Da Irv Beiman

L'amministrazione strategica in Cina è una sfida enorme. Che cosa è la strategia? Come possiamo aumentare il nostro reddito per colpire gli obiettivi di grescita ambiziosi? Come possiamo essere più efficienti e fare l'uso migliore dei nostri beni effettuare o aumentare il profitto? Perchè dovrebbero i nostri clienti attuali continuare a comprare da noi? Come attrarremo e mantennremo i nuovi clienti? Una volta che siamo libero circa la strategia, come possiamo comunicarli efficacemente? Come possiamo generare il fuoco che dobbiamo riuscire? Siamo sicuri noi siamo di destra circa come vincere? Se siamo errato, possiamo scoprire abbastanza presto per procedere alle registrazioni necessarie? Come possiamo controllare efficacemente la nostra strategia in così ambiente domestico e globale turbolento di affari? Che cosa sono le competenze strategiche che sono critico per effettuare la nostra strategia e come possiamo assicurarli per avere possibilità sufficiente in queste zone? Che cosa è il software ed ESSO l'infrastruttura che ci permetterà di controllare le nostre prestazioni strategiche e di eseguire più efficacemente?

Questi sono giusti alcune delle domande da interessare circa quando controlla la strategia sulla terra in Cina. Come partecipante-osservatore dell'amministrazione strategica in Cina per più di 10 anni, vedo avvenire evolutivo dei cambiamenti. La Cina ha una base d'espansione di i quadri ed i responsabili che stanno prestando l'attenzione all'ultima amministrazione tende nell'amministrazione strategica ed in stanno imparando velocemente. Their practical penchant for determining what works and then adapting it for their own needs is either heartening or disturbing, depending on whether you are their customer or their competitor. Foreign invested enterprises in most major industries are increasingly troubled by their competitors’ ability to adapt innovations to better fit this market’s needs and deliver them at lower cost.

Chinese companies face the same problem. Innovations are rapidly assimilated by domestic competitors who often deliver at lower cost. Consider the case of a successful first level subsidiary of a state owned bank. It was ranked as the #1 performer among first level subsidiaries of this Fortune 500 Bank for 4 consecutive years. It was also #1 in revenue growth and profitability compared to its local competition. The bank’s strategy had been to focus on product leadership and innovation. It was the first bank in its area to establish 3 special centers – for housing mortgages, car loans, and currency trading – with each attracting many new customers. The bank had also created many new financial products for the private sector including telephone banking, Internet banking, government bonds, and foreign exchange products. Other state owned banks in the local area were following the bank’s business strategy, and competition was rapidly intensifying.

This bank’s strategy involved a focus on products rather than customers. For example, high net worth individuals had to travel to special centers at different locations to obtain a housing mortgage and a car loan. The bank was not delivering total solutions to its strategic customers and the bank’s culture [like most domestic banks] was not customer-focused. The bank did not maintain a customer database. All departments and branches were focused on their own specialty functions and responsibilities without consideration of cross functional business needs.

The bank’s CEO was a capable executive. He had led his organization to success as a product leader in its market. He was innovative and receptive to new management ideas. He recognized that private banking might provide significant growth and profit potential, but he also knew his organization would have to become more customer focused to execute that strategy. He recognized his organization needed to focus on improving key business processes as well as developing new competencies, if it was to successfully implement a more customer focused strategy.

The CEO decided to use a strategic management methodology based on the Balanced Scorecard [BSC] to create the rapid change and new focus required to implement his new strategy. He began by helping his top team get clarity on the new strategy, which included a new value proposition that was focused on high net worth individuals. The top team used a management tool called a strategy map to visually identify strategic themes and objectives for clearly communicating the new strategy to all managers and staff throughout the organization. This leadership group developed a BSC for the entire bank that was cascaded to additional scorecards for all departments and branches, eventually down to the level of individual employees. The design of these balanced scorecards included attention to establishing vertical and horizontal alignment of objectives and measures with the new strategy.

The strategic management and organizational change process included identification of key business processes to improve, as well as careful linkage of employee incentive compensation and competency development with the new strategy. The bank established an information system to monitor strategic performance and report progress as well as identify areas for special attention. Changing all these aspects of the bank’s management systems contributed to a significant culture change throughout the bank. The bank created a dynamic strategic management system that enabled it to improve transparency throughout the organization. This transparency of strategic performance enabled the bank to analyze results and make timely adjustments where they were needed. The bank was able to once again create a significant competitive advantage as a result of dramatic improvements in its strategic management capability. One year after implementing the strategic management system and methodology, they were once again ranked #1 in terms of growth and profitability among more than 30 first level banks within the Fortune 500 Bank.

Dr. Ivr Beiman, http://www.egate-china.com/