With the companies decisions been removed and wiped clear, so did our strategy. A new formation of values, insight and strategies was then born.
Strategies are known as drivers, they hold you accountable for every decision you make. Once all your members have that same strategy in mind, every decision they make or implement will make them think ¿how will this get us to our goal?¿.
The practice round was a big learning curb for our team. We absorbed so much information from this, the decisions we made and how it affected us in a slightly bad way. Mr. Smith said last week, if you did not perform or achieve your goals, this experience shows you where and what you can improve on. If you were on top of the leader board, how do you go beyond this? Was it really your decisions, or was it luck. Anyways, that is last week.
This week our foot was on the gas pedal. Everything changed from how we structured meetings, to how we communicate with each other. For example; prior to meetings we had a general agenda. Now we are working more together, as we now see how our roles are intertwined and effect our results.
Monday¿s meeting fixated on creating a strategy. Our practice strategy was partially non-existent, it was flawed, with all honesty. So prior to our meeting, I was expecting there to be some heat-y conversations as to where we go from here. In reading the Charting your company¿s future, it talks about a company that goes into creating a strategy canvas and changing their old ways into new ways to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Taking this into NetMike, they advise each player to go for 100% success rating when developing a bike. However where does this differentiate us from another company, if we all go and hit that bulls eye? We will be competing in a red ocean, as Kim & Mauborgne (2004) calls it (all offering the same product and fighting for a piece of the market).
Going back to the original subject, creating a strategy. Unlike the heated top management discussions which usually happen when developing their new strategy as described by Kim & Mauborgne (2002), ours was simple. There was two options. We weighed the good and the bad of each option and came to a conclusion to incorporate both.
Without exact figures; or even a glimpse of what our competitors are planning, or potentially what market¿s they are entering, we are blind.
Starting from scratch with a clean canvas was hard. We decided that in order to make our mark, we will make our focus clear. We changed our company name to make a stand. Whether or not our competitors take it as a ploy or truthful, they will soon find out.
When making decisions this week, it was tough. So many factors to think about, more importantly you are constantly reminded how this decision will work towards the overall strategy. Mr Smith¿s words, ¿it is not about the strategy, more about the execution of it¿, is fixed into my mind. Kim & Mauborgne (2002), holds the same view, after they incorporated their new strategy, each decision had to show how it fits into their strategy or it will not take action. I kept asking myself, why are you making this decision now, I would then justify it. I then think, how will this impact the following year, where can I save, what should I invest in now to meet our strategy? How will my decisions affect another department, could I possibly cut costs to allow Marketing have more advertising or PR budget. These are all driven by the overall reality that we are working towards the same goal to fulfill and potentially stick to our strategy.
Our strategy brings us back to the basics, providing for our customers wants and needs. The basic things they want as opposed to our wants for them. The strategy we have chosen to implement focus¿ on our segments solely. In order to do this, we will listen to the values of our customers and incorporate those into creating bikes specialized for them. In order to be successful, Kim & Mauborgne (2004), suggests you need to create a blue ocean within a red ocean. This means for example, even though you are in the same market, you need to make your company unique and focused, as did Southwest (Kim & Mauborgne, 2002). Another example is the recent franchise, KiwiYo. They worked out Wendy¿s Sundaes and Movenpick have to offer and found the gap to build something.
I really have gone a bit over board this week, so I shall not even attempt to talk about the last reading! I also heard it is very similar to the Charting your company's future reading.
Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. (2002). Charting your company's future. Harvard Business Review, 80(6), 76--83
Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategy. Harvard Business Review, 82(10), 75--84