Businesses and People : performance according to Antoine Riboud

A reflection that is not very far my usual discourse since it’s about optimization under resource constaintes. Most of all human resources.

Everybody know that a company’s goal is to make money in order to create value for its shareholders without whom it wouldn’t exist.

As time went by the need for making profit was turned into the need for maximizing it. A vision that made possible the strongest and longest period of growth, more than a decade ago. But it seems that the engine is now jamming with consequences we can all observe in our daily lives.

At a corporate level it implies the will of doing always more and keep with growth rates that are incompatible with the mere logic. A logic that becomes counter productive when it lead to halve strategies and promising linear performances where people end one day or the other by meeting a ceiling. Both leading to cyclic crisis.

Outside of companies, this lead to a period when, for the first time, growth creates poverty, this poverty being a threat for tomorrow’s growth, destroying current markets and making it impossible for new ones to emerge.

In one word, we have the evidence that, in order to continue to grow rich tomorrow, people must may not ask for the impossible today. In other words one don’t run a marathon by linkinng up sprints.

The event co-organized by Danone and HEC which I attended recently gave me the idea or reading again a collection of Antoine Riboud’s speeches and interviews (Antoine Riboud : Un patron dans la cité) [Antoine Riboud was the founder of Danone] [Read more...]

What management has to learn from the Airbus vs. Boeing competition

Remember, it was a long long time ago, that, in the times we are living, means something like ten years. At this time Airbus was wondering how to compete with Boeing on the big carriersmarket and was working on what would become the A380. On its side, Boeing was not thinking about replacing its mythic 747 and was working on a smaller carrier, which would become the 787.

Why these two so opposite approaches ? In fact, they were the embodiment of two radically different visions.

According to Airbus, airlines companies and were should be on a trend of rationalizing costs and most globally transportation organization. So their conclusions were that passengers would have to be taken to Hubs from where they would fly to their final destination, possibly another Hub. That meant that, for example, to go from Marseille to Miami, you should go from Marseille to Paris where you would be gathered with a lot of people going to the USA, then fly to New York and, then onlyn take a plane from NYC to Miami. It would allow to rationalize the use of airports infrastructures (for which companies has to pay), take off slots, ensure a maximum planes occupancy in order to lower the cost per passenger.

In the other hand, Boeing was convinced the future was in peer to peer travels (ie direct flight from Marseille to Miami). That implies smaller planes that can be more easily filled filled.

Who was finally rigth ?

[Read more...]