Blogs are like diaries, some pages are wonderful and full of insights delivered in poetic frenzy of a wine drenched sage, and others...are well babbling...and this my dear reader, is; my page. Today I want to explore my understanding of an organization. We have finance, operations, and marketing, which sometimes are the same person who answers the phone, no matter how many different numbers are listed on the website.
Everything you make is operations, everything you sell is marketing, and everything you spend or earn is finance. Yes, I understand it is a bit more complicated than that! but complication is the devil in the heaven of free floating thoughts and we don't want to have none of it here in this blog. The question now is where does strategy sit in this whole affair of bartering products (services are products of labor) for that abstraction of human capability or "luck", which used to be identified by paper, plastic and soon to be your phone?
The question is why can't all the intelligent people involved in these functions/"departments" come together to decide what is the best course of action(ugh! for lack of better prose) to take. After all if you are making a goblet or you are in serving business you should know pouring better than the "Saqis" of Rumi or at least know the make of Jamshed's "Jaam". If you are in business of selling bibles you better be able to sell it to the pope. Lastly if you don't know profit and loss you would have some one who does, and you must be the expert crafts man or his voice to the world.
As much as I would like the world to exist in dimensions of you make, I like and we exchange, it has moved on to be a world of manufacturers, services providers, consumers and regulators. And hence evolved the need of a fourth player. Somebody who can Abra cadabra in to the minds of people, generalize their desires to satisfy their needs in a sustained manner to market segment, and then, best of all, magically guess their future needs and wants into sustained growth or "forecasting".
On top of it someone may desire a service and may have ample means to satisfy his need, but the problem here is that his excess in exercising his will and means to quench his needs may evoke a chain reaction of desire in others, with or without the means, to satisfy their needs, causing a disruption in ways of living of us "normals", and when things are good, change is bad, hence we must have, you guessed it, regulators.
Then there are those, who, while the enterprising creator of comforts grinds his capabilities to deliver, simply mimick to evolve and hence create competition. Competition is bad for an enterprise, the consumers, us humans may benefit through the evolutionary benefits of competition, but enterprises fear becoming the apes of world, so competition is bad. In the days of yore, we would use a club to extinguish such a blatant attempt to steal now we must use stealth sting of competitive intelligence, and avoid in process, SEC, FCC, FDA and whole bunch of other acronyms.
The ever increasing engagement of species into genetics chaos through random multiplication leaves nothing to certainty except fickleness, hence we need consumer trends. But we do expect a pattern in randomness and we intend to find a person who can identify that pattern of needs, and behaviors. But we want that person to understand that we are limited in our powers to create an exact match to the perceived need because of limitations of our craft and our access to "resources",( ummm! budgetary constraints). And we also want this voodoo child to realize that seemingly entwined human interests are not that "interdependant" to all eyes seeking sustenance through same enterprise. So he must act as a vehicle to bridge that gap of understanding between the maker, seller and counter. Also he must do all this in a way that makes the regulators feel that the greater good caused by the tax dollars is far more beneficial than the implications of dodging "regulations" and quashing pesky competitors
No wonder the ROI of strategy is hard to calculate......
Everything you make is operations, everything you sell is marketing, and everything you spend or earn is finance. Yes, I understand it is a bit more complicated than that! but complication is the devil in the heaven of free floating thoughts and we don't want to have none of it here in this blog. The question now is where does strategy sit in this whole affair of bartering products (services are products of labor) for that abstraction of human capability or "luck", which used to be identified by paper, plastic and soon to be your phone?
The question is why can't all the intelligent people involved in these functions/"departments" come together to decide what is the best course of action(ugh! for lack of better prose) to take. After all if you are making a goblet or you are in serving business you should know pouring better than the "Saqis" of Rumi or at least know the make of Jamshed's "Jaam". If you are in business of selling bibles you better be able to sell it to the pope. Lastly if you don't know profit and loss you would have some one who does, and you must be the expert crafts man or his voice to the world.
As much as I would like the world to exist in dimensions of you make, I like and we exchange, it has moved on to be a world of manufacturers, services providers, consumers and regulators. And hence evolved the need of a fourth player. Somebody who can Abra cadabra in to the minds of people, generalize their desires to satisfy their needs in a sustained manner to market segment, and then, best of all, magically guess their future needs and wants into sustained growth or "forecasting".
On top of it someone may desire a service and may have ample means to satisfy his need, but the problem here is that his excess in exercising his will and means to quench his needs may evoke a chain reaction of desire in others, with or without the means, to satisfy their needs, causing a disruption in ways of living of us "normals", and when things are good, change is bad, hence we must have, you guessed it, regulators.
Then there are those, who, while the enterprising creator of comforts grinds his capabilities to deliver, simply mimick to evolve and hence create competition. Competition is bad for an enterprise, the consumers, us humans may benefit through the evolutionary benefits of competition, but enterprises fear becoming the apes of world, so competition is bad. In the days of yore, we would use a club to extinguish such a blatant attempt to steal now we must use stealth sting of competitive intelligence, and avoid in process, SEC, FCC, FDA and whole bunch of other acronyms.
The ever increasing engagement of species into genetics chaos through random multiplication leaves nothing to certainty except fickleness, hence we need consumer trends. But we do expect a pattern in randomness and we intend to find a person who can identify that pattern of needs, and behaviors. But we want that person to understand that we are limited in our powers to create an exact match to the perceived need because of limitations of our craft and our access to "resources",( ummm! budgetary constraints). And we also want this voodoo child to realize that seemingly entwined human interests are not that "interdependant" to all eyes seeking sustenance through same enterprise. So he must act as a vehicle to bridge that gap of understanding between the maker, seller and counter. Also he must do all this in a way that makes the regulators feel that the greater good caused by the tax dollars is far more beneficial than the implications of dodging "regulations" and quashing pesky competitors
No wonder the ROI of strategy is hard to calculate......
