| 
 | Executive Times | ||
|  |  | ||
|  |  | ||
|  | 2005 Book Reviews | ||
| Winning
  by Jack Welch with Suzy Welch | |||
|  | Rating: ••• (Recommended) | ||
|  |  | ||
|  | Click on
  title or picture to buy from amazon.com | ||
|  |  | ||
|  |  | ||
|  | Spinning By all means, buy and
  read Jack Welch’s new book, Winning.
  However tarnished you may feel Jack’s crown has become since his retirement
  from GE, there are probably two or three useful ideas you may glean from this
  book. Also, author’s royalties will be donated to charity, so you’re not
  paying his green fees, not that he plays anymore, given back problems. I
  heard him admit to Jay Leno that this is his wife Suzy’s book. That may be
  another reason to buy and read it, although perhaps he should have changed
  the “with” to “and” to give her proper credit. Knowing her involvement in
  this book, don’t expect greater insight into Welch as a person. The first
  book, Jack:
  Straight From the Gut, written with John Byrne had more personal
  disclosures. My review
  of that book in 2001 was a highly recommended four-star rating. Winning
  isn’t as good. Here’s an excerpt, from the beginning of Chapter 11,
  “Strategy: It’s All in the Sauce,” pp. 165-171: More than a few times
  over the past three years, I have been on a speaking program or at a business
  conference with one big strategy guru or another. And more than a few times,
  I have listened to their presentations in disbelief. It’s
  not that I don’t understand their theories about competitive advantage, core
  competencies, virtual commerce, supply chain economics, disruptive
  innovation, and so on, it’s just that the way these experts tend to talk
  about strategy—as if it is some kind of high-brain scientific
  methodology—feels really off to me. I
  know that strategy is a living, breathing, totally dynamic game. It’s
  fun—and fast. And it’s alive. Forget
  the arduous, intellectualized number crunching and data grinding that gurus say you have to go through to get strategy
  right. Forget the scenario planning, yearlong studies, and hundred—plus—page
  reports. They’re time-consuming and expensive, and you just don’t need them. In
  real life, strategy is actually very straightforward. You pick a general
  direction and implement like hell. Yes, theories can be interesting,
  charts and graphs can be beautiful, and big, fat stacks of PowerPoint slides
  can make you feel like you’ve done your job. But you just should not make
  strategy too complex. The more you think about it, and the more you grind
  down into the data and details, the more you tie yourself in knots about what
  to do. That’s
  not strategy, that’s suffering. Now,
  I don’t want to write off strategy gurus. Some of their concepts have merit. But
  I do want to disagree with the scientific approach to strategy that they
  propagate. It is taught in many business schools, peddled by countless
  consulting firms, and practiced in far too many corporate headquarters. It’s
  just so unproductive! If you want to win, when it comes to strategy, ponder
  less and do more. I’m
  certainly not alone in this view. In speaking with many thousands of
  businesspeople around the world, I can count the number of strategy questions
  on one hand. Virtually every other topic—from managing a temperamental
  employee to the dollar’s effect on trade—gets more interest by orders of
  magnitude. Obviously,
  everyone cares about strategy. You have to. But most managers I know
  see strategy as I do—an approximate course of action that you frequently
  revisit and redefine, according to shifting market conditions. It is an
  iterative process and not nearly as theoretical or life-and-death as some
  would have you believe. Given
  this view, you may be wondering what I’m going to say in this chapter. The
  answer is, nothing that’s going to get me tenure! Instead, I’m going to
  describe how to do strategy in three steps. Over my career, this approach
  worked incredibly well across varied businesses and industries, in upturns
  and downturns, and in competitive situations from  The steps are: First, come up with a
  big aha for your business—a smart, realistic, relatively fast way to gain
  sustainable competitive advantage. I don’t know any better way to come up with this big aha
  than by answering a set of questions I have long called the Five Slides,
  because each set fits roughly onto one page. This assessment process should
  take a group of informed people somewhere between a couple of days and a
  month. Second, put the right
  people in the right jobs to drive the big aha forward. This may sound generic; it’s not. To
  drive your big aha forward, you need to match certain kinds of people with
  commodity businesses and a different type entirely with high-value-added
  businesses. I don’t like to pigeonhole, but the fact is,
  you get a lot more bang for your buck when strategy and skills fit. Third, relentlessly
  seek out the best practices to achieve your big aha, whether inside or out,
  adapt them, and continually improve them. Strategy is unleashed when you have a learning
  organization where people thirst to do everything better every day They draw
  on best practices from anywhere, and push them to ever-higher levels of
  effectiveness. You can have the best big aha in the world, but without this
  learning culture in place, any sustainable competitive advantage will not
  last. Strategy, then, is simply
  finding the big aha and setting a broad direction, putting the right people
  behind it, and then executing with an unyielding emphasis on continual
  improvement. I couldn’t make it more
  complicated than that if I tried. So What Is Strategy? Before we look at each of
  the three steps in some detail, a few thoughts about strategy in general. At the time I retired
  from GE, the company employed more than three hundred thousand people in
  about fifteen major businesses, from gas turbines to credit cards. It was a
  complex, wide-ranging company, but I always said I wanted it to operate with
  the speed, informality, and open communication of a corner store. Corner stores often have
  strategy right too. With their limited resources, they have to rely on a laserlike focus on doing one thing very well. In our  But the pizza is to die
  for; you could faint just describing the flavor of the sauce, and the crust
  puts you over the edge. Investment bankers, artists, and cops start lining
  up at eleven in the morning to see the “Slice of the Day” posted on the door, and around lunch and dinner, the line can run twenty
  deep. A fleet of delivery people work nonstop until closing. At Upper Crust, strategy
  is all about product. Then there’s Gary Drug,
  about half the size of a  At Gary Drug, strategy is
  all about service. Look, what is strategy
  but resource allocation? When you strip away all the noise, that’s what it
  comes down to. Strategy means making clear-cut choices about how to compete.
  You cannot be everything to everybody, no matter what the size of your
  business or how deep its pockets. Corner stores have
  learned that survival depends on finding a strategic position where no one
  can beat them. Big companies have the same challenge. When I became CEO in
  1981, we launched a highly publicized initiative: “Be No. 1 or No. 2 in every
  market, and fix, sell, or close to get there.” This was not our strategy, although
  I’ve heard it described that way. It was a galvanizing mantra to describe how
  we were going to do business going forward. There would be no more hanging on
  to uncompetitive businesses for old times’ sake. More than anything else, the
  No. 1 or No. 2 initiative was a communication tool to clean up our portfolio,
  and it really worked. Our strategy was much
  more directional. GE was going to move away from businesses that were being
  commoditized toward businesses that manufactured high-value technology
  products or sold services instead of things. As part of that move, we were
  going to massively upgrade our human resources—our people—with a relentless
  focus on training and development. We chose that strategy
  after getting hammered by the Japanese in the 1970s. They had rapidly
  commoditized businesses where we had had reasonable margins, like TV sets and
  room air conditioners. We ended up playing defense in a losing game. Our
  quality, cost, and service—the weapons of a commodity business—weren’t good
  enough in the face of their innovation and declining prices. Every day at
  work was a kind of protracted agony Despite our productivity improvements and
  increasing innovation, margins were eroding, as competitors like Toshiba,  Meanwhile, overseeing GE
  Capital in the late ‘70s, I was shocked (and delighted) to see how easy it
  was to make money in financial services, particularly with GE’s balance
  sheet. There were no union factories, no foreign competition, and plenty of
  interesting, creative ways to offer customers differentiated products and
  services. I remember the excitement in that period, seeing our people develop
  new private-label credit card programs and find niche after niche in
  middle-market industrial financing. Fat margins weren’t exactly low-hanging
  fruit, but close. By the time I was made
  CEO, I knew that GE had to get as far away as it could from any business that
  smelled like a commodity and get as close as possible to the other end of the
  spectrum. That’s why we divested businesses like TV sets, small appliances,
  air conditioners, and a huge coal company, Utah International. It is also
  why we invested so heavily in GE Capital; bought RCA, which included NBC;
  and poured resources into developing high-technology products in our power,
  medical, aircraft engine, and locomotive businesses. Now, in such changing
  times, how and why did GE stick with one strategy over twenty years? The
  answer is that strategies, if they’re headed in the right direction and are
  broad enough, don’t really need to change all that often, especially if they
  are supplemented with fresh initiatives. To that end, over the years, we
  launched four programs to bolster our strategy—globalization, service
  add-ons, Six Sigma, and e-business. More than anything,
  though, our strategy lasted because it was based on two powerful underlying
  principles: commoditization is evil and people are everything. Virtually every resource
  allocation decision we made was based on those beliefs. Yes, some companies can
  win in commodity situations—Dell and Wal-Mart are great examples of companies
  that have pulled the levers of cost, quality, and service to succeed in
  extremely competitive games. But that is really tough. You just can’t make
  any mistakes. My advice, then, is when
  you think strategy, think about decommoditizing.
  Try desperately to make products and services distinctive and customers stick
  to you like glue. Think about innovation, technology, internal processes,
  service add-ons— whatever works to be unique. Doing that right means you can
  even make a few mistakes and still succeed. That’s enough theory! Thanks to Suzy’s good writing, Winning
  presents the Welch theories and practices of management in a readable way that
  can lead readers to reflection on how to apply some of Welch’s practices in
  one’s own organization. To whatever extent Suzy wanted to help redeem Welch’s
  tarnished reputation, the spin she creates in Winning
  helps.  Steve Hopkins,
  May 25, 2005 | ||
|  |  | ||
| Go to Executive Times
  Archives | |||
|  |  | ||
|  |  | ||
|  | ã 2005 Hopkins and Company, LLC The recommendation rating for
  this book appeared  in the June 2005
  issue of Executive Times URL for this review: http://www.hopkinsandcompany.com/Books/Winning.htm For Reprint Permission,
  Contact: Hopkins & Company, LLC •  E-mail: books@hopkinsandcompany.com | ||
|  |  | ||
|  |  | ||