麦肯锡咨询报告原版Impact of

Enhancing the Impact of your ReportSummaryA report summary is a crucial part of any document as it provides a brief overview of the key points and findings to the reader. In order to enhance the impact of your report summary, there are several key strategies that can be implemented.First and foremost, it is essential to ensure that the summary is clear, concise, and well-organized. The purpose of a report summary is to provide the reader with a quick understanding of the main points of the report without having to read the entire document. Therefore, it is important to summarize the key findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a clear and succinct manner.Additionally, it is important to tailor the summary to the target audience. Consider who will be reading the report and what information will be most important to them. This will help you prioritize the key points to include in the summary and ensure that it is relevant and engaging to the reader.Another important aspect of enhancing the impact of your report summary is to use visual aids and graphics to help communicate the information. Charts, graphs, and tables can help to illustrate key data points and make complex information more digestible for the reader. Visual aids can also help to break up the text and make the summary more visually appealing.Furthermore, it is important to highlight the main takeaways and implications of the report in the summary. This will help to emphasize the significance of the findings and recommendations and make it easier for the reader to understand the report's importance.In conclusion, enhancing the impact of your report summary involves creating a clear, concise, and well-organized summary that is tailored to the target audience, uses visual aids to communicate information, and highlights the main takeaways and implications of the report. By implementing these strategies, you can ensure that yourreport summary effectively communicates the key points and findings of your report and leaves a lasting impact on the reader.。

大数据：创新、竞争和生产力的下一个前沿（原文翻译）麦肯锡在2011年5月发布了一个关于大数据方面的报告：《Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity》，虽然是6年前的报告，但是今天读来，还是非常用指导意义。

报告分为两个版本，一个是概要版20页，一个是完整版156页。

正好最近看了一遍概要版，觉得收益甚大。

所以试着翻译一下，仅供参考。

标题：Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity译文：大数据：创新、竞争和生产力的下一个前沿第二页是关于MGI（麦肯锡全球研究院）的介绍，就不翻译了。

略。

Data have become a torrent flowing into every area of the global economy. 1 Companies churn out a burgeoning volume of transactional data, capturing trillions of bytes of information about their customers, suppliers, and operations. millions of networked sensors are being embedded in the physical world in devices such as mobile phones, smart energy meters, automobiles, and industrial machines that sense, create, and communicate data in the age of the Internet of Things. 2 Indeed, as companies and organizations go about their business and interact with individuals, they are generating a tremendous amount of digital“exhaust data,”i.e., data that are created as a by-product of other activities. Social media sites, smartphones, and other consumer devices including PCs and laptops have allowed billions of individuals around the world to contribute to the amount of big data available. And the growing volume of multimedia content has played a major role in the exponential growth in the amount of big data (see Box 1, “What do we mean by ‘big data’?”). Each second of high-definition video, for example, generates more than 2,000 times as many bytes as required to store a single page of text. In a digitized world, consumers going about their day—communicating, browsing, buying, sharing, searching—create their own enormous trails of data.译文：数据已成为流入全球经济各个领域的激流。

麦肯锡案例面试题：Great Burger 案例分析(英文，有答案)Practice CasesGreat BurgerIntroductionTo step through this case example, we will give you some information, ask a question, and then, when you are ready, give you a sample answer. We hope that the exercise will give you a sense of the flow of a case interview. (Please note, you can stop this exercise and pick up where you left off later. Your cookies must be on to usethis feature).In this exercise, you will answer a series of questions as the case unfolds. We provide our recommended answers after each question, with which you can compare your own answers. We want to emphasize that most questions in a case study do not have a single right answer. In a live case interview, we are more interested in your explanation of how you arrived at your answer, not just the answer itself. An interviewer can always assess different but equally valid ways of approaching an issue, and then bring you back to the particular line of inquiry that he or shewants to pursue.You should also keep in mind that in a live case, there will be far more interaction with the interviewer than this exercise allows. For example, you will have theopportunity to ask clarifying questions.Finally, a live case interview would typically be completed in 30 - 45 minutes, depending on how the case evolves. In this on-line exercise, there is no time limit.There are six questions in this on-line case study. This case study is designed to roughly simulate one during your interview, so you will not be able to skip ahead to the next question until you have answered the one you are on. You can refresh your memory of previous answers by clicking the highlighted Q&A links to the left. To print the answer, click on the print icon that appears in the TOP RIGHT corner.At the end, you can print the entire on-line case study at once.Start Case Study=============================================================================================================Client Goal: Should Great Burger acquire Heavenly Donuts as part of its growthstrategy?Our client is Great Burger (GB) a fast food chain that competes head–to-head with McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, KFC, etc.Description of Great BurgerGB is the fourth largest fast food chain worldwide, measured by the number of stores in operation. As most of its competitors do, GB offers food and "combos" for the three largest meal occasions: breakfast, lunch, and dinner.Even though GB owns some of its stores, it operates under the franchising business model with 85 percent of its stores owned by franchisees (individuals own and manage stores, pay franchise fee to GB, but major business decisions (e.g., menu, lookof store) controlled by GB).McKinsey studyAs part of its growth strategy GB has analyzed some potential acquisition targets including Heavenly Donuts (HD), a growing doughnut producer with both a U.S. andinternational store presence.HD operates under the franchising business model too, though a little bit differently than GB. While GB franchises restaurants, HD franchises areas or regions in which the franchisee is required to open a certain number of stores.GB's CEO has hired McKinsey to advise him on whether they should acquire HD or not.QUESTION 1What areas would you want to explore to determine whether GB should acquire HD?ANSWER 1Some possible areas are given below. Great job if you identified several of theseand perhaps others.∙Stand alone value of HD∙Growth in market for doughnuts∙HD's past and projected future sales growth (break down intogrowth in number of stores, and growth in same store sales) ∙Competition – are there any other major national chainsthat are doing better than HD in terms of growth/profit. Whatdoes this imply for future growth?∙Profitability/profit margin∙Capital required to fund growth (capital investment to opennew stores, working capital)Synergies/strategic fit∙Brand quality similar? Would they enhance or detract fromeach other if marketed side by side?∙How much overlap of customer base? (very little overlapmight cause concern that brands are not compatible, too muchmight imply little room to expand sales by cross-marketing) ∙Synergies (Hint: do not dive deep on this, as it will becovered later)Management team/cultural fit∙Capabilities/skills of top, middle management∙Cultural fit, if very different, what percent of keymanagement would likely be able to adjustAbility to execute merger/combine companies∙GB experience with mergers in past/experience inintegrating companies∙Franchise structure differences. Detail “dive” intofranchising structures. Would these different structuresaffect the deal? Can we manage two different franchisingstructures at the same time?=============================================================================================================The team started thinking about potential synergies that could be achieved by acquiring HD. Here are some key facts on GB and HD.QUESTION 2What potential synergies can you think of between GB and HD?ANSWER 2We are looking for a few responses similar to the ones below:∙Lower costs∙Biggest opportunity likely in corporate selling, general, and administrative expenses (SG&A) by integrating corporatemanagement∙May be some opportunity to lower food costs with larger purchasing volume on similar food items (e.g., beverages,deep frying oil), however overlaps may be low as ingredientsare very different∙GB appears to have an advantage in property and equipment costs which might be leveragable to HD (e.g., superiorskills in lease negotiation)Increase revenues∙Sell doughnuts in GB stores, or some selected GB productsin HD stores∙GB has much greater international presence thus likely hasknowledge/skills to enable HD to expand outside of NorthAmerica∙GB may have superior skills in identifying attractivelocations for stores as its sales per store are higher thanindustry average, whereas HD's is lower than industryaverage; might be able to leverage this when opening new HDstores to increase HD average sales per store∙Expand HD faster than it could do on own–GB, as a largercompany with lower debt, may have better access to capital=============================================================================================================QUESTION 3The team thinks that with synergies, it should be possible to double HD’s U.S. market share in the next 5 years, and that GB’s access to capital will allow it to expand the number of HD stores by 2.5 times. What sales per store will HD require in 5 years in order for GB to achieve these goals? Use any data from Exhibit 1 you need, additionally, your interviewer would provide the following assumptions foryou:∙Doughnut consumption/capita in the U.S. is $10/year today, and isprojected to grow to $20/year in 5 years.∙For ease of calculation, assume U.S. population is 300m.ANSWER 3You should always feel free to ask your interviewer additional questions to helpyou with your response.Possible responses might include the following:∙Market share today: $700M HD sales (from Exhibit 1) ÷ $3B U.S. market ($10 x 300M people) = 23% (round to 25% for simplicity sake)∙U.S. market in 5 years = $20 x 300 = $6B∙HD sales if double market share: 50% x $6B = $3B∙Per store sales: $3B/2.5 (1000 stores) = $1.2MDoes this seem reasonable?∙Yes, given it implies less than double same store sales growth and percapita consumption is predicted to double.=============================================================================================================QUESTION 4One of the synergies that the team thinks might have a big potential is the idea of increasing the businesses' overall profitability by selling doughnuts in GB stores. How would you assess the profitability impact of this synergy?ANSWER 4Be sure you can clearly explain how the assessment you are proposing would helpto answer the question posed.Some possible answers include:∙Calculate incremental revenues by selling doughnuts in GB stores(calculate how many doughnuts per store, times price per doughnut, timesnumber of GB stores)∙Calculate incremental costs by selling doughnuts in GB stores (costs of production, incremental number of employees, employee training,software changes, incremental marketing and advertising, incrementalcost of distribution if we cannot produce doughnuts in house, etc.) ∙Calculate incremental investments. Do we need more space in each store if we think we are going to attract new customers? Do we need to invest in store layout to have in-house doughnut production?∙If your answer were to take into account cannibalization, what would be the rate of cannibalization with GB offerings? Doughnut cannibalization will be higher with breakfast products than lunch anddinner products, etc.∙One way to calculate this cannibalization is to look at historiccannibalization rates with new product/offering launchings within GBstores∙Might also cannibalize other HD stores if they are nearby GB store–could estimate this impact by seeing historical change in HD’s sales whencompetitor doughnut store opens nearby=============================================================================================================QUESTION 5What would be the incremental profit per store if we think we are going to sell 50,000 doughnuts per store at a price of $2 per doughnut at a 60 percent margin with a cannibalization rate of 10 percent of GB's sales?ANSWER 5While you may find that doing straightforward math problems in the context of an interview is a bit tougher, you can see that it is just a matter of breaking the problem down. We are looking at both your ability to set the analysis up properlyand then do the math in real time.Based on correct calculations, your response should be as follows: Incremental profit = contribution from HD sales less contribution lost due tocannibalized GB sales= 50K units x $2/unit x 60% margin – 300K units x 10% cannibalization x $3/unitx 50% margin= $60K – 45K = 15K incremental profit/store=============================================================================================================QUESTION 6You run into the CEO of GB in the hall. He asks you to summarize McKinsey’s perspective so far on whether GB should acquire HD. Pretend the interviewer is theCEO–what would you say?ANSWER 6You may have a slightly different list. Whatever your approach, we love to see candidates come at a problem in more than one way, but still address the issue asdirectly and practically as possible.Answers may vary, but here is an example of a response:∙Early findings lead us to believe acquiring HD would create significantvalue for GB, and that GB should acquire HD∙Believe can add $15 thousand in profit per GB store byselling HD in GB stores. This could mean $50 million inincremental profit for North American stores (whereimmediate synergies are most likely given HD has littlebrand presence in rest of world)∙We also believe there are other potential revenue and costsynergies that the team still needs to quantify Once the team has quantified the incremental revenues, cost savings,and investments, we will make a recommendation on the price you shouldbe willing to payWe will also give you recommendations on what it will take to integratethe two companies in order to capture the potential revenue and cost savings, and also to manage the different franchise structures and potentially different cultures of GB and HD。

This article was downloaded by: [Zhejiang University]On: 09 May 2015, At: 20:22Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UKClick for updatesInternational Journal of Production ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:/loi/tprs20The impact of supply chain analytics on operational performance: a resource-based viewBongsug (Kevin) Chae a, David Olson b& Chwen Sheuaa Department of Management, Kansas State University , Manhattan, KS, USAbCollege of Business Administration, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA Published online: 04 Dec 2013.PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLEThe impact of supply chain analytics on operational performance:a resource-based viewBongsug (Kevin)Chae a ,David Olson b and Chwen Sheu a *aDepartment of Management,Kansas State University,Manhattan,KS,USA;b College of Business Administration,University ofNebraska at Lincoln,Lincoln,NE,USA(Received 22September 2012;accepted 27October 2013)This study seeks to better understand the role of supply chain analytics (SCA)on supply chain planning satisfaction and operational performance.We de fine the architecture of SCA as the integration of three sets of resources,data management resources (DMR),IT-enabled planning resources and performance management resources (PMR),from the perspective of a resource-based view.Based on the data collected from 537manufacturing plants,we test hypotheses exploring the relationships among these resources,supply chain planning satisfaction,and operational performance.Our analysis supports that DMR should be considered a key building block of manufacturers ’business analytics initiatives for supply chains.The value of data is transmitted to outcome values through increasing supply chain planning and performance capabilities.Additionally,the deployment of advanced IT-enabled planning resources occurs after acquisition of DMR.Manufacturers with sophisticated planning technologies are likely to take advantage of data-driven processes and quality control practices.DMR are found to be a stronger predictor of PMR than IT planning resources.All three sets of resources are related to supply chain planning satisfaction and operational performance.The paper concludes by reviewing research limitations and suggesting further SCA research issues.Keywords:manufacturing management;supply chain management;data mining1.IntroductionFirms are under heavy pressure to improve supply chain planning and performance because of factors such as increasing uncertainty and competition.Manufacturers have adopted a variety of innovative technological and process-based solutions to obtain and sustain competitive advantage over their competitors.In supply chain management,there is growing interest in business analytics,which is also called supply chain analytics (SCA).SCA refers to the use of data and quantitative tools and techniques to improve operational performance,often indicated by such metrics as order ful filment and flexibility,in supply chain management (Hand field 2006;Davis-Sramek,Germain,and Iyer 2010;Davenport and O ’dwyer 2011;O ’dwyer and Renner 2011).There are numerous cases of successful SCA implementation by leading firms.For example,Proctor &Gamble and Walmart are reported to have signi ficantly improved operational ef ficiency through the use of data and analytical IT tools for supply chain decisions (Davenport and Harris 2007;Davenport and O ’dwyer 2011;O ’Dwyer and Renner 2011;SAS 2012).Tesco,one of the world ’s largest retailers,based in the UK,has experienced signi ficant cost savings through SCA over the years (Clark 2013).Analytics in SCM is not necessarily a new idea (Davenport and O ’dwyer 2011),since various quantitative techniques and modelling methods have long been used in manufacturing firms (Turban and Sepehri 1986;Shapiro 2000;Kusiak 2006;Trkman et al.2010).The recent surge of interest in SCA is accompanied by new challenges and opportunities in both business and information technology (IT)environments.These challenges include issues arising from managing large amounts of data (e.g.data availability and data quality)and dealing with environmental uncertainties (Hand field and Nichols 2004;Liberatore and Luo 2010;Huner et al.2011;Lavalle et al.2011;Manyika et al.2011).First,IT-based innovations have generated and captured ‘more data while also changing the nature of businesses ’(Kohli and Grover 2008,32).For instance,a leading consumer goods firm (Li &Fung)reported the flow of over 100gigabytes of data through the firm ’s supply chain network on a given day in 2009(Economist 2010).The opportunity to gain competitive advantage may thus arise from how firms manage data (Vosburg and Kumar 2001;Forslund and Jonsson 2007;Oliva and Watson 2011).Another major challenge for businesses is the increasing uncertainty in both demand (e.g.consumer market)and supply sides of their businesses.Dealing with demand and supply uncertainty by*Corresponding author.Email:csheu@©2013Taylor &FrancisInternational Journal of Production Research ,2014V ol.52,No.16,4695–4710,/10.1080/00207543.2013.861616D o w n l o a d e d b y [Z h e j i a n g U n i v e r s i t y ] a t 20:22 09 M a y 2015means of proper supply chain planning has been a major theme in many recent SCM studies (Oliva and Watson 2011;Demirkan and Delen 2012).In response to those challenges,SCA has been proposed as a promising approach to better manage data,utilise IT resources and prepare for effective supply chain planning (Hand field 2006;Davenport,Harris,and Morison 2010;Davis-Sramek,Germain,and Iyer 2010;Viswanathan and Sadlovska 2010).This new generation of analytic tools can develop a firm ’s IT and data management capabilities to enhance planning and improve operational performance (Kohli and Grover 2008;Shapiro 2010;Mithas,Ramasubbu,and Sambamurthy 2011).It is suggested that firms can use SCA from data acquisition (e.g.RFID)and repository (e.g.ERP)technologies to improve supply chain planning through IT-enabled planning and scheduling systems (Davenport and O ’dwyer 2011;O ’dwyer and Renner 2011).To date,however,there has been very limited empirical research in this data-driven innovative approach to SCM.SCA research is in its early stage and there is a general lack of theory and of empirical ing the resource-based view (RBV)as the theoretical base,this study expands the understanding of components and performance of SCA.The principal idea of the RBV is that the competitive advantage of a firm lies in its heterogeneous resources,which are valuable,inimitable and non-substitutable (Barney 1991).(Please see Armstrong and Shimzu 2007;Newbert 2007for a more comprehensive review of empirical research using RBV).Accordingly,we develop a theoretical per-spective on SCA as a valuable,inimitable and non-substitutable resource in manufacturing contexts that can be a source of sustained competitive advantage.SCA is a combination of three sets of data and IT-enabled SCM resources,which we refer to as data management resources (DMR),IT-based supply chain planning resources (IPR)and performance management resources (PMR)(Figure 1).Manufacturing firms acquire and use various IT and organisational resources (ORs)in these three aspects of SCA.Firms use diverse analytical and IT resources for acquiring,storing and retrieving data.DMR includes IT-related resources (e.g.RFID and ERP)and analytical capabilities (e.g.mathematical optimization techniques)for data acquisition and management.Also,different software tools (or IPR),from less sophisticated to more advanced,are used for supply chain planning in manufacturers.IPR represents these IT resources (e.g.advanced plan-ning systems)embedding various optimization and predictive analytics (e.g.mathematical programming and statistical analysis).Manufacturers put different degrees of investment in the use of data-oriented process and performance improvement methodologies such as statistical process control and Six Sigma,which are considered PMR.In this study,these three sets of analytics and IT resources are viewed as complementary,enabling each other.This perspective is developed with reference to the RBV theory,which acknowledges that resources are important for com-petitive advantage and,in particular,IT-related resources become more effective when combined with non-IT-related resources as complementarities.This study tests hypotheses exploring the relationships among those three dimensions of SCA and the link between SCA and user satisfaction of supply chain planning and SCM performance (e.g.reliability and flexibility).A major contribution of this study is that it offers empirical findings on the relatively new topic of businesses ’use of SCA.Particularly,the study ’s findings shed light on the importance of three sets of complementary IT-enabled resources for successfully taking advantage of business analytics for SCM,the signi ficant role of DMR as the key building block of SCA and the positive impact of SCA on operational performance.Section 2reviews relevant literature pertaining to SCA.Three types of IT and ORs are introduced from the RBV perspective.In Section 3,the research model is developed with the hypotheses of the relationships among types of resources and performance variables.The research methodology,including samples and measurements,is discussed in Section 4,followed by the presentation of statistical results in Section 5.Section 6discusses results,and Section 7concludes with managerial implications,research limitations and suggestions for future research.Data management resources (DMR)IT-ased supply chain planning resources (IPR)Performance managementresources (PMR)Operational PerformanceSupply Chain AnalyticsFigure 1.Conceptual model.4696B.Chae et al.D o w n l o a d e d b y [Z h e j i a n g U n i v e r s i t y ] a t 20:22 09 M a y 20152.Theoretical background2.1Resource-based viewThe RBV holds that resources vary across firms,and differences in resource levels that persist over time enable firms to sustain competitive advantage (Penrose 1959;Wernerfelt 1984;Barney 1991).Under RBV,various technological and organisational practices can be considered resources for acquiring sustained competitive advantage.For instance,organisational knowledge,managerial skills,backend integration,technology and manufacturing facilities are viewed as manufacturer resources (Dong,Xu,and Zhu 2009).Also,diverse SCM-related activities and practices (e.g.supply manage-ment practices and environmental management practices)are considered important resources for improving operational performance (Narasimhan and Schoenherr 2012;Blome,Schoenherr,and Rexhausen 2013).IT is often viewed as a firm resource in the RBV framework (Barney 1991;Wade and Hulland 2004)to create sustained competitive advantage (Barney 1991).Recent studies have studied the role of other resources as complemen-tarities in the effects of IT on firm performance (Powell and Dent-Micallef 1997;Tippins and Sohi 2003;Wade and Hulland 2004;Jeffers,Muhanna,and Nault 2008;Kohli and Grover 2008).Speci fically,IT becomes an effective firm resource when it is complemented by other resources or practices (Powell and Dent-Micallef 1997;Tippins and Sohi 2003;Nevo and Wade 2010).Kohli and Grover (2008,26)argued that ‘IT,as simply hardware and software tools,does not create value in isolation,but must be a part of a business value creating process with ‘other ’IT and organisational factors operating in a synergistic manner ’.These ‘other ’IT and organisational factors are called complementarities.The interaction of IT and complementarities would lead to competitive advantage (Wade and Hulland 2004).2.2Supply chain analyticsThe emergence of new terms,such as SCA,re flects a broad interest in leveraging the business value of supply chain data and harnessing the power of various analytical technologies and methods.Top performing companies are better at utilising their data for business planning and execution (Kiron et al.2011;Lavalle et al.2011)and this has led to the increase in supply chain integration and visibility (Viswanathan and Sadlovska 2010;O ’dwyer and Renner 2011).In general,academic research expects the bene fits of analytics in supporting supply chain operations (Trkman et al.2010;Davenport and O ’dwyer 2011).Manufacturers have used statistical modelling and optimization (Turban and Sepehri 1986;Shapiro 2000;Chellappa,Sambamurthy,and Saraf 2010;Davenport and O ’dwyer 2011)to help deal with supply chain problems (e.g.inventory optimization)on an ad hoc basis.However,the role that SCA plays,regarding both supply and demand factors,is growing in importance and deserves more thorough investigation.Demand factors include the massive amount of data generated from manufacturing activities and customer and supplier interaction,growing competition and uncertainty,and the need for enterprise-level planning on a daily or regular basis.Supply factors include powerful IT for data management and supply chain planning and advanced data-driven techniques for better process and quality control.2.3A RBV of SCAIn this study,firm resources (e.g.IT)as a source of sustained competitive advantage are used to conceptualise SCA,to test the relationships between different SCA-related resources and to predict their impact on supply chain planning satisfaction and operational performance.Theoretically,IT-enabled resource is an RBV-based construct and is supplemented with concepts from systems theory (Nevo and Wade 2010;Nevo and Wade 2011).The concept,de fined as ‘a system (or a subsystem,depending on one ’s perspective)comprised of an IT asset and an OR in a relationship ’(Nevo and Wade 2011,405),postulates IT assets as a potential resource for competitive advantage.This conceptual framework asserts that such potential can be realised when IT is integrated with other resources (Nevo and Wade 2010).Analytics,in general,does not refer to a particular technology,method or practice (Davenport,Harris,and Morison 2010;Trkman et al.2010;Turban et al.2011).Rather,it is a combination of multiple IT-enabled resources,which includes both IT assets and ORs,helping the use of ‘data,analytical IT,and fact-based management methodologies ’(Davenport and Harris 2007)in decision-making.Therefore,SCA is viewed as a combination of IT-enabled resources for manufacturing-related data management,supply chain planning and data-driven process and quality improvement.It is a data-driven,analytical decision-making approach to SCM supported by IT resources for data management,supply chain planning and evidence-based management methodologies.These IT-enabled resources would include enterprise IT infrastructure (e.g.ERP and RFID)and analytical methods for data management,technologies embedding optimization and predictive analytics (e.g.mathematical programming)for supply chain planning,and data-driven supply chain ORsInternational Journal of Production Research 4697D o w n l o a d e d b y [Z h e j i a n g U n i v e r s i t y ] a t 20:22 09 M a y 2015(e.g.statistical process control,Six Sigma)for improving manufacturing processes and performance.We give general de finitions of three types of SCA IT-enabled resources:DMR:Data has long been recognised as a critical asset for organisations (Marchand,Kettinger,and Rollins 2000).The information processing view asserts that ‘the greater the uncertainty of the task,the greater the amount of information that has to be processed between decision makers during task execution in order to achieve a given level of performance ’(Galbraith 1974,28).Thus,data management becomes critical for firm performance and IT serves as the infrastructure for data capture,manipulation and redistribution (Fairbank et al.2006).DMR represents the firm ’s IT resources for such activities as data acquisition,storage and retrieval.For example,ERP is an IT resource and serves as an integrated,single-instance database for ef ficient data management providing integrated data for manufacturing planning and control (Su and Yang 2010).Analytic techniques and methods can also be used to generate important manufactur-ing data or master data (e.g.lead time and batch size).Data management is an important dimension in the quality/process management literature (Flynn,Schroeder,and Sakakibara 1994;Nair 2006;Kaynak and Hartley 2008).IPR:IPR represents the IT resources embedding various optimization and predictive analytics,such as mathematical programming,simulation,statistical analysis and machine learning algorithms.These analytic techniques and methods are invaluable means for supply chain planning activities,such as master production planning,material requirements planning and capacity planning (Kreipl and Pinedo 2004;Stadtler 2005;V ollmann et al.2005;Hendricks,Singhal,and Stratman 2007).Supply chain planning software (e.g.Advanced Planning Scheduling)embed these analytics and also have the capability of accessing large data stores (Dehning,Richardson,and Zmud 2007).DMR is important for IPR since the data become inputs for supply chain planning.In general,the more sophisticated those technologies are,the more such analytic methods and data access capabilities are embedded (Singh 2003).PMR:While IPR is primarily used for supply chain planning;our use of PMR refers to the firm ’s resources focusing on closing the gap between planning and execution,through monitoring and correcting manufacturing processes and performance.This is another key area where analytical methods (and technolo-gies)can have positive impacts (Houghton et al.2004;Yang et al.2007;Turban et al.2011).PMR enables analytical thinking and fact-based management.These resources are data-driven SCM practices (Kannan and Tan 2005),often combined with performance metrics (Schroeder 2008),data visualisation of quality problems (Zu,Fredendall,and Douglas 2008)and analytical methods (Scheuermann,Zhu,and Scheuermann 1997).PMR becomes an integral component for SCA,since these ORs help monitor supply chain execution,control performance variability and improve the quality of planning and execution.These resources have been extensively surveyed in the literature (Rungtusanatham 2001;Shah and Ward 2003;Holweg 2007;Shah and Ward 2007;Schroeder 2008;Zu,Fredendall,and Douglas 2008),but with no focus on their data-oriented,analytical aspects.In summary,these three types of IT and ORs are related and synergistically affect supply chain planning,as well as SCM operational performance.In particular,DMR is expected to serve as the foundation of SCA,since IPR and PMR rely on data as inputs.Advanced IT resources for data management can enable the use of comprehensive and reliable data by IPR and PMR.However,these IT-enabled resources are complementary;DMR,IPR and PMR are not expected to drive performance individually,but,rather,they need to work together.3.Research model and hypothesesWhen SCA is viewed as a combination of IT-enabled resources,we expect there will be interactions among those elements (DMR,IPR,and PMR).Thus,we first consider three internal relationships:(H1)DMR are positively associated with IPR;(H2)DMR are positively associated with PMR;(H3)IPR are positively associated with PMR.Then,with two outcome latent variables –supply chain planning satisfaction and SCM operational performance –we explore the impact of SCA:(H4a)DMR are positively associated with supply chain planning satisfaction;(H4b)IPR are positively associated with supply chain planning satisfaction;(H4c)PMR are positively associated with supply chain planning satisfaction;(H5a)supply chain planning satisfaction are positively associated with SCM operational performance;and (H5b)PMR are positively associated with SCM operational performance.These hypotheses are presented in Figure 2.The remainder of this section provides the theoretical development of the research hypotheses.4698 B.Chae et al.D o w n l o a d e d b y [Z h e j i a n g U n i v e r s i t y ] a t 20:22 09 M a y 20153.1Linking IT-enabled resources of SCAManufacturing firms have different levels of IT-enabled resources for data management.Some firms possess advanced IT-enabled resources for data management,such as ERP and RFID,that can enable automatic data acquisition,high accuracy in manufacturing-related data quality,and easy data retrieval and use for SCM planning and control.For example,RFID offers many bene fits to supply chain management (Sellitto,Burgess,and Hawking 2007)and a major bene fit is data acquisition capability (Singh 2003;Delen,Hardgrave,and Sharda 2007).ERP is widely adopted as a centralised data repository (Bendoly 2003;Olson,Chae,and Sheu 2013).Some firms also use sophisticated mathematical models or analytical techniques to determine manufacturing-related master data (e.g.lead time).IPR involves processing a large volume of production,sales,delivery,and material data for effective planning and scheduling (Gustavsson and Wanstrom 2009;Dionne and Kempf 2011).A centralised corporate repository allows the same data to be used for all types of planning and helps such planning to correctly re flect the company ’s condition (Hendricks,Singhal,and Stratman 2007).Effective supply chain planning relies on ‘informational ’ef ficiency,meaning that data is collected,aggregated,and distributed for the planning process (Oliva and Watson 2011).Performance management practices or resources (PMR),such as quality management and Six Sigma,rely on manufacturers ’planning and execution data (Kannan and Tan 2005;Zu,Fredendall,and Douglas 2008).In other words,DMR can be a key contributor to PMR.As argued by Davenport,Harris,and Morison (2010,23):You cannot be analytical without data.Data are the basis for both supply chain planning and performance management.Supply chain planning relies on the availability of financial and operational data (Shapiro 2010;Oliva and Watson 2011).Thus,DMR are strongly required prior to IT-based supply chain resources (IPR).For example,IT-based resources for inventory control need to extract data from DMR such as ERP (Stadtler 2005;V ollmann et al.2005).Also,measuring and improving performance of quality and processes is not possible without access to properly managed data.Thus,quality data and reporting are important for and strongly associated with performance management (Kaynak and Hartley 2008;Mithas,Ramasubbu,and Sambamurthy 2011).Accordingly,we expect that DMR in fluences the adoptions of IPR and PMR:the adoption of advanced IPR and diverse PMR presupposes the existence of sophisticated DMR.H1.DMR positively affect IT-enabled supply chain planning resources (IPR).H2.DMR positively affect PMR.Manufacturers differ considerably in terms of their analytical capabilities used for supply chain planning activities,such as material planning,inventory control and shop floor control.Some manufacturers possess advanced planning technolo-gies,embedding optimization algorithms,data mining tools and so on.These analytics-embedded IT sources offer several bene fits,including reducing planning errors and potential disruption and increasing planning accuracy (Hendricks,Singhal,and Stratman 2007).While IPR might potentially lead to positive SCM outcomes,such as improved on-time delivery (Wu et al.2006),and financial outcomes,such as pro fitability (Hendricks,Singhal,and Stratman 2007),in the RBV of IT (Devaraj and Kohli 2003;Wade and Hulland 2004;Kohli and Grover 2008;Nevo and Wade 2010),their value is expected to be attained through complementary resources,PMR.Supply Chain AnalyticsData management resources (DMR)IT-based supply chain planning resources (IPR)Performance management resources (PMR)Supply chain planning satisfaction (SAT)SCM operational performance(SCP)H1H2H3H4aH4bH4cH5aH5bFigure 2.Research model.International Journal of Production Research4699D o w n l o a d e d b y [Z h e j i a n g U n i v e r s i t y ] a t 20:22 09 M a y 2015IPR in general increases visibility and coordination in manufacturing planning and control (Vollmann et al.2005).This stimulates firms to engage in sensing potential gaps between planning and execution and correcting errors in different areas.For example,IT-based planning reveals forecasting errors,overstocks and other issues,which require coordination to fix.As a result,IPR is expected to increase the need for performance management.Firms are likely to increase relevant resources for performance management.Among previous studies,Martinez-Lorente,Sanchez-Rodriguez,and Dewhurst (2004)suggested that IT resources are positively associated with supply chain practices,such as TQM.Thus,we posit thatH3.IT-enabled supply chain planning resources (IPR)positively affect PMR.3.2Relationships with outcome constructsThe impact of SCA on firm-level outcomes may be the result of both indirect and direct in fluences.The RBV of SCA indicates that DMR and IPR are more technological than organisational,while the opposite is true for PMR.Many RBV-based studies suggest that the impact of IT on performance is likely to be indirect,through non-IT factors or resources as complementary resources (Bharadwaj 2000;Wade and Hulland 2004;Devaraj,Krajewski,and Wei 2007;Jeffers,Muhanna,and Nault 2008;Nevo and Wade 2010).Therefore,we consider ‘supply chain planning satisfaction (SAT)’as an indicator for planning quality.Satisfaction is the level of favourable ‘attitude ’(Delone and Mclean 1992;Wixom and Todd 2005)toward supply chain planning.SAT is the measure for the perceived quality or performance of supply chain planning activities.Accordingly,we expect that each component of SCA positively in fluences supply chain planning satisfaction.IT resources,such as advanced data repository technology and supply chain planning software,are likely to in fluence the attitude toward supply chain planning.The literature shows that the quality of data and IT positively in fluences satisfaction,which in turn results in positive organisational impacts or bene fits (Delone and Mclean 1992;Wixom and Todd 2005;Petter and McLean 2009).In addition to DMC and IPR,process and performance management is important to the outcome of supply chain planning.The planning process is in fluential in supply chain planning performance (De Snoo,Wezel,and Jorna 2011).The implementation of data-driven performance practices has positive effects on planning quality,which in turn leads to operational improvement (De Leeuw and Van Den Berg 2011).As a result,we expect that DMR,IPR and PMR have positive impacts on supply chain planning satisfaction.H4a.DMR positively affect supply chain planning satisfaction (SAT).H4b.IT-enabled supply chain planning resources (IPR)positively affect supply chain planning satisfaction (SAT).H4c.PMR positively affect supply chain planning satisfaction (SAT).Finally,we expect that supply chain planning satisfaction and PMR positively affect SCM operational performance.DMR and IPR are mostly associated with the usage of information technology,and this leads us to consider their indirect impact on SCM performance.On the other hand,PMR represents more the data-driven,analytical SCM practices or methodolo-gies for improving SCM performance.Therefore,we expect a direct impact of PMR on SCM performance.For instance,studies show that the investment in quality and process improvement practices has positive effects on organisational or supply chain performance (SCP)(Merino-díaz De Cerio 2003).In addition,the literature suggests that satisfaction is linked with positive performance impacts on organisational bene fits (Delone and Mclean 1992;Petter and McLean 2009).H5a.Supply chain planning satisfaction (SAT)positively affects SCM operational performance (SCP).H5b.PMR positively affect SCM operational performance (SCP).4.Methodology 4.1Data collectionThe research data used in this paper were gathered by the Global Manufacturing Research Group (GMRG),an organisation of international academic researchers studying the effectiveness of manufacturing practices in the supply chain worldwide ( ).The GMRG developed its database using a common survey instrument for all countries.Standardised survey instruments are administered by the GMRG members in their respective countries.Rigorous translating and back-translating rounds were performed by multiple academics to ensure the equivalency,validity and reliability of the4700 B.Chae et al.D o w n l o a d e d b y [Z h e j i a n g U n i v e r s i t y ] a t 20:22 09 M a y 2015。

麦肯锡战略咨询报告_[全文]高层领导以事实及数据为基础，对业务单元的战略规划的各个方面提出质询XX业务单元战略规划他提出的这些战略设想是否真有新意,是否可行, 这个业务单元的领导层的目标是不是够高,雄心够不够大, 他对其业务单元短期内可采用的举措是否都已了解并做过分析, 他对其自身的竞争优势以及该优势的来源是否了解透彻, 他对其所处的行业可能出现的各种变化、发展是否都已经考虑周到, 这个业务单元领导层是否真有能力来实施这个方案, 他对提出的战略举措的实施时间表及资源需求是不是过于乐观, 他似乎对规划的内容不了解，很明显这个规划不是他主持做的，而是由规划部门“代笔”的～成功的战略规划的基本要素13></a>. 以经营单位为中心效益驱动高层领导的重视4. 由负责实施的人来领导5. 渗透到组织的各个级别之中6. 集中于良好的信息/事实基础7. 通过真正的对话来进行资料来源: 麦肯锡对销售增长稳定、利润业绩骄人的十大跨国公司的调查研讨会的内容战略规划与价值管理的关系战略规划的要素战略规划程序业务单元战略规划战略规划的主要工具三个战略分析方法分别用于战略规划中的三个重要环节内部竞争力分析战略制订财务预测市场环境分析组织结构及能力“五种力量对比”理论“SWOT”分析基于价值链的业务模型战略规划内容对市场环境分析的十分有用的“五种力量”理论决定供应商力量大小的主要因素所供应货品/服务的差别程度供应商变更成本是否存在替代品供应商的市场份额采购量对于供应商是否重要该供应货品/服务占总成本的比例该供应货品/服务对下游产品区别性的影响行业供应链上竖向一体化的趋势决定替代威胁性的主要因素替代品的价格转换成本买家对替代品的接受程度决定进入壁垒强弱的主要因素规模经济技术专长的多少品牌的强弱顾客转变成本是否资本密集获得分销渠道的难易成本优势的坚固程度现有厂家的行为特点决定买方力量大小的主要因素讨价还价能力相对市场份额数量转换成本信息竖向一体化的能力替代产品价格敏感性采购总量产品差异性品牌对质量感受的影响买方的利润决策者的动机决定行业内部竞争程度的主要因素行业增长速度固定成本/附加价值能力利用率产品差异程度品牌认知度转换成本市场份额的集中与平衡信息复杂度竞争者的背景退出成本2. 新玩家3. 买家4. 替代产品1. 供应商5. 行业内部竞争程度 SWOT分析把公司内部竞争力与外部环境结合起来机会/挑战供与求各将如何变化, 行业各环节的经济效益将如何变化造成行业剧变的潜在契机有那些,竞争对手将有什么举动, 中粮公司利用机会发挥优势对付威胁弥补弱点优势/弱点公司靠什么资产/能力来保持与加强目前的竞争地位,削弱公司竞争力的资产/能力有那些,可用来作内部能力评价和竞争分析从各种外部因素中找出潜在的机会与挑战基于价值链的业务模型概括了业务战略的各要素如何提高经营额和市场份额(损益表上部)价值定位理解价值需求选定目标选择价值产品和工艺流程设计采购制造提供价值交货和收费服务决定利益/价格比信息内容宣传价值广告促销及公关价值交付系统如何创造与交付产品和服务(损益表中部)如何销售(损益表下部)如何进行市场细分向目标市场提供什么与竞争对手不同的价值如何让客户认为他们付出的价钱是合理的如何以最低成本提供所承诺的价值如何获取所需的能力如何利用已有的能力提高单个行为的效率改善行为之间的协同性如何让客户理解我们的价值定位如何提升客户对于我们的价值感受如何把价值宣传变成竞争致胜的工具业务单元战略及业务计划要点 2. 内部竞争力分析2.1. 优势2.2. 劣势2.3. 机会2.4. 威胁3. 战略3.1. 使命和远景(为何)3.2. 产品和服务组合(何种)3.3. 价值定位3.4. 战略举措优先排序3.5. 成长阶段(何时)3.6.价值实现和能力获取(如何)3.7. 实施计划3.8. 机会及风险4. 财务预测4.1. 损益预测4.2. 现金流量预测4.3. 敏感性分析5. 组织结构要求组织结构概述1. 市场及竞争环境1.1. 市场供应1.2. 进入壁垒1.3. 市场需求1.4. 替代品1.5. 竞争态势使命、远景和战略的区别理解了企业的财务目标后，在发展经营单元战略之前还必须了解公司的使命和远景。

The power of pricingTransaction pricing is the key to surviving the current downturn—and to flourishing when conditions improve. February 2003 • Michael V. Marn, Eric V. Roegner, and Craig C. ZawadaAt few moments since the end of World War II has downward pressure on prices been so great. Some of it stems from cyclical factors—such as sluggish economic growth in the Western economies and Japan—that have reined in consumer spending. There are newer sources as well: the vastly increased purchasing power of retailers, such as Wal-Mart, which can therefore pressure suppliers; the Internet, which adds to the transparency of markets by making it easier to compare prices; and the role of China and other burgeoning industrial powers whose low labor costs have driven down prices for manufactured goods. The one-two punch of cyclical and newer factors has eroded corporate pricing power and forced frustrated managers to look in every direction for ways to hold the line.In such an environment, managers might think it mad to talk about raising prices. Yet nothing could be further from the truth. We are not talking about raising prices across the board; quite often, the most effective path is to get prices right for one customer, one transaction at a time, and to capture more of the price that you already, in theory, charge. In this sense, there is room for price increases or at least price stability even in today's difficult markets.Such an approach to pricing—transaction pricing, one of the three levels of price management (see sidebar "Pricing at three levels")—was first described ten years ago.1 The idea was to figure out the real price you charged customers after accounting for a host of discounts, allowances, rebates, and other deductions. Only then could you determine how much money, if any, you were making and whether you were charging the right price for each customer and transaction.A simple but powerful tool—the pocket price waterfall, which shows how much revenue companies really keep from each of their transactions—helps them diagnose and capture opportunities in transaction pricing. In this article, we revisit that toolto see how it has held up through dramatic changes in the way businesses work and in the broader economy. Our experience serving hundreds of companies on pricing issues shows that the pocket price waterfall still effectively helps identify transaction-pricing opportunities. Nevertheless, in view of evolving business practice, we have greatly expanded the tool's application. The increase in the number of companies selling customized products and solutions or bundling service packages with each sale, for instance, means that assessing the profitability of transactions has become much more complex. The pocket price waterfall has evolved over time to take account of this transition.Today, it is more critical than ever for managers to focus on transaction pricing; they can no longer rely on the double-digit annual sales growth and rich margins of the 1990s to overshadow pricing shortfalls. Moreover, at many companies, littlecost-cutting juice can easily be extracted from operations. Pricing is therefore one of the few untapped levers to boost earnings, and companies that start now will be in a good position to profit fully from the next upturn.Advancing one percentage point at a timePricing right is the fastest and most effective way for managers to increase profits. Consider the average income statement of an S&P 1500 company: a price rise of 1 percent, if volumes remained stable, would generate an 8 percent increase in operating profits (Exhibit 1)—an impact nearly 50 percent greater than that of a 1 percent fall in variable costs such as materials and direct labor and more than three times greater than the impact of a 1 percent increase in volume.Unfortunately, the sword of pricing cuts both ways. A decrease of 1 percent in average prices has the opposite effect, bringing down operating profits by that same 8 percent if other factors remain steady. Managers may hope that higher volumes will compensate for revenues lost from lower prices and thereby raise profits, but this rarely happens; to continue our examination of typical S&P 1500 economics, volumes would have to rise by 18.7 percent just to offset the profit impact of a 5 percent price cut. Such demand sensitivity to price cuts is extremely rare. A strategy based on cutting prices to increase volumes and, as a result, to raise profits is generally doomed to failure in almost every market and industry.Following the pocket price waterfallMany companies can find an additional 1 percent or more in prices by carefully looking at what part of the list price of a product or service is actually pocketed from each transaction. Right pricing is a more subtle game than setting list prices or even tracking invoice prices. Significant amounts of money can leak away from list or base prices as customers receive discounts, incentives, promotions, and other giveaways to seal contracts and maintain volumes (see sidebar "A hole in your pocket").The experience of a global lighting supplier shows how the pocket price—what remains after all discounts and other incentives have been tallied—is usually much lower than the list or invoice price. This company made incandescent lightbulbs and fluorescent lights sold to distributors that then resold them for use in offices, factories, stores, and other commercial buildings. Every lightbulb had a standard list price, but a series of discounts that were itemized on each invoice pushed average invoice prices 32.8 percent lower than the standard list prices. These on-invoice deductions included the standard discounts given to most distributors as well as special discounts for selected ones, discounts for large-volume customers, and discounts offered during promotions.Managers who oversee pricing often focus on invoice prices, which are readily available, but the real pricing story goes much further. Revenue leaks beyond invoice prices aren't detailed on invoices. The many off-invoice leakages at the lighting company included cash discounts for prompt payment, the cost of carrying accounts receivable, cooperative advertising allowances, rebates based on a distributor's total annual volume, off-invoice promotional programs, and freight expenses. In the end, the company's average pocket price—including 16.3 percentage points in revenue reductions that didn't appear on invoices—was about half of the standard list price (Exhibit 2a). Over the past decade, companies have tried to entice buyerswith a growing number of discounts, including discounts for on-line orders as well as the increasingly popular performance penalties that require companies to provide a discount if they fail to meet specific performance commitments such as on-time delivery and order fill rates.By consciously and assiduously managing all elements of the pocket price waterfall, companies can often find and capture an additional 1 percent or more in their realized prices. Indeed, an adjustment of any discount or element along the waterfall—either on- or off-invoice—is capable of improving prices on a transaction-by-transaction basis.Embracing a wide bandThe pocket price waterfall is often first created as an average of all transactions. But the amount and type of the discounts offered may differ from customer to customer and even order to order, so pocket prices can vary a good deal. We call the distribution of sales volumes over this range of variation the pocket price band.At the lighting company, some bulbs were sold at a pocket price of less than 30 percent of the standard list price, others at 90 percent or more—three times higher than those of the lowest-priced transactions (Exhibit 2b). This range may seem spectacular, but it is not very unusual. In our work, we have seen pocket price bands in which the highest pocket price was five or six times greater than the lowest.A wide band shows that certain customers generate much higher pocket prices than do othersIt would be a mistake, though, to assume that wide pocket price bands are necessarily bad. A wide band shows that neither all customers nor all competitive situations are the same—that for a whole host of reasons, some customers generate much higher pocket prices than do others. When a band is wide, small changes in its shape can readily move the average price a percentage point or more higher. If a manager can increase sales slightly at the high end of the band while improving or even dropping transactions at the low end, such an increase comes within reach. But when the price band is narrow, the manager has less room to maneuver; changing its shape becomes more difficult; and any move has less impact on average prices.Although the lighting company was surprised by the width of its pocket price band, it had a quick explanation: the range resulted from a conscious effort to reward high-volume customers with deeper discounts, which in theory were justified notonly by the desire to court such customers but also by a lower cost to serve them. A closer examination showed that this explanation was actually wide of the mark (Exhibit 3): many large customers received relatively modest discounts, resulting in high pocket prices, while a lot of small buyers got much greater discounts and lower pocket prices than their size would warrant. A few smaller customers received large discounts in special circumstances—unusually competitive or depressed markets, for instance—but most just had long-standing ties to the company and knew which employees to call for extra discounts, additional time to pay, or more promotional money. These experienced customers were working the pocket price waterfall to their advantage.The lighting company attacked the problem from three directions. First, it instructed its sales force to bring into line—or drop—the smaller distributors getting unacceptably high discounts. Within 12 months, 85 percent of these accounts were being priced and serviced in a more appropriate way, and new accounts had replaced most of the remainder. Second, the company launched an intensive program to stimulate sales at larger accounts for which higher pocket prices had been realized. Finally, it controlled transaction prices by initiating stricter rules on discounting and by installing IT systems that could track pocket prices more effectively. In the first year thereafter, the average pocket price rose by 3.6 percent and operating profits by 51 percent.In addition to these immediate fixes, the lighting company took longer-term measures to change the relationship between pocket prices and the characteristics of its accounts. New and explicit pocket price targets were based on the size, type, and segment of each account, and whenever a customer's prices were renegotiated or a new customer was signed, that target guided the negotiations.Pocket margins become more relevantFor companies that not only sell standard products and services but also experience little variation in the cost of selling and delivering them to different customers, pocket prices are an adequate measure of price performance. Today, however, as companies seek to differentiate themselves amid growing competition, many are offering customized products, bundling product and service packages with each sale, offering unique solutions packages, or providing unique forms of logistical andtechnical support. Pocket prices don't capture these different product costs or the cost to serve specific customers. For such companies, another level of analysis—the pocket margin—is needed to reflect the varying costs associated with each order. The pocket margin for a transaction is calculated by subtracting from the pocket price any direct product costs and costs incurred specifically to serve an individual account.One North American company, which manufactures tempered glass for heavy trucks and for farm and construction machinery, sharply increased its profits by understanding and actively managing its pocket margins. Each piece of the company's glass was custom-designed for a specific customer, so costs varied transaction by transaction. Other costs differed from customer to customer as well. The company's glass, for example, was frequently shipped in special containers that were designed to be compatible with the customers' assembly machines. The costs of retooling and other customer-specific services varied widely from case to case but averaged no less than 17 percent of the target base price (Exhibit 4a).A fuller picture emerges when a company examines each account and creates a pocket margin bandAs with pocket prices, a fuller picture emerges when a company examines each account and creates a pocket margin band. The glass company's pocket margins ranged from more than 60 percent of base prices to a loss of more than 15 percent of base prices (Exhibit 4b). When fixed costs were allocated, the company found that it required a pocket margin of at least 12 percent just to break even at the current operating level. More than a quarter of the company's sales fell below this threshold.Traditionally, the pricing policies of the glass company had focused on invoice prices and standard product costs; it paid little attention to off-invoice discounts or extra costs to serve specific customers. The pocket margin band helped it identify which individual customers were more profitable and which should be approached more aggressively even at the risk of losing their business. The company also uncovered narrowly defined customer segments (for example, medium-volume buyers of flat or single-bend door glass) that were concentrated at the high end of the margin band. In addition, it evaluated its policies for some of the more standard waterfall elements to ensure that it had clear objectives, accountability, and controls for each of them—for instance, it decided to base volume bonuses on stretch performance targets and to charge for last-minute technical support. By focusing on and increasing sales in profitable subsegments, pruning less attractive accounts, and making selective policy changes across the waterfall elements, the company pushed up its average pocket margin by 4 percent and its operating profits by 60 percent within a year.Taming transactionsThe game of transaction pricing is won or lost in hundreds, sometimes thousands, of individual decisions each day. Standard and discretionary discounts allow percentage points of revenue to drop from the table one transaction at a time. Companies are often poorly equipped to track these losses, especially for off-invoice items; after all, the volumes and complexity of transactions can be overwhelming, and many items, such as cooperative advertising or freight allowances, are accounted for after the fact or on a company-wide basis. Even if managers wanted to track transaction pricing, it has often been impossible to get the data for specific customers or transactions. But some recent technical advances have helped remove this obstacle; enterprise-management-information systems and off-the-shelf custom-pricing software have made it easier to keep tabs on transaction pricing. Managers can no longer hide behind the excuse that gathering the data is too difficult.Current price pressures should go a long way toward removing two other obstacles: will and skill. In the booming economy of the 1990s, robust demand and cost-cutting programs, which drove up corporate earnings, made too many managers pay too little attention to pricing. But now that a global economic downturn has slowed growth and the easiest cost cutting has already occurred, the shortfall in pricing capabilities has been exposed. A large number of companies still don't understand the untapped opportunity that superior transaction pricing represents. For many companies, getting it right may be one of the keys to surviving the current downturn and to flourishing when the upturn arrives. It has never been more crucial—ormore possible—to learn and apply the skills needed to execute superior transaction-price management.Pricing at three levelsTransaction pricing is one of three levels of price management. Although distinct, each level is related to the others, and action at any one level could easily affect the others as well. Businesses trying to obtain a price advantage—that is, to make superior pricing a source of distinctive performance—must master all three of these levels.Industry price level. The broadest view of pricing comes at the industry price level, where managers must understand how supply, demand, costs, regulations, and other high-level factors interact and affect overall prices. Companies that excel at this level avoid unnecessary downward pressure on prices and often emerge as industry price leaders.Product/market strategy level. The primary issue at this second level is pricing a product or service relative to the competition. To do so, companies must understand how customers perceive all offerings on the market and, most particularly, which attributes—product as well as service and intangible attributes—drive purchase decisions. With this knowledge, companies can set visible list prices that accurately reflect the competitive strengths (or weaknesses) of their offerings.Transaction level. The focus of transaction pricing is to decide the exact price for each transaction—starting with the list price and determining which discounts, allowances, payment terms, bonuses, and other incentives should be applied. For a majority of companies, the management of transaction pricing is the most detailed, time-consuming, systems-intensive, andenergy-intensive task involved in gaining a price advantage.A hole in your pocketMany on- and off-invoice items can easily lead to price and margin leaks. Here we provide a nonexhaustive list:Annual volume bonus: an end-of-year bonus paid to customers if preset purchase volume targets are met.Cash discount: a deduction from the invoice price if payment for an order is made quickly, often within 15 days. Consignment cost: the cost of funds when a supplier provides consigned inventory to a wholesaler or retailer.Cooperative advertising: an allowance paid to support local advertising of the manufacturer’s brand by a retailer or wholesaler.End-customer discount: a rebate paid to a retailer for selling a product to a specific customer—often a large or national one—at a discount.Freight: the cost to the company of transporting goods to the customer.Market-development funds: a discount to promote sales growth in specific segments of a market.Off-invoice promotions: a marketing incentive that would, for example, pay retailers a rebate on sales during a specific promotional period.On-line order discount: a discount offered to customers ordering over the Internet or an intranet.Performance penalties: a discount that sellers agree to give buyers if performance targets, such as quality levels or delivery times, are missed.Receivables carrying cost: the cost of funds from the moment an invoice is sent until payment is received.Slotting allowance: an allowance paid to retailers to secure a set amount of shelf space.Stocking allowance: a discount paid to wholesalers or retailers to make large purchases into inventory, often before a seasonal increase in demand.The challenges ahead for supply chains: McKinsey Global Survey resultsSenior executives say their companies manage key trade-offs well, yet see barriers to better performance: rising risk, lack of collaboration, and low CEO involvement.As economies around the world step back from the financial brink and begin adjusting to a new normal, companies face a different set of supply chain challenges than they did at the height of the downturn—among them are rising pressure from global competition, consumer expectations, and increasingly complex patterns of customer demand. Executives in this McKinsey survey1are divided on their companies’ preparedness to meet those challenges, and fully two-thirds expect supply chain risk to increase. What’s more, the survey highlights troubling signs of struggle associated with key, underlying supply chain processes and capabilities, including the ability of different functions to collaborate, the role of CEOs in supply chain planning, and the extent to which companies gather and use information.Emerging from the downturnAs companies have managed their supply chains over the past three years, the challenges they faced and the goals they set have reflected a single-minded focus on weathering the financial crisis. The most frequently cited challenge of the past three years is the increasing volatility of customer demand (Exhibit 1). This is no doubt a result of the sharp drop in consumer spending that has reverberated throughout all sectors across the globe. Looking at challenges over the next five years, though, the focus shifts: respondents most frequently cite increasing pressure from global competition. Some issues that receive a lot of public attention, such as climate change and natural-resource use, have remained a low priority since our 2008 survey.2 Still, the share that identify environmental concerns as a top challenge in the next five years nearly doubled, to 21 percent, over the proportion saying it was a top challenge during the past three years. This suggests that companies anticipate returning to a new normal,3 wherein they can focus on issues other than cost at least some of the time.With regard to goals for supply chain management, the results show a similar shift between past and future, perhaps another indicator that companies are focusing on pursuing growth in addition to cost containment (Exhibit 2). Of course, executives are not ignoring supply chain costs altogether; after weathering a downturn, they know their companies can manage and control future expenses, now that this issue has been on their radar consistently. Indeed, reducing operating costs remains the most frequently chosen goal over the next five years—as it was over the past three—followed by customer service. In a 2008 survey, 43 percent of respondents said improving service was one of their companies’ top two goals for supply chain management, and though it fell as a priority during the crisis, it is now number two for the next five years.Executives also indicate that many of their companies have met past goals, with supply chain performance improving in both efficiency and effectiveness as they come out of the downturn. For example, nearly half say th eir companies’ service levels are higher now than they were three years ago, 39 percent say costs as a percentage of sales are lower, and 45 percent have cut inventories.What hasn’t changed much, though, is the amount of supply chain risk that executives foresee (Exhibit 3). More thantwo-thirds say risk increased in the past three years, and nearly the same share see risk continuing to rise. Respondents in developed Asian countries report more concern than those in any other region: 82 percent say their c ompanies’ supply chain risk will increase in the next five years.4Managing challenges and trade-offsThough the strategic goals executives are setting suggest a hope that more predictable business conditions will prevail over the next five years, respondents are divided over how well their companies can manage the challenges (Exhibit 4). This finding holds true for large and small companies alike and among executives in different functions.The good news is that on the three challenges cited most frequently (global competition, rising consumer expectations, and complex patterns of customer demand), the highest shares of executives say their companies are prepared to meet those challenges. The bad news is that the shares saying their companies are well prepared are still below half.Most executives recognize the importance of managing the functional trade-offs related to these challenges and think that their companies are effective at doing so. Among trade-offs, the highest share of respondents—85 percent—say balancing cost to serve and customer service is important to their companies’ supply chain strategy. The lowest share (59 percent) say balancing centralized production against proximity to customers is important. Respondents also report that the managers who make decisions about supply chain trade-offs are well informed.Yet the cross-functional discussions that companies need if they are to make informed decisions are not happening often. For each of the six trade-offs the survey explored, regular cross-functional meetings are cited as the most common process for making decisions, but between 31 and 40 percent of respondents say their operations teams never or rarely meet with salesand marketing to discuss supply chain tensions. Furthermore, respondents across functions say sales/marketing has the most difficulty collaborating with other functions, with 23 percent citing a problem between that group and manufacturing, and 21 percent between it and planning. Additionally, one-third of respondents say the biggest barrier to collaborating when managing trade-offs is that functional areas don’t understand their impact on others.This disconnection is likely exacerbated by the relatively low levels of CEO involvement reported: the vast majority of CEOs do not actively develop supply chain strategy or work hands-on to execute it (Exhibit 5). Respondents do, however, expect more CEO involvement over the next five years—a hopeful sign for companies aspiring to mend key cross-functional disconnections.Knowledge is powerThe results show a similar disconnection between data and decision making: companies seem to collect and use much less detailed information than our experience suggests is prudent in making astute supply chain decisions (Exhibit 6). For example, customer service is becoming a higher priority, and executives say their companies balance service and cost to serve effectively, yet companies are most likely to take a one-size-fits-all approach when defining and managing service-level targets. Half of the executives say their companies have limited or no quantitative information about incremental costs for raw materials, manufacturing capacity, and personnel, and 41 percent do not track per-customer supply chain costs at any useful level of detail.Many of the future supply chain challenges will require companies to keep better information on individual costs and customers. Yet only about a quarter of respondents expect their companies will invest in IT systems over the next five years, and only 10 percent of respondents say their companies currently use social media to identify customers’ service needs.Looking ahead∙In our experience, senior-executive involvement, including hands-on attention from the CEO, is pivotal in managing the cross-functional trade-offs that underpin many supply chain decisions. Yet the role of CEOs at many companies we surveyed is limited or nonexistent. Companies that can bridge the functional divides that thwart collaboration will have an edge in creating competitive supply chains capable of fulfilling business strategy requirements.∙Addressing the challenges companies have identified—improving service and responding to new expectations and patterns of customer demand—requires more and better information, regardless of the geographical scope or the length of supply chains.As the marketplace becomes increasingly fragmented, keeping better track of customer information and costs, which can inform and support interpersonal, cross-functional discussions, will help companies prepare for the supply chainuncertainties that lie ahead.∙Despite the importance of volatile commodity prices as a supply chain challenge, just 28 percent of respondents say their companies are prepared to manage that volatility. One way to cope with this uncertainty: view supply chain assets as a hedge.By considering investment in production resources that aren’t necessarily lowest-cost today (but soon could be), companies can position themselves for greater flexibility in the future.∙Executives expect environmental concerns to be a more significant issue for supply chains in the years ahead, yet relatively few consider it a priority today. Given that up to 60 percent of a company’s carbon footprint can reside upstr eam in its supply chain,5 companies would be wise to pursue economically attractive opportunities that address environmental impact in the near term and prepare to respond quickly to any sudden shifts in environmental expectations and requirements.A new idea in banking for the poorBy teaming up with retail outlets in low-income, often hard-to-reach areas, financial institutions can create value both for themselves and their new customers.November 2010 • Alberto Chaia, Robert Schiff, and Esteban Silva。

The Impact of Globalization onBusiness Ethics全球化对商业道德的影响随着全球化的不断深入，商业领域也经历了巨大的变革。

全球化给商业道德带来了诸多挑战和机遇。

本文将探讨全球化对商业道德的影响，并分析其带来的利弊。

首先，全球化促进了商业道德的发展。

全球化使得企业的业务范围变得更广泛，涉及到更多的国家和地区。

在面对不同的文化和价值观时，企业需要根据当地的道德标准来开展业务。

这推动了商业道德的国际化，使得企业必须采取更加负责任的经营行为。

例如，一些跨国公司在面对台风或地震等自然灾害时，积极捐助资金和物资，展现出社会责任感，这种道德表现有助于树立企业良好的形象。

其次，全球化也引发了一些商业道德问题。

随着全球交流的增加，跨国企业处理跨国界的问题更加复杂。

在追求利润最大化的同时，企业可能面临一些困境，比如环境破坏、违反劳工权益等。

例如，一些跨国公司为了降低成本，将生产工厂迁至发展中国家，但在该国家的劳动条件和环保标准可能较低，导致劳工受到剥削和环境受到破坏。

这些问题引发了对企业伦理责任的争议，并促使企业制定更加严格的道德准则。

此外，全球化还加剧了商业道德的监管和合规压力。

由于企业活动越来越跨境，各国政府和国际组织对企业的监管也越来越严格。

例如，欧盟于2016年颁布了《通用数据保护条例》，要求企业在处理个人数据时更加谨慎和透明，否则将面临巨额罚款。

这种强制性的合规要求迫使企业加强对商业道德的管理，保护消费者隐私权和数据安全。

然而，与此同时，全球化也为企业提供了更多的商业道德机会。

随着信息技术的快速发展，企业可以更好地实施道德和可持续经营。

例如，一些电商平台致力于打击假冒伪劣产品，提供可追溯的商品信息和服务保障。

这种可见的道德行为不仅增强了消费者对品牌的信任，也推动了商业道德的进步。

此外，全球化还推动了跨国合作和商业道德之间的紧密联系。

在全球化的背景下，企业之间的合作变得更加紧密和频繁。