romanticist, I had to admit that I felt sentimental about Pluto. I don’t want it remove from my list but then also, I’m not exactly enthusiastic about welcoming Xena and the rest either. What can I say? I grew up knowing that our solar system is made up of 9 planets and it is one of the few “constants” that I hold in life (I’m a person who holds very, very few constants in life with the rest being arbitrary). Now, it looks like it is going to be change. Well, I should have known better. As science progresses, our understanding of our universe expands as well. What was once deemed true and universal may no longer be the case as we discover more of what it is out there. Keeping an open mind and keeping abreast with the unraveling truth is an imperative in our modern lives. There are times however that I wish that I could see a star at night for what it is, the star of our childhood dreams, a star that we wonder about, amaze of its beauty, wish upon during our young life and not the distant solar system light years away. That would however be naïve in my age. Guess I had to live with the fact that our solar system will have 8 or 12 planets depending on the outcome of the vote on August 24 by the IAU. But my question is, for how long would this “fact” stand?

Afterthoughts Upon Receiving An Unexpected Phone Call

Two Sundays ago, I received a very, very unexpected call. No, it’s not my ex or anybody else but from someone that one wouldn’t think of in a million years, my competitor or to be more exact, my competitor’s wife. She has an interesting proposition to make, a proposition that I wouldn’t have dreamt of at all. She is offering to sell me their business. Wow! That was a huge offer but I’m not buying because she was asking for a stiff price. Anyway, the point is that I should be feeling exceptionally good about the offer but I don’t exactly felt that way. Instead, I felt disturb for an entirely different reason. I should be happy about the way events had turned out mainly for two reasons. First, is that I got rid of myself of a pain in the neck and second, it is mark of honor and pride that your competitor finally acknowledge your “superiority” by “surrendering” their “kingdom”. As things turn out, the reason that my competitor’s wife sold the business was because she ran out of cash and the circumstances that led her bankruptcy was due to their “internal” family problems. My competitor used to be very big. In fact, they are humongous in our eyes. Well, it is because we were small if not tiny back then. They are actually a medium size firm with several subsidiaries, around 10 perhaps if I’m not mistaken. We are in the same line of business as they are and they are very, very intolerant of competition for they throw everything at us including the kitchen sink. They used every tactics, the dirtier the better; no niceties just to drive us out of business. And in those trying times, I say that they could have succeeded if we weren’t made of sterner stuff. I truly hate them for that. But times had changed, indeed! For who would expect that 20 years later, I would be getting an offer from them? Their business is actually still viable and probably profitable if not for their family woes. It happened a long time ago according to rumors. They are once a happy couple with two kids and then, they had a nasty fight and things turn sour. My competitor, the husband started to had affairs outside marriage and no sooner, he had a string of mistresses. He later went to China and started a business there with one of his trusted lieutenant by his side. In China, the husband took in a concubine and had a son with her. The wife upon learning an inkling of her husband’s indiscretion began actively scrutinizing him, investigating him, stalking him. One time, it was rumored that she learned through a private eye that she hired the whereabouts of her husband and she went there. Climbing over the walls to the backyard and sneaking into the house, she was shocked to discover that her husband was having a threesome with another woman along with his lieutenant. What happens next was anybody’s guess. At any rate, they separated (though they didn’t divorce or got an annulment) and no sooner than later, the wife began to take in lovers of her own even bearing one child after the other for every “husband” she had. Since, the husband was a foreign national and couldn’t legally own assets in the Philippines, every asset and businesses were in the name of the wife. She began to squander the fortune by showering her lovers with gifts and she opened one business after another for her lovers. The lovers only manage to take as much as they can get their hands on and as the oil well went dry, they left her. She was left with nothing except for her bruised ego and their love child. And so it began, she sold off one business after the other to finance her life or what left of it and partly, to take revenge against her true husband for forsaking her. Their children seeing that their parents are squandering their inheritance hiked off with the remaining cash in the bank accounts as well as skimming the company profits and left their mother to herself. In the end, she was left with nothing but the crown jewel that is the business and she offering it to me. For that, I could be more than overjoyed. However, the “victory” ringed somehow hollow, if not illusionary. I prefer to earn that singular distinction of putting them out of business as they tried on us but failed decades ago. I prefer seeing their face on the ground with one of my foot on top of them like a conqueror or even like a buffoon who thinks he is Napoleon but not like this. I don’t want to take the victory “prize” from a silver platter that they handed to me because of their own problems. Not this way. The husband, the last I heard fared no better and was struggling in China. His once trusted lieutenant skimmed profit from the company, took away his clients, pirated his staff and employees, and turn around and almost drive him out of business. Talk about double crossing. This may all sound like a script in one of the popular soap opera but this is no TV act. It is real life. Their story could elicit pity from anyone who hears their tale but I don’t pity them. I simply cannot…… Though I have no love lost for my competitor, I cannot help myself but felt “disturbed” by what had happened. I came to learn a few things from this “story”. First, wealth but is only fleeting. One could spend half of their lifetime amassing their fortune and squander them in half the time. If wealth is the end all be all goal then, I say one is a fool to built their house on shifting sand. Second, business fails for many a reason but ultimately from bankruptcy. However, family problems or marital problems could be just as detrimental as outdated product lines and poor investment choice. Thirdly, I cannot help but wonder about the wisdom of marriage. Is marriage practical? I mean we have two people from different families with different background, different culture, different belief coming together and expects to live happily ever after. How could that be? We are trying to “fused” in two different cultures, two different beliefs, and two different worlds each with their own idiosyncrasies into one. The resulting situation is unstable and conflicts are inevitable. Is it then any surprise that stories such as those of my competitors happen? If marriage were to work, is love enough? Is love all we need to make a marriage work? Or do we consider character of our future mate? Their personality? The chemistry or the rapport between one and his wife? Perhaps…….

And They Call It Customer Service

It's been 3 weeks since my phone line cum DSL line went down and until now, it wasn't yet fix. I've been calling the phone company's repair service since the 30th and I still get the same response, "Yes sir, I will report this to the repair service" or "Sorry sir but we are just the call center representatives but I will personally follow it up for you." Crap! 17 days! 17 days!! And my phone line is still out. I got so impatient about the inefficiency that I went to the branch 2 weeks ago to report my complaint and the explanation I got was that the lines were totally messed by the last typhoon. Ok, in that case, I thought that it is understandable for a certain bit of delay but when things didn't improve last week, I got so pissed that I decided to try an "alternative" method. I got hold of a line man's number and asked him point blank to fix my line in consideration for a "tip". The line man agreed and we had a deal but as thing turns out, he didn't show up. When confronted, the line man told me that the phone company is undergoing a restructuring with plans to totally "remove" the repair service department and outsource it to a third party. Guess what? Who is the third party? None other but the former company line men. Pretty bright idea indeed. Turning your employees into your contractual partners and consultants and in one swoop transform your fix cost into a variable cost since the contract line men get paid on a per phone line fixed basis. No overtime pay, no benefits whatsoever. Pretty bright (I would have done it the same way) except that their employees don't buy it! The result is that the line men are initiating a work slowdown to "voice" their protest over the scheme. Their work has grind to almost a halt as a consequence with only 10 lines repaired per day against 200 assigned per team. Talk about efficiency. Damn! I am sandwich in between a labor dispute and my phone line is held hostage by both the nincompoops who thought of the bright idea in the first place but didn’t provide a backup plan in case the entire scheme backfired and the overtly sensitive, egoistic, uncompromising line men! Because of this work slowdown, the phone company’s management has initiated a strict monitoring system, so much so that the line man I’d dealt with couldn’t “manage” to take a time off to fix my line. Damn!!! Talk about customer service. If this case were in the States, probably the Trade department would have already intervened to protect consumer interest but as it turns out, I’m in the Philippines and the only thing I can do is suffer, fume, curse, and write a blog about it!

ON BEING 32

We all write stories of our lives because we are all fond of story – telling. Each of us has three stories to tell. The first one is when we were young. We wrote our life stories, stories of what we wanted to be, of how our lives are going to be, of what the world would look like by then. It is a story filled with dreams and hopes. It is a story full of idealism and immortality. It may sound like a fantasy and could be dismissed as such but that was our road map of life, one that is steadfastly held. The last story we all write is when we are already past our prime and near our time. By then, we will write our stories. Stories of what we had done, of how it all happened, of how the world looked like back then. Probably, those stories would be full of regrets and bittersweet memories or of triumphs, and challenges that had been overcome. It would most likely be a story full of lessons and sighs about unfinished businesses and dreams. It may sound like an assessment or perhaps a complaint of life thus far and in fact, it is so but it is still the life we by then have gone through nevertheless. The second story we all write is when we are at our prime. We write the stories of our life, stories of what challenges we are facing, of how to shape our lives amidst all that is going on, of the world we are now living. This is a story full of adventure and of challenges and trials. This is a story of how we turn our dreams into reality and of turning realities into memories. It is a story of excitement and of fear, of taking risk and of dreading uncertainty. It may sound like an action adventure story, or perhaps a drama, or even a suspense and is could actually be for unlike the two other stories, this story of our prime is not yet written and it wouldn’t be written in ink but in blood and sweat.
Today, I turn 32 and I’m now in the midst of writing the story of my prime. Hopefully, I could fill many a page in this story of mine. There would be plenty of victories and parties to write about but also probably some frustrations along the way as well and perhaps a few events that could be portent of future regrets. I wish I only had a few of the latter (frustrations and regrets) and more of the former (victories and triumphs) to write but I cannot really tell. But, the one thing I could tell and that is, I’m not going to write this story of mine blindly for I had the story written during my youth to copy from and probably a future bestseller to be written in my old age to worry about.

A Happy Birthday

by Ted Kooser

This evening, I sat by an open window

and read till the light was gone and the book

was no more than a part of the darkness.

I could easily switch on a lamp,

but I wanted to ride this day down into night,

to sit alone and smooth the unreadable page

with the pale gray ghost of my hand.

STOPPING BY WOODS ON A SNOWY EVENING

By Robert Frost

Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake.
The only other sound’s the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.

LIFE WAITS FOR NO ONE

This is the message that greets me every morning when I turned on my cell phone. I wrote this quote of mine a few years ago ostensibly as a reminder to myself. I want to remind myself that life doesn’t slows down or waits for me in spite of every excuse however valid or silly. I could waste my life in a merry spiral of indulgences and play and turn up one day to find out that my time is nearly up. By then, I would have most likely regretted to have done nothing worthwhile and wasted a lifetime of opportunities. Then, I would most likely say to myself, I could have invested in a more useful enterprise given a second chance. There is however, no second chance. This is not a computer game wherein one has 3 lives to spare and could reset every time one fails. We only had one shot at this and what’s gone is gone, no use crying over spilled milk. However, in the same breathe, this simple quote of mine also serves to remind me that there is more to life than the single – minded pursuit of the definition of one’s short existence. Life is not all about purpose or mission. Life is about enjoying the time given to us, of enjoying one’s stay in this transient time and space. Life is like an exotic cruise down a mystical river. It is the sight along the way that makes the trip worth taking and not what’s at the end. Be it so, at times, I find my quote funny. For how could a simple one liner have two contradictory interpretations? Perhaps, it is because life is not a race or a leisurely walk to the finish line. It is in fact both. There are times when we had to make haste to reach our goal before the sun sets for time is against us but then again, there are times when we had to make a detour from our journey especially when we chance upon an open field with its luscious green grass, the warm sunshine, the cool breeze, the beautiful birds’ chirpings, and the inviting shades under the tree. It is “forgivable” to postpone the chase for another day or two perhaps and take a rest and cherish the moment.

STRATEGY AND THE CEO

I’ve been reading this book by Henry Mintzberg. It is called, Strategy Safari, A Guided Tour Through The Wilds of Strategic Management. The book is all about how strategies are created within the firm. It lists 10 schools of Strategic Management and how each school crafted strategy. Not only that, the book also define the role of the CEO in each school in relation to the strategy formation process. According to Mintzberg, strategies are crafted either by deliberate action, i.e., through analysis and planning process, by the learning process i.e., understanding that strategies “emerges” as a trend and later adopted, or by maintaining consistency, i.e., strategies as a constant pattern of action or by combining the three. Each of the schools emphasizes one “process” of strategy making over the other with certain modifications for schools with almost similar ideas. The 10 schools according to Mintzberg are:
1. The Design School
2. The Planning School
3. The Positioning School
4. The Entrepreneurial School
5. The Cognitive School
6. The Learning School
7. The Power School
8. The Cultural School
9. The Environmental School
10. The Configuration School
The differentiation of the field of Strategic Management thinking into 10 schools is actually a fine one and probably debatable but Mintzberg made distinction quite clearly. Of the 10 schools, the first 4 emphasize more on deliberate strategies while the remaining schools focuses more on the emergent strategies with varying emphasis on strategies as patterns. The last school though makes use of the 3 types of planning process.
The Design School believes that the strategy formation is a process of conception. Strategies developed here are deliberate through careful analysis of the environment and the opportunity it presents and the threats it posed while at the same understanding the strength and weaknesses of the company in face of such environment. In this school, the task of “conceiving” strategy lies squarely on the CEO, be he the head of a small company or a large organization with global presence. The CEO is the master strategist and it’s chief executor, period. In order for that to happen, the CEO should be an exceptional genius in order to craft such a grand strategy based primarily on their intuitive analysis. This is because of the breadth, size, complexity, and scope of the organization where the strategy would be applied.
The Planning School views strategy making as a formal process. Like the first school, strategies are deliberate and are the outcome of analysis and planning. The difference however is that the Planning School believes that strategy formation should go through a step-by-step procedure of deliberation and analysis. In here, analysis is no longer limited but is pretty much overblown, in – depth, and concise. Because of the requirement of an in depth analysis, CEOs can’t simply do the job, instead a host of analyst does the job for him. In fact, an entire department was created to do precisely that and this unit is usually the Corporate Planning department of a company. Here, the CEO is no longer the “genius” for he is no longer the chief strategist; the Corporate Planner Head now takes that role. The CEO as the title implies (Chief Executive Officer) executes the strategy formulated by the CORPLAN group ensuring that strategies gets implemented as intended. In this school, action is differentiated from thinking while in the Design School, action and thinking is united as one.
The Positioning School on the other hand viewed strategy making as an analytical process. Here, there is no CORPLAN group, instead there is a staff of experts who readily analyzes the impact of environment changes on the company and advises the CEO. The CEO here decides on it en route to crafting a strategy. This school believes that there are only a finite number of viable strategies on the table for the CEO to choose from. In order words, given a set of conditions, only a handful of strategic choices known as positions are available to choose from and most importantly, these positions are generally known to all the industry participants. So much so that companies within the same industries having more or less the same orientation and capabilities adopts the same position. The CEO’s role here although a thinking one is reduce to merely choosing a viable and defensible “position” and not crafting a creatively new strategy. Once a position is chosen, the CEO must pursue it, hence, strategy here though initially deliberate (planned) becomes a pattern over time since “positions” takes time to build.
The Entrepreneurial School of Strategic Management believes that strategy creation as a visionary process. Here, the CEO is both the strategist and the executor but unlike in the Design School wherein the CEO is the master strategist. The Entrepreneur/Visionary is the master. In the words of one CEO, he is the dictator, the king, the emperor, or god whatever you may want to call him because he alone holds the vision and only his interpretation of that vision is legitimate/correct. The CEO of the Design School tries to find a fit between environment and company but for a Visionary, the company/organization is for him to craft and mold to fit his liking. It is in this latter fact that the role of the CEO in this school is one of opportunity seeking. Strategy here though deliberate becomes a pattern for the most part. In fact, strategy as a term is no longer relevant. The more appropriate term more often used here is the business model.
The Cognitive School holds that strategy formation is a mental process, i.e., it exists in the mind of the CEO colored with his own biases and his own interpretations. The CEO’s main role here is a thinker and his approach to strategy hinges less on trying to “cope” with the environment using the company’s capability rather it relies more on “how” the company should be coping. In short, the CEO is more interested in the “paradigm” of the company. An example would be the concept of customer. In the old paradigm, customers are institutions or people that buys the company’s end products. In the new paradigm, customers are not outside the organization but could be anyone down below the supply chain, i.e., the concept of internal customers.
The Learning School of Strategic Management considers strategy making as an emergent process. Strategy formation here follows the dictum “learning as we go”. CEOs of this school believes that strategy is a complex undertaking and that people at the center abrogating all the decision making powers are insulated from the outside environment and hence, couldn’t possibly appreciate the intricacies of the “outside world” much like the frontline people. Hence, CEOs of this school favors decentralization and are obsessed with creating a “learning” organization, i.e., an organization that learns as it goes and react automatically without the CEOs intervention, which may come too late. The CEOs role in school functions not as a strategy maker but as a “controller” and ‘overseer” of the entire strategy making process, i.e., others makes the strategy, the CEO just ensures that the strategies are in the right path. However, the CEO of this school varies in the “looseness” of control exerted over strategy making. Some CEOs prefer to put up an umbrella strategy, imposing constraints and limits, communicating rather clearly their preferences but leaves the content and execution of the strategy to the “frontline”. Other CEOs prefer to control the processing side of strategy by providing support services like HR, Finance, etc in order to make the strategy work. The frontline unit handles the content of strategy as well as the execution but the resources required for implementation comes from the center. Still, another variation would be to form a consensus strategy wherein each autonomous unit plan and direct their own strategy and the CEO’s role here is to prevent friction and conflict among the various units with overlapping interest by “balancing” each other through consensus. Picture that of a newspaper publishing with many egoistic reporters vying for the same story but with different angle.
The Power School views the entire strategy making process as a process of negotiation. The CEO in this school is the ultimate deal maker for he has to consider the demands of the various stakeholders, which includes among others employees, shareholder, government regulator, community, customers, interest/pressure group, etc. Each stakeholder has a legitimate claim on the company and their demand is many and varied. The CEO doesn’t try to satisfy all the demands of the all stakeholders for that is impossible neither does he tries to maximize the satisfaction of a particular stakeholder for that would be difficult and risky if not unwise. Instead, the CEO “satisfice” the various stakeholders by meeting their minimum demands. Hence, the CEO negotiates. Strategy here is crafted not only based on the exigencies of the market but also on the imperatives of the deal (and therefore, it is largely emergent). In the end, after this entire balancing act, the CEO must be able to enhance his power, prestige, and influence. In this case, a Power School CEO should be a superb politician.
The Cultural School is different from the Power School in that this school believes that strategy formation is a process of social interaction based upon the shared beliefs and understanding of the members of the organization. Here, strategy is collectively developed and the CEOs role is that of a team leader. He not only defends the company values vigorously but also epitomizes the company spirit. However, once the organization is faced with a crisis that threatens its survival, the CEO also plays the role of “rule breaker”, one that tries to recast the mold of the company hopefully for the better.
The Environmental School holds that strategy formation is a reactive process, one in which the environment plays a very active role. The CEO merely reacts to the environmental forces, i.e., he doesn’t have the initiative. His role is that of a contingency planner or a crisis manager, not a strategist in full control of the situation. In fact, I surmised, strategy doesn’t exist at this school, instead, a set of logical common sense rules are in place, heuristic rules. Heuristic rules are those kind of rules that contains a pre - condition and an established response as in “If this happens, we should do this” rules.
The last school of thought in Strategic Management is the Configuration School. This school believes that strategy formation is a process of transformation. It view strategy as changing through the entire life cycle of the organization. During start – up, strategy tends to reflect the entrepreneurial school of thinking; while growing, strategy formation tends to mimic a learning process; on maturity, strategy tends to follow the planning school of formalize planning process; and in it’s decline, strategy reflects that of environmental school of reactive process. The role of CEO also changes along the life cycle path of the company. In short, each situation dictates a different kind of leadership approach. Hence, the CEO’s role is situational.
As I said, the differentiation of the various school of though is a fine one and one that probably exist in the mind of an academician for in real life experience, a CEO would probably play all the roles of the different school of thought. He could be a visionary and also a master deal maker. He could be a team player but also a mere executor relying on a think tank rather than a thinker. However, the difference for each CEOs and CEOs do differ from one another is in their emphasis of what role they assume. In fact, one could gather much by simply understanding how do CEOs “see” themselves. A CEO maybe both a visionary and a deal maker but he is more of a deal maker if he sees himself in such light. Hence, I believe that any deserving CEO should be able to grasp their conception of their role in the organization and understand how the grand strategy flows from such self – conceptualization in order to improve their leadership capability and that of their organization’s performance as well.

ON LEADERSHIP

What is leadership? This is a question that has boggled me since the day I finished my academic works in MBA. It has also recently become a topic that occupies my thoughts for sometime now. My professor, Professor Elfren Cruz was the main culprit in both instances. It all started 5 years ago when I asked my professor during a break in the lecture on an article I read in the paper concerning competitive advantage of firms. Specifically, my question is about people and why some strategy makers believed that they are the source of a company’s advantage and not in its assets or in its resources. My professor’s answer was that a firm’s capability is performed by it’s people using the assets and resources available to them. Without people, the assets and the resources amount to nothing. The answer was simple as that but back then, with my relatively simplistic view about business, I was simply awed by the realization. So much so that I blurted out that “Why isn’t it being emphasized that way in MBA, I mean why we are being taught with analysis and techniques and everything else and not the big picture?” And to that, he gave me a curt reply, “because most of the professors are not aware of that since none of them are CEOs. Many of them had only a very limited view of the business.” Inadvertently, he also mentioned that I’m not (yet) a CEO either. I was profoundly shocked by his frank comment. For all my life up to then, I was being groomed to handle the family business and to realize that I’m not ready to be a CEO and therefore unworthy to carry the task was something I couldn’t simply accept. If I had to run the business someday, I had to change. I had to be better. That night, I resolved to change my ways and to train myself to become a CEO by acting and most importantly, by thinking like a CEO. And to achieve my goal, I figured that I had to develop a strategic mindset. To see things in a big picture and to break it down to it’s individual constituents and analyze each of these pieces and from there develop a strategy to exploit opportunities, to counter, and to neutralize the threats. By the time I’m through with STRAMA, I was able to establish that kind of thinking even though it was kind of raw. However, I felt something lacking in my training to become a CEO and that is leadership. At that time, I thought that I could come up with the most incisive analysis and craft the most brilliant strategy but if I cannot make it work or make it happen or convince people that my strategies are correct, things wouldn’t change and that I’m no better than just a simple analyst. Analytical skills and technique plus a strategic mindset don’t a CEO make. In the end, it’s how you make it happen. No wonder, MBAs make good business administrators but not entrepreneurs. I wonder then why business school doesn’t teach such an important aspect of management. Probably, it is because leadership is something personal or personality based and that it is impossible to teach a person a standard set of “knowledge”. Leadership, I surmised couldn’t be taught with words but only with hands – on experience. And so, I experimented, taught myself, and developed my own style and know – how on leadership. You could say that the past 5 years or so was a sort of training for me. I thought that I was on a right path until recently. About 2 months ago, I had lunch with my professor and he was talking about the recent trend in Strategic Management based from his readings on Harvard Business Review. He mentioned that the trend seemed to shift towards emphasizing leadership. I was curios with what he said and actually questioned that trend. For how could that happen? I mean, Strategic Management is all about frameworks, and analysis while leadership is personality based. The former could be taught while the latter could only be trained. To suggest that strategy is tied up with the personality would transform the study of strategy making and management into more of an art rather than a strict science, which goes against the grain of strategic management. My professor feeling amused with my shortsighted understanding asked my evaluation on some historical personage and their leadership. Specifically, he asked me what do I think about Hitler’s leadership? What about Hu Jin Tao’s (the current Chinese leader)? Or for that matter, Mao? I was dumbfounded by his questions. Leaders from what I remembered in textbooks are people who directs and guides an organization towards it’s goals and are able to command the cooperation of a majority of it’s constituents in working towards that goal either through force i.e., executive fiat or coercion or through consensus or through motivations i.e., reward and punishment. By this definition, Hitler, Mao, and one could even throw in Stalin (Soviet dictator) would turn out to be good leaders for they were able to garner the support of a majority to work towards the established goals in spite of their ultimate failure. The failure of their ventures shouldn’t denigrate their leadership. For can we blame leaders who did their best but ultimately fail? (By the way, this is no exoneration of their culpability or their immoral acts). However, to say that the end result of their leadership is immaterial is to turn a blind eye to the sufferings of the multitude within the organization i.e., people eventually suffered from their failure. The case in point, Germany defeated in WWII was divided into two and was in shambles while China suffered decades of stagnancy as a result of the failed Great Leap Forward and the destructive Cultural Revolution. Not to mention the multitudes, who died because of it. By this context, their leadership was a failure. If that is the case, then the definition of leadership and of leaders is inadequate (by the way, these are text book definitions). It is not enough that leaders work toward a goal with the support of the many in an organization. They should also succeed. However, some of the variables of success are way beyond the leader’s control i.e., there are things beyond the control of an individual. One can control events but only up to a limited degree. If a leader couldn’t control all the factors of success then wouldn’t it be unfair to them if we use success as a yardstick? Furthermore, is leadership merely about success or achieving goals? Perplexing indeed, couldn’t imagine myself unable to grasp a simple concept like leadership. Over the past weeks, I try to understand the concept that my professor parlayed to me. I thought about it, I read about it, I researched about it but I was nowhere close until recently. In most books I read or in researches I made on leadership, various author tried to “portray” leadership. They didn’t define it per se but describe it. They describe leadership either by example (of famous personage) or through type (authoritarian, charismatic), or through style (paternal, participatory). In fact, most authors are biased towards charismatic, participatory type of leadership. As if to further enlighten us on what leadership is all about, authors emphasize about the difference between a manager and a leader. To simply put, a manager is told what to do and does it while a leader decides what to do and does it, i.e., leaders possesses the overall strategic initiative. In spite of all of this, I don’t seem to get anywhere near the mark of what he is talking about. What does initiative, style; type etc has to do with ultimate success and achieving goals? One could be open and participative as well as charismatic but still aimless and incompetent. I tried thinking about in terms of ethico – moral perspective considering the example of Hitler and Mao. Is ethico – moral perspective an important aspect of leadership? Yes, indeed! If so, by what ethico – moral framework a leader should subscribe to? Should it be Christian? Buddhist? Islamic? Or even philosophical? What is considered morally and ethically correct or even permissible in one framework may not be the case in the other framework. Aside from that, what if the ethico – moral perspective of leadership clashes with the expressed mission or goals of the organization, which are to be sacrificed? Furthermore, is ethico – moral framework the only one to consider? Is it in fact, operating independently from let say, tradition? Ultimately, ethico – moral framework is but a strand of culture, or more aptly, organizational culture. It is in this realization that I finally understood what my professor is saying for he hinted it as much when I asked him that is leadership related to culture and to which, he answered that I was thinking in the right direction. You see, I was thinking leadership in terms of personality while my professor was thinking all together in another plane. He is thinking leadership as a strategic concept. Why is it some organization (not just business firms but could include polities as well) stand out among the rest while others are barely noticed? Why is it some organization are able to consistently deliver the goods while others find it difficult to do so? Why is it some organizations are able to sustain their performance and achieve their goals year in, year out while others are erratic in their performance? Why is it some organization are able to constantly outperform their peers and went beyond everybody’s expectation while others are simply engrossed in surviving? Why is it some organization are able to continuously grow while others stagnate? Why some organizations are able to survive for so long, outlive their competitors while others come and go like the wind? The answer is leadership. Leadership I am referring here is not about the traits and personality. It is not about a leader rather it refers to leaders, generations of leaders who pursued the same goal in the same way as the founder(s) of the organization with the same intensity, the same dedication, and the same passion. It is in the consistency of each generation of leaders and not in their IQ’s or in their business education that enables organization to thrive. And this has to do with the organizational culture that bred those generations of leaders. Admittedly, organizational culture plays an important role in shaping an effective leadership. During succession, organization as a whole “chooses” (whether such rights are exercised by the many or a select section within the organization is immaterial) the next leader based on their cultural biases for each organization has it’s own view what an ideal leader should be. Candidates for leadership that aren’t in the mold of an ideal leader are waylaid by the selection process. This is to ensure the consistent quality of leadership. As an added insurance to the consistency of leadership quality, culture also trains leaders within the different levels of the organization as well as future leaders by conditioning candidates to accept certain behavior seen ideal for leadership position. Furthermore, it is also this cultural view of leadership that dictates the behavior of leaders. For leaders should act within a certain premise of acceptable behavior (example: ethico – moral framework) in order for them to become effective and thus garner support for their endeavors. Hence, this would tend to discourage leaders from being “disruptive” as in pursuing other interest inimical to the organization’s interest as a whole and therefore preserve leadership quality and consistency over generations. Though culture has a definitive control on leadership, leaders also exert a huge influence on both the organization and it’s culture. A leader’s flair, style, preferences, and even their biases tend to modify an organization’s culture and even more so during crisis situation. During crisis, when the confluence of outside pressures tends to conspire to push an organization to the brink of extinction, organization tends to be awakened to the need of change realizing the “old” ways don’t work anymore and that a new solution should be made to bring the organization out of the rut. In such situations, the organizations more often ejects the current leaders and in it’s place supplant with non – traditional leaders, hoping that they would bring in fresh ideas on how to run the organization (you can say it is part of their fail – safe mechanism). However, in most times, such actions aren’t enough. Leadership changes aren’t real change but a direction towards it. Real change comes from the changes made in how things are done in the organization that could better cope with the new environment. This means that organization collectively has to give up or more appropriately sacrifice some of their most prized and cherished rights as well as some of their behaviors, values. However, most of the time, organization resist change for it wouldn’t sacrifice cherished values and expected benefits for an unknown outcome. But, more often than not, crisis leaders are able to extract such sacrifices from a desperate organization through the manipulation of expectations by the conscious and selective awarding of rewards and punishments. Viewed in such light, one could say that the case of Hitler and Mao, the Cultural Revolution were such a response (again, this is no exoneration of their guilt). It is in this fail – safe mechanism of selecting non – traditional leaders (but before an organization could do that, it should be aware what is a traditional leader) to head the organization that ensures the survival of an organization in spite of all odds. Another fail – safe mechanism inherent in any organization is the existence of alternate leadership. Leadership exist the moment an organization is born and ceased to function when the organization dies. Leadership is part and parcel of an organization. Leadership however is not the office or the hierarchal structure of an organization. The office provided the holder with legitimate authority to provide direction. Authority makes the exercise of leadership easier however; authority is not substitute for leadership. Once hierarchy fails to deliver the goods, alternate leaders from the hierarchy or informal leaders arose to take charge of the situation. Power struggle would inevitably ensue with one desperate to maintain power while the other keen on legalizing their role as leaders. Again, this is but a way to ensure consistency of leadership quality. Though the system is barbaric but it is nonetheless, effective. Henceforth, in the final analysis, leadership is not simply about direction or initiative towards a set of goals but rather leadership should be about an insurance on the consistency of achieving goals, on the sustainability of above par performance, and most important of all, on the continuing of the organization’s vitality and ensuring it’s survival. The emphasis of leadership should be on creating a dynamic organization with a positive culture of performance and the training of future leaders, ones that share the passion and vision of the founders. Given that understanding, I’m in no way near the mark. It seems that I still have a long road ahead of me to become a real CEO……………

P.S. Tell me if I’m making any sense on this.

INNOVATION 101

Read my professor’s column last Tuesday (July 4) at Businessworld. Professor Cruz’s latest article is entitled “Managing Innovations”. The article is all about Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management’s latest study on innovation penned by Sawhney, Wolcott, and Arroniz and is entitled, “The 12 Different Ways for Companies to Innovate”. The authors defined business innovation as “the creation of substantially new value for the customers and the firm by creatively changing one or more dimensions of the business system”. They go on to list 12 dimensions that are subject to innovation. A few points should be emphasized here. Innovation is not equal to new invention or breakthrough technology. Rather innovation is about in my interpretation of the article, redefining value, i.e., what is valuable to customer or better yet restructuring the value offering into a more superior value for customer. Furthermore, innovations can be made in several dimensions, which include not only the product but also the entire business. In layman’s term, there are many facets or “fronts” in the businesses where innovation could be made to offer customer a much more superior value that they needed. These dimensions are:
1. Offerings,
2. Platform,
3. Solutions,
4. Customer’s (Need and Satisfaction),
5. Customer Experience,
6. Value Capture,
7. Processes,
8. Organization,
9 .Supply Chain,
10. Presence,
11. Networking,
12. Brand.
My professor ended his article here (Of course, he defined each of them). But being a business school graduate, I can’t help but be amazed by the power of this new framework on innovation. Of the 12 dimensions, I felt that I could classify them into 4 broad but interrelated categories (I’m no genius by the way, so if you have other opinions please let me know). These categories are Product and Services (#1 – 3), Customer Relationship (#4 – 6), Process Efficiency (#7 – 9), and Distributions/Marketing (#10 – 12).
Offerings, the first dimension simply refers to the product and service offerings of a company. It is fairly obvious that innovation of this type can happen by simply introducing new product variants or a better improve version of the existing products. An example of the former would be the introduction of new flavors to an existing food product or beverage while for the latter; the higher “speed” of Pentium computers would be a great example.
Platform, the second dimension refers to the base technology from which all subsequent new products are created. The example that came to my mind is the computer CPU chip. Currently, the available processor chip in wide use is the Pentium chip but a new chip is being marketed now, the Xeon chip, which functions like a dual core processor, an entirely different technology from the Pentium.
Solutions refer to the combination of end products and services that a company offers to help solve customers’ needs. An example of an innovation in solutions is event management. Used to be, people or organization had to do it themselves in order to stage an event like call up the catering, reserve a place, set up the props, etc. Now with event management, a single entity would be doing all the legworks and people or organization just call them up. Of course, there are other examples of “solutions” out there and the most popular now is the call center.
Customer, which in my understanding refers to the discovery of untapped customer needs. However, this is not that simple. It is possible that the product or services is already present but the customer is unaware of the features of the product offering due to poor attention given or people aren’t aware of the “creative” features of a product or technology. A classic example of innovation of this type would be text messaging. The technology and the feature are already present then but firms and the market aren’t able to fully exploit its potential but once it did, the outcome is far beyond everybody’s imagination.
Customer Experience refers to the total sensory and emotional stimulation that the customer had while “consuming” the product or services. The advent of fast food is one such example. Before McDonalds came into the picture, food service is not only slow but also inconsistent and expensive in some cases. McDonald’s offer of quick service, cleanliness, and quality revolutionizes the entire food service concept.
Value Capture, according to the article is about generating new revenue stream while offering value product. The example I could think of relating to innovation of this type is SM malls. Everybody knew that SM is in the real estate business of selling/renting out commercial spaces inside a gigantic mall to different retailers and merchants. Their primary source of income is in the rentals. However, lately, one could find billboard ads conspicuously littering the place to take advantage of high volume of traffic. Of course most of the ads are related to the retailers the mall host but that is a new revenue stream for a real estate company. This is an innovation in the sense that not only it offers customer information but in the process, it also generates revenue for the company. Internet web sites are prime examples of this innovation. Most web sites gave content away for free but generate revenue through ads viewed or what the industry termed as “clicks”.
Processes refer to the set of activities related to internal operations. By internal operations, it doesn’t merely meant production processes. It also encompasses other activities like accounting, customer support, etc. The idea of innovation at this stage is to improve efficiency and thus lower cost.
Organization refers to the reporting relationship between units. It also refers to the structure in which “work” is divided, i.e., to roll out a car, several work should be done, production, accounting, sales, etc. and the people - units that handle those work. Innovation of this type would mean to simplify the communication line such that responses could be made not only immediately but also accurately. Decision time would also be trimmed. Furthermore, “work” procedures would be simplified, streamlined, and made efficient as well as cost effective.
Supply Chain refers to the activities relating to the transmission of information on product requirement from the end customer to the primary suppliers and the delivery and transportation of the materials and products from the suppliers to the end customers. Innovation of this type centers on simplifying, reducing the communication link between the end users and the suppliers while at the same time improving the reliability, quality, and the speed of delivery of products from suppliers to end users. The last 3 types of innovation can be categorized as innovation on efficiency. Here, innovation is not merely about introduction of the expensive and latest technology but rather it is all about better control and coordination. There are many tools to identify possible “innovation” on efficiency. Tools like TQM, Reengineering, Six Sigma, Lean Manufacturing System are some of the prime examples.
Presence refers in my view to the visibility of the product or service to the target market. Presence in my understanding has two forms, namely, market presence and presence in the mind. The former deals with distribution while the latter talks about advertisements. Innovation in distribution refers to the use of creative alternative means of distribution like selling through the World Wide Web. Advertising innovations would be using new mediums other than the established ones like tri – media campaign, sponsorships etc. An example I could think of is internet advertising or being advertised/incorporated in a popular movie, e.g., James Bond’s favorite car, BMW.
Network as I understand refers to the “link” that connects the company and it’s products to it’s intended customers. This is not simply referring to distribution. It could also encompass co – marketing arrangements like promotion, partnering, co – branding etc. Innovation of this could also come in the form of “creating” new distribution channel aside from the existing channels. An example would be sports shoes. I remembered when I was young sports shoes are sold in department stores. Nowadays, sports shoes can be seen in sports equipment stores or fashion boutiques catering to a sporty lifestyle crowd.
Brand refers to the imagery conjured by the buyer that conveys the promise of the provider of what to expect from the use of the latter’s product or services. It is a promise made by the supplier to the customer. Innovation on brand in my view pertains to the creative way of positioning the brand either by extending it or rebranding it. An example of the former is the extension of sports shoes brands into sports apparel. As for the second case, an appropriate example would be the creation of the “mass luxury” market and the repositioning of some luxury brands into that category.
From a Strategic Management perspective, the list of dimensions to innovate afforded the strategy maker a focus for them to design their strategy. Using Michael Potter’s 5 forces framework on competition, the competitive forces in the industry conspire limit the maximum prices that a company could profitably charge, in short, a price ceiling while at the same time, these forces tend to establish a price floor (cost pressure) below which the company would experience a loss. The difference between the price ceiling and the price floor is the average profit potential that a company in the industry could reasonably expect given the host of competitive pressure. When the price ceiling collapses and the price floor is forced upward due to cost pressures, companies in the industry would felt literally feel the squeeze in their profitability. Michael Potter proposes 3 generic strategies to neutralize the squeeze. The first is Differentiation that is how to convince buyers that the company’s product is unique and therefore deserving of the price it dictates and not what the competitor dictates. This strategy negates the price pressure by “pushing” the ceiling higher. Of the 12 dimensions to innovate, the strategy maker should focus more on the Customer relationship category. Other categories are important too but the emphasis should be how the customer feels about the product or service, specifically, how it felt different from the other offerings. The second strategy is Low Cost, which is finding ways to lower the “overall” cost of the company, not only production cost but also overheads. This strategy negates the cost pressures and hence lowers if not maintains the price floor. Obviously, the efficiency category of the 12 dimensions is useful for the strategy maker to focus his attention on. The third strategy according to Potter is to focus on a certain segment of the industry (by the way, this is not the niche in marketing terminology). The idea of the strategy is to focus on a segment of the industry where the competitive pressures are the weakest and hence the company would feel “less squeeze” on it’s profitability. The strategy maker in this case should focus more on innovating the distribution and marketing side. For an aspiring entrepreneur, the 12 dimensions of innovation would help them figure out what to offer in a highly competitive market. One of the possible ways for entry available to an entrepreneur is to provide innovative products and services on the table that buyers really dig and makes existing player run for their money. Sawhney et al’s framework can help do just that by focusing the would – be entreprenuer’s mental prowess towards figuring out what to innovate. It is really difficult to come up with a new idea, a new innovation from the existing offerings by the established players that really offers superior value to customers. However it would be easier if one has something to start with.