In order to help candidates pass the exam more smoothly, the following is a case study of management consultants that I searched and sorted out for you. Welcome to learn from it, I hope it will help you!
First, the strategy of mobile phone service providers
In the mid-1990s, with the popularity of mobile phones, the mobile communication industry was unprecedentedly prosperous. Two mobile service providers, China Mobile and China Unicom, controlled the market and made a lot of money. In the past, China Telecom, the industry leader, was unable to get a share because it could only engage in fixed telephone business.
At this time, Wu Ying, a China student who had worked in the United States, saw the business opportunity. He introduced a PHS (Mobile Local Telephone) wireless technology invented by the Japanese into China. This technology can use the existing fixed telephone network to provide wireless communication services through wireless access, so that the traditional telephone can be carried around within the coverage of the wireless network, and can answer and dial local and local networks, domestic and international calls at any time and place, and can also conveniently dial pagers and mobile phones, which is an extension and supplement of local calls. Its biggest weakness is poor signal. But China Telecom's entry into the mobile telecommunications market has become a curve? Lifesaving straw? . However, the high call service fees of the two major mobile service providers undoubtedly provide a huge interest space for China Telecom to enter.
The main characteristics of PHS are: 1, one-way billing, and the telephone bill is similar to the local telephone standard; 2. Mobile, but not roaming; 3. All-digital technology is adopted, with strong confidentiality; 4. Adopt 32KADPCM speech coding, which can support 200, 300, 800 and WAP services; 5. The mobile phone is exquisite and beautiful (only 80 grams), with low power consumption and no harm to the body (called green mobile phone). Can talk continuously for 5-8 hours, stand by for 500-800 hours, and the price of mobile phone is equivalent to that of GSM mobile phone; 6. The investment is low, and the average cost per user is about 1500 yuan (excluding mobile phones); 7. It can be the same number as the fixed telephone.
UT Starcom of Wu Ying became the equipment supplier of PHS project, and he named this handset? PHS? . 1997 65438+February, PHS was piloted in Yuhang, Zhejiang Province, and local consumers were told that the price difference between PHS and GSM was about 10 times for the same phone! In just three months, the number of PHS users in Yuhang has caught up with the sum of mobile and Unicom users. PHS soon spread all over Zhejiang.
Subsequently, China Telecom simultaneously promoted PHS in hundreds of cities across the country. By 200 1, except for a few big cities such as Beijing and Shanghai, PHS services were fully opened, with more than 60 million users.
China Telecom's vigorous promotion of PHS has naturally made UT Starcom, an equipment supplier, get amazing growth. UT Starcom was listed in the United States in 2000, and its market value reached 26 billion yuan in 2002.
In 2005, China Telecom decided to reduce its investment in PHS. In 2005, UT Starcom reported a loss and its market value shrank by 90%, so it was sworn by Nasdaq? Delisting from the market? . In June 2007, Wu Ying resigned. At the beginning of September, there were rumors in the industry that UT Starcom might be acquired.
Question:
1. In the marketing process of PHS, which positioning method does China Telecom consider from the perspective of market positioning?
2. Try to analyze UT Starcom's grasp of market opportunities.
Please analyze the market position of China Telecom in the mobile service business at the end of 1997.
4. Analyze the new product price strategy adopted by China Telecom in the initial stage of PHS launch.
Key points of the answer:
1, strongly oriented.
2. Marginal market opportunities. Once marginal market opportunities are successfully developed, it is easy to get higher returns.
3. Market challenger.
4. Low-price penetration strategy is the main strategy, and the price of new products can be accepted and satisfied by the vast consumer groups.
Second, about performance.
As human resource managers, are we still tirelessly repeating Liu Cheng's mistakes in setting performance indicators? Are you still talking about the index system that may bring huge losses to the organization? Are you still in the sense of accomplishment in formulating the assessment rules? Sleepwalking, wake up! One wrong step in the performance index may lose the whole game. Let's see what mistakes we often make in this regard:
(1) Dear, why aren't you with me-performance indicators are out of touch with organizational strategy.
Fane Company is a manufacturer of shock absorbers, which has been high for several years. Innovation? This strategic banner can be seen everywhere in the company? Innovation is the source of eternal vitality? 、? Innovation is an inexhaustible motive force for our development? Wait for a slogan. But unfortunately, innovation has not really been implemented in the company's performance indicators and the actions of employees. The production department is most concerned about output and cost; The sales department is still busy around sales all day, and the time-consuming and laborious new product sales have no place in his assessment; Among the indicators of the financial sector, ensuring the safety of funds has become the main assessment indicator. These performance indicators that have not been formed through unified strategic planning have finally become? Chicken flying dog jumping? Farce: The R&D department complains that the production department only pays attention to the cost and delays the trial production of new products; The production department is worried that the sales department is slow to respond to the product sales information; The purchasing department was furious because the finance department could not pay the supplier in advance. Each department has its own independent assessment indicators, and strategy has become a slogan that no one cares about.
Judging from the completion of the indicators, the production, sales and financial departments have done a good job, and their practices are understandable. However, judging from the overall situation of the company, these departments have handed in an unqualified answer sheet. But it is not them who are wrong, but the enterprise's assessment indicators and strategies are completely opposite, which leads to their behavior taking a different path.
Why are performance indicators out of line with strategy? In addition to the strategic emptiness, a very important reason is that some performance indicators are not derived from strategy at all. When formulating indicators, the organizational strategic objectives are not decomposed layer by layer, but performance indicators are formulated based on some experience and subjective judgment, which will inevitably bring departmental limitations and cause the separation of performance indicators and strategies. At the same time, when making performance indicators, it is necessary to adjust performance indicators at any time according to the changed environment and strategy. Today's society is full of ever-changing changes all the time. The environment of most industries is rapidly changing, very complex, changing frequently and unpredictable. Therefore, when setting performance goals, it must be based on new environmental requirements and new strategic requirements, and not excessively based on past behavior habits.
How to closely combine performance indicators with organizational strategy? We can do it with the help of strategic map and balanced scorecard. First, the strategy map can be used to interpret the strategy and clarify the specific strategy of the company in four levels: finance, customers, internal business and processes, learning and growth. Then, under the guidance of strategy, we can use the balanced scorecard to determine specific indicators and priorities.
(2) I only have eyes for you-performance indicators are too dependent? And the result? index
In 1980s, the traffic police department in new york made mistakes and made illegal arrests for a period of time, and innocent people were accused of committing serious crimes, most of them were blacks and Mexicans. After this incident was exposed, it was found that four policemen in a sub-bureau were mainly responsible for these mistakes and illegal arrests. All four policemen were suspended for inspection. Strangely, the survey results show that these four policemen are the best policemen in this branch! It turns out that this sub-bureau takes the number of arrests, especially those for felony and sexual harassment, as the basis for police performance, recognition and promotion. White racists in the police took the opportunity to abuse their powers, killing two birds with one stone, persecuting ethnic minorities by illegal and cruel means, and were commended and rewarded by the branch bureau. However, they have caused great damage to society and police stations, and people, especially ethnic minorities, have lost confidence in the police and law enforcement personnel. Protests triggered racial confrontation and social unrest.
This case is similar to the story of Liu Cheng at the beginning of the article. The traffic police department in new york made a mistake similar to that in Liu Cheng: they all took the only result indicator as a yardstick to measure the employees' work performance, while ignoring other process indicators that can standardize the goal realization. Just as freedom without responsibility will lead to human extinction, the result index without process index constraint is likely to lead employees astray-in order to complete this result index, employees are likely to sacrifice other things.
Performance appraisal is not? Win or lose? Games, not really? There are no traces of birds in the sky, but I try to fly over? This is a romantic story, but it is a management process that helps to promote employees to achieve excellent performance, so it is not advisable to focus only on the results and process. It is necessary for us to combine process indicators with result indicators. In this regard, an American factory provides us with a good example. This American company is called Marui Company, which is responsible for repairing the propellers of cruise ships. They worked out a performance appraisal method: maintenance workers must assemble three propellers every day, and the salary standard for each propeller assembled is $4, and the part exceeding three is paid according to 1 50% of the original work standard. Then this greatly stimulated the enthusiasm of workers, who constantly accelerated the assembly speed and greatly increased the number of finished products. However, more and more unqualified products are assembled. It turns out that these workers forgot the assembly quality on the premise of speeding up. So Marui Company changed the assessment method: on the basis of the original performance assessment index, it added a technological index-the qualified rate of assembly quality must reach 100%, otherwise all the assembled propellers will be paid according to the original standard of 60%. In this way, these maintenance workers have to abandon their impetuous style and work hard to pursue speed and quantity on the premise of ensuring quality.
There is a clear and obvious dynamic relationship between process indicators and result indicators. Any good indicator system should seek a proper balance between these two indicators, and relying on only one indicator is not enough. It is important to know the final score after the game, and it is equally important to know how the score was obtained. Process indicators provide you with a predictive ability, which tells you how the game is going, and it also provides you with an opportunity to intervene when necessary, so that the game can develop in the direction you designed. Combining incentive pay with a set of well-crafted and balanced indicators has a convincing impact on everyone, enabling them to perform their duties and ensure success.
(c) Blurred vision-indicators of achievement are too complex.
American companies have a seemingly complete evaluation index system, and bosses always like to talk about it. You see how complete our company's index system is, covering almost all aspects of all employees! This evaluation index system guides the work of employees well! ? Is that really the case? Indeed, this index system covers a wide range and is dubbed by employees as? Even closing the door and opening the door have to be assessed? . In addition, each index is accompanied by an obscure calculation method. For example, the individual bonus for completing task A =P? q？ G where p is the department performance evaluation coefficient (also called weight); Q is the personal performance appraisal coefficient; G is the post salary. ? Income =P? q？ g？ Although this formula is simple, as a complex multivariate function, it is very difficult and complicated to operate. Finally, one day, Sarah from the human resources department found the boss and told him very anxiously. Sorry, boss, I think it's time to reform our performance index system! It's too complicated! ?
At present, considering the accuracy and comprehensiveness of performance appraisal, many companies often design the appraisal indicators very complicated, regardless of details, and all the work done by employees will be evaluated. But this often deviates from the designer's original intention-too many indicators often make employees confused about the focus of their work, tired of coping with various indicators, and greatly increase the workload of human resources departments. The staff who calculate the scores of assessment indicators are often at a loss. At the same time, these indicators often overlap or even conflict with each other, which is not conducive to or even hinders employees from understanding their own work and performance appraisal.
Therefore, the design of assessment indicators should not be too complicated. If an employee can't understand it himself, how can he turn the indicators into his own actions? Therefore, in order to avoid complexity, when we formulate assessment indicators, it is best to control the number at 2-4. On the one hand, it avoids guiding employees to chase too much because there are too few indicators, ignoring other factors; On the other hand, it also avoids the dizziness brought by complex indicators to employees.
(d) Why do I always get hurt? The human resources department is thankless.
One morning, Zhang, the sales manager of Company C, rushed into the office of He Yilin, the manager of human resources department. ? Why is the performance evaluation of our sales department so low this month? ? Manager Zhang is furious and being swept over is a problem. Why did Lin explain with a smile:? Due to the heavy traffic in the morning, several delivery salesmen in your department were late for delivery this month, which led to the shortage of goods in the mall. The mall made several complaint calls! Which department didn't complain, and why only our department should join the assessment. Your assessment indicators are not scientific at all! We work hard all day, why don't you set the evaluation index! ? Why Lin hasn't finished, manager Zhang left a word and slammed the door, which made Why Lin laugh and cry. In fact, Manager He is also full of bitterness: every time performance appraisal indicators are formulated, the opinions of the business departments should be sought, and they always shirk them, because the business departments always think that this is a matter for the human resources department. However, as soon as the assessment results came out, all business departments complained about the assessment indicators.
In fact, the human resources department, as the main department to organize and implement the assessment, has an important responsibility in formulating the assessment indicators, but this does not mean that other departments can stand by and watch the indicators. On the one hand, in general, other business departments are more aware of their own business processes and departments, and they know what assessment indicators can be used to ignite the enthusiasm of employees. They participate in the process of setting indicators; On the other hand, the assessment indicators produced by the discussion and running-in between the Human Resources Department and various business departments have been recognized by everyone, which is more convincing and can also convince employees to clarify their work priorities and implement assessment.
Therefore, the human resources department should work closely with the business department or other functional departments of the enterprise, and urge the managers to include the business focus of the department in the departmental assessment indicators. Generally speaking, the department assessment indicators must include the business plan tasks undertaken by the department, and the index value shall not be lower than the business plan tasks.
? If you don't accumulate a small stream, you can't make a river. If you don't accumulate a small stream, you can't make a thousand miles. Although an assessment index is small or even insignificant, it is a basic part of the assessment system. The organic combination of all assessment indicators is related to whether the whole performance appraisal system can effectively promote employee performance and organizational development. Human resources workers must not take it lightly, or scribble according to their own subjective assumptions, or copy external experience completely? Nazism? . Only by combining the industry situation and organizational strategy, comprehensively considering various factors, taking into account the process and results, and highlighting the key points, can we formulate scientific and reasonable assessment indicators.
;