Winter 2007 / No. 70
Company executives vs. company
strategy
It might be the result of a retirement, a promotion or reshuffling,
or just a changing of the guard. But the insurer has appointed
new leaders. We might expect a new sales staff with different
field relationships attracting different types of producers.
We might look for new and revised products, possibly a whole
new emphasis. And the services will probably change, eliminating
some, enhancing others, maybe charging for still others.
But what will probably not change is the result. After watching
more than a few of these, we can expect that business will initially
pick up as new producers enter, then even out (as some old producers
leave) at a new level. From a distance, there was a lot of activity,
but we basically incurred a new set of start-up costs to wind
up roughly where we were.
The company has an offering that is executive-based. The value
offered depends on the executive who is in charge: his background,
preferences, mandate, etc. And yet this approach violates the
principles of clarity and consistency (see the article Sustainable
Industry Leadership elsewhere in this issue).
Companies need to have a firm strategy that dictates their value
proposition and have executives charged with implementing rather
than starting over. Executive success should be measured through
implementation success, not creative destruction. Let’s
get to the point where the value we bring is determined by our
strategy rather than by the executive of the day.
|