Finally we’re talking about the 21st century! It’s likewise encouraging that our economic managers are looking at setting more dynamic economic goals; and that we are developing the next-generation jeepney or Philippine-branded vehicle in partnership with a Japanese entity. (Partnership is what we must offer to be able to aggressively pursue capital, market, technology and expertise globally!) Given the credibility of government, NEDA and our economic managers better start fleshing up these press releases.
To push into this apparent new direction requires tough-mindedness in order to develop discipline and focus. Discipline and focus? Is it second nature to us? Many of our local businesses can’t drive margins and thus resort to tweaking to generate decent profits – and hence are not globally competitive. Margins are a function of great product ideas – the end to which we must discipline and focus Pinoy creativity, not to adapting to circumstances, which we mistake for resiliency? The Senate’s efforts to define our strategic industries and NEDA’s list of 21st century industries are laudable. But as NEDA pointed out, our fiscal position limits our ability to pursue priority initiatives – that it behooves government to pull their efforts together.
It’s the wrong foot to start if we say that we can’t be competitive in manufacturing – it can rob our resolve to move up the value chain, the key to overcoming barriers. Steve Jobs demonstrated it against BIG Blue and IBM was almost sunk by the PC and thus shifted to services! (But even services have their product architecture. Our BPO industry has to move up the value chain! A recent article from the industry was silent on this – if we sit idly we will be victims of circumstances, again?) Nor was Apple first with the MP3 or the smartphone. IDEAS are the key to win global partners as we seek capital, market, technology and expertise.
Understanding Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs in order to generate the corresponding product ideas to satisfy them is the starting point of competitiveness. Caveat: not every principle or theory applies to problem-solving – or why doctors don’t order antibiotics indiscriminately! Neither should we be bogged down debating and defining 21st century: competitiveness – which reinforces sustainability – is the Holy Grail!
Government may not be in a (fiscal) position to pursue priority initiatives now but it has the brains to develop its game plan, NOW – and tee it up for successful execution? Says the Manila Bulletin about NEDA’s initiative: “Among the 21st century industries cited were high-value agribusiness and aquaculture, renewable energy, shipbuilding, tourism, business process outsourcing (BPO), information and communications technology (ICT), and mining.” What then are the ideal next steps?
The writer is restating an earlier point: “What products will we produce: low-end, high-end, or mainstream? Does the industry have a good handle on the product architecture – that is, it spells out “multi-generation”, higher value-added benefits desired by consumers, so that they can invest for the future to sustain the business? Which countries are the target markets? Does the industry have the requisite consumer insights to win in these target countries? What is the size of the market and what volumes can we sell? Which countries are we competing against? Can our products win versus these countries – from a quality- and customer service-standpoint? How does our cost structure compare? Is our infrastructure and logistics competitive against them? Will our market share and revenues be sufficient to yield ideal margins – to fund aggressive marketing efforts – and profits to be sustainable?”
Initiatives are only as good as they are designed to succeed – they must cascade from a “must-achieve” revenue or GDP goal of $270 billion in 5 years, for example? Being disciplined and focused is imperative. We can’t be everything to everybody – tough-mindedness means saying NO whenever we are being led astray, off our game plan!
To push into this apparent new direction requires tough-mindedness in order to develop discipline and focus. Discipline and focus? Is it second nature to us? Many of our local businesses can’t drive margins and thus resort to tweaking to generate decent profits – and hence are not globally competitive. Margins are a function of great product ideas – the end to which we must discipline and focus Pinoy creativity, not to adapting to circumstances, which we mistake for resiliency? The Senate’s efforts to define our strategic industries and NEDA’s list of 21st century industries are laudable. But as NEDA pointed out, our fiscal position limits our ability to pursue priority initiatives – that it behooves government to pull their efforts together.
It’s the wrong foot to start if we say that we can’t be competitive in manufacturing – it can rob our resolve to move up the value chain, the key to overcoming barriers. Steve Jobs demonstrated it against BIG Blue and IBM was almost sunk by the PC and thus shifted to services! (But even services have their product architecture. Our BPO industry has to move up the value chain! A recent article from the industry was silent on this – if we sit idly we will be victims of circumstances, again?) Nor was Apple first with the MP3 or the smartphone. IDEAS are the key to win global partners as we seek capital, market, technology and expertise.
Understanding Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs in order to generate the corresponding product ideas to satisfy them is the starting point of competitiveness. Caveat: not every principle or theory applies to problem-solving – or why doctors don’t order antibiotics indiscriminately! Neither should we be bogged down debating and defining 21st century: competitiveness – which reinforces sustainability – is the Holy Grail!
Government may not be in a (fiscal) position to pursue priority initiatives now but it has the brains to develop its game plan, NOW – and tee it up for successful execution? Says the Manila Bulletin about NEDA’s initiative: “Among the 21st century industries cited were high-value agribusiness and aquaculture, renewable energy, shipbuilding, tourism, business process outsourcing (BPO), information and communications technology (ICT), and mining.” What then are the ideal next steps?
The writer is restating an earlier point: “What products will we produce: low-end, high-end, or mainstream? Does the industry have a good handle on the product architecture – that is, it spells out “multi-generation”, higher value-added benefits desired by consumers, so that they can invest for the future to sustain the business? Which countries are the target markets? Does the industry have the requisite consumer insights to win in these target countries? What is the size of the market and what volumes can we sell? Which countries are we competing against? Can our products win versus these countries – from a quality- and customer service-standpoint? How does our cost structure compare? Is our infrastructure and logistics competitive against them? Will our market share and revenues be sufficient to yield ideal margins – to fund aggressive marketing efforts – and profits to be sustainable?”
Initiatives are only as good as they are designed to succeed – they must cascade from a “must-achieve” revenue or GDP goal of $270 billion in 5 years, for example? Being disciplined and focused is imperative. We can’t be everything to everybody – tough-mindedness means saying NO whenever we are being led astray, off our game plan!
No comments:
Post a Comment