This presentation was hold at the Arizona State University. It describes strategies and pathways for extending the service business. It highlights necessary adaptations in the organizational structures and competencies. It shows relevant dynamic and operational capabilities as well as management innovations for making the service business successful.
Service business development in manufacturing companies
1. Service Business Development in Manufacturing
Companies
Heiko Gebauer
Associate Professor
Department Innovation Research in Utility Sectors - Eawag: Swiss
Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology
University of St.Gallen (Switzerland)
Karlstad University (Sweden)
2. Research activities @
Competence Center of Managing industrial services
• Vision: Assisting manufacturing
companies in the service business
development
• Time: 1996 to 2010
• Research approach: engaged
scholarship, focus groups, benchmarking
projects, and surveys
• Research partners: approximately 350
SMEs and MNEs in Switzerland, South of
Germany and Northern Italy, international
firms
• Industries: Manufacturing, utilities,
consultancies, and others
• Topics: “Everything, but nothing twice”
University of St. Gallen
Institute of Technology Management
(Operations Management)
4. Agenda
1) Key challenges in the service business development
2) Future research fields (work in progress)
5. Theoretical perspectives
Service business development relates to various theoretical
perspectives
−Transition from product manufacturers to services providers
−Moving downstream towards services
−Servitization in the manufacturing sector
−Capital equipment manufactures moving towards high-value solutions
−Product-service-systems
−Solution providers
−Service infusion or growing for service solutions
−Hybrid offerings
Selected references: Wise and Baumgartner, 1998; Davies (2004), Vandermerwe and Rada, 1988, Oliva and Kallenberg (2003), Mathyssens
and Vandendempt (1998 and 2008), Neely (2008), Brown, Gustafsson, Witell, 2009
6. Service business development (1)
Investments into the service business
Service paradox
Ad-hoc service
support
Low
Value
contribution
through
services
Maintenance contracts
Performance-based
Business consulting
Integration services
High
7. Service business development (2)
Product
manufacturers
Manufacturing
capabilities
Combinations of products and services
Integration capabilities
Service capabilities Manufacturing
capabilitiesOperationa
l
capabilitie
s
Dynamic
capabilities
Adapted from Teece et al. (1997), Teece, (2007) Stefano et al. (2010
Individual skills
Sensing Seizing Reconfiguring
Organizational routines
(management innovations)
8. Cognitive phenomena limiting individual skills
• Overemphasize tangible and obvious elements
• Disbelief in economic opportunities
• Risk aversion for compete with customers
• Fundamental attribution error (pushing people,
instead of setting up structures)
• Aggressive goals
Source: Ross, 1974; Gebauer and Friedli, 2004; Gebauer 2009Source: Ocasio, 1997
Cognitive phenomenaAttention-based theory of
the firm
9. Management innovation drives service
business development
Sensing routines
(n=7)
•Down-stream-analysis
•Utility maps
•Service scenarios
•..
Seizing routines
(n=5)
•Strategy guide and
handbook
•Service portfolio
management
•...
Reconfiguring routines
(n=7)
•Cost-accounting systems
•Service innovation
process
•Performance
measurement
Management
innovations facilitating
the sensing phase
•Characteristics
•Utilization process
•Change agent
Management
innovations facilitating
the seizing phase
•Characteristics
•Utilization process
•Change agent
Management
innovations facilitating
the reconfiguring phase
•Characteristics
•Utilization process
•Change agent
Source: Gebauer (2011)
10. Service business development (2)
Product
manufacturers
Manufacturing
capabilities
Combinations of products and services
Integration capabilities
Service capabilities Manufacturing
capabilitiesOperationa
l
capabilitie
s
Dynamic
capabilities
Adapted from Teece et al. (1997), Teece, (2007) Stefano et al. (2010
Organizational routines
(management innovations)
Individual skills
Sensing Seizing Reconfiguring
11. Exploitation or exploration: How to
approach the service business development?
Adapted from Sawhney, 2004
Reconfiguration
Extension
How do service
opportunities
appear?)
Primary customer
activities
Where do service opportunities appear?
Supplementary
customer activities
SalesPre-Sales After-sales
12. Exploitation or exploration: How to
approach the service business development?
Adapted from Sawhney, 2004, Fischer, Gebauer, Guanjie, Gregory and Fleisch(2010)
Reconfiguration
Extension
How do service
opportunities
appear?)
Primary customer
activities
Where do service opportunities appear?
Supplementary
customer activities
SalesPre-Sales After-sales
Exploration
•Radical improvement
•New value constellation
•Dynamic capabilities
Exploitation
•Incremental improvements
•Value-adding to existing value constellation
•Development of operational capabilities
13. Parameter Exploration
Example
Organisational
adaptation
Radical
Antecedents Dynamic capabilities
Value constellation
Creation of a new value
constellation
Value contribution
Short-term, significant
increase in service revenue
Exploration of uncontested service markets
Example - Hilti
Exploration
Fischer, Gebauer, Ren, Gregory & Fleisch, 2010
14. Innovation and dynamic capabilities at Hilti
Fleet management in the
car industry
Fleet management for
tools
Turn key solutions in
power plant industry
Turn key solutions for
photovoltaic panels
Sensing, seizing, and
reconfiguring
Source: hilti
15. Exploitation of existing service markets
Example – Bosch Packaging
Fischer, Gebauer, Ren, Gregory & Fleisch, 2010
Exploitation
Parameter Exploitation
Example
Organisational
change
Incremental
Antecedents Operational capabilities
Value constellation
Improving existing value
constellation
Value contribution
Long-term, continuous
increase in service revenue
(15 to 30% in 10 years)
16. Extension of the service business at
Bosch Packaging
Products to services Revenue shares
− Spare and wear parts,
field services and
modernizations
− Service level agreements,
extended warranty, and spare
parts packages
− Services for competitor products,
operational and outsourcing services
Services
Revenue Market share for
services
Customers
Third-party service
providers
45%
30%
25%
Machines and
systems
66%
34%
Hänggi, 2006
17. Service orientation in the operational capabilities¹
A – abstract value of services, B – role understanding, C – personnel recruiting, D –
training, E – compensation, F – distinction product and service organization, G –proximity
to customers
Operational capabilities for service strategies
related to the exploitation approach (1)
After-sales
service providers
Customer support
service providers
Development partners
Outsourcing partners
Legend (0 – low, 1 – high – cluster means)¹
Source: Gebauer, Gustafsson, Edvardsson and Witell (2010), Neu and Brown (2005 and 2008)
18. Operational capabilities for service strategies
related to the exploitation approach (2)
Service differentiation
Service revenue Service profitability
Based on Fischer, Gebauer, and Fleisch (2012)
19. Structural equation model on the role of service
differentiation (1)
Complexity of
customer needs
Customer
centricity
Innovativeness
Business
performance
H3 (+)
Service
differentiation
H4 (+)
H2 (+)H1 (+)
H5 (-) H6 (+)H7 (-) H8 (+)
Based on Gebauer, Gustafsson, and Witell (2011)
20. Structural equation model on the role of service
differentiation (2)
Complexity of
customer needs
Customer
centricity
Innovativeness
Business
performance
H3 (+) ✔
Service
differentiation
H4 (+) ✔
H2 (+) ✔H1 (+) ✔
H5 (-) ✔ H6 (+) ✔H7 (-) ✔ H8 (+) ✔
Based on Gebauer, Gustafsson, and Witell (2011)
21. Stuck in the middle between product and
service orientation
Complexity of
customer needs
Customer
centricity
H3 (+)
H2 (+)H1 (+)
H5 (-) H6 (+)H7 (-)
H4 (+)
Innovativeness
Service
differentiation
H8 (+)
Business
performance
Service differentiation
Impact of innovation
on business
performance
Based on Gebauer, Gustafsson, and Witell (2011)
22. China as an important aspect of service
orientation
• China today / future most important single market
• Contribution of services is very little
• Challenges
– Chinese culture (Guanxi, Mianzi, Renqin) hinders service
orientation
– Customers consider services as „free“ and add-ons
– Insufficient quality in the basics for earned a living
through services (spare parts logistics)
• Solutions:
– Adaptation of human resource management to cultural
characteristics
– State-of-the art logistics solution (bonded / non-bonded
warehouse) and logistic processes (temporary borrowing,
post-custom clearance)
Gebauer, Kuzca & Wang, 2011; Kuzca and Gebauer,
2011
23. Service blueprint of an innovative logistic
solutions for the Chinese market
Idea of the logistic solutionDetailed blue print
Existing solutions
• Exporting parts (Europe>China)
• Stocking parts in China
• New solutions
– State-of-the art logistics solution
(bonded / non-bonded warehouse)
and logistic processes (temporary
borrowing, post-custom clearance)
– Adaptation of human resource
management to cultural
characteristics
24. First summary
• Key challenges
• Cognitive phenomena limiting individual skills
• Management innovation drives service business development
• Balancing exploration and exploitation approaches
• Strategies for moving along with the exploitation approach
• Service differentiation as an integral part of customer centricity
and innovativeness
• Innovative solutions for Asian markets
• Future research opportunities (work in progress)
25. Service business development (2)
Product
manufacturers
Manufacturing
capabilities
Combinations of products and services
Integration capabilities
Service capabilities Manufacturing
capabilitiesOperationa
l
capabilitie
s
Dynamic
capabilities
Adapted from Teece et al. (1997), Teece, (2007) Stefano et al. (2010
Organizational routines
(management innovations)
Individual skills
Sensing Seizing Reconfiguring
26. MDS of the co-citation analysis
Suppliers Customers
Highly operational (micro-perspective)
Highly strategic (macro-perspective)
Company
Result of multidimensional scaling of the existing contributions (n=127)
Work in progress
27. Suppliers Customers
Highly operational
Highly strategic
Company
Multidimensional Scaling
Cohen, M., Agrawal, N. and
Agrawal, V. (2006), ‘Winning
in the aftermarket’, Harvard
Business Review 84 (5),
129-38.
Cohen, M., Agrawal, N. and
Agrawal, V. (2006), ‘Winning
in the aftermarket’, Harvard
Business Review 84 (5),
129-38.
Windahl, C. and Lakemond, E. (2010).
‘Integrated solutions from a service-
centered perspective: Applicability and
limitations in the capital goods
industry’, Industrial Marketing
Management 39 (8): 1278-90.
Windahl, C. and Lakemond, E. (2010).
‘Integrated solutions from a service-
centered perspective: Applicability and
limitations in the capital goods
industry’, Industrial Marketing
Management 39 (8): 1278-90.
Tuli, K.R., Kohli, A.K. and Bharadwaj,
S.G. (2007). ‘Rethinking customer
solutions: from product bundles to
relational processes’, Journal of
Marketing 71 (3): 1-17.
Tuli, K.R., Kohli, A.K. and Bharadwaj,
S.G. (2007). ‘Rethinking customer
solutions: from product bundles to
relational processes’, Journal of
Marketing 71 (3): 1-17.
Kowalkowski C, et al, Service infusion
as agile incrementalism in action, J
Bus Res (2011), doi:10.1016/j.
jbusres.2010.12.014
Kowalkowski C, et al, Service infusion
as agile incrementalism in action, J
Bus Res (2011), doi:10.1016/j.
jbusres.2010.12.014
Davies, A., Brady, T. and Hobday,
M. (2007). ‘Organizing for
solutions: systems seller vs.
systems integrator’, Industrial
Marketing Management 36 (2):
183−193.
Davies, A., Brady, T. and Hobday,
M. (2007). ‘Organizing for
solutions: systems seller vs.
systems integrator’, Industrial
Marketing Management 36 (2):
183−193.
Examples
28. Results of the co-citation analysis
Future empirical fields
a) Strategic decisions such as merger & acquisitions
b) Unit of analysis could be network perspective and
international business structures
Theoretical considerations
c) Christensen‘s Innovators dilemma, boundary of the firm,
and industry dynamic
29. a) Example for merger & acquisitions
Milestones Merger & acquisitions
• Employers Reinsurance Corp.
• Decimus (computer leasing)
• Polaris (aircraft leasing)
• Genstar (container leasing)
• Gelco (portable building leasing)
• Penske Leasing (truck leasing)
• Financial Guaranty Insurance Co.
• Burton Group Financial Services
• Travelers Mortgage (mortgage services)
• Chase Manhattan Leasing
• Itel Containers (container leasing)
In million US dollar
General Electric
Bartlett & Wozny (1999)
30. c) Examples for alternative theoretical
approaches (1)
Performance
Time
High
Low
Christensen‘s Innovators dilemma
31. 3) Examples for alternative theoretical
approaches (2)
Founding of Voith Industrial
services
Acquisition of Hörmann (technical service
specialists for the automotive industry)
Acquisition of Premier Group
(technical services for the
automotive industry)
Acquisition of SIS Scandinavian industrial
services (technical services for Chemical &
petro chemical industry
Acquisition of the Ermo-Group (technical services for
the petro chemical industry and power plants
Acquisition of DIW (German Industrial Maintenance) (technical
services for industrial equipment (partly and full)
Acquisition of CeBe Network (engineering
services)
2001 2004 2007 2010
Since October 2010 the business
of all acquired companies
continued under the name of Voith
Industrial Services
Years
Combining
Service specialist
Product
Services
Boundary of the firm
32. Second summary
• Key challenges
• Cognitive phenomena limiting individual skills
• Management innovation drives service business development
• Balancing exploration and exploitation approaches
• Strategies for moving along with the exploitation approach
• Service differentiation as an integral part of customer centricity
and innovativeness
• Innovative solutions for Asian markets
• Future research opportunities
• New empirical fields are about M&E activities
• Theoretical perspectives should be extended
33. Thank you very much for your attention
If you have any further questions, please
contact me:
heiko.gebauer@eawag.ch
Ergänzung der Produktorientierung mit der Dienstleistungsorientierung als Ausweg aus der Beschränkung bisheriger produktorientierter Geschäftsmodelle. Weg zur Dienstleistungsorientierung verschiedene Entwicklungsstufen. Historisch – Dienstleistungswüste, Produktverkauf hiess noch Vertrieb und es ging eher darum Kunden ausreichend viele Produkte zur Verfügung zu stellen und Nachfrage zu befriedigen. Vertriebsfunktion zur Vertriebs/Service-Funktion gewandelt, Service-Funktion –ad-hoc unterstützung. Waschmaschinen läuft aus oder Fernseher ist kaputt. Dann Servicetechniker bezahlt man für Reparatur und Ersatzteile (Fixpreis oder variable ja nach Aufwand). Service-Funktion in Marktorganisation aktiv versucht Dienstleistungen zu verkaufen. Typisches Beispiel sind Serviceverträge für eine bestimmten Zeitraum 1 oder 2 Jahre, alle Servicetätigkeiten und Ersatzteile für einen bestimmten Festbetrag. Serviceveträge findet man heute auch teilweise bei Waschmaschinen (V-Zug), Werkzeugmaschinen). Weitere Ausbau hat jedoch ein Risiko, statt die Dienstleistungswüste in einen Dienstleistungsgarten zu verwandeln. Einen Garten der gut gepflegt ist und einen schönen Ertrag erwirtschaften, landen Sie im Dienstleistungsdschungel. Dienstleistungsdschungel heisst, die ausuferndes Dienstleistungsangebot, mangelnde Kostentransparenz, Kunden verlieren die Übersicht über das Dienstleistungsangebot und den –nutzen. Am Ende investieren sie in das Dienstleistungsgeschäfts, aber die erwarteten Return-on Investments in den Dienstleistungsbereich sind geringer als erwartet. Vermeidung des Dienstleistungsdschungels durch Professionelles und systematisches Dienstleistungsmanagement Service als strategisches Instrument und Wandel zu Performance-based Geschäftsmodellen oder pay-per-use. Beispiel Flugzeugturbine, GE & Rolls-Royce neue Turbinengeneration, günstiger im Unterhalt, und leichte Verbesserung der Leistung, niemand wollte aber die Turbine, Marktflop. Kurz vor dem Scheitern. Ausweg Power-by-the hour. Bezahlung nur für die Verfügbarkeit und die Nutzung der Turbine. Revolution der gesamten Wertschöpfungskette in der Luftfahrt. Boeing und Airbus umgangen, Konzept gemeinsam mit Fluggesellschaften, (Power-by-the-hour – Anstieg ins Finanzierungsgeschäfts für Flugzeuge, Boeing und Airbus erwirtschaften bis heute nur circa 2-3% der Umsatzes mit Dienstleistungen. Turbinenhersteller bis zu 50%. Solchen strategischen Erfolgen von Dienstleistungen stehen jedoch auch strategische Risiken gegenüber. Konsequenz solcher Risiken sehr gut bei Herstellern von Kopiergeräten und Druckern erkennbar. Bereich professionelle Drucker. Performance-based oder pay-per-use. Bezahlung pro Kopie oder gedruckte Seite. Dunkle Seite (Risiko/Gefahr) bei diesem Geschäftsmodell ist Verändertes Kundenverhalten und erzeugte Preistransparenz. Kunden erkennt kaum Qualitätsunterschiede. Gedruckte Seite HP = Xerox, Kopie von Canon = Sharp, kaum qualitative Unterschiede. Kunden erkennt nur, eine Seite 7 Rappen oder 6 Rappen. Kaufentscheid rein vom Preisabhängig. Kostenführerschaft als notwendige Erfolgsposition. Ruinöser Preiswettbewerb, fast keines der Unternehmen wirklich Profitabel war, Verlagerungen in Niedriglohnländer und Zusammenschlüsse. Eventuell Form erklären.
R&D and innovation competencies Logistic & purchasing competencies Manufacturing competencies Assembly and production skills Understanding of customer’s technical, business, and operational needs Combination of product and services into customer-specific solutions Engineering competencies R&D and innovation competencies Logistic & purchasing competencies Manufacturing competencies Assembly and production skills Engineering competencies Recognizing and dealing with service opportunities and threats Service-oriented values and behavior Service-oriented personnel recruitment, development, and compensation Service-oriented organizational structures (e.g., separate business unit for services, service innovation processes) Exploiting the sensed opportunities and fending off threats Modifying operational capabilities Over the years and responding to some criticism of the approach (see especially Priem and Butler, 2001), the RBV was developed and enriched. It started to deal (once again) more explicitly with how a firm’s external environment is influencing the process of managing resources and how a firm’s resources are transformed into value. Sirmon et al. (2007) for example recently proposed a dynamic resource management model of value creation. Bingham and Eisenhardt (2008, p. 242) contributed to the RBV by arguing that “competitive advantage stems from both the characteristics of individual resources as497 well as the linkages among the resources”. Then they apply the VRIN criteria basically to the combinations of resources and especially see inimitability as the key criterion for gaining competitive advantage. Instead, dynamic capabilities or “the firm’s ability to integrate, build and reconfigure internal and external competencies to address rapidly changing environments” (Teece et al., 1997, p. 516) are seen as key and perceived as the cornerstone of competitive advantage. Dynamic capabilities (still following Teece et al., 1997, pp. 518-24) are based upon highly firm-specific managerial and organizational processes (or routines) and are shaped to a considerable degree by its specific asset position (current specif Teece has recently developed the dynamic capability framework considerably in another landmark study (2007 and included in 2009). Here, he more deliberately attempts to weave an “umbrella framework that highlights the most critical capabilities needed to sustain the evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness of the business enterprise” (Teece, 2007, p. 1322). He proposes three categories of dynamic capabilities that he sees as most critical for sustaining evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness [10], i.e. the capacity to sense and shape opportunities and threats, to seize opportunities and dynamic capabilities to maintain competitiveness through enhancing, combining, protecting and, when necessary reconfiguring the business enterprise’s intangible and tangible assets (Teece, 2007, p. 1319). “ the capability of an organization to perform a coordinated set of tasks utilizing organizational resources, for the purpose of achieving a particular end result”. They stress that “dynamic capabilities do not directly affect output for the firm in which they reside, but indirectly contribute to the output of the firm through an impact on operational capabilities”. Winter has formulated the basic difference between zero-level and higher order capabilities nicely. He refers to the first as “how we earn a living now capabilities” and in contrast, the others as “capabilities that would change the product, the production process, the scale, or the customers (markets) served” (p. 992).
Model of attention and firm behavior to explain is not surprising that, having created a success- ful company by making a superior product, management continues to be oriented toward the product rather than the people who con- sume it. It develops the philosophy that contin- ued growth is a matter of continued product innovation and improvement. Because electronic products are highly complex and sophisticated, managements be- come top-heavy with engineers and scientists. This creates a selective bias in favor of research and production at the expense of marketing. The organization tends to view itself as making things rather than as satisfying customer needs. Marketing gets treated as a residual ac- tivity, “something else” that must be done once the vital job of product creation and produc- tion is completed. Engineers and scientists are at home in the world of concrete things like machines, test tubes, production lines, and even balance sheets. The abstractions to which they feel kindly are those that are testable or manipulat- able in the laboratory or, if not testable, then functional, such as Euclid’s axioms. In short, the managements of the new glamour-growth companies tend to favor business activities that lend themselves to careful study, experimenta- tion, and control—the hard, practical realities The latter occupy a stepchild status. They are recognized as exist- ing, as having to be taken care of, but not worth very much real thought or dedicated at- tention.
Frequently executed Minimal causal ambiguity between action and outcome Moderate heterogeneity of tasks for executing the routines Executed only occasionally Minimal causal ambiguity between action and outcomes High heterogeneity of tasks for executing routines Executed continuously High causal ambiguity between actions and outcomes Low heterogeneity of tasks for executing routines
R&D and innovation competencies Logistic & purchasing competencies Manufacturing competencies Assembly and production skills Understanding of customer’s technical, business, and operational needs Combination of product and services into customer-specific solutions Engineering competencies R&D and innovation competencies Logistic & purchasing competencies Manufacturing competencies Assembly and production skills Engineering competencies Recognizing and dealing with service opportunities and threats Service-oriented values and behavior Service-oriented personnel recruitment, development, and compensation Service-oriented organizational structures (e.g., separate business unit for services, service innovation processes) Exploiting the sensed opportunities and fending off threats Modifying operational capabilities Over the years and responding to some criticism of the approach (see especially Priem and Butler, 2001), the RBV was developed and enriched. It started to deal (once again) more explicitly with how a firm’s external environment is influencing the process of managing resources and how a firm’s resources are transformed into value. Sirmon et al. (2007) for example recently proposed a dynamic resource management model of value creation. Bingham and Eisenhardt (2008, p. 242) contributed to the RBV by arguing that “competitive advantage stems from both the characteristics of individual resources as497 well as the linkages among the resources”. Then they apply the VRIN criteria basically to the combinations of resources and especially see inimitability as the key criterion for gaining competitive advantage. Instead, dynamic capabilities or “the firm’s ability to integrate, build and reconfigure internal and external competencies to address rapidly changing environments” (Teece et al., 1997, p. 516) are seen as key and perceived as the cornerstone of competitive advantage. Dynamic capabilities (still following Teece et al., 1997, pp. 518-24) are based upon highly firm-specific managerial and organizational processes (or routines) and are shaped to a considerable degree by its specific asset position (current specif Teece has recently developed the dynamic capability framework considerably in another landmark study (2007 and included in 2009). Here, he more deliberately attempts to weave an “umbrella framework that highlights the most critical capabilities needed to sustain the evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness of the business enterprise” (Teece, 2007, p. 1322). He proposes three categories of dynamic capabilities that he sees as most critical for sustaining evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness [10], i.e. the capacity to sense and shape opportunities and threats, to seize opportunities and dynamic capabilities to maintain competitiveness through enhancing, combining, protecting and, when necessary reconfiguring the business enterprise’s intangible and tangible assets (Teece, 2007, p. 1319). “ the capability of an organization to perform a coordinated set of tasks utilizing organizational resources, for the purpose of achieving a particular end result”. They stress that “dynamic capabilities do not directly affect output for the firm in which they reside, but indirectly contribute to the output of the firm through an impact on operational capabilities”. Winter has formulated the basic difference between zero-level and higher order capabilities nicely. He refers to the first as “how we earn a living now capabilities” and in contrast, the others as “capabilities that would change the product, the production process, the scale, or the customers (markets) served” (p. 992).
Wertbeitrag anfangen – Reduktion Produktumsatz, Anteil der Dienstleistungen nimmt schnell zu Andere Wertkonstellation, nicht mehr Verkauf über Qualität der Zerspannungswerkzeuge bei argumentierbaren Preisen, sondern effektive Kosten für den Werkzeugeinsatz. Kunde bezahlt werkzeuge die wirklich gebraucht werden und die zu Aufträgen passen. Dynamische Fähigkeiten –Fähigkeit ein Unternehmen zu verändern, neu auszurichten, neue Geschäftfelder zu erobern. Wahrnehmen der Chancen und Risiken, Richtiges Dimensionieren des neuen Geschäftsmodells, Bsp. Entsorgung – wie gross schneidet man das Leistungspaket, Durchsetzung der Veränderung im Unternehmen, Pilotkunde, Motivation der Mitarbeiter radikale Veränderung mitzumachen, gleichzeitig das bestehende bewahren. Radikal – Veränderung der Verkaufstaktik, Umgehen der direkten Kunden (Erstausrüstung, Distributoren), Um so eine Radikale Veränderung zu schaffen braucht es dy
Theodore Levitt „Selling the hole instead of the drill. Customer want a quarter-inch hole!“
Beispiel für die Ausschöpfung des bekannten, nochmals Bosch. Versuch mit Dienstleistungen inkrementell wachsen. Nutzungsphase mit Dienstleistungen wie Ersatzteile, Modernisierungen, Reparaturen, Inspektionen, usw. Voraussetzungen sind eher der Ausbau der operativen Fähigkeiten mit diesen Dienstleistungen Geld zu verdienen, Management der Dienstleistungsorganisation. Prozesse zur Steuerung der Mitarbeiter, usw. Geringe Änderung an der Wertkonstellation im Markt für Verpackungsmaschinen. Es geht immer noch um die Qualität und Zuverlässigkeit der Verpackungsmaschinen und die Unterstützung der Qualität und Zuverlässigkeit mit Verpackungsmaschine mit Dienstleistungen.
Offensichtliche Ausbau des Angebots, treibt Umsatzwachstum durch Dienstleistungen Konkurrenz – Drittanbieter, ehemalige Mitarbeiter, Instandhaltungsspezialisten, Kostenstrukturen, Bilfinger Berger
Frage – wo sehen sehen sie spezielle Herausforderungen bei Dienstleistleistungsorientierung in China. Erklärungsansatz – Umsatz- und Gewinne bei Dienstleistungen sehr gering Verrechnungsansatz – 200 Dollar – 20 Dollar, Ersatzteilgeschäfte unter Druck, Piraten (Alternativanbieter) Tandem-Konzepte Teilbeitritt von China zur WTO) 2007 rechtliche Umstellung der Import- und Exportvorschriften. Kombiniertes verzolltes und zollfreilager
R&D and innovation competencies Logistic & purchasing competencies Manufacturing competencies Assembly and production skills Understanding of customer’s technical, business, and operational needs Combination of product and services into customer-specific solutions Engineering competencies R&D and innovation competencies Logistic & purchasing competencies Manufacturing competencies Assembly and production skills Engineering competencies Recognizing and dealing with service opportunities and threats Service-oriented values and behavior Service-oriented personnel recruitment, development, and compensation Service-oriented organizational structures (e.g., separate business unit for services, service innovation processes) Exploiting the sensed opportunities and fending off threats Modifying operational capabilities Over the years and responding to some criticism of the approach (see especially Priem and Butler, 2001), the RBV was developed and enriched. It started to deal (once again) more explicitly with how a firm’s external environment is influencing the process of managing resources and how a firm’s resources are transformed into value. Sirmon et al. (2007) for example recently proposed a dynamic resource management model of value creation. Bingham and Eisenhardt (2008, p. 242) contributed to the RBV by arguing that “competitive advantage stems from both the characteristics of individual resources as497 well as the linkages among the resources”. Then they apply the VRIN criteria basically to the combinations of resources and especially see inimitability as the key criterion for gaining competitive advantage. Instead, dynamic capabilities or “the firm’s ability to integrate, build and reconfigure internal and external competencies to address rapidly changing environments” (Teece et al., 1997, p. 516) are seen as key and perceived as the cornerstone of competitive advantage. Dynamic capabilities (still following Teece et al., 1997, pp. 518-24) are based upon highly firm-specific managerial and organizational processes (or routines) and are shaped to a considerable degree by its specific asset position (current specif Teece has recently developed the dynamic capability framework considerably in another landmark study (2007 and included in 2009). Here, he more deliberately attempts to weave an “umbrella framework that highlights the most critical capabilities needed to sustain the evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness of the business enterprise” (Teece, 2007, p. 1322). He proposes three categories of dynamic capabilities that he sees as most critical for sustaining evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness [10], i.e. the capacity to sense and shape opportunities and threats, to seize opportunities and dynamic capabilities to maintain competitiveness through enhancing, combining, protecting and, when necessary reconfiguring the business enterprise’s intangible and tangible assets (Teece, 2007, p. 1319). “ the capability of an organization to perform a coordinated set of tasks utilizing organizational resources, for the purpose of achieving a particular end result”. They stress that “dynamic capabilities do not directly affect output for the firm in which they reside, but indirectly contribute to the output of the firm through an impact on operational capabilities”. Winter has formulated the basic difference between zero-level and higher order capabilities nicely. He refers to the first as “how we earn a living now capabilities” and in contrast, the others as “capabilities that would change the product, the production process, the scale, or the customers (markets) served” (p. 992).
Company failure is caused by the side effects of the SDL. I call it the dark side. Star wars – Darkvader or dark side becomes evident by considering innovators dilemma. Explains why big companies fail. It is about disruptive innovation / technology. Technology is business approaches. Disruptive business innovation. Causes to close to the customers. Now, let‘s consider the two of the holy ten premises of SDL. The customer is always the co-creator of value. Firms are resource integrators. Considering these fundamental premises, from the Innovators dilemma. Customers guiding R&D resources. SDL can create a strategic exposure to a disruptive change. SDL makes companies vulnarable for disruptive changes. Company Wetrok – SDL can create a strategic risk, empore of good-dominat firms can strike back. Don‘t get me wrong here-