REAL Wellness: A Key Element In Strategic Planning During Challenging Economic Times

“The change in the world economy is of a magnitude that comes once every hundred years. We are facing an unprecedented emergency.” Katsuaki Watanabe, author of this remark, is the president of Toyota. This statement was offered on December 22, 2008 while announcing the company’s first operating loss in 70 years – $1.7 billion.

Tina Turner made famous the question, “What’s love got to do with it?” This might be a good time to ask, What’s wellness got to do with it? Is a wellness philosophy as significant in the context of economic ruin as in times that pass for normal?

America and the rest of the world are beset with burst bubbles, bailouts and bankruptcies. Conditions are beyond serious – they’re a fright. There are multiple, interrelated crises – a loss of faith in markets and the economic order, a loss of hope for the future and a diminution in social connectedness. The daily news reflects high levels of worry, fear, insecurity, stress, self-doubt and negativity. This is the context for my question: Is the wellness concept as important now as before? Or, is wellness more of an option than ever, even a luxury of sorts with appeal mostly to privileged elites with the means to get their needs met AND aspire to a good and fulfilling life?

Consider a bit more detail on the extent of the current crisis. The American economy is sinking into a recession just this side of a depression. Frustration bordering on panic is evident throughout the land. Distress marks the national mood. Job losses (533,000 of them disappeared in November), the unavailability of credit from banks (despite massive taxpayer bailout funds later channeled in part for executive bonuses), the presence of pockets of severe unemployment (almost 14 percent in South Carolina), business failures, big losses in household worth due to market declines and the burst housing bubble – this is the context for the question posed about the viability of wellness as 2009 looms. If all this does not get your attention, consider the fact that Russian academic Igor Panarin predicts a US collapse by 2010, followed by a civil war and the breakup of the nation into five different countries. (The only good news is that Alaska will revert to Russia, thereby making Sarah Palin Russia’s problem, not ours – see Andrew Osborn, As if Things Weren’t Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S., Wall Street Journal, December 29, 2009.) In summary, in case you had not noticed, the world’s coalmine seems littered with dead canaries.

On a bright note, Americans will have new leadership in a few weeks. The president-elect is amazingly popular at the moment (73% approval), but even the most optimistic Democrat knows Obama is no fiscal Superman or supernatural economic turnaround messiah sent from above. Obama’s $775 billion economic recovery plan, announced a month ago, already seems too little, too late. Rebuilding the infrastructure with WPA-like bridges, roads and other projects will be helpful, but some economists predict it won’t be enough to arrest a national slide toward a deeper state of crisis. (I will refrain from expressions like ruin and despair.)

Given this context, let’s pause for a hard, cold look at where wellness fits, if indeed it fits at all. Of course I refer to REAL (reason, exuberance and liberty) wellness, a mindset or philosophy of personal responsibility, optimism and commitment to affirmative, evidence-based principles for making choices small and large. Not the same as prevention, risk reduction or illness management – REAL wellness is a unwavering focus on exceptional health and quality of life.

Little public attention is given, in good times or bad, to positive health and life satisfaction. Instead, the focus always seems to be on the many frightful consequences of NOT doing the right thing. At a time of financial crises unknown since the Great Depression, it is fitting to ask if our philosophy for good living has a place, alongside the struggle millions are experiencing to feed their families, pay their bills and provide for the welfare of their children. Is this an appropriate time to proclaim the applications of a wellness lifestyle and, if you think so, how is this communicated to those struggling at the lower rungs of Maslow’s hierarchy?

I suggest a REAL wellness mindset is always important. In hard times, little else will make a quality difference, for the better. REAL wellness will liberate those who embrace it and enable advances toward the most important kind of prosperity, namely, physical and psychological well-being. Given the stresses of today’s fiscal turmoil, perils await those who seek only comfort and relief. The best ally in the quest for economic recovery is a positive lifestyle that promotes personal health and builds upon positive social connections. Economic perils are best faced with positive attitudes, high resolve of mental discipline and peak physical strengths, not while mired in a struggle against negativity.

Wellness itself does not solve any financial problems. However, it helps in reaching and maintaining first-rate levels of physical and mental functioning. That state can in turn facilitate the pursuit of activities that best advance opportunities and manage crises.

Consider some factors that make REAL wellness a winning philosophy in hard as well as good times. As you know, REAL wellness entails:

* A disciplined focus on the bright side.

* A commitment to personal excellence.

* A regard for social support and the value of communities.

* A willingness to secure and work to maintain high standards of physical fitness.

* A continuing conscious pursuit of added meaning and purpose.

* A desire to comprehend the phenomenon of happiness and realize some measure or degree of it, as circumstances permit.

* A continuing respect for personal honor associated with the art of applied ethics

* A recognition that it’s best to want what you have and to live in the present (versus bemoaning what you had before or could have had save for an errant decision or two). An excellent book on this approach to prospering in the best sense of the word is Wishcraft: How to Get What You Really Want by Barbara Sher.

* A predisposition to take the time to appreciate the beauty around you, in natural as well as human forms.

* A sense of gratitude for the fact that, while conditions are difficult, there is so much left to celebrate and resolve to appreciate.

* An outlook marked by compassion for others in general, as well as a mindset of forgiveness for those who may have contributed to difficult circumstances. (Yes, include in the latter even George W. Bush. But, not the Devil. Humans need someone or something as a scapegoat, even if they have to invent such characters to make their saviors seem deliriously wonderful by comparison.)

Some still might fret at the contradictions in the affirmative nature of REAL wellness, such as sketched above, and hard times, massive human suffering, scarce resources and widespread worry and fear. Is REAL wellness of a positive nature not a guilty indulgence while Rome (and the rest of the world) burns? Or not?

The proper answer, I say, is Absolutely not! Major not! In fact, au contraire, no way Jose and just the opposite. Now more than ever, we need a REAL wellness philosophy to deal with challenges greater than normal. Much greater than normal, in fact.

A healthy lifestyle that includes physical, mental/emotional and social components will protect and build your immunity while maintaining and boosting your morale. The REAL wellness qualities sketched above (a partial list, I might add) are invaluable for weathering the proverbial storm (s) AND for building a capacity to flourish.

Wellness qualities are always advantageous, but when times are tough, such qualities lend toughness, as well. The weak in body, mind and morale will be first to succumb to unrelenting demands, stresses, setbacks and other misfortunes that accompany prolonged crises. Furthermore, family, friends and perfect strangers need you at your best, providing leadership, guidance, inspiration and hope. Judd Allen, like his father Robert F. Allen before him, often describes the health and other positive benefits that follow when people come together for support, for entertainment or to seek political solutions. All are helpful ways to boost well-being, no doubt even more so when budgets are light and conditions difficult.

There are no guarantees, even with a bright-side outlook, but more than ever, it will pay to adopt and practice REAL wellness. To be physically fit, mentally strong and resolute, adaptable, flexible, resilient and capable is a formula for success in bad times – and good.

If these comments seem plausible and convincing, if you agree that REAL wellness makes sense in normal times and more so in crises, then you will want to support public policies and private initiatives that make such learning and living opportunities widely available. For instance, you will want to support continuing worksite wellness programs, knowing that the common reaction to less business might be to pull back programming to save money. This is an ideal time to not only deal creatively with the current crisis but to prepare as well for the future. Let’s explore innovative new approaches to healthy, productive work forces and work settings. Similar thinking should influence the shape of health system reforms. Likewise, apply REAL wellness values introduced with varied public programs aimed at creating jobs, rebuilding the economy and making individual life and society itself better than before the economy fell apart. Perhaps solutions to the fiscal downturn will only be possible when we more effectively work together for solutions that meet the needs of all classes, not just the most advantaged.

8 Lessons in Strategic Marketing A La ‘Daddy Daycare’

I bet you thought the movie “Daddy Daycare” was a kiddie comedy, right? Wrong…It’s a marketing strategy film! When Charlie and his friend Phil are fired as Product Development/Brand Managers for a cereal company, they decide to fill a need in their community.

Along the way to success they demonstrate several solid marketing strategies — equally applicable to online, offline, and integrated companies. Take these lessons to heart when developing plans for your business.

Lesson 1: Research the competition

The future entrepreneurs visited each daycare in the area. While doing so, they got a feel for their daycare competitors. By knowing your own competitors you will be better able to effectively find a way to compete.

Competitor research does not have to be thought of as “guerrilla warfare.” In many industries, competitors work together by partnering, cross promoting, sending business to each other, or even manufacturing each other’s products.

Lesson 2: Know your customers’ values

Charlie and Phil understood that price is not the only important factor for their target market. Based on their own experience and customer research (talking to other parents), they recognized that other concerns besides price played a part when parents choose a daycare provider.

While price is almost certainly a consideration for your customers, don’t get caught in the mentality that customers will buy from you only if you have the lowest cost. If you think of your own service/product as a bundle of attributes having a unique value for your customers, you will be more successful.

Lesson 3: Identify opportunities

Charlie and Phil uncovered an unmet need in the market by combining their competitor research and knowledge of customer values. You can do the same when looking to develop new products/services or improve existing ones.

Lesson 4: Develop a positioning based on opportunity

Using knowledge from the first three lessons, they positioned themselves as the quality alternative and focused on providing different benefits than their nearest competitor. In the movie, Daddy Daycare stole all the competitor’s customers and drove her out of business.

In real life, customers choose a product/service that best fits their needs. Consequently, competitors can co-exist when each are valuable in different ways to industry customers.

Lesson 5: Create a catchy tag line

The tag line “Who’s your Daddy?” helped advertise the new business. Often, a concise, catchy tag line can go a long way in building brand equity, communicating benefits and features, and/or conveying a feeling/mentality your target customers can relate to.

Some examples:

“Just do it.” (Nike)

“Life Unscripted” (TLC)

“Naturally sweetened whole grain oat cereal with real berries.” (Berry Burst Cheerios)

“Makes anything possible.” (Craftsman)

Lesson 6: Spread the Word

Phil and Charlie put their tag line on t-shirts along with their business name. They also printed and distributed flyers that explained their new company’s positioning.

A few more ideas you can use to spread the word about your business:

Word of mouth — give customers an incentive to tell people about your business.

Advertising — use both online and offline methods. Online options include pay-per-click search engines and ezine advertisements. Offline methods include radio spots and newspaper advertisements.

Philanthropy — donate money, services, and/or time to non-profit organizations or conduct your own event.

Lesson 7: Be ethical and above-board

The new business owners cooperated fully with the daycare inspector. They treated him as a source of information rather than “Big Brother”. This resulted in not only a better business, but also a valuable ally. In the long run, your own company will be more likely to thrive if you concentrate on improving the business rather than dodging regulations.

Lesson 7A: Subterfuge is a poor long-term strategy

Besides being unethical, subterfuge soils your reputation. In the movie, the competing daycare crashed and ruined a fundraiser event…spilling bugs, freeing animals, and drenching visitors. Short-term, it worked. Phil and Charlie were broke, seemingly with no way to continue with their venture.

In the long run, Ms. Subterfuge had such a poor reputation (from this and other business tactics), her business failed.

Lesson 8: Implement until you’re blue in the face

In the beginning, the new Daddy Daycare was a complete disaster. Charlie and Phil did their “homework” and knew they had a good idea. When reality hit theory, however, a few not-so-minor details got in the way. Like all successful marketers, they worked out the kinks (okay…disasters) and kept trying (and trying, and trying) until they got it right.

Keep the Daddy Daycare lessons in mind when developing and implementing your own marketing plan. Don’t give up, strive to continually improve, and you’re business is sure to be a success.

Merger or Acquisition Failing? The Solution Lies in Your Strategic Focus

The evidence is unmistakable. Mergers and acquisitions fail somewhere between 50% and 75% of the time (see Footnote). There are two main reasons: culture clash and leadership clash.

Culture Clash

For understandable reasons, leaders discount the impact of corporate culture when they merge and/or acquire. They have other factors to consider at the time of the merger or acquisition – market opportunities; operational and business process synergies; financial analysis; and potential cost savings. These factors are obviously important. In addition, “culture” is not only an amorphous concept, it is believed to be immeasurable and inherently unmanageable. Most leaders probably just assume that culture will ‘iron itself out’ over time. However, culture is too important to be left up to hope and natural evolution and here is why.

Culture means how we do things around here in order to succeed. It has everything to do with implementation and identity. Culture is our way and who we are. Every day that an organization succeeds is another day that that organization’s culture is reinforced. In 1992, Kotter and Heskett (Corporate Culture and Performance. NY: The Free Press. 1992) researched 207 firms from 22 industries to determine whether culture impacted the bottom line. They measured the economic performance of these firms between the years 1977 and 1988. They discovered that the organizations with strong cultures that fit the organization’s strategy improved their net incomes by a factor of 756% versus 1% for the organizations that did not have strong cultures and did not fit the organization’s strategy. They concluded that, when it comes to impacting the bottom line, culture’s influence is “more powerful than anything else,” including strategy, structure, leadership, financial analysis, and management systems.

The essential reason that culture has such a powerful impact in mergers and acquisitions is that one or both successful organizations are implicitly being asked to change how they do things in order to succeed. It is historical success that creates the tremendous power of culture. So, if our way of accomplishing success has been so effective, why are you trying to change it? Both organizations in a merger or acquisition are, certainly, thinking this.

Given the power of culture, it is almost inevitable that cultures will clash. The key issues are what is the exact nature of the two cultures and how do leaders manage those cultural differences.

Leadership Clash

If culture is our way, leadership is my way. The same issues come into play regarding leadership. Each dominant coalition of leaders in each organization has been centrally responsible for the historical success of their organization. After all, these leaders have set strategic direction, mobilized commitment, and established organizational capability to accomplish strategic objectives. If the two organizations were losers, neither organization would be interested in the other. Successful leaders want to ally with other successful leaders.

Again, nothing succeeds like success! Therefore, leaders get their noses out of joint when other leaders question how they are doing things. Given the nature and inherent accountability of leadership, it is almost inevitable that leaders will clash. The key issues are, again, what is the exact nature of the two leadership approaches and how do we manage leadership differences.

If you leave the resolution of these two critical differences, culture clash and leadership clash, up to the very same people who are in the middle of the clash, we think it is fairly safe to predict that, most of the time, such resolution will not occur. It is very unlikely that the very same cultures and leaders that got into the clash in the first place will know how to resolve those same clashes. If they did, they would not have gotten into the clashes, to start with. So, what is the solution?

With one very big proviso, the solution is strategic focus.

By strategic focus, we mean the fundamental focus for action that an organization adopts in order to add value to its customers. Each of the two organizations came into the merger or acquisition with its own historical strategic focus. To some considerable extent, each organization had been successful in accomplishing its own strategic focus or neither organization would have any interest in the other.

The first question, then, is: what has been the strategic focus for each organization? If both organizations come in with identical strategic foci, the likelihood of a complete integration is high. The more divergent the strategic foci of the two organizations, the more incomplete the integration will be. The key message here is: let strategic focus drive decision making about what should remain and what should be changed. Culture and leadership are all about how. Strategic focus is all about historical and future outcomes. Projected outcomes are the source of resolution of culture and leadership clash. If leaders try to resolve their differences by insisting that their respective hows are better than the other’s, the resolution will never occur. The solution is to agree on future strategic focus and then decide on the implications for how to get there.

However, you say: “what how is right for what strategic focus?” This is where the proviso comes in. In order for this to work, you must be able to objectively make the connection between the desired strategic focus and the culture and leadership required to accomplish that strategic focus.

We have made these links and we have developed a way to measure them. There are four fundamental strategic foci: certainty, synergy, superiority and enrichment. There are four fundamental leadership approaches: directive, participative, standard-setter and charismatic. In addition, there are four fundamental cultures: control, collaboration, competence and cultivation.

Once strategic focus is established, the roadmap for integration can be built.

Here is an example. In early 1999, a local newspaper acquired a target marketing company that was operating within the newspaper’s circulation base. The basic rationale for the acquisition was ‘if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.’ The target marketing company was taking advertising dollars away from the paper. Why not join forces, capitalize on one another’s unique competencies, and garner even more total advertising dollars in the long run?

Well, the alliance started falling apart, almost from day one. The newspaper had a long-standing, established routine for doing things. The target marketing company was constantly coming up with new ideas and wanting to run with them right away. The newspaper wanted to plan things out, to build slowly and to carefully track every move made and every dollar spent. The target marketing company, on the other hand, was coming up with clever target marketing tactics that no customer was asking for, but had considerable potential for revenue generation if the right customer base(s) were identified. Leadership in the newspaper was systematic, careful, and thorough. Leadership in the target marketing company was fast moving, speculative and challenging.

Our measurement system revealed that the newspaper had a strategic focus of certainty, a core culture of control and a directive leadership approach. The target marketing company, on the other hand, had a strategic focus of superiority, a core culture of competence and a standard-setter leadership approach. Our measurement system revealed that both organizations had a fundamentally similar method for making decisions, a strength to build upon. It also revealed that the two organizations essentially differed around what each was paying attention to. The newspaper was primarily attending to day-to-day realities. The target marketing company was primarily attending to possibilities.

The leaders of both organizations determined that the common strategic focus for both organizations was certainty. They could have determined to keep two strategic foci, but they chose to concentrate on one. Given this decision, the solution quickly fell into place. The leaders of the newspaper relaxed and determined with the leaders of the target marketing organization what was an acceptable risk for the latter to take. Rather than operate entirely as a separate entity, the target marketing company became, in effect, a unique department of the newspaper. All of the routine, regularized business processes of the target marketing company were melded into the appropriate functions of the newspaper. The research and development part of the target marketing organization was carefully preserved and actively enabled by newspaper leadership. The target marketing “department” was immediately provided with an expensive information technology upgrade, an advance that greatly enhanced the “department’s” ability to create and generate new, one-of-a-kind initiatives.

One year later, the combined organization was thriving.

The leaders of both organizations could have chosen a combined strategic focus of superiority or they could have chosen to keep two separate strategic foci. In either case, the solution regarding how to put the two organizations together and how to lead the two organizations would have been drastically different than the solution described above.

In the end, the best solution comes from two factors: the agreed-upon strategic focus and the ability to objectively and measurably link the required culture and leadership to it.

Footnote: The Evidence

o Michael Porter analyzed 2,700 mergers and acquisitions by 33 major US companies over a 36-year period (1950 to 1986). Results: Failure rates between 50 and 75 percent. Major cause: culture and leadership clash

o Dutch study in the prestigious journal Economisch-Statistische Berichten found failure rates of up to 60 percent in similar situations. Major cause: culture and leadership clash

o In a 1992 study by Coopers & Lybrand of 100 companies with failed or troubled mergers, 85 percent of the executives polled said that differences in management style and practices (culture) were the major problem

o In 1995, Business Week reviewed studies covering 30 years of mergers and acquisitions and concluded that a negative correlation exists between merger activity and profitability. Business Week’s own analysis revealed that stock prices of acquiring companies fell an average of 4 percent.

o In 1996, the British Institute of Management surveyed executives involved in a number of acquisitions and concluded that “the major factor in failure was the underestimation of difficulties of merging two cultures.”

o P. T. Bangsberg in the 1998 Journal of Commerce (p 2A) concluded that the key to the success of mergers and acquisitions was full consideration of employee and culture.

o In 1996, the Bureau of Business Research at American International College surveyed the CFOs and other top financial executives of 45 Forbes 500 companies. Conclusion: the number one reason that mergers and acquisitions fail is “incompatible corporate cultures.” According to Ira Smolowitz, dean of the Bureau of Business Research: “I knew culture was important, but I didn’t think it would be most important.”

o Hewitt, Inc., 1998. Hewitt Associates conducted a global study of HR implications of mergers and acquisitions. Almost 500 companies responded. When asked to identify the top challenges they encountered while implementing the transaction (i.e., merger or acquisition), HR Directors from every region overwhelmingly cited difficulties integrating the two organizational cultures. 75% of respondents cited culture integration as the most difficult issue they had to deal with.

o Pratap Parameswaran in Business Times, 1999. Cites research that merger integration success rates in the financial services industry is low with only a paltry 17 percent of mergers able to create substantial returns. The main cause of the problem is culture clash.

o Right Management Consultants research report, 1999. According to the Conference Board, the success of a merger “ultimately depends on the effective use of people.” Indeed, the Board bluntly states that people issues are “capable of derailing alliances.”

o Right Management Consultants research report, 1999. Surveyed 179 organizations. Found that the number one reason that mergers and acquisitions failed was “lack of culture integration.” They also found that managing culture “is clearly tied to success in reaching business objectives.”

o Mercer Management Consulting research study, 1997. Found that poor culture integration was the major failure responsible for the fact that, in deals worth more than $500 million, only 43 percent of some three hundred merged companies outperformed their peers in total returns for shareholders.

o A. T. Kearney Consulting research study, 1997. Reviewed 155 M&A deals in multiple industries and determined most failures to be “people-related.”

o Research shows that a majority of deals have not created significant shareholder value. In the 1980s, the average shareholder return three years after the merger was – 16 percent (Sirower, 2000)

o In the 1990s, a survey by Andersen Consulting of 150 large deals said only 17 percent created substantial returns, and some 50 percent of the transaction actually eroded value. Quoted in Bloomer and Shafer.

o 1999 J P Morgan study. Over 1/2 of M&As, worldwide, failed to reach their promised strategic and financial goals. Totaling $1.6 TRILLION in bad investments

Managing Global Supply Chains – Striking a Strategic Balance

Global supply chains are facing difficult times as the marketplace shifts to a more global environment. Companies want to enter new markets with lower costs and better speed. However, many executives are struggling to meet goals in the face of new challenges.

Factors such as higher transportation and energy costs are enough to throw a wrench into a company’s supply chain. Building a strong strategic plan can assist executives in achieving their goals.

Evaluate Higher Transportation Costs

It’s no surprise that energy and transportation costs have experienced a sharp increase. Companies are scrambling to balance these costs while staying competitive in current market conditions. Striking the right balance can add up to increased efficiency and profit gains.

Manage Product Lead Time

Although producing oversees offers less expensive labor, this may also result in longer lead time. This slows down the process of bringing a new product to market. These factors need to be carefully considered when planning production.

Review Exchange Rates and Tariffs

Tariff and exchange rate challenges are introduced when a company manufactures overseas. Senior managers should carefully evaluate these components and identify opportunities to increase efficiencies.

Manage Complex Products Closely

Consumers are demanding more sophisticated products. Companies are working creatively to meet these needs, but sometimes production gets left in a lurch. Producing more complex products can slow down production, leaving the supply chain out of balance.

The solution to this issue is forming strong communication channels between marketing and operations. Working closely will provide a synergy between launching a new product and meeting production demands.

The Challenge of Reducing Costs

Senior mangers are always evaluating strategies to increase efficiencies and lower costs. Managing global supply chains in this demanding market requires strategic oversight. Leaders from all business units need to come together to create strategic goals that are measurable and realistic. A systematic way to measure these goals should be established so results can be tracked.

Evaluating Ways to Get Products to Market Quicker

Once a company discovers an innovative product, marketing and sales push hard to bring the item to market. Operations is the business unit that can best provide knowledge on capacity to produce a product while maintaining a high level of customer service. If production is slammed with orders, angry customers will surface, creating a lasting affect on a business’ reputation.

A strategic plan for getting products to market in the most efficient way should be created. Senior managers should meet regularly to strike a balance between bringing a product to market while persevering production and customer service. Discovering this balance will positively affect the global supply chain.

Find Communication Efficiencies in Manufacturing

Companies serving a global marketplace may have manufacturing facilities spread out all over the world. The communication flow across such a large area may become challenging for some businesses. This can be addressed by creating formal procedures for sharing information across all locations. The results of making this change are improved consistency and performance.

Examine the Benefits of Centralization

Many companies are moving away from local management to a centralized model. The manufacturing may be accomplished overseas, while the home office is charged will managing those tasks.

Retaining Employees in a Global Marketplace

As your company goes abroad, attracting and retaining talented employees may be challenging. Spend time and resources on creating an attractive work environment for employees. The time and effort invested initially will payoff with a decreased turnover ratio.

Managing Compatibility Issues

Managing technical infrastructure can be challenging enough in the local market. But once you introduce vendors from around the world, the issue becomes more complex.

Spend time working with vendors to ensure technology works seamlessly across all channels. Frontloading your investment will minimize issues down the road. This will also improve your efficiency and profit potential.

Acknowledge the Environmental Effect on the Global Supply Chain

Consumers are becoming more aware of their carbon footprint. Companies are facing the challenge of finding a balance between being environmentally responsible and maintaining profitability. Working with leaders in your company to discover a harmonious solution will impact your business positively in the global marketplace. You’ll benefit from an environmentally conscious image, while preserving profits.

Forming a Partnership between Operations and Marketing

Executives from marketing and operations need to meet regularly to review goals. They need to form a partnership to improve the global supply chain process. This will enable a quicker response to change when working to bring products to market.

Most company executives agree that global supply chains have room for improvement. While facing economic changes and rising fuel costs, there will be opportunities to review processes and maximize efficiencies. Investing time and resources into maximizing the efficiency will preserve and grow your profits.

Resources:

July 2008 McKinsey Quarterly Survey on Global Supply Chains

Exit mobile version