THE DEATH OF THE BUSINESS PLAN: MORE THAN EVER, LEARNING PLANS AND NOT
BUSINESS PLANS ARE MEANT TO ANALYZE MOST OF BUSINESS GROWTH ALTERNATIVES
Leandro
A. Viltard
Universidad
de Buenos Aires
Professor
at Universidad Católica Argentina
Universidad
de Palermo, Argentina
E-mail:
lviltard@yahoo.com.ar
Submission: 13/08/2015
Revision: 28/08/2015
Accept: 28/08/2015
ABSTRACT
This article explores the nature and scope of Business Plans (BP) and
Learning Plans (LP), and its objective is to verify the circumstances in which
these tools become applicable.
It states that competitiveness and productivity must be understood
through the globalization borderless geography, the identification of
innovation key drivers, the achievement of a sustainable competitive advantage,
the distinction between functional and innovative products and finally the
application of the right management/business tools. In this context, LPs
portray a flexible work plan and a learning process for fast-changing times.
The final conclusion, is that as the unpredictability is part of our common
lives today and business as usual should be rare, BPs are about to die.
This is a qualitative
investigation and the research design is transversal and not experimental.
To verify the circumstances
in which Business Plans (BP) and Learning Plans (LP) become applicable.
Keywords: Business
Plan; Learning Plan; Globalization;
Innovation; Functional product; Innovative product.
1. INTRODUCTION
Determining what customers want and
the right markets to launch products represents a fundamental consideration for
business people. That is why markets and products have a difficult
interrelationship for many firms’ executives as unknown and unpredicted factors
usually abound in our volatile and fast world.
In this perspective, globalization
is one of the key drivers for business growth and it generally implies the
deployment of different activities across the value chain in diverse
geographies. These activities include strategic/ market analysis, forecasting
and planning, inventory management, resources management, efficient production,
work scheduling and fast time-to-market. To “do the right things, right” is a
matter of good business perspective and future sustainability.
In other words, competitiveness and
productivity is a matter of a thorough comprehension of the following subjects
that are covered in the present study:
·
Globalization: As a process, that changes the rules of
the overall game with enormous implications on society and firm’s activities.
·
Innovation key drivers: to identify and apply them to
the day-to-day operation.
·
Competitive advantage: to apart the firm from
competitors.
·
Functional and innovative products: to set up the
right organization, processes and practices.
·
Management/business tools: to evaluate investments in markets and
products. This investments should sustain future business decisions and be
supported by appropriate analysis and metrics.
The final step in being competitive
and productive is to establish proper qualitative, quantitative and timing
demand objectives to be able to respond to customers’ needs. In this sense and
as of now, Business Plans (BP) seemed to be the right tool to respond to these
fundamental factors but there are some considerations that will come up in this
paper which will show additional perspectives on the matter.
1.1.
Objective
of this investigation
To verify the circumstances in which
Business Plans (BP) and Learning Plans (LP) become applicable.
1.2.
1.2 Design:
Methodology and analysis
The study was exploratory and
descriptive, and a qualitative methodology was used. Its design was not
experimental and transversal, as the information was collected at a given
moment in time.
The unit of analysis was related to
business organizations. We tried to ensure that prior knowledge did not hinder
the analysis that was done.
The research is based on the work of
significant and well known specialists on the field and our own experience on
the matter.
This investigation was conducted in
Argentina between Jan. 2015 – Aug. 2015.
1.3.
Research
Limitations/Clarifications
Although we recognize that it is
very difficult to ascertain that all relevant information has been included, we
referred to worldwide information from relevant secondary sources. As a result,
an empirical study was not used.
Not to undermine the content and the
investigation´s purpose, the conclusions and opinions that were expressed are
strictly based on the information obtained from the analyzed data.
As a qualitative investigation, the
results that are shown cannot be generalized, although they are useful for
decision-making purposes. Our objective is to enhance the knowledge on the
matter and improve the startup processes through new tools and novel
perspectives.
1.4.
Findings
There are certain conditions in
which Business Plans (BP) could be applied but, more than ever and because of
globalization borderless geography, innovation and competitive advantages
uncertainties, and the distinction that should be made between functional and
innovative products, firms should focus on Learning Plans (LP) not on Business
Plans (BP). Surely, there are cultural biases that come from old paradigms that
are still being pursued, and a lot of questions that haven’t been asked by
managers yet. That is why this paper highlights fundamental differences between
BP and LP.
1.5.
Originality
and Value
This research has been an attempt to
explore BP and LP as tools to monitor business/product development. Actual
consideration of managers and executives of value perception when using BP for
functional and innovative products and for every market could distort the
intended objectives, impeding the appropriate implementation of new businesses.
As a result, LPs are shown as a
contribution to launching novel businesses/products and expanding the
organizational learning processes to achieve the proposed success.
In addition, there had not been made
many studies on this matter. That is why the study of this phenomenon could
help firms progress on new businesses/products implementation results.
2. UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION
In prior work[1], it was stated
that new powers are setting up an unknown framework, configuring complex scenes
in which boundaries and spaces that are yet to be deciphered. Its final goal is
to help decision factors (meaning: officials, entrepreneurs, executives and
individuals) to find better answers to globalization, which has changed the
physiognomy of much of the known.
In the following paragraphs, some of
the basic considerations on the four aspects analyzed in the book in order to
understand this particular, complex, multidimensional and controversial
phenomenon and its implications on firms’ decisions are being presented.
2.1.
Culture
and society
It is the end of closed universes,
and global cities with new users/customers are flourishing in today’s world.
Foreign companies abound and many of
them are new to many markets. It appears a new transnational professional and
immigration is common and possible. Transportation and communication become
faster and secure helping the interexchange of human, technological and
financial capitals.
As there is a continuous
reconfiguration of the political space and power, social tensions and
inequalities are becoming part of the day-to-day scenario of many cities and
nations.
In this context, cultural
homogenization is seen as an invasive factor for many people or as a must for
others. Additionally, social sciences must change as they refer to the past and
seems static to measure a changing social environment. As an example, they do not
measure new categories such as transnational professional immigrants or
national supply chains.
2.2.
Identity
A fast and turbulent time is forcing
the integration and fragmentation of each individual. There is a travelling
identity and people lack universal certainties. History of each population is
forgotten, and consequently identity is diluted.
There is a new social segmentation
combined with the emergence of cosmopolitan and multiple transnational and
diverse cultural identities. Also, true subcultures are appearing which promote
the disintegration of many local cultures. In contrast, nationalism is
invigorated in many populations.
The metaphor and utopia explain
everything, and the individual is taken apart from the center of the scene.
There is a loss of individuality and
global context, and every human being is immersed in a transitory world, full
of mercantilism and a here-and-now position. As a result, it is not believed in
values, virtues and institutions, and identity is linked more with goods that
somebody access than with the place that she/he was born.
2.3.
Economic
ambience and companies
The global/international context
represents a must for growth, but obliges to operational and competitive
considerations.
Beginning the ’90s, neoliberalism
has entered in the worldwide scene and citizens’ power passed to the investor.
As a consequence, the old logic collapsed, and values and models were given
to the hands of the commercial organizations and people. The instrumental
rationality took the place of the universal reason.
For organizations and individuals to
live close and out of the world is no longer applicable. That is one of the
fundamental reasons why transnational firms are being developed beyond the
geographical and political boundaries of their home countries.
Concepts like global, glocalization
and multiple locations are part of a restless business environment in which
small and medium enterprises are emerging.
Imbalances and dispossession have
been installed at all levels, and there is an ongoing discussion on the limits
of the welfare State and who finances many businesses.
Work is being transformed to a
flexible specialization and fragmentation of production processes. Value chain
is seen in a holistic manner and value proposition lasts on minor and subtle
details.
Internet democratizes information,
and everyone can access to uncountable electronic spaces, which are combined
with other non-electronic. Businesses and life are virtual and real at the same
time, and both are confused.
Organizations need to innovate,
communicate and use technology in different ways. From one side, strategy must
be conceived for volatile and turbulent times, and marketing turns to global
markets which mostly are unknown and unpredictable. On the other hand,
processes don’t stand for what it is needed in the future, they require
rebuilding their overall value proposition. Consequently, there is a huge
challenge on management and human resources.
On the management side, the way we
do in the organizations is not applicable anymore: many management tools that
are used today have more than 80 years, like organizational hierarchies, brand
management and time and motion studies. Also, they were in good tune with an
economy of goods production of elder times but not with the knowledge economy
in which we are immerse today. Specifically, if things should be done
differently, a change is needed in the way that the basic management processes,
like talent selection, budgeting and planning are being managed.
On the human resources side,
learning and training should be thought for times that have not come yet. In
this sense, there is a need in recognizing new business drivers and understand
future markets and products to set up priorities on skills and competencies
that will be needed to be developed.
2.4.
State-nation
and power
States/nations are facing ambiguity,
versatility and a new dimensionality in their relations with others (meant as
other States/nations, organizations and individuals).
New powers are changing their
identity and relationships, and they don’t necessarily depend on natural
resources, as knowledge is the new value added metric for consumers all over
the world.
Executives gain more control and
power because is who deals with international organizations and powers like IMF
(International Monetary Fund), WTO (World Trade Organization), international
financial markets, international courts, or organizations dedicated to the
environment and human rights. That’s one of the reasons why the democratic
quality is affected in most countries. In this situation, States decline and
marginalization increases, having specialists which advert that the scope of
democracy should be reviewed. Moreover, there are issues as environmental or
human rights that exceed the reality of countries and become a transnational
problematic.
As a summary, it was said that
globalization has turned to a volatile and definite concept at the same time,
proposing new dimensions, an apparent cultural homogenization and novel users’
categories. Also, new transportation and communication methods and tools, are
helping to reach the most unexpected places in fast times.
The whole society and human beings
have been crossed by this phenomenon which impacts decision making at
collective and individual levels.
Society has a new physiognomy with
new actors, categories and conflicts showing new social segmentations,
subcultures and nationalisms. Social sciences (and specifically, census and
marketing studies) are needed to be rethought. They lost their tune with
reality. In addition and in many countries, the institutions got heart and the
data and information they produce, too. As a result, decision making processes
are affecting not only internal structures of organizations but also their
partners and context.
The individual identity is diluted,
being exposed to fragmentation and integrations at the same time, depending on
others’ views. The results are superficial, external and perishable patterns.
Everything is transitory and connected with material things, disbelieving of
values, virtues and institutions. The world becomes unstable and uncertain, and
does not belong to a fixed and unchanging place, bringing about cosmopolitism
and multiple identities. Identity does
not respond to the place where somebody was born, but to a specific moment and
to the goods that somebody acquires.
Economically, globalization is
connected with internationalization, mobile investments, products and processes
standardization, and global supply/value chains. Trade is the king as
instrumental rationality took the place of universal reason. Long term becomes
short term for many organizations and many investors show impatience to develop
new businesses.
Becoming a player in an industrial
sector is practically connected to “thinking globally and acting locally” (globalization).
The “global village” doesn’t admit local players. This is helped by poor labor
conditions in many countries, flexible specialization and processes
fragmentation. Strategic, marketing, technological and operational efficiencies
are extremely required in order to be able to compete. Thus, globality, globalization
and multiple localizations are new aspects in the decision making process which
leaders must consider.
Besides, foreign direct investments
(FDI) are causing inequalities in different countries and regions, and factors
like education levels, innovation, resources, flexibility and
easy-to-make-business-with are key in the future capital movement, that do not
respond to a dominant logic and creates threats everywhere. Consequently, new
and unknown champions are hearting many traditional markets.
Finally, globalization affects
everybody and it is impossible to live in closed contexts and out of what is
going on. New roles and new kind of decisions need to be considered,
engendering a rethought on leadership and processes.
The universe is in the outdoor, and
regions, States/nations, organizations and people have an “adapt or die”
challenge to be pursued. Businesses and the way they are conceived are not an
exception. Therefore, dominant logic, spaces and times have changed abruptly,
and old management and market tools don´t reflect this evolution.
3. INNOVATION KEY DRIVERS
The business world is changing
rapidly, and huge differences in how companies operate are about to come. For
Prahalad (2012) new opportunities and a new way to compete will come out from
the following five key drivers:
·
Globalization.
·
Connectivity: For the first time in human history, 3
billion people are connected through cellular phones and this number will
increase.
·
The costs of digital technologies are going down
dramatically: the starting point is the cellular phone that can be acquired for
$30 as 16 gigabytes of USB memory. This means that technology does not
differentiate any longer between the rich and the poor. Everybody can have the
same technology.
·
Convergence of technologies: a product like a cellular
phone is a cell phone, a computer, a camera, a watch. All this technologies are
built coming together.
·
Social networks are becoming extremely important, too.
The author adds that these five
forces will create new wealth and that the question is “how would the poor and
the rich markets change and therefore how we would create value”.
In addition, Walters (2008) asserts
that Prahalad & Krishnan reminds us that modern business is not only a
matter of Web 2.0 and consumer tech but of two main ideas:
·
N=1, as a way to say that “value is based on unique,
personalized experiences of consumers”. So, no matter how many consumers may a
firm has the focus should be on individuals.
·
R=G, meaning that resources are global and they are in
a “variety of other big and small firms”, constituting a global ecosystem. That
is, that firm’s efforts should be “on gaining access to resources, not necessarily
owning them”.
To make this happen there are some
shifts which are required: from “impersonal to customized offerings, from
vertical to horizontal organizations”. Firms will have to go against many
paradigms and “rethink its fundamentals to success within the N=1, R=G world”.
UPS is given as an example. This firm transformed the picking-up-packages
business process from “requiring customers to drop off parcels at a central
collection point to picking up packages from clients at specific times”.
Another mentioned example, Madras
Cements, is a firm which deployed a sophisticated and expensive GPS technology
to truck movements and goods by a $30 cell phone communication via SMS that was
processed timely to improve driver performance, helping executives on the
identification of areas of improvements. Finally, an important auto supplier
teaches that, while they shifted sourcing to China, no cost saving was achieved
while lost in flexibility and longer lead times indicated a need to rethink the
entire process (Walters, 2008).
Subsequently, businesses must be
rethought. None of what is being done will probably be done in the future. The
N=1, R=G world represents a peril for firms that don’t understand that the new
era of innovation will take products, services, processes and practices.
Strategic and operational flexibility and unprecedented time-to-market are key
drivers of this era.
Additionally, it is extremely
important to get the big picture and to have less codified processes and
systems. In other words, there will be unforeseen consequences that the future
will bring about for the ones that miss this opportunity. The business
landscape is under transformation independently of what anybody alone would
like or want.
4. COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE (CA)
CA can be understood as a general
guide when making different plans and taking actions to build a new business,
achieving the necessary objectives.
Porter (1991) states that it is
needed to understand where the firm stands, know its context and main characteristics.
In other words, it is needed to analyze the attractiveness of the industrial
sector in which the company competes and to make that analysis suggests the
five competitive forces model (rivalry among competitors, bargaining power of
vendors and clients, substitute products, and finally, threats of new
competitors). Additionally, remarks that establishing a CA is needed to work on
drivers like economies of scale, costs, product differentiation, capital
investments and access to distribution channels.
For other authors like Best (2007)
to find a CA implies finding advantages against competitors and it may come up
from costs, differentiation and marketing advising that firms should focus on
one of these three alternatives. Porter (1991) suggests three generic
strategies, coinciding with Best in the first two and proposing as a third one
to focus on specific niches.
Finally, Christensen (1998) advises
that it is required a constant review on market and business behavior as
internal and external changes affect directly firm’s offering. In this way, CA
can change in accordance to market conditions and new consumers’ behavior.
As a result and in the long run,
company growth depends on CA and its evolution. Prior business knowledge and
market analysis are necessary in order to have a better perspective on business
potential.
In the following Figure 1 it is
showed a summary of what was proposed in this section:
Figure 1: Competitive Advantage (CA)
5. FUNCTIONAL AND INNOVATIVE PRODUCTS
Products are found in different
places, respond to different needs and therefore, have different
characteristics. Key factors like demand, competitors and margins should be
considered while analyzing them. As a result, Fischer (1997) distinguishes
between functional and innovative products, as follows:
·
Functional products: are found in
retail shops and have a predictable demand, as they respond to basic needs
which don’t change through time. They are connected to incremental innovations
and propose low margins. Typical examples of these products are found in the
consumer business domain.
·
Innovative products: are found in
specific places and have an unpredictable demand, as they answer to not basic needs,
which change through time. As they are connected with breakthrough innovations,
they offer high margins. Generally, technological products may be good examples
of innovative products.
The author refers that firms like
Obermeyer (a private skiwear firm) launches every year 95% of their products
with new designs. That is why, usually their demand forecasts err by 200%. Therefore,
they have little time to react because the season is short. On the contrary,
Campbell Soup Company launches 5% of new products each year and their existing
products have been in the market for years. As a result, demand is satisfied
immediately with inventories and their market cycle time is around 6 months. Therefore,
for innovative products, flexibility and time-to-market are key factors and for
functional products, it is required to be focused on operational efficiencies.
The following Table 1 shows a
summary of what was said in this paragraph:
Table 1: Functional and Innovative products
|
|
Functional Productions |
Innovative Products |
|
Where are they found? |
Retail (stores
an gas stations). |
Specific
places. |
|
What needs they satisfy? |
Basic: don’t
change through time and are stable. |
Not basic: new
and not stable. |
|
How is the demand? |
Stable and
predictable. Stands for long periods of time. |
Variable,
volatile and unpredictable. Stands for short periods of time. |
|
What about competitors? |
Invite to competition. |
Invite to imitators. |
|
What margins do they offer? |
Low. That is
why they are related to incremental innovations. |
High. That is
why they are related to breakthroughs. |
|
Examples (industrial sector) |
Consumer products. |
Technological
products. |
Summarizing, organizations need to
identify their different products and manage them in different business units,
each one with specific policies, strategies and operational processes.
6. BUSINESS PLANS (BP) versus LEARNING PLANS (LP)
Startups and new businesses are
common in the business world. In addition, technology and new communication
tools are game-changing factors for many industrial sectors. In this context,
ideas are the raw material to progress and establish a sustainable CA.
Christensen (1998) specifically endorses that ideas for new businesses don’t
come completely delineated. Some of them are undercooked and should follow a
process.
Additionally, novel ideas are the
basis to build new and innovative products, and in contrast incremental ideas
support existing or functional products. Specifically, growth may come from a
combination of novel or existing markets and products. Hanlon (2013) says that
Ansoff Matrix[2], which
relates products and markets, can be applied to find new opportunities to grow
revenues through developing new products/services or tapping into new markets,
as per the following four strategies:
·
Market penetration strategy: existing products in
existing markets.
·
Market development strategy: existing products in new
markets.
·
Product development strategy: new products in existing
markets.
·
Diversification strategy: new products in new markets.
More than ever, firms need to find
new ways to increase revenues out of their traditional boundaries. New markets
and new products are a must in an increasingly mature developed world. By
contrast, Prahalad (2006) demonstrates that emerging economies propose new
paradigms and novel ways to understand products/services and markets and that
there is a fortune at the bottom of the pyramid.
Correspondingly, new and existing
businesses respond to different settings, as it is shown in the following Table
2:
Table
2: New and existing businesses
|
|
New business
(Startup) |
Existing
business |
|
Do ideas come completely delineated? |
No |
Yes |
|
What kinds of innovations are
needed? |
Novel/Breakthrough |
Incremental |
|
What products support? |
New &
Innovative |
Existing &
Functional |
|
Examples |
Obermeyer |
Campbell Soup
Company |
|
Ansoff related strategy |
Product
development & Diversification |
Market
penetration & Market development |
|
Related type of economy |
Emerging |
Developed |
|
Are needed new ways to interpret
markets, products and services? |
Yes |
No |
As a consequence, new
products/services and original ways to interpret markets are increasingly required.
However, Christensen et al. (2008) say that the stage-gate system used in
incremental innovations is sabotaging innovation in the following main areas:
·
Funding: To win it is a nanoseconds exercise, twitting
assumptions and running another full scenario to have a better net present
value of the same project.
·
Strategy: assuming that the strategy for disruptive
innovations has a right strategy as the stage-gate system assumes in
incremental innovations, which have a known strategy and a skillful execution.
By contrary, disruptive innovations have an unknown strategy and a variable
execution.
Authors insist that as it was shown
“the stage-gate
system is not suited for the task of assessing innovations whose purpose is to
build new growth business”. As a result, discovery-driven planning (or Learning
Plans, LP) should be used to reverse some steps for which the stage-gate
process is not capable. The following considerations are offered for LPs:
·
It should be
established a minimum accepted revenue, income statement and cash flow. We add
that data, analysis and full back ups are required in BP.
·
As it is not a plan to
execute (like BP) but to learn (LP), assumptions’ checklist should be built,
which must prove true to materialize these numbers. A set of plausible
assumptions must support the case for success, if not the project should be
killed.
·
LPs offer a way to
illuminate management and “assumptions constitute the key uncertainties”. As a
result, a go-to market and test the assumptions as many times as it is
required, and come back to the design table.
·
LPs should be routed
to asking important questions, rather than arriving to apparently correct
answers.
·
LP “is more used in
entrepreneurial settings than in large corporations that desperately need
them”.
They conclude that:
·
There are no
good tools to help managers “understand markets, build brands, find customers,
select employees, organize teams and develop strategy”.
·
Some financial
analysis and decision making tools about investments “distort the value, importance
and the likelihood of success of investments in innovation”.
·
Managers must
challenge paradigms and develop alternative
methodologies.
As
a result, LPs are
applicable to new
products/services and/or markets as variables are unknown and BPs to existing
products/services and/or markets as variables are more predictable. In addtion,
LPs require to be assigned a specific amount of money that will serve to learn
about the new venture in the market. That is why the key questions on LPs are:
what have we learned? and if the new knowledge that was got is applicable for
this specific project or another in the future?
The
following Table 3 shows the fundamental concepts that were shown on BPs and LPs
in this section:
Table
3: Business plans versus Learning plans
|
|
Business Plan (BP) |
Learning Plan (LP) |
|
Objective |
Execution |
Learning |
|
Strategy |
Known |
Unknown |
|
Execution |
Skillful |
Variable |
|
Process |
Stage-gate-system |
Market Check and continuos come
back to the design table |
|
What is needed? |
Data, analysis and full back ups. |
Minimum accepted revenue, income
statement and cash flow. |
|
Assumptions |
Known. Constitute key certainties |
A set of plausible assumptions
must support the case. Constitute key uncertainties. |
|
Routed to |
Finding correct answers. |
Asking important questions. |
|
Sabotage innovation? |
On funding and strategy |
|
|
Traditional financial analysis/decision making
tools. |
Applicable |
Value distortion on investments
in innovation |
|
Management attitude |
Business as usual |
Challenge paradigms and develop
alternative methodologies. |
|
Applicable to |
Existing products/services and/or
markets |
New products/services and/or
markets. |
7. CONCLUSIONS
The
world is profoundly
under constant change.
Different forces have been shaping a new framework in which volatility and the
unknown are opening new avenues to a future in which innovation seems the only
possibility for survival. CA has become a construct for shorter periods of
time; flexibility and adaptability are a must at this time.
Globalization
proposes a new dimensional interrelationship of all that is known, with an
apparent cultural homogenization and novel user’s categories that are not
included in current analysis. As a consequence, social sciences must be
rethought as they have lost tune with reality. Addtionally, affects decision
making at collective and individual levels, and also the internal and external
organizational structures. The individual identity is subject to other’s
opinion, multiple identities and to perishable patterns. Identity is connected
with the goods that somebody acquires.
In
economic terms, globalization is referred to internationalization, mobile
investments, standardization of products and processes, and global supply/value
chains. Organizations need to foster their ability to “think globally and act
locally” inside their internal and external structures. Therefore, flexibility,
specialization and processes fragmentation are the new ways to dislocate work
among the internal structures of the organizations. Under this paradigm
managers are inmerse in a decision making process with globality, glocalization
and multiple locations. Everything is “just now and far away”. In addtion, FDI
moves quickly causing inequalities everywhere generating that new champions
abound in many traditional markets.
Thanks
to globalization it is not possible to live in closed contexts and new roles
and decisions should be taken. As a consequence, leadership and the way we do
should be rethought, including the old management tools that we still use. The
challenge is to “adapt or die” not only for business people but to everybody.
Dominant logic, spaces and times have changed abruptly.
Under
the N=1 R=G paradigm, products, services, processes and practices need to be
rethought. Generally, the comon mistake in start-ups is that are used
techniques that come from existing businesses which require skillful execution.
That is rigid and detailed stage-gate-systems related to incremental products
with known assumptions. Consequently, traditional financial analysis and
decision making tools are only applicable to existing products and markets,
which turn completely new everyday. Focus should be on asking the correct
questions, not finding the correct answers.
Thus,
under globalization borderless geography, innovation and competitive advantages
uncertainties, and the distinction that should be made between functional and
innovative products, LPs
represent an excellent reply to these problematics as they propose to
continuosly check a set of assumptions in the market going back to the design
table, as many times as it is needed, not using traditional standard
investments and decision making tools “as-they-are”. In other words, LPs
portray a flexible work plan and a learning process for fast-changing times.
Finally,
executives and managers should challenge old paradigms and develop alternative
methodologies in order to enhance the odds of success of their new projects.
More than ever LPs should be used as their applicability is on changing
volatile cirmcunstances in which variables are unknown. As the unpredictable is
part of our comon lives today and business as usual is rare BPs are about to
die.
REFERENCES
CHRISTENSEN, C.; KAUFMAN, S. P.;
SHIH, W. (2008) Innovation killers, How financial tools destroy your capacity
to do new things, Harvard Business
Review, USA: Boston.
CHRISTENSEN, C. (1998) The
innovator’s dilemma: When technology cause great firms to fail, Harvard
Business Review Press, USA:
Boston.
FISCHER, M. L. (1997) What is the
right supply chain for your product, Harvard
Business Review, USA: Boston.
HAMEL, G.; BREEN, B. (2007) The
future of Management, Harvard Business
School Press, USA: Boston.
HANLON, A. (2013) Essential Marketing Models: Classic
planning tools to inform strategy, from http://www.smartinsights.com/marketing-planning/create-a-marketing-plan/ansoff-model/, recovered
08/07/2015.
PORTER, M. (1991) Strategy:
Seeking and securing competitive advantage, Harvard Business Review, USA:
Boston.
PRAHALAD, C. K. (2006) The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid:
Eradicating poverty through profits,
Pearson Education Inc/Wharton School Publishing, USA: NJ.
PRAHALAD, C. K.; KRISHNAN, M. S.
(2008) The new age of innovation:
Driving co-created value through global networks, McGraw Hill, India, Pvt
Limited.
PRAHALAD, C. K. (03/08/2012) C. K. Prahalad:
Innovation's Newest Age, from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf6HoLMhJR0,
recovered: 08/08/2015.
STUTELY, R. (2012) The definitive Business Plan, Pearson
Education Limited, UK: Harlow.
VILTARD,
L. A (2015) Innovación organizacional: su comprensión, puesta en marcha
como proceso y medición (Organizational innovation: its Understanding,
implementation as a Process and measurement). B. S. Lab, Italy: Avellino.
VILTARD, L. A. (2013) Globalización: Entender el nuevo ámbito mundial y tomar
decisiones (Globalization: Understanding the new worldwide context and take
decisions), B.S. Lab, Italy: Avellino.
WALTERS, H. (May, 19, 2008) C. K. Prahalad: The new age of innovation,
from: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2008-05-19/c-dot-k-dot-prahalad-the-new-age-of-innovationbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice,
recovered: 08/08/2015.