Business advice and interesting stories about business.
Paid Advertisement
Dreamstime
Welcome
Ever notice that the world is full of experts who have never actually done what they are "experts" at?
Many a business professor has never actually managed a business.Most business courses stress defining business terms but never actually teach the concepts of running a business.
This blog hopes to teach some of the terms and, at the same time, give some examples and lessons on running a business.
There will also be reviews of books on business listed here. Sometimes companies give me books to review. Regardless of where I get the book to review, I will give my honest opinion. If I was given the book to review I will always disclose that in the review.
I seek to start posting on 02 January 2012. Some of the posts will be recycled from some of my other blogs.
The reader should know that there is no one “Right Way” to conduct business that will apply in all situations. This blog is meant as a place to start. It is hoped that you will perform further research and consult professionals experienced in your particular business before making any important decisions.
Showing posts with label Differentiation Vitality Curve. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Differentiation Vitality Curve. Show all posts
The Pareto Principle is just that, a principle. This principle says that, generally, 20% of
the input is responsible for 80% of the outcome. This is also called the 80/20 rule.
In 1896, Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto reported that he discovered in Italy 80% of all the publicly-owned land in the country was owned by 20% of the population. Inversely, he observed that 20% of the land was owned by 80% of the population. It is reported that Pareto noticed in his garden that 20% of the peapods contained 80% of the peas.
Later, a management consultant named Joseph Juran developed the concept a little more formally.
Today, the Pareto Principle is used to note that 80% of results are produced by 20% of the company’s employees.
This rule of thumb should only be used as just that, a rule of thumb. It is not cast in stone, nor is it 100% accurate.
Accuracy aside, let’s take a look at what might happen if someone acted upon the principle.
Let’s say you are in charge of a company that has 10 stores. Your company’s total profit for the year is $100,000. You review your data and discover that 80% of your profits came from 20% of your stores.
20% of ten stores is 2 stores. 80% of $100,000 is $80,000. This means that you had 2 stores that produced approximately $40K each. That would mean that your remaining stores had an average of $2,500 per store.
Some looking at the data would suggest that the company should close the stores making $2,500 in profit or less per year.
However, remember that the Pareto Principle is a tool. This tool should be used to help improve the company.
The proper thing to do in this situation is to analyze the data. What do the two more profitable stores have in common with each other that is not found in the other locations or is found there but is not as prevalent?
Next, it is time for a little of that Management by Walking Around we talked about. This would be the time for senior management to get into the two more profitable stores and observe them in detail, but not mess with anything.
After observing the two more profitable stores for several days, senior management should get into each of the less profitable stores and observe.
If we remember the Iceberg of Ignorance, we will remember that the line-level employee is typically aware of 100% of the problems within a company, while top-level management is only aware of approximately 4% of the problems faced by the company.
With that in mind, each line-level employee, one at a time, should be sent from the less profitable stores to observe the most profitable stores. At the same time, line-level employees from the most profitable stores should be sent to observe the less profitable stores.
To determine what, if anything, these line-level employees observed, top management should debrief these employees.
Knee jerk reactions to the situation are not helpful. Keeping accurate records and reviewing the information from those records is important.
A salesman wishing to improve his sales should review what data he may have on previous sales calls. Immediately after any sales call, successful or not, the salesman should record all the details he can recall about the sales call.
In reading How I Raised Myself from Failure to Success in Selling, I learned that the author, Frank Bettger, learned that he closed most of the sales on the first or second call. Sales calls after the first or second did not yield great results. Bettger learned to concentrate on the first two sales calls and not pursue the sale any further.
Other sales people have learned that it takes at least five sales calls, in most cases, for them to close a sale. Reviews of their call records indicate that in many cases they failed to follow through to the fifth or sixth sales calls.
The take away from this is that we really cannot know what the data is telling us without thoroughly analyzing that data in detail and asking why the results are like they are.
Once we know what the data reveals, it is up to management to determine how to act on it.
Imagine, if you will, our store scenario. What if our data indicates that 80% of our sales and profits come from the PCBs (Packaged Carbonated Beverages)? One might determine that since this is where most of our sales and profits come from that we should get out of all other product lines and just sell PCBs.
Now, our manager determines that, in the PCBs, Kooky Kola has 80% of all sales and profits. Another beverage, Fiza Cola Fit, accounts for 20% of the sales and profits for the store.
In a world where some managers only see the data and not the big picture, our manager might determine that since most of our profits come from PCBs, we should ONLY sell PCBs. Then, the manager might determine that since Kooky Kola accounts for most of the sales in the PCB line, the store should ONLY sell Kooky Kola.
This means we now have a store that has one product, Kooky Kola. Would you shop there?
Jack Welch’s Differentiation Vitality Curve is based on the Pareto Principle. See our video about it to see how the principle is applied.
I respond to all comments on this blog, ideally within 24 hours. Please check back here for a response to your comment. Thank you!
Please be advised that all the information in this course is provided to educate, enlighten, and broaden your views in life. The information provided is not a substitute for medical, legal, dietary, financial/accounting, or religious professionals.Always consult a professional before you act on any of the information you find in this course.
Do you have a frugal recipe? Please e-mail it to me.
Help us reach 1,000 YouTube subscribers. Please watch some of our videos. If you like them, please subscribe. Also, please share our YouTube information with your friends. We thank you so much for all your help. Please subscribe to My YouTube Channel. Thanks!
Disclaimer The opinions or advice listed in this blog or website should be used as a place to start only. It is not a substitute for the use of a professional.
Please be sure to consult your attorney and/or accountant with any specific questions.
There is no one right answer to any business question that will cover all circumstances. Please Visit McClendon Enterprises
Jack Welch, the former CEO of GE, has this great idea called the Differentiation Vitality Curve. A company is made up of the top 20% who are A players. Then, there is a middle 70%, which are the B players. Finally, the bottom 10% is made up of the C players and they have to go.
This is based, in part, on the old Pareto Principle that 80% of your profits come from 20% of your actions and that 20% of your profits come from 80% of your actions. This principle is often a good rule of thumb, but is only a rule of thumb and should not be seen as an absolute.
In his book,Jack: Straight from the Gut Jack Welch admits that in the first year, it is not very difficult to identify the bottom 10%. Once this bottom 10% is found, you get rid of them. It is harder the second year to identify the bottom 10%.
By the third year, managers tell him that they have no C players on their staffs. Jack does not seem to believe this is true. However, if a good team was assembled in the first place, it probably is true that there are no C players remaining.
The problem with all of this is that, once you remove the bottom 10%, some of your B players are now C players by comparison. Therefore, no matter what you do, you will always have some people that rank at the bottom.
On a professional football team, everyone is supposedly very good at what they do. However, on any given team you will find some people who, when compared to the others, will not be as good. They are still great players and any team would do well to have them on their team. Still, they would be the bottom 10%.
Jack Welch likes to use baseball teams for his analogies, so let us use a baseball team as an example. There are nine field positions on baseball team. On our team, we have only ten players. We have two pitchers, one catcher, one player for each base, a short stop, and three outfielders. This totals ten players.
Every player is good at their job. None of them ever commits any errors. Both pitchers always pitch no-hitters and never, ever throw a single ball. Each inning consists of nine pitches. There are three up-at-bats each inning and three consecutive strikes for each up-at-bat.
Three years in a row the team goes completely undefeated. They win the World Series each year.
Jack Welch buys the team and introduces Differentiation. One person has to go since the bottom ten percent has to go. Remember everyone is error-free. The only logical choice is one of the pitchers since you have two of them. Which pitcher gets the ax?
You get rid of one pitcher. Now you have nine people on the baseball team. Under Jack, you must get rid of the bottom 10%. Next year, you have nine people and have to cut ten percent of nine people. You cannot do that. It is impossible to get rid of part of a person and if you get rid of an entire person, you no longer qualify as a baseball team.
The concept of differentiation works perfectly if you let the idea of differentiation be mixed with a little common sense. I suspect that Jack did exactly that.
An example of differentiation gone wrong might be the following: A company has ten stores. Each of those stores has a manager, three assistant managers, and ten line-level employees. All stores are in the same geographic area in the same city. Each store has about the same level of sales per square foot. All stores are laid out the same way as set by corporate.
The managers have all been with the company for over ten years. These managers are friendly with one another and often discuss innovations they have made in their stores. Sometimes one store will swap merchandise with another store so that items that move slowly in one store can be sold in a store that has a higher volume for that item. This keeps merchandise fresh and improves inventory turns in both stores.
Sometimes when a store has a temporary staffing problem, one store will send another store some of their employees. This keeps service levels at their peak. Customers benefit from this.
One day, the CEO reads the book Jack: Straight from the Gut. Then, he reads Winning. The CEO decides that Welch must know what he is doing. He looks at his sales figures. He determines that all stores are operating above the standard for the industry and sales in all stores are improving in a stagnant economy. Still, he thinks Welch must be right.
The CEO introduces the concept of the differentiation vitality curve to his employees. He tells managers that they must get rid of the bottom ten percent of their employees. He further tells his managers that by this time next year one of them will have to go.
This also means that one of the stores will be closed. Welch’s concept of differentiation covers not only employees but businesses as well.
The managers take a hard look at their employees. The team works well together. They swap shifts with one another and they work together to serve their customers. Sometimes when a floor needs to be mopped due to a customer spill, an employee will grab a mop even if it is not their job to do so. Everyone works for the good of the team.
Each manager tells his team that by this time next year one of the line-level employees will be gone. He is not sure what he will have to do about the assistant managers. This store may close completely.
In each store, it becomes dog-eat-dog. No one is swapping shifts. Everybody is doing only his job. There is no longer a team. Employees begin to look for other jobs.
Managers stop sharing information with one another. It becomes a contest between stores. Employees are not being swapped when there are staffing problems. Inventory sits at one store while there is an outage at another. Managers keep innovations to themselves so other managers in the chain cannot beat them. It is a fight to the death.
Sales at all stores begin to decline. The bottom person on the totem pole has been removed (I am Native American, so I can use this term) from each store. Some assistant managers have left the company for fear of losing their jobs. Those that left were the better ones and now they all work for a competitor. One of the stores is sold and is now a direct competitor for the chain.
One manager is fired and a new guy is hired. This new guy is told he will get one year to get up to speed. In his second year, he will have to compete in this “Differentiation Vitality Curve”. The CEO asks the other managers to train the new guy. Each gives a half-hearted effort because he knows that next year he will be in competition with the new guy.
The company is no longer a great place to shop. Some stores have old merchandise in one category and outages in others. Customers have to wait in line because each store has one fewer well-trained line-level employee and in their place is a trainee.
Customer service has slipped. This all took place because an arbitrary number of ten percent was set.
Would it be better if we forgot all about ranking people by A, B, and C? Instead, if an employee is not pulling his weight, they have to go. If it means firing all C-level people, so be it.
If it means firing everyone and starting over, then do it. However, if everyone is pulling their own weight, they should not have to be concerned that they will be fired just because they are not at the top of the heap.
In my opinion, this erodes team spirit since everyone is trying to step on one another to keep from being in that bottom 10%.
Welch likes to compare differentiation to choosing sides to play ball on the playground. The best players get chosen first. The okay players are chosen next. Players like me have to sit and watch.
The whole system can become one of politics and favoritism if not controlled carefully. That is what happened with Enron’s performance review committee (PRC). People began to game the system by colluding to support one another’s people to the exclusion of others.
However, Welch makes a good point in that management must use candor in management. This means that one must be brutally honest with employees about where they shine and where they could use improvement, without sugar-coating it. If someone’s performance is below expectations in one area, they should be told so and given suggestions on where and how to improve.
Welch makes an excellent point in that all the numbers should be shared all of the time with everyone on the team. Each person should know where they stand. My opinion is each person should be told where they stand. This should not be based upon comparisons with other employees, but based upon expectations. You are falling well below expectations or you exceed expectations.
Provided that the implementation is not ruled by the numbers, differentiation can be a very great way to run a company or a division. However, when people have to go because they are part of an arbitrary number, regardless of their actual performance, the system fails.
What is your opinion of this ranking system? Does Jack have a good idea? Send me an email.
Welch, J., & Byrne, J. A. (2001). Jack: Straight from the Gut. New York, New York, USA: Warner Books. Retrieved July 30, 20133, from www.twbookmark.com
Welch, J., & Welch, S. (2005). Winning
. New York, New York, USA: HarperCollins. Retrieved July 31, 2013
Disclaimer The opinions or advice listed in this blog or website should be used as a place to start only. It is not a substitute for the use of a professional.
Please be sure to consult your attorney and/or accountant with any specific questions.
There is no one right answer to any business question that will cover all circumstances.
Jack Welch, the former CEO of GE, has this great idea called the Differentiation Vitality Curve.A company is made up of the top 20% who are A players.Then, there is a middle 70%, which are the B players. Finally, the bottom 10% is made up of the C players and they have to go.
In his book, Jack: Straight from the Gut, Jack Welch admits that the first year it is not very difficult to find the bottom 10% and get rid of them.The second year is harder. By the third year, managers tell him that they have no C players on their staffs. Jack does not seem to believe this is true.
The problem with all of this is that, once you remove the bottom 10%, some of your B players are now C players by comparison. Therefore, no matter what you do, you will always have some people that rank at the bottom.
On a professional football team, everyone is supposedly very good at what they do.However, on any given team you will find some people who, compared to the others, would not be as good. They are still great players and any team would do well to have them on their team. Still, they would be the bottom 10%.
An example of differentiation gone wrong might be the following.A company has ten stores.Each of those stores has a manager, three assistant managers, and ten line-level employees.All stores are in the same geographic area in the same city.Each store has about the same level of sales per square foot.All stores are laid out the same way as set by corporate.
The managers have all been with the company for over ten years.These managers are friendly with one another and often discuss innovations they have made in their stores.Sometimes one store will swap merchandise with another store so that items that move slowly in one store can be sold in a store that has a higher volume in the store for that item.This keeps merchandise fresh and improves inventory turns in both stores.
Sometimes when a store has a temporary staffing problem, one store will send another store some of their employees.This keeps service levels at their peak.Customers benefit from this.
One day the CEO reads the book Jack: Straight from the Gut
.Then he reads Winning.The CEO decides that Welch must know what he is doing.He looks at his sales figures.He determines that all stores are operating above the standard for the industry and sales in all stores are improving in a stagnant economy.Still, he thinks Welch must be right.
The CEO introduces the concept of the differentiation vitality curve to his employees.He tells managers that they must get rid of the bottom ten percent of their employees.He further tells his managers that by this time next year one of them will have to go.
The managers take a hard look at their employees.The team works well together.They swap shifts with one another and they work together to serve their customers.Sometimes when a floor needs to be mopped due to a customer spill, an employee will grab a mop even if it is not their job to do so.Everyone works for the good of the team.
Each manager tells his team that by this time next year one of the line-level employees will be gone and he is not sure what he will have to do about the assistant managers.
In each store, it becomes dog-eat-dog.No one is swapping shifts.Everybody is doing only his job.There is no longer a team.
Managers stop sharing information with one another.It becomes a contest between stores.Employees are not being swapped when there are staffing problems.Inventory sits at one store while there is an outage at another.Managers keep innovations to themselves so other managers in the chain cannot beat them.It is a fight to the death.
Sales at all stores begin to decline.The bottom person on the totem pole has been removed (I am Native American so I can use this term) from each store.Some assistant managers have left the company for fear of losing their jobs.Those that left were the better ones and now they all work for a competitor.
One manager is fired and a new guy is hired.This new guy is told he will get one year to get up to speed.In his second year, he will have to compete in this “Differentiation Vitality Curve”.The CEO asks the other managers to train the new guy.Each does a half-hearted effort because he knows that next year he will be in competition with the new guy.
The company is no longer a great place to shop.Some stores have old merchandise in one category and outages in others.Customers have to wait in line because each store has one fewer well-trained line-level employee and in their place is a trainee.
Customer service has slipped.This all took place because an arbitrary number of ten percent was set.
Would it be better if we forgot all about ranking people by A, B, and C?Instead, if an employee is not pulling his weight, they have to go.If it means firing all C level people, so be it.If it means firing everyone and starting over, then do it. But, if it means that everyone is pulling their own weight, then they should not have to be concerned that they will be fired just because they are not at the top of the heap.
In my opinion, this erodes team spirit since everyone is trying to step on one another to keep from being in that bottom 10%.
What is your opinion of this ranking system?Does Jack have a good idea?
References
Welch, J., & Byrne, J. A. (2001). jack: Straight from the Gut. New York, New York, USA: Warner Books. Retrieved July 30, 20133, from www.twbookmark.com
Welch, J., & Welch, S. (2005). Winning. New York, New York, USA: HarperCollins. Retrieved July 31, 2013
Disclaimer The opinions or advice listed in this blog or website should be used as a place to start only. It is not a substitute for the use of a professional.
Please be sure to consult your attorney and/or accountant with any specific questions.
There is no one right answer to any business question that will cover all circumstances. Send us an email