"You're
happy with the bottom line but not the top line?" The fellow
didn’t then ask: "When will you ever be pleased?"
Instead: "That must be the discipline from your former (MNC)
company?" And I said, "I learned it from my grandfather
when I was a boy!" [But I’ve also asked them to listen to
webcasts of “Earnings Call" of select Fortune 500 companies.]
We recently completed the business reviews with my Eastern European
friends and every country and business unit was updating their
respective plans and budgets for the balance of the year. They know
the drill: (a) product plans are pronounced truly
competitive in their respective markets; (b) resources
moving forward locked in; (c) then execution with a BIG E.
Especially countries in the top 20% that will deliver 80% of the
results.
After
reading the news re PHL poverty and competitiveness (or the lack of
it), I looked up two Philippine companies (in the consumer-goods
business) that recently reported earnings. If these businesses are to
be globally competitive they must deliver double-digit profits! And
given that global investors have a wide range of options, they
wouldn't be predisposed to bet on these companies. Over ninety
percent of Philippine businesses are SMEs. And if even prominent
companies don't meet global profitability yardsticks, SMEs, given
less resources, will indeed only account for 30% of GDP. There lies
our problem, of our widespread poverty – i.e., their ability to
grow and thus create jobs is limited. If major companies and SMEs are
not pulling their weight in the economy, then indeed oligopoly shall
dominate. Ergo: our lopsided economy will be a permanent fixture so
long as our SMEs and well-known enterprises are no panacea.
One
hundred million Pinoys is a big market, but Indonesia is even bigger
with a larger GDP per person to boot. Conclusion: our big population
has been negated by Indonesia and no wonder the FDIs (foreign direct
investments) they attracted ($7B) during Q1-2013 would dwarf what we
do in one year ($2B). Beyond sheer numbers, we need to raise our
output if we are to leverage population, like China did.
An
undertaking must be designed to be sustainable if it is to make
sense, so said my grandfather. And decades later his wisdom is still
a big boost to my Eastern European friends. "Rumen and Vladi
just called from Istanbul, our new partner just signed up to sell our
products in Turkey. You will be happy with both the projected top
line and bottom line. And we are already shipping to Lebanon, and my
group is also working on the countries we talked to you about."
They were a bit jealous that I was with the new Asia team that
traveled around the region and was even part of the negotiations. But
they also know that Asia is the bigger opportunity – and understand
the 80-20 rule.
So
how do we in PHL fix our problem? First, do we believe that we must
be an egalitarian society? And do we believe that we must shed our
parochialism? These are the two most critical commitments we must
make otherwise we can just be in la-la land? If we are committed to
be egalitarian and global, then the rest would follow. Is this where
the church ought to focus – because that is in fact at the heart of
Christianity, i.e., respect and brotherhood of people, including our
muchachas and muchachos? We are parochial because at
home we are royalty? And it follows that our economic model would be
skewed to oligopoly – to keep our rank and its privileges? Ergo: we
shall indeed keep the economic barriers up despite PHL's dire need
for foreign investment. [No wonder the cement industry is critical of
our energy-protectionism?]
In
the meantime, the business model of our enterprises can't be about
making cheap products. Because we Pinoys care for the poor, do we
find that virtuous or is that a marketing strategy that in fact falls
short of global profitability metrics? The 21st century is about
developing products that understand the person of today and tomorrow
and their wellbeing. And which is why Edison, Jobs and Gates are the
models. The object is to attain the confidence (it applies even to
SMEs) and the ability to price products and generate healthy margins
– and to aggressively invest in R&D, product development and
innovation as well as in developing talent and markets.
Understandably that is a lot to chew for Juan de la Cruz. But if we
want an alternative to a lopsided economy – that is dominated by
oligopoly – and raise the capacity of our enterprises to grow and
create jobs, we have to learn what it’s like to be egalitarian and
global? We must be equal to the task – we really don’t have a
choice?
No comments:
Post a Comment