This week we were in a bit of an unfamiliar situation, our first rollover did not go as planned. We lost shareholder value and profits were down. It seemed that we were unable to accurately predict the competitors’ decisions in order to plan appropriately for our own decisions. We sold out of our bikes and lost out on over 11 million in sales. Devising a more focused strategy and concentrating on figuring out the numbers and mastering the spreadsheets. However this doesn’t give us insight as to what the competitors will do and how it will affect our own performance. We decided to adopt a strategy that was impossible to fulfil due to the limited capacity and the high SCU requirements of adventure bikes which led to us selling out of bikes quickly. In hindsight, we should’ve been able to see that coming and only employ our initial strategy as a long term strategy and had a different strategy in order to set up our previous strategy. From here on I think we should really look at the numbers and the activities of the competition to closely monitor their decisions. From that we will be able to make more accurate predictions of what the competitors will do in the market and respond accordingly.
In the reading this week Peiperl (2001) suggested the notion that when - executives understand and manage around 4 inherent paradoxes – peer appraisal can take place without negative effects. One of the Paradoxes, the paradox of group performance: where focusing on individuals puts the entire group at risk. This made me think about my team and whether we can even focus on any individual as I believe that every group member is putting in the work and that our performance isn’t reflective of any one individual’s performance rather a collective oversight. We will probably gather to discuss possible responses to this rollover and it will be interested to see the results.
Peiperl, M. A. (2001). Getting 360° feedback right. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 142--147