Read & Lead

먼저 “BTL 원칙의 고수”를 읽으십시오. 그리고 Built to Last 원칙과 메커니즘들이 어떻게 비전기업을 만드는 전체 과정에 부합되어 왔는지에 대한 “큰 그림(big-picture)"과 관련해서는, “비전 있는 기업의 핵심요소”를 살펴보십시오.

다음으로 비전기업의 한 예로 여러분이 몸 담고 있는 기업이나 관심이 있는 기업(Find The BTL Evidence 학습자료에 소개된 18개 기업을 포함하여 국내 기업도 가능: 가능한 한 관련자료를 얻기 쉬운 기업) 중 한 개의 기업을 선정하여 웹사이트를 방문하십시오. 그리고 그 곳에서 어떻게 그 기업이 비전기업인지에 대한 증거를 찾아내어 아래의 질문 순서에 따라 600자(2-3페이지)분량으로 작성하십시오.

다음의 질문 순서에 따라 답하시오.

[1] 그 기업이 지속적으로 "시계 만들기" 관점을 가지고 있다는 증거 한 가지를 들어 주십시오. 

P&G is a training company. It has been conducting on-the-job, formal classroom, and web based training for a long time based on the belief that its success is derived from its people. It has been paying much attention to attracting and recruiting the finest people in the world. P&G provides the various learning program like personal leadership, people and communication, project management and e-learning programs. P&G’s extensive supports for training its people means that it can encourage individuals to develop their competency through high-quality education. P&G’s pursuing the learning organization surely seems to focus on long-term success, not short-term profit. P&G has been clearly concentrated on building a “learning” organization rather than on acquiring the individual personality traits of visionary leadership. That is the outstanding example of clock building.

As the principle put it, organization is the ultimate invention of the clock-building leadership.

[2] 그 기업이 지속적으로 핵심 가치와 핵심목표에 부합하고 있다는 증거 한 가지를 들어 주십시오.

P&G’s core purpose is “provide branded products and services of superior quality and value that improve the lives of world’s consumers. And its core values are “leadership, ownership, integrity, passion for winning, trust”  P&G invests $4 billion each year in research and development (R&D) to achieve its core purpose. This has led to a talent made up of 7500 Ph.D.s and researchers in 71 countries. It also holds more than 24,000 active patents worldwide. P&G was a 1995 recipient of the National Medal of Technology, the highest award the U.S. government gives for achievement in technology.   The award recognized the company for creating, developing, and applying advanced technologies to consumer products that have helped improve the quality of life for billions of consumers worldwide. P&G remains one of only a few companies to have received this recognition. This means P&G continues to live by its core purpose because P&G has been making the most efforts to provide the product of the world-best quality based on the continuous product innovation. And this also means that P&G lives by its core values, passion for winning (compelling desire to improve and to win in the marketplace).

Yes, P&G has a clearly defined core ideology and do every effort to stick to it.

[3] 그 기업이 이익 보다 자신의 핵심 이념을 더 우선하고 있다는 증거 한 가지를 들어 주십시오.

In China, P&G partnered with the Beijing Health Bureau Labor Union. P&G donated 10,000 product packs to families of the front line health care workers, who were helping prevent the spread of SARS. The event touched the hearts of P&G employees, who volunteered to help prepare the product packs. Many P&G people worked through weekends and nights so that the product packs could reach the families before the local holiday, when the separation from the family member would be felt the most. This shows that P&G adheres to its core purpose to improve the lives of the world’s consumers by providing its products to people in need without profit, as well as sales of its product, not being oppressed by the “Tyranny of the OR”. The core ideology of P&G surely represents more than just a bunch of nice-sounding platitude. P&G shows the faithful adherence to its core ideology and That is the good example of “More than Profit”.

Yes, this anecdote shows clearly how P&G adhere to its core ideology.

[4] 그 기업이 핵심을 보존하며 발전을 촉진하기 위해 활용하는 메커니즘은 무엇입니까? 두 가지 들어 주십시오.

   4-1.   Preserve the Core

P&G has long-standing practices of carefully screening potential new hires, hiring young people for entry-level jobs, rigorously molding them into P&G ways of thought and behavior, spitting out the misfits, and making middle and top slots available only to loyal P&Gers who grew up inside the company. Indoctrination processes are both formal and informal. P&G inducts new employee into the company with training and orientation sessions and expects them to read its official biography “Eyes on Tomorrow”, which describes the company as “an integral part of the nation’s history” with “A spiritual inheritance” and “unchanging character”. New hires immediately find nearly all of their time occupied by working or socializing with other members of “the family”. P&G has a long historical track record of paternalistic and progressive employee pay and benefit programs, which bind its people closely to the company. (profit-sharing plan for workers, employee stock ownership plan, sickness-disability-retirement-life-insurance plan) P&G has used these programs not only as a means of rewarding employees, but also as mechanisms to influence behavior, gain commitment, and ensuring tightness of fit. That means P&G translates its core ideologies into tangible mechanisms aligned to send a consistent set of reinforcing signals. And it also indoctrinates people and impose tight of fit, and create a sense of belonging to something special. That is the exact example of “Cult-like Culture”, one mechanism among “Preserve the Core” principles.

You’ve proved the existence of indoctrination process and tight of fit mechanism, showing that you understand cult-like culture which is pivotal in preserving the core.

   4-2.   Stimulate Progress

P&G has the competing brand management structure that P&G brands compete directly with other P&G brands, almost if they were from different countries. P&G already had the best people, the best products, the best marketing muscle. So why not pit the best of P&G against the best of P&G? If the marketplace doesn’t provide enough competition, why not create a system of internal competition that makes it virtually impossible for any brand to rest on its laurels? That means P&G create internal competition in order to keep itself vibrant. P&G has a definite discomfort mechanism in place to combat the disease of complacency that inevitably begins to infect all successful organizations. This is the good example of “Good enough never is”, one mechanism among “Stimulate Progress”.

Yes, brand manager system is a perfect example of GENI translated in the form of “clock”.

Instructor feedback: Yours was a perfect one.

Assessment: E

사이프러스 반도체 사례를 읽고, 사이프러스사가 전반적으로 Built to Last 원칙과 메커니즘들을 준수하고 있는지, 아니면 이들 원칙과 메커니즘에 상충되는지를 분석하십시오. 과제 4는 이전의 과제와는 달리, 사이프러스가 BTL원칙 혹은 메커니즘을 어떻게 사용하고 있는지 그 증거를 확인할 뿐 아니라 동시에 사이프러스가 어떻게 자신들이 추구하는 가치(values)와 실제(practice)를 조화시키지 못하고 있는지를 분석할 것을 요구하고 있습니다.  이 코스에서 공부한 여섯 개 메커니즘 중에서 어느 것이든 네 가지 예를 들 어 설명하십시오. 또한 핵심 이념과 시계 만들기에 대해서도 각각 적어도 두 가지 예를 들어 설명하십시오.

[1] 사이프러스사가 시계 만들기(Clock Building) 원칙에 부합하는지 아니면 상충하는지 예를 들어 분석하십시오. 적어도 두 가지 예를 들어 설명하십시오.

CS(Cypress Semiconductor), in its early stage, focused on instituting a decentralized multidivisional structure based on its CEO, T.J. Rodgers’ wish that CS would be a big company with the speed, discipline, and energy of its early history. Rodgers proposed the idea of building a federation of small companies. The philosophy behind this approach was designed to create an energy level, sense of mission, and spirit of determination that Rodgers doubted could be achieved in a large company.   That means CS aimed to be a self-contained market economy rather than a self-centered bureaucracy. Considering that its decentralization gave every division the authority and freedom to run it as if it were an independent business, this surely was the example CS practiced ‘clock building’ principle.

Yes, CS had adopted the decentralized organization approach before.

On the other hand, CS has the example of conflicting with ‘clock building’ principle. It changed its organizational structure in the face of negative growth in 1992. It has cut its product portfolio in half and removed incubator ventures and subsidiaries and sold some assets, laid off employees in the recognition that there was too much autonomy and not enough control. This change seemed to be focused on short-term profit rather than long-term success because it chose just the way to increase rapidly its operational efficiency without paying much attention to what would provide the long-term success. (Mechanism that could develop decentralized organization based on employees’ individual initiatives, for example, education program)

Yes, as you put it, Rodgers have turned the direction of CS to a wrong destination.

[2] 사이프러스사가 핵심이념(Core Ideology) 원칙에 부합하는지 아니면 상충하는지 예를 들어 분석하십시오. 적어도 두 가지 예를 들어 설명하십시오.

Rodgers exactly recognized that core values should not be created from the top.  He and his senior team spent a year developing the set of values, beginning with a statement of a purpose. And, this process included brainstorming sessions that involved hundreds of employees and managers. Its purpose is “Invent, make, and sell the world’s best semiconductor products. Its core values are like follows, “Cypress is about winning, Cypress people are only the best, we do what’s right for Cypress, we make our numbers, we invest and make state-of-the-art products”. CS surely discovered and set up its own core ideology through sufficient efforts of CS people at all levels. Therefore, this can be considered as the example for CS to adhere to ‘core ideology’ principle from the viewpoint that its core ideology is based on what a company believes in and it makes sense for CS, may not for another. (Specially, its core value explicitly shows what CS stands for).

그래니트록(Graniterock,GR)의 사례를 읽고, 그래니트록사가 전반적으로 ‘발전을 촉진하는’ 메커니즘을 이용했는지를 분석하십시오. 이 코스에서 제시한 세 가지 메커니즘에 대해 각각 적어도 두 가지 이상의 예를 들어 설명하십시오. 또한, ‘발전을 촉진하는’ 기능을 하고 있지만, 이 과제에서 연구하는 세 가지 메커니즘의 범주에 포함시키기 어려운 예들을 추가로 확인하여 설명하십시오.


[1] ‘크고 위험하고 대담한 목표’(BHAGs: Big Hairy Audacious Goals) 메커니즘의 두 가지 예를 들고, 이 것들이 왜 ‘BHAGs’ 메커니즘에 해당하는지 설명하십시오.

GR’s core purpose is to nurture exceptional creativity and innovation by supporting people’s continuous and ambitious personal and professional growth in the pursuit of the highest quality products and services  which advance global business standards and practices. It emphasizes focusing on total quality of the company. One of its BHAG for stimulating progress in terms of highest quality is “Defect-free product”. It is definitely consistent with GR’s core purpose and so clear, precise and focused that it requires little or no explanation. The BHAG encouraged GR to train its all plant operators in statistical process control and made them identify opportunities for improvement toward their visionary goal of defect-free product, and that enabled the highest batching accuracy in the industry. GR’s efforts to reduce process variability and increase product reliability resulted in satisfying its customers and lowering variable costs. Evidently, GR has been dedicated to approaching its core ideology through setting up its BHAG and making it best to achieve it. 

Great! You proved that you understand and apply BHAGs concept. As you put it, “Defect-free product” can be an example of BHAGs in that it is consistent with GR’s core ideology and secure company-wide endeavor to achieve it resulting everlasting progress.

Another BHAG is “Win the Baldridge Award”. It is also obviously consistent with GR’s core purpose and so clear, precise and focused. Would you please explain why it is an example of BHAGs? What’s the relationship between winning M. Baldridge award and having a BHAG? GR’s first try to win the award in 1990 failed, but it gained the 138 valuable suggestions for improvement from the examiners. Because GR’s real goal is not just winning the award, but receiving as much feedback as possible from the Baldridge process, its first failure to win, after all, resulted in winning the award in 1992. The admirable point here is that GR prepared to prevent “we’ve arrived” syndrome by having follow-on BHAGs. GR’s CEO, Bruce Woolpert knew exactly that it was very important to instill drive for progress that resulted in a repeating pattern of BHAGs within the company and keep the company moving with a belief that vigorous movement in any direction is better than sitting still. Therefore, GR continued to pursue awards in which the application processes themselves provided additional insights into the business. In so doing, Woolpert and his team have brought their own philosophy of continual self-improvement to the Baldrige Program. That is the exact reverse of Ford’s case that it suffered from a complacent lethargy that can arise once a company has achieved one BHAG and does not replace it with another. GR’s case shows precisely how great companies should use their BHAG for continually stimulating progress of them. I am afraid that you have failed to explain the meaning of winning Malcolm Baldridge award.

[2] ‘잘 되는 것에 집중하라’(Try a Lot and Keep What Works) 메커니즘의 두 가지 예를 들고, 이 것들이 왜 ‘잘되는 것에 집중하라’ 메커니즘에 해당하는지 설명하십시오.

Bruce believed that if GR gave its people more responsibility, they would respond. 

That means GR give its people a lot of room to act and their enhanced involvement enables the elevation of its manager capability to focus on long-term planning. Therefore, GR got to have the high possibility of evolving into the organization that continually self-mutates from within, impelled forward by employees exercising its individual initiatives. Right. I am curious about something specific. GR understood exactly that encouraging individual initiatives would produce the raw material of evolutionary progress. “No more messiahs”(You should have explained it) is the good example of “try a lot and keep what works” mechanism. And of course, that is consistent with its core ideology. One of its core values is “people growth and development”.

Another example is its passion for benchmarking. GR has two kinds of benchmarking methodology for gathering ideas and observing the quality efforts of other companies. With one numerical benchmarking GR found that on-time delivery was critical from customer survey, they started exchanging statistics and information with a world-leader in on-time delivery. That helped the company focus on improving customer service that was one of its core values (dedication to customer service excellence). And GR also did pioneering benchmarking to explore for good business ideas in a fashion that was intended to shake up mental models and assumptions of the surrounding world. Although the companies they look at for benchmarking are simply interesting and not related in a direct way with Girl’s operation, they believe that if they get one good idea from a benchmarking visit, it’s worth it. Girl’s clinging tenaciously to new ideas is also based on its core value, continuous improvement as a way of life. Rather than protecting the work of past, GR people really encourage and support both incremental and sweeping change and recognize that risk-taking and honest mistakes are unavoidable parts of doing this. That’s the mechanism, “try a lot of stuff and keep what works”.

I believe that you has a good understanding on the concept of “try a lot and keep what works”. But I am afraid that you have failed to offer the right examples. For example, benchmarking is a mechanism for GENI rather than “try a lot” in that it cause intentional dissatisfaction with its status quo prompting pursuing something more and better. And in the case of “no more messiahs”, you should have explained what is it and why, do you think, it is related with the “try a lot” mechanism.

[3] ‘지속적인 발전의 추구’(Good Enough Never Is) 메커니즘의 두 가지 예를 들고, 이 것들이 왜 ‘지속적인 발전의 추구’ 메커니즘에 해당하는지 설명하십시오.

GR has the discipline of self-improvement that stands out as one of the clear differences between the visionary and comparison companies. That’s the IPDP(Individual Professional Development Plan). It is composed of developmental objective, developmental experiences to help achieve a developmental objective and measures to show that the objectives had been met. Its purpose is future development, not used to determine an individual’s past job performance. It is focused on managers’ role as leaders, teachers and coaches. And it can develop a great deal of perspective on how people should be developing and alternative ways to motivate new learning experiences for people. It is forward-looking, encourages people growth, and increases accountability. GR is creating development experts through creating mechanisms of discontent that brings about change and improvement from within, yet is consistent with its core value This is just about GENI. (people growth and development, continuous improvement as a way of life).

As you said, IPDP can be a good example of GENI in that it is in line with GR’s core value and force future-oriented changes.

Anther example show “good enough never is” mechanism is that GR’s long-term investment for training people. Bruce created “Graniterock University”, which grew to include over 50 different courses, seminars and lectures every year on various topics. All GR people were encouraged to attend, as well as their spouses fro many courses. In 1991 GR invested on average $1,700 per employee, compared with an average of $529 per employee in the mining industry and $127 in the construction company. That corresponds to 1% of gross sales. This belief that GR people are a large part of its competitive edge made GR consistently demonstrate a penny-foolish, pound-wise attention on people training that has incite continuous improvement into the future. Instead of waiting for the world to impose the need for change, GR's likely to be and earlier adopter than the competitors.
Good. Advanced training system can be used as GENI mechanism.

[4] ‘발전을 촉진하는’ 기능을 하고 있지만, 이 과제에서 연구하는 세 가지 메커니즘의 범주에 포함시키기 어려운 예 하나를 추가로 확인하여 설명하십시오. (2점)

GR has a unique mechanism for stimulating progress. That is open door policy and suggestion card programs. GR believed that communication flow within the organization was very important as well as knowledge flow within it. GR broke communication barriers within the company and announced a formal, 24-hour a day open door policy, whereby anyone could carry a concern or question directly to any level of management. And GR formalized comment/suggestion card program and provided other vehicles to people who were not comfortable in a direct-face-to-face discussion. In GR, people can talk directly to their supervisors and get issues addressed immediately, and this work for the majority of issues. Open door policy was the great example of clock-building that made GR people build good rapport with each other regardless of levels. That means GR has the high possibility of stimulating progress through keeping any problems, issues under control and keeping movements moving based on enough communication between employees and their proactive involvement. This is another mechanism that GR has been using for stimulating progress.

You got it again. GR has a great communication system like open-door policy and suggestion card program. As you put it these are a good examples of clock building principle rather than an example of 3 mechanisms of stimulating progress. Communication system can be used both to preserve the core and stimulate progress.

Instructor Feedback: In this task, you’ve derailed for a while but returned to normal quickly. So I think you are somewhere between NI and M.

Assessment: If you want, you can keep M grade. But I recommend you to try again for an E grade.