Thursday, March 24, 2011
Biotexing and Decision Making
Labels:
biotexing,
Caluwe,
decision making,
project,
success,
Theory of Constraints,
TOC
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Equations behind successful change: I2 = M2
I2 = M2 |
If managers are Informed as they were always Informed, managers will Manage in the way they always Managed (Stefan van Aalst) |
A good equation is usually simple and beautiful and is perfectly capable of explaining itself. This is definitely one of them.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Equations behind successful change: M2 = D2
M2 = D2 |
If people Do what people always Did, you Get what you always Got (Stefan van Aalst) |
A good equation is usually simple and beautiful and is perfectly capable of explaining itself. This is definitely one of them.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Project Portfolio Management
A lot has been written on Project Portfolio Management (PPM). However, I needed to piece things together to get a picture of why it is good to have PPM in place. This blog is sharing this picture.
Labels:
PPM,
project,
Project Portfolio Management,
Standish 2009,
success
Friday, December 10, 2010
Equations behind successful change: D2 = G2
D2 = G2 |
If people Do what people always Did, you Get what you always Got (anon) |
A good equation is usually simple and beautiful and is perfectly capable of explaining itself. This is definitely one of them.
MIN = MAX-rule
MIN = MAX-rule |
The MINimum that is required is the MAXimum that we'll do (Stefan van Aalst) |
In the top 3 of reasons why projects fail or are less successful than they could have been, is scope creep / changes. The min=max-rule significantly reduces this cause for failure.
Labels:
change,
cooperation,
min=max,
project,
success
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Switchboard Profit Model
Adrian-Slywotzky's Art of Profitability is a business noval set in a very simple plot: a teacher (David Zhao) with many years of practical experience and a willing student (Steve Gardner) who is committed to move his organization forward.
The book covers 23 profit models in a way that hits the little gray cells. By no means what is written is sufficient in itself, but I found by rereading some chapters I filled in more details than actually are there.
Another interesting and sometimes bothering thing is, is that a lot of the homework assignments for Steve are to read other books.
Back to the Switchboard Profit model.
Switchboard Profit identifies the components that led to the business success of the Hollywood agent Michael Ovitz who took the bundling-of-talent concept that he so successfully perfected in television, and applied it to film-making, but with a difference, because it was much more difficult to create a concentration of power in an industry fragmented by many movie studios. Ovitz' first step was to assemble talent; the second, to find a source of stories through a great literary agent; and third, the creation of critical mass. In the author's words, "The more critical mass you build, the higher your probability of putting together a package that works. That, in turn, means that a star, a writer, or a director will be better off being represented by you rather than any other agent, because the odds of being part of a winning combination are so much higher. …So now the studios have to deal with you, and the stars want to deal with you." Thus the analogy of the old-fashioned switchboard Ovitz became that all his various contacts needed to plug into. The lesson, of course, isn't that simple. Predictably, much work is needed to arrive at the numbers constituting the critical mass that is required to generate revenues seven to ten times greater than in the traditional model for that industry.
With this in mind I discussed a business model for a professional-association and a university. The interesting part is that with a model like the Switchboard Profit model one can quickly translate it to the specific situation and drive down into the particular crucial nifty gritty details. And the Switchboard Profit model is just one of the models that can be used to evaluate and develop profound sounding business models.
Of course the real interesting and challenging part is what is coined in the book as the drudgery part of innovation. Where people need the most pressure and encouragement: turning a new idea into people working processes, procedures, etc to deliver the real products; from marketing to sales, from purchasing to manufacturing and delivery. However interesting, it is outside the scope of the Art of Profitability.
The book covers 23 profit models in a way that hits the little gray cells. By no means what is written is sufficient in itself, but I found by rereading some chapters I filled in more details than actually are there.
Another interesting and sometimes bothering thing is, is that a lot of the homework assignments for Steve are to read other books.
Back to the Switchboard Profit model.
Switchboard Profit identifies the components that led to the business success of the Hollywood agent Michael Ovitz who took the bundling-of-talent concept that he so successfully perfected in television, and applied it to film-making, but with a difference, because it was much more difficult to create a concentration of power in an industry fragmented by many movie studios. Ovitz' first step was to assemble talent; the second, to find a source of stories through a great literary agent; and third, the creation of critical mass. In the author's words, "The more critical mass you build, the higher your probability of putting together a package that works. That, in turn, means that a star, a writer, or a director will be better off being represented by you rather than any other agent, because the odds of being part of a winning combination are so much higher. …So now the studios have to deal with you, and the stars want to deal with you." Thus the analogy of the old-fashioned switchboard Ovitz became that all his various contacts needed to plug into. The lesson, of course, isn't that simple. Predictably, much work is needed to arrive at the numbers constituting the critical mass that is required to generate revenues seven to ten times greater than in the traditional model for that industry.
With this in mind I discussed a business model for a professional-association and a university. The interesting part is that with a model like the Switchboard Profit model one can quickly translate it to the specific situation and drive down into the particular crucial nifty gritty details. And the Switchboard Profit model is just one of the models that can be used to evaluate and develop profound sounding business models.
Of course the real interesting and challenging part is what is coined in the book as the drudgery part of innovation. Where people need the most pressure and encouragement: turning a new idea into people working processes, procedures, etc to deliver the real products; from marketing to sales, from purchasing to manufacturing and delivery. However interesting, it is outside the scope of the Art of Profitability.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)