Learn from experience. Borrowing experience as an effective method for improving business

The most difficult thing for people is not to recognize new ideas, but to forget old ones.

M. Keynes

Kleptomania elevated to the rank of art of management

Frederick Winslow Taylor said: “Scientific management is the art of knowing exactly what is to be done and how to do it in the best and cheapest way.” A creative approach to the experience of others will help you save your own money. Active use of knowledge, technologies, and methods from outside allows you to accelerate your progress, reduce costs, increase profits, optimize the organizational structure, and choose an effective development strategy.

Since ancient times, information about competitors has been mined to assess the strength and tactics of enemies. Cleopatra also sent spies to keep an eye on the Romans. In general, in any area of ​​human life where competition appeared, there was a temptation to find out how the opponent managed to achieve better results. The theft of other people's ideas is far from limited to military espionage. With the development of society, new priorities and values ​​appeared; economic intelligence appeared, obviously, with the emergence of economic relations.

The Japanese can be considered the founders of competitive benchmarking, who learned to perfectly copy the achievements of others. Japan is known to be a country of traditions. So, the Japanese have a tradition of bringing back something useful for themselves from every trip (and they love to travel). “Useful” not in the sense of souvenirs, a new pair of shoes or a tie, but in the sense of new knowledge that can be applied at home.

According to various estimates, intelligence services receive from 80% to 90% of information from open sources. These numbers hold true for business intelligence as well. It is not for nothing that many ideas from the Soviet magazine “Young Technician” were brought to life at Japanese enterprises, and all the best characteristics of European and American products and services are not only embodied, but also significantly enhanced in Japanese goods. Henry Neave, in his book Dr. Deming's Space, gives the example of Nissan, which suddenly began buying up all the used small cars it could get its hands on around the world, including broken ones, and sent them to Japan. Moreover, the number of such machines was measured not in tens, or even hundreds, but in thousands. And about 4 years after all these old cars were exported to Japan, the Nissan-Micra entered the market, which became one of the leading cars in its class.

A detailed analysis of used cars from all over the world allowed the company’s designers not only to take the best, but also to “work on the mistakes” of other manufacturers. On this score, Otto von Bismarck said: “He who learns from his own experience is stupid; I prefer to learn from others and avoid paying for my mistakes.” The key word in Bismarck's quote is “learn.” The need for learning, caused by incomplete and uncertain knowledge about the world around us and its limited predictability, determines the need for an adaptive approach to management and cognition.

Today, almost every more or less serious and self-respecting company constantly keeps its finger on the pulse of its competitors and monitors their technological innovations. Competitive intelligence, or its softer version - competitive analysis, allows you to identify the differences between you and your competitors, but does not explain how to overcome these differences and how to gain the best position in the market. Experience in itself teaches nothing unless it is studied through theory. Edward Deming said: “Experience teaches (makes it possible to plan and predict) only when we use it to modify and understand theory.” Thus, it is necessary to adapt the experience of others in your company, analyzing in detail the real picture of inconsistencies and the reasons for their occurrence. The ability to customize someone else’s practice “for yourself” in this way is what benchmarking provides.

Competitive analysis is included in the “mandatory program” of benchmarking and is the first link in the project chain. Information collection is the raw material for benchmarking. Moreover, raw materials are not necessarily extracted due to competition. The same Japanese transfer technology and know-how from one area of ​​business to another. Let's remember Henry Ford's assembly line, which went far beyond the automotive industry. Benchmarking involves studying the best practices not only of competitors, but also of successful companies operating in other industries. This important point is noted by the founding father of the benchmarking method, Robert Camp: “Benchmarking is a constant process of studying and evaluating the products, services and production experience of our most serious competitors or those companies that are recognized leaders in their field.”

When planning to adopt the benchmarking method, you should understand that benchmarking is not simple copying or imitation, industrial tourism or espionage, not a comparative analysis of products, costs or technologies, economic and financial indicators of competitors, the characteristics of their relationships with customers and suppliers. For example, the “look under the lid” marketing ploy, which is used in turn by manufacturers of soft drinks and beer, attracting customers with the opportunity to win a prize, is it benchmarking or something else that has a not so beautiful name? Fred Bowers once made a great point: “Benchmarking is the process by which an organization learns and is modeled on the human learning process.” In the process of learning, one acquires the ability to do things that one could not do before, to perceive the world and connections with it in a new way, and to develop the ability to be creative. A learning organization “...constantly expands its ability to create its own future” (Peter Senge). For organizations where the leader preaches comprehensive learning, benchmarking is no longer an issue. Eastman Kodak noted that “...managers in such organizations no longer ask “why?” They ask “how?”

Benchmarking can actually help companies achieve significant advantages by borrowing other people's ideas (and then applying their own brains). And this idea is not too new and original, but in such a shell, ethical issues seem to fade into the background.

However, we should not forget that “cross-pollination” is not fruitful for every enterprise. Therefore, the need for benchmarking must be demonstrated, i.e., the goals of benchmarking must coincide with the strategic goals of the organization.

Apply but don't accept

“Continue to look for new and interesting ideas that others have used successfully. Your idea should only be original in its adaptation to the problem you are currently working on,” said Thomas Edison, who at one time knew nothing about benchmarking. But Gregory Watson, one of the most competent experts in benchmarking, today develops the same idea as follows: “New ideas are not born out of nowhere. On the contrary, a new idea is born in conditions when it has become impossible to use the old idea.”

What conclusion should managers draw after reading these words? I think it's something like this: The experiences and ideas of others need to be adapted to your own conditions. In other people's experience, undoubtedly, there are inclusions of diamonds, but the process of “cutting” is very specific and difficult; one cannot think that benchmarking is simple and quick. A real benchmarking study, by the way, usually takes about six months. Managers initiating benchmarking must recognize that there is no shortcut. If you need quick changes, it is better to choose another method. Only the first stage of searching for best practices can last several months. Typically there are three stages that a company goes through when choosing a benchmark. These stages are usually defined by three English verbs (terminology in Russian has not yet been formed):

1. “To skim” - read it quickly, skim it with your eyes. At this stage, a superficial review of available sources of information is carried out, and already available data is collected.

   Here, in addition to traditional methods of searching for a standard (books, magazines, business contacts, conferences, seminars, etc.), I would like to focus the readers’ attention on benchmarking centers created specifically to find partners for benchmark comparison; Philip Kotler calls them “industrial dating bureaus.” Thanks to the activities of such national centers in 20 countries around the world, united in the Global Benchmarking Network (GBN), benchmarking projects become international.

   For European companies, the conditions and infrastructure for benchmarking are created by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM). The Foundation, as the organizer of the European Quality Award, accumulates and systematizes information about the best practices of participants and laureates of this competition and offers several types of benchmarking activities for European organizations.

2. “To trim” - to trim, polish, put in order. In this phase, the information and information collected up to this point is put in order: described in detail and systematized.

   For an organization that decides to learn from the experience of others, a necessary condition is a clear understanding of its activities and its business process. The problem is "comparing apples to apples." There are different approaches to describing a business process. In my opinion, two approaches are applicable here:

   • “top-down” detailing is a process classification scheme, where each stage of the scheme for the main, auxiliary and control processes has several levels of detail up to the level of work operations, which helps to more accurately determine the epicenter of the problem and guarantees a clear formulation of the requirements for reference comparison;
   • “bottom-up” detailing is a functional modeling methodology IDEF/0, where a business process is a set of operations (functions) performed at its individual stages. The main conceptual principle of the IDEF/0 methodology is the representation of any system under study (in our case, a business process) as a set of interacting and interconnected blocks that display processes, operations, and actions occurring in the system under study. A graphical model of a business process displays (and allows you to understand) its structure and functional content, as well as incoming and outgoing flows of information and material objects that connect processes within the organization.

   When information is analyzed at the process (function) level, you may be faced with the fact that the planned improvement project cannot be implemented due to identified limitations. In this case, a detailed analysis of information is required, which helps to identify the causes of certain barriers and minimize restrictions. If minimizing restrictions still does not allow you to implement the project, it means that the standard was chosen poorly and you should look for other options and experience that will suit your company.

3. “To cream” - remove cream. The final stage is selecting the best companies and establishing contacts with them.

   When making the final choice of a benchmarking partner or making a decision to implement an idea, technology, or strategy you found “on the side,” you must be completely confident in the high degree of comparability of someone else’s approach with business practices, the external and internal environment of your own company. For example, Japanese taxi drivers wear white gloves. However, an entrepreneur I know who is involved in the taxi business (by the way, a big fan of benchmarking and Japanese management) is in no hurry to dress his drivers in white gloves. Perhaps this would be a good move in relation to competitors. It could, but it won't... yet. For now, there is a high probability that this decision will either simply be sabotaged or turn into a clownery. It is necessary for drivers to “grow up” to white gloves, the organizational culture, the culture of relationships between consumers and staff in the domestic taxi business have matured.

“Other” businesses (not just Japanese, but also the competitor down the street) have their own “tricks,” and if those “tricks” work to the benefit of that “other” business, they can certainly be useful for you, but also on the contrary, to do harm. Gregory Watson noted the following on this matter: “The process is developed in a certain business environment and corporate culture in response to the needs of a certain type of business. No enterprises have exactly the same business environment and culture. Without careful consideration of the conditions that need to be changed to suit the environment and culture of the organization, it is impossible to transfer the practices of another organization. Therefore, 'unapologetic appropriation' will cause problems if one company's business practices are not 'translated' into the language of another."

Thus, the task of a manager who decides to apply the experience of others is to adapt the organizational technologies available in his arsenal. And of course, any management decision should be made on the principle of expediency. (This is about “Westernism” in our business, and not only business, when they try to cultivate advanced methods and technologies on unprepared soil.)

Among the advice of the creator of the “Japanese miracle,” Edward Deming, is this: “Apply, but do not accept.” In other words, one-to-one copying is unacceptable, since the desired results will certainly not be achieved, and managers will lose interest in benchmarking for a long time (and this conclusion can be made not only in relation to benchmarking, but also to all other approaches that are new to us). Failed managers who were looking for a “miracle pill” to improve their business received in return another pathology and will angrily stigmatize and discredit a method that has helped and is helping hundreds and even thousands of other companies around the world (more consistent and scrupulous in making decisions and their implementation).

The negative experience of using benchmarking once again confirms that...

• firstly, blind copying in benchmarking should be avoided;
• secondly, when initiating benchmarking, a manager must understand that this is a practical tool that has a scientific methodological base that needs to be familiarized with, or better yet, seriously studied, starting at least by searching for information on the Internet.

Not gonna get us!..

The benefits for a company that learns from the best examples are obvious. But what is the point of leading companies disclosing information about themselves? The motives can be very different. Many, for example, consider it prestigious to act as a reference company. Moreover, this increases their investment attractiveness and allows them to lobby for their interests at different levels. Many “open” companies believe that while they are catching up, they will have time to come up with something new, and the experience that is usually adopted as part of benchmarking research is always “second freshness”. For a breakthrough, fundamentally new ideas are needed, which usually no one ever shares and which, on the contrary, are carefully guarded (benchmarking will not help here - contact professional spies).

The Japanese are sure: if a company teaches someone, then it develops itself. For example, laureates of the Japanese Quality Award willingly share their successes with anyone who is interested in this. An example from personal experience. Not long ago, as part of a Russian delegation, I visited the Musashino company, winner of the Japanese Quality Award in 2000. The company’s core business is somewhat unusual (for now) for us. Musashino provides cleaning services for areas and premises to organizations and individuals and provides rental of related equipment and supplies. The company is a small business with a staff of about 360 people. So, in parallel with us, Musashino hosted three more groups of visitors, in particular, students from one of the Tokyo universities, a delegation of businessmen from a neighboring prefecture and someone else. After receiving a national quality award, an unknown company found itself, as they say, in the public eye and skillfully took advantage of this by starting to develop an additional line of activity - a consulting business. For example, the student delegation that was received before us, in its entirety (twenty people), acquired books with the Musashino management plan for 1000 yen each (almost $10 for a small notebook - in my opinion, not bad, considering that there are 5 such visits every day -7 and visits are not free either).

Continuing the Japanese theme, we return again to Dr. Deming. One of the key ideas of Deming's quality philosophy (which was partly a result of his influence from working with the Japanese) can be summarized as “cooperative management” as opposed to “conflict management.” In other words, “Cooperation: Everyone Wins” is much better than “Competition: Some Win, Some Lose.” According to Deming, the prevailing belief that competition is always good initially, both for companies with their employees and for their consumers, is wrong. In the near future, a transition from the existing society (in which both the cause and the result of someone’s winning will necessarily be someone else’s loss - win-lose) to a society in which there should (and cannot) be losers (win-win) is inevitable. ).

Working together for the benefit of the company, for the benefit of the economy and society as a whole, has much greater potential than work based on conflict, ranking and competition. The ideas embedded in benchmarking perfectly correspond to the principle “We all win together”, and therefore correspond to the paradigm of modern management. In addition, the mechanism of the benchmarking method has restraining elements that are regulated by the benchmarking code of conduct. For example, the European document (The European Benchmarking Code of Conduct) includes the following principles.

1. Principle of preparation: before visiting a partner, it is necessary to conduct a research and assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of your company, and also inform the receiving partner about the purpose of your visit.
2. Contact principle: contact only persons responsible for benchmarking; do not disclose the names of contact persons and survey participants without the permission of the receiving party.
3. Exchange principle: open communication; clarity of research goals and expectations in relation to the partner; the inability to demand from another company information and data that you yourself would not want to disclose to it.
4. Confidentiality principle: do not publish competitive information, patented and other data without the consent of the partner.
5. Principle of use: use the information received only for the purpose of improving the work process in your company.
6. Principle of legality: use only legal methods of obtaining information.
7. Principle of completion: the survey is considered completed subject to the satisfaction and mutual agreement of all participants.
8. The principle of understanding and agreement: before conducting the survey, find out the features and rules for using the information exchanged between partners.
9. Benchmarking with competitors: it is necessary to determine the limits of confidentiality in the mutual exchange of information; you should not ask for data and figures outside the framework established by the agreement.

If the accepted rules of the game are respected by the participants (you - to me, I - to you), when the limits of disclosed information, the procedure for exchanging data, and the logic of conducting research are agreed upon, you can count on mutual benefit and joint advancement.

Sim-sim, open up!

Many domestic companies have been doing something akin to benchmarking for a long time, they are just unfamiliar with the term itself. Managers, entering into informal relationships with partners or competitors, often use each other's best achievements in their companies. Experience shows that direct communication with colleagues provides the most valuable ideas and knowledge for business, which, as a rule, leads to the introduction of new forms of management, software products, and the use of new technologies in production. Useful information can also be gleaned from interviews with businessmen, managers of various companies, or from a long article (for example, from this one) you can get just one, but interesting idea.

As for “official” benchmarking and its prospects in domestic business, they are overshadowed by a number of barriers, which we will discuss further.

It was not by chance that Maynard Keynes said: “The most difficult thing for people is not to recognize new ideas, but to forget old ones.” The current position of many managers regarding benchmarking (and in general everything that is associated with obtaining new knowledge and requires a revision of traditional approaches to management, as well as a fundamental change in consciousness) can be formulated approximately as follows: “a waste of time and resources,” or, in the words of one manager, “benchmarking was invented by consultants for consultants.” But, fortunately, organizations appear that, by their example, refute this already established stereotype. There are more and more such companies (growth points), so the barrier of the “denseness” of business will be overcome over time, especially since the market is increasingly demanding that managers develop new management competencies.

Against the background of standard reasons for refusing reference comparison, the “closed nature” of domestic business appears to be a more significant obstacle. Despite all the positive trends, it cannot be called transparent. Reporting on the company's activities, the number of employees, supplier and customer bases, supply and sales volumes are usually carefully protected from prying eyes and ears. Therefore, an official proposal to exchange such information can even cause aggression. Most companies close all information, as they say, just in case. Although, as we found out, benchmarking involves the use of only open information. Everything related to finding out trade secrets or know-how is pure industrial espionage and has nothing to do with benchmarking. At the same time, an imperfect taxation system, financial accounting that raises a lot of questions, and other problems do not always allow companies to provide/obtain real data on certain indicators. Managers would be happy to conduct benchmarking, but they can’t.

Although almost every company has a large layer of information that is more profitable to open to a competitor, partner, or other interested companies, in order to learn something useful for themselves from their opponents in return. Here are some quotes from managers who see the potential for business improvement in benchmarking.

• “Keeping secrets is a thing of the past. This way you only stimulate your stagnation. If you open it, you develop”;
• “Unfortunately, we don’t have enough time to teach someone just like that. Although, if we are offered interesting information in return, then why not?”;
• “Practice has shown that conducting even occasional comparative studies brings unconditional benefits to their participants”;
• “It is better for both enterprises to move forward than for both to stagnate.”

Domestic business is gradually overcoming the “secrecy complex”, in particular with the help of benchmarking. Knowing others and knowing yourself, you can predict the situation and respond effectively to changes. “Think and act, anticipating your opponent or partner,” says one of the principles of Buddhist philosophy. Following this principle in business can be a key factor in achieving competitiveness, and the cross-pollination strategy can be a success strategy for many companies.

Dmitry Maslov

What questions will you find answers to in this article?

• What type of benchmarking is right for your company?
• How can the General Director organize benchmarking?
• Is it always necessary to focus on competitors?

You will also read

• How Ralf Ringer and Nizhpharm companies conduct benchmarking
• What information does it collect about competitors’ activities?
• General Director of Irbitsky Motorcycle Plant LLC

When collective farmers in Soviet films showed off their achievements at agricultural exhibitions and visited each other to exchange best practices, this was not called benchmarking. But in essence it was exactly that. When Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev visited American farms and admired the corn harvest and milk yield, he was also involved in benchmarking.

In the most general sense, benchmarking is comparison with the best. Benchmarking helps improve business processes relatively quickly and at the lowest cost. It allows you to understand how leading companies operate and achieve the same or better results. The value of benchmarking is not only that it eliminates the need to reinvent the wheel. By carefully studying the achievements and mistakes of other companies, you can develop your own most effective business model.

Which benchmarking is right for your company?

There are many types of benchmarking: competitive, general, internal, strategic, functional. Which one should you choose? It all depends on what task the General Director sets.

Competitive benchmarking should be used if the General Director decides to compare the performance of his company with similar indicators of direct competitors. It must be said that Russian companies most often use this type of benchmarking. You can entrust the collection of information about competitors to marketing analysts. They will analyze competitors' products, their prices, business practices, survey consumers, and find out their opinions about competitors' products (services). Based on the collected data, it will be possible to conclude what actions of competitors led to success. Sometimes, to study competitors, they resort to competitive intelligence methods (for more details on competitive intelligence, see the article “How to find out the whole truth about competitors,” No. 2 - 2006). However, competitive intelligence should not be equated with benchmarking.

An open, voluntary exchange of information is also possible - for example, within professional associations. Readers may have a question: why does a company disclose information about itself? The fact is that it is prestigious to act as a standard. This increases the investment attractiveness of the company and allows you to lobby your interests at different levels. In addition, many General Directors are confident that if the company teaches someone, then it itself develops.

General Director speaks

The Nizhpharm company is one of the leading Russian pharmaceutical companies. Founded in 1919. Since January 2005, Nizhpharm has been part of the structure of the international pharmaceutical company Stada. Nizhpharm's product portfolio includes more than 100 types of generic and branded drugs (its own production and those manufactured by Stada).

When solving some business problems, we pay attention to the experience of not only pharmaceutical companies, but also companies of other types of business. For example, our sales policy, which determines the relationship between discounts, deferred payment and volume of purchased products, is based on an analysis of the coffee business in the United States and Canada. For several years we could not build a sales policy that would minimize subjectivity in decision making. Different groups of distributors (regional, national and local) had their own conditions. Moreover, in each specific case, the discount could be adjusted taking into account the arguments (not always objective) of the distributors. We were not happy with this state of affairs. Our goal was to develop a policy that would provide equal rights to all distributors.

One Canadian businessman selling coffee came up with an effective pricing system and made a revolutionary offer to distributors. His competitors spent ten years saying that he was wrong, and then they themselves switched to his system. The example of the Canadian businessman inspired us, and within six months we were able to create our own distribution policy. It was launched in early 2004 and has not changed since then. This is an indicator that the solution found is optimal.

Sometimes it is useful for the General Director to pay attention to successful business solutions implemented in one of the structural divisions of his company and extend them to other services. It is called internal benchmarking. For example, you can compare the performance of the sales department and the purchasing department. In holdings, you can compare the same function (say, the work of marketing departments) at different enterprises. An example of the successful use of internal benchmarking is the experience of the St. Petersburg company Pervomaiskaya Zarya. Studying the work of its subsidiary Kurt Kellermann SPb LLC, the management of Pervomaiskaya Zarya discovered that they manage the purchase of raw materials well. In particular, the subsidiary agreed with suppliers that it would purchase from them unpurchased remnants of fabrics (stock) at large discounts. As a result, the management of Pervomaiskaya Zarya took a number of similar measures to deal with wastewater.

Strategic benchmarking carried out when the CEO decides to develop new markets or release a new product. In many sectors of the Russian economy, the market is still closed and unstructured. Its analysis is unlikely to allow developing a long-term strategy for the company. Therefore, to determine strategic priorities, one can study similar mature and structured markets that have developed in other countries. An example is the Russian distribution market. Today in Russia there are many small and medium-sized distribution companies that resell products from manufacturers to retailers. But an analysis of the world market shows that in Russia, like several decades ago in the West, retail chains working directly with suppliers are rapidly developing. Therefore, many distribution companies are at the dying stage. They are being replaced by companies that provide qualified services in the field of logistics. Specialized companies that engage in small deliveries also have a chance to survive and remain on the market - for example, delivering snacks to tents or supplying perishable goods (frozen foods, bread, flowers). It is not always profitable for “logistics” to engage in such segments, so there is a promising niche for small companies, but the scale of the business in this case is very limited.

TO functional benchmarking It is worth contacting when the General Director wants to compare the effectiveness of certain functions (sales, purchasing, personnel management, etc.) with the effectiveness of similar functions in other companies, and not necessarily in the same industry. Functional benchmarking is used in all areas of the enterprise - in production, logistics, finance, personnel management, etc.

The practitioner tells

Anastasia Tatulova, Marketing Director at Ralf Ringer, Moscow

We also focus on very large Western manufacturers with a long history, such as Clarks, Mephisto. For example, our product line two years ago was 150 models, now it is 300. Dealers told us: “The Chinese bring 1000 models and sell a million pairs, but you want to sell a million pairs with only 150 models.” However, for me the Chinese are not role models. Therefore, we decided to compare our product line with that of Clarks. This company sells 40 million pairs of shoes with only 250 models. That is why, out of 500 models put up for the assortment council, we discard 40%, and begin selling the remaining collection that we are confident in.

How to organize benchmarking

Step 1. Define the problem and select indicators for comparison. The main task is to formulate a problem, for the solution of which you will turn to the experience of other companies. You need to understand why there are gaps between the practices of your company and the market leaders. What is their advantage? Is it possible to catch up and do better than others?

History of benchmarking

The Japanese are considered the founders of benchmarking as a business technology, who learned to perfectly copy other people's achievements. In the 1950s, they began to carefully research European and American products and services, identify their strengths and weaknesses, and then produce similar products at lower prices. At the same time, the Japanese successfully transferred technology and know-how from one business area to another.

In the West, benchmarking began to be actively used in the late 1970s. At this time, the products of Japanese companies began to displace American goods in the domestic market. American companies began to look for reasons for the sharp loss of their positions. Benchmarking was first carried out at Xerox Corporation by Robert Camp. Xerox began to lose in sales volumes of copiers to the Japanese company Fuji. To understand the reasons for the failures, Xerox top managers went on a long business trip to Japan. They studied not only the technical achievements of their colleagues, but also the Japanese labor organization system, work with personnel, and corporate culture. Leveraging this experience has enabled Xerox to reduce costs, increase productivity and improve customer service. Since then, benchmarking has become part of Xerox's business strategy.

Having chosen a problem, the CEO, together with marketing analysts or the development director, must decide on what indicators to compare. For example, if a pharmaceutical company wants to develop no worse than its Western competitors, it needs investments in R&D and fixed assets. Accordingly, indicators for comparison can be the ratio of investments in R&D to the company's profit, as well as the ratio of sales to fixed assets.

In other cases, indicators for comparison may be revenue per seller, production profitability, etc. For example, the Irbit Motorcycle Plant (IMZ) compared itself with a similar manufacturer of heavy motorcycles in India - Royal Enfield. Both plants employed approximately 900 people. But the Irbit plant produced 1.5 thousand motorcycles per year, and the plant in India produced 22 thousand. Consequently, the number of motorcycles produced per person at IMZ was 1.6, and at Royal Enfield it was 24.4. That is, the labor productivity of an Indian worker turned out to be 15 times higher than that of a Russian worker. Question: due to what?

General Director speaks

Andrey Mladentsev, General Director of OJSC Nizhpharm, Nizhny Novgorod

At one time, we were concerned with the questions: how optimal is the ratio of sales and production costs in our company? Are our administrative and sales costs too high? How reasonable are our standards for reserves of raw materials and finished products? We received answers to these questions by conducting a comparative analysis of our indicators with similar indicators of other companies. It should be noted that it is useless to compare Nizhpharm with companies not from the pharmaceutical industry, because each industry is specific. We also decided not to make comparisons with Russian companies. Firstly, foreign firms are winning the competition in the pharmaceutical market. Secondly, not all Russian companies are open.

In the pharmaceutical industry, there are companies with different business models: innovative companies, which have their own cost structure, and generic companies; Nizhpharm also belongs to the latter. We began to conduct benchmarking with the best generic companies located in Eastern Europe - Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Croatia and the Czech Republic. As a result of benchmarking, we were able to determine the optimal type of business model for our company, an adequate percentage of the main expense items to sales, as well as the basic standards for working capital, inventories and assets.

Step 2. Selecting an object for comparison and collecting information. Having identified the problem, you need to find the right object for comparison. Who do you compare yourself to? The answer to this question depends on many factors. For example, the Irbit Motorcycle Plant, having undertaken reorganization, analyzed how the business of heavy motorcycle manufacturers was organized. There are only a few such enterprises in the world. Who to target? It turned out that we should focus on India: IMZ was seriously inferior even to Indian companies in terms of indicators, and the world's leading manufacturers generally found themselves in the sky: you can keep them in mind, but do not set the goal of “catching up” in the medium term.

Sources of information for benchmarking

To obtain information about the activities of companies, you need:

• attend industry exhibitions, congresses, seminars, fairs;
• attract marketing experts, including consultants from industry research institutes;
• join professional associations, participate in conferences, communicate with colleagues in an informal setting;
• conduct industry and competitor research;
• interview clients;
• study the websites of Western public companies, where annual reports and other information for investors are posted;
• study annual reports of open Russian companies;
• visit specialized websites of American associations (for example, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, SEC) is an independent federal agency whose tasks include regulating transactions with securities, monitoring compliance with laws and regulations of exchanges and the financial market , protecting investors from fraud. Commission rules require full disclosure of all information about the company and securities before entering into a transaction)).

The practitioner tells

Anastasia Tatulova, Marketing Director at Ralf Ringer, Moscow

One source of information is industry exhibitions. We visit them and communicate with colleagues. For example, two years ago we were interested in the issue of building a company structure. We had problems with interaction between the marketing, design, and production departments... The company grew very quickly, and it was difficult to understand where the responsibility of one employee ends and the responsibility of another begins. We talked at exhibitions with colleagues from Europe and China, learned how their design department is structured, where product development ends and implementation begins.

General Director speaks

Andrey Mladentsev, General Director of OJSC Nizhpharm, Nizhny Novgorod

I have a negative attitude towards the exchange of experience in the style of Soviet times, when a delegation from some enterprise comes and just looks at what’s going on. Each company has its own set of factors that allow or do not allow it to develop. The delegation can come and study our experience, but there are no guarantees that it will be implemented later. It turns out that I and other company employees are wasting time aimlessly. I am ready to exchange experiences with my business partner, because this will help mutual understanding and improve our joint activities. But if tomorrow a delegation from a metallurgical plant comes to me to learn experience in the field of personnel management, I will most likely refuse. Because I don't understand why.

I am also not a supporter of attending conferences and participating in inter-industry associations where representatives of companies from different areas of business gather. I think it’s better to spend time reading books, and if you communicate, then it’s substantive and substantive. However, despite this, I am an ardent supporter of intra-industry cooperation. Three years ago we created an association of Russian pharmaceutical manufacturers. There are currently 13 members. We united because we are close in spirit and believe that joint activities bring more results than confrontation. We are happy to exchange information, and not only General Directors communicate, but also department heads. This helps a lot when we are faced with some local problem in which I, as the General Director, may be less competent than the line manager.

The International Quality System is currently being implemented at our enterprises. Since Nizhpharm was the first to implement such a system, we are happy to disclose information to other members of the association. We are interested in raising the quality standards of the Russian pharmaceutical industry.

Step 3. Information analysis. The next stage is data analysis, as a result of which the General Director must obtain information, due to which a gap has formed between his company and the reference company. For example, in the case of IMZ, it turned out that, firstly, generalist workers worked at the Indian plant - they could perform a greater number of operations. Due to this, downtime was reduced. Secondly, the Indian plant used more universal equipment. And, finally, it was placed more compactly, which reduced the cost of maintaining both the equipment itself and the structures.

Benchmarking

In Japan, the USA and other Western countries, benchmarking programs are developed with government support. There are industry benchmarking associations there, a kind of “dating bureau” that were created specifically for finding benchmarking partners (See links to association websites in the “Useful Internet Resources” section). It is believed that thanks to such an exchange of experience, the country's economy as a whole benefits.

In 1994, the Global Benchmarking Network (GBN) was created. Today it unites benchmarking centers from 20 countries (USA, Germany, Italy, UK, etc.). Russia became a full member of the GBN in the fall of 2004 (the All-Russian Quality Organization joined it).

Membership in any of the benchmarking associations is not very expensive. Thus, membership in the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) for a small company will cost 1,350 euros per year. Unfortunately, almost all available resources are English-language, and potential benchmarking partners within these clubs are foreign companies.

Another example. While conducting benchmarking, a car repair service center found that the average repair time per item at the benchmark company was three times less than theirs. What caused this advantage? After analyzing the information, the service center management found that the reference company’s personnel are more highly qualified, and the company operates not only on weekdays, but also on weekends.

Step 4. Decision making. Knowing the reasons why your company lags behind the standard company, you need to understand how to close the gap. Then you need to make a decision. For example, for a car repair service center, it would be important to recruit more qualified employees, make the work schedule of service centers more flexible, arrange timely delivery of components, etc.

However, blind copying is unacceptable. Each enterprise conducting benchmarking must understand that the information collected may confirm the futility of implementing any planned project due to the identified limitations. For example, there may not be qualified car mechanics in your region, or the remoteness of the service center may not allow for timely delivery of spare parts from the manufacturer.

And one more important point. In benchmarking, it is imperative to maintain a balance between the cost of implementing the solutions found and their potential benefits. Even small innovations can be unprofitable.

General Director speaks

Ilya Khait, General Director of Irbitsky Motorcycle Plant LLC, Sverdlovsk region

Irbit Motorcycle Plant is the only plant in Russia producing heavy motorcycles. Today, most of the products are exported to the USA and Europe. Ural motorcycles are well known on the world market. There are several clubs of Ural owners in Europe and the USA. King Abdullah II of Jordan owns several Urals.

We study the best practices of other companies for two reasons. Firstly, it is better to learn from the mistakes of others than from your own (Bismarck noticed this). Secondly, to become competitive, you need to be better than your competitors in some way. Therefore, before setting clear goals for yourself, you need to study in as much detail as possible how competing companies are structured, what business model they use, what their indicators are, etc.

Unfortunately, we have practically nothing to borrow from Russian companies. China and India, on the contrary, are very interesting. The pace at which companies in these countries are developing and their desire to attract you as a client is simply amazing. In Russia they don’t work like this yet, and this is very sad. So the experience of our foreign colleagues is most important for us: these are our main competitors. Naturally, first of all, we try to study the leading motorcycle companies, such as KTM, BMW, Ducati, in as much detail as possible. I would not say that they are willing to share their experience. For example, we were able to visit KTM factories, but I can’t say that we had the opportunity to study them in detail. So you have to process a large amount of information in order to extract something useful. There are especially many problems with finding the numbers that interest us: labor productivity, number of personnel, etc. It can also be interesting to analyze unsuccessful experiences. For example, it was useful to understand the history of the fall of Indian.

We also study the experience of companies that have solved or are solving problems similar to ours, namely, entering and expanding their presence in the markets of developed countries (in particular, the US market). Therefore, for example, we are interested in the experience of Hyundai. In a sense, examples such as Hyundai also provide a psychotherapeutic effect - after all, they did it!

In addition to direct competitors, we are also interested in the automotive industry, especially those companies that offer a “niche” product, such as Subaru. We also study the experience of companies that promote not just a product, but a lifestyle (for example, Starbucks).

We also study in great detail the construction of dealer networks of various motorcycle brands (number of dealers, their distribution across the country, buyer demographics, economic parameters, ordering system, guarantee systems, incentives, etc.). This comparison allows us to more clearly formulate the vision of our own dealer network.

We collect both quantitative and qualitative information. For example, we study competitors’ products down to the smallest detail, down to what fasteners they use. This is important in order to bring our products into line with industry standards - we, unfortunately, have been divorced from world experience for several decades. We also compare our labor productivity with the corresponding indicator of the world's leading companies. Although it is difficult to obtain information (mostly open sources are used - company reports, publications in the industry press), it is very useful, on its basis it is possible to formulate tasks in terms of reducing the number of personnel and restructuring the company.

Cheat sheet for the General Director

Sergey Pukovich, Director of the Consulting Center of the Institute of Privatization and Management, Minsk (Belarus)

Consulting center of the Institute of Privatization and Management (IPM) exists since 2000. Engaged in consulting in the field of marketing and strategy, assessing the investment attractiveness of projects, and conducting marketing research. Main clients: representative offices of Sanofi-Aventis (France - Germany), Hygiene Kinetics (Ola!) brand (Russia), Syngenta (Switzerland), ZTE (China), World Bank, Pierre Fabre company (France), Belarusian enterprises "Milavitsa", Brewery "Olivaria".

Digital Equipment Corporation has developed a structure for subject-oriented benchmarking. It is reflected in the so-called benchmarking template (see. diagram). It is useful for the General Director to use this template as a kind of reminder or model that can be used as a guide when benchmarking your company.

The entire benchmarking process is represented by four zones corresponding to four questions:

1. What is subject to benchmarking?
2. How to benchmark?
3. Who is the best?
4. How do the best businesses operate?

Zones 1 and 2 relate to your own enterprise, the other two zones - to the enterprise - the benchmarking partner.

Zone 1. What is subject to benchmarking? The activities that define the critical success factor should be presented. In other words, factors that directly affect customer satisfaction.

Zone 2. How to benchmark? The processes and methods underlying critical success factors are explored. The head of the company needs to answer the following questions:

• Is the process (technology) fixed?
• Who is my client?
• What are my client's expectations?
• Do employees understand the process or technology?
• Are the activities required to complete each subtask identified and included in the action plan?

Zone 3: Who is the best? When studying a benchmarking partner, you should focus not on the enterprise as such, but on the processes or technologies that are carried out at it.

The procedure is as follows:

• Searching for processes in your own enterprise that can be compared (internal benchmarking).
• Finding processes to compare in the market your company serves (competitive benchmarking).
• Search for processes to be compared in your business sector (functional benchmarking).
• Finding processes to compare outside your industry (general benchmarking).

Zone 4: How do the best businesses operate? You need to analyze the processes that allow you to achieve the best results and determine the reasons for the discrepancies between the data of your company and the reference company. Then you need to implement these processes at your enterprise. In this case it is necessary:

• clearly formulate the goal;
• determine what means will be used to achieve this goal;
• plan deadlines and resources.

Very often we tend to try on the career examples of other people, focus on them and even sometimes copy them. We buy books by authors who talk about their path to success, go to seminars and lectures, often sincerely believing that the paths from point A to point B are in most cases almost the same, and we only need the right guide. As a result, you have to look back and wonder what went wrong. In fact, in order to successfully complete your journey, you do not need to completely rely on the authority of someone who has already been to the finish line. Let's figure out how to correctly learn from other people's experiences and what you should pay attention to.

1. Point A

The beginning of your path and the one chosen as an example may not always coincide. Depending on this, the duration and nature of the movement may also differ. Perhaps the person you are targeting was in much more favorable conditions, which as a result required much simpler actions from him than you will have to do. And vice versa: if now you are in more favorable conditions, then there is no need for you to take detours and extra effort - the direct road is open. For example, if in order to start their own business, someone needed to spend a long time selecting a team of professionals, and you are already familiar with them and have experience in cooperation. At the same time, this person already had potential investors, and you have to launch a crowdfunding campaign - in this case, completely copying other people’s actions will be useless, at least in the early stages.

2. Point B

Where you expect to end up. There is no point in following someone who is moving in a completely different direction, even if at first you have some common part of the path. The illusion of “common point A” creates the impression that all further actions will be similar. This often happens in school and university groups, when students find themselves in the same conditions, and others strive to repeat the successful examples of certain people. But at certain stages you have to make your own choices, which sometimes require radically opposite actions. And then, for example, you put aside general textbooks, enroll in other courses, apply for completely different internship programs. Therefore, before you copy someone, decide on your own ultimate (or at least intermediate) goal so that you can clearly understand which option for achieving the goal is right for you and which is not.

3. Opportunity analysis

When listening or reading a particular success story, always analyze what exactly could help the person you are targeting, and what is also available to you: similar personal qualities, the same city of residence, equally developed abilities in some area knowledge and skills in a certain field, etc. For example, you want to repeat the successful experience of a famous entrepreneur. He had developed the ability to communicate with people, negotiate, make sales - and you can say the same about yourself. Then you can, just like him, take over the main work of concluding deals and relationships with clients, delegating other tasks to employees.

4. Against the system

When everyone chooses to follow the “well-trodden path” and achieve mediocre results, it is the anti-examples that achieve success that attract all the attention. What if their experience is the most revealing? For example, Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard and created Facebook - maybe, following his example, you shouldn’t waste time on university, but start right away with something promising?

In such a situation, it is important to be able to figure out whether you are dealing with a rule or an exception. For example, if the decision to leave university is based only on isolated examples from others and, accordingly, on the assumption that “university is a waste of time, you need to study less and act more,” then as a result the person is deprived of the opportunity to gain important theoretical knowledge, which, perhaps they could help us achieve more in the future.

Sometimes it's better to pick up speed a little longer than to make a false start and start all over again. But if something really gets in the way in life, for example, you made the wrong choice of profession, then you really shouldn’t hold on, but rather focus on other ways to achieve what you want. The main thing is to take other people’s examples into account, not as a direct guide to action, and to weigh whether this or that option is acceptable in a particular case.

5. Not obvious reasons for success

When reading biographies of successful individuals, pay attention not only to what actions they took to achieve their goal. Analyze what is between the lines and what is not immediately apparent. For example, that the happy coincidence and key meetings in many success stories would not have happened if people had not worked on themselves, honing their skills, etc. Evaluate the story of a person comprehensively, taking into account all the components, both positive and negative. This is the only way you can understand what is suitable and applicable in your case.

The prerequisite for creating this topic was the following (perhaps I misunderstood the answer).

I was somewhat confused by V.V. Putin’s response to S. Goryacheva’s address to him with the following question: “... - And the second thing I want to say. In the world, in developed countries, 20 percent of entrepreneurship occurs among young people. We only have two percent. Let's study the experience of China, Japan, Germany, and other countries, how it was done there, and involve young people, especially, perhaps, in the villages. It is very important to create such incentives. And there will also be motivation for young people to work. Why is this so important? Because today there is a new ambassador to Russia. We ourselves know that the special services will be lurking around here. Let's knock this ground out of them. And let’s protect our youth by giving them the opportunity to work, work honestly and support their families.”
V. PUTIN: Regarding studying the experience and accepting the experience of other countries, including in working with youth, we, of course, must do this and will study the experience. But there are a lot of negative experiences there. There is drug addiction, there is where xenophobia often flourishes, there are all sorts of others, not quite traditional... Well, you understand what I’m talking about. So we don't need this experience. But there is also a positive one, of course. We must analyze as a whole and take the best, of course. And take the best from our history, from our culture and look at what is being done in other countries.
Regarding other experiences related, say, to migrants. There's nothing to take there. There are only problems there. It's worse there than here. They have already publicly announced the collapse of the policy that they have pursued until now, they have publicly said so. For the Western establishment, this is generally a unique thing. No one could believe that just five years ago someone would dare to say such things. But now they are not only talking, but also trying to do something. And everything turns out very clumsily.
We have the best experience, because our country was initially formed as a multinational and multi-religious state. We have a tradition of not just coexistence, but interpenetration of cultures and religions. And this is an extremely important historical disadvantage for us, which we certainly must use. We have, say, 10 percent of the almost Muslim population, but these are not migrants, these are our citizens, you see, they have no other homeland, and for the most part they treat Russia as their big homeland. There is a small homeland, and there is a large one. And we should not discriminate against anyone. But at the same time, in local labor markets, for example, we need to learn how to regulate them in a modern way.
And you mentioned, say, entire industries that are occupied by emigrants: the construction industry, markets, and so on. You know, of course, we need to open secondary educational institutions, higher educational institutions, and professional ones. And young boys and girls need to be taught, educated, and so on. All this needs to be done. But other regulatory measures are also needed. Let's say, in the construction industry, if it is more profitable for a business to hire a migrant with cheap, small money, then at least assign a policeman or a policeman to everyone - there will be no sense. They will still hire migrants. Do you understand? That's why we need sound economic measures. It's not that easy to come up with.
The mayor of Moscow, Sergei Semyonovich Sobyanin, proposed expanding this patent system and making it more flexible, adapting it to each region of the Russian Federation in such a way that we could influence the business community in hiring by economic means and means. In Moscow this may be one price for a patent, in Ryazan it may be another. And give the regions the right to flexibly regulate and use this mechanism.
Let's try to implement it and see what comes of it. But if (I am now addressing not only you, but all colleagues) you have your own ideas, then we will be very grateful to you for your suggestions about what and how we should do in a civilized, modern way in order to improve regulation in this very sensitive area. I agree with you. http://kremlin.ru/transcripts/46451

Answer

I believe that the question posed by S. Goryacheva should have been given a broader and more detailed answer in relation to entrepreneurship, without reference to youth.
In my opinion, studying the experience of China, Japan, Germany, and other countries in the field of entrepreneurship is one of the important economic aspects of entrepreneurship.
Forgive me, but I’ll ask pressing questions about state-owned enterprises, and then I’ll try to move on to entrepreneurship. :)

Why do our state-owned enterprises have more than one employee per worker? Why do our state-owned enterprises, unlike private ones, make inappropriate, unnecessary expenses and irrational use of resources? Why do we pay taxes to the budget, including for the maintenance of these enterprises, and the managers for the most part do not “support” the enterprise, but only do what they do to inflate expenses - for the purchase of foreign cars, for their maintenance, for the wages of those employed by cronyism and employees who do not bring real benefit, to pay for their cellular communication services, the Internet, to train pets who graduated, worked for several months and fled to higher salaries in another company and many other unnecessary expenses??? We observe the same situation in government institutions at almost all levels.
In private enterprises, the owners are interested in cutting costs, minimizing them, because for the most part they invested THEIR money for the development of the business and the extra expenses will simply reduce the profit in their pockets! If we are unable to organize work in state-owned enterprises, if we have such careless managers, then they need to be trained and we simply need to study the experience of advanced countries! And the question here is not only about state-owned enterprises, but also about entrepreneurship in general. All entrepreneurs are interested in producing high-quality, competitive products and increasing their profits!
I know firsthand that in Japan, everyone works to reduce costs, which in turn reduce the cost of manufactured products, make them more competitive and ultimately increase the profit of the enterprise, from the worker to the general director. At large enterprises, due to the mass production, there are “economies of scale”; there are also savings in the fact that small and sometimes medium-sized batches of parts, semi-finished products, GIZ are supplied to them by small enterprises oriented towards this. Thus, clear, well-coordinated cooperation between small and large enterprises has been established. And their constant kaizen!? And their technologists!? After all, we can learn a lot from them and implement it ourselves! I think China, not without their help, reached its current level. And if he did, then honor and praise be to him!

Can't we organize our work the same way they do?

Answer

Allah, it looks like you are in a lot of pain, I understand! I propose the following formulation: “When developing your own management models, it is necessary, if possible, to study the experience of colleagues (on an appropriate scale).” I'm sure most sane people do this. As a rule, I myself check with other people’s experience at the stage when my own management model has already been worked out.

Answer

It seems to me, Sergei, that we are losing sight of the properties of the Russian business environment. Learning from experience is not enough. It is necessary to develop and implement our own effective management tools. This requires research, the application of models that will work in our business environment. Unfortunately, there is practically no activity in this direction. don't you think so?

Sincerely.

Answer

1. I guess I didn’t formulate it precisely. BETWEEN development and implementation, I recommend checking with other people's experience.
2. Activity. A change in the elite is needed - the existing one is not suitable for such tasks (see the topic “Putin lied to everyone...”)
3. I had already started writing a book on the topic “Management in Post-Soviet Russia” (the first in my life), but I realized that I had little experience and stopped it for now. We need to restart this problem! Probably many people think so, study and gain experience. We'll write closer to retirement!

Answer

1. Alas, Sergey, I did not have the opportunity to check with other people’s experience while developing my own interests, but the direction of movement from the specific to the general allowed me to start first with modeling a business process for the task, performing specific field work, making adjustments, and only then to the description processes. It wouldn't be a bad idea to check. Can you help?
2. Changing the elite is not a spontaneous process. The elite cannot appear out of nowhere. It seems to me that there is not a change in the elite, but only a change in methods of resource control. The study of the historical experience of social development suggests that the stages of development for different states have the same characteristic features. For example, there is a lot in common between the gangster 30s and our 90s. Such periods can be identified in Italy from the 40s to the 60s, and Ukraine at the present time. It is not the elite that changes, although of course each period brings new personalities into the public spotlight. The way resources are controlled is changing. Now I am almost sure that with the change of the main control tool, the stage of development also changes. The names of the stages were not invented by me, but I completely agree with them. After any revolutionary leap, when one elite is replaced by another, the development of social relations goes through several stages: bandit, bureaucratic, intellectual. Each form corresponds to the main tools for controlling resources. I won't go into details. If you want, you will find a detailed description of the characteristic features and conditions for the transition from one control tool to another in my essay or book. But the main thing is that you don’t have to wait. It is necessary to actively promote new control tools, which will bring closer the transition to an intellectual period of development, characterized by high efficiency of both production processes and a high level of social relations.
3. Don't put off writing your book until retirement. Perhaps this is what will be in demand now. Yes, and I would like to find useful information in the direction of my work. Unfortunately, there is practically nothing on the topic that interests me. Maybe it’s your work that I’m waiting for?

Sincerely.

Answer

We must not forget that our country has moved from totalitarianism to democracy. Essentially, we got something of the middle kind. Napoleon also said that in Russia he found two classes - the class of masters and the class of slaves, there is no third class, therefore, to abolish serfdom means to plunge the country into a political and economic house. This is relevant now.

The Chinese began their transition to capitalism from the economy, gradually changing the political system. Our property was dismantled. It belongs to the local elite. Money is constantly allocated for development. The number of directors in the management apparatus is off the charts. You need to build your own people. As for borrowing, which the author is worried about, it is useless to talk about it; we borrow something all our lives. Until responsible owners appear who will support the work of their enterprises and not sit out in other countries or the government service, there is nothing to wait for.

Answer

According to point 1, it is built quite logically, I recommend adding the “simplification” stage - as experience shows, there is always something to simplify.
according to point 2 - our elite is a reflection of our society, don’t think that “they” there are bad, and “we” here are good. The elite can be changed “roughly-quickly-for oneself” (Lenin, Stalin) or “softly-not quickly” to change society (I’m not ready to give an example, but I think there is one, maybe Jesus?).
according to point 3 - the book is from the area of ​​“soft, not fast”, on the topic “Goals, obstacles and results” in order to help the new generation not to “break” and not accept post-Soviet methods. I’m not ready to share my thoughts yet, because I don’t have enough experience and the topic goes heavily into psychology.

Answer

Is this our level, good or bad? In the second paragraph you made one illogicality. The change of elite is fast or slow. There is a semantic error here. The change can only be quick. Only the evolution of the existing elite can be slow. Yes, it is gradually transforming, but this process cannot be called a change.
And finally the last thing. Work and work are different. It may be correct to consider a book and other forms of presentation as sources of knowledge on which the reader relies in achieving his goals. This is precisely the role of coaches and consultants - to teach and provide the necessary knowledge. As a practitioner, this seemed to me not enough.
You are right, psychology is very important when building any strategy. Especially if you expect a good result.

Sincerely.

Answer

(((It is necessary to actively promote new control tools, which will bring the transition closer to the intellectual period of development, characterized by high efficiency of both production processes and a high level of social relations.)))

Agree. Let me add that total control (not selective) is required, with a certain frequency. I am omitting the tax audit; control over the use of resources is important here. But, “we are all human and we all want to live well,” a mutual agreement to resolve the identified violations is not excluded. :)
It is also necessary to develop measures of responsibility for managers, tightening them. It is no secret that the majority of managers “have nothing behind them”; in the event of litigation against them, there is nothing even to impose an arrest on. But their close relatives can boast of many things. :) We all know this very well, what to do in this case? This blatant “injustice” needs to be regulated by law! Can liability for personal property be extended to close relatives, as is the case with guarantors? :) I think this will be very effective and the ranks of officials would thin out on their own, but none of them would even consider this issue, and an bureaucratic revolution would begin! :)))) How many of these “Saakashvili” do we have?

In general, I do not believe in the various branches, subsidiaries of state-owned enterprises, so to speak, in their elite, where they pursue their own specific goals. I don’t believe in loans and grants, in estimates for them, where the level of wages is several times higher than the wages of mere mortals in parallel positions in other enterprises, where “dead souls” are often employed in these positions, the same can be said about the cost of the work performed is estimated to be equivalent to the cost on international markets, which are passed through “their” companies. And repayment of loans and interest on them will occur at the expense of taxes, including at the expense of me and my children.

Answer

Why do we cause mischief and at the same time, most often, become “victims of the situation”, and everyone and everything around us is guilty (coincidence, human factor, natural disasters), but not us?
Why is it easier for us to deny than to analyze, think through, refine, adapt and accept?
Why are we like this? Mentality, bribery, corruption, familiarity, selfishness, developing laws “for oneself”, what else can you add here? :) If everything boils down to this, then there is a way out - to tighten it up and remember Stalin’s management methods?

Answer

You ask very logical questions. I will answer your questions as thoroughly as possible.
Operational efficiency largely depends on the properties of the business environment. Quite a few such traits can be identified. The main ones are: high corruption, including intra-corporate corruption, low level of division and an appropriate level of industrial relations. Of these, the most important property is the highest level of corruption. Here it is not necessary to fight windmills - all manifestations of corruption. It is possible to eliminate internal corporate corruption at a single enterprise. Remember Lenin’s thesis about the possibility of a socialist revolution in a single country, which appeared after the failure of the idea of ​​world revolution. As a separate question. Let's eliminate corruption, effective management tools developed by developed capital countries will work. The result will be immediate. Practice shows that the implementation of the latest management systems provides savings of up to 50% of the costs of servicing production processes.
It is human nature to consider one’s own interests first. If effective production relations have not developed, if workers are not interested in the final product, productivity growth, if consciousness does not contribute to success, then we get what happens in enterprises. Enterprise environments are thoroughly politicized, saturated with multidirectional interests, not necessarily of a corrupt nature. But in this heterogeneous industrial community, there are ideal conditions for individuals and groups of individuals to take into account their own interests at the expense of enterprise funds. This is corruption. But oddly enough, the damage from corruption operations is not as significant as from indifference and indifference. From a psychological point of view, it is difficult to motivate people to work productively when someone nearby is using their official position for personal interests. Thus, in almost any enterprise, even one considered prosperous, we can find varying degrees of opacity in production processes, artificially supported by interested parties. If you make the environment truly transparent, then taking ineffective actions becomes impossible. Again, work experience at large enterprises shows that in a transparent environment with effective unobtrusive control, employee activity suddenly awakens aimed at increasing the efficiency of production processes. You know that some idioms like “initiative is punishable”, “those who are lucky ride” are born in such an opaque environment when attempts to work effectively are perceived, if not as a threat to certain interests, then certainly as stupidity. Transparency, the removal of politics, and the interests of individuals and groups free up the creativity of workers. Participating in service production processes as an independent agent working to increase the transparency of the internal environment of enterprises, I often encountered voluntary and selfless help from employees in solving complex production problems. They came with their proposals not to their immediate superiors, but to us. This even speaks to the need for participation in improving efficiency. People are burdened by the inability to use their abilities, practical and theoretical knowledge. Working without taking into account production needs negatively affects the psychological state of people.
Now that effective management tools have appeared, the only problem is the spread of the practice of their use. Take it and use it. Learn methods to effectively manage production processes.

Sincerely.

Answer

Allah, hello! Isn’t this the same Svetlana Goryacheva who “could not give up her principles” and moved from the Far East to the capital? Is this granny still sane and capable of attracting the president’s attention?)

Answer

Hello, Evgenia! :)
(((Isn’t this the same Svetlana Goryacheva...?)))
Don't know.:)

But her question and the answer to it puzzled me somewhat.
Since I considered the answer regarding experience through the prism of entrepreneurship, and Putin V.V. through youth. :) And when I heard - no need, I was at a loss.

Some time ago I talked with the Japanese, they are a very interesting nation. They have interesting approaches to doing work, down to how many movements need to be made and which side to approach/lay out, etc. to minimize the operation time. For example, I worked as a seamstress, the work was piecework. Accordingly, in order to earn more money, I was looking for the most optimal cut layout, and not just its layout, but also which side is easier for me to grab the part so that there is no loss of time, also what I first need to sew - this or that and etc. Since, for me, this somewhere turned into the creative process, I was interested in it and I achieved better results than those who did not bother. :) The Japanese are the same - they are looking for the most effective methods, methods, and so on everywhere and in everything. I even laughed when I heard from them that they were thinking about how to use not only the worker’s hands, but also his legs! I remembered our Soviet slogan at one of the factories: “Every working minute is fully loaded.” The Japanese work strictly according to it. After that, I immediately thought about their high number of suicides... If their worker does not fit into the allotted time for completing an operation, then they try this worker on another job site to determine the most effective return from him.
In our country, when they take a photo of a working day or various maps, timekeeping, our people try to show that it takes a little more time to complete this or that detail or operation, well, this is so that during its implementation it is not too stressful, but over-fulfillment the norm will also affect the size of the premium. :)

Why can't we work/provide work like they do? I neglect the level of our corruption, our officials, I pose the question as business owners, because the owners will be able to implement such a system, such methods? And for this, we need to learn, get better, think, learn from experience. :)

I also like Japanese methods of economic analysis, they are somewhat different from ours, they are based on the theory of constraints and will be very useful to business owners, not to mention the state as a whole. In general, as an economist, as an analyst, as a person who cares for our economies (I’m not Russian), for our people’s well-being :), I would like to adopt their experience in order to implement it in our countries.
The problems of our post-Soviet countries are almost the same, except that their specific weights differ in one direction or another.

Answer

Allah, hello! I don’t want to be sarcastic, but I can’t help but remember one of Murphy’s postulates! Sorry, in my own words, like... if you create a system in which a fool can work, then only a fool will want to work in this system.)
You can carry out a plan of tightening screws, mining coal, digging a hole for a while, laying out patterns and raising the bar every time, well, like in Japan, but why? What interest? Always stand at the machine and think that tomorrow will be better than yesterday?) Boring and uninteresting!)
Maybe the Japanese are going crazy about this?
I am more impressed by the image of Ivan “the fool from the stove” from the fairy tale, who trained Pike!

Answer

Adopting experience or learning from one’s own (or other people’s) mistakes is one of the integral parts of progress, but this question is posed this way precisely due to the fact that recently more and more mistakes have been made in the field of economics, for example, agricultural holdings, although every farmer, agronomist , economist and other agricultural specialists are probably better informed about how to obtain crops or milk yields without the help of officials. It would be better to provide the state at first. purchases of goods, preferential lending and taxation of farms, call them whatever you like: collective farms, cooperatives, TOZs, agricultural holdings, but on a voluntary economically beneficial basis. Funding artificial formations means resuscitating a stillborn. The possibility of free development is the world experience of progress and economic growth.

Answer

There is no problem with the transfer of experience accumulated by developed countries and some successfully developing ones. I think your question is too naive. This experience is actively spreading in Russia. So the answer to your simple question is quite obvious and does not contain any topic for discussion. But if you allow me, I would like to correct the topic with a question: Why don’t imported effective management tools work for us?
We do not have a market economy for which these instruments were created. Our business environment is not transparent. Corruption mechanisms both in government structures and in enterprises do not allow the use of global experience, and this experience itself is not entirely suitable. For example, according to the general concept of business development (marketing), the main tool is to increase sales, but for some reason not to modernize management and production processes or increase their efficiency. Even when prescribing medications, we don’t really understand how suitable they are for us. But it will not be possible to change the situation using conventional methods. Any “I want” will rest against the ineffective, corrupt structures of officials and enterprise structures.

Sincerely.

Answer

(((For example, according to the general concept of business development (marketing), the main tool is to increase sales, but for some reason not to modernize management and production processes, or increase their efficiency.)))

This is precisely how Japan has a more in-depth approach to considering the reasons for the decline in sales. They also study the products of competitors, comparing them with their own, set tasks for their departments to reduce the costs of supplied raw materials, materials, and invent some additional, unique functions that distinguish their products from those of competitors. They also have good feedback from customers, from whom they learn about the advantages and disadvantages during the operation of the products they purchase; by launching prototypes, they learn from consumers whether this new function is convenient or not. Products are constantly being improved, without which their competitors will simply bypass them.

Answer

I also forgot to note that in Japan, enterprise employees are often given such a task - the cost of production should be such and such, how to achieve this?
Brainstorming begins, sometimes this also affects suppliers of raw materials, who also receive a lower price that will satisfy the buyer (customer); in general, all areas of the production process are involved, aimed at achieving one goal - reducing the cost of production.
This is one of the tools for increasing sales (from the reverse, from the final one) - the product will sell with a bang if its price is such and such.

Answer

Of course, Alla, cost reduction is much more in line with the interests of production. For inefficient production processes of Russian business, marketing policy must take into account, first of all, internal reserves. The government understands this judging by the laws adopted, such as Federal Laws 261, 190 and others. Some economists understand this. But with consultants and business owners the situation is different. Even those who rely on the optimization of production processes do not solve this problem radically, but limit themselves only to tools known, including in Japan, where optimization is the basis of any business due to the high cost of resources. In your answer, I also did not find the main characteristic problem of our production processes, which makes the effective management tools taken in the West and East useless. It seems that everything is simple - take a ready-made algorithm as a basis and act. But this experience is limited to small enterprises in the service sector, where the Owner is close to the production processes. It would seem that what is stopping you? And the opacity of the business environment both at enterprises and the external business environment is a hindrance. Such a defining property as corruption is completely ignored. And if corruption in government structures may not seem like a production problem (although it is not), then internal corporate corruption should be considered as the main problem. Neither in the West nor in the East in developed countries does internal corporate corruption play virtually any role. Their tools do not take this factor into account. Why be surprised that our tools for increasing efficiency do not work?

Answer

Here is the most famous example of adopting foreign experience.
.
But seriously.
What made the Soviet defense industry advanced and effective? Competition with the American defense industry.
What made Russia an Empire? The desire of Peter 1 to compete with Europe, in particular with the leading European power of that time - Sweden.
.
Adopting experience has its own logic and meaning, if we continue to compete as a country, as a state (outside and inside), and do not nail ourselves to the “original soil” with unique “spiritual bonds” - in this case, nothing can be adopted!

Answer

It’s somehow strange that this experience is being introduced here. Gaidar and his team introduced a lot of things. Our education has taken educational standards and created something so confusing that they themselves cannot get out of it. If you read the annually updated Law on Education, then outwardly the first chapter is similar to the ISO standard. It all starts with the definition of terms, and then.... rubbish. The processes are not written down, but this is infrastructure, which means it was thrown away. With us, the quality standard of an enterprise can be bought for 20 thousand. Parrrrody for the introduction of a new one.

Answer