| 作者 |
 从杰夫里 摩尔对美国制造商面对中国挑战而提出的建议中，我们能学到什么。 |
 |
完颜
头衔: 海归中校
声望: 学员
加入时间: 2004/02/20
文章: 629
来自: 我就不告诉你！
海归分: 54865
|
|
|
作者：完颜 在 海归商务 发贴, 来自【海归网】 http://www.haiguinet.com
Geoffrey Moore是的作者，高科技企业的头头们应该都不会陌生吧。他还写过其他书如，等。这些书里的观点在今天看来也许有些不合时宜，但对做新产品的高科技企业来说，“跨越裂缝”的整体思想仍对我们有巨大的指导作用。
完颜强力推荐这本书，另外推荐一本和此书互补的书，哈佛一教授写的。
在本文中，摩尔提出面对中国的直接竞争，美国制造业企业可采用三种应对策略：
1。向高端产品转移。
2。向终端市场和服务转移。
3。向高端市场转移。
1和3的区别，我的体会，1是靠不断创新，搞高精尖产品。而3是靠对市场的理解，做集成多个产品的系统，保持高利润率。
我想我们海龟也可以向这三个方向靠拢，这好像本坛大佬们意见相左，很多大佬的观点是老老实实作我们的lost cost supplier，是吧？
我倒觉得眼光应该放远一点，过十几年把美国佬生意全TM抢过来，你们说呢？
不说废话了，请看原文：
原载于MSI杂志。
-----------------------------------------------------------
Taking on China Inc.
By Geoffrey Moore
What business models make the most sense in the U.S. post-industrial age?
Global competition circles back to one thing for U.S. manufacturers today: the rise of China. We are witnessing an industrial transformation in Asia, led by China (on both sides of the Formosa Straits), which will realign economic power globally.
This transfer of work will enable millions to raise their standard of living, and will do much to align the world抯 most populous nation with the interests of liberal democracy and market economies. But from a U.S. manufacturing perspective, particularly in the short term, the competitive situation is grave.
In taking on a challenge of this magnitude, the first thing we must do is defend ourselves against what author Gary Hamel likes to call DAN: Denial, Arrogance, and Nostalgia. The U.S. auto industry has flunked on all three. It is imperative that the current generation of manufacturers does not.
So, no denial: China is in the driver抯 seat, and there抯 nothing in the short term we can do about it. No arrogance: we are not entitled to anything we cannot earn and cannot defend against competition. No nostalgia: whatever pricing, salaries, terms, and conditions we used to enjoy are being swept off the table, and we have to start from ground zero to reestablish our right to earn a premium.
Identify advantages
If we look clear-eyed at the position that China is staking out, it has three dimensions of note:
Converting its current low-cost labor advantage into a long-term, sustainable cost advantage rooted in operational excellence. The U.S. standard of living creates a price umbrella that has always attracted other nations to offer comparable work at much lower labor costs. This alone has never represented a sustainable threat because we have been able to out-innovate these efforts on the front end, and co-opt them through outsourcing low-value work on the back end, and thus stay ahead of the cost curve. In China Inc., however, we have a far more experienced, educated, and well-funded competitor to deal with, and we can expect to be competing against a Wal-Mart-like entity going forward.
High-volume commodity markets where low-cost advantage has the greatest leverage. All business models ultimately revert to one of two archetypes: complex systems or volume operations, or what we used to call the value/volume split. China抯 strategy for the foreseeable future will put it on the volume side of this divide. That suggests a competitive response anchored on the value side.
Become the market-share leader in manufacturing worldwide, further reinforcing its cost advantage through volume advantage. There is a virtuous cycle that unfolds around successful business models, leading the leader to become more and more powerful, at the expense of its direct competitors. This bodes ill for high-
volume manufacturers outside of China. At the same time, however, the inertial momentum of a successful cycle makes it harder and harder for entities to change strategy. This bodes well for indirect competitors that shift their focus onto value rather than volume.
Faced with direct competition from China Inc., there are at least three promising 搗alue-centric?directions in which to point your company抯 strategy:
Upstream. Focus on complex engineering needs that feed into manufacturing, where time-to-market issues create onshore advantage.
Downstream. Focus on complex marketing needs that follow out of manufacturing, where distribution and customer service issues create onshore advantage.
Up-market: Shift the focus from supplying the product to supplying the entire subsystem of which it is a part (and turn China Inc. from a competitor into a supplier).
Swimming upstream
Companies adopting this strategy will focus on new product and new process introductions and shift their resource allocation from plants to people and processes. To their customers they will look more and more like design houses, with a role in the value chain comparable to that of an R&D fab in the semiconductor industry. Their primary added value will be in delivering cutting-edge services, exploring uncharacterized processes, or rapidly mobilizing for very tight time-to-market windows.
The value disciplines that drive this business are technology leadership, with intellectual property displacing capital equipment as the strategy-defining asset; and customer intimacy, to earn the trust of advanced technology groups. To sustain this kind of relationship almost always implies a vertical market focus. Side benefits of such a focus limit the domain of knowledge you must master, build customer relationships that support an ongoing stream of high-margin sales, and open up a population from which to recruit future experts.
Today, much of this work is offered in a less differentiated form and at a discount by volume manufacturers in hopes of winning downstream, high-volume business. It is critical, therefore, that companies adopting this strategy do so from a position of strength, tying their offers to specifications that are critical to customer success (e.g., hitting a tight time-to-volume window on a complex product) and that traditional competition simply cannot meet.
The good news about this strategy is that there is an unending stream of technology innovation to be absorbed. The less good news is that it is hard to scale expertise-based businesses, particularly when the base of required expertise can be expected to shift over time.
The bad news is that you can never rest on your laurels, for as soon as your customers can bring your expertise in house, they will, and you must find a new frontier to exploit. For all these reasons, from an investor point of view, innovation-based service businesses are not particularly attractive, and liquidity, as in advertising and marketing companies, tends to come from leveraged buyout rollups rather than initial public offerings.
Swimming downstream
Companies swimming downstream focus their differentiating capabilities on mass customization and assemble-to-order value propositions, often combined with logistical services to make the consumption of offers more convenient. For example, a company like Muscatine, Iowa-based Bandag, in the retread tire business, delivers its products downstream through thousands of franchisees that lease Bandag equipment to actually do the manufacturing right at the point of sale. And the company is expanding its business into selling 搈anaged tire services,?where truckers pay a fixed expense per mile to have all their tire needs taken care of.
The value discipline that drives this business model is a combination of customer intimacy, which gains the trust of the end customer and the other members of the value chain, and operational excellence, to keep costs down while providing just-in-time value-add. It is therefore a process-focused approach, but one that is complex because of its linkages to other companies?processes as well.
The challenge in this model is to seamlessly integrate with your downstream customer抯 business processes such that wait-time, inventory, and rework are minimized. This requires state-of-the-art systems at both ends, a bar that the customer is not always prepared to step up to.
The good news for this strategy is that, with the rise of the build-to-order model, more and more products will require late-stage configuration, ideally at the point of sale. This plays against the strengths of offshore, high-volume commodity competition, with plenty of opportunity for onshore providers to earn a premium.
Moving upmarket
Companies going up-market redefine the boundary between the customer and themselves by taking it up a level in complexity. That is, instead of selling a product that fits into a system, they sell the whole system. Thus in the automotive industry, companies like Delphi and Visteon focus on taking a complex-systems approach to the market, selling whole subsystems rather than commodity components, thereby securing their place as Tier 1 suppliers and earning additional points of margin.
The value disciplines that drive this model are technology leadership, to bring the skills necessary to take on the next level of complexity; and operational excellence, to integrate with the customer抯 business processes. Note that as with downstream integration, this kind of operational excellence is very different from the offshore, high-volume model. It is instead specific to the complex-systems model, and its primary cost-reducer is not price, but rather friction reduction. These are achieved through breakthroughs in integration, and that is the watchword for this strategy.
The challenge in this model is winning the support of your customers to outsource to you functions they have historically done in-house. Thus your old customer, the one who bought your product components, often can become your in-house competitor, who sees the new offer as job threatening. Getting around this obstacle, as in all outsourcing contracts, requires executive support along with a thoughtful plan about what is to become of the in-house team.
The good news is this strategy lets you co-opt the high-volume, low-cost value proposition from China Inc., as now you become its customer, with the negotiating power of your customers?orders behind you. To earn this new position, of course, requires you to redefine your own business. Thus, it抯 not for the faint of heart.
Complexity as friend
In any market, over time, complex systems can become commoditized into volume operations. For the low-cost producer, this creates a stream of new business opportunities. For the value chain as a whole, however, it simply moves the bottleneck of complexity from one zone to another.
The key to the complex systems business model is to follow the complexity and set up your shop wherever it lights next. This, in turn, requires a consultative relationship with your customers and partners so that you have the perspective and the trusted-advisor status to bring off the new role. It is a demanding business, to be sure, but innovation always is.
作者：完颜 在 海归商务 发贴, 来自【海归网】 http://www.haiguinet.com
|
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
|
-
 从杰夫里 摩尔对美国制造商面对中国挑战而提出的建议中，我们能学到什么。 -- 完颜 - (10842 Byte) 2004-2-20 周五, 23:14 (935 reads)
|
|
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题, 不能回复主题, 不能编辑自己的文章, 不能删除自己的文章, 不能发表投票, 您 不可以 发表活动帖子在本论坛, 不能添加附件不能下载文件, |
|
|
