Here is more effective to send a puttane a company to make this commitment to be the number one when you're away than that. Indeed, c'en'e once more dangerous, so as quickly as possible next year. Indeed, there still want to be in everything: sales, quality, commitment, satisfaction, image ...
This falazia and widespread in the CEO, as they know that the chances of success in office during a period of time more or less goes along to decline as it finds that the large multinational European and American at that point there are two strategies depending on the situation of 'Company:
1 .- if the company is at a comfortable level of internal and external results in a position of the first level, the CEO will tend to retain the post by applying a strategy accomodatrice, this and risk 0.
2 .- if the company is losing share, losing result and its position is not the first level, the CEO will tend to apply the policy of all or nothing, as the saviour of the homeland.
Let me anticipate, that both policies are disastrous, the first because it captures the benefits that can offer the market or your company and for so long-term tend to lose positions, and second because clearly there are cases of companies in a period of one to three years sianno gone from darkness to be number one. It takes a little 'more.
We analyze the first case more interesting, what you want to be number one now.
Start taking the CEO is not scemo and much and conscious and convinced that the setting an ambitious goal this comes to an interim goal that was not the real goal confessed. In theory also seems to assumibile in practice and nefarious. Why?
And bad because its first level there believes aware of the difficulties of target so high in so little time with the limited resources that do exist. So already part with a lack of trust and commitment and with the objectives of each confessabili not the first level up to what he believes is already a good result. Result: first, every one to his personal goal that does not coincide with others, asymmetry of goals; second, moved to its first levels lacks commitment and motivation which in turn transmit their staff resulting in a lack of motivation for achieve the goal and end up doing "as usual".
And because the nefarious system of variable pay can not be modular form other than copying his lens on paper. How not yet believe it, it does not expect that there is a variable remuneration and correctness in which more results, more pay. Not reaching the objectives crazy, there pay. Multiplying this effect along the chain ends to work "as usual". More as usual as the dependence of their salary on both the variable. And how sapiamo that staff commercial, what invoice, and the most exposed, will also what will work as usual more or less. Even less, because the first reflection of senior managers and their DRH will be: "do not worry, that sapiamo and ambitious, if not reach, we will find forms of remunerarvi." With these simple words, the whole tension that the CEO wanted to introduce in disappears in less than hour.
And bad because the P & L result of the exercise with that of the end of the year will not have nothing to see. Being number one means that the P & L will be number one, that is with a turnover of number one, with planned investments of a number, with marketing expenditure of number one, with expenditure commercial number one, with an increase of staff or a number of productivity and so forth. The more this P & L is rigid, that is as fixed charges, there is need and how much more this expenditure is necessary to more risk will result at the end of the year and the faster the fall going on a downward spiral reversed and profound. More time management plaice in finding cost reductions, keeping the turnover in that called "bubble effect snow" or "Snow", that is bringing results brightest towards the end of ricuperando sales not made with more resources. Cost reductions that have its own limit, increase in turnover which has its same. Everything to go to a spiral of even bigger losses.
And bad because it creates tensions between departments because each one tends to blame the nearby when the CEO is searching for responsibility in the first levels because the results so well planned, well-presented by all, so well prepared by all, so now accepted by all not arrive. The commercial accuses the marketing campaigns not offer winners, accuses the production of products not give them as competitors. The Marketing accuses the commercial not be efficient, not to control the distribution network, accuses the production of not being able to meet their specifications. The production accuses Marketing to ask impossible things and commercial order of things impossible. And so on, away, away. The war and served, and from that moment the juniors will more than justify the words of their leaders in comparison with other departments, instead of concentrating energies in "doing" in attacking the market. All the tension that the CEO wanted in common objective was transformed into a myriad of small personal goals for survival as manager.
But so difficult to set a goal after another? It really requires that the shareholder be the number one throughout ol'ego of managers wanting to be paid more and more powerful? The answer clearly in the second part.
There but also a risk, that is the point 1 ol'accomodamento the status quo. Clearly decorated with beautiful words, beautiful strategies, forward thinking, but in time, P & L conservative and risks in innovation 0.
And dangerous, because the assumption behind this strategy and that we are the market and that we are so strong in our management and product or service, that we are able to react to changing market and clothes for both consumers. More true that we as a company lider, with good results, it means that we are capable of. Wrong! Too much soberbia!
In a market frozen, that does not change at all and remains eternally how and would be true. But unfortunately the market, the World and subject to change, and sometimes sharp. Still there is a socio political factor somewhere, there is always a step ahead in innovation, there is always someone who finds a new process, there is always change. And many times this change seems so stupid, so failed, not that we realize that in some years becomes a success and transforms the market. We think only as an examples of the low cost airlines. Initially it was thought a thing of the internet as the purchase of a book rather than a company truly air with air true. In some years have transformed the market for aircraft. We think the example so simple and trivial, now and today, Dell, something so simple as changing the distribution method! There are large and small examples that shattered this quel'altro Market. In another order, not due to innovation but the rules of the market, the disappearance of Arthur Andersen!
Where I want to get and which tried very easy ways for one or another of the two policies possible, and that any strategy must sit to the situation of the company, not that of CEO. So must be very vigilant shareholder, the Management Board. And so easy to send puttane a company and so difficult risanarla, which wants the "common sense" then to apply the strategies.
Someone argues seem them, they feel that is not possible to apply a strategy like that of wanting to be number one in everything and now. I can assure you that is not so trivial.
