Customers have the greatest impact on shareholder value, but number 2 is: the state
.
This view is most managers, McKinsey says in a worldwide online survey of 1,400 executives in the readable study "Managing government relations for the future: McKinsey Global Survey results " in the current McKinsey Quarterly (February 2011) .
- The state will be in the next three to five years one of the stakeholders who will have the greatest economic impact on businesses, says half of the respondents. In developing countries believe that two thirds of the managers.
- More than half believe that the state in this period more is involved than before in their sectors. This confirms the results of the previous study - in spite of some political changes such as the electoral victories of the U.S. Republican and Conservative Party in Britain.
assess very different managers in developed countries and developing countries presented their perspectives While the majority in the developed world, the policy has a negative impact expected on their operating income, it looks like the majority in developing countries (including China and India) vice versa. A stark contrast.
also interesting that the survey compared to last year shows that companies are showing more willingness to put up with government and politics and deal with them.
my Only 10 percent of managers, however, that their businesses are in a position to influence policy - and only 10 percent believe that politics is the opinion of the Company is seeking or underestimated. In any case, says about half of the respondents that should be the external relations among the three top priorities of their CEOs.
is really the critical role of the state in sectors such as energy, financial services and health care. Here the state ranks No. 1 on the most powerful forces in the business environment. In these industries, the managers are particularly pessimistic about the impact on corporate balance sheets. Three quarters of respondents also expect more government intervention.
two-thirds of managers believe that their industry should proactively and regularly linked to the policy dialogue, regardless of current interests. But only half of the respondents said observed that their companies actually do this. This contrast was striking even in the previous study (71 vs. 43 percent).
The Mackie wanted to know something more about how the managers keep it with the state. In the analysis, they divided the respondents into five groups or types : opportunists, avoidance ("avoid"), Partner, reserved Cooperative ("reluctant Engage") and adversaries ("adversaries").
The Opprtunisten and the partners are the two groups that tend to emphasize the opportunities and the problems with the policy. Policy decisions think the opportunists, also open up opportunities for business. The partners also see something generally good in transparency and openness for cooperation with the policy. The two groups each account for a quarter of the respondents. In the previous study, the shares were a little smaller. The opportunists and partners are also more likely those who believe that their companies are quite successful in influencing the state - be it to increase its own value or mitigate risks.
manager in China, India and developing countries tend to belong to the group of opportunists. In Europe and North America are more likely to report restrained cooperatives ("reluctant Engagers") - those who see benefits even in the external relations with the state, but also believe that the state of the economy being treated unfairly.
also between industries, there are differences. Managers in high-tech and telecommunications sectors are more opportunists and executives in the financial industry are more the type of opponent ("adversaries"), and in the health industry, there are many of the reluctant co-operatives ("Reluctant Engagers").
McKinsey now asked for 15 specific practices in the care of external relations . The consultant shall be equal, however, that only a minority of companies is very good. None of the categories of practice more than 40 percent each said that their businesses are in it very effective.
After all, there are so McKinsey, a small group of managers, who feel that their companies can exercise regularly quite successful and thus their influence Reputation develop a competitive advantage. In this group of "successful" are more managers from China or Latin America, represented in the energy or financial sector, or from companies with more than one billion in sales.
is interesting to note the difference between the practice categories where the companies are exceptionally good or bad. What in the "successful" group of respondents compared to the other commonly work well: balance the agenda of the external relations with the overall strategy of the company, 'compromise across the topic list and coordination of external relationships across the enterprise. The fact that these companies provide sufficient staff and resources for these tasks is a plus, as are attempts to address its financial contributions to political activities, quantify and measure.
- Dua, A., Nuttall, R. & Wilkins, J. (2011, February). Managing government relations for the future: McKinsey Global Survey results. https The McKinsey Quarterly, online at : / / www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Public_Sector/Management/Managing_government_relations_for_the_future_McKinsey_Global_Survey_results_2751
- Dua, A., Heil, K. Wilkins, J. (2010, January). How business interacts with government: McKinsey Global Survey results. The McKinsey Quartely https, online : / / www.mckinseyquarterly.com/How_business_interacts_with_government_McKinsey_Global_Survey_results_2495
0 comments:
Post a Comment