sexta-feira, 23 de outubro de 2009

REVIE na Prática – Inteligência de Parceiros

Inteligência de Parceiros é o último artigo da série ‘REVIE na Prática’ que exemplifica como funciona o Método REVIE (Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial), utilizando um estudo de caso aplicado a uma empresa de Telecomunicações.

O foco do presente artigo foi em soluções para resolver um problema/desafio de um gerente no desenvolvimento de parcerias estratégicas. Para isso, foram mostradas três das melhores práticas mapeadas para o eixo Inteligência de Parceiros da REVIE (Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial).

O estudo de caso, abaixo, já é conhecido pelos leitores que vem acompanhando a série de artigos sobre o Método REVIE, publicada no Portal Meta Análise.

Para acessar os três artigos anteriores com foco no estudo de caso apresentado: Inteligência de Clientes - http://www.metaanalise.com.br/inteligenciademercado/momento/ponto-de-vista/revie-na-pratica-inteligencia-de-clientes.html, Inteligência de Produtos -http://www.metaanalise.com.br/inteligenciademercado/momento/ponto-de-vista/revie-na-pratica-inteligencia-de-produtos.html e Inteligência Competitiva - http://www.metaanalise.com.br/inteligenciademercado/momento/ponto-de-vista/revie-na-pratica-estudo-de-caso-parte-1.html


A Bomba!

“O telefone toca. O gerente de negócios de uma empresa de telecomunicações diz: essa empresa é mais uma que caminha para a fusão. No correio eletrônico, e-mail sobre os avanços da convergência no Brasil, analisando os impactos no portifólio de soluções -- a empresa não possui parceiros estratégicos para enfrentar a era da Convergência.

Na mesa dele, uma proposta da equipe para avaliação de investimentos no desenvolvimento de um novo produto. Ele sabe que já tem concorrente com oferta no mercado similar a este produto. Mas este produto do concorrente é lucrativo? Já alcançou a maturidade? Quais os pontos fracos desta solução?

O analista da equipe chega e diz: detectamos que um grupo de clientes quer mais interação com a empresa. Ele pergunta: mas já não temos o web site e a central de call center?

O gerente de vendas liga para afirmar que os dados de ‘mkt share’ enviados pela área de Inteligência Competitiva não estão corretos: vendemos mais! Não podemos estar atrás daquele concorrente.”



Eixo: Inteligência de Parceiros

A Inteligência de Parceiros é o processo de captura, seleção, análise, gerenciamento de informações e criação de conhecimento sobre parceiros para a tomada de decisão, seja ela estratégica ou operacional, desde a etapa de prospecção até a gestão dos parceiros. (Teixeira 2009)

Táticas de Guerrilha relacionadas à Inteligência de Parceiros: respostas rápidas ao mercado, parcerias estratégicas e ações que surpreendam o cliente e o concorrente. (Teixeira 2009)


Problema/Desafio:

- a empresa de Telecomunicações não possui parceiros estratégicos para enfrentar a era da Convergência.


Solução:

- a empresa precisa montar uma rede de parcerias estratégicas para ganhar agilidade num setor altamente competitivo.

Para isso, são recomendadas as melhores práticas:

1. segmentação de parceiros;
2. análise SWOT (Pontos Fortes, Pontos Fracos, Ameaças e Oportunidades) e
3. análise de GAP dos parceiros.

O sistema de BI (Business Intelligence) pode ajudar a empresa na segmentação de parceiros. É possível também fazer uma segmentação de parceiros sem o BI. Neste estudo de caso, o sistema de BI desempenha um papel coadjuvante em inteligência empresarial.

É importante lembrar que a Inteligência Empresarial busca integrar os sistemas computacionais aos sistemas de informação organizacionais, enquanto o BI (Business Intelligence) concentra-se no desenvolvimento de sistemas de informação computacionais. (Matheus; Parreiras, 2004). Portanto, a Inteligência Empresarial não se limita à tecnologia, assumindo posição de destaque na tomada de decisão estratégica de diversas categorias de usuários como executivos, gerentes e analistas. (Teixeira 2009)

Já as melhores práticas análise SWOT (Pontos Fortes, Pontos Fracos, Ameaças e Oportunidades) e análise de GAP irão ajudar a empresa a fazer uma análise técnica e mais qualitativa, comparando a empresa de Telecom, seus produtos/serviços com a empresa dos parceiros e suas soluções.

Depois da aplicabilidade dessa melhores práticas, pode-se evoluir para a seleção dos parceiros estratégicos.

Dependendo do nível de evolução e de maturidade da empresa para desenvolver uma rede de parceiros estratégicos, pode-se caminhar para a seleção de um modelo colaborativo de negócios com apoio do eBusiness (extranet), web services e software de Gestão de Relacionamento com Parceiros (PRM).

Dentre os maiores desafios está a definição dos níveis de compartilhamento da informação, pois há uma preocupação para liberar dados da empresa para as outras empresas mesmo sendo parceiros estratégicos. Dessa forma, acordos entre essa empresa e os parceiros terão que ser feitos e muito bem ‘amarrados’. (Heinrich; Betts 2003)

Outro grande desafio é a integração de alguns processos internos entre empresas, já que é necessário um nível de integração entre empresas que deverá ser definido no início da formação da rede de parceiros.

Para obter sucesso, não bastará simplesmente intensificar as estratégias de gestão existentes. As cadeias de suprimento funcionam de maneira mais eficaz quando o risco, a recompensa e a competência para completar grandes projetos estão distribuídos em redes planetárias de parceiros que trabalham como colaboradores. (Tapscott; Williams, 2007)

As Alianças e Parcerias, Fusões & Aquisições já se tornaram uma prática mundial em mercados altamente competitivos como Telecomunicações.

O estudo global de CEO da IBM, em 2008, mostra que 85% dos CEOs pretendem entrar em parcerias para aproveitar as oportunidades de integração global – e mais da metade planeja fazê-lo intensivamente. Neste cenário, ganha força a Inteligência de Parceiros.

A Inteligência de Parceiros é um dos quatro eixos do Método REVIE (Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial).

O Método REVIE é formado por padrões, técnicas, modelos e melhores
práticas, incluindo as quatro principais frentes em MKT e
Vendas trabalhando juntas e integradas:

- Inteligência Competitiva;
- Produtos/ Serviços;
- Clientes e
- Parcerias.

É uma rede de melhores práticas para Marketing e Vendas com foco nos quatro eixos citados acima trabalhando juntos e integrados.

Há indicadores de performance e desempenho para cada um dos eixos da Inteligência. O total de negócios gerados com as parcerias atuais e novas é um exemplo de indicador para Inteligência de Parceiros.

Para este eixo da Inteligência, foram mapeadas dezessete melhores práticas, sendo que três delas foram apresentadas no estudo de caso acima: 1. segmentação de parceiros, 2. análise SWOT (Pontos Fortes, Pontos Fracos, Ameaças e Oportunidades) e 3. análise de GAP dos parceiros.


REFERÊNCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS

HEINRICH, C.; BETTS B. Adapt Or Die : transforming your supply chain into an adaptive business network. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

IBM. A Empresa do Futuro. Terceira edição da série bi-anual do Estudo Global de CEO da IBM. 2008. Entrevistas com 1.130 CEOs, gerentes gerais e executivos dos setores público e privado em nível mundial.

MATHEUS, Renato Fabiano; PARREIRAS, Fernando Silva. Inteligência Empresarial versus Business Intelligence: abordagens complementares para o apoio a tomada de decisão no Brasil. In: Congresso Anual da Sociedade Brasileira de Gestão do Conhecimento, 3, 2004, São Paulo, Anais.

TAPSCOTT, D.; WILLIAMS A.D. Wikinomics : como a colaboração pode mudar o seu negócio. 2ª edição. Rio de Janeiro : Nova Fronteira, 2007.

TEIXEIRA, D. R. Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial. Revista da ESPM, vol. 16, Edição nº 1, pg. 80-90, janeiro/fevereiro 2009.



Fonte: www.metaanalise.com.br/inteligenciademercado/momento/ponto-de-vista/revie-na-pratica-inteligencia-de-parceiros.html


Este artigo esteve no ranking dos mais lidos do Portal Meta Análise no mês de Outubro






blog: www.inteligenciaempresarial-brasil.blogspot.com

twitter: www.twitter.com/reviebrasil

quinta-feira, 15 de outubro de 2009

Prahalad: redes de valor, inteligência de clientes, consumidores populares

Recomendo a leitura dessa entrevista com o Prahalad. Ele fala sobre a fragmentação das cadeias de valor nas empresas, sobre a força dos consumidores populares, principalmente, em países como o Brasil e sobre a importância da co-criação de valor entre empresa-cliente.

Dois desses temas estão relacionados com o método REVIE (Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial): o próprio conceito de redes de valor e a co-criação de valor não só entre empresa-clientes (http://inteligenciaempresarial-brasil.blogspot.com/2009/09/revie-na-pratica-inteligencia-de.html), mas também entre empresa-parceiros (http://www.metaanalise.com.br/inteligenciademercado/momento/ponto-de-vista/revie-na-pratica-inteligencia-de-parceiros.html) e parceiros-clientes. Prahalad foi um dos autores que estudei para estruturar o conceito do método REVIE.

Prahalad ganhou como o pensador de negócios do ano. Mais em http://www.thinkers50.com/results


Entrevista Prahalad

http://www.thinkers50.com/interviews/1/2009

C. K. Prahalad is Harvey C. Fruehauf Professor of Business Administration, Professor of Corporate Strategy and International Business at the University of Michigan and an independent consultant.. He is best known for his collaborations with fellow strategy expert Gary Hamel. Together they wrote The Core Competence of the Corporation, which became one of the most highly acclaimed articles ever to be published in the Harvard Business Review. This was followed by their bestselling business book, Competing for the Future: Breakthrough Strategies for Seizing Control of Your Industry and Creating the Markets of Tomorrow (1994). His latest book, The Future of Competition: Co-Creating Unique Value with Customers, waas published early in 2004.


Competing for The Future was written in 1994 and had a huge impact on how companies think about strategy. How has your view of the world changed since then?
Competing for the Future was a very company-centric view of the world. We were still focused on the firm. We were also very product and service centric. Think about what has happened since then. Competing for the Future was written before ubiquitous connectivity became common. Whether it is the PCs or wireless, the book was pre-connectivity. Also the business world was not as well developed in terms of convergence of technologies and industries. That process was just starting.


What has changed in the intervening period?
In the last ten years, several forces have changed the way we think and live.One is tremendous deregulation. Consider what is happening to wireless around the world. It's going crazy. Today there are more wireless phones than landlines. Ten years ago wireless was just a blip.
A second force is the increasing role of emerging markets today. China and India are driving wireless and the development of wireless devices as much as the developed world. Actually, I would argue that poor people have driven wireless more towards success than rich people. We have fundamentally new business models, like prepaid cards, where I don't have to own a home in order to get a telephone. I can be poor and still get access to a telephone.


What impact do you think these changes have had on the relationship between corporation and consumer?
Deregulation, emerging markets, new forms of globalization, convergence of technologies and industries, and ubiquitous connectivity, these have changed many aspects of business.
They have also changed the nature of consumers. Today you have consumers who are informed, networked, active and global. As a consumer, I don't have to leave home in order to be globally connected and active.
At the same time they have changed the nature of companies. Today firms can fragment their value chain in ways that they could not have done before. Not just the physical products, but the intellectual part of my company - the business processes, management processes, including research and development, engineering - all that can be fragmented. Some of it can be in India, some of it can be in the UK and the United States.
Combine digital technology and the telecommunications revolution, the nature of consumer-to-consumer, and consumer-to-company interactions, the nature of business becomes very different. It changes the very basis of all transactions- the interaction between the consumer and the company. The consumer is interacting differently with the firm, and not only that, consumers are interacting differently among themselves.


Could you give an example of how these interactions have changed?
There is a medication called Lotronex. It's used by people with irritable bowel syndrome. After about 250,000 people had taken the medication various side-effects became apparent. So the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) suggested they withdraw the medication. But soon the people who were taking the medication organized themselves, and appealed to the FDA saying 'we understand there are risks but we are willing to take the risks because the alternative is even worse for us'.
So you find an activist consumer community emerging which is challenging the FDA, and the FDA has reinstated the medicine. Now the medication is available for a very selective subset of people. The doctors, the pharmacy, the company, GlaxoSmithKline in this case, the patients and the FDA have all come together and agreed on the risks, how to make those risks explicit, and how to make sure that the medication is given under a fair level of supervision, higher than it used to be before. All the parties understand what the implications are. It is an intelligent way of taking risks. Let us reflect on what has happened here. The consumers, the patients, have created the ability for GlaxoSsmithKkline to remarket the product and create value for themselves. So have the patients. They are creating value for themselves. This is a "win-win" for both, an excellent example of co- creation of value, where the consumer is actively engaged.


In the new book you talk about the consumer as a co-creator of value. What exactly does this mean?
We are moving to a new form of value creation, when value is not created by the firm and exchanged with customer, but rather when value is co-created by the consumers and the company. So the first question is: how do you go from a unilateral view of value creation by the company, to co-creation of value by consumers?
Co-creation of value is a very different thing from being consumer oriented. This is not about the firm targeting consumers and being more sensitive to them. It is about enabling consumers to be equal problem solvers, so that collectively they create value, and collectively they extract value. So that the consumer is helping the company to create value and also taking value away by extracting value through either explicit or implicit bargains.
So, the first big idea is the concept of co-creation of value. It's no longer just unilateral creation of value by the firm to be exchanged with customers.
The second big idea is that it is no longer all about the product, but it is about the experience. The product becomes the artifact around which an experience is created. If you think about Lotronex, the experience is about feeling well, and having a good relationship with the community of people who suffer from the same problem. So it is the experience that is of value, in addition to the medication. Medication is clearly the carrier, but the value is in the experience.
Thirdly, individuals do matter. Consumer communities, and the interaction with the consumers among themselves, and between the consumer communities and the company, are of great importance in thinking about value creation. So if you think about the transition we've made, we have moved away from a firm and product-centric view of value creation, to an experience-centric view of co-creation of value. It's a huge distinction; from looking at consumers as targets, to looking at consumers as co-creators of value. Looking at consumer networks, which are autonomously involved, with or without the sanction of the company, as an integral part of how we create value.


How significant is that shift?
My sense is that Competing for the Future was a clear conceptual and managerial break from the previous view of how to create value. Co-creation is an equally fundamental break from a firm-centric view.
What co-creation is saying is, because of the changes that have taken place during the last decade we can no longer be firm-centric. We have to be experience-centric, and co-creation centric. That I think is a big change.
Earlier you touched on the influence of emerging markets. How does this process of co-creation roll out to the developing world, or does it just pass them by?
That's a very interesting question. The most interesting thing for me is that we cannot deal with the markets of the poor, or the bottom of the pyramid, without a view of co-creation. Because the poor are very value conscious. The poor cannot afford to take risks with their purchases. By definition, they are going to be a lot more concerned about their experiences with products. There is a lot more word of mouth, and a lot more community-based activism in making buying decisions.
So actually co-creation is more natural, not among the rich but at the bottom of the pyramid. Because the rich in developing and developed countries behave alike. So when they buy something the attitude is:"if we don't like it, it is no big deal, it won't break the bank". On the other hand if you're very poor you can't afford to take that attitude. You have one shot, at buying something, you'd better make sure that it is absolutely what you want, and therefore by definition, they do a lot more networking and word of mouth discussion before they make any choices.


While we are on the subject of emerging economies, you have in the past spoken about the huge potential of the Indian economy. Do you foresee a major change in the economic world order?
I think three forces are changing the world order:
One is the co-creation of value we have just been talking about.
Second is the importance of the 'bottom of the pyramid' markets. There are five billion people at the bottom of the pyramid. They have been below the radar screen of large companies, or not on the radar screen at all. But now they are asserting themselves. If you look at the
number of television sets, the number of radios, and wireless devices that are being consumed by them, it is quite phenomenal. You suddenly find the Chinese poor, the Indian poor and the Brazilian poor are changing the basic dynamics of industries worldwide.
The third thing, which I think is usually reported, unfortunately, as outsourcing, whether it's call-centers, or research and development, or engineering, or IT. What I think is happening is a new willingness of companies to fragment their value chains in search of speed, low cost, and quality. Improved quality is one theme that we don't see so much of in the press, as all outsourcing is seen as primarily leveraging the asymmetry of wage rates in India and China, for example, compared to those in the UK and the United States. Yes that's part of it. But the quality levels are far superior in IT, for example, in terms of what can be done in India, compared to a lot of companies here in the UK or the US.
And then of course there is access to a huge talent pool which I think as a manager you have the obligation to access.
So if you take these three:
A willingness to access talent pool and quality for speed and revenues and cost reduction worldwide.
The emergence of 'bottom of the pyramid' markets as agents of growth and change in the global economy.
And, co-creation, where active consumers become a resource for companies and become equal problem solvers to create new business opportunities.
These three forces will collectively change the world economic order.


So do you see, as a corollary, a diminishing of the relative competitive position of the United States?
I think that would be premature. The United States is a funny place. They complain a lot but they also change very rapidly. For example, when manufacturing started moving out of United States in the 1980s, we had the same complaints and calls for protectionism to stop the import of Japanese cars and television sets. It was popular at the time to go and smash television sets in front of the Capitol building. So we went through that. Then people understand. This transition is inevitable and we have to do something. Now nobody is complaining about manufacturing jobs being lost as much, instead it's about high-end jobs going to India, and high-end jobs going to other places.
I think there is an immediate reaction, and I think that America is inventive enough to build new business opportunities, and new kinds of businesses. The leverage is the inventiveness of the community. Because after complaining and saying it is unfair, Americans are clever enough to realize that they are the ones pushing for globalization and their agenda is working. The only surprise is that they didn't think that if globalization worked they would also get hurt. And now globalization is working. Americans are hurting a little bit. But we have to move on. We cannot stop these forces.

segunda-feira, 5 de outubro de 2009

Video REVIE (Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial) - a Rede de Melhores Práticas para Marketing e Vendas

Nesta entrevista ao Portal Meta Análise, Daniela Ramos Teixeira fala sobre os principais aspectos do Método REVIE (Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial), a evolução da Inteligência Empresarial no Brasil, o nível de maturidade das empresas, e como as organizações devem se posicionar junto aos consumidores populares (classes C, D e E), que consomem anualmente cerca de R$ 575 bilhões.

Este video foi publicado no Portal Meta Análise e esteve entre os 50 mais vistos do mês de setembro/2009.
Título: Melhores Práticas em MKT e Vendas impulsionam estratégias empresarias em http://www.metaanalise.com.br/inteligenciademercado/content/view/2365/29/

REVIE é um método criado por Daniela Ramos Teixeira, em 2008, e significa Rede de Valor para Inteligência Empresarial.

É uma Rede de Melhores Práticas para Marketing e Vendas com foco em quatro eixos trabalhando juntos e integrados: Inteligência Competitiva, Clientes, Produtos/Serviços e Parceiros.


video







Mais Visto Meta Análise - Setembro 2009




Divulgação Newsletter Meta Análise