Sabado, Enero 29, 2011

JOP- January, 2011... Travel and Fun with my NEW 3D NIKON CAMERA...Egypt, Singapore and Philippines.

             Caught in my 3D Nikon Camera. Egypt's People Power.. During our last day of EFMD-EQUIS (MBA) accreditation of Cairo University.

Cairo... Cairo... Caught in my 3D Nikon Camera .. Egypt's People Power ...during the EFMD -EQUIS (MBA) accreditation of Cairo University.
  Cairo People's Power

 Tokyo, Japan

  Singapore
  La Union-Baguio Road, Philippines
  Singapore
  Singapore
  Singapore
 Guimaras, Iloilo... The name is Gumar..son of Irhads..
 
2011-Year of the Rabbit
 La Union


                                                                                                                                                                     

Biyernes, Enero 28, 2011

What Jolito Ortizo Padilla say about Globalization, an excerpts from Strategic Management- Building Competitive Advantage

                            Strategic Management is a Digital Texbook
Globalization is the more or less simultaneous marketing and sale of identical goods and services around the world. So widespread has the phenomenon become over the past two decades that no-one is surprised any more to find Coca-Cola in rural Vietnam, Accenture in Tashkent and Nike shoes in Nigeria.

The statistics that best reflects the growth of globalization is the value of cross-border world trade expressed as a percentage of total GDP: it was around 15% in 1990; is some 20% today and is expected by Mckinsey & Company to rise 30% by 2015.

Use the word  in this business context is alleged to go back at least as 1944; but its first very visible appearance was in the writings of Theodore Levitt, a professor of marketing who foresaw " the emergence of global markets for standardized products on a previously unimagined scale of magnitude".

Globalization is encouraged by:
- The growing  liberalization of market around the world, giving western multinationals access to new customers they never thought they would be able to reach.
- Easy internet access and cheap international telecommunication
- The rapid growth of large developing countries such as China, India and Brazil, and their growing demand not only for western consumer goods and technologies but also for goods and services from other developing countries.

Companies have approached globalization in two ways. On the one hand are those that have made little concession to local tastes and manufacture their goods in a few centralized production facilities that follow strictly uniforn standards.

On the other hand are companies that tailor their products or services for each local market. Among those are Japanese carmakers such as Toyota, which has plants in several countries producing for local markets, and Coca -Cola which never tastes the same from one country to the next.

Strategic Management- Building Competitive Advantage is now the official textbook of Mahatma Gandhi University...

Martes, Enero 25, 2011

Your Career Questions Answered: A letter from the Human Resource Officer of Etisalat.

 
     Thank you for reading my book- Managing People at Amazon's Kindle 3G

Problem: I've been asked to head up an employee initiative within our company, but where should I start?

The Answer::
This is a huge topic and you need to establish what is expected of you. Putting in place a new system of involving employees in their work will require a range of knowledge and skills, including an understanding of psychology for individuals and groups. The more traditional problem-solving and project management skills will also be needed. Presumably whoever has asked you to lead this project has seen something in how you operate that they valued.Apart from hard skills you must have shown softer people skills including empathy and coaching.

As with anything, the key to success is in understanding the current situation and putting together a plan to deliver the organization's objectives. It may seem obvious but if  you have been asked to look at improving employee involvement then there must be perceived problem with how staff currently work and you need to understand the reasons for this.

Typical reasons are more to do with the working environment than individual people's attitude. Many managers still believe they may motivate staff, but this is a fallacy-the best you can do is create an environment where individuals find their own motivation. One example is money. Many people believe this is a motivator, despite evidence of people who are dedicated and doing a good job while working alongside others who are paid the same, but do significantly less.

Your first task is to identify the demotivators- those things that are stopping people doing a good job. Typical areas include poor communication, poor structures and processes that hinder getting work done. It is generally a fairly long list with micro- management and a lack of ownership as the most visible symptoms.

If you get as far as putting in place systems that encourage involvement you won't be disappointed for ideas. People working within their organization generally want it to succeed-both continued employment and to tell their friends and family.

Whatever you come up with you have to sell your idea carefully. Dealing with people is the most difficult part of a manager's job and the rewards of employee involvement are some of the least certain. To have a manager believe there will be a significant improvement through giving employees more say in their work may go against their experience and possibly against their tendency to command and control. But if you are able to release some of this human potential, the rewards in terms of quality and productivity are tremendous.

Lunes, Enero 24, 2011

Creating A Quality Business Case by Jolito Ortizo Padilla

                                          

Strategic Management- Building Competitive Advantage 2nd edition (2011)  is now in the market ..Worldwide.

                                                      
There is a general rule of thumb that most organizations waste about 25% of their effort. In manufacturing this could be in the form of scrap and rework., in services it could be complaints or wasted journeys and in government it could be failed strategies and unnecessary bureaucracy. Each problem requires an improvement initiative and someone, ideally a quality professional, to make the business case for action.

Putting together a business case for quality is a series of simple steps , with actions to be avoided and actions that mustn't left out. However, we need to be sure we don't confuse simple with easy. Standing up to present quality case is equivalent to putting your head above a parapet. Your visibility is increased and any demand for resources is always contentious, now more than ever. Each of the following simple steps requires a lot of effort, knowledge and skill to be completed successfully , but the organizational and personal rewards are worth it.

The Beginning
Do have an objective in mind.It is a good quality principle that in order to achieve you have to know what goal it is you want to reach. Definition of the problem is vital.There are many tools outlined in my book Strategic Management - Building Competitive Advantage, 2011 edition. Knowledge that can be used for defining problems , including specifying the scope of what will be covered and the areas to which any problem relates. 

Don't assume too much. Although senior managers are "all quality" they may not be aware of the detail of how processes are managed and where the organization's areas of waste are. When it comes to the presentation stage you may need to summarize some things that may seem obvious to you.

Step 1: Gather your facts
Do be clear on the type of business case you are making. The sort of facts you collect will depend on the case you are making. If you are justifying current activity then you need to know what your function is spending its time and money on and, more importantly , how it contributes to the overall business including current goals. If you have some idea how much it would cost to outsource this activity then this may support your case. Through all of this do make sure that the value is clear or it can be used against you.

Do assess the whole of the process in order to gather facts. If you are making a case for change-an improvement project-then the data should include the current state of the area you are looking to improve. Test each piece of data going into the plan because it is likely you will be challenged. Use hard data wherever possible and make sure the information is relevant to your case and lines up with the organization's objectives. A Supplier saying you are good to work with may sound like good news in the short term, but there has to be a payback for your organization. Your fellow managers may expect you to be tougher with suppliers. By following and possibly mapping the process you will have an accurate understanding of the interactions of people and information to enable you to make your recommendations int he next stage.

Do make sure your language is appropriate. As a support activity, quality often struggles to obtain the interest and funding that core processes such as sales and operations attract. Quality professionals need to speak the language of business so, despite what we may think , gauge calibration and internal audit are not good things in their own right. They only exist in the context of what they provide for the business.

Do think of your investigation as starting the Shewhart cycle at the " check" stage. You are looking at current practices to see how they are performing with a view to "acting" on your findings to make an improvement. If your recommendation to top management is given the go ahead it will result in a "plan" that will be implemented (or "done").

Don't cut corners with fact gathering -make sure you have the facts correct. You will be asking for authority to take action and therefore need to present the facts to those who have the power to say yes or no. The amount of effort at this stage needs to be proportional to what you are asking. You wouldn't expect a good reception from the board of the organization if you asked for a million dollars investment based on gut feeling. Similarly, a four week group savings in the future just to pay for the research time. You need to gather and carefully check your facts.

Time invested at the stage helps to make your case "open and shut" with a smooth ride when it comes to presentation time. The reverse is also true-many sound cases have not been taken up because the presenter hasn't had answers when challenged.

Don't forget the people. We all have to work with the processes we are part of and by talking to the people involved you will get a good idea of the current issues and you may even get ideas for possible solutions.

Don't restrict your investigation to your own organization. If others are doing things better then gather the facts and bring them in as part of your proposal -your own benchmarking will support the case

Quality Tools:
- Check sheets, tally, and "measles" charts- where people gather data about errors and where they are found to simplify analysis later.
- Bar and Pareto Charts- to help present and make sense of the data collected above.
- Trend/run and statistical process control charts-to identify changes in performance overtime.
- Flowchart- as part of information gathering you can assess the current process and identify the steps. With further development these can become value stream maps of identifying times and timing of process steps and where the organization adds value
- Read the problem diagnostic tools under technologies and techniques in my book Strategic Management-Building Competitive Advantage, 2nd edition-2011 at Samsung Galaxy e-book, Sharp Galapagos tablet reader, Amazon Kindle e-book and Sony tablet reader.

Step 2: Developing your proposal
Do think of your business case for quality as a project: Most managers are familiar with project management and will recognize your business case as being the start of a project plan. Your business case will be the project brief that they sign up to. It should contain key deliverables in the form of quality such as end result they can expect to be delivered, cost (what it will take in terms of hard expenditure) resources (such as hidden expenditure in terms of time time from people you will need on the project) and delivery ( when they can expect their return on investment, bearing in mind it may arrive in stages as a range of deliverables at each phase of the project).

Do work out who may be affected by the project and its outcomes. Colleagues , including your peers , may have their own ideas of what needs doing. If your ideas build on theirs then you are likely to find some allies. On the other hand, your assessment of the current state may contain some implied or unintended criticism of their area and you should be ready for some challenges. You need to be sure your facts are correct and focused in order to avoid any scatter gun approach. This would probably lead to attacks from all sides and your argument may become overwhelmed by protest, whether they are justified or not.

Do make sure you understand the implications of any changes you are proposing. What may seem to be a simple change to take out unnecessary work in one area may lead to significant implications for others in the process. Look at the bigger picture.

Do make sure the team of people working on the project is appropriate. Individual team members have responsibility for the work they do but if they fail and cause project to fail then the buck stops with you as the project manager. If you have some concerns about the capability of a team member then express it at the time.

Do provide a range of options-this is always good tactic. If you have a grand plan that will result in 50% savings, but that will require drastic changes across the organization then you might like to present this alongside one or two options involving less transformation and providing some easy wins, albeit with less dramatic improvements at the end.

Don't jump in with the first solution you think. Again, you need to get the root cause of any problem by using established quality tools and techniques and put in place a solution to deal with that root cause. The cause and effect diagram can be really useful here.

Don't underestimate the work involved. You need to give an honest assessment of how much work is involved. Credibility doesn't fall faster then when you promise an individual that a job will take five minutes' work and it seriously disrupts their day/week/month.

Don't forget to build in a bit of contingency. You can be totally honest about it and tell people that it exists but again being able to deliver. Contingency exists for a purpose to allow changes to the project to be accommodated and key elements of cost, delivery and specification to be met.

Quality Tools:
- Brainstorming- a small group can quickly gather a range of potental problem causes and possible solutions using this creative approach.
- Cause and effect diagrams- for example, use brainstorming to construct a fishbone diagram to identify the problem and break potential causes down into category areas. These can be prioritized as potential causes for action.
- Affinity diagram- causes and solutions may be collected to enable clear groupings for further investigation and action.
- Find a cause and effect diagram in the problem diagnostic tolls in my book Strategic Management -Building Competitive Advantage at Nokia MeeGo e-book and Toshiba Libretto.

Step 3:
Implementing the Plan
Do avoid peak times: If your project is going to take up resources make sure that you plan peaks of activity around people's busy time. Remember any work you ask them to do is worked around their day job-the work their bosses and colleagues recognize.

Do keep a check on your progress and monitor to see that predicted improvements actually materialize. Keep people up to date with where the project is. If anything unforeseen looks as if it is going to derail the project, let people know immediately-they maybe able to put things right or at least acknowledge that the improvements won't be realized in your original timescale.

Do make sure the gains are visible and there are processes in place to prevent losses recurring.Successful improvement projects lead to more of the same and your track record will help when you next ask to make further improvements.

Don't take no for an answer. If you have been given the go ahead by senior people, then you need to make sure people do for you what their bosses have agreed to. If you still face resistance , escalate the issue. In mature organization people will recognize that what you are asking is fair. By being given the project you have the authority to require action. You have to use this authority sensitively and use all your people skills to manage the situation effectively.

Don't panic!Improvement projects don't run smoothly every time. Often there are blind alleys you go down when you are trying something new, but you need to trust your knowledge and use your skills to find the route that delivers results.

Quality Tools:
The tools used here are genetically the same as in step 1. The logic is the same :if you have presented your facts to obtain the approval to go ahead based on a business case, then you need to be gathering the same information and showing improvement.

Step 4: Lessons Learned:
Do capture the experience you have gained on this project and try to spread the knowledge around to members of your team and others in the organization. By using the knowledge in this way the organization not only benefits from the individual projects, but can learn as a whole.

Quality Tools:
This requires similar tools to step 2 . If organization is to learn lessons, then the key points throughout the process have to be gathered and analyzed before being presented to the organization. 

Presenting the lessons learned needs to take form that allows people not involved on the project to quickly identify what they need to do in the future to either repeat good points or avoid pitfalls.

Miyerkules, Enero 19, 2011

Value Management Research by Jolito Ortizo Padilla




No matter how good a communicator you are, if you ask the wrong questions and pose them in the wrong areas then no amount of accessible or skillful communication will produce any sort of impact.

There is some skepticism throughout the management community about the value management research- who listens, who notices, what consequences does it have? This is something that scholars and also potential users of management research are increasingly concerned about. How can research into management issues be both of high scholarly quality and of real use to practitioners? How do we give management research "scholarly impact"?There are four considerations:

The first is that scholars in the area should have the aspiration to do both scholarly and practical research work- to tackle the "double hurdle".

The second, the quality of the relationships of the academics and their ability to sometimes work through "knowledge brokers", or intermediaries.

The third is the quality of ideas.

Finally, the co-production of research by scholars and practitioners.

The Double Hurdle
Research into management often seems to have a dual basis-you either have an impact on scholarship, or you have an impact on the worlds of policy and practice. However, we should aspire to meet a double hurdle, where we seek to do work that has both a quality of scholarship and a practical impact.

The reality is that people diverge and define themselves either as a scholar, spending all their time writing articles and books; or others who define themselves as applied researchers or consultants. These don't worry too much about where their work is published, but are much more concerned about who they can influence in the "real" world. It's rare to find people who want to produce work of the highest scholarly quality and deal with practical issues at the same time. we should encourage people to try to do this.

This will involve a cultural change to shift scholars focus from publishing output, writing articles and books-which to me is an "intermediate good"- to the final good., which is having scholarly and practical impact. A lot of incentive systems in academia have unwittingly focused people on the intermediate good. Published research is valuable, but somehow we have to turn people's efforts from this intermediate good to the final good. That will not be easy.

Relationships
There is the problem of engaging with potential users of research. The one thing we know about user engagement is that very often it depends on how particular issues are regarded at the time by potential users-are these issues rising or falling in their list of priorities?

Often, too, they become interested in something because they know, or have heard of , the academic involved. It's really about brands. For example, a famous writer can become a "brand" and , therefore , what he or she says is likely to generate interest and to be accepted as authentic. The same is true of some research centers and other institutions that have gained general acclaim. These, too, can be characterized as a brand.

Potential users of research can be fickle because they are so influenced by branding, and by reputation of individual academics or of the centers where they work.

User receptivity is unpredictable and person -dependent. It's built on relationships. If the director of an institution changes, something may go with them. Some users may walk away because their allegiance was to that person.

It's also dependent on context and timing. As an academic you can come up with really great concept or idea-let's say it's about technological change -and then find that there's absolutely no interest in it whatsoever. Three years later something has stirred up people's consciousness and everybody is fixated with technological change. This means that academics have to be visible over the long term. They have to have sustainable long term-relationships.

What this means for younger scholars is that they not only have to develop social capital. Some of them may know this intuitively. But generally they don't go out and deliberately build networks. If you want your work to have impact , then you must be a networker; not only build relationships, but also know how to sustain and exploit them.

These networks must be global. One of the the problem at the moment is that some are becoming rather self-concerned with their own academic institutions. This is fine. But if it is at the expense of neglecting other institutions, then it is a mistake. Networks must be global; building networks in North America and other areas is particularly important to this.

Network should also extend to the corporate world. If you are an expert in say, the financial services, you need to know chief executives, senior people, strategy people and other financial businesses. It also means having network inside the government, knowing senior civil servants, consulting firms, think tanks, even journalists, who often act as translators and amplifiers of academic work in the management field. The fact that someone writes about your work in, for instance , the Times, makes people interested.


The Quality of Ideas
Another issue is the belief that some people have that publication is impact: "If only I could write or talk better, then there wouldn't be a problem. We are such a dreadful communicators but if only I could spread the word better then there wouldn't be a problem."

This is a fantasy and trivializes the problem. We cannot deny the importance of skill writing or talking; we are in the influence business and people are influenced through the written and spoken word. But no matter how good a communicator you are, if you ask the wrong questions and pose them in a wrong areas then no amount of accessible or skillful communication will produce a sort of impact.

Dissemination is not impact. You can't guarantee impact just by writing and talking well. You have to ask the right questions, pursue the right themes at the right time. Accessibility on its own is not enough. We need to ensure our message is really understood.

Co-Production
This leads on to key proposition of co-production.

I can sit here and work on my own or with other academics and that's fine. But if I say I want to work with the major consultancy on something, it doesn't mean setting up an advisory group so that they come here and give me advice.

Co- Production here is that early and continuous engagement increases the probability of impact. There is no set model for co-production , and it is encouraging that many scholars are now willing to experiment with various forms of engagement to see which works most effectively.

The complete opposite of co-production is what one might call "smash-and grab" research, which amazingly enough, is still going on. Smash -and -grab research is where a scholar can gain access to an organization; grab the information and data, and then write it all up in scholarly isolation.

Not only is this unfair to other scholars, who may come along later and be refused access to the same organization, because of the poor behavior of their predecessors.

Co-production is involvement in the whole research cycle from inception  to publication. This increases the probability of impact; you can't guarantee it, of course. But people should experiment in the co-production of knowledge.

Co-Production depends on relationships. You can's do it if you don't get out beyond the boundaries of the university. Go and meet people, engage with them, talk to them and develop good personal relationships so that they say " well I don't mind working with this guy, it sounds OK, we might get something good out of it". It's fundamentally about building relationships and a willingness to experiment.

The corporate world is much more open to this kind of thing than might be imagined. But again it's often very person specific. You can go to any number of people in a big company, most will be indifferent, but you will find some who see the value in what you are proposing.

They see the value because they are going to learn from direct engagement with the scholar. They will be capturing the finding earlier, not waiting to read a great academic tome three years down the track. If you're working as a team then you are capturing the value as it is being created rather than waiting for it to materialize.

Other thing you can do, if you are engaged like this, is to help shape the project: that increases the commitment of people to the process. They are also much more likely to co-fund if they co-produce. This has been going on for ten years in areas such as engineering, it's nothing new, it's not some great invention.

This may be seen by some academic as very close to a form of consulting, as not "pure" research but becoming an applied researcher.

But it need be. Academics can fashion and shape the work so that all the interests of the various parties are met without compromising the important academic values of independence. It is perfectly possible for scholars to manage the dual activity of high involvement with users, and high independence form those same users. In doing double-hurdle research it is important that we maintain the capacity for mold  breaking and challenge.

My own experience of working with people in business is that they are interested in ideas and concepts in their own right. They are quite willing to be challenged with important ideas on important subjects.

Lunes, Enero 17, 2011

Your Career Questions Answered: A letter from my former student - Joyce of Bernardo College-Las Pinas, Philippines.


Joyce is working as Purchasing Officer at Gulf Air, Bahrain

Thank you  for reading my book, Human Resource Management in Action at Samsung Galaxy e-book.

Question: What sort of procurement officer struggles to procure (and retain) decent staff?
Answer: Most of them. But there are no shame in that.

Recruiters everywhere are struggling with the same challenge. welcome to the famous, deadly, "war for talent". The shrapnel is flying and collateral damage cannot be avoided.

Do you remember those quaint old job interviews where the candidates were deferential, and nervous, and were expected to answer questions like: "If we gave you this job, what would you see yourself doing in the five years' time? Now " candidates" interview the prospective employer. And you had better be ready to answer their questions. Such as: how long do I have to work for you before I get offered a sabbatical/career break? Can I work part time? Can I work from home whenever I want? I don't want to do anything boring-can you guarantee that the job is always interesting?

Recruiters have to bite their tongues and suppress their indignation at the attitude of potential new colleagues. The spirit of L 'Oreal ads seems to have infected many of them. "I am worth it", they say. "Give in to my demands  and I may consider working for you- for a little while, at least."

Perhaps the coming downturn and probable  rise in unemployment, will take some of the wind out of the sails of cocky applicants. Over the past decade, usually, there really has been another job to go to, for the people with the right abilities and experience at least.

But maybe now recruiters will begin to regain the upper hand. But it would be a mistake to go back to the old ways of doing things. "High maintenance" employees are here to stay. It's a generational thing. The 20's and early 30-somethings, in particular, are in a hurry to get on. It's hardly surprising: most of them have emerged from university with a fairly hefty debt and are struggling to find a property they can afford to buy.

But they have also looked at the deference shown by their parents to their employers and have asked themselves: what's the point of that? Did being patient get them anywhere?

In any case , employers have been busy telling the world there is no such things as "a job for life" any more. That cuts both ways. Why not look after yourself if no-one else is going to look after you?

What do employers need to do to attract and hang on to good people? Consider your "employers brand"- what do you stand for as a business, and why anyone want to be a part of that? Are you offering interesting , challenging and varied work? Is any sort of career path discernible? Will people learn and develop their skills if they stick around?

Most of the company today have four different generational "cohorts" to reckon with: the Baby Boomers, Generation X , Generation Y and millenials. Their needs, expectations and prejudices are different.

But the common factor to persuading anyone to join and then stay is to ensure the "value proposition" is attractive. Why should anyone want to work with you?

When it comes to recruitment and retention it is your salesmanship you need to worry about.

Linggo, Enero 16, 2011

The Winnovation by Jolito Ortizo Padilla

Every company should organize a serious , high level strategy forum (call it the "Innovation war room") to start rethinking their business from the customer backward.

In a world where the pace of change has gone hypercritical , today's most important race is for strategic renewal: to change as fast as the environment is changing around you; to invent new sources of profit before the old ones disappear; and reinvent your strategy and your business model before they become obsolete.

Strategic renewal is dynamically adjusting business models and strategies to the changes in the external environment. This requires innovation. Strategic renewal is creative reconstruction;taking your traditional business model apart, looking for imaginative ways to reconstruct it and create significant new value for your customers and your company.To go about the task of strategic renewal set up an "innovation war room". This is simple, effective device that forces all your people to focus on reinventing the business model and find bold , new growth opportunities.

Few companies have a specific innovation war room. But every company should organize a serious, high level strategy forum (call it the "innovation war room") to start rethinking their business from customer backward. Think about a slogan IBM now using: Stop selling what you have. Start selling what they need!" Never assume you can just continue to sell the same old product or service to the same old customers in the same old way-and the same old price.

Instead, business needs to get busy  working out how customers' priorities may have changed, and realign the business model to address these new needs. The winners will be those who recognize that all the game has changed, and that " same old, same old" will no longer work.

The business model can be split into five components: who they serve, what they provide, how they provide it, how they make money, and how they differentiate and sustain an advantage. Then companies need to radically rethink each component using the "four lenses of innovation". Strategy teams should:
- Challenge orthodoxies, about who their customers are, how they interact with them, how they define their products or services, and so on;
- Harness new trends to substantially change the way things are done in their industry.
- Use core competencies and strategic  assets in novel ways to generate new growth; and
- Understand and deal with customer needs that are currently going unmet.

Perhaps it is time to look  at your own business model and some " creative reconstruction", aimed at making it better to today's shifting customer needs and new economic realities.

Belated Happy New Year to all my friends all over the world.