Showing posts with label emerson electric co.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label emerson electric co.. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

My AMA article: “Hard-Won Lessons from a Turnaround CEO”


The American Management Association published my article “Anticipate, Focus, Execute - Hard-Won Lessons from a Turnaround CEO”.

An excerpt from the article is as follows:
“After 15 years at Emerson Electric Co, I have spent more than 20 years as a turnaround CEO.  During this time, I have discovered that companies get themselves into trouble, not because of technological advances in the marketplace, new competition, or other external factors, but because they have been mismanaged. Here are eight characteristics that separate successful businesses from those that are headed for trouble.”

Sunday, October 23, 2011

The Netflix Culture & Mistake


Netflix’s culture was described in a recent edition of the Business Insider. It makes an interesting read. At more than one hundred pages, it is quite long and detailed – but worthwhile.

While it is described as a statement of its company culture, it is more of a guide and blueprint for its employees on how the company operates or, perhaps more accurately what is expected of its employees.

Netflix’s culture document has three principal themes – Performance, Freedom, Responsibility - and expands into seven specific requirements which are listed below:
Values are what we value.
High Performance.
Freedom & Responsibility.
Context, not Control.
Highly Aligned, Loosely Coupled.
Pay Top of Market.
Promotions & Development.
 The several factors frequently emphasized:
“Performance” is the most important variable leading to success – it is cited repeatedly throughout the statement. It will overcome context and control failures, responsibility issues and success with hiring and promotions.
An indication of Performance’s importance are two warnings to employees: “Accomplish amazing amounts of important work.” “Adequate performance gets a generous severance package.”
“Think strategically.” “Focus on strategy & goals.”

“Minimize written rules.”

“Communication.” “Frequent department meetings.” “Honest, candid, non-political communication.” “Challenge prevailing assumptions.” “Courage to say what you think.” “Quick to admit mistakes.”

“Open internally about strategy and results.” (i.e., the company makes sure all employees are thoroughly familiar with its strategy and results)

“Judgment.” Largely refers to how decisions are made: Identify root causes, not symptoms. Think strategically, not tactically. Make good decisions regardless of uncertainties – i.e., do your homework.

“No toleration for brilliant jerks” Smart but difficult to work for managers are not retained.
In the first few pages they surprisingly go out of their way to harpoon Enron’s value statement that was displayed in Enron’s lobby: Integrity, Communication, Respect, Excellence.

It is unusual for a company’s culture to be a written document. Although one of the world’s most successful companies – Wal-Mart – publishes a statement of culture.

By comparison, in my fifteen years at Emerson Electric Co. there was none and one was never discussed. We all understood the culture and the company’s values. It was exactly the same as Netflix’s emphasis throughout its culture statement: “Performance” and “Strategic Focus”.

Netflix acknowledges that they know they are not perfect but continue to work toward achieving their goals by stating in the culture document: “We are getting better” “We keep improving our culture as we grow. We get better at seeking excellence.” This certainly gives credibility to the constructive perspective that supports Netflix’s statement of culture are.

However, Netflix does make mistakes. One major error was this year’s decision to separate its DVD service from its Internet streaming service. Three weeks after the spin off decision was announced, Netflix reversed itself and decided to not spin off its DVD service. It decided to keep both services under one name and one Web site.

The positives:
● The quick realization of a mistake with the reversal decision being made just three weeks after it was announced. (It took Coca Cola three months to reverse its New Coke decision.)

● A candid admission that a mistake was made and that hubris was a factor.

● The 60% price increase. It may make the mistake fade quickly, if it sticks, as it will have a significantly favorable impact on profitability.
The negatives:
● Contrary to its culture statement on Judgment, thorough homework for this decision was not completed.

● The admission that hubris played a big role.
● Can the company recover? Will competition capitalize on the error? Will customers accept the 60% price increase? Will Netflix record Net Losses in 2012?


Click on this link for Netflix's culture document.




Friday, July 2, 2010

China to Surpass USA as World Leader in Manufacturing?

The headline in a June 2010 Financial Times article was bothersome. It chronicled “US Manufacturing Crown Slips”.

In summary, the article reported:

“The US remained the world’s biggest manufacturing nation by output last year, but is poised to relinquish this slot in 2011 to China – thus ending a 110-year run as the number one country in factory production.”

“Last year, the US created 19.9 per cent of world manufacturing output, compared with 18.6 per cent for China, with the US staying ahead despite a steep fall in factory production due to the global recession.”

“If the figures are calculated in inflation-adjusted, constant price terms, then….the US will keep its top role in manufacturing…. On an inflation-adjusted basis….China is forecast to take over the number one position in manufacturing….”


In this article, population is a primary factor impacting the prediction. China is four times as large as the USA in terms of population. This size, coupled with a lower wage rate, estimated at one tenth of the average cost in the United States, makes it reasonable to expect China will surpass the USA in manufacturing production.

However, in my opinion, there are sincere problems with this premise. The USA is superior in several manufacturing categories, particularly in the innovative capability to create new products, technologies, and industries. A properly focused, capitalized USA manufacturing industry, can remain the world leader in output.

After having a number of business experiences within China, I now believe the Chinese will not retain the leadership in manufacturing in the world. I predict a pendulum will swing eventually. China will most likely stumble, similar to the historic decline of Japan's edge in business.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Criticism of GE’s CEO, Jeffrey Immelt

A March Money Watch article on Jeffrey Immelt, titled 'GE Has Been An Investor Disaster Under Jeff Immelt', is strongly critical of his relatively high level of compensation as it relates to GE’s depressed stock price. Mr. Immelt is General Electric Company’s Chief Executive Officer.

An example of the criticism:
"By any measure of shareholder value, GE has been a disaster under Jeffrey Immelt. Investors haven't made a nickel since he took the helm as chairman nine years ago. In fact, they've lost tens of billions of dollars."
There is certainly room to criticize Mr. Immelt’s salary, bonus, common stock grants and retirement plan while GE’s stock price and profit performance are in the doldrums. However the article does not analyze the condition of GE’s operating businesses. Have its divisions deteriorated? Are there market share losses? Are its operating units registering Operating Losses? Or is its poor profit performance related solely to the 2007-2010 financial and economic crisis?

During this crisis most blue-chip, well-run companies have experienced sales and operating profit declines of 20% - 30% with large declines in the price of their common stock. Although slightly improved recently, many prices are still sluggish and down.

This even includes my Alma Mater, Emerson Electric Co., one of the best managed companies in this country. Emerson has registered sales and operating profit declines of 20%-30%. But their operating divisions have continued to perform well.

Chief Executive Officers are responsible for the operating performance of the businesses they manage – this is their primary role. Granted their tenure is also dependent on the stock price. If the performance of GE’s operating businesses has deteriorated, then Mr. Immelt should be criticized and replaced as CEO.

Monday, December 7, 2009

An Op-Ed on Federal Spending and Legislation

The following is an op-ed article written by Dave Farr, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Emerson Electric Co. His concern is the affect federal spending and legislation are having on the ability of USA manufacturers to compete globally, and to successfully invest in USA operations. It is a non-partisan, truly objective article, and thus worthwhile reading:

To: Emerson U.S. based employees

Attached is a copy of an op-ed that I recently wrote and submitted to local St. Louis newspapers relative to my concerns as the CEO of Emerson -- a global manufacturing company.

As the leader of this company of 120,000 employees, hundreds of thousands retirees, and 350,000 shareholders, I must be concerned about strategic global issues that will impact Emerson and our ability to survive, compete and win.

We are a diverse company and I realize that opinions vary. My responsibility is to do my best to represent the overall interests of our shareholders, our employees and our customers. In this instance, I want first to share this piece with you as employees of this great company.

I wish all of you a very special and joyous holiday season and a prosperous new year.

My personal regards,
David N. Farr

---

America's Survival as a Prosperous Nation is at Risk

Major manufacturers today must compete in global markets if they want to survive, prosper, and grow. Emerson is no exception. We compete head-to-head with Asian and European companies here at home and in virtually every market of the world. The ability to manage quality, innovation, logistics, customer support, manufacturing cost and many other factors determines which companies survive or don't.