Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Implementing BI and understanding the value of such investments


CORE BUSINESS: Canadian Tire Corporation (CTC) is an enterprise that includes a network of businesses including retail, financial services, and petroleum operations. CTC operations were divided into five main categories including Canadian Tire Retail (CTR), Canadian Tire Financial Services (CTFS), Canadian Tire Petroleum (CTP), and PartSource (specialized automotive product servicing company), and Mark’s Work Wearhouse (retail provider of casual and work wear for men and women)  
MARKET TRENDS
Competitive market forces within the retail sector: Historically, retail organizations have invested significantly less than other industries in IT infrastructure (2% versus 5% revenue expenditure, respectively). They had traditionally focused on POS and supply-chain management. However, due to increasing competition, retailers began switching to Business Intelligence to improve sales and better serve their customer base. Recently, however, large North American companies with sales over $1 billion intended to make Business Intelligence (BI) analytics their second-largest IT investment after their Web Portal investments. 
Business Intelligence: Consolidation and analysis of internal/external data to enable effective decision making. At the core of all BI initiatives, there is a data warehouse that contains the data and analytics software that stores data from operational systems in the organization and restructures it to enable queries and models to extract decision support reports. The BI industry is expected to grow from $30 billion to $75 billion by 2005
Challenges: Despite the benefits from BI and data warehousing investments, implementation of these projects consumed huge organizational resources and was difficult. Some of the challenges to achieve success in implementing BI were related to budgetary constraints and their justification, understanding and managing user expectations, and logistics related to its implementation.
HOW BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE ALIGNS WITH THE CORPORATE VISION AT CTC
Change of image: Development of the Information Warehouse (IW), which was implemented by the CTC IT group, was prompted by a paradigm shift in CTR’s image from a wholesaler to that of a retailer. This meant that more data was required in order to begin analyzing data like a retailer, including sensitization to product, store, and margin trends. This eventually led to the development of the Finance Retail Analytics Group (FRAG) that fulfilled the marketing needs at CTC and provided the relevant reports that enabled strategic business decisions.
Barriers to BI success at CTC:  Despite the vision, there were a few transitory challenges that CTC had to address prior to integrating BI with their daily business operations. 
  1. Resource constraints: Due to limited resources, storage and querying of the IW was not possible. While this cut down query duplication, it resulted in limited data access across the breadth of business operations
  2. Lack of standardized definitions: This meant that the same IW could be interpreted in different ways by different users. For instance, depending on the interpretation, one could end up with six different levels of inventory. This delayed the decision-making process.
  3. Lack of available data: Multiple data resources were not available. Thus, the data model was not exhaustive and failed to reflect the data requirements of the business. 
REMEDIAL MEASURES TO ENSURE LONG-TERM SUCCESS OF CTR WITHIN CTC 
The retail IT segment within CTR identified several short-term initiatives, including development of dedicated resources to implementing quick-win projects and finalizing a detailed strategy-and-planning document to guide business operations for the next three years. Broadly, they intended to address the aforementioned challenges through
  1. Systemic information sourcing and organization: developing standardized data formats and a central data warehouse. Essentially, this would collate, organize, and provide easy access to data and meta-data.
  2. Developing data marts/views: To enable timely decision-making while masking the complexities associated with access to the full corporate data structure. 
  3. Quick-win assessments: These comprised short-term IT projects that improved BI capabilities and provided users with new information. These included opportunities such as providing access to daily promotional sales data and market-basket analytical capabilities
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER IMPROVEMENT
  1. Data privacy: While there is emphasis on improving data auditing and archiving, issues such as privacy and security are important within the retail IT segment to ensure integrity of the data. The current and the future IT system do not factor this within the scheme of priorities.
  2. Data cleansing and governance: Detecting and removing data that is out-of-date (incomplete or redundant) is considered to be one of the most important, costly, and time-consuming activities within any BI initiative. Further, identifying irrelevant information is not confined to the IT department. This requires a collective engagement of the HR, Operations, Marketing, and Vendor divisions within CTC. 
  3. Senior management commitment: Finally, for most organizations, an enterprise-wide approach to managing data analytics is a major departure from the current practice. Therefore, a robust IT infrastructure needs to be well-supported by a committed senior IT management, which must establish and rigorously enforce data management policies and high-quality data that is scalable, well-integrated, and consistent.

Friday, April 1, 2011

Monday, March 28, 2011

Google-A Strategy perspective (analysis)





Key factors behind Google’s early success
Many key factors contributed to Google’s early success making Google a market leader in an unattractive industry. 
  • Technology: Technology played a major role in Google’s growth.  They implemented cutting edge innovative systems that catered to the needs of all parties involved.  The creators at Google had always focused on the importance of scalable architecture to provide a cheaper and more efficient service “Google is designed to scale well to extremely large data sets.” Google’s focus on innovation and developing better technology based on their R&D capabilities allowed them to overcome the first mover advantages of its competitors and attracted more network users (both advertisers and consumers), thereby positively contributing to their success.  In addition, their Page Rank Algorithm delivered more reliable search results than their competitors therefore attracting more users and further contributing to their positive network effects. 
  • Business Model Innovation. Google’s model was to attract consumers or users by providing them with free service, made sustainable through revenue generated from advertising.  
Paid Listing increased and became the backbone of Google’s business model.  Google attracted advertisers by adapting their original model from a cost per click model to a click through rate model, which allowed for more effective services.  By perfecting the nature of contextual paid listings, Google not only created a highly effective revenue generator, but it also produced a better experience for its users. One goal was to ensure that their contextual paid listing was at least as relevant and useful to users as the search results themselves.  
  • Product - Focus on The User Experience. Product decisions at Google were driven by the optimization of first the user experience, then generating revenue. The people at Google firmly believed that the better the user experience, the more easily revenues would follow.  They offered innovative and effective products that served a growing demand.  As more and more users began using their services, more revenue was generated through advertising and as a result of a positive network effect, contributed to Google’s success.
Google capitalized on positive network effects to form an easy to use and simple line of products where its users could search anything and everything and the advertiser could place their ads in effective locations relative to search consumers. The model was mutually beneficial both the sides of Google’s network.
  • Capitalization on Industry Growth & Size: Google targeted a growing market and as a result had 500 million users by the end of 2003 as noted by Exhibit 5 which highlights the industry growth of 120% (Appendix A). The web search was the evolution of search growing large enough to overpower the traditional search demand and capabilities.
  • Strategic Partnerships:  Google formed Strategic partnerships (AOL, YAHOO already partnered with Overture) and as a result Google overtook Overture and other web search models in the market.
Overall, Google developed a sound business model, through customer-focused innovation and technology geared towards creating optimal conditions to satisfy a two-sided market.  Their business model allowed revenue to grow and success to follow.

Search a winner-take-all business? 
Certain industry dynamics can lead to a winner-take-all scenario.  This occurs when a network market situation can be served by a single platform provide and one market leader emerges as the dominant player.  Search traditionally involves the dynamics of two-sided networks, where advertisers and searchers (or consumers) interact with one another through the search platform provider or intermediary.  For search to be a winner-take-all business the following three conditions must hold true:
  1. Multi-Homing Costs higher for at least one user side then a winner-take-all dynamic is optimal.
Upon examination of the two parties involved in search, a winner-take-all situation could occur as multi-homing costs are high for at least one user side, namely advertisers.
Advertiser In Search:  One platform would be an optimal situation for advertisers and they would benefit from a winner-take-all scenario.  When an advertiser uses multiple platforms to reach consumers additional costs or homing costs are incurred.  For example, homing costs for advertisers include the time to manage various platforms, or the time to design different ad requirements for multiple search engines, and even the extra diligence involved in ensuring that all the channels portray one cohesive message. Therefore, advertisers incur unnecessarily high multi-homing costs, and ideally the advertiser would be benefit if there was only one platform to reach end consumers.   However, since multiple search engines have a wide variety of users with multiple platforms available at no cost per use advertisers must still advertise on a variety of platforms to be effective. 
Consumers In Search:  As evident in the case, a search consumer uses a search engine that best fulfils his/her needs.  In search, there are low homing costs for individual consumers.  They can use multiple search engines as most platforms are free, easy to use and involve little learning curve or costs to use multiple search engine. As shown in Exhibit 8 from the Case (Appendix B) in the case about 23% of the users use multiple search engines between Yahoo, Google and MSN, which suggests that from the consumer perspective there are low homing costs. 
As the winner-take-all conditions stipulates only one user must have high multi-homing costs, therefore search would qualify and condition one would be satisfied.  
  1. Network effects are positive and strong for at least one party or user side.
 Advertiser In Search:  For an advertiser that utilizes a search platform they would benefit from a winner-take-all dynamic as number of users viewing the search engine increases the more attractive it becomes for the advertiser. Advertisers also face positive cross network effects, whereby the value to them as users is positively correlated with the number of consumers using the search platform.  On the other hand Advertisers have negative same side effects, as the more the advertisers that use a certain platform may decrease the value to the advertiser as there will be more competition 
Consumers In Search: For searchers it doesn’t really matter how many people are using the search engine in this industry, nor does it matter for the user the number of advertisers who promote through search. Consumers in search do not have similar same side or cross side network benefits. 
As is the case in the previous condition, the strong and positive network effects for the advertisers combined with high multi homing costs stipulate an optimal winner-take-all scenario.   
  1. Demand for differentiated features is limited for at least one party or user side.This is not necessarily the case within the search industry and as both parties will be segmented based on features that best fit their needs.  Furthermore, in search features may be more attractive to different niche users and therefore negate the losses associated with not having a single platform.  Advertiser In Search:  Advertisers want to reach as many searchers in their target market as possible. As long as they are doing that they may or may not care about the high tech functionality that a search engine provides them. Consumers In Search: If we look at the needs of the searchers, a majority of them use search engines as a primarily search tool but there is a number of users who prefer other features. Looking at Exhibit 8 in the case we can see that Google users prefer speed and relevance, whereas Yahoo and MSN are more into the portal features. Thus preference for features does exist in Search and the winner-take-all scenario does not hold true in this case. 
To conclude not all three conditions are satisfied, therefore search is not an optimal winner-take all business.
In addition to enhancing its core search businesses, should Google also branch out into new arenas, such as 1) building a full-fledged portal like Yahoo!’s; 2) targeting Microsoft’s desktop software hegemony; and/or 3) becoming an ecommerce intermediate like eBay? 
Using Strategic Positioning Analysis methods, it is possible to approximate which product will offer the best strategy for Google in the future. The products are 1) Portal – the option to build a Yahoo/AOL/MSN-like portal. 2) Online Software/Document (OS) – the option to offer a Windows-like OS, online with office document support.     3) E-Commerce – to build an online marketplace like that of E-Bay.
Our team has identified four parameters for attractiveness of a product and three parameters for competitive positioning as key determinants to determine the best strategy.
Segment Attractiveness
  • Market Size: Google would benefit from determining the market size for each product offering. Yahoo’s market size is 345 Million whereas eBay is 80 million. A portal can attract more customers than an online market place. This is also apparent since a portal also has shopping as a product offering. But without OS, no user can use any product or features. Hence the OS users could be considered as the entire user base. An OS with document editing capability is a basic functionality for most internet users.
  • Intensity of Competitors: Another parameter is the intensity of competitors. In the portal business, there are many players. In the online marketplace, though eBay is the major player, portals have also started offering “shopping” as a product. This reduces the number of buyers and sellers in a particular marketplace. In OS, there is only one big player, Microsoft windows.
  • Innovation:  The next parameter is innovation in product business models. This parameter evaluates the attractiveness for Google in terms of the business model to determine which option will create the most innovative and new opportunities for revenues. The portal and online marketplace industry model would be very similar to the business model of Yahoo or any other portal. 
  • Number of Platforms:  The last parameter that we used for attractiveness is the number of platforms that exist and their weight. This parameter evaluates the possibility of other players entering Google’s platform and the risk of envelopment.  
Competitive Positioning
  • Market Share:  The first competitive positioning parameter is the market share with respect to search query rates. Since Google’s main technology is search, it can better use the technology in Portal and online marketplace businesses but not necessarily as much as in the online OS.
  • Innovation Level: The second parameter is the innovation level. This parameter identifies the technology positions of the new product launch. We identify the importance of the advancement of technology and see how Google can position itself with each of these products. The portal and online market place is like a me-too product. But online OS is a new technology and Google can maintain a better competitive position
  • Risk: The last parameter is the risk involved in replicating the product by other companies. We qualitatively measure the possibility of other companies developing a similar product.
Based on our overall Strategic Positioning analysis (see Appendix C) as well as the pros and cons of each option (see Appendix D), the OS product is the most attractive avenue for Google moving forward.  As the market conditions change and competitive threat grows, it would be wise for Google to adopt additional strategic positioning that will allow them to sustain their position.
Google should differentiate with additional service and/or increasing product quality.  Based on the attractiveness of the Online OS, Google should branch out into this area.  The OS product is an entirely new area and business model for them that can be seen as offering more value to Google in future. Google could charge an initial low cost fee or recurring fee from the users as well, who at present are using Google products for free. Moreover, Google could use their existing base and challenge Microsoft by bundling software and offering it at a discount price.
Appendix
Appendix A – Search Industry: Overall Analysis
GROWTH/SIZE 
  • Growing Market, Number of Users 500 Million and growing
  • International Growth Rate 
  • See Exhibit 5 – 120% Growth
  • Web grew too large for traditional search demand and capabilities (i.e. Human editors)
RIVALRY
  • Large Companies with media budgets > than 1 Million = 12% paid listing accounts & 20% paid listing revenues
  • One Clear Market Leader – Overture with 55% of the global paid-listings revenue in 2003 compared to Google’s 35%
  • Clear market leaders & Increasing competition 
    • Inktomi, Overture, Yahoo,
    • Yahoo, AOL, MSN, Alta Vista, all housed and dominated by Overture – major search portal
BUYER POWER:
  • Low switching Costs
  • Two Sided Markets – Both with High Buyer Power – can go to any company at any time…
  • Consumers – have high buyer power – they can go to multiple search engines
MANY ENTRY BARRIERS – HIGH
  • First- Mover Advantages of other key players (i.e. Overture):
    • R& D Capabilities – 
    • Exclusive Partnerships (AOL, YAHOO already partnered with Overture)
    • Lack of initial Networks Effects
SUBSITITUTES
  • N/A
Appendix C – Strategic Position Analysis
pastedGraphic.pdf
pastedGraphic_1.pdf
pastedGraphic_2.pdf
Appendix E – Branching Out

PORTAL
PROS
CONS
  • Google’s monthly visitors are 74 million compared to Yahoo’s 345 million
  • Can offer 3rd party services like hotels, jobs etc along with advertisements

  • Multiple players exists and Google has to still face competition with MSN, Yahoo and AOL
  • Tired business model
  • Low switching costs
  • Less scope for innovation
  • More than one comparable platforms available to users, hence, switching costs will still be low for the user
WINDOWS ONLINE OS
PROS
CONS
  • More Windows pc than any other operating system
  • Innovative solution / first mover advantage
  • Has other collaborating systems and services like Gtalk, SMS, Gmail, Google Desktop
  • Two sided market will be served by a single platform
  • Switching costs will be more
  • Technology challenges
  • Windows Live initiative form Microsoft
  • Microsoft is a major competitive threat
BONDS (HONG KONG MARKET)
PROS
CONS
  • Issuing these Bonds will allow the company to tap into a knowledgably investment base that already is aware of the Company
  • There is no need for the Company to change or restructure their financial statements
  • The market is already saturated with bonds issued from the People’s Republic of China
  • As a result, bonds in this market are considered high-yield, have a higher risk of default and therefore less attractive to investors
  • In addition, this market is strained and pressure on pricing has increased
E-COMMERCE
PROS
CONS
  • Large user base and advertisers
  • Search was the first step in e-commerce

  • Existence of a clear market leader
  • Multiple platforms may exist
  • Low switching costs
  • Less scope for innovation
  • Can be a service provider and intermediary

Friday, December 31, 2010

Utility Pricing Models

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Learning from the West- Narayan Murthy

Ladies and gentlemen:

It is a pleasure to be here at the Lal Bahadur Shastri Institute of Management. Lal Bahadur Shastri was a man of strong values and he epitomized simple living. He was a freedom fighter and innovative administrator who contributed to nation building in full measure. It is indeed a matter of pride for me to be chosen for the Lal Bahadur Shastri Award for Public Administration and Management Sciences. I thank the jury for this honor.

When I got the invitation to speak here, I decided to speak on an important topic on which I have pondered for years - the role of Western values in contemporary Indian society. Coming from a company that is built on strong values, the topic is close to my
heart. Moreover, an organization is representative of society, and some of the lessons that I have learnt are applicable in the national context. In fact, values drive progress and define quality of life in society.

The word community joins two Latin words com ("together" or "with") and unus ("one"). A community, then, is both one and many. It is a unified multitude and not a mere group of people. As it is said in the Vedas: Man can live individually, but can survive only collectively. Hence, the challenge is to form a progressive community by balancing the interests of the individual and that of the society. To meet this, we need to develop a value system where people accept modest sacrifices for the common good.

What is a value system? It is the protocol for behavior that enhances the trust, confidence and commitment of members of the community. It goes beyond the domain of legality - it is about decent and desirable behavior. Further, it includes putting the community interests ahead of your own. Thus, our collective survival and progress is predicated on sound values.

There are two pillars of the cultural value system - loyalty to family and loyalty to community. One should not be in isolation to the other, because, successful societies are those which combine both harmoniously. It is in this context that I will discuss the
role of Western values in contemporary Indian society.

Some of you here might say that most of what I am going to discuss are actually Indian values in old ages, and not Western values. I live in the present, not in the bygone era. Therefore, I have seen these values practiced primarily in the West and not in India.
Hence, the title of the topic.
I am happy as long as we practice these values - whether we call it Western or old Indian values. As an Indian, I am proud to be part of a culture, which has deep-rooted family values. We have tremendous loyalty to the family. For instance, parents make enormous sacrifices for their children. They support them until they can stand on their own feet. On the other side, children consider it their duty to take care of aged parents.We believe: Mathru devo bhava - mother is God, and pithru devo bhava - father is God. Further, brothers and sisters sacrifice for each other. In fact, the eldest brother or sister is respected by all the other siblings. As for marriage, it is held to be a sacred union - husband and wife are bonded, most often, for life. In joint families, the entire family works towards the welfare of the family. There is so much love and affection in our family life.

This is the essence of Indian values and one of our key strengths. Our families act as a critical support mechanism for us. In fact, the credit to the success of Infosys goes, as much to the founders as to their families, for supporting them through the tough times.
Unfortunately, our attitude towards family life is not reflected in our attitude towards community behavior. From littering the streets to corruption to breaking of contractual obligations, we are apathetic to the common good. In the West - the US, Canada, Europe,
Australia, New Zealand - individuals understand that they have to be responsible towards their community.

The primary difference between the West and us is that, there, people have a much 
better societal orientation. They care more for the society than we do. Further, they generally sacrifice more for the society than us. Quality of life is enhanced because of this. This is where we need to learn from the West. I will talk about some of the lessons that we, Indians, can learn from the West.

In the West, there is respect for the public good. For instance, parks free of litter, clean streets, public toilets free of graffiti - all these are instances of care for the public good. On the contrary, in India, we keep our houses clean and water our gardens everyday - but, when we go to a park, we do not think twice before littering the place.
Corruption, as we see in India, is another example of putting the interest of oneself, and at best that of one's family, above that of the society. Society is relatively corruption free in the West. For instance, it is very difficult to bribe a police officer into avoiding a speeding ticket.

This is because of the individual's responsible behavior towards the community as a whole On the contrary, in India, corruption, tax evasion, cheating and bribery have eaten into our vitals. For instance, contractors bribe officials, and construct low-quality
roads and bridges. The result is that society loses in the form of substandard defence equipment and infrastructure, and low-quality recruitment, just to name a few impediments. Unfortunately, this behavior is condoned by almost everyone.

Apathy in solving community matters has held us back from making progress, which is otherwise within our reach. 
We see serious problems around us but do not try to solve them. We behave as if the problems do not exist or is somebody else's. On the other hand, in the West, people solve societal problems proactively. There are several examples of our apathetic attitude. For instance, all of us are aware of the problem of drought in India.
More than 40 years ago, Dr. K. L. Rao - an irrigation expert, suggested creation of a water grid connecting all the rivers in North and South India, to solve this problem. Unfortunately, nothing has been done about this. The story of power shortage in
Bangalore is another instance. In 1983, it was decided to build a thermal power plant to meet Bangalore's power requirements. Unfortunately, we have still not started it. Further, the Milan subway in Bombay is in a deplorable state for the last 40 years,
and no action has been taken.

To quote another example, considering the constant travel required in the software industry; five years ago, I had suggested a 240-page passport. This would eliminate frequent visits to the passport office. In fact, we are ready to pay for it. However, I am
yet to hear from the Ministry of External Affairs on this.

We, Indians, would do well to remember Thomas Hunter's words: 
Idleness travels very slowly, and poverty soon overtakes it. What could be the reason for all this? We were ruled by foreigners for over thousand years. Thus, we have always believed that public issues belonged to some foreign ruler and that we have no role in solving them. 
Moreover, we have lost the will to proactively solve our own problems. Thus, we have got used to just executing someone else's orders. Borrowing Aristotle's words: We are what we repeatedly do.
Thus, having done this over the years, the decision-makers in our society are not trained for solving problems. Our decision-makers look to somebody else to take decisions. Unfortunately, there is nobody to look up to, and this is the tragedy.

Our intellectual arrogance has also not helped our society. I have traveled extensively, and in my experience, have not come across another society where people are as contemptuous of better societies as we are, with as little progress as we have achieved.
Remember that arrogance breeds hypocrisy. No other society gloats so much about the past as we do, with as little current accomplishment.
Friends, this is not a new phenomenon, but at least a thousand years old. For instance, Al Barouni, the famous Arabic logician and traveler of the 10th century, who spent about 30 years in India from 997 AD to around 1027 AD, referred to this trait of Indians.

According to him, during his visit, most Indian pundits considered it below their dignity even to hold arguments with him. In fact, on a few occasions when a pundit was willing to listen to him, and found his arguments to be very sound, he invariably asked Barouni:
which Indian pundit taught these smart things!

The most important attribute of a progressive society is respect for others who have accomplished more than they themselves have, and learn from them. Contrary to this, our leaders make us believe that other societies do not know anything! At the same time,
everyday, in the newspapers, you will find numerous claims from our leaders that ours is the greatest nation. These people would do well to remember
 Thomas Carlyle's words: The greatest of faults is to be conscious of none.

If we have to progress, we have to change this attitude, listen to people who have performed better than us, learn from them and perform better than them. Infosys is a good example of such an attitude. We continue to rationalize our failures. No other society has mastered this part as well as we have. Obviously, this is an excuse to justify our incompetence, corruption, and apathy. This attitude has to change. As Sir Josiah Stamp has said: It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities.
Another interesting attribute, which we Indians can learn from the West, is their accountability. Irrespective of your position, in the West, you are held accountable for what you do. However, in India, the more 'important' you are, the less answerable you are. 
For instance, a senior politician once declared that he 'forgot' to file his tax returns for 10 consecutive years - and he got away with it. To quote another instance, there are over 100 loss making public sector units (central) in India. Nevertheless, I have not seen action taken for bad performance against top managers in these organizations. 
Dignity of labor is an integral part of the Western value system. In the West, each person is proud about his or her labor that raises honest sweat. On the other hand, in India, we tend to overlook the significance of those who are not in professional jobs. We have a mind set that reveres only supposedly intellectual work. 
For instance, I have seen many engineers, fresh from college, who only want to do cutting-edge work and not work that is of relevance to business and the country. However, be it an organization or society, there are different people performing different roles. For success, all these people are required to discharge their duties. This includes everyone from the CEO to the person who serves tea - every role is important. Hence, we need a mind set that reveres everyone who puts in honest work.

Indians become intimate even without being friendly. They ask favors of strangers without any hesitation. For instance, the other day, while I was traveling from Bangalore to Mantralaya, I met a fellow traveler on the train. Hardly 5 minutes into the conversation, he requested me to speak to his MD about removing him from the bottom 10% list in his company, earmarked for disciplinary action. I was reminded of what Rudyard Kipling once said:
A westerner can be friendly without being intimate while an easterner tends to be intimate without being friendly.

Yet another lesson to be learnt from the West, is about their professionalism in dealings. The common good being more important than personal equations, people do not let personal relations interfere with their professional dealings. For instance, they don't hesitate to chastise a colleague, even if he is a personal friend, for incompetent work.
In India, I have seen that we tend to view even work interactions from a personal perspective. Further, we are the most 'thin-skinned' society in the world - we see insults where none is meant. This may be because we were not free for most of the last
thousand years. Further, we seem to extend this lack of professionalism to our sense of punctuality.
We do not seem to respect the other person's time. The Indian Standard Time somehow seems to be always running late. Moreover, deadlines are typically not met. How many public projects are completed on time? The disheartening aspect is that we have accepted this as the norm rather than the exception. In the West, they show professionalism by embracing meritocracy. Meritocracy by definition means that we cannot let personal prejudices affect our evaluation of an individual's performance. As we increasingly start to benchmark ourselves with global standards, we have to embrace meritocracy.

In the West, right from a very young age, parents teach their children to be independent in thinking. Thus, they grow up to be strong, confident individuals. In India, we still suffer from feudal thinking. I have seen people, who are otherwise bright, refusing to show independence and preferring to be told what to do by their boss. We need to overcome this attitude if we have to succeed globally.

The Western value system teaches respect to contractual obligation. In the West, contractual obligations are seldom dishonored. This is important - enforceability of legal rights and contracts is the most important factor in the enhancement of credibility of our people and nation.
In India, we consider our marriage vows as sacred. We are willing to sacrifice in order to respect our marriage vows. However, we do not extend this to the public domain. For instance, India had an unfavorable contract with Enron. Instead of punishing the people
responsible for negotiating this, we reneged on the contract - this was much before we came to know about the illegal activities at Enron.

To quote another instance, I had given recommendations to several students for the national scholarship for higher studies in US universities. Most of them did not return to India even though contractually they were obliged to spend five years after their
degree in India. 
In fact, according to a professor at a reputed US university, the maximum default rate for student loans is among Indians - all of these students pass out in flying colors and land lucrative jobs, yet they refuse to pay back their loans. Thus, their action has made it difficult for the students after them, from India, to obtain loans. We have to change this attitude.
Further, we Indians do not display intellectual honesty. For example, our political leaders use mobile phones to tell journalists on the other side that they do not believe in
technology! If we want our youngsters to progress, such hypocrisy must be stopped. We are all aware of our rights as citizens. Nevertheless, we often fail to acknowledge the duty that accompanies every right. To borrow Dwight Eisenhower's words: 
People that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. Our duty is towards the community as a whole, as much as it is towards our families.

We have to remember that fundamental social problems grow out of a lack of commitment to the common good. To quote Henry Beecher:
Culture is that which helps us to work for the betterment of all. Hence, friends, I do believe that we can make our society even better by assimilating these Western values into our own culture - we will be stronger for it.

Most of our behavior comes from greed, lack of self-confidence, lack of confidence in the nation, and lack of respect for the society. To borrow Gandhi's words:
 There is enough in this world for everyone's need, but not enough for everyone's greed.
Let us work towards a society where we would do unto others what we would have others do unto us. Let us all be responsible citizens who make our country a great place to live. In the words of Churchill: 
Responsibility is the price of greatness. We have to extend our family values beyond the boundaries of our home. Finally, let us work towards maximum welfare of the maximum people - Samasta janaanaam sukhino bhavantu. Thus, let us - people of this generation, conduct ourselves as great citizens rather than just good people so that we can serve as good examples for our younger generation.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Restoring Trust

There has been a real, measurable 'erosion' of Trust by the pharmaceutical industry. The future health is a series of changes that will better align the industry with the needs of the patients. The efficiency and effectiveness with which they work through research and development ultimately has to make measurable difference in the lives of the patients, because that's what it's all about. that's how trust is restored.
Over the last several years we have been leading the way in terms of demonstration , capabilities and enhanced productivity and effectiveness during the drug development process. Our efforts are all aligned to improve healthcare for the customer benefit, but the patients, people with conditions, people with serious disease are going to benefit from our endeavors.

New Healthcare is the innovation and we need to be the change agent.