Pub Date : 2000-12-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006874
T. Kippenberger
Covers change in organizations and highlights three in particular: BT payphones; Citibank; and Hewlett‐Packard, using insets to show level of change, initial response, movement and new situations. Discusses research findings and unveils a variety of factors that affect how change initiatives are received, employing a Figure to aid in explanation of three groups: content; context; and cognition. Concludes, for employees to unlearn old ways, they themselves must take some responsibility for change.
{"title":"The gap between rhetoric and reality","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006874","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006874","url":null,"abstract":"Covers change in organizations and highlights three in particular: BT payphones; Citibank; and Hewlett‐Packard, using insets to show level of change, initial response, movement and new situations. Discusses research findings and unveils a variety of factors that affect how change initiatives are received, employing a Figure to aid in explanation of three groups: content; context; and cognition. Concludes, for employees to unlearn old ways, they themselves must take some responsibility for change.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127789399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-12-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006875
T. Kippenberger
Discusses event pacing (companies reacting to various changes) and time pacing (creating new products/services, etc.) and looks at their differences in detail. Identifies three areas in particular where transition management is crucial. Employs two insets, one on specification trade‐offs, the other strategic choices. Believes time pacing helps companies to tread the fine line between over‐and under‐reacting. Concludes time pacing many not be every businesses’ answer — but it cannot be ignored.
{"title":"Using time‐paced change to maintain momentum","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006875","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006875","url":null,"abstract":"Discusses event pacing (companies reacting to various changes) and time pacing (creating new products/services, etc.) and looks at their differences in detail. Identifies three areas in particular where transition management is crucial. Employs two insets, one on specification trade‐offs, the other strategic choices. Believes time pacing helps companies to tread the fine line between over‐and under‐reacting. Concludes time pacing many not be every businesses’ answer — but it cannot be ignored.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134517098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-12-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006873
T. Kippenberger
Proclaims that the hard approach (referred to here as theory E) is the creation of economic value/high returns to shareholders; and that the soft approach (theory O) sees organizations as having many stakeholders, developing employees and their loyalty. Posits that, for organizations to prosper, eventually, theory E must be joined with theory O. Uses an inset with some arguments about change. Gives an example of Asda trying to combine Theories E and O, although, because Wal‐Mart bought Asda in 1999 for eight times its 1991 value, the Asda case could not be tracked over time.
{"title":"Two contrasting theories of change: Theory E and Theory O","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006873","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006873","url":null,"abstract":"Proclaims that the hard approach (referred to here as theory E) is the creation of economic value/high returns to shareholders; and that the soft approach (theory O) sees organizations as having many stakeholders, developing employees and their loyalty. Posits that, for organizations to prosper, eventually, theory E must be joined with theory O. Uses an inset with some arguments about change. Gives an example of Asda trying to combine Theories E and O, although, because Wal‐Mart bought Asda in 1999 for eight times its 1991 value, the Asda case could not be tracked over time.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"177 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123231654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-12-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006872
T. Kippenberger
Profiles two types of technological change — sustaining and disruptive. Employs an inset of definitions explaining technology, innovation, sustaining technologies and disruptive technologies. States a lack of understanding about the strategic difference between sustaining and disruptive technologies can result in a crucial failure. Further insets shows Hewlett‐Packard’s laser jet and ink‐jet printers as a prime example of how to cope with disruptive technology, even if it threatens suicide for its original business division. Sums up firms are rarely in a position to have the correct organizational, managerial or cultural response to enable them to cope successfully with changes generated by disruptive technologies.
{"title":"Change that can kill off great, well‐run companies","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006872","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006872","url":null,"abstract":"Profiles two types of technological change — sustaining and disruptive. Employs an inset of definitions explaining technology, innovation, sustaining technologies and disruptive technologies. States a lack of understanding about the strategic difference between sustaining and disruptive technologies can result in a crucial failure. Further insets shows Hewlett‐Packard’s laser jet and ink‐jet printers as a prime example of how to cope with disruptive technology, even if it threatens suicide for its original business division. Sums up firms are rarely in a position to have the correct organizational, managerial or cultural response to enable them to cope successfully with changes generated by disruptive technologies.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115675378","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-12-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006869
T. Kippenberger
Discusses the surge of interest in hi‐tech shares fuelled by dot.com mania. Flags up that most mergers and acquisitions fail to achieve their originally intended benefits — even though this is ignored at times. Looks at Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric (GE) and the way that, in the last 20 years, he has changed one of the world’s largest companies — the value increasing from $14bn to more than $400bn. Concludes GE is now a business built to last.
{"title":"Change just won’t go away","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006869","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006869","url":null,"abstract":"Discusses the surge of interest in hi‐tech shares fuelled by dot.com mania. Flags up that most mergers and acquisitions fail to achieve their originally intended benefits — even though this is ignored at times. Looks at Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric (GE) and the way that, in the last 20 years, he has changed one of the world’s largest companies — the value increasing from $14bn to more than $400bn. Concludes GE is now a business built to last.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"86 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126528438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-12-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006870
T. Kippenberger
Proclaims much depends on managers’ capacity to move to a dynamic form of control that is the antithesis of routine management. States the era of mass production was at its peak in the 1950s and 1960s, which saw jobs become standardized and management tasks more specialized as control and co‐ordination became central for organization. Posits organizations have to be able to innovate and adapt to changing conditions in order to survive.
{"title":"What does it mean to be flexible","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006870","url":null,"abstract":"Proclaims much depends on managers’ capacity to move to a dynamic form of control that is the antithesis of routine management. States the era of mass production was at its peak in the 1950s and 1960s, which saw jobs become standardized and management tasks more specialized as control and co‐ordination became central for organization. Posits organizations have to be able to innovate and adapt to changing conditions in order to survive.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116800169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-11-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006862
T. Kippenberger
Reflects on strategic alliances including local/home alliances and global alliances. Suggests there are three factors driving the growth of strategic alliances: globalization; accelerated technical change; and disenchantment with mergers and acquisitions. Uses two Figures for explanation of points and alliances. Concludes research shows that most partnerships achieve the desired objectives — for at least one partner anyway.
{"title":"Competing through alliances","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006862","url":null,"abstract":"Reflects on strategic alliances including local/home alliances and global alliances. Suggests there are three factors driving the growth of strategic alliances: globalization; accelerated technical change; and disenchantment with mergers and acquisitions. Uses two Figures for explanation of points and alliances. Concludes research shows that most partnerships achieve the desired objectives — for at least one partner anyway.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123019539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-11-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006861
T. Kippenberger
Discloses that the concept of the unique selling proposition (USP), as defined, means every advertisement has to propose a specific benefit to the consumer, that competition could not or did not offer. Warns it is much more difficult nowadays than 40 years ago to maintain a product difference or benefit. Looks at differentiators — some that don’t work and some that do. Examines the four steps to differentiation stating differentiating ideas must be simple, visible and delivered again and again.
{"title":"Remember the USP? (Unique selling proposition)","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006861","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006861","url":null,"abstract":"Discloses that the concept of the unique selling proposition (USP), as defined, means every advertisement has to propose a specific benefit to the consumer, that competition could not or did not offer. Warns it is much more difficult nowadays than 40 years ago to maintain a product difference or benefit. Looks at differentiators — some that don’t work and some that do. Examines the four steps to differentiation stating differentiating ideas must be simple, visible and delivered again and again.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127662167","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-11-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006868
T. Kippenberger
Investigates the online market and its new vocabulary. Defines what is offered and what the ‘e’ and ‘i’ models are. Suggests there are four basic types of online marketplaces, and these are: exchanges; catalogue hubs; MRO hubs; and yield managers. Looks at other models of online sources and where they might work best. Sums up that online markets are a new phenomenon and their impact on competition is still difficult to judge — but should not be ignored — regulators do not want to stifle new forms of competition.
{"title":"The potential impact of B2B exchanges","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006868","url":null,"abstract":"Investigates the online market and its new vocabulary. Defines what is offered and what the ‘e’ and ‘i’ models are. Suggests there are four basic types of online marketplaces, and these are: exchanges; catalogue hubs; MRO hubs; and yield managers. Looks at other models of online sources and where they might work best. Sums up that online markets are a new phenomenon and their impact on competition is still difficult to judge — but should not be ignored — regulators do not want to stifle new forms of competition.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125413485","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-11-01DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000006860
T. Kippenberger
Records that most mergers and acquisitions fail to deliver shareholder value and not much attention is paid to more mundane reality matters meaning loss of priority in important matters. States resource‐based views of strategy highlights the fact that competitive advantage lies not in products or services but in resources and intangible capabilities which produce them.
{"title":"Competition isn’t someone else’s job!","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006860","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006860","url":null,"abstract":"Records that most mergers and acquisitions fail to deliver shareholder value and not much attention is paid to more mundane reality matters meaning loss of priority in important matters. States resource‐based views of strategy highlights the fact that competitive advantage lies not in products or services but in resources and intangible capabilities which produce them.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128053842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}