Posts Tagged ‘competition’

Copyright: Borislav Marinic | 123RF Stock Photo

By Richard Martin

The ongoing saga in Catalonia is an excellent illustration of how crucial it is to consider a range of scenarios before implementing a decision that could be heavy with consequences. And the scenarios shouldn’t all be rosy and positive for us. Consideration must be given to the worst-case possibility as well, so we know what we may be up against before acting. This entails a detailed consideration of competiting and opposing positions, as well as those of other stakeholders and bystanders. It also means preparing contingency plans for the most probable and dangerous possibilities so we aren’t caught flatfooted if they come to fruition.

A well-known radio commentator (and former politician) here in Montreal said this week that he had the impression that the Catalonian prime minister and regional authorities hadn’t really thought through the potential consequences of the independance referendum held a few weeks ago. I agree with him; both sides appear guilty of amateurish improvisation. It seems as though both the instigators of Catalonian independance and their opponents inside and outside Catalonia have given little or no thought to the inherent risks in their decisions and actions, as well as the range of possible responses of the Spanish government, population, businesses, and other countries. I also little or no evidence of forethought in securing international recognition for the referendum and subsequent moves. It’s as if it was all being driven by pure emotion, with not a lot of rational consideration of options.

Such conflicts usually build and fester over time until they reach a feverous level. And it takes two to tango. Threat generates counterthreat; action entails counteraction. Not all outcomes can be foreseen ahead of time, but a great many can be characterized to some extent and compared to see which are most probable and consequential. This is the essence of risk management.

Whether we’re talking about a political entity, a business, a non-profit organization or an individual person, prudent forethought should be given to the range of scenarios and options available or possible before deciding and acting. No forecasting or planning process is perfect, but the benefits of a disciplined and rigorous assessment of the situation and its various branches and outcomes will always pay dividends in better decision-making, management, and leadership. And this includes looking at the situation from your opponent’s or competitor’s standpoint. If I were to take this action, what would my opponent do?

It’s how we try to play sports and games, and it’s the essence of strategy, military, diplomatic, political, and commercial.

Copyright 2017 Alcera Consulting Inc.

By Richard Martin

There has been a lot of chest thumping and ink spilled in recent days about the announcement that Airbus and Bombardier Aerospace have agreed to transfer control of the new C Series airliner business from the latter to the former.

There are important implications from this transaction in terms of politics and economic policy. My goal here, however, is to focus on the readiness and strategic implications for the two companies involved. In a nutshell, both Bombardier and Airbus saw a window of opportunity open and jumped through it at the right time.

© Sergey Ilin|123RF Stock Photo

For Bombardier, Airbus brings financial, commercial, and industrial know how and credibility. If you want to be a global player in the market for commercial airliners, then you have to have a global network with a strong backbone, including the robustness and resilience to batten down the hatches during storms, absorb shocks, and bounce back when the weather turns. Bombardier, while technically able in terms of innovation and development, didn’t have the wherewithal to compete against the big boys: Airbus and Boeing. As a business decision, this opportunity makes eminent sense and I’m sure will be a long-term success.

For Airbus, the opportunity was just too good to pass up. Airbus acquires a brand-new design with huge commercial potential, especially in Asia and the Far East. Talks between Airbus and Bombardier had apparently been ongoing for two years or so, but had broken down more than once for undisclosed reasons. The biggest advantage for Airbus, though, is that the tie-up with Bombardier’s C-Series deals a blow to Boeing. Airbus no longer has to continue developing an aircraft in the same size-class as the C-Series, while acquiring new capabilities and geographical reach.

The big loser in this manoeuvre is, however, Boeing. The latter was evidently trying to destroy the C-Series by lobbying for punitive tariffs on the planes if sold in the US. However, Airbus already has facilities in the US to assemble the aircraft. Delta Airlines, Bombardier’s lead customer for the C-Series in the US, has already declared that they will wait for the planes that are assembled in Airbus’s Alabama factory.

The biggest difference between Boeing and Airbus when faced with Bombardier’s competition is the fact that Boeing chose to view the C-Series antagonistically, as a threat, whereas Airbus viewed it positively, as an opportunity. The same goes for Bombardier. Claims and counter-claims of “illegal” government support are overblown. No one is blameless in that regard, and Boeing is probably the most hypocritical of all.

Regardless, from the standpoint of business strategy and business readiness, Airbus and Bombardier have shown that exploiting opportunities are just as important, if not more so, than trying to prevent or mitigate threats, as important as these may be.

© 2017 Alcera Consulting Inc. This article may be used for non-commercial use with proper attribution.

Here’s the link to my February 2017 column on Defence Leadership or download as PDF.

by Richard Martin

© Kheng Guan Toh

I’ve been answering questions lately (from my daughters, among others) about the threat of war, specifically nuclear war. This obviously comes from the worries about North Korea’s nuclear capabilities and intentions, as well as American ones.

Although this concerns military strategy and geopolitics, the underlying analytical approach can be applied to any consideration of threats, whether a generic SWOT analysis, or the evaluation of a specific security or competitive menace.

Threat analysis goes beyond risk analysis. Risk is the product of the probability and impact of a negative event or cause. Risks are usually categorized under three headings: natural, technological, and human. Focusing on the last, there are criminality, security, labour conflict and many other sub-categories of human originated risks. The problem, however, comes in evaluating the likelihood of a human risk. If we are considering only generic risks, we can talk about probability and impact in abstract terms. For instance, what is the probability of a criminal act? We can use statistics about, say, white collar crime in corporate settings as a starting point for assessing the risk. There are statistics describing the probability of certain acts in certain situations along with average impacts (including their statistical distribution).

But how can we assess a specific threat where there is no historical or statistical data to illuminate the analysis? That’s where military-style threat analysis can be very useful. Military threats are broken into two parts: capability and intent. Capability is self-explanatory: What can the potential or actual enemy do? What are the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of his forces? How many tanks can he deploy? How many aircraft? In the case of North Korea, how many nuclear bombs, of what type, and through what means can they be delivered? I discussed this at length in early September with Dr. Sean Maloney of RMC, an expert on nuclear history and strategy.

While there is uncertainty in capability assessment, at least we’re dealing with tangible realities. Intent is a completely different ballgame. How do we know what the enemy will do? How will he react to our own threats or efforts at conflict resolution? These are imponderables and we must consider a range of scenarios to determine the inevitable commonalities that arise in each, so we can prepare for them. We must also examine the action-reaction cycles that occur because of the moves and countermoves by both sides.

An analogous approach can be used in analyzing and assessing business threats, even though the stakes are obviously of a completely different order and importance. Whether you’re trying to assess your competitors’ next moves, or your market’s reception of your new product, you can learn a lot by considering the threat as both capability and intent. This allows you to disentangle what is possible (given assessed capabilities) from what is probable (given assessed intentions) over a range of scenarios. The insight gained can then be incorporated into your own strategy and contingency planning.

© 2017 Alcera Consulting Inc. This article may be used for non-commercial use with proper attribution.

by Richard Martin
I’ve often heard this ridiculous statement, inside and outside the military: “We can’t take time to strategize and plan; we’re too busy right now.”But if not now, when? Considering the future and planning is no different than any other habit. You have to set aside the time and resources to “just do it” (Remember the Nike ads?) Would you avoid getting up in the morning and going to work just because you don’t want to, or think you have other/better things to do?

Here are some guidelines to help you get in the habit of strategizing and planning for the near and more distant future:
  • Set aside time every day to consider the next few days (5-10 minutes). It’s a good idea to work a week ahead on a running basis.
  • Set aside time once a week (1 hour) to consider the next month. Apply the same running approach by focusing on the next month on a weekly basis. This allows you to integrate and assess new information periodically while staying a month ahead.
  • Quarterly reviews and projections for the next year on the same basis are required. Don’t just focus on getting to the end of the current year. This is endemic in businesses trying to “make their numbers” in the final quarter. That’s fine at the tactical level, but if you’re only concentrating on the next weeks and months, you’re going to miss implementing needed changes and plans for the next year(s).
  • Finally, at least once a year, preferably every 6 months, conduct a strategy/planning session to look out 18-36 months. The actual timeframe will depend on the nature of your business, speed of change, competitive threats and opportunities, and financial position and projections. This comes in addition to your annual strategic planning cycle I described a few weeks ago.
Think this is a lot of planning? Well, what’s the alternative? If you, as a leader and manager aren’t taking the time and putting in the effort to “see beyond the next hill,” then who in your team is?
Richard Martin’s Business Readiness Process:
  1. Ensure vigilance through situational awareness.
  2. Do preliminary assessment of tasks and time.
  3. Activate organization or team.
  4. Conduct reconnaissance.
  5. Do detailed situational estimate.
  6. Conduct wargame and decide on optimal course(s) of action.
  7. Perform risk management and contingency planning.
  8. Communicate plan and issue direction.
  9. Build organizational robustness.
  10. Ensure operational continuity.
  11. Lead and control execution.
  12. Assess performance.

Contact me to apply the whole thing–or just a piece, as needed–to improve your strategy, your readiness… and your results!

Did you know that an infantry battalion only needs about 3 to 4 hours of prep and planning time to be battle ready? What are you waiting for to get the same benefits for your outfit?
Why Sunday and What Does “Stand To” Mean?
Sunday? I want you to get my insights and advice first and fast, so you can prepare and up your readiness and results before others even know what’s happening!
And Stand To? It’s the order used in the military to get forces to man the parapets and be in a heightened state of situational awareness and, yes, readiness, so they can face any threat or undertake any mission.


My name is Richard Martin and I’m an expert on applying readiness principles to position companies and leaders to grow and thrive by shaping and exploiting change and opportunity, instead of just passively succumbing to uncertainty and risk.


© 2017 Alcera Consulting Inc. This article may be used for non-commercial use with proper attribution.

 

by Richard Martin

Conflict? Well, maybe that’s too strong a word. But I got your attention.

What I’m really alluding to is that readiness depends on considering varied points of view, a range of scenarios, especially ones you don’t like or fear, and a willingness to look at the consequences, negative and positive, of your future decisions and actions.

The best way to generate a full range of considerations, analyses, and options is to surround yourself with advisors and leaders who are not afraid of speaking their minds and whom you know for certain have divergent opinions, interests, and talents. Doris Kearns Goodwin wrote a book about Lincoln’s leadership and his cabinet, called Team of Rivals.

The title says it all. Goodwin makes the case that Lincoln was more interested in generating disagreement and, yes, even a healthy amount of conflict and competition, between his cabinet members. That way he was assured that he could get a variety of heartfelt opinions, and not just sycophantic agreement with his own ideas.

Contrast that with the pictures we regularly see of the North Korean dictator surrounded by his minions. They’re all holding their little notebooks and pencils, ready to jot down the “dear leader’s” every thought and wish. The forced rictuses of these supposed advisors and senior military commanders reminds me more of the dominated chimpanzees in a troupe who are trying to avoid the wrath of a despotic alpha male than the confident stance of generals and leaders of men.

On the other hand, this contrast shows what is needed for a team-of-rivals approach to be successful:

  1. The boss must be secure and confident in his/her leadership to not feel threatened by opposing points of view, especially from his/her advisors and delegated leaders.
  2. The advisors and subordinate leaders must have faith that they will be heard and listened to, that they will get their chance to put their point of view across without getting fired or otherwise reprimanded or humiliated.
  3. This entails loyalty both ways. The boss must be willing to hear divergent points of view, so long as they are debated “in camera.” The advisors and subordinates must accept that once a decision is made, they will carry it out as if it were their own decision, and this regardless of whether they were originally in agreement with it or not.
  4. If a subordinate or advisor can’t live with a decision by the boss, then he or she must resign.

How about you? Are you surrounded with advisors and subordinates who always agree with you, or do you have a “team of rivals,” people who will give you ground truth and stand by their principles? What’s more, are they willing to say what they want to say, and then execute the plan once the decision is made? Do you have the confidence and self-esteem to accept well-considered criticism and a divergence of opinions and passions? Can you take disagreement and even a certain level of conflict?

If you can count on the loyalty, integrity, and collegiality of your closest advisors and subordinates, then you have a great start on generating the range of understandings and options to propel your state of readiness to higher and more sustainable levels.

Remember Richard’s Business Readiness Process in 2017!

  1. Ensure vigilance through situational awareness.
  2. Do preliminary assessment of tasks and time.
  3. Activate organization or team.
  4. Conduct reconnaissance.
  5. Do detailed situational estimate.
  6. Conduct wargame and decide on optimal course(s) of action.
  7. Perform risk management and contingency planning.
  8. Communicate plan and issue direction.
  9. Build organizational robustness.
  10. Ensure operational continuity.
  11. Lead and control execution.
  12. Assess performance.

Call me for a Business Readiness Briefing in 2017!

Did you know that an infantry battalion only needs about 3 to 4 hours of prep and planning time to be battle ready? What are you waiting for to get the same benefits for your outfit?

Feel free to contact me at any time to discuss your objectives and needs.

And remember… STAND TO!!!

My name is Richard Martin and I’m an expert on applying readiness principles to position companies and leaders to grow and thrive by shaping and exploiting change and opportunity, instead of just passively succumbing to uncertainty and risk.

© 2017 Alcera Consulting Inc. This article may be used for non-commercial use with proper attribution.

 

I learned a valuable tactical lesson as a young infantry officer in the Canadian Army. We were on exercise in northern Norway, training to defend against a Soviet invasion (or incursion) as part of Nato’s deterrent stance.

My platoon was in a company that had to adopt a defensive posture against the forces simulating the enemy. As we rode into our positions in the company commander’s jeep, he told us that a quick and dirty technique to reconnoiter a defensive position was to drive into the area on the route we believe the enemy will take. That way, we get a view of the terrain from the enemy’s perspective and can incorporate that into our own positioning and planning.

It was a valuable lesson which I used throughout my military career, whether on the offensive, the defensive, or in peacekeeping and internal security. Always look at your situation from your enemy’s point of view. What is his objective? What is he trying to achieve? How is he likely to move and manoeuvre? What are his concerns and weaknesses? What are his strengths? You can apply this not only to an enemy, but also to a potential ally or any of the numerous stakeholders and bystanders on the modern battlefield.

When you think of it, though, this wisdom is just as applicable in business and management in general. I’ve been working as a volunteer with a non-profit to organize an upcoming event. I’ve been applying a similar logic to the people we want to attract to our event, as well as the potential exhibitors we want involved. What is their likely goal? What are their interests, concerns, values, and fears? What will make them comfortable in committing to participating or attending?

A colleague and friend of mine has had a long career in marketing, promotion, selling and business development. He says the key word in marketing and selling is “other.” What does the other person want? What are his goals and interests?

If we put ourselves in the other person’s shoes and look at the situation or the transaction from their point of view, we can gain a lot of understanding (and even empathy) and that will help us formulate better plans, strategies, and communications to reach them–and achieve our ends!

Remember Richard’s Business Readiness Process in 2017!

  1. Ensure vigilance through situational awareness.
  2. Do preliminary assessment of tasks and time.
  3. Activate organization or team.
  4. Conduct reconnaissance.
  5. Do detailed situational estimate.
  6. Conduct wargame and decide on optimal course(s) of action.
  7. Perform risk management and contingency planning.
  8. Communicate plan and issue direction.
  9. Build organizational robustness.
  10. Ensure operational continuity.
  11. Lead and control execution.
  12. Assess performance.

Call me for a Business Readiness Briefing in 2017!

Did you know that an infantry battalion only needs about 3 to 4 hours of prep and planning time to be battle ready? What are you waiting for to get the same benefits for your outfit?

Feel free to contact me at any time to discuss your objectives and needs.

And remember… STAND TO!!!

My name is Richard Martin and I’m an expert on applying readiness principles to position companies and leaders to grow and thrive by shaping and exploiting change and opportunity, instead of just passively succumbing to uncertainty and risk.

© 2017 Alcera Consulting Inc. This article may be used for non-commercial use with proper attribution.