Technology and Operations Strategy Block Week in Argentina & Uruguay 17 December 21 December 2013

Transcription

1 Technology and Operations Strategy Block Week in Argentina & Uruguay 17 December 21 December 2013 Instructors: Nelson M. Fraiman ) and Medini R. Singh Summary This course focuses on the roles technology & operations play in the development and implementation of strategy. In the core Strategy Formulation course, you learned about the foundations of corporate success and how managers can devise a set of actions (the strategy) to achieve a competitive edge. Strategy development, at a fundamental level, is to identify an effective match between a firm s distinctive capabilities and selected markets. This course takes a new look at strategy formulation/implementation: we will focus on a firm s key operational and technological decisions (e.g., processes, capacities, technologies, process improvement, project management, supply chains) in order to understand how effective the firm s resulting operational capabilities (e.g., cost, quality, flexibility, delivery) match the markets it strives to serve. Conversely, we will also consider how to translate a business strategy into a set of actions and how these actions can be measured and supported for continuous improvements. However, given shifting market trends and evolving industry dynamics, a short term match between capabilities and current markets does not necessarily imply a sustainable competitive advantage. What operational and technological capabilities a firm chooses to develop can have a profound impact on its strategic options in the future. In other words, strategic operational decisions made today will determine the firm s operational capabilities tomorrow which in turn influence its business strategy in the future. Consequently, we will also try to emphasize the long term impact of strategic operational and

2 technological decisions. In addition to class time taught by Professors Fraiman and Singh, there will be facility visits in both Argentina and Uruguay. Faculty: Nelson M. Fraiman Professor Fraiman joined Columbia Business School in He is a professor of practice in the Decision, Risk, and Operations division and is director of the W. Edwards Deming Center for Quality, Productivity and Competitiveness. He teaches the core Operations Management and Strategy course and the electives Retailing Strategy & Operations and Technology & Operations Strategy. He is also the Faculty director of ECLA (Entrepreneurship and Competitiveness in Latin America), a program for Latin American entrepreneurs who aim to be successful across borders. Prior to Columbia Business School he spent seventeen years in industry and consulting. His last job was with International Paper where he was chief technology officer for eight manufacturing divisions. His current research centers on entrepreneurship and process improvement. He has written cases on operational excellence on the Ritz Carlton Hotel and the supply chain strategies of Lolita, Mango and Zara. He has also conducted executive education programs in Asia, Europe, Latin America and the Middle East. Professor Fraiman holds a B.S. in Industrial Engineering, an M.S., M.B.A., and a Ph.D., all from Columbia University. Medini R. Singh comes to Columbia from the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth. At Tuck, Singh taught the MBA core course in operations management for the last six years. He has also taught MBA electives on time-based competition and simulation modeling. Singh has also taught in the Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, where he won the 1991 Teacher of the Year Award. His research interests are in the areas of modeling, analysis and optimization of manufacturing and service systems. His current research focuses on the impact of demand and supply uncertainties on the performance of supply chains. Singh has published numerous articles on the impact of yield, demand and supply uncertainties on the performance of manufacturing systems. He has also consulted for several Fortune 500 companies. His PhD is from Carnegie Mellon University.

3 Group Project Part of this course will be a hands-on laboratory in which firm sponsor projects that will be attacked by student teams under the guidance of experienced professors. The course is part of the Business School s strategic thrust to better bridge the gap between theory and practice. The course will emphasize the process of creating actionable recommendations on issues faced by the sponsoring firms. As part of the course you will be assigned to work in a group project with a specific entrepreneurial organization. The idea is that you conduct a technological and operational assessment of your firm and suggest what type of strategies your company could use to improve on. You will need to contact your project firm towards the end of October or early November. Project Deliverables: Teams will provide an action oriented project report to their client in the form of a Word document (not more than 7 pages in length) in addition to a PowerPoint deck with supporting exhibits as needed. This is to be a self-contained, fully documented description of the team s analysis and recommendations Project Presentation: You should meet with your assigned company, during late October and early November to understand the firm, its strategy and the technologies that the company is using/developing to achieve its goals. During the first day of the block week you will have 7-10 minutes to present your findings. There will be a brief Q&A afterwards. Project Report: As part of the final project you will have to suggest strategies that your firm could implement to improve the company s performance. Please note that your report should include: 1. Brief description of the company 2. Strategy 3. Existing operating and technology strategies 4. Suggested operations and technology strategies 5. Expected impact

4 The deadline for submitting your project report is Friday, January 17, 2014 Grading: Your grade in the course will be based on your individual as well as group efforts and performance. Your performance will be judged through a variety of mechanisms that will enable us to assess your understanding of the tools and concepts covered your ability to synthesize, integrate, and apply them, and your contributions to the class's learning experience. Thus, in determining your course grade, we will use the following grading scheme to help us judge your performance: Class Participation and participation in polls 40% Project Presentation during block week 10% Project report 50%

5

6 Case Case: Where Cows are Happy and Food is Healthy 1. What type of technologies would you use, if any, if you were to improve the process? Case: Strategic Outsourcing at Bharti Airtel Limited 1. What must Bharti do well to succeed in the Indian mobile phone market? What are Bharti s core competencies? 2. Do you think Bharti should enter the outsourcing agreements outlined by Gupta? What do you see as advantages and disadvantages of such agreements? How do the different outsourcing agreements work towards building these core competencies? 3. If you were Bharti, what major concerns would you have about entering an outsourcing agreement with IBM? With Ericsson, Nokia, or Siemens? 4. How would you structure the agreements to address your concerns and capture any advantages you have identified? What governance mechanisms would you design for the agreements? 5. Assume the role of IBM or Nokia. What major concerns would you have about entering an agreement with Bharti? How would you structure the agreement and the governance mechanisms? Case: Arcor: Global Strategy and Local Turbulence (HBS ) 1. How would you characterize Arcor s international strategy historically? What were its sources of competitive advantage and how, if at all, did they vary across its key geographies? 2. How did the financial crisis affect Arcor domestically? 3. Looking forward, how might Arcor s strategy in a region such as the U.S./Canada resemble or differ from the strategy it is pursuing in Latin America in terms of: a. Whether to engage in local manufacturing? b. Which products to prioritize? c. Whether to sell under its own brand or as a private label supplier? 4. Which regions should Arcor prioritize given its resource constraints? 5. What other recommendations would you make to Luis Pagani about the architecture of Arcor s international strategy?

7 Case: Benetton (A) 1. What are the most important elements of Benetton's logistics, manufacturing, and financial strategies? (Answer the Poll question in Angel.) 2. How does it gain advantage over its competition in Europe? How does is manage risks to its operation? 3. Which of these important elements of strategy and sources of competitive advantage can it maintain in the U.S. market? Case: Lolita 1. What was Lolita s business model? How would you explain the success? 2. Evaluate Lolita s sourcing policy, supply chain management, and its logistics strategy. What were the major shortcomings? What should Cohen do to remedy these shortcomings? 3. What advice would you give to Cohen for Lolita s growth? Which countries/region should Lolita target for future stores? Should it adopt a franchising strategy or open its own stores? How fast should it grow? What are the risks? Case: Wriston Manufacturing Corporation 1. What motivated the Detroit Plant Study? What are the key findings? 2. How do you explain the performance differences between the Detroit Plant and the other sister plants? 3. What are your recommendations to Richard Sullivan regarding the fate of the Detroit Plant? Case: Tata Consulting Services: Selling Certainty 1. Evaluate TCS s competitive position in the global service delivery business. 2. Is the Experience Certainty strategy proposed at TCS low-cost or differentiated? 3. Evaluate the proposed strategy from the perspective of TCS. 4. What implications does this new strategy have for customer selection, contract pricing, human resources, global delivery footprint, inorganic growth and R&D at TCS? 5. Consider in greater depth the expansion of TCS s delivery footprint, particularly in Latin America. Does this expansion make sense for TCS?

8 Case: Tata Consulting Services Iberoamerica 1. What was the prime motive behind expansion in to Latin America for Tata Consulting Services (TCS)? What was Gabriel Rozman s argument for TCS s expansion into Latin America? 2. Why Rozman decided to locate Tata Consulting Services Iberoamerica (TCSI) in Uruguay? Do you agree with his rationale? 3. Who are the competitors for TCSI? What advantages do they posses compared to TCSI? 4. In your opinion, being the first Indian software company to establish operations in Latin America was an expression of Tata Consultancy Service s strategic vision or just corporate hubris?

9 Technology & Operations Strategy - Fall December 17-21, Block Week in Argentina and Uruguay Group 1 Eric Hu EHu14@gsb.columbia.edu Danielle Kuchinskas DKuchinskas14@gsb.columbia.edu Robtec Kazushi Udagawa KUdagawa14@gsb.columbia.edu Laura Wu YuWu14@gsb.columbia.edu Rohan Yelvigi RYelvigi14@gsb.columbia.edu Juhana Putkonen JPutkonen14@london.columbia.edu Group 2 Ajay Vasudevan AVasudevan14@gsb.columbia.edu Richard Barakat RBarakat14@gsb.columbia.edu ECLA Kristen Ballinger KBallinger14@gsb.columbia.edu Eric Wiegand EWiegand14@gsb.columbia.edu Neil Uchitel NUchitel14@gsb.columbia.edu Group 3 Natalie Centeno NCenteno14@gsb.columbia.edu Mo Jardaneh MJardaneh14@gsb.columbia.edu UlaSoft Scott Morris SMorris14@gsb.columbia.edu Anya Soubbotina ASoubbotina14@gsb.columbia.edu Katerina Vorotova KVorotova14@gsb.columbia.edu Nishidhdha Shah NShah14@gsb.columbia.edu Group 4 Justyna Kuczaj JKuczaj14@gsb.columbia.edu Kimberly Rust KRust14@gsb.columbia.edu Editoriales Stephan Hirschler SHirschler14@gsb.columbia.edu Mapas Tiffany McQueen TMcQueen14@gsb.columbia.edu Muge Sencalis MSencalis14@gsb.columbia.edu Group 5 Melinda Roylett MRoylett14@london.columbia.edu Justin Meno GMeno14@london.columbia.edu Lolita I Ali El Hamidi AElHamidi14@london.columbia.edu Matthew Ouwerkek Bernard Milan MOuwerkerk14@london.columbia.edu BMilan14@gsb.columbia.edu Group 6 Tara Axler TAxler14@gsb.columbia.edu Jamie Karper SKarper14@gsb.columbia.edu Lolita II Annie McAninch AMcAninch14@gsb.columbia.edu Jasdeep Sahota Kiley Smith Tal Sheynfeld JSahota14@gsb.columbia.edu KSmith14@gsb.columbia.edu tsheynfeld14@gsb.columbia.edu Group 7 Naheema Mehta NMehta14@gsb.columbia.edu Elizabeth Schneider ESchneider14@gsb.columbia.edu TVG I Robert Tawse RTawse14@gsb.columbia.edu Leon Ojalvo Tyson Peschke LOjalvo14@gsb.columbia.edu TPeschke14@london.columbia.edu Group 8 Brent Bowker BBowker14@gsb.columbia.edu Maximilian Crown MCrown14@london.columbia.edu TVG II Jennifer Holm JHolm14@london.columbia.edu Andrey Menemsh AMenemshev14@london.columbia.edu