Immediate Vault Immediate Access

Managing Strategic Risk: It All Starts With a Plan

There are many ways a company’s long-term strategy can fail.

The problem may be execution. Or perhaps continually shifting the plan aka moving the goal posts (*cough* … Hewlett-Packard). Another common downfall is expanding too fast (*cough*Toyota). Sometimes companies fall victim to their own success, deluding themselves into believing they can thrive in areas in which they aren’t suited to succeed (*cough*Bank of America buying Countrywide) or emerging areas they simply don’t understand (*cough* … AIG insuring mortgage-backed securities). Or companies can fail via the inverse: resting on their laurels and failing to change as the world around the does (*cough* … Blockbuster).

In short, there are eight millions ways to die.

There may only be one, however, that predestines a company to fail: starting with a flawed plan. Or, to play on the cliché: failing to plan may be planning to fail — but planning poorly might be just as bad.

To that end, Forbes has compiled a “top ten ways strategic plans fail.” Head over there for the full list but these are the five I consider to be the most insightful lessons.

1. Having a plan simply for plans sake. Some organizations go through the motions of developing a plan simply because common sense says every good organization must have a plan. Don’t do this. Just like most everything in life, you get out of a plan what you put in. If you’re going to take the time to do it, do it right.

3. Partial commitment. Business owners/CEOs/presidents must be fully committed and fully understand how a strategic plan can improve their enterprise. Without this knowledge, it’s tough to stay committed to the process.

7. Having the wrong people in leadership positions. Management must be willing to make the tough decisions to ensure the right individuals are in the right leadership positions. The “right” individuals include those who will advocate for and champion the strategic plan and keep the company on track.

8. Ignoring marketplace reality, facts, and assumptions. Don’t bury your head in the sand when it comes to marketplace realities, and don’t discount potential problems because they have not had an immediate impact on your business yet. Plan in advance and you’ll be ready when the tide comes in.

10. Unrealistic goals or lack of focus and resources. Strategic plans must be focused and include a manageable number of goals, objectives, and programs. Fewer and focused is better than numerous and nebulous. Also be prepared to assign adequate resources to accomplish those goals and objectives outlined in the plan.

The 5 Companies Hit Hardest by the Thailand Floods

Thailand’s worst flooding in five decades has affected companies in every industry, from automotive to technology to pharmaceuticals and beyond. As we saw with the earthquake in Japan, it’s a company’s supply chain that is affected most when natural disasters strike. Thailand is a midsize country of 67 million people and its outsized importance in global supply chains is now becoming clear. Here are 5 companies most affected by the historical floods:

  1. Toyota — It seems as though any natural disaster affects this automotive manufacturer. Toyota announced today that it will suspend production at its plants in North American on Saturday, citing an interruption in the supply chain of some Thai-made components. Toyota plants in Indiana, Kentucky and Ontario, Canada, will be shut down until the situation in Thailand improves. As of last Friday, the floods had resulted in an output loss of 37,500 vehicles in the Southeast Asian country since Toyota idled three plants there October 10th. That number could potentially climb to 250,000 by mid-November. If that happens, it is estimated that operating profit could be reduced by $1.6 billion.
  2. Ford — On a conference call yesterday, Ford Chief Financial Officer Lewis Booth stated that the carmaker may lose production of 30,000 vehicles. Though Ford’s assembly plant is not affected, their supply chain is. The company said the Thai floods have cut fourth-quarter production so far by 17,000 vehicles due to supplier issues. That number could climb to 30,000. Ford said it is “working closely with its affected suppliers to return to production as quickly as possible and to minimize any potential impact in other regions.”
  3. Lenovo — The Chinese computer maker said yesterday that it expects its supply of hard disk drives to tighten “through the first quarter of next year.” Thailand supplies approximately 40% of the global output of hard disk data storage devices, meaning Lenovo is not the only company within the industry experiencing interruption issues. Western Digital and Seagate Technology have both said they expect to face a shortage of parts soon. Because of this, Apple announced they expect a shortage in the coming months of disk drives for their products, specifically the company’s Mac lines, according to Apple CEO Tim Cook .
  4. Canon — The Tokyo-based company has recently revised its full-year financial outlook based on concerns about the impact of flooding in Thailand. The company said the Thai flooding will lower its sales and operating profit by Y50 billion ($660,000) and Y20 billion ($264,000), respectively, in the fourth quarter.
  5. Sharp — Having recently announced that the company is almost fully recovered from the business interruption it experienced after the Japan earthquake in March, Japan’s number one liquid-crystal display maker is now stating that the Thai floods may affect revenue.

    Although Sharp’s manufacturing facilities in Thailand weren’t damaged, the company’s inability to secure certain parts from suppliers hit by the flooding may result in tens of billions of yen in lost revenue, said Sharp Executive Vice President Toshio Adachi at a press conference.

As companies scramble to obtain parts from other regions of the world, we are reminded that supply chain risk management is an often-overlooked segment of the discipline…until disaster strikes.

Toyota’s Troubles Part Two (Or Three or Four or . . .)

Here I am again, writing about Toyota’s troubles.

Today, the car company announced another massive global recall of close to 1.7 million cars due to fuel leak problems. The car models in question affecting the U.S. are the Lexus IS and GS sedans. And though Toyota says it has received no reports of accidents or deaths due to the malfunction, it has had numerous complaints from North American, European and Japanese customers.

It’s been a horrible two years for the world’s largest car manufacturer. Last February I wrote about the Prius recall and the numerous questions that followed regarding the company’s totalitarian business environment.

The “Toyota Way” is the company’s long-standing philosophy that, among other things, places an extreme emphasis on maximizing efficiency by minimizing waste. Some have even said it acts almost like a religion amongst Toyota’s 316,000 employees. There is even a Toyota-approved way of turning corners when walking around the company’s numerous hallways (you must do say at a 90 degree angle). Think that’s bad? Toyota also demands that their employees never walk around the office with their hands in their pockets.

Now if only they could be that vigilant and careful with their car manufacturing process. Does Toyota value waste-cutting and efficiency more than product quality and customer safety? It’s a question that has been asked more than once.

Toyota Settles Hybrid Patent Case

As we reported a few weeks ago, Toyota has been embroiled in a patent dispute with Paice LLC concerning its hybrid vehicle technology that threatened to halt hybrid imports in the United States.  As it turns out, after six years of litigation, Toyota has finally reached a settlement in the case. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Paice founder Alex Severinsky, who had claimed that Toyota infringed on his 1994 patent, was pleased with the result.

“Finally people understand the merits of what I invented and give it the proper value,” Severinsky said. “Toyota is the leading technology company and finally appreciates the value of the invention.”

Toyota had insisted that, while its technology was similar to Paice patent, its hyrib vehicles were the result of its own independent research. Evidently, both parties were in agreement.

“The parties agree that, although certain Toyota vehicles have been found to be equivalent to a Paice patent, Toyota invented, designed and developed the Prius and Toyota’s hybrid technology independent of any inventions of Dr. Severinsky and Paice as part of Toyota’s long history of innovation,” both companies said in separate statements.

With this issue out of the way, Toyota can now concentrate on its latest round of subpeonas. This time, a federal grand jury in New York is investigating whether or not Toyota notified the NHTSA in a timely fashion about faulty steering rods.

For Toyota, a bad year just keeps getting worse.