1. Final case exam: analysis & recommendation Silva Arturo Tepedino Gianpaolo Madrid, 19/12/2010
2.
3. Decision making and structure: decentralized;- Initiatives are mostly generated by the CEO; - Span of control is getting too high (CEO); - Subsidiaries’ products: fill gaps in the market; Competition PayPal (Alipay) Joyo (Taobao) Salesforce (Alisoft) Collaborators
4. Definition of the problem: statement & consequences Problem Is the model of competition between the different companies and the current organizational structure hindering the capability of the group to use internal synergies to face new challenges and new business opportunities? Consequences NBD Strategy IT Sales NBD: New business development
5. Alternatives evaluated I Move to a centralized decision making structure Severely damage the corporate culture as well as the employees’ morale, bureaucracy & span of control. Status quo (decentralization) + New supporting function for “Mobile solutions” + Chief Technology Officer (CTO) II Guidelines and nice-to-have instead of MUST have III Status quo (decentralized) + New structures (external opportunities) & synergies
6. Implementation: strategic roadmap Strategic imperatives Organizational structure (flexibility to grow & span of control) Corporate culture (collaboration in the competition) Human resources (employees’ alignment) Information technology (knowledge & ideas sharing) Marketing & sales (consistency & no-cannibalization)
11. Final remarks and other recommendations Financing small businesses Joint venture with a financial firm - Diversification & growing business - Lack of expertise & liquidity - No creation of synergies between the subsidiaries Financial leverage Leverage more - Important way to create value within firms - Higher debt to equity ratios (D/E) in similar companies
14. Peterson’s model & scenario planning (1/2) Source: Peterson’s Model for Uncertain environments. http://www.geog.mcgill.ca/, last visited on 18/12/2010.