Monthly Archives: September 2011

The Cloud is Full of Sweet Fluffy Dreams

If you want to win favour with the doctor, this is a good way to start. Over in the recent edition of the SIG newsletter, Kent Parker, COO of Ariba, wrote an article on how the Cloud represents a more scalable, efficient way to do business on a global basis because it requires no software, hardware or resources to deploy and time to value is near immediate. However, he noted that these rewards can only be reaped if the organizations providing these networked community capabilities transform in ways that enable them to deliver products and services that meet a completely new set of business challenges and customer needs. Otherwise, the benefit of the Cloud will remain nothing more than sweet, fluffy dreams.

In the article, Kent presented six new rules that companies need to follow if they are to transform in a way that will enable them to deliver the products and services that are required in today’s knowledge-based network economy. The first four were quite obvious:

  • break down application silos
    the goal is to connect all of your applications and let data flow through the lifecycle
  • make innovation a constant
    customers expect improvements on a rapid timeline
  • focus on quality
    because, simply put, no one wants cr@p
  • stay agile
    or you will be outmaneuvered by your competition

However, the last two were not and keys to success in today’s economy:

  • overhaul customer support
    In an always-on community, customers demand immediate, proactive response to their issues, particularly as they impact business commerce continuity. But if you’ve outsourced most of the function of internal IT to an external provider, then you need to make sure the provider is not only offering the service level guarantees, but that it has the competency to provide the necessary support. In the IT world, system restoration sometime between 8 am and 5 pm on the next business day is NOT acceptable.
  • redefine customer relationships
    Go-live is the beginning, not the end, of a customer relationship. In a network-driven cloud community, customers and other participants require more continuous, ongoing assistance with enabling and institutionalizing business commerce capabilities. A company that offers a cloud-based solution has to be willing to continuously work and support the customer on that solution. Or the customer will go elsewhere.

Is Globalization Hurting You?

A recent article over on the McKinsey Quarterly on “Understanding your Globalization Penalty” is very thought provoking and a must read for any organization — or supply chain — looking to extend its global reach. Not only does globalization bring with it a risk for every opportunity — creeping complexity, culture clashes, and courageous counters from local competitors to name a few, but, high-performing global companies consistently score lower than more locally focused ones on several critical dimensions of organizational health — direction setting, coordination and control, innovation, and external orientation. This is backed up by data from McKinsey’s organizational-health index database which contains the results of surveys of more than 600,000 employees who assessed the health of nearly 500 different corporations.

This is scary. We’re in a knowledge economy driven by innovation, which requires direction, coordination, and external collaboration with suppliers and partners. Everything that globalization appears to be putting at risk!

Given that at least 50 percent of an organization’s long-term success is a function of its health, this is doubly troubling. Especially since McKinsey restricted the study to 20 “local champions”, which had outperformed their industries over the previous ten years, and 18 “global champions”, which had likewise outperformed their industries and met the composite criteria for full globalization — the cream-of-the-crop, if you will.

So what’s the problem? According to interviews McKinsey conducted with executives, it’s the familiar challenge of balancing local adaption against global scale, scope, and coordination, often hindered by existing internal networks and linkages [that] are ineffective for managing global-local trade-offs and instead just add costs and complexity. For example, many companies can’t identify transferable lessons about low-income consumers in one high-growth emerging market and apply them in another while others struggle when local entrants undermine traditional business models and disrupt previously successful strategies.

So what can you do? Get a health check and find out if it’s hurting you, where, and why. Then you can craft an appropriate action plan which may be to pull back and focus more on local sales. Sometimes your best market is down the street.

Buy India, Sell China?

A recent article on Fortune on “Another Global Recession? Buy India, Sell China” caught my attention because, while I think China is over-hyped, I’m not sure India is ready for prime yet due to their infrastructure problems and the issues with getting freight from even a few hundred miles inland in many parts of the country. China still has problems, but they have been investing Billions to improve their infrastructure in recent years and making progress at a rapid rate whereas India, with twenty-eight states and seven union territories, and 22 languages of official status, has been slow to tackle their logistics challenges due to the very long timeframes it takes to get agreements on projects of a national scale. (It probably doesn’t help that the Republic of India is a federation with a parliamentary system that was based on that of Great Britain, where some projects take so long that they literally cross career life-spans!)

So why is the article recommending to Buy India, and Sell China? According to the authors, even though BRIC countries are growing at a rapid rate, countries like Brazil and China are doing so at the expense of other countries — primarily by supplying the global economy with raw materials and manufacturing. If major financial crises (continue to) materialize in the US and the EU, and global demand slumps significantly, these countries are going to get hit the hardest and the growth-rates of nearly 10% will be unsustainable. (And depending on which fear-monger you ask, growth could come to a screeching halt.) And this doesn’t even take into account the deep financial exposure China has to troubled regions through its massive foreign exchange reserves.

On the other hand, poorer, insulated economies like India are in much better shape to weather the storm and, in some economists’ views, even see a silver lining if major obstacles (such as nosebleed inflation rates) decline or disappear.

I have to agree, but only to a point. China is experiencing a rapid rise in its middle class at home and the local economy is booming as well. Plus it has a very aggressive five year plan, and a history of meeting those five year plans. While it will get hit hard, and probably drop down to a growth rate of 5% if a double-dip global recession hits us (just like its growth rate fell from 13% in 2007 to 6.8% in 2008), it will continue to grow and, more importantly, will likely be the first to recover when the double-dip recession ends (if it does hit us).

In other words, if you are one of the few investors left with the brains to take a long term view, don’t count China out yet. It may experience a few bumps, but it will figure out how to smooth them over as it builds its global highways. Moreover, if you’re looking to get rich quick, it will likely be another decade before India provides you with that opportunity. If you’re patient, I believe you can win with both economies.