процесса систематического анализа информационных потоков. Единственное, что следует помнить, – управленческие модели не в состоянии самостоятельно принимать решения: они лишь обеспечивают аналитическую базу, способствующую принятию обоснованных решений.
Время от времени имеет смысл пересматривать набор моделей, используемых в рамках анализа деятельности компании или отрасли. Такую инвентаризацию целесообразно осуществлять посредством «мозгового штурма», позволяющего свести воедино различные точки зрения руководителей раздельных отделов или подразделений компании. При этом следует помнить, что, если вдруг оказывается, что какая-либо модель не вполне приемлема для описания некой конкретной ситуации (например, модель пяти сил Портера для анализа темпов роста отрасли в экономике), это вовсе не означает, что данная модель неприемлема для организации в принципе. Комбинация различных моделей позволяет компенсировать недостатки одних за счет достоинств других. Например, PEST-анализ может дополнить модель БКГ, указав, какие события могут произойти в будущем и тем или иным образом повлиять на деятельность компании.
Общий вывод:
Инструменты управления могут помочь лучше понять специфические аспекты деятельности организации и окружающую ее деловую среду. Для следующего шага – интерпретации результатов работы модели – моделей не существует. Модели управления эффективны только тогда, когда тот, кто их использует, глубоко понимает суть модели, область ее применения и ограничения и на основании этого делает соответствующие выводы.
Источник: www.franklin-grant.ru
Lesson 11
Strategic Management Tools
Read and translate the text and learn terms from the Essential Vocabulary.
The Balanced Scorecard
In the industrial age, most of the assets of a firm were in property, plant and equipment, and the financial accounting system performed an adequate job of valuing these assets. In the information age, when much of the firm’s value is embedded in innovative processes, customer relationships, and human resources, the financial accounting system is not enough.
A new approach to strategic management was developed in the early 1990s by Drs. Robert Kaplan and David Norton. They named this system the ‘balanced scorecard’. The BSC approach provides a clear prescription as to what companies should measure in order to ‘balance’ the financial perspective.
The BSC is a measurement and management system that enables organizations to clarify their vision and strategy and translate them into action. It provides feedback around both the internal business processes and external outcomes in order to continuously improve strategic performance and results.
The BSC methodology builds on some key concepts of previous management ideas such as Total Quality Management (TQM), including customer-defined quality, continuous improvement, employee empowerment, and – primarily – measurement-based management and feedback.
The balanced scorecard views the organization from four perspectives:
– The Learning and Growth Perspective – includes measures such as employee satisfaction, employee retention, skill sets, etc.;
– The Business Process Perspective – includes measures such as cost, throughput and quality. These are for business processes such as procurement, production, and order fulfilment;
– The Customer Perspective – includes measures such as customer satisfaction, customer retention, and market share in target segments;
– The Financial Perspective – includes measures such as operating income, return on capital employed, and economic value added.
There is a logical connection between these four perspectives – learning and growth lead to better business processes, which in turn lead to increased value to the customer, which finally leads to improved financial performance. Each perspective of the balanced scorecard includes objectives, measures of those objectives, target values of those measures, and initiatives that are aimed at meeting the objectives.
Double-Loop Feedback
In traditional industrial activity, «quality control» and «zero defects» were the watchwords. In order to shield the customer from receiving poor quality products, aggressive efforts were focused on inspection and testing at the end of the production line. The problem with this approach is that the true causes of defects are never identified, and there are always inefficiencies due to the rejection of defects. Variation is created at every step in a production process, and the causes of variation need to be identified and fixed. If this can be done, then there is a way to reduce the defects and improve product quality indefinitely. To establish such a process all business processes should be part of a system with feedback loops. The feedback data should be examined by managers to determine the causes of variation, what are the processes with significant problems, and then they can focus on fixing that subset of processes.
The