Many people have read Jack Welch’s books such as “Straight from the Gut” and “Winning” But do you know you should apply it to your own company and when it may not be applicable? As with any prescription for success, not every formula is fit for every diet. One must know what works for them and which ones will not be appropriate. I have used his concepts as cover stories in select periodicals, denoting when to apply his ideas for smaller companies, so here are a few thoughts one might consider if you are not a Fortune 500 Corporation.
Jack Welch had the nickname of neutron Jack, which connoted the fact that being intolerant of bureaucracies he often terminated large numbers of people while leaving the business still standing, like a wide swath of people while leaving the building still standing, like the proverbial neutron bomb is supposed to do. This in fact is a typical strategy when doing an acquisition and there are many redundant positions and to make the deal work similar jobs are synergized out of existence to make the economics work, saving money and increasing efficiency. During poor economic times downsizing (now called right sizing) is appropriate and of course every so often the organizational tree must be trimmed as it tends to become overgrown if not watched. This can be overdone however and cutting back may have its disadvantages such as terminating people who have not been given time to learn the system yet, leaving oneself without replacement people (bench strength) and being caught short when unplanned resignations happen, or increasing near term profits at the detriment of long term potential.
Related to this syndrome was Jack’s so called vitality curve used to rank employees. He handsomely rewarded the top 20% of his people, kept the middle 70% with modest increases and mandated the firing of the lowest 10% every year in every department and business unit. In GE’s case this was particularly interesting as they were known to hire the best and brightest, so undoubtedly they lost some good people along the way, but one could not argue with their success. The concept might be even better applied to the average or sub par company where the bottom 10% of their workforce would likely be far below the lower 10% of GE’s employees. Holding people to meeting high standards is not done often enough in most companies and when poor performers are allowed to stay people get the message that there are no consequences for not meeting expectations. We call this the government mentality and is a motivational killer.
There are many other principals that can be explored from his “boundryless” markets concept and span of control to information systems, market domination, et al.
We welcome your questions as to the challenges you face in order to grow.
To see all articles in this series please go to http://optimal-mgt.com/blog.
What is “right pricing”? It is pricing not to maximize your margin but to maximize your profits. Many companies price their products and services to get the highest margin rate. This is great as long as the market will accept you process. As a pricing leader you can very often set prices and that is an enviable position to be in. but how many companies are in a position to do this? The answer is very few. The vast majority of the time one must deal with the realities of dealing in a competitive environment, where you may have some intrinsic advantages but are in no position tom dictate prices. You nay be able to avoid pure price commodity pricing where you do offer the basically the same thing as everyone else, but can offer better payment term, have a sales rep with great connections, are really nice pe3ple to deal with, have a liberal returns policy, etc, but when it come down to it you may be able to get 1 or 2 points in higher prices then your competition.
So what are you alternative? The answer is right pricing. There are various ways to do this, recognizing that what follows is but the simplest of examples.
Case A, is the 3 status quo where ones revenue is 1,000 units of anything, with a $50/unit price and a 20% margin, generating $10,000 in margin.
– Option 1, is to fragment the market into regular clients, selling 800 units at the normal $50/unit price and 20% margin which will generate $8,000 in margin, and discount prices from $50/unit to $47/unit, with a corresponding 15% margin. This will add $1,750 in margin. The total margin generated will be $9,750 or 2.5% less margin then we stated with which would be counter productive and not generally a wise strategy. un less there
– Option 2, would be the same as above as far the 800 units sold, but as is based in greater price-volume flexibility, dropped prices to $46/unit with a 13% margin and selling 400 more units. The total margin would be $10,400 or 4% higher margin then Case A. We assume no increase in fixed cost and not setting pricing precedents that would impact the 800 units sold and might be a good strategy.
– Option 3, gives us the same results as the prior case but at the same overall volume, selling the additional 200 units at $52/units at a 23% margin.
Whatever one does should be based on current conditions as to price and volume sensitivity and setting prices based on the most profitable course of action. Time change and what worked best yesterday might not be the option best today. Test marketing new policies allows one to check out “right pricing” on a small scale first before making global changes.
We welcome your questions as to the challenges you face in order to grow.
To see all articles in this series please go to http://optimal-mgt.com/blog.
Optimal Management has served the staffing industry since 1994 and has been a member of NACCB, CSP, ASA and NTSA. Our President, Michael Neidle has been in the staffing industry since 1989, including a senior executive for 2 large national staffing companies, starts-ups and Fortune 500 Corporations in the IT, biotech, service, and manufacturing sectors and is a noted speaker and author. Optimal Management was selected for the 2012 Best of San Mateo Award in the Business Management Consultants category. [More]