Good communications skills for managers

If you’ve ever had a bad boss, you probably have a litany of sentences tucked away in your memory that stands out as a bad way to lead people.

Here I have picked some that any manager should be banned from using. If you find these sentences coming out of your mouth as a manager, it might be time to take a step back and examine your motivations.

Then I will describe a list of prohibited phrases for manager that want having good communication with employees.

1.                  “It’s work; it’s not supposed to be fun.”

2.                    “Your job is what I say it is.”

3.                  “You’re lucky to even have a job.”

4.                   “I don’t make the rules.”

5.                   “I don’t pay you to think.”

6.                   I got an anonymous complaint…”

7.                   “Just figure it out.”

8.                   “Sounds like a personal problem.”

9.                   “I’ll take that under advisement.”

10.               “This is the way we’ve always done things.”

“It’s work; it’s not supposed to be fun.”

The misconception here is that all hard work has to be drudgery. People can enjoy and be passionate about all kinds of work. Rather than dismissing this kind of complaint outright, try to see what might be the root cause.

How can you encourage passion and pride in whatever the hard work is?

Are people not feeling motivated?

 Do they not feel ownership of their work?

“Your job is what I say it is.”

This sentence is the same as saying: “This is your new priority.” Disregarding an employee’s priorities to deal with your crisis of the moment is disrespectful and conveys an impression that you don’t have your act together when it comes to managing projects and priorities. Rather than just reassigning people, explain why you need them to shift directions and how their current projects will be affected or covered.

“You’re lucky to even have a job.”

Depending on what the economy situation, this might certainly be true, but it’s an empty threat. As much as the employee is lucky to have a job, you the manager are lucky to have a qualified candidate filling the position. Censure or terminate the employee if things really aren’t working out, but petty threats like this aren’t helpful to anyone.

“I don’t make the rules.”

Again, while this might be true, it absolutely undermines your authority and makes you appear to be just a puppet of upper management. There are different ways to answer a complaint about company policy. You could direct the employee on how to take their complaint to the correct person who can affect change, or take the complaint up the ladder yourself.

“I don’t pay you to think.”

You shouldn’t stop people from thinking and innovating. Even people in the most menial of jobs might have ideas to improve the process. It’s important to listen to and respect everyone in the company — from the CEO right down to the janitor.

“I got an anonymous complaint…”

Anonymous complaints are the spark that can light a conflagration of interoffice politics and resentment. By calling it out, you’re signaling to your employees that either you want to find out who made the complaint or you want them to — and if it was made anonymously, there’s probably a reason. Avoid mentioning that someone made a complaint at all, if possible, and take the burden on yourself by saying something like, “I’ve noticed,” or “It’s come to my attention,” to avoid creating a scapegoat.

“Just figure it out.”

This sort of managing is both unkind and lazy. If it really is something that an employee should address on their own, you could point out the resources he or she has at their disposal or the training they can rely on.

 “Sounds like a personal problem.”

Personal problems become work problems when they start to affect an employee’s performance. If someone is routinely coming in late or missing work because of a problem at home, that problem has become your problem. A good manager will help employees brainstorm solutions rather than just throwing it back at them and expecting them to manage it on their own.

“I’ll take that under advisement.”

Translated: “I don’t really care what you think, and I’m going to carry on doing what I’m doing as if you never expressed an opinion at all.” Rather than give someone lip service or false hope that their thoughts have been heard, why not try really hearing them. You could just as easily say something along the lines of, “Thank you; you’ve given me a lot to think about.”

“This is the way we’ve always done things.”

This sentence is the same as saying: “I don’t like change.” And hey, change is scary. But just because you’ve done something the same way for years doesn’t mean there’s not a better way. Examine your own hesitations along with the validity of a proposal.

Final Analysis

Words have power, and what we say is important. Someone might think that they are a good manager because of what they do, but if they use sentences like the ones I have listed here than this indicates that they are not. As a manager it's essential to review our way to think and the way to express our thoughts. It is essential to review our thoughts because communication is irreversible, powerful and vital to achieve better performance from employees.

We hope that these concepts are useful for solving problems in the world of entrepreneurs and family businesses.

Lic. Claudio M. Pizzi

Director

www.dorbaires.com

References: 12manage.com

Henri Fayol and the family business

Helping to a family business is a difficult task, since we can find more than one family manager in it. It is possible that different family members have different feelings about the process, people, and the vision of the future. It is not easy for employees working in this atmosphere of work due to the obligation to follow the contradictory orders from the corporate directory.

Who is the boss, the mother, the father, brothers, or the supervisor employee? And what about the rules that employees must follow? How do you know if they are right or wrong, if some of them are changed with regularly? How to be efficient if the directory have different point of view about the efficient?

Henri Fayol was a French management theorist whose theories in management and organization of work were very influential at the beginning of the 20th century. It is possible that Fayol can help us find the answer to this great and intricate problem.

Fayol rules are commonly used to solve problems in different topics as: change and organization. Decision- making skills. Improve the basic effectiveness of a manager, or understand that management can be seen as a variety of activities, which can be listed and grouped.

Then we list the 14 principles of management described in his book and industrial General management.

1. Division of work. Specialization allows the individual to build up experience, and to continuously improve his skills. Thereby he can be more productive.
2. Discipline.  Employees must obey, but this is two-sided: employees will only obey orders if management plays their part by providing good leadership.
3. Unit of command. Each worker should have only one boss with no other conflicting lines of command.
4. Authority. The right to issue commands, along with which must go the balanced responsibility for its function.
5. Subordination of individual interest (to the general interest). Management must see that the goals of the firms are always paramount.
6. Unit of direction. People engaged in the same kind of activities must have the same objectives in a single plan. This is essential to ensure unity and coordination in the enterprise. Unity of command does not exist without unity of direction but does not necessarily flows from it.
7. Remuneration. Payment is an important motivator although by analyzing a number of possibilities, Fayol points out that there is no such thing as a perfect system.
8. Centralization or decentralization. This is a matter or degree depending on the condition of the business and the quality of its personnel.
9. Scalar chain (Line of Authority). A hierarchy is necessary for unity of direction. But lateral communication is also fundamental, as long as superiors know that such communication is taking place. Scalar chain refers to the number of levels in the hierarchy from the ultimate authority to the lowest level in the organization. It should not be over-stretched and consist of too-many levels.
10. Team Spirit of Corps. Management must foster the morale of its employees. He further suggests that. “Real talent is needed to coordinate effort, encourage keenness, use each persons’s abilities, and reward each one’s merit without arousing possible jealousies and disturbing harmonious relations”.
11. Equity. In running business a combination of kindliness and justice is needed. Treating employees well is important to achieve equity.
12. Stability of Tenure of Personnel. Employees work better if job security and career progress are assured to them. An insecure tenure and a high rate of employee turnover will affect the organization adversely.
13. Order. Both material order and social order are necessary. The former minimizes lost time and useless handling of materials. The latter is achieved through organization and selection.
14. Initiative. Allowing all personnel to show their initiative in some way is a source of strength for the organization. Even though it may well involve a sacrifice of “personal vanity” on the part of many managers.

We hope that these concepts are useful for solving problems in the world of entrepreneurs and family businesses.

Lic. Claudio M. Pizzi

Director

www.dorbaires.com

COVEY’S SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE

Stephen Richards Covey (Salt Lake City, Utah, United States, October 24, 1932 - Idaho Falls, Idaho, United States, July 16, 2012) was a lawyer, writer, lecturer, professor and US religious known for being the author selling book: the Seven Habits of Highly effective people. Wildly popular throughout the 1990s and into the twenty-first century, Stephen Covey (1989) has changed the face of many an ambitious manager’s bedside table.

Covey claims that highly effective people have seven habits that make them very successful in life and business:

1.            Be proactive

2.            Begin with the end in mind

3.            Put first things first

4.            Think win – win

5.            First understand, and then be understood.

6.            Synergise.

7.            Sharpen the saw.

In addition, Covey argues that highly effective managers do exactly what they feel is both right and important, and they do it consciously.

The seven habits model is a theory that tries to give an insight into why successful people are successful in both business and personal life. It is therefore highly applicable for leaders and managers.

The model provides a self-help programme, based on an inside-out approach. According to Covey, our personal paradigms affect our interactions with others, which in turn affect how others interact with us.

Improving interactions thus stars with a thorough understanding of our own paradigms and motives. To become successful, one should examine how effectively one acts and interacts.

According to Covey, one first has to break loose from being dependent on others.

People may become independent by adopting the first three habits:

Be proactive. From now on, you take responsibility for your own behavior. You do not blame circumstances, conditions, or – perhaps most importantly – your conditioning for your behavior.

You actively choose your response to any situation and any person. You must be prepared to respond in a way that makes you feel proud. If that requires extra hard work or makes you feel uncomfortable, so be it.

Begin with the end in mind. When, and whatever you undertake, you must visualize the result of future that you want to achieve. You must have a clear vision of where you want to go, or you will not go there at all. You must know exactly what you want to accomplish, or you choose not to accomplish it at all.

You live your life and make decisions according to your deeply held beliefs, principles or fundamental truths.

Put first things first. By taking full control and remaining disciplined, you can focus on the most important, but not necessarily the most urgent activities.

Covey’s list of such important activities includes buildings relationships, writing a personal mission statement, making a long-range plan, doing you workout, and preparing for that presentation, next week. Do all those things now that otherwise would be squeezed in at the last minute delayed or even dismissed.

They will help you eliminate those urgent activities that recently topped your over-loaded to-do list, but really were not as important. Now that you have reached the point of being independent, and you are using your time to pursue your must important goals in life effectively, you must  increase your effectiveness with others around you.

Think win-win. You must believe in “abundance”: there is plenty for everyone.

One person’s success does not necessarily require  someone else’s failure. You seek solutions to problems that allow all parties involved (including yourself) to benefit.

Understand first, before trying to be understood. By this means you can make people around you feel like winners. You might actually learn something from them in the process, now that you have finally decided to shut up and listen. In fact, you must listen with the firm intention of understanding the other person fully and deeply on an intellectual, analytical and emotional level.

Diagnose before you prescribe, says Covey.

Synergise. Finally, you need to open your mind to fresh, creative ideas. You become and agent for innovation, a trailblazer and a pathfinder. You are convinced that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. You value differences between people and try to build upon those differences. You think of creative ways to resolve conflict.

Sharpen the saw. You have now reached a stage of interdependence. You are effective and admired by family, friends and co-workers. Nevertheless, you should never allow yourself to rest on your laurels. You must constantly try to improve yourself, and retain a relentless eagerness to learn and explore.

The question is, what drives people to do the things they do, and low can they become happy doing them? Covey appeals to business managers and all other professionals who take themselves seriously, by bringing it all back to one commonly understood concept: effectiveness. What happened to that world trip you dreamed of 20 years ago? Effectiveness, and having the time to do all those important things that make us love life and others love us, is the ultimate dream of the overworked manager. Key management models Marcel Van Assen – Gerben van den Berg & P. Pietersma

We hope this summary is to your liking. We appreciate any suggestions and comments you want to do about it.

The dorbaires team

www.dorbaires.com

Problemas graves de comunicación interna: email@-fobia

Las fobias o fobos, del griego pánico, son definidas como trastornos emocionales o psicológicos. La primera característica tiene que ver con el miedo desproporcionado hacia algo, pero también se las suele definir como un sentimiento de odio o rechazo hacia algo que causa malestar. Se dice que existen tantas fobias como personas porque cada uno de nosotros puede desarrollar una en particular hacia cualquier cosa. Existen las habituales como ser: a los procedimientos médicos, a espacios cerrados, a los animales, a los insectos, a lugares altos, etc.

En las organizaciones, los empleados también generan fobias. Algunas de ellas tienen que ver con la “comunicación interna”.

Una de ellas es la que yo denomino: “email-fobia”, y es muy interesante de observar por cuanto tiene que ver con las nuevas formas de comunicación que hemos desarrollado a partir de la tecnología.  Cuando un jefe necesitaba dar una orden a sus subordinados, lo hacía en forma “oral, telefónica, telegráfica, o escrita en papel”.  En aquellos tiempos era muy difícil mantener el control de las respuestas y de los trabajos solicitados. La demora en las confirmaciones y el control eran mayores.

El email tiene la particularidad de dejar asentada la orden. Dentro de un “sistema organizado de correos” como por ejemplo el Outlook de Microsoft, se puede trasladar a agenda, toda actividad que se pretenda, incluso enviando avisos de tareas pendientes, y reiterarlos todas las veces que se quiera.

La tecnología a través de esta herramienta, suplantó “la voz y el contacto cara a cara”. Es común ver a compañeros de tareas, separados solo por algunos metros, que prefieren comunicarse por email en vez de hacerlo de forma directa.

Tanto a jefes como a empleados les resulta “más cómodo”, pedir y responder ciertos reclamos por correo electrónico que mantener una “acalorada / activa conversación de trabajo”. El email, suprime por el momento, el contacto visual y el auditivo, y por lo tanto, facilita la comunicación interna de control en ese aspecto, pero lo deteriora en otro.

En algunas organizaciones, el email ha acentuado las diferencias entre jefes y empleados, ¿cómo puede ser posible esto?, sencillo.

El jefe comienza a “disparar emails con tareas para todos”, e incluso les asigna prioridad “alta”, cuando los empleados se dan cuenta de que no pueden llegar a cumplir con los requerimientos solicitados, empiezan a responder, y reciben como contra – respuestas, nuevos emails hasta que ya no responden. Aquí comienza la “enfermedad”, los empleados desarrollan la fobia al email de trabajo. Ellos han aprendido algo en la práctica que los jefes deberían conocer muy bien: 

“si una tarea es urgente, es urgente, si dos tareas son urgentes, son urgentes, si tres tareas son urgentes, son urgentes, si todas las tareas son urgentes, nada es urgente.”

Es así como las empresas se auto generan problemas de comunicación interna. El abuso de la tecnología sumado a la no observación de una adecuada carga de trabajo, se transforma en lo que hemos denominado: email-fobia.

El empleado siente un rechazo natural a los pedidos por email porque de antemano saben que no podrán cumplir con lo solicitado, o porque si cumplen, llegarán más y más…

Es importante darle la importancia que merece a este tipo de “fobias organizacionales” porque el inicio es el rechazo, pero si la enfermedad crece, se produce lo que llamamos “PCO” o parálisis comunicacional operativa, la gente sencillamente deja de comunicarse y se pierde el principio de mando – autoridad – liderazgo.

No está nada mal recordar el principio de la comunicación donde encontramos al emisor, al receptor, al mensaje, el proceso de decodificación y el feedback. Este último elemento debe ser tenido en cuenta. No es necesario generar fobias gratuitas o paralizar las actividades por incomunicación cuando podemos utilizar los dones del habla y la buena predisposición para pedir que se ejecuten las tareas de buena forma.

Los problemas de comunicación, no son propiedad exclusiva de las empresas de familia, PYMES, las multinacionales también los padecen y generan sus propias fobias.

Si te ha resultado interesante la nota, déjanos un comentario, como así también tus sugerencias y temas de tu interés.

Lic. Claudio M. Pizzi

Director

www.dorbaires.com

Cuidado con lo que hace, con tal de vender y conservar sus clientes. Por José Quintero.

Muchas empresas hacen hasta lo imposible con tal de vender sus bienes y servicios o hasta para conservar su cartera de clientes, acción muy válida hoy en día en una economía tan difícil como la nuestra, mas lo que no deberá ser válido, es afectar los procesos operativos y administrativos de la empresa por esta acción.

Como ejemplo, en una empresa se definieron 4 precios por los servicios de mantenimiento que ellos prestaban, esto dependiendo de qué tan complejo era el equipo que previamente se le había vendido al cliente, es decir, mientras más complejo era el equipo, pues su canon de mantenimiento era más alto.

Los problemas comenzaban cuando a los clientes les eran aumentados sus precios por mantenimiento, pues en ningún caso, dicho aumento era informado al cliente y este se enteraba pues al ver en la factura el incremento del servicio.

Ante esta situación, se indago en las gerencias de Ventas, Cobranzas y Administración, no encontrando respuesta alguna ante tal proceder, por lo que se recurrió a la Gerencia General.

En la Gerencia General de la empresa nos indicaron, que este era el procedimiento aprobado por los accionistas, ya que de esta forma se evitaba tener que sentarse a negociar con los clientes los aumentos de los servicios y así evitar entrar en conflicto con ellos (los clientes).

Ante esta respuesta, procedimos a realizar un análisis de los efectos que esta situación generaba en la cartera de clientes y en el ingreso de la empresa y lo que se encontró fue lo siguiente:

1-Clientes que aceptaban el aumento y continuaban con el servicio.

2- Cliente que no aceptaban el aumento y solicitaban  la finalización del servicio.

Y es en este segundo punto es donde queremos enfocarnos, pues al llegar a esta situación, algunas acciones un poco ortodoxas eran realizadas.

Los clientes que solicitaban el retiro del servicio, lo hacían más en reclamo por la forma en la cual les fue “notificado” el aumento del servicio, también otro grupo de clientes solicitaban la finalización del servicio en desacuerdo por el nuevo monto del aumento, lo que a la larga comenzó a generar otro tipo de situaciones.

Cuando estos clientes manifestaban su desacuerdo en el monto del incremento y se negaban a cancelarlo, no había en la empresa una persona responsable de fijar la posición y establecer cuales eran las bandas de descuento que se podían otorgar a los clientes, la Gerencia de Cobranzas (quienes eran los principales receptores de las quejas de los clientes) acudía a la Gerencia de Ventas, específicamente a los vendedores y cuando estos no daban una respuesta oportuna, pues a la Gerencia General de la empresa.

A veces los descuentos otorgados eran dados sin analizar el impacto que estos traerían en los ingresos de la empresa, por ejemplo, 4 clientes distintos que pagaban un mismo monto por mantenimiento, y en algunos casos pues no se realizaba aumento alguno, manteniendo el mismo precio del servicio, afectando de igual forma el flujo de ingresos de la empresa.

En el peor de los casos y como alternativa para conservar al cliente, se dejaba que este definiera el porcentaje de aumento o que indicara  cual era el monto que estaba dispuesto a cancelar por el servicio prestado.

Al realizar una revisión de la cartera de clientes, se puedo observar, que de los cuatro precios originales, ahora se tenían doce tarifas adicionales, esto debido a la forma desordenada y desorganizada en el otorgamiento de descuentos y aumentos de precios.

Como podemos ver en este ejemplo, son evidentes las fallas dentro del proceso de aumento de precios, lo que genera una serie de inconvenientes que afectan directamente los ingresos de la empresa.

Como puntos de oportunidad de mejora se le indicaron a la Gerencia General de la Organización, entre otros:

      1-    Establecer mecanismos de notificación de aumentos de precios a los clientes y garantizar que el cliente se dé por notificado del mismo, se sugirió que la notificación del aumento del precio del servicio sea realizada por los menos dos meses antes del vencimiento del contrato.

      2-    Definir los niveles de descuento a ser otorgados a los clientes, previo análisis del impacto del mismo en las cuentas por cobrar de la empresa.

      3-    Delegar en la Gerencia de Ventas, específicamente el gerente de ventas, la negociación de los incrementos y porcentajes de descuento a ser otorgados en caso de los clientes que rechacen dichos incrementos.

   4-   Una vez que la Gerencia de Ventas negocie algún tipo de descuento, este debe ser notificado a la Gerencia de Cobranzas a fin de que puedan tomar previsiones en sus proyecciones de cobranzas.

     5-    Diseño, elaboración y puesta en marcha de un formato de asignación de descuento, a fin de dejar constancia en los expedientes de los clientes, las fechas, montos de los descuentos otorgados y quien realizo la autorización de ello.

Lamentablemente la organización, no acogió estas sugerencias dadas, y continúo la desorganización al momento de asignar los descuentos y lo peor de todo, la pérdida de clientes.

Gracias por llegar hasta acá, espero que esta información le haya sido útil y que la compartas con aquellas personas que creas que les será de utilidad,  ayúdame a que más personas lo conozcan y se beneficien, ¿Cómo?:

Envíalo por correo, Tuitéalo, Compártelo en Facebook o Dale un +1 al artículo

Recuerda seguir visitando mi blog y dejar tu comentario, para mí tu opinión es muy importante.

¡Gracias por tu ayuda en este camino de ayudar!

José G. Quintero E.

Twitter: @TGerencial

Email: tertuliagerencial@gmail.com

www.teruliagerencial.blogspot.com

BLUE OCEAN STRATEGY

The Blue Ocean Strategy, was created by W. Chan Kim, in 1990, seeks to set aside the competition among enterprises, expanding the market through innovation. Kim and Mauborgne (K and M) said that "what companies need to achieve to be successful in the future it is to stop competing with each other". They divide current markets in two options; red markets and blue markets.

 In the last twenty years, all the strategic thinking has been directed to the red ocean; Administration defines that competition is the success or failure of companies, which has allowed many know perform ably in this world, but knowing that another type of strategy could produce better results, without much concern for competition.

The red ocean represents all existing industries today. These companies must be clearly marked limits and the competencies defined, and their aim is to overcome the opponent and gain a foothold in the market. They are constantly exposed to new competitors, which diminish their growth potential. Usually this type of ocean is the reality of any business. Blue ocean strategy focuses attention on the creation of new markets at the product development stage.

The concept is designed to encourage managers to focus on the creating of uncontested markets.

Most strategic models focus on achieving competitive advantages: the central question being how to be better than the competition. The BOSM (Blue ocean strategy model) does not focus on winning from competitors, but on making the competition irrelevant by creating "blue ocean" opportunities. Blue oceans are uncontested marketplaces in which new demands of customers are satisfied (Kim and Mauborgne, 1997). Read oceans, in contrast, are competitive arenas in which competitors fight and consequently weaken each other.

We can list most important characteristics of these markets

Red ocean Strategy (defend current position perspective)

Compete in an existing market place.

Beat the competition

Exploit existing demand

Make the value / cost trade-off

Align the whole system of a firm’s activities with its strategic choice of differentiation or low cost

Blue ocean strategy (innovate and pursue new opportunities perspective)

Create an uncontested marketplace

Make the competition irrelevant

Create and capture new demand

Beat the value / cost trade – off

Align the whole system of a firm’s activities in pursuit of differentiation and low cost.

Examples of blue markets are:

• Cirque du Soleil
• NetJets (arrendadora de aviones de negocios)
• Ralph Lauren
• Swatch
• Novo Nordisk (empresa farmacéutica danesa)
• Nabi

The BOSM encourages innovation and influences the focus of strategy development. Instead of using competitors as a benchmark, managers look beyond the limits of existing market boundaries to seek new opportunities to create new value for customers. Rather than trying to beat the competition directly, managers should take actions to develop a business offering that opens up and captures a new market space (Ki and M, 2005)

BOSM adds direction to the strategic management process. Development strategy often focuses solely on how to beat the competition. This will lead inevitably to a red ocean scenario in which competitors fight and consequently weaken each other, in order to direct the focus of strategy development towards the creation of blue oceans, the management team needs to answer four questions:

1. Which of the factors that our industry takes for granted should be eliminated?
2. Which factors should be reduced well below the industry’s standard?
3. Which factors should be raised well above the industry’s standard?
4. Which factors should be created that the industry has never offered?

In this process, it is essential to focus on what customers value, rather than merely focusing on competitors or the core competencies of the firm. Instead, one should start from scratch. By answering these questions, it is possible to create entirely new concepts for products. As a result, a new so-called value curve can be created. This curve determines a new value proposition, which shows how the value of the new product differs from current products (K and M, 1997).

Two types of Blue Ocean can be created using this process: either by launching a completely new industry; or by creating new opportunities from within the existing industry by expanding the strategic boundaries of the industry. Most blue oceans are created this way.

BOS is not a well-structured plan that is easy to implement. On the contrary, it is a concept that can be used to focus strategic development (by answering the above questions). Nevertheless, there are six core principles at the heart of BOS that can be used as a guideline to tackle six key risks common to new product development strategy, namely: search risk, planning risk, scope risk, business model risks, organizational risk and management risk (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005). The six blue ocean principles can be interpreted as an implementation guide for creating uncontested markets.

The first principle: reconstruct market boundaries identify commercially compelling blue oceans in which the search risk is minimized.

The second principle: focus on the big picture, not the numbers: tackle the planning risks by focusing demand for a new offering.

The fourth principle: get the strategic sequence right: reduce the business model rusk by focusing on how to build a robust model that ensures long-term profit.

The fifth principle: build execution into strategy: focus attention on the motivation and use of the competencies of employees to execute BOS, thereby overcoming management risk.

Regarding everything mentioned above, the question to be answered is whether this strategy can be used in all cases.

The BOSM is a theoretical model that may be a revelation for many managers. However, the model primarily describes what to do (on an abstract level) instead of demonstrating how to for it. The model and related ideas are descriptive rather than prescriptive. Moreover, the cases mentions by K and M as examples of successful blue ocean innovations are interpreted through a “blue ocean lens”, rather than being based on this model. Although K and M have made a valuable contribution to strategic management literature, not all firms should adopt this model. BOS may be a good strategy for many firms, but for others a fast-moving strategy, cost leadership, differentiation or focus strategy may be far more successful (Porter, 1979). K and M provide the important insight that a firm can simultaneously pursue cost differentiation and low costs.(Marcel Van Assen – Gerben Van den Berg & Paul Pletersma).

We hope this summary has been to his liking. You may want to comment about it to help us improve our publications.

Thank you very much.

The dorbaires team

www.dorbaires.com