U.S Government Does Not Have a Strategic Plan
Many find it difficult to believe that the Government of the United
States does not have a strategic plan. While it is true that various departments and agencies within the government have strategic plans (the Department of Transportation usually creates a good strategic plan) the government, as a whole, does not have a long-term strategic plan.
Every four years there is a presidential election and senators and house members are elected every six years in the United States. Whoever is elected as president sets the agenda, along with a Congress who sets the budget. That means the long-term strategy of the federal government can (and often does) change based upon the personal agendas of these individuals.
Have you noticed that sometimes the U.S. Government helps a foreign country and then at other times, after an election, that assistance changes? Or sometimes the relationship with the United Nations is stronger than at other times? Strategic relationships often depend upon who is sitting in the chairs of leadership.
A few years ago I was sitting in the living room of a Prime Minister in the Caribbean listening as he described how the U.S. government developed a relationship with his country only to then find that the United States did not like the fact that offshore gambling was allowed, which could encourage money laundering. According to the PM, the U.S. Government provided enough pressure to cause this small island nation to revamp its policy, a policy that was a major revenue generation for the country.
Strategic planning, a process that has successfully been used going all the way back to ancient Greece, a process created by military institutions (segments of government) and perfected by business, is not used at the macro level by the U.S. Government.
Do you think China's growth is happenstance? It is not. It is part of China's strategic plan that it created years ago. In fact I am told that this is China's eleventh 5-year strategic plan. Thus, China has been working off of strategic plans for the last 55 years.
Perhaps it is time leadership decides where the U.S. should be 10, 15 or even 20 years from now instead of only thinking short-term and changing the agenda all the time. Imagine if a business brought in a new CEO every four years and a new Board every six years and they changed the entire focus of the organization based upon their own personal agendas.......
Need prove the federal government needs to concentrate on strategic planning? The White House blog today (march 3) writes:
"The Federal government owns 1.2 million properties across the country making it the biggest property owner in the United States, but billions of taxpayer dollars are wasted each year on government properties that are no longer needed. This includes roughly 14,000 buildings and structures currently designated as excess and thousands of others that are underutilized."
An organization governed by a strategic plan that is constantly controlled and monitored would never let that happen.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Fly the Flexible Pricing Skies
Fly The Flexible Pricing Skies
Allegiant Air has sent a letter to the Department of Transportation floating the idea of offering a new strategy for airline pricing. The consumer would pay a base price and based upon the price of fuel at the time of travel, the final price would actually be higher or lower. The consumer would be offered the option of paying the regular fare or the new flexible fare.
Sound innovative? It is not a new idea, the charter industry already uses a similar approach. It is basically a strategy of pushing fuel hedging to the customer thus mitigating risk to the airlines associated with world events and the price of fuel.
Which would you rather buy, a set price ticket or one that may go up or down depending upon world events and fuel prices? What percentage of the buying public is likely to participate? If your company's financial policy is to select the lowest price, might that fit into this strategy?
We'll have to wait and see what the Dept. of Transportation thinks about this old strategy being used in a new way.
Allegiant Air has sent a letter to the Department of Transportation floating the idea of offering a new strategy for airline pricing. The consumer would pay a base price and based upon the price of fuel at the time of travel, the final price would actually be higher or lower. The consumer would be offered the option of paying the regular fare or the new flexible fare.
Sound innovative? It is not a new idea, the charter industry already uses a similar approach. It is basically a strategy of pushing fuel hedging to the customer thus mitigating risk to the airlines associated with world events and the price of fuel.
Which would you rather buy, a set price ticket or one that may go up or down depending upon world events and fuel prices? What percentage of the buying public is likely to participate? If your company's financial policy is to select the lowest price, might that fit into this strategy?
We'll have to wait and see what the Dept. of Transportation thinks about this old strategy being used in a new way.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Two and a Half (minus) Men
Two and a Half (minus) Men
The news is buzzing about the possible end of the television show, Two and a Half Men.
Looking at the situation from purely a strategic perspective, one has to wonder what went wrong? Sure TV shows, like products, have a lifecycle but it didn't appear that the show had progressed to the exit strategy stage as of yet. Two and a Half has been a top-rated show featuring Charlie Harper, a man successful in the entertainment business who earns lots of money, drinks and likes his women. Sound familiar? People watch the show and it is (was) one of CBS's top shows - a proven model for success.
One of the stars of the show, Charlie Sheen, according to the media, lives a similar lifestyle in real life, but much to the dislike of some executives. The media is reporting that Charlie does not have a "morals clause" in his contract, meaning any activities he pursues would not be a violation of his contract.
In business, this type of branding would be great. Consistency between the highly successful character that everyone watches and the real life character might even add value to the business and the brand. Sheen gets paid millions to portray a lifestyle on TV and then criticized for living a similar lifestyle. I hear that no major advertisers have left the show. Perhaps CBS should be supporting Charlie and hope that he makes the news. It might actually draw more viewers to the show. Remember the old PR adage, I don't care what they say as long as they spell my name right?
Some might say Sheen's alleged behavior can be bad for business. A star might get drunk or high, hurt someone, be arrested or even get hurt and miss a few weeks of taping. Ok, I agree. But knowing that those risks exist at the beginning of a season, executives should account for that in its timeline and account for it in its risk assessment and contingency budget.
One media report indicated that Two and a Half Men is a billion dollar business. Surely a cost-benefit analysis would show a delayed taping schedule of a few weeks would not be that detrimental when looking at the overall strategic picture. It is hard to believe that management did not prepare for the recent events and actually bring in PR to mitigate the risk or even capitalize on the events. Instead of consistent marketing and branding of the two Charlie's, it appears we may see a going out of business sign.
That's too bad. I guess we will all be minus two and a half.
The news is buzzing about the possible end of the television show, Two and a Half Men.
Looking at the situation from purely a strategic perspective, one has to wonder what went wrong? Sure TV shows, like products, have a lifecycle but it didn't appear that the show had progressed to the exit strategy stage as of yet. Two and a Half has been a top-rated show featuring Charlie Harper, a man successful in the entertainment business who earns lots of money, drinks and likes his women. Sound familiar? People watch the show and it is (was) one of CBS's top shows - a proven model for success.
One of the stars of the show, Charlie Sheen, according to the media, lives a similar lifestyle in real life, but much to the dislike of some executives. The media is reporting that Charlie does not have a "morals clause" in his contract, meaning any activities he pursues would not be a violation of his contract.
In business, this type of branding would be great. Consistency between the highly successful character that everyone watches and the real life character might even add value to the business and the brand. Sheen gets paid millions to portray a lifestyle on TV and then criticized for living a similar lifestyle. I hear that no major advertisers have left the show. Perhaps CBS should be supporting Charlie and hope that he makes the news. It might actually draw more viewers to the show. Remember the old PR adage, I don't care what they say as long as they spell my name right?
Some might say Sheen's alleged behavior can be bad for business. A star might get drunk or high, hurt someone, be arrested or even get hurt and miss a few weeks of taping. Ok, I agree. But knowing that those risks exist at the beginning of a season, executives should account for that in its timeline and account for it in its risk assessment and contingency budget.
One media report indicated that Two and a Half Men is a billion dollar business. Surely a cost-benefit analysis would show a delayed taping schedule of a few weeks would not be that detrimental when looking at the overall strategic picture. It is hard to believe that management did not prepare for the recent events and actually bring in PR to mitigate the risk or even capitalize on the events. Instead of consistent marketing and branding of the two Charlie's, it appears we may see a going out of business sign.
That's too bad. I guess we will all be minus two and a half.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
The Domino Effect
The Domino Effect
In business, there is a process called The Domino Effect. When one significant event occurs, it often sets off a series or chain of events. This appears to be what is happening in the Middle East and North Africa. One person in Tunisia started an uprising that brought down the country. The people of Egypt quickly saw that it was possible to protest (and win) and the second government fell. Now Libya is on the brink, and there are other countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Yemen, who are experiencing unrest as well. If the dominoes continue to fall, a dozen or so countries could ultimately see new leadership.
The strategic questions at this point are which countries are next? How far will the dominoes fall? Will a European country be one of the dominoes? What about a country in the Americas? These events warrant close watching as the global impact could be significant.
The implications of the revolutions could be significant for foreign affairs and trade for years, if not decades, in the future. New opportunities and new threats will be created. Time to revise the SWOTT analysis.
How can you strategically prepare to take advantage of any opportunities or mitigate any risks associated with the revolution?
In business, there is a process called The Domino Effect. When one significant event occurs, it often sets off a series or chain of events. This appears to be what is happening in the Middle East and North Africa. One person in Tunisia started an uprising that brought down the country. The people of Egypt quickly saw that it was possible to protest (and win) and the second government fell. Now Libya is on the brink, and there are other countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Yemen, who are experiencing unrest as well. If the dominoes continue to fall, a dozen or so countries could ultimately see new leadership.
The strategic questions at this point are which countries are next? How far will the dominoes fall? Will a European country be one of the dominoes? What about a country in the Americas? These events warrant close watching as the global impact could be significant.
The implications of the revolutions could be significant for foreign affairs and trade for years, if not decades, in the future. New opportunities and new threats will be created. Time to revise the SWOTT analysis.
How can you strategically prepare to take advantage of any opportunities or mitigate any risks associated with the revolution?
Saturday, February 26, 2011
NEW HORIZON’S 18TH ANNIVERSARY
THAILAND – March marks the beginning of New Horizon International Consulting LLC’s 18th year in business.
New Horizon wishes to thank its clients, affiliates, strategic partners and various stakeholders for the business relationships formed over the past nearly two decades.
To commemorate the occasion, New Horizon is launching a new program. S.A. Romeo, Founder and CEO of New Horizon states, “As companies begin to grow and expand coming out of the recession, the expectations for companies to perform will be greater.”
New Horizon has designed a management program that helps managers cut through the theory and utilize practical management skills in order to “get things done” and implement the strategic plan.
The management program is offered as a keynote address, half-day seminar and 2-day hands on training.
-30-
New Horizon wishes to thank its clients, affiliates, strategic partners and various stakeholders for the business relationships formed over the past nearly two decades.
To commemorate the occasion, New Horizon is launching a new program. S.A. Romeo, Founder and CEO of New Horizon states, “As companies begin to grow and expand coming out of the recession, the expectations for companies to perform will be greater.”
New Horizon has designed a management program that helps managers cut through the theory and utilize practical management skills in order to “get things done” and implement the strategic plan.
The management program is offered as a keynote address, half-day seminar and 2-day hands on training.
-30-
Monday, February 21, 2011
Uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa
As I write this post from Thailand, the local news is constantly breaking news about the unrest in the Middle East and North Africa.
One has to ask, why all these uprisings at this point in time? Has there been a strategic shift in power that is allowing the people of these countries to feel the need to stand up to leaders who have ruled for decades in some cases?
One has to ask, why all these uprisings at this point in time? Has there been a strategic shift in power that is allowing the people of these countries to feel the need to stand up to leaders who have ruled for decades in some cases?
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Strategic Alliances - It's a Relationship
Strategic alliances are distinctly different from mergers and acquisitions. I have just published a brief article describing how alliances are more relationship driven than mergers and acquisitions, which are more transaction oriented.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
