Compared to last week, this week has been worse in terms of our shareholder value but also in terms of my motivation. I feel as though I'm struggling to get myself to put effort into the simulation at this point because I can't see what is going wrong and I feel as though I'm getting a bit sick of trying to figure out what is wrong which is leading me to slowly give up...
As the first reading for this week suggests, to have a strong firm it needs to include the right focus, the right culture, the right people and the right technology (Davenport, 2006). Our team seems to have all of these sources of strength and I feel as though my team members also have all the technical skills required to make financial decisions... so what is going wrong? We have tried to come up with a focus for each week, we have changed our culture in terms of trying to get less distracted and switching to a more detailed agenda for our meetings, we definitely have the right people with the right attitudes and we have all the technology required. I think the overload of assignments and test from other papers that I'm doing along with the time spent on trying to figure out what is going wrong in our firm on MikesBikes is draining most of my energy and I find myself at times willing to accept defeat. But although I feel this way, the readings for this week have given me a little bit of hope believe it or not. After reading the Baghai and Viguerie text I have slightly changed my perspective on how to increase my team's shareholder value.
After reading the second text allocated to us this week, I feel as though I might have a small solution. Previously our team's growth strategy had been 'flying blind' thinking that our strategy would work without having to put effort into prevention of loss sales (Baghai, Smit & Viguerie, 2009). But after looking at the reading I have realised that we need to target growth at a granular level. The reading suggests that low growth areas within a firm should be jettisoned so maybe investing in the most successful markets from now on instead of spending money on resources across multiple markets will help us reach our goal (Baghai, Smit & Viguerie, 2009). This means we need to find a balance between cost and revenue. Instead of expecting such big returns from markets which aren't doing so well, we need to define opportunities at a granular level within markets which are succeeding thus enabling us to allocate resources precisely and hopefully raise our shareholder value. So my solution consists of looking at the reports in depth over the weekend but this time spotting out opportunities such as aiming for successful markets which other firms have not paid attention to and investing in resources within that market instead or something along those lines. By looking at opportunities rather than continuing with our current strategy, we can begin to find the right balance between cost and revenue and hopefully do better in the next rollover.
So in conclusion, although I am sitting on a very fine line between motivation and failure I feel as though I will definitely keep trying because if my team has made it this far without giving up then we can definitely make it to the end! I will not let myself be the old sack of potatoes sitting in the corner looking blue. Wish me luck with my solutions!
Baghai, M., Smit, S., & Viguerie, P. (2009). Is your growth strategy flying blind? Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 86—96.
Davenport, T. H. (2006). Competing on analytics. Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 98--107.