The problem companies make is to cut costs across the board. Firms should concentrate on expense around capabilities that make a real difference. At magtalaga ng tao na qualificado.
He nails it when he talks about essential and non-essential functions of a business. Essential items are production, sales and distribution of a product. Everything else is non-essential or support functions that should be kept to a minimum.
Please check out my video - Profitability Analysis via Detailed Variance Analysis.
A complete breakdown of every variable margin item - by cost or revenue driver to identify opportunities for improvements - marketing and operational strategy, cost containment, etc. Actionable and insightful.
so basically the biggest expense to an company is its employees. they can fire the people that make the most money and hire two people in their place to get double the work force.
REVENUE - EXPENSE = PROFITS
its the companys goal is to shrink expense drive profits. its not the companys job to pay employees more money.
This is far from a rational approach - the focus on cost itself is irrational! The key for a lean business is to optimise every stage of production and to ensure that quality is delivered to the customer. Profits are a function of customer satisfaction, not vice versa!
I believe there are instances where cutting costs are necessary for the company to survive. And, if the company fails to survive, it will not be able to deliver to the customer.
The prioritisation of cost indicates a short termist mentality, whereas a rational approach is systemic, focused on the customer and on the long term, which produces the most lean / efficient system via reducing process variation.... cont'd
As Deming said (paraphrased) the role of a company is not just to please but to DELIGHT the customer. This is achieved via a qualitative approach: if the customer comes first, turnover, profits and shareholder value follows naturally... BUT if you reverse the equation it no longer holds true!
I see where you come from. But would you not agree that if a firm looses funding--the market for commercial paper dries up, etc--then there is no alternative but to cut costs in order to survive? I think this may not be the norm, but many companies faced this kind of scenario in the last two years.
This approach is being touted as something approaching 'best practice' and it would certainly come with that positioning coming from Harvard... however I think you'll find that this kind of cost focused approach has caused massive damage to some of the biggest companies and it has often been imposed by external consultants.
So, NO, bad practice is BAD PRACTICE and you eliminate waste via SYSTEMIC OPTIMISATION, NOT by a cost focus!!
If this interview had been done in Germany,the "case" in this interview would have been about a company who produced something that the world needs,and not about a Pepsi owned company who markets junkfood to children!
Excellent interview. Thank you.
thesuccessinstitute 4 days ago
The problem companies make is to cut costs across the board. Firms should concentrate on expense around capabilities that make a real difference. At magtalaga ng tao na qualificado.
StroonsGlen 2 months ago
That's it?
katheryncruz24 2 months ago
Interesting stuff, Chezz. Go Cats! Go!
60187guy 3 months ago 2
Why not cut down on not so important aspects?
pamelbia2011 3 months ago
He nails it when he talks about essential and non-essential functions of a business. Essential items are production, sales and distribution of a product. Everything else is non-essential or support functions that should be kept to a minimum.
bbeadles 1 year ago
Cost reduction should never be taken as strategy. Strategy should always be on process improvement which consequently should target Cost cutting.
jaigmat 1 year ago
nothing new at all
jrampue 1 year ago
Please check out my video - Profitability Analysis via Detailed Variance Analysis.
A complete breakdown of every variable margin item - by cost or revenue driver to identify opportunities for improvements - marketing and operational strategy, cost containment, etc. Actionable and insightful.
NilaBranzburg 1 year ago
manual-workers are observed as a cost driver whereas are knowledge workers are seen as a capital asset
drmoney01 2 years ago
@drmoney01 truth being ther are both equally well important.
circusboy90210 1 year ago
even more bored!
rhaneyboy 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great vid, view my channel and be my friend. Thank you.
Take care.
FreeTrafficSystems 2 years ago
im still bored
Perfectbreed 2 years ago
so basically the biggest expense to an company is its employees. they can fire the people that make the most money and hire two people in their place to get double the work force.
REVENUE - EXPENSE = PROFITS
its the companys goal is to shrink expense drive profits. its not the companys job to pay employees more money.
DefCon1990 2 years ago
@DefCon1990 labor is the one who does the work and has a right to a large share of the profit, without them there is nothing.
circusboy90210 1 year ago
This is far from a rational approach - the focus on cost itself is irrational! The key for a lean business is to optimise every stage of production and to ensure that quality is delivered to the customer. Profits are a function of customer satisfaction, not vice versa!
MikeUpstone 2 years ago 2
I believe there are instances where cutting costs are necessary for the company to survive. And, if the company fails to survive, it will not be able to deliver to the customer.
sergiocrego 2 years ago
The prioritisation of cost indicates a short termist mentality, whereas a rational approach is systemic, focused on the customer and on the long term, which produces the most lean / efficient system via reducing process variation.... cont'd
MikeUpstone 2 years ago
As Deming said (paraphrased) the role of a company is not just to please but to DELIGHT the customer. This is achieved via a qualitative approach: if the customer comes first, turnover, profits and shareholder value follows naturally... BUT if you reverse the equation it no longer holds true!
MikeUpstone 2 years ago
I see where you come from. But would you not agree that if a firm looses funding--the market for commercial paper dries up, etc--then there is no alternative but to cut costs in order to survive? I think this may not be the norm, but many companies faced this kind of scenario in the last two years.
sergiocrego 2 years ago
This approach is being touted as something approaching 'best practice' and it would certainly come with that positioning coming from Harvard... however I think you'll find that this kind of cost focused approach has caused massive damage to some of the biggest companies and it has often been imposed by external consultants.
So, NO, bad practice is BAD PRACTICE and you eliminate waste via SYSTEMIC OPTIMISATION, NOT by a cost focus!!
MikeUpstone 2 years ago
net schlecht für heute is aba GeileZone . com mein lieblings fund
marcberron21 2 years ago
If this interview had been done in Germany,the "case" in this interview would have been about a company who produced something that the world needs,and not about a Pepsi owned company who markets junkfood to children!
wanabee100 2 years ago
seems like slightly redefined Prioritization, isnt it?
volis77 2 years ago
7:50. Excellent question.
EyesLikeHoles 2 years ago
make the "that" to "what" and you might have a coherent opinion.
Athenaikos 2 years ago
Tactical vs. strategic. Flexibility should be in focus as well, since that is strategic today might become reactionary tomorrow.
Athenaikos 2 years ago