哈佛個案 EMBA


Ice-Fili

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6tfbvohihl7advc/BPjhXiNdov  組織與設計



http://freedownload.is/ppt/dhl-express

產業分析思考邏輯的迷與思

一般而言,產業(industry)係指由提供具有高度替代性產品的企業所共同形成的集合體,
而這些在實質上具有交互影響的企業,其互動行為及其動態的演進結果,形成了所謂的產業
結構(industry structure)。產業經濟學(industrial economics)很早便提出了所謂S-C-P
(Structure-Conduct-Performance)的分析架構,其意指產業結構會影響企業的行為,從而決定整
體產業的獲利程度;哈佛大學的Michael E. Porter 教授則將此一架構及其相關研究結果,巧妙
地轉化為管理的語言與分析工具,於1980 年提出其著名的五力模型(Five-force Model),意指
產業內上下游間的議價能力、替代品與潛在進入者的威脅程度、加上產業內企業競爭的程度,
共同決定產業的整體獲利程度;晚進的競爭互動理論(Competitive dynamics)與賽局理論
(Game Theory)的發展雖然對S-C-P 相對外生的架構提出修正,但運用五力模型分析企業所處
環境之競爭態勢,從而擬定其競爭策略,已然成為管理界的標準分析工具了。
然而,在這個普遍被採用的分析工具的思考過程中,卻有一個迷思的邏輯:那就是如何
從五力結構的分析結果,去形成個別企業的競爭策略;因為這個不連續的思考過程的存在,
使得分析者常常會發現幾個渾沌的結:
其一、影響五力的因素常有正反向作用的因素同時存在,在無法量化各因素強度的限制下,
如何歸結其淨作用對產業獲利究竟為正或為負?例如:某一產業內進入障礙不低,但業
內企業對上游供應商議價能力普遍不高,若其他力量不計,吾人如何預估其對產業獲利
程度的淨作用?
其二、常有人以歸納出產業的關鍵成功因素(key success factors, KSF),作為產業分析的主要
結果,但是在上述的情形下,如何歸結出KSFs?
其三、一般在分析產業結構後,總希望為某一特定的企業,規劃出可支持競爭優勢(sustainable
competitive advantages, SCAs),以作為策略決策之參考;問題是SCAs 觀念上需與KSFs
銜接,若建立KSFs 的邏輯未能澄清,SCAs 的思考顯然無法打通任督二脈?
本文旨於以個人教授產業競爭分析時,建議學習者的思考邏輯,嘗試為此一迷思提供淺
見,還望就教於讀者。
2
事實上,此一系列的疑問來自於5-force 分析模型與現實想法間的二個差距(gaps):
第一,五力模型表面上展現成一個“預測(predict)”產業獲利程度的工具,然而在無法量化的
現實下,實難展現“先見之明”的功夫;
第二,五力模型實為一靜態架構,現實的企業行為卻為動態的現象;關於第二項差距,只要
在分析時注意時間構面,觀察該產業的結構因素在時間線上的變化,當可由靜態分析
逐步勾勒出產業結構變化的動態面貌,例如,最小經濟規模(minimum efficient scale)
是否因技術創新而產生變化,從而改變大企業的優勢地位;至於第一個差距,則需改
變先見之明的想法,先採取“後見之明”的作法,待掌握了該產業之結構特色後,才
可能因後見經驗轉為先見之能力;運用此一思考邏輯,倒是很容易將產業分析結果,
與KSFs 與SCAs 的觀念相連接,以下便運用此一思考方式,說明該三者之邏輯關係,
同時也作為對前段所提疑問之回應。
後見之明的想法,首在確立分析時點產業之整體獲利率(profitability),一旦此一關鍵訊
息獲得後,分析者可將之與同性質產業之平均獲利率,或無風險利率相比較,判斷該產業在
當時屬於高或低獲利率的產業,如果是屬高獲利者,邏輯上應可確立該產業在正負向結構因
素的“同時”作用下,正向因素(即有利於整體產業獲利的因素)應較負向因素更可能主導
(dominate)產業整體的競爭與互動。
所以,這些主導的正向因素便成了參與此一產業競爭的個別企業若想獲利所必須掌握的
結構性因素,而這些因素便是KSFs 的來源;反之,若產業屬低獲利,依上述之思考邏輯,
如何改變主導之負向因素,也正是KSFs 的內涵,意即在此一低獲利的產業中,能夠獲利的
企業必然有較佳的策略在扭轉這些(負向)因素所造成的影響上。
確立了KSFs 之後,吾人便可以就主要競爭企業在這些成功關鍵因素上的作法加以剖
析,以進一步確認這些因素的關鍵性,如果各表現較好的企業皆在這些因素的全部或局部上,
有較佳的掌握方法或優勢地位,則這些自然構成所謂的產業競爭規則(game rules),而各主要
企業在各KSFs 上的強弱地位,更可反應出其不同的競爭策略,或所處策略群(strategic groups)
之不同;依此邏輯推演,策略群之分析在分析構面上的選擇,當從這些成功關鍵因素中,選
擇最能區別企業內部資源能力差異之因素為之,此一作法與思考邏輯,亦可解決在分析時常
發生對於構面選擇的爭議。
3
至於如何建構某一特定企業之SCAs,則亦應與KSFs 的思考銜接;也就是說,在觀念上,
企業的策略規劃可以著眼充實己身資源,以對KSFs 形成較佳的掌握度,從而建構競爭優勢,
或者,若此一資源的取得有不易克服的障礙,則可評估改變既有競爭規則的可能性,此一策
略方向若運用得宜,往往有出奇兵之效果;當然,競爭優勢不等於SCAs,欲建構SCAs 則須
進一步考慮,關鍵結構因素因其他企業競爭行為所產生的動態變化,在此一方面,晚近賽局
理論的理論研究,可以提供相當不錯的思考方向。
最後,延續此一邏輯,若KSFs 係因企業策略性行為而產生顯著的改變,或使原來非主
導的因素變得更重要,則分析者便可預見產業獲利程度的改變,這不正就是透由「後見之明」
的經驗累績,逐漸培養「先見之明」的能力嗎?其實這也正是管理教育之目的!






閱讀材料:「IDEA物語」by Tom Kelley (大塊文化)
個案四:IDEO產品發展(IDEO product development)
本個案描述IDEO這個全球居於領導地位的產品研發公司,以及其創新的文化價值與流程。這是一個經理人如何育成更為創新的組織的例子。工作室的負責人Dennis Boyle被一家新創的企業Handspring聘請,藉由IDEO公司傳奇性的研發過程作為捷徑,以一半研發的時間,製造一種新型的掌上型電腦。• 個案問題研討:
每組必須準備兩頁的報告回答以下的問題:
1. 請敘述IDEO的營運流程、組織、文化與管理的特性。
2. 你認為Boyle是否應該說服Handspring 的管理團隊改變其積極的產品開發進度計劃?或者是他們應該拒絕此專案?在你的討論中,請分別考慮IDEOHandspring 的立場。
3. IDEO的創新流程可以為台灣的公司所採用嗎?
課堂影片:美國ABC電視台對IDEO之報導


Table of Contents for Packet 2, BA380N, Fall 2008
1 Syllabus
2 Note on Busines Model Analysis for the Entrepreneur (HBS 9-802-048)
3 Zipcar: Refining the Business Model (HBS 9-803-096)
4 Fast Foreward MBA in Project Management, chaps. 5, 12
5 PCNET Case (A) & (B) INSEAD Cases 605-011-1 and 605-012-1
6 Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System (HBS 99509)
7 Toyota Motor Manufacturing, USA, Inc. (HBS 9-693-019)
8 Chase, Jacobs, and Aquilano, chapter 9: Six-Sigma Quality
9 Quality Wireless (A) (HBS KEL153)
10 Quality Wireless (B) (HBS KEL154)
11 What is the Right Supply Chain for your Products? (HBS 97205)
12 Chase, Jacobs, and Aquilano, chapter 17: Inventory Control
13 Zara: IT for Fast Fashion (HBS 9-604-081)
14 Sport Obermeyer Ltd. (HBS 9-695-022)
15 Lean Six-Sigma for Service, chaps 1 & 2
16 Southwest Airline in Baltimore (HBS 9-602-156)
17 Southwest Airline in Baltimore, Supplement (HBS 9-602-157)

http://hbsp.harvard.edu/


http://www.scribd.com/doc/79721642/The-Story-Behind-Southwest-Airlines-Success

http://video.mit.edu/


Southwest Airlines in Baltimore (哈佛商業評論 個案編號 9-602-156)
Assigned Questions to Begin with
1.         西南航空如何與其他航空公司競爭?請比較西南航空與人民航空(People Express) (請參閱Supplement 1之資料).
2.         根據Supplement 2,西南航空的營運劣勢為何? 為什麼快速的折返迴轉(fast turnaround)對西南航空而言如此重要?為什麼巴爾的摩的營運表現逐漸下滑? 系統性思考工具(例如因果迴路圖,存貨與流程圖) 如何解釋員工不足的原因?
3.         你會建議Hanfer如何決策?


Southwest Airlines in Baltimore

The number of connecting passengers through Southwest Airlines' Baltimore station has grown 100% CAGR since 1997. Originally designed as a point-to-point network, this load of connecting passengers has been stressing Baltimore ground operations, resulting in an erosion of service quality and difficulties in achieving fast plane turnarounds--one of the key elements of Southwest's low-cost strategy. This case presents comparative data to illuminate the key elements of Southwest's operating strategy and provides detailed information about the activities and information flows required to turn around a plane, allowing for a meaningful analysis of the process--e.g., resource utilization, capacity, bottlenecks, and coordination mechanisms. A rewritten version of an earlier case.



Southwest Airlines in Baltimore

Operations


Southwest's business model revolved around providing safe, reliable, and short duration air service at the lowest possible fare. With an average aircraft trip of roughly 400 miles, the company had benchmarked its costs against ground transportation. But Southwest believed that cost leadership should not dilute the quality of service. According to analysts, who had been tracking Southwest closely, the airline's approach had a lot in common with the approaches taken by cost leaders in other industries. Southwest pursued a blanketing strategy similar to that of the famous US retailer, Wal-Mart. When Southwest decided to serve a new city, it typically scheduled flights from the new city to two, three or even four destinations at which the company had previously established itself.




Southwest did not commence a service between any two cities until it was able to devote the planes and personnel necessary to operate at least five to six flights a day. Like Toyota, which manufactured small batches of cars in a cost effective way, Southwest had developed competencies in turning around aircraft quickly.

Looking Ahead


Southwest planned to add two more nonstop flights between Baltimore and Houston by 2004. With the additional flights, Southwest would offer a total of four daily nonstop flights between the two airports. 




Southwest planned to connect with a new daily nonstop service between Spokane and Las Vegas on January 18, 2004. Southwest also had plans to add one daily nonstop flight between various cities from April 4, 2004. These included Chicago midway and Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood, Chicago midway and Orlando, Chicago midway and Columbus, Baltimore/Washington and Columbus (A total of 12 flights daily).

Southwest confirmed, it would start a new service from Philadelphia on May 2004, with daily nonstop service to Chicago midway, Las Vegas, Orlando, Phoenix, Providence, and Tampa Bay.

Exhibits


Exhibit I: Southwest Building Blocks of Operational Efficiency
Exhibit II: Southwest: Anatomy of a 15-minute Turnaround

Southwest Airlines In Baltimore

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES IN BALTIMORE

Issue at Hand: Baltimore is one of the eight mega stations for Southwest Airlines. The airline plans to expand operations there, rapidly. But the operational performance at Baltimore station is lagging behind the system-wide average of the airline. The challenge is to overcome this impediment so that the station can accommodate additional growth as planned.

Q 1: Comparative Advantages:

• Strategic business policy which envisions car and bus as Southwest’s rivals, thus creating a commitment to most inexpensive fares and most frequent flights between urban markets separated by 500 miles or less.
• Use of a single operating platform i.e., Boeing 737 gives enhanced efficiency of spare parts, maintenance and ramp operations.
• Use of less congested airports with easy access to large metropolitan areas. This choice saves both money and time for the company as well as passengers.
• No in-flight meals and no transfer baggage to other airlines also
save major hassles.
• Open single class seating does away with the need of computer hardware and software required for sorting purposes. Moreover, this system encourages the passengers to board quickly so as to lay claim to their desired seats (in-built mechanism).
• Decentralized control making the system more responsive to circumstantial need.
• Maintaining a young fleet bestows the reliability of service necessary to deal with rigour of use.
• Effective human resource practices and a well defined and rigorous selection process ensure that applicants are tested for attitude, teamwork and service orientation.
• Strong training emphasis for new recruits as well as the old employees says a lot about commitment to human capital development.
• Company has a culture of empowerment as well as that of forgiveness. This ensures a steady stream of new and bold ideas for operational and service improvement. 
• A high priority is given to resolving conflicts between functional groups. This...
商品編號: 9-602-156
出版日期: 2002/06/21
作者姓名:Oliva, Rogelio;Gittell, Jody Hoffer;Lane, David
商品類別: Operations management
商品規格: 23p

再版日期: 
地域: Maryland
產業: 
個案年度: 2001 -  2001


商品敘述:
The number of connecting passengers through Southwest Airlines'' Baltimore station has grown 100% CAGR since 1997. Originally designed as a point-to-point network, this load of connecting passengers has been stressing Baltimore ground operations, resulting in an erosion of service quality and difficulties in achieving fast plane turnarounds--one of the key elements of Southwest''s low-cost strategy. This case presents comparative data to illuminate the key elements of Southwest''s operating strategy and provides detailed information about the activities and information flows required to turn around a plane, allowing for a meaningful analysis of the process--e.g., resource utilization, capacity, bottlenecks, and coordination mechanisms. A rewritten version of an earlier case.

涵蓋領域:
Operations management;Service management

相關資料:
Supplement, (9-602-157), 3p, by David Lane;
Case Teaching Note, (5-603-055), 22p, by Rogelio Oliva;
Spreadsheet Supplement, (XLS267), 0p, by Rogelio Oliva, Jody Hoffer Gittell, David Lane



Benihana of Tokyo



個案 1. 東京紅花鐵板燒
個案 2. 利豐貿易有限公司
個案 3. 加拿大Shouldice醫院
個案 4. Zappos.com
個案 5. Barilla公司
個案 6. Obermeyer運動用品公司




日期

主題

個案討論

閱讀文章與小組報告

6/19

1pm-1:30pm

創業型專業經理人



透視創業家精神

1







7/10

9am-10:30am

創業與創新精神



事業計畫書的重要思維                                   
#1 科技創業聖經Ch.1

#2 科技創業聖經Ch.2

10:50am

-12:30pm

創業機會之辨識

#1:R&R



1:30pm-3pm

價值創造



#3 科技創業聖經Ch.3
#4 科技創業聖經Ch.4


3:20pm-5pm

商業模式與籌資

#2: Zipcar



2







7/11

9am-10:00am




#6 科技創業聖經Ch.5

#7 科技創業聖經Ch.6

10:20am

-12:30pm

企業成長

#3: E Ink

          

1:30pm-3pm

企業內創業



#8 科技創業聖經Ch.10
#9 四種企業內部創業模式

#10創新障礙賽

3:20pm-5pm

新興的商業機會

#4: Mercury Rising



 

課前說明會 (6/19)   1pm-1:30pm            
創業型專業經理人
·             閱讀文章
Ø   Stevenson (1988) 透視創業家精神

1(7/10)
9am-10:30am         
創業與創新精神
·             閱讀文章
Ø   Sahlman (1997) 事業計畫書的重要思維
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 1 (#1小組報告)
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 2 (#2小組報告)

10:50am-12:30pm  
創業機會之辨識
·             個案一: R&R (哈佛個案9-386-019)
Ø   本個案描述具經驗的創業家如何靈活掌控創業資源以降低進入新創事業所耗費之固定成本。本個案亦幫助學員了解創業經驗、過去信譽、以及人際網路在個人新創事業發展的過程中所扮演之角色與重要性。
·             個案研討問題:
Ø   單號組請針對下列研討問題準備二頁A4書面報告:
1          在創業過程中,Bob Reiss面臨什麼樣的風險與障礙?他應該如何克服?你認為他成功的因素為何?
2          Bob Reiss從這個事業進帳多少?
3          Parker Bros.以及Milton Bradley這樣的大公司是否適合採用Bob Reiss這種作法?
4          延襲TV Guide Game的成功策略,Bob 下一步該如何走?
·             個案影片: R&R

1:30pm-3pm   
價值創造
·             閱讀文章
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 3 (#3小組報告)
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 4 (#4小組報告)
Ø   創業資金籌措 (#5小組報告)
3:20pm-5pm           
商業模式與籌資
·             個案二:Zipcar調整商業模式 (哈佛個案9-803-096)
Ø   Zipcar是一個透過會員來共用汽車的新創公司。本個案描述數次Zipcar的商業模式及財務計劃調整,這些商業計畫調整包含早期版本、開始企業時的版本以及營運幾個月時的版本。
·             個案研討問題:
Ø   雙號組請針對下列研討問題準備二頁A4書面報告:
1.      從網站上下載Excel檔,完成五月份以每台車及每每個預訂者的經濟模式。在模式裡面,重要的因子是什麼?
2.      從網站上下載PPT檔。附件(A1)表列五月的商業分析,用Exhibit 8b九月份的數據以及其他成本資訊來完成實際的績效分析,附件(A2)(A3)為兩個template。從九月實際營運資料來看,商業模式在實務營運績效如何?
3.      附件(B)表列更詳細的實際績效分析,分別分析以計算以及以小時計算的商業模式。完成附件(B)的分析,從這項分析中,我們可以知道什麼管理意涵?
4.      從九月的營運結果來看,Chase應該採取怎樣動作?
·             個案影片: Zipcar


2(7/11)
9am-10:00am         
管理新事業
·             閱讀文章
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 5 (#6小組報告)
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 6 (#7小組報告)

10:20am-12:30pm  
企業成長
·             個案三:E Ink因應成長的籌資 (哈佛個案9-800-252)
Ø   E Ink是一家新創的高科技公司,企圖透過電子墨水顯影來變革印刷傳播。這家公司的發起者與高階經理急著要將技術變成工作雛型,之後大量生產以及引起市場注目。同時他們正處理一項組織基本重要事情:如何在注意於組織成長以及第一批產品需求的同時,保持E Ink的創造力以及有趣的靈感?
·             個案研討問題
Ø   單號組請針對下列研討問題準備二頁A4書面報告:
1.      E Ink所面臨的機會是什麼?
2.      你覺得他們三階段達成長期目標的方法如何?
3.      這家公司應該要募得多少錢?從誰身上募得?該用怎樣方式?
4.      Iuliano以及他的管理團隊該怎麼做?

1:30pm-3pm   
企業內創業
·             閱讀文章
Ø   科技創業聖經Ch. 10 (#8小組報告)
Ø   Wolcott (2007) 四種企業內部創業模式 (#9小組報告)
Ø   Kanter (2006) 創新障礙賽 (#10小組報告)

3:20pm-5pm           
新興的商業機會
·             個案四:Mercury Rising (哈佛個案9-803-107)
Ø   本次個案為美國報業出版商Knight Ridder試圖創造網路數位事業的過程。作為數位出版之先驅,Knight Ridder建立了第一個網路報紙、投資美國第二大網路人力銀行等,結果損失了將近美金1億元。本個案詳述整個新創事業的三階段:(1)新創時期與實驗 (2)快速擴充期(3)網路泡沫期後之經營。
·             個案研討問題:
Ø   雙號組請針對下列研討問題準備二頁A4書面報告:
1.      Bob Ingle新創時期為何遭受阻力?後來有何情勢改變?
2.      請評估Knight Ridder新創網路數位事業的實驗過程。
3.      如果你是Hilary Schnider,你會接任KRD(Knight Ridder Digital)CEO?
4.      Schnider面對目前事業的方案,應該如何決策?
·             個案影片: Interview with Hilary Schnider