'decentralization'에 해당되는 글 1건

[Built to Last] 사이프러스 반도체 분석 :: 2007/04/19 00:02

3년 전 수강했던 Mini-MBA 과정 중 가장 인상 깊었던 PGEC (Principles of great enduring companies) 과정의 4주차 숙제...  


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 worlds best semiconductor products. Its core values are like follows, Cypress is about winning, Cypress people are only the best, we do whats 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).

Yes, at least seemingly, CS has developed its own core ideology based on internal consensus.


But, its core ideology has the defect in some standpoint. CS made the mistake of simply describing its specific product line, semiconductor.  It cant be considered an effective purpose because a specific product lines might not even exist in 100 years. . Purpose should not be confused with specific goals or business strategies, but be like a guiding star on the horizon. CSs purpose places a definite limit on its being developed into a visionary company. This is the example of CS conflicting with core ideology principle.

Great! Mckinsey should not restrict its domain to consulting. Based on its purpose to help its clients to be the best in their industry, Mckinsey can do something other than consulting in 100 years later. Like this CS may do something more than just producing semiconductors sometime.



[3]
사이프러스사가 핵심을 보존하고 발전을 촉진하기(Preserve the Core and Stimulate Progress)원칙 혹은 메커니즘에 부합하는지 아니면 상충하는지 예를 들어 분석하십시오. 적어도 여섯 개 메커니즘 중에서 어느 것이든 네 가지 예를 들어 설명하십시오.

3-1. Preserve the Core and Stimulate Progress

The example that shows CS adheres to cult-like culture mechanism is its tightness of fit. Rodgers believed that hiring the talented people is the very important factor for CSs success. As an important part of the recruiting process, all hiring managers must submit a hiring book that documents the entire process. It can select the talented people with right attitude through the severe and elaborate evaluation for the interviewees. During the interview process, an explicit attempt is made to probe for cultural mismatches by using a career, and aspirations. The questionnaire forces the applicant to be specific about hard-to-quantify issues. After all, CS acquires only the competitive and talented people that can fit its core values. Its core values are focused on winning in competition, talented people, excellent quality. This means CS vigorously screen out those who dont fit with the ideology and create an almost cult-like environment around the core ideology. Good.

On the other hand, regrettably, CS shows the conflict with home-grown management mechanism. It has focused only on attracting talented people from raiding party, not paid relatively little attention to training and developing its inner employees into managers, directors, chief executives. That means CS have been pursuing recruitment of talented people outside from the short-term perspective, have not made enough efforts to keep leadership continuity through developing current employees from long-term perspective. This enables big questions about CS like follows. What will happen to CS when its great leader is gone?

This time you offered two different examples, one for example of adherence and another for example of in conflict. This is a very good approach because CS may not be Gold but clearly be Silver.


3-2. Stimulate Progress

GR You mean CS? has a good mechanism to stimulate progress. Rodgers believed that growth masks waste, extravagance, and inefficiency. For this reason, CS demands ever-increasing productivity. To help achieve this, every quarter the company benchmarks itself on critical measures against its competitors. This exercise reinforces the shared mind-set about the importance of productivity growth. Unless there are significant improvements, the manager cant request additional people. The logic underpinning this process is to run as lean as possible so that layoffs will not be required during a downturn. This means CS has discomfort mechanism in place to combat the disease of complacency that inevitably begins to infect all successful organizations. It is Good enough never is mechanism. I agree that Rodgers is a very demanding guy and he created some mechanisms to enforce discontent and endeavor to come up with it such as benchmarking.

On the other hand, CS didnt have its own BHAGs. CS has only focused on continuous improvement cost efficiency and productivity of operations, the implementation of programs for reducing cycle times and inventory. It didnt have any BHAGs that was so clear, compelling and fell well outside the comfort zone. It just concentrated on increasing short-term revenue through people/performance management, killer software rather than continually set bold new goals for itself long into the future. This is the conflict with BHAGs mechanism.

Yes. Just pursuing higher operational excellence cannot be a BHAGs.

Instructor feedback: Good job. You have proved you have a thorough and balanced view on CS.

Assessment : E.





Trackback Address :: http://read-lead.com/blog/trackback/208
NAME PASSWORD HOMEPAGE
< PREV #1  | NEXT >