Clustering StrategyCzech Republic 2010Meeting with MC
Facts Objectives• Knowledge about clustering • Presentation of the options for• We decided to have this our clustering strategy strategy in our plan • Define witch is the proposal• Focus of the clusters: that is more align with our MC ▫ X+L priorities ▫ TD + X • Analyze the processes that are ▫ X going to be align with the clusters • Questions and Answers about the process
Proposal 1.Performance – Membership• Pro: • Contra: ▫ Short term clusters (one year) ▫ We will need to think again ▫ Enable the entities in the about the clusters the next 2010 year ▫ 3 clusters + extensions ▫ Can change in a big way the ▫ Clear competition between performance of the LCs los clusters ▫ Is really simple, we don’t are ▫ Customized TM processes in taking into account the the LCs market ▫ Push the coach to: High Performance Creating Capacity Starting the Growth Russia- Colombia
Proposal 3.Cities Relevance – Results• Pro: • Contra: ▫ Long term strategy ▫ Minimum opportunities for ▫ We will take advantage for small LCs? the external environment ▫ No competition for growth ▫ Our strategy is going to be just because mindset base in the connection with ▫ Do we really need to have a the city long term strategy in ▫ Bigger use of the 3rd clusters? sector, Government ▫ Can be irrelevant this ▫ Bigger opportunities in segmentation? Bigger LCs ▫ Pilsen?
Proposal 2.Based on issues• Pro: • Contra: ▫ We will generate culture to ▫ Our support is just base on move forward the stuck LCs issues? ▫ We will challenge them base ▫ How we are going to support on percentage no numbers them in exchange if we are ▫ 3 Clusters: focus in their issues? Growing LC ▫ Is a 6 months strategy, so we Decreasing Performance will need to revaluate the Membership Focus clusters again ▫ Using strategies to overcome ▫ The support the same cluster the current issue needs is different ▫ Short term results and strategies
Proposal A.Results- X pipeline• Pro: • Contra: ▫ Will be based in the current ▫ We will need to think again reality of the LCs about the clusters the next ▫ We will take advantage of Q3 semester and Q4 for the incoming term ▫ Can change in a big way the ▫ Customized support to use performance of the LCs what we have in the platform ▫ Is really simple the for exchange proposal, we don’t are taking ▫ 3 clusters + Extentions into account the market ▫ Just 2 LCs in the performance cluster Russia
Proposal B.Size of the LCs (# Members) – Results• Pros: • Contra: ▫ Long term strategy ▫ LCs in the cluster can stop ▫ 3 clusters + expansions the growth of others? ▫ Membership focus to enable ▫ Do we really need to have a exchange long term strategy in ▫ Every person counts in our clusters? structures ▫ Just 2 LC in the big ▫ Focus in membership performance cluster efficiency South Cone – Brasil
Proposal C.Based on goals for 2010• Pro: • Contra: ▫ We are basing this cluster ▫ We knows who is going to be strategy in the goals the best LC . ▫ We will track their results and ▫ Praha is going to be in one based our strategies on the cluster alone numbers ▫ 5 LCs in the same cluster with different realities, no customized support for them. ▫ Which is the type of culture that we want to create?