Currently I am in US on a business trip. Got a chance to be here on a weekend and watch the Baseball World Series (!!). That triggered off this post.
If we keep aside the sports part and look at business face of it; we will be surprised to see how American Capitalism is playing a major role in sports as well. Sports business has really matured in America, where all players deal through their professional agents for the contracts.
There are two parts of it, one is professional agents in sports and another is corporate world’s involvement in these sports.
In a way, it is good for players. Their agents can take care about money and team a player needs to play, leaving players to concentrate on the game. In this way, they need not worry about the contract details. An agent’s main aim is to sell the players in his portfolio for more money.
These agents also guide the players in terms of career, about the care they need to take about their fitness, the public image they need to build, the social service they need to do in order to stay afloat. This kind of advice will certainly help players to be in the game for longer time.
Mark McCormick is supposed to be founding father of this kind of sports business, where his consulting company guided players like Bon Borge, Martina Navratilova, Jimmy Conners etc.
Each ball club is managed by a professional management team, led by their CEO. His ultimate aim is to generate more revenue for the ball club. So, they will hire more good players with the idea that if players are good, team will advance to next stage of the game (Like Semi final, Final etc) and thus brining more people to watch, which is nothing but more revenue. Such times these ball clubs and CEOs are under pressure to perform, so does the coaches. Coaches needs to take the ball club in to newer heights, otherwise their jobs will be at stake.
The point what we need to note is, American sports runs as any other business. And we can see the American management effect; like being ruthless, expecting results and generating more revenue, in all sports.
Compare this to India; the Subhash Chandra’s ICL has some elements of it, but yet to see how this gets shaped up. But, this is certainly a good change, it is just a beginning.
It is any way better than having out-of-the-form players getting selected based on number of years of experience he/she has, or because of he/she belongs to particular state.
What do you say?
(Don’t take me wrong, I am not against any player, I don’t follow Cricket :-)
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Sunday, October 21, 2007
The man who rewrote the supply chain concept-Michael Dell
I got a new Laptop, as my earlier IBM Lenovo got screwed up. The new one is sleek, Dell made, D630; boots and works faster!
This new one really made me to think about Dell Inc and the man behind its remarkable success, Michael Dell. Michael Dell came up with an innovating idea of selling directly to customers and thus redefining the supply chain concept. Its very hard business plan to reproduce and I guess this was Dell's USP when it started its business, in the area where there were established players like IBM, HP, and Compaq.
In 1994, Dell was a struggling second-tier PC maker. Like other PC makers, Dell ordered its components in advance and carried a large amount of component inventory. If its forecasts were wrong, Dell had major write-downs. Then Dell began to implement a new business model. Its operations had always featured a build-to-order process with direct sales to customers, but Dell took a series of ingenious steps to eliminate its inventories. The results were spectacular.
Over a four-year period, Dell's revenues grew from $2 billion to $16 billion, a 50 percent annual growth rate.
Profitability management, coordinating a company's day-to-day activities through careful forethought and great management, was at the core of Dell's transformation in this critical period. Dell created a tightly aligned business model that enabled it to manage away the need for its component inventories.
However, at the heart of Dell's profitability management was a seemingly impossible dilemma: the company had adopted a build-to-order system, yet it had to commit to purchase key components sixty days in advance.
Profitability, not inventory
The inventory in a channel is determined by the variance in supply and the variance in demand. Unless these variances are reduced, channel inventory can only be moved around, not eliminated. I think of this as the "waterbed effect." When you sit on a waterbed, it sinks in one spot and bulges in another. The water is redistributed but the amount stays the same.
Through its use of profitability management, Dell matched supply and demand on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It sharply reduced the variance, and the need for inventories simply disappeared.
In many companies, inventory substitutes for profitability management, tying up valuable capital and preventing the company from focusing on day-to-day business alignment. In most companies, managers face a choice between managing inventory and managing away the need for it.
This principle can be implemented to any industry, even to Software industry. We also deal with inventory, supply and demand.
By the way, are we managing profitability or inventory in our group? If the answer is profitability, we can have our cake and eat it too! If not, how we can improve?
This new one really made me to think about Dell Inc and the man behind its remarkable success, Michael Dell. Michael Dell came up with an innovating idea of selling directly to customers and thus redefining the supply chain concept. Its very hard business plan to reproduce and I guess this was Dell's USP when it started its business, in the area where there were established players like IBM, HP, and Compaq.
In 1994, Dell was a struggling second-tier PC maker. Like other PC makers, Dell ordered its components in advance and carried a large amount of component inventory. If its forecasts were wrong, Dell had major write-downs. Then Dell began to implement a new business model. Its operations had always featured a build-to-order process with direct sales to customers, but Dell took a series of ingenious steps to eliminate its inventories. The results were spectacular.
Over a four-year period, Dell's revenues grew from $2 billion to $16 billion, a 50 percent annual growth rate.
Profitability management, coordinating a company's day-to-day activities through careful forethought and great management, was at the core of Dell's transformation in this critical period. Dell created a tightly aligned business model that enabled it to manage away the need for its component inventories.
However, at the heart of Dell's profitability management was a seemingly impossible dilemma: the company had adopted a build-to-order system, yet it had to commit to purchase key components sixty days in advance.
Profitability, not inventory
The inventory in a channel is determined by the variance in supply and the variance in demand. Unless these variances are reduced, channel inventory can only be moved around, not eliminated. I think of this as the "waterbed effect." When you sit on a waterbed, it sinks in one spot and bulges in another. The water is redistributed but the amount stays the same.
Through its use of profitability management, Dell matched supply and demand on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It sharply reduced the variance, and the need for inventories simply disappeared.
In many companies, inventory substitutes for profitability management, tying up valuable capital and preventing the company from focusing on day-to-day business alignment. In most companies, managers face a choice between managing inventory and managing away the need for it.
This principle can be implemented to any industry, even to Software industry. We also deal with inventory, supply and demand.
By the way, are we managing profitability or inventory in our group? If the answer is profitability, we can have our cake and eat it too! If not, how we can improve?
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Fit To Be A Effective Leader
I am a firm believer of the fact that leaders should have a high energy level, which generally reflect how they interact with customers and employees.
Its vital to have a very positive body language.
I was reading an article about how keeping fit is important for leaders. This business week article gives some examples and concludes how it would help you to become a better communicator.
So, one needs to start hitting the treadmill
Its vital to have a very positive body language.
I was reading an article about how keeping fit is important for leaders. This business week article gives some examples and concludes how it would help you to become a better communicator.
So, one needs to start hitting the treadmill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
