Strategic thinking is a major component of business planning that sets the course of action that leads to either business success or business failure. Short-term thinking can be problematic as resources are wasted fixing potholes and gaining immediate results without considering long-term solutions. Executives that focus exclusively on short-term results sometimes leave their organizations in worse shape.
A great portion of our day is engaged in crisis management where new problems arise and we must deal with them immediately before the they spread. This process can be effective in the short run but can damage the company in the long-term when the root of the problem is not addressed. The crisis situations will continue to spread and grow as the underlying issues spread.
A strategy should focus on limiting the damage caused by crisis problems while ensuring the root problem is still being addressed. Executives who think short-term will see immediate results but will often damage long-term organizational performance. Jumping from fire to fire is a reactive strategy.
Long-term thinking can save the company money in the future by increasing competitiveness. When the company doesn’t have the ability to implement a long-term strategy, plenty of resources are wasted on counter-productive activities.
For example, a business many continue facing shut-downs due to dilapidated infrastructure. The production line breaks down frequently and requires heavy maintenance to keep going. It has a poor design and raises per product cost leaving a company slowly but surely less competitive by the year.
A long-term thinking will assess the long-term goals of the company and the strategy to get there to determine how to handle this problem. Instead of hiring new maintenance workers and dumping more money into a poor system the long-term thinker invests in a cutting-edge system that affords more adaptability to the production system.
Short-term and long-term strategy can work together. Short-term strategies can fix or minimize immediate problems through proper crisis management but will not ignore the needs of deeper problems. Short-term goals can build into long-term goals that lead to a stronger competitive stance.
Executives should ensure that short-term solutions do not supplant the long-term needs of the company. Even though solving immediate problems is attractive, it is the resolution of long-term issues that separates the exceptional executives from the rest of the herd. Developing a stronger strategy helps to reduce the frequency of short-term distractions by fixing fundamental competitive problems.
The blog discusses current affairs and development of national economic and social health through unique idea generation. Consider the blog a type of thought experiment where ideas are generated to be pondered but should never be considered definitive as a final conclusion. It is just a pathway to understanding and one may equally reject as accept ideas as theoretical dribble. New perspectives, new opportunities, for a new generation. “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”—Thomas Jefferson
Sunday, May 17, 2015
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Do You Have an Opinion or a Persuasive Argument?
What makes the difference between an opinion and a persuasive argument? People love their opinions, but are based on thoughts, feelings, and wishes of the individual and don’t always have validity. It doesn’t matter if one is in college, a seasoned manager or running for political office, creating a persuasive argument leads to credibility. Their emotions may drive people, but it is their logic that makes them worthy of your ear.
Persuasive arguments are reinforced by substantial information that is reasonable and logical in its construction of the conclusion. The average person can see the argument as reasonable based on shared knowledge. They can follow the information and make the same conclusion as the speaker.
Opinions based on emotions and quick judgments often lack enough supportive information to be worthy of attention. They can use emotions to draw a crowd into a frenzy but lose their appeal once people start to question the logic. Over time, the emotional appeal fades the speaker's credibility suffers.
A problem with not evaluating what others are saying is that most people simply regurgitate the opinions of others within their social networks or people with authority without critical thought. This leads to the spreading of false information among a broad group of persons. They didn't look into the details of the information or whether or not it is true before spreading it.
The inability to truly think about issues and come to an independent conclusion is based in mental laziness and lack of self-confidence. We can see that destructive nature at work on the path to war, bullying behavior, or any other situation where emotions are stirred, but critical thinking is missing. Those who are least likely to think about issues or stand up for their beliefs are open to manipulation.
Leaders who want to create credibility and develop a justifiable argument should state their main proposition and then support that proposition with reliable information. Their argument should have enough supporting facts to justify that position and lead to a reasonable conclusion. Well thought-out arguments gain more support than flimsy opinions.
The justification for arguments should be from credible sources that have facts to support their claims. For example, a generic search for a term on the Internet will return lots of opinions but it is up to the reader to seek out credible information to formulate their opinions. Perusing government websites, research, studies, polls, and industry knowledge is better than relying on the abundance of unsubstantiated fluff on the web.
The ability to see logical holes in other’s arguments allows for a more critical view of presented information. People are always seeking adherents to their cause and regularly manipulate information to justify their main points. Being able to question that information and where that information comes from makes a big difference in creating persuasive arguments.
It has been said that no one truly owns themselves until they can create an independent opinion. That opinion should be based in fact, information, experience, logic, and knowledge versus social considerations. Stating the main points and supporting those points with factual information is likely to raise credibility and differentiate a substantiated argument from unsubstantiated opinion. When people speak with knowledge, they can gain long term followers to their cause.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
Collaborative Investing in Local Clusters Leads to Economic Development
Group investment
is not a novel
idea
but
can be significant
in developing
stronger
local
growth
models.
A “hot”
market
is one that draws
substantial
investment
interest
that encourages
growth
among market
relevant
businesses.
Pack investing
offers
opportunities
to create
multiple
points
of capital
infusion
that lead
to the growth
of a battery
of related
companies.
Companies do not work in a vacuum and rely on different local stakeholders to feed the building of their business. They need resources, human capital, science, facilities, suppliers, partners, and customers to develop momentum. If they lack the right environment, their business is doomed to failure before it gets started.
Pack investing offers the opportunity to take a local core competency with a solid industry base and infuse large amounts of capital at various points to encourage mutual growth. Multiple investors may work together to invest in complementary businesses that have market relevance but are not operating at peak performance.
The potential for quick growth and higher market returns is greater for companies that work together. Network relationships and alliance capitalism can create higher growth records among businesses (Eng, 2007). Sharing resources and knowledge during the growth stages with peer companies seems to make a difference.
Pack investing, and allied companies develop a stronger competitive stance. Industry alliances, even when money is not transferring between them, earned abnormally high local returns (Wang & Der-Jin, 2005). Getting businesses to support each other’s growth trajectories with shared services lead to stronger intra-firm alliances.
Collaborating on an investment level and working on a firm level creates two forms of potential synergy. Infusion of cash allows individual companies to expand their operations. Sharing knowledge and resources with other businesses helps them learn and adapt. Together investment and development create clusters of competitive firms that lead to jobs and economic wealth.
Investing in a pack and encouraging mutual growth is different than standard competitive strategies and requires a new way of thinking. Competitiveness is in the American blood, but collaboration can sometimes supersede this instinct to create greater value. Persuading investing institutions and company CEO’s to work together is a challenging game.
Pack investing relies on transparent city data that allows investors to find underperforming clusters and explore them. Seeing the opportunities and sharing those opportunities with like-minded investors may be against culture but can be lucrative, in the long run, when investment returns rises. Greater revenue is followed by new investment, tax income and jobs that can raise living standards of residents.
Eng, T. (2007). Relationship value of firms in alliance capitalism and implications for FDI. International Journal of Business Studies, 15 (1).
Wang, Y. & Der-Jin, M. (2005). Using strategic alliances to make decisions about investing in technological innovations. International Journal of Management, 22 (4).
Companies do not work in a vacuum and rely on different local stakeholders to feed the building of their business. They need resources, human capital, science, facilities, suppliers, partners, and customers to develop momentum. If they lack the right environment, their business is doomed to failure before it gets started.
Pack investing offers the opportunity to take a local core competency with a solid industry base and infuse large amounts of capital at various points to encourage mutual growth. Multiple investors may work together to invest in complementary businesses that have market relevance but are not operating at peak performance.
The potential for quick growth and higher market returns is greater for companies that work together. Network relationships and alliance capitalism can create higher growth records among businesses (Eng, 2007). Sharing resources and knowledge during the growth stages with peer companies seems to make a difference.
Pack investing, and allied companies develop a stronger competitive stance. Industry alliances, even when money is not transferring between them, earned abnormally high local returns (Wang & Der-Jin, 2005). Getting businesses to support each other’s growth trajectories with shared services lead to stronger intra-firm alliances.
Collaborating on an investment level and working on a firm level creates two forms of potential synergy. Infusion of cash allows individual companies to expand their operations. Sharing knowledge and resources with other businesses helps them learn and adapt. Together investment and development create clusters of competitive firms that lead to jobs and economic wealth.
Investing in a pack and encouraging mutual growth is different than standard competitive strategies and requires a new way of thinking. Competitiveness is in the American blood, but collaboration can sometimes supersede this instinct to create greater value. Persuading investing institutions and company CEO’s to work together is a challenging game.
Pack investing relies on transparent city data that allows investors to find underperforming clusters and explore them. Seeing the opportunities and sharing those opportunities with like-minded investors may be against culture but can be lucrative, in the long run, when investment returns rises. Greater revenue is followed by new investment, tax income and jobs that can raise living standards of residents.
Eng, T. (2007). Relationship value of firms in alliance capitalism and implications for FDI. International Journal of Business Studies, 15 (1).
Wang, Y. & Der-Jin, M. (2005). Using strategic alliances to make decisions about investing in technological innovations. International Journal of Management, 22 (4).
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Studying for Career Success-Knowing What You Know
Everyone who attended formal schooling knows that studying is a grueling and often not so fun process. For a few out there who enjoy learning they seem to slice through their books like a knife through butter. Despite the motivated few the vast majority of students either don’t know how to study or don’t study to maximize their future potential.
Studying is one of those activities that comes along with attending any type of formal educational program. The professor typically steers the student to certain conclusions, but it is up to the student to do the leg work so they can learn the necessary background information to reach those conclusions. Understand what the professors says is different than understanding why he/she says it.
Not reading the text or outside sources is apparent in the level of depth in discussion and papers. Length is not the same thing as depth. Depth means a student can cover the required concepts succinctly and with enough substance to justify their main points. It is not a long winded explanation consisting of shallow and unsubstantiated rhetoric.
Without this effort, answers won’t have much meaning and graduates are unlikely to be able to apply this information to real life situations during the course of their employment. For example, if a graduated was exposed to best management practices during a course but doesn’t know how to apply those practices they will risk failure in their careers.
Success comes to those who put in the time and effort to learn. It can be frustrating, and it can take a long time but over the course of one’s career they will become more successful than those who didn’t study. It may not make sense to them while they are in class, but it will make sense to them when they have to rely on their knowledge to overcome challenges.
A few tips for studying:
-Read all required and supplemental materials.
-Search through the library and outside sources to support papers and develop a point of view.
-Engage in discussions to learn what others know about the topic.
-Question other students and expand on ideas they offer.
-Develop a method of studying that can apply to most learning situations.
-Ask questions when you don’t understand principles.
-Incorporate feedback to continue to add the quality of papers and thought.
Studying is one of those activities that comes along with attending any type of formal educational program. The professor typically steers the student to certain conclusions, but it is up to the student to do the leg work so they can learn the necessary background information to reach those conclusions. Understand what the professors says is different than understanding why he/she says it.
Not reading the text or outside sources is apparent in the level of depth in discussion and papers. Length is not the same thing as depth. Depth means a student can cover the required concepts succinctly and with enough substance to justify their main points. It is not a long winded explanation consisting of shallow and unsubstantiated rhetoric.
Without this effort, answers won’t have much meaning and graduates are unlikely to be able to apply this information to real life situations during the course of their employment. For example, if a graduated was exposed to best management practices during a course but doesn’t know how to apply those practices they will risk failure in their careers.
Success comes to those who put in the time and effort to learn. It can be frustrating, and it can take a long time but over the course of one’s career they will become more successful than those who didn’t study. It may not make sense to them while they are in class, but it will make sense to them when they have to rely on their knowledge to overcome challenges.
A few tips for studying:
-Read all required and supplemental materials.
-Search through the library and outside sources to support papers and develop a point of view.
-Engage in discussions to learn what others know about the topic.
-Question other students and expand on ideas they offer.
-Develop a method of studying that can apply to most learning situations.
-Ask questions when you don’t understand principles.
-Incorporate feedback to continue to add the quality of papers and thought.
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Poem: A Cottage of a Thousand Years
![]() |
A cheesy painting I did. I know...its not that good!💁 |
Generation after generation is born and transfers information from one to the next creating collective knowledge. Newer generations build off of the knowledge of the old to develop a better world for themselves. It is the same with each generation and it will continue as long as we adapt and grow. Decisions at one time and in one area have an influence on the entire organism.
People may believe they are different and the values and characteristics they hold make them better than each other. In the end we are only one generation on a path of generations. In the collective nature of our lives we are all the same. Only our thoughts, hopes, and dreams make us unique. Together they push our species forward indifferent of our petty arguments. Abundance is waiting to be drawn when we work together to solve problems.
A Cottage of a Thousand Years
Fields of green blankets,
the smell of cut grass.
A cottage of history old,
spanning the time of our lives.
A place of multiple generations,
Solid stones of time make its walls.
A warm fire glows inside,
A pot of soup in hearth.
Kitchen conversation fills the room,
like a symphony of dreams.
Fish swim in the pond,
waiting to be drawn.
Nothing changes in his land,
An hour and a thousand years are the same.
Monday, May 4, 2015
The Heart of an Entrepreneur
By Dr. Susan Sasiadek (March 13, 2015)
While working on my MBA it was clear to me that the
number one goal for all companies was to turn a profit. I remember learning early on that owning a
business is much like the game of Monopoly; as long as you have money, you re
in the game. Once you are out of money, the game is over. So why then wouldn’t
the focus of owning a business be centered on profits? For many companies this is exactly where the
focus is. However, there has been a dynamic shift in the thinking as to why
entrepreneurs set out to create a business and how to maintain a successful
organization.
One of the beliefs that lies within the hearts of many
entrepreneurs is to do what you have a passion for and the profits will follow.
A similar concept I have often shared with young college students; do what you
love and the money will come. Although
this sounds easy enough, many times people and organizations lose their focus
of what it is they set out to achieve. As the world is constantly changing so do
companies and the people that work for them. How can one start a business they
are passionate about, ensure it will be successful and keep the heart of an
entrepreneur?
- Create a mission that drives not only your company, but the employees that are invested in working for you.
- When you start a business always have a purpose. One of the best ways to accomplish this is to have the business product/service with the end result to the client as the goal, not the profit (Cited by Paul Mitchell, Case, n.d.)
- Incorporate a value system that is focuses on employees, giving back to the community and on your customers (Cited by Danny Meyer, Case, n.d.). Philanthropy needs to be part of your organizational culture.
- Embrace rejections and failures as they leave an imprint on you of valuable lessons from which your business will grow (Cited by Paul Mitchell, Case, n.d.).
The greatest asset for any organization are the employees
that work diligently to drive the mission, embrace the values and focus on each
customer. In order to create an organizational culture in which the employees
are driven to perform at this level, it is imperative to have leaders within
the organization that create the dynamics of the culture in which, employees not
only want to come to work each day, but look forward to coming to work. An
environment in which the passion of the founder is passed on to all levels
within the organization. Danny Meyer, the CEO and founder of Shake Shack once
shared that the “best way to be greedy is to focus on your employee’s first,
then your community and third, on your customers (Case, n.d.).
Taking the time to identify your organization’s focus,
purpose and mission, will not only help to create the organizational culture in which the values and passion come
alive; it will also help to ensure a servant style of leadership that focuses on
the people first and profits second.
Case,
Jean . (n.d.) . Two years to build a
billion-dollar brand – with meaning. Forbes under 30 Summit . Retrieved on March 13, 2015, from
http://www.forbes.com/under30video/#/sessions-and-speakers/3855955367001
Sunday, May 3, 2015
Grade Inflation: Rescuing Students from Unrealistic Expectations
Grade inflation has been a drag on the quality of education for sometime and sets students up for future failure. The artificial, and often accidental, inflation of grades persists and doesn’t appear to have an immediate resolution. Professors feel pressure to continue providing high grades despite its long-term damage to the student, the university, and future employers. Looking out for students requires holding the line on grade pressure.
Its easy to give high grades when the benefits significantly outweigh the costs of holding students accountable for learning. Professors mentioned that grade inflation is a result of poor student evaluations, poor student-teacher relationships, financial aid requirements, and excessively high student expectations (Caruth & Caruth, 2013). Giving accurate grades comes with internal and external pressure to lower the standards.
On the first day, students walk/ log into a class with preconceived expectations of what grade they should have regardless of their actual performance. Based upon studies of undergraduate and graduate students the average undergraduate student expects a B- while graduate students expect a B+ (Schwartz, 2009). This expectation sometimes leads to disappointment and anger if they do not get what they thought they should.
Perception vs. Market Performance
One problem with giving into student demands is that eventually reality will hit the student in ways they don’t foresee. At some point, they will need to show their mastery of the material and will experience serious disappointment from job loss, lack of forthcoming opportunities, and inability to overcome challenges. Today’s false perception of their performance can lead to serious job market consequences tomorrow.
An employer may consider the merits of hiring a student on the honor roll but will become disappointed with the value of the degree if the student has lower performance than expected. The problem of high grades with low performance becomes a detriment that can take students years to figure out once they reflect on their failures. The costs to the employer and the student can be substantial.
Reserving the Independence of Faculty
There is no doubt there are good and bad faculty. Faculty should be held accountable when they are miserably not engaged in the educational process but should not be held accountable for student misperceptions of grades. Faculty evaluations should have only a limited amount of performance influence as they can at times be conduits to express anger stemming from disappointment than an actual reflection of teaching quality.
Peer reviews should weigh higher on these evaluations as they offer a better reflection of performance. This doesn’t mean that student evaluations are not important but that they sometimes don’t reflect accurately the job that high performing professors are doing. Peer reviews offer a method of seeing if the professor is actively engaged in the learning process from the perspective of people with industry knowledge.
It is better to use a battery of measurements that include peer reviews, student evaluations, basic class metrics (i.e. postings, engagement, etc...), and quality of content to evaluate professors. If the goal is to create more accurate assessments than a well-rounded report with multiple measurements may get a better total picture. Each university will need to determine if that "accurate picture" is worth the time and cost.
Setting the Tone Right From the First Day
Universities should stand by their commitment to high quality learning to create relevance in the modern market which will be the truest judge of performance. Student disappointment is often a result of misperceptions fed by grade inflating, misinterpretation of the value of grades, and the overall academic culture. Students should consistently be told they need to earn their grades and must challenge their existing assumptions to move to higher states of adaptive learning.
Forcing students to reach higher levels of performance should be a fundamental goal. A’s should be difficult to obtain and a valid measure of actual performance. The average student should be in the C and B range with areas of improvement apparent. Continually pushing students to get better may create frustration but often leads to higher long-term performance. If the student see where they can improve it is up to the professor to show them. Rescuing students from drowning themselves in the misperceptions of what is needed to be successful in life may be one of the most valuable higher education lessons.
Caruth, D. & Caruth, G. (2013). Grade inflation: an issue for higher education? Journal of Distance Education, 14 (1).
Schwartz, D. (2009). The impact of more rigorous grading on instructor evaluations: a longitudinal study, 2 (1).
Its easy to give high grades when the benefits significantly outweigh the costs of holding students accountable for learning. Professors mentioned that grade inflation is a result of poor student evaluations, poor student-teacher relationships, financial aid requirements, and excessively high student expectations (Caruth & Caruth, 2013). Giving accurate grades comes with internal and external pressure to lower the standards.
On the first day, students walk/ log into a class with preconceived expectations of what grade they should have regardless of their actual performance. Based upon studies of undergraduate and graduate students the average undergraduate student expects a B- while graduate students expect a B+ (Schwartz, 2009). This expectation sometimes leads to disappointment and anger if they do not get what they thought they should.
Perception vs. Market Performance
One problem with giving into student demands is that eventually reality will hit the student in ways they don’t foresee. At some point, they will need to show their mastery of the material and will experience serious disappointment from job loss, lack of forthcoming opportunities, and inability to overcome challenges. Today’s false perception of their performance can lead to serious job market consequences tomorrow.
An employer may consider the merits of hiring a student on the honor roll but will become disappointed with the value of the degree if the student has lower performance than expected. The problem of high grades with low performance becomes a detriment that can take students years to figure out once they reflect on their failures. The costs to the employer and the student can be substantial.
Reserving the Independence of Faculty
There is no doubt there are good and bad faculty. Faculty should be held accountable when they are miserably not engaged in the educational process but should not be held accountable for student misperceptions of grades. Faculty evaluations should have only a limited amount of performance influence as they can at times be conduits to express anger stemming from disappointment than an actual reflection of teaching quality.
Peer reviews should weigh higher on these evaluations as they offer a better reflection of performance. This doesn’t mean that student evaluations are not important but that they sometimes don’t reflect accurately the job that high performing professors are doing. Peer reviews offer a method of seeing if the professor is actively engaged in the learning process from the perspective of people with industry knowledge.
It is better to use a battery of measurements that include peer reviews, student evaluations, basic class metrics (i.e. postings, engagement, etc...), and quality of content to evaluate professors. If the goal is to create more accurate assessments than a well-rounded report with multiple measurements may get a better total picture. Each university will need to determine if that "accurate picture" is worth the time and cost.
Setting the Tone Right From the First Day
Universities should stand by their commitment to high quality learning to create relevance in the modern market which will be the truest judge of performance. Student disappointment is often a result of misperceptions fed by grade inflating, misinterpretation of the value of grades, and the overall academic culture. Students should consistently be told they need to earn their grades and must challenge their existing assumptions to move to higher states of adaptive learning.
Forcing students to reach higher levels of performance should be a fundamental goal. A’s should be difficult to obtain and a valid measure of actual performance. The average student should be in the C and B range with areas of improvement apparent. Continually pushing students to get better may create frustration but often leads to higher long-term performance. If the student see where they can improve it is up to the professor to show them. Rescuing students from drowning themselves in the misperceptions of what is needed to be successful in life may be one of the most valuable higher education lessons.
Caruth, D. & Caruth, G. (2013). Grade inflation: an issue for higher education? Journal of Distance Education, 14 (1).
Schwartz, D. (2009). The impact of more rigorous grading on instructor evaluations: a longitudinal study, 2 (1).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)