Tuesday, July 31, 2018

PERSONAL SPECIAL.... Focus on what is important and not just what’s urgent


Focus on what is important and not just what’s urgent

Knowing how to prioritise means you do what matters at the right time. Follow these tips to make the most of your day

Do you get to the end of the day and feel that you have met your most pressing deadlines, but haven’t accomplished anything that’s fundamentally important? You are not alone. People typically choose to complete tasks that have very short deadlines, even in situations where tasks with less pressing deadlines are just as easy and promised a bigger reward. Alice Boyes, the author of The Healthy Mind Toolkit, shares tips on how to make the perfect choices. What can you do to beat the urge? 

Here are some strategies to try:

Schedule important tasks
Research shows that scheduling when and where you’ll do something makes it dramatically more likely that the task will get done. For very important tasks, try assigning a particular task to be the only one you work on for an entire day.
Isolate the most impactful elements of important tasks
When you consider a goal, also consider a half-size version. Mentally put your original version and the half-size version side by side, and ask yourself which is the more realistic goal. If your task still feels intimidating, shrink it further until it feels doable.
Anticipate and manage your feelings
Broadly speaking, working on important things typically requires having good skills for tolerating uncomfortable emotions, such as anxiety. Acknowledging and labeling the specific emotions that make an experience challenging is a basic but effective step for reducing those emotions.
Spend less time on unimportant tasks
Unimportant tasks have a nasty tendency of taking up more time than they should. For instance, you might sit down to proofread an employee’s report — but before you know it, you’ve spent an hour rewriting the whole thing. In the future, you might decide to limit yourself to making your three most important comments on any piece of work that’s fundamentally acceptable, or give yourself a time limit for how long you’ll spend providing notes.
Prioritise tasks that will reduce your number of urgent but unimportant tasks
The sort of scenarios you most want to avoid are fixing the same problems over and over or giving the same instructions repeatedly. To overcome a pattern of spending all day ‘chasing cows’, you can outsource, automate, eliminate tasks, streamline your workflow or create templates for recu r ri ng t asks.
Look for situations in which you can make an investment of time once to set up a system that will save you time in the future.
Pay attention to what helps you see the big picture
When we’re head-down in the grind, it’s hard to have enough mental space to see the big picture. Pay attention to what naturally helps you do this. Something that travelling, especially taking flights alone can give you space. There’s nothing like a literal 10,000-foot view to give you a clearer perspective on your path. Whatever helps you see the big picture, don’t skip those things. Also, give yourself time after those activities to figure out how you’re going to translate your insights into specific plans and actions.
— THE NEW YORK TIMES


MANAGEMENT SPECIAL... From lean to lasting: Making operational improvements stick


From lean to lasting: Making operational improvements stick

By focusing on the “soft” side of lean and Six Sigma initiatives, leading global companies gain substantial, scalable, and sustainable advantages.
For companies seeking large-scale operational improvements, all roads lead to Toyota. Each year, thousands of executives tour its facilities to learn how lean production—the operational and organizational innovations the automaker pioneered—might help their own companies. During the past 20 years, lean has become, along with Six Sigma, one of two kinds of prominent performance-improvement programs adopted by global manufacturing and, more recently, service companies. Recently, organizations as diverse as steelmakers, insurance companies, and public-sector agencies have benefited from “leaning” their operations with Toyota’s now-classic approach: eliminating waste, variability, and inflexibility.
Yet in our experience, organizations overlook up to half of the potential savings when they implement or expand operational-improvement programs inspired by lean, Six Sigma, or both.1Some companies set their sights too low; others falter by implementing lean and other performance-enhancing tools without recognizing how existing performance-management systems or employee mind-sets might undermine them. Still others underestimate the level of senior-management involvement required; for example, they delegate responsibility for change programs to their lean experts or Six Sigma black belts—practitioners who are technically skilled but often lack the authority, capabilities, or numbers to make change stick.
The broader challenge underlying such problems is integrating the better-known “hard” operational tools and approaches—such as just-in-time production—with the “soft” side, including the development of leaders who can help teams to continuously identify and make efficiency improvements, link and align the boardroom with the shop floor, and build the technical and interpersonal skills that make efficiency benefits real. Mastering lean’s softer side is difficult because it forces all employees to commit themselves to new ways of thinking and working. Toyota remains the exemplar: while many companies can replicate its lean technology, success on the softer side often eludes them.
Some companies, however, overcome the challenges and get more from their operational-improvement programs. Against a backdrop of growing economic uncertainty, their success can be a source of inspiration and enlightenment for industrial and service companies and for public- and social-sector organizations looking to extract greater value from these efforts.
Soft is hard
Making operational change stick is difficult. Operations typically account for the largest number of a company’s employees and the widest variation in skill levels. Units often are scattered across dozens or even hundreds of sites throughout the world, function independently, and have distinct corporate cultures—particularly if M&A has fueled a company’s growth. Each facility may specialize in different products or services and face unique pressures from customers, competitors, and regulators. These factors complicate efforts to design, execute, and scale operational-improvement programs.
Consequently, many companies emphasize the technical aspects of their programs over the organizational ones. That approach is understandable. Technical solutions are objective and straightforward; analytical solutions to operational problems abound in lean and Six Sigma tool kits; and companies make significant investments to train experts who know how to apply them. What’s more, the tools and experts actually are invaluable in diagnosing and improving operational performance.
Overlooking the softer side, however, drastically lowers any initiative’s odds of success. Some companies, for example, rush to implement the tool kit without ensuring that their employees—including managers—are prepared to work and lead in new and different ways. In such cases, “initiative fatigue” and even distrust may set in, and efficiency gains fizzle out as the black belts move on to other projects.
At times, such an improvement initiative first appears to be successful but is later found to be insufficient to meet the company’s main objectives. An aerospace manufacturer, for example, wanted to increase production of a product with rapidly growing sales. The company’s lean experts, assigned to plan and run the initiative, quickly identified productivity-enhancement opportunities and began conducting kaizen projects.2On the surface, the program was working: the number of projects and employees trained in the new approaches—two indicators the company tracked—were increasing. But management’s inattention to the softer side created difficulties.
Since the program’s goals weren’t adequately defined or communicated by senior managers, the experts focused on what they could achieve—primarily easy wins, including technical changes to redesign assembly processes and to improve the effectiveness of certain machines. In retrospect, these changes, while broadly useful, did little to help meet growing demand for the product. Meanwhile, some of the company’s salespeople, long frustrated with what they saw as the shortcomings of the operations group, began circumventing the production-scheduling system in order to speed their own products through the queue. That undercut many of the efficiency gains the experts managed to create.
The result, in fact, was chaos: line workers later showed executives a schedule indicating that one machine, chosen at random, was to perform 250 hours of work during an 8-hour shift. This revelation spurred the executives to refocus the program, investigate the organizational factors behind the difficulties, and ultimately identify much more far-reaching solutions—starting with an effort to get sales and operations to collaborate in setting production priorities and to work together on a daily basis.
Getting started: Set high aspirations
Such examples show that neglecting the organizational components of an operational transformation can delay or even derail it. Top companies, by contrast, attend to the softer elements of an initiative throughout its whole course, starting with the earliest, aspiration-setting phases, when senior leaders identify the key goals and start to communicate them. That helps companies to establish a stronger foundation for change and to set more achievable, and often much higher, ambitions than they otherwise could. A better understanding of the cultural starting point enables top companies to determine where they should focus at the beginning of a program, when to implement its various elements, and how to achieve their goals.
Consider the experience of a North American power generator that used cultural insights to combat skepticism about the scope of the efficiency improvements attainable in a nascent initiative. This kind of doubt is common when companies lack a self-evident catalyst for change—say, a takeover or a looming bankruptcy. The power generator responded by sending its managers to visit a company, in another process-intensive industry, that had recently implemented a lean program. There the managers saw similar improvements in action and heard the enthusiasm that line managers and union leaders expressed for them. That experience was instrumental in helping the managers address their own employees’ uncertainties about how much improvement was possible.
Likewise, greater attention to corporate culture helped a global chemical company launch an efficiency-improvement program across its network of 300 plants. The company’s abiding respect for science and for highly educated experts at first biased managers in favor of solutions based on new technology rather than line-level process improvements. After conducting a pilot project, however, executives saw that about 60 percent of the value it generated came from new work processes, not new and more efficient machines. That realization changed the design of the program and raised its goals—in some cases, by a factor of three. The company now expects the program to have an annual impact of more than $1 billion.
By contrast, companies that misread employee mind-sets and other cultural elements squander time and resources. A large logistics group that tried to overhaul its transport network, for example, overlooked the way years of inadequate capital investment would affect the program’s ramp-up. Why did the company make this mistake? It turned out that the gradual decline in capital spending had, over time, led the company’s maintenance workers to assume that their skills weren’t valued, so the seriousness of many problems had gone unreported. The company’s executives found that the goals of the program were therefore initially unattainable.
Making change happen
After accounting for the way culture and other organizational factors will affect the goals of a program, leading companies put what they learn into action. They reap bigger, more sustainable benefits by balancing the program’s hard and soft elements and developing their line managers’ lean leadership skills.
Take a balanced approach
The experience of a North American distribution company that sought to address higher customer expectations and eroding margins in its network of 70 distribution centers shows the virtues of a more balanced approach (Exhibit 1). The company looked beyond technical changes, to the ways that organizational structures and processes—and even the mind-sets of employees—could affect its ability to meet the goals it set.
Operations leaders identified labor balancing as an important technical improvement: they planned to create teams that would combine two roles—“pickers,” who located products to fill customer orders, and “packers,” who loaded orders onto trucks. The new system was supposed to increase productivity by redistributing labor more efficiently to meet shifting demand. The company didn’t stop at such technical fixes, however. In parallel, it revamped its performance-management system to encourage the new ways of working. Pickers had been measured quantitatively (primarily on speed, not accuracy), packers qualitatively or not at all, depending on the site. Executives now combined the existing metrics into a team-based system aimed at helping the company’s trucks depart on time. This change not only balanced speed and accuracy but also pushed workers to collaborate and to focus on a common goal. In addition, the company created a prominent visual tracking system to reinforce the new behavior by showing employees, in real time, when shifting workloads required their immediate attention.
Changing the mind-sets of workers proved critical as well. Many workers in both groups, which had viewed each other as rivals, were company veterans who strongly identified with their roles. Pickers had traditionally felt superior, since they typically worked alone and could be quite successful with individualized approaches, whereas packing was more standardized. Recognizing that such factors would breed resentment if ignored, the company provided supervisors with on-the-job training in interpersonal skills—including coaching and the art of having difficult conversations—in the weeks before making the technical changes. The supervisors later reported that the integration and timing of these elements helped the program succeed by instilling in them the influencing skills needed to highlight the new system’s benefits (both to their teams and to individual workers) and to convince doubters that the changes were important. (Often, companies undermine their performance-improvement programs by introducing otherwise useful training elements at inappropriate times—for instance, several months before the implementation of the program, when its goals may not be clear to the trainees.)
Within six months, the distribution centers that had adopted the new system were 10 to 15 percent more productive, on-time deliveries were up 5 to 10 percent, and errors reported by customers were down by as much as one-third. Moreover, a survey of workers found that their satisfaction levels had risen by 10 percent. Subsequent analysis suggested that about half of the productivity gains were attributable to the softer elements and about half to technical changes, such as more efficient warehouse layouts.
Lead through the line
At the heart of most big operational-improvement efforts are a company’s black belts, lean sensei, and other change agents brought in to lead programs, spur new ideas and practices, and champion the mind-set of continuous improvement. Companies typically follow this template because it appears easier than significantly involving their line leadership. Shop floor deadlines are fierce, line leaders are busy, and many of them lack the skills to direct large initiatives. Some executives therefore argue that line managers should focus instead on day-to-day concerns.
Yet that is a mistake. Large-scale change requires all employees—from the C-suite to the shop floor—to think and work differently. Companies that use only experts to orchestrate change programs may be fairly successful. Still, by outsourcing the responsibility for initiatives (and, by extension, the underlying ideas) to experts, even their own, these companies often miss significant opportunities. Moreover, once the low-hanging fruit is gone, such efforts often lose steam as employees slip into old habits; experts may convey the new language or technical tools but rarely the desire to change behavior permanently, nor can these experts build the organizational capabilities that permanent change requires.
By contrast, when a company shifts the attention of its line managers away from firefighting, develops their leadership capabilities, and expects more from them, the gains are bigger and longer lasting. Experts still play a vital catalyzing role, of course, but now as teachers, coaches, and counselors. Line managers are better placed to lead change efforts and to serve as long-term role models—and should be held accountable for doing so.
The North American power generator mentioned previously learned this lesson several months into its improvement initiative as executives sought to fire up the program’s momentum. This company had sent its operations experts into field offices, so they could work closely with employees at individual plants, where they had enjoyed significant success. Senior executives, however, observed that enthusiasm and engagement soon started fading among the line workers. In the words of one executive, “They were still coming to work from the neck down.”
Senior executives therefore vowed to move the effort “out of the office and into the line.” The company created a “lean leader” profile—a list of desirable characteristics, such as problem-solving, coaching, and analytical skills. Management then created a curriculum to build them through the “forum and field” approach: hands-on training and coaching forums (on topics such as performance management, time management, and problem solving) followed by practice in real-world applications.
To ensure that everyone understood the permanence of the changes, the company made weekly one-on-one training and coaching sessions a part of its line managers’ jobs. Shift schedules were adjusted to incorporate coaching into the workers’ routines. (While most executives recognize the value of coaching, many fail to institutionalize it, thus unintentionally making it seem less important.) These brief sessions allowed workers to celebrate successes, share ideas, and measure progress in achieving the program’s goals. Soon, employees began carrying index cards listing the improvement priorities they had spotted during the previous week.
The cards and related conversations generated creative ideas—including a new way to keep coal dry when it was shipped to the company’s power plants. These and other line-led improvements helped significantly to raise the plant’s output and, subsequently, to cut its fuel costs. More important, the training efforts enhanced the skills of managers, enabling them to become the foundation for a host of additional improvements.

To get the most from large operational-improvement programs, top companies look beyond the technical aspects of lean and Six Sigma and embrace the softer side. Complementing the development of technical skills with a focus on the organizational capabilities that make efficiency benefits real can help companies to achieve more substantial, sustainable, and scalable results.
By David FineMaia A. Hansen, and Stefan Roggenhofer
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/


INDUSTRY SPECIAL..... Chlor-alkali & PVC: Global trends & local ramifications


Chlor-alkali & PVC: Global trends & local ramifications

The chlor-alkali industry, producing mainly chlorine and caustic soda, serves diverse sectors of the economy. The usage of chlorine is more diverse than of caustic soda, but markets for both are shaped by what happens in the larger economy. Downturns impact demand, but they also suppress prices, which has some correcting influence in itself. These dynamics play out all the time and some of these were covered in the recent World Chlor-alkali Conference held in Singapore (and covered in detail elsewhere in this issue).
Chlorine – more intimately tied
Over the last decade or so, global demand for chlorine and caustic soda have grown in tandem with global GDP. The relationship between chlor-alkali production and industrial production is particularly strong. This was very evident in the sharp downward correction in demand for both commodities in 2009 in the wake of the global economic crisis, as also in the recovery a year after.
Since that downturn, the global chlor-alkali industry has been showing consistent year-on-year increase in production. The incremental growth has been somewhat muted since 2014, averaging about 1.5% each year since, but that is not surprising for mature commodities.
Chlorine demand is dominated by its use in vinyls, and is much more GDP sensitive than caustic soda, which has a distinct but more fragmented customer base. According to estimates made by Mizuho, a securities firm, about half of the chlorine consumed globally is highly sensitive to industrial activity.
Technology transition
Global manufacturing capacity for caustic soda is estimated at about 88-mtpa in 2017, and dominated by the membrane process, which accounts for nearly 78% of installed capacity (100% in India). The last vestiges of mercury-based production are on the way out globally, driven by sheer economics and by restrictions on the use of mercury for industrial purposes. The most significant change is currently well underway in Europe, and by the end of the decade the global share of this route in the installed capacity base will halve to 2%, from about a 4% share in 2017.
The diaphragm process will continue to remain a distant second manufacturing option, with legacy plants built with the technology continuing to operate. Virtually all new chlor-alkali plants are now being built on the membrane route – for the virtues of being both environmentally friendlier and more energy efficient. While most of the capacity lost in Europe during the technology transition has been replaced (by membrane capacity), there has been a marginal decline in caustic soda capacity in that region – from over 13-mtpa in 2008 to less than 12-mtpa in 2018.
The rise and rise of China
Over the last two decades the most significant force in the global chemical markets has been China. The chlor-alkali industry is no exception. Investments in caustic soda/chlorine manufacture in the country have been spurred by the desire to ramp up capacity for polyvinyl chloride (PVC) resin to meet local demand.
China’s share of global demand of the three main products in the vinyl chain – ethylene dichloride (EDC), vinyl chloride monomer (VCM) and PVC resin – has been climbing almost relentlessly. In the case of EDC, the widely traded carrier for chlorine, China’s share has increased from under 5% in 2001 to nearly 15% in 2018, while for PVC the rise is from about 20% to 40%.
What is also remarkable is that the country has charted its own course of development of the vinyl industry and attained a level of self-sufficiency unimaginable when the plans unfolded.
The carbide route – bypassing ethylene
At the heart of China’s vinyl story is the carbide process, which starts from coal – a fuel the country is amply blessed with (unlike crude oil or natural gas). Through the intermediate stages of calcium carbide (hence the name) and acetylene, VCM, the monomer for PVC, is produced. This is thus an ethylene-free route, which has unshackled PVC production from a capital-intensive naphtha or gas cracker – the conventional sources of ethylene.
But the carbide process has a heavy environmental footprint, some of which comes from using a carbon-rich fuel as coal as the starting material, and some from the use of toxic mercury as catalyst in acetylene production. In addition, it has a high energy footprint.
More than three-quarters of China’s PVC production now comes via this route – unlike anywhere else in the world. Elsewhere, the oxy-chlorination route, involving the optimal utilisation of elemental chlorine and the hydrogen chloride generated in direct chlorination, is preferred.
Environmental challenges
Operating rates for the several PVC units based on this technology have traditionally been poor, though there has been some improvement thanks to some rationalisation of older, sub-economic units, and gains from the experience of running these plants over time. But the capacity build-up has been so rapid that China turned from being a net importer of PVC to a small, but not insignificant exporter. Indeed, for some time last year, India was the biggest market for Chinese PVC resin, though some market share has since been taken up by other countries not affected by anti-dumping duties levied by Indian authorities on some Chinese PVC producers and exporters.
But the old ways of operating are now being challenged as never before in China. New environmental regulations now in place are forcing several carbide-based PVC plants to shut due inability to meet norms. Rather than pay the stiff fines that come with non-compliance, or relocate to dedicated zones identified for chemical manufacturing, capacity is being shuttered. This is not unique to the PVC industry; indeed several bulk, fine and speciality chemical plants have been forced to either shut or curb operating rates, disrupting several supply chains and sending prices for some chemicals soaring.
According to some estimates as much as 13% of existing capacity for caustic soda and 11% of that for PVC – located near Tianjin and Beijing – have been impacted by the new norms and more may follow as the rules tighten. At the same time, approvals for new PVC projects based on the carbide route are no longer being granted.
All of this will mean that going forward the capacity growth in China is expected to lag behind demand growth. While the supply overhang that pervades the PVC industry will not disappear, it will certainly diminish in time.
New capacity?
Where could new capacity for PVC come from? The best location seems to the US where shale gas is proving to be a bonanza for ethylene production and for gas-based power plants. A world-beating cost position in ethylene and chlorine could spur investments in the vinyl chain in that country.
India is an investment opportunity, as well, given the huge gap between demand and supply, which is currently met by imports. There are some indications that Reliance Industries Ltd. is contemplating a new world-scale PVC plant, but it is as yet unclear whether this will be based on imported EDC or utilise locally available chlorine for an integrated play.
The former approach will exclude the entire chlor-alkali industry from any of the benefits a large chlorine sink can bring, and is undesirable. In the end, the options will be decided by two main factors: the availability of ethylene and the alternate uses that it can be put to at the hands of its producer; and the acquisition cost of the chlorine needed. The chlor-alkali industry here will have no role to play in determining the former, but it can and should engage in a dialogue that will culminate in the latter situation emerging as the choice for PVC production.

Ravi Raghavan
Chemical Weekly Issue date: 17th July 2018

FOODIE SPECIAL..... Best Street foods in the world


Best Street foods in the world

Pocket-friendly, delicious and on-the-go street food are a big hit with travellers.

DURUM
Where to Eat It: Istanbul Often called a ‘roll’, a durum is a wrap made with flat breads like the Turkish yufka. What makes this wrap tasty are the kebab and ingredients including spiced meat with toppings of tomatoes, onions, cucumbers, and let tuce. To add some spice, there is herbladen yogurt and hot sauce.
SUPPLI
Where to Eat It: Rome Be in for a surprise, literally. As these fried rice balls are named for the word ‘surprise’ (French pronunciation of Suppli). This has the delectable oozy mozarella, which is stuffed inside. Made with rice, ground beef and tomatoes with mozzarella, Supplì is a fabulous roadside delicacy. Its classier version of a croquette can also be found in Roman pizza place.


SATAY
Where to Eat It: Malaysia
Known as ‘sate’ in Malay, the dish of Satay is popular amongst all the states of Malaysia. You shall find it in the restaurants and on the streets. While the popular kinds of satay are usually beef and chicken satays, different regions of Malaysia have developed their own unique variations. If you are looking for some authentic tasting then head to well-known outlets in Kajang, Selangor (called the Sate City in the country). You will also come across servings of ‘Sate Kajang’, in which meat chunks are bigger than usual. Mixed with slightly sweet peanut sauce, it is served along with fried chilli paste.

TAGINE
Where to Eat It: Marrakesh Named for the earthenware pot in which it is cooked, tajine is a delicious and popular Berber stew from North Africa. Its flavours arise from the slow cooking over hot coals. Made with (lamb, chicken, or beef), vegetables, and fresh herbs and spices; sometimes with a dash of fruit and nuts, it is served with couscous or bread. This stew is almost a staple across Morocco and you will spot it at the street stalls and also fine dine eateries.

JERK CHICKEN
Where to Eat It: Jamaica Jerk chicken is easily Jamaica’s best-known culinary dish apart from the patty and coconut water (served with love). Jerk dish is abundantly offered in most corners of Jamaican cities. It is filling and delicious, say food lovers. A tantalising combination of local seasonings that is infused with scotch bonnet pepper(this give an amazing flavour to the chicken). The flavoured pieces are then slow-cooked over an open fire (most popular being pimento wood fire). Whichever city you’d visit, ask the locals for recommendations and they can point you to the best outlets around.

FOOD TRUCKS & HOT JUICY BURGERS
Where to Eat It: New York New York can perhaps be given the title of beginning the trend of Food Trucks for many other destinations to follow. Some of its best food can be found on the streets. Eclectic communities have in fact added a fabulous taste to the new offerings of traditional dishes that are extended at the food trucks. These mobile eateries hawking gourmet global cuisine move around the corners of the city and also have an online presence for you to know where exactly to catch up with them over meal time.
Compiled by Nimisha Tiwari
Nimisha.Tiwari@timesgroup.com


ANALYTICS SPECIAL .....Advanced analytics: Nine insights from the C-suite PART I


Advanced analytics: Nine insights from the C-suite PART I

Conversations with hundreds of business leaders reveal nine ways that they are—and are not—adapting to the analytics revolution.
Data and advanced analytics have arrived. The volume of available data is growing exponentially, with more added every day from billions of phones, sensors, payment systems, and cameras. Machine learning is becoming ubiquitous, but organizations are struggling to turn data into value.
The stakes are high. Those who advance furthest, fastest will have a significant competitive advantage; those who fall behind risk becoming irrelevant. Analytics cannot be the sole province of the chief information officer (CIO), as is sometimes the case. The CIO may not understand the business as a whole well enough to spot opportunities and threats, or be influential enough to ensure that the company addresses them appropriately. While the expertise the CIO brings is of course essential, business-unit leaders and CEOs must be in charge of analytics to accelerate the pace of change and to ensure intelligent investment. This is beginning to happen: McKinsey has found that more than 50 percent of CEOs consider themselves the primary leader of the analytics agenda, and that figure has been growing steadily.
With this in mind, we spoke to more than 300 top executives of major companies. Here we offer nine insights based on these conversations, and suggest actions for business leaders to take.
Analytics can create new opportunities and disrupt entire industries. But few leaders can say how
“Where do we want to be in five years as a result of advanced analytics? What are the implications to our business model, culture, portfolio mix, and value proposition?” CEOs all over the world are asking these questions—for good reason. Analytics has the potential to upend the prevailing business models in many industries, and CEOs are struggling to understand how. The need is urgent.
Beyond reorienting the existing business models, analytics leaders are also learning how to create and capitalize on new opportunities. Organizations are moving from hoarding data to sharing it. Some are pooling data as part of industry consortia, increasing their comprehensiveness and therefore their value. Product-based organizations are adding data and analytics to their offerings as value-added services. Some have gone further, charging for the analytics-enabled service rather than directly selling the product. For example, some jet-engine manufacturers now sell flight hours instead of the engines; this is only possible because sensors provide the data that help them understand usage and required maintenance.
Recommendations
There are two areas to explore. First, to understand how analytics can disrupt existing business models, set aside the time to focus on the long term. What can be learned from other industries that are farther along? What customer needs can be better met through new business models?
Second, to capture new opportunities, start with the data, analyzing what they are worth, how distinct they are, who would find them valuable, and how they can be combined with other sources to increase their value. Then, think through the business model. A simple way to get started is to conduct a market scan of the data and analytics players, as well as a competitor scan to understand what others may be doing. Identify where and how to play within this ecosystem.
Surprisingly few companies know where and how analytics can create value
Analytics create value when big data and advanced algorithms are applied to business problems to yield a solution that is measurably better than before. By identifying, sizing, prioritizing, and phasing all applicable use cases, businesses can create an analytics strategy that generates value. For example, a CEO of a global consumer-packaged-goods company told us that the application of advanced analytics and machine learning to business functions such as revenue-growth management and supply-chain optimization uncovered as much as $4 billion in benefits.
Few executives, however, have such a detailed view of value across their business units and functions. More typical is this kind of comment: “Sometimes I feel we are doing analytics for the sake of doing analytics. We need to have more clarity on what business value we are trying to create,” one senior executive said. Most have experimented with a handful of use cases, but lack a comprehensive view. Even fewer have considered how analytics can create new sources of revenue. Lacking an enterprise-wide view of opportunity, business leaders struggle to make a considered business case for analytics. They may also struggle to communicate why analytics matter—and that is essential to get the organization committed to change.
Recommendations
Start a rigorous process with the executive team to decide where the most promising sources of value exist. To start, identify which functions or parts of the value chain have the most potential. For consumer-goods companies, for example, it could be product development or inventory optimization; for insurance companies, it may be risk models. Then come up with possible use cases—as many as 100 for a large company—and how new data and techniques could be applied to them. Using outside benchmarks can be useful to get a sense of how valuable a given use case might be. Finally, decide the order of priority, considering economic impact, fit with the business, feasibility, and speed.
Data science is the easy part. Getting the right data, and getting the data ready for analyses, is much more difficult
As data science enters the mainstream, commercial analytics platforms and code-sharing platforms are providing algorithm libraries and analytics tools. For most organizations, this simplifies the practical application of data science. But that still leaves the matter of what to do with it. In our conversations, we heard a familiar refrain: “The majority of our time is spent getting the data,” said a senior executive at an advanced-industries company. “Once we have that in a good place, the modeling is quick.”
Each data set is unique, and it takes time to prepare it for analyses. One major issue is that it can be difficult to agree on a “single source of truth,” because different departments often use different ways to measure the same metric. For example, the sales function may measure the volume of goods sold by transaction, while operations may measure by inventory movement. Most companies have not yet incorporated real-time data into day-to-day business processes. Many also struggle to identify what data are needed to improve competitive advantage, and therefore what they need to create. Other common challenges are implementing a unique identifier to link different data sets (such as transaction data and customer profiles) and filling in gaps to increase quality and usability.
Recommendations
The sea of data is vast and growing exponentially. To avoid drowning, executives must connect the data strategy to the analytics strategy. When exploring new data sources, it helps to have specific use cases in mind and to reflect on how data are acquired—whether through commercial vendors or via open sources. Know what data the business owns; this can become an asset to monetize. To continuously improve data quality, put in place governance and processes, and ensure that the rightful owners have direct access. Mandate good data and metadata practices and build automatic data-reconciliation processes that constantly verify that new data meet quality standards. To drive new insight, interconnect different data sets, potentially in a centralized repository (or “data lake”). Resist the temptation of complexity. Rather than building a data lake for all legacy data—a project that can take years—fill the lake gradually. Start with data required for priority use cases, and gradually add to it. Get started with what you have, and don’t let perfection be the enemy of the good.
Data ownership and access needs to be democratized
The most common excuse that businesses roll out for refusing to adopt counterintuitive analytics insights is that the underlying data are not valid. This claim is much more difficult to make if accountability for data quality rests with the business, and if business leaders have ready access. Successful analytics organizations give as many people as possible access to the data, while making sure there is a single source of truth, so that employees can play with them and come up with new ideas, or discard old ones that are past their prime. “The way we are thinking about eliminating the finger-pointing between business and IT on data,” said the CIO of a large pharmaceutical company, “is by making data available to everyone.” By doing so, a data-driven decision-making mind-set gets infused throughout the organization.
Recommendations
Design effective data governance, specifying who is responsible for data definition, creation, verification, curation, and validation—the business, IT, or the analytics center. Embrace the dual principles of business ownership and broad access. Hold the business accountable for data, even if the IT department houses and supports them. Create data-discovery platforms, such as web-based self-serve portals that allow frontline staff to easily extract data. Host data-discovery sessions to build data literacy.
Embedding analytics is as much about change management as it is about data science
Old ways of working are deeply ingrained, especially if there is an underlying distrust of analytics. Another question, then, that executives are asking is how to influence frontline staff to use the insights delivered by analytic tools to change how to make decisions. The CEO of GE, Jeff Immelt, told McKinsey: “I thought if we hired a couple thousand technology people, if we upgraded our software, things like that, that was it. I was wrong. Product managers have to be different; salespeople have to be different; on-site support has to be different.”
There are some success stories. One common and essential factor is that leadership has to commit to analytics, visibly. One executive told us how the head of a business unit used analytical tools to crunch the numbers regarding stock levels. He then presented the results to the weekly leadership meeting and required each channel manager to take action.
It is also essential to integrate insights into the daily work flow. Another executive spoke about how the sales staff resisted using leads generated by the analytics model, preferring to rely on their instincts. His team was able to engineer the work flow so that the recommendation engine was “invisible”: the sales team was simply presented with leads, and then acted on them—successfully.
Recommendations
People buy into change when they understand it and feel they are part of it. The design of analytics solutions therefore needs to be user led and have business-process participation from the start. Have a “translator”—someone who not only understands the data science but also how it can be applied to the business—lead use-case development from start to finish. Match the talent to the task. The business identifies the opportunity, the data scientists develop the algorithm, the user-experience designers shape the user interface, the software developers run production, the process engineers reengineer work flows, and the change agents do the implementation. Develop a playbook for each use case, making sure critical adoption elements such as training and communication are not neglected. Beyond individual use cases, design a broader change program that builds analytics literacy and shifts the organization toward a data-driven culture. Organizational change management is generally well understood; it is a matter of applying these principles to analytics.
CONTINUES IN PART II