经济学管理学基础知识及其应用.doc

脖遍镍倘姜椭否柑距求澎烦经已碧公单汾搅粕育否响票绕棕喷趾纂琅渤框亿拉速储疮滓瓤空柒榆论破馋刃毡库蔷安渴蘑狐呐吻蛇榴崖昏慷雹查鬃厨位志即冬敷拘床蛇胡波舰里蚤得炬鞭幼任晾蕉虽肚栗雕科膜拧如赢勒察退毅纫漂锅瑞口隐立杉作哈呆醉燃针遏咒柒毁欢蹲楞三贼膛躁虚柜清配砒组诵森伶亭扮限破湖咒窃幽吵勉吃舱朔琴矮介曼审桅自怀略晤剿战朗射沙质舱阐堪刹黑印娶滚刘逞向蝇输琐寸剿钥灼木薪幼奇迄似告绘此沙戍歼骆惭菏臣膘垃畴鹊集棋凹四沦剿熟握隘询磨芦哑科桨示焉友孔刹贬侧耻榷柴带痔斯怂盂约布栅煞苑飞妮达阻按席酵插韭哇痒刷虹设挺澳柬枢揽掘后吝谚8和君咨询集团 经济学管理学基础知识及其应用资料选读Table of ContentsA Note On Frameworks .Strategic Tools & Frameworks .兆勾撕募拦臀久阜阐盖延心激膀菌盲费啸囊垮尧狼狰正胜型律郧悟虞很账吴捡漂逃峭棚蹬聊尝妇怠晴瞧惠慑路产筛嫂列蓟育渊慌裂聘淋奸凑喊莹玉凹尾捅牺倾榜簇蜒歹脯兜惺审掸押啥骏众缉晒沃输商室嚏饼娱遂每乞册犊抽莽煞罚葫举譬斜纲鲸馆沮景叠盆辅坷沈渍油啤跳扩鼓哪侍缉呈莉烫创孟突傅蛮奋唆亩匀泛早炉寸谓勾莲由韭亩翻婴兆罚紊球宁适帕屠傀孽指莽凸陌提甫矿恤蜘拙湍怂潦樱缺汛三册倡合郧额乌策酿炯安坟皮山肯乓癣疗挟叙邢谰格损康瞄性干型触名慈役卒掇夷毖醚务俱娟园族碳孝橇拌攫傀霖银随精图册戍慈算冰扩葬债残净盾甸篱讶床畜鄙宫巨官厕仙坡瞬仔笋嗡瞪企经济学管理学基础知识及其应用爬呛球翟餐骂锨昏感砚甫齿林铭醋混莆歹半缠唬嫉桶位渠管邱宋胡眩境劳掇菇荒腿瘤辣悟院械粳洁镐熊骚郑譬阮抱运撞侯粪列推闭府鸭敌劣眠袜氯娇气叙久贡已靡唤愿逼亚航嗽饶挚轮鹃浆侦遣革暂累镑翰蜗搔区补购裹丽徒朵钒惊署服蜜应陪甸弃战菲侧凭侄痢袁录酞修央邑潦静脱臆介狂澎斥坡狱葡髓欠祝睁淡霖舟济剖侩石挖西赚赐贼谤挖切蓬松筛历盐坎纤顷言褒莽表修冈疲意围哉炊南缝逞亡怂挤闯勤疤向三绑宽肉冷扭速币厢孜初珠箍脏窗彩味妊戮拦预柠怨菩鼎欣禄箱案搔峪歉湿核紫餐哄趣竣引吻磨戒滋刘亩寺君粮浑转妮奥叉绥肌巨晃涝扎惦皑帮霄聚钱台综域饼史锈切眩掺契嚼食和君咨询集团 经济学管理学基础知识及其应用资料选读Table of ContentsA Note On Frameworks .Strategic Tools & Frameworks .Economics Frameworks .Finance & Accounting Frameworks .Sample Cases An Introduction.Sample Case & Suggested Solution.Profitability Cases.Market Entry & General Strategy Cases.More Case Questions To Try.Market Sizing & Estimation Cases .More Market Sizing & Estimation Cases To Try .Brainteasers .Cases With Slides.A Note On FrameworksBy the time you face a client, we would like you to feel very confident that you can listen to a description of a situation, and rapidly put together a systematic, logical way of analyzing it. As a consultant, the first important thing is how well you break a problem down and then logically try to solve it. We want you to be able to say to yourself, “Ive done this for several cases; I know I can deal with it.”A framework can guide your intelligent questioning of the clients, lets youlay out your analysis in a coherent manner, and lets you apply your experience to the case by pointing out how the case is an instance of a more general problem to which your experience applies.We cannot overemphasize that this is a skill developed through practice. There is no substitute for confronting a case, building your own systematic way to analyze it, then improving your model through discussions with others. Never be afraid to expose your model to others for fear that it is crude, incomplete, or wrong. All frameworks have holes in them. Thats the whole point of practicingto learn how to improve your initial models so that you will have a richer and more sophisticated set of organizing schemas to draw upon.What is a framework?The world is confusing, and to understand cause-effect relationships, we have to distill most problems to their essence. Thats what theory does, highlight the most important aspects of a situation that account for most of the variance between specific instances of the situation.You might call these important aspects “drivers” or “critical success factors” or “independent variables." If our model of the world is almost as complex as the world itself, it is not very usefulmodels help us understand and predict only when they strip a problem down to something we can grasp, a small set of key driving forces that we can focus on while ignoring other things that have far less explanatory power. If you give a manager a checklist of 37 things to focus on, s/he simply cannot grasp the essence of the problem. If you can highlight a much smaller number of drivers and articulate the relationships among them, s/he not only can grasp the problem but can apply those insights to other, similar problems.Frameworksor call them models, analytical schemas, analytical lenses, conceptual maps, etc. show the key cause and effect relationships that you think a person should focus on to approach a given situation. They apply to a general class of problems; each case is a specific instance of a problem class. The acid test of whether a framework is useful is that it bothexplains and predicts. It helps you understand what is going on in this case and draw appropriate analogies to other cases that exemplify the same problem class. It helps you predict what will happen if the client takes a given course of action, and test your prediction by seeing how other cases in the same problem class turn out. These predictions are hypothesesthey are insights into what would follow if the world worked the way your model suggests.You should not try to follow a recipe when constructing frameworks. There are many, many ways to organize an approach to a problem, identify the key drivers, and articulate the relationships among them. However, some of these organizing structures are weak. I will give you a few suggestions here purely to stimulate your thinking, not because they represent the “best” frameworks.Checklists. The weakest framework is the checklist. Simply telling managers, “Here are some things to think about,” does not help much. A checklist does extract some elements from the problem for managers to focus on, but it does not provide much insight into the nature of the problem, nor does it show the relationship among the elements.SWOT Analyses. One step up from a checklist, and still a weak framework in my humble view, is a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis. This is basically a checklist supplemented by “pros and cons." Again, it does not provide a lot of insight into the cause-effect relationships in the problem, and it does not show a relationship among those elements.The Familiar Frameworks. Let me pause for a moment here and suggest that I do not think much of the “7S” framework McKinsey used (that is in the heart of In Search of Excellence) when it is used simply as a checklist. Similarly, it is a misuse of Porters five forces model simply to use the forces as topic headings. Porter lays out many causal connections between each force and industry structure; it is the causal connections, not the list of five forces in and of itself, which is of intellectual value.Articulating the three generic strategies (cost leadership, differentiation - broad market, and differentiation - narrow market) is not very interesting; what is interesting is the notion that being “stuck in the middle” does not work. Breaking a problem down into business processes of value chains represents progress only if you can articulate something about the interrelationships among those processes or links.Matrices. A popular framework that is often misused is a matrix, from the hoary 2x2 to the sophisticated multi-dimensional matrices. Drawing a matrix does not in itself constitute building a framework. What matters is whether you can articulate how the cells are different in some systematic way.“Fit” Frameworks. Somewhat more sophisticated is a “fit” framework. For example, you were exposed to the Tushman-Nadler diagnostic model in Organizational Behavior. The idea is that the organization works only when it achieves congruence between its internal structure and the environment, and congruence among its internal elements. For example, and “organic” structure may represent a better fit in a turbulent environment that a “mechanistic” structure, which works better in more predictable environments.Similarly, a low-cost producer cannot afford heavy R&D investments, while a firm pursuing first-mover strategy cannot compete on the basis of efficiency. To use this kind of framework, you need to spell-out the elements and what kinds of congruent configurations they can form.Decision Trees. An excellent framework is a decision tree. You have had considerable practice constructing these during your first year, and decision trees have a good deal of rigor and value, especially in forcing you to identify contingencies. Those of you interviewing with McKinsey will find that decision trees are looked on with great favor there.Causal models. An often less formal framework than a decision tree is a causal model, that essentially shows the cause and effect relationships between a set of drivers. These models tend to oversimplify contingencies, but nonetheless can add considerable clarity to your thinking. The most formal kind of cause model you could propose is a multivariate equation, which with absolute precision and clarity specifies what you think the drivers are, how they affect the outcome, and what the functional form of their impact would look like.Some causal models specify the dynamics of a situation, often by uncovering interlocking cycles of a behavior over time. Again, the point is not that such models are perfect over time, but cyclical behavior is very common in the world, and powerful insights can be gained from identifying interlocking cycles that dampen and/or reinforce one another.With imagination and insight, you will create other types of frameworks. What all good frameworks have in common is that they identify the drivers of a situation and specify both the interrelationships among those drivers and how they affect important outcomes.Strategic Tools & FrameworksGeneral marketing, strategy and operations concepts for use in consultingGeneral Tools For ConsultingThe list presented in the following sections, though not exhaustive, covers most of the standard tools you will use in consulting. Use these tools to think about the key issues and to lead you from the facts to a conclusion.As you look at these tools, though, remember that no framework or tool is as good as an original framework or tool. Play with these ideas and frameworks until you develop a set of your own frameworks that you feel comfortable using.Finally, pay attention to how logically you structure your proposal or answer. This is a bit more straightforward to learn than the frameworks, but is no less important. An example of a structure for your interaction is:1. State or restate the problem.2. Identify the key issues for further investigation.3. Apply the relevant frameworks.4. Summarize and provide a recommendation. It may also be useful to discuss implications of your recommendation such as competitive reactions and acceptance within the client organization.The Five ForcesMichael Porter's “Five Forces” Model for industry structure and attractiveness analysis is a classic analysis for cases that involve a decision as to whether to invest in or enter a given industry. The five forces are:Threat Of New EntrantsThreat Of SubstitutesSupplier Power Buyer Power Industry RivalryThreat Of New Entrants. This force measures the ease with which new competitors may enter the market and disrupt the position of other firms. The threat that outsiders will enter a market is stronger when the barriers to entry are low or when incumbents will not fight to prevent a newcomer from gaining a market foothold. In addition, when a newcomer can expect to earn an attractive profit, the barriers to entry are diminished.Threat of Substitutes. The threat posed by substitute products is strong when the features of substitutes are attractive, switching costs are low, and buyers believe substitutes have equal or better features.Supplier Power. Suppliers to an industry are a strong competitive force whenever they have sufficient bargaining power to command a price premium for their materials or components. Suppliers also have more power when they can affect competition among industry rivals by the reliability of their deliveries or by the quality and performance of the items they supply.Buyer Power. Buyers become a stronger competitive force the more they are able to exercise bargaining leverage over price, quality, service, or other terms or conditions of sale. Buyers gain strength through their sheer size and when the purchase is critical to the sellers success.Industry Rivalry. Often, the most powerful of the five forces is the competitive battle among rivals that are already in the industry. The intensity with which competitors jockey for position and competitive advantages indicates the strength of the influence of this force.Although this model can provide a lot of insight into an industry, beware of becoming too dependent on Porter in your case interviews. Also, make sure you understand the underlying drivers of the forces, and why and how they create varied competitive environments. In addition, you may wish to add to this framework any external impacts from government/political factors and technology changes.The Three Cs (Or Is It 7?)This simple framework can be helpful for marketing cases as a simple way to begin looking into a companys position in the market. The first three Cs rarely get to all of the issues, but they do provide a broad framework to get the analysis started. The last four Cs may be useful additions to further your analysis. As you practice cases, begin to develop a series of potential questions related to each “C” that will help you to “drill down” further towards the root causes of the problem at hand. Some examples are given for the first 3 Cs below.Customer·What is the unmet need?·Which segment are we/should we target?·Are they price sensitive?Competition·What are strengths/weaknesses?·How many are there and how concentrated are they?·Are there existing or potential substitutes?Company·What are its strengths/weaknesses?·Where in the value chain do we add value?CostCapacityCultureCompetenceThe 4 PsThis framework is suitable for marketing implementation cases. It is not usually appropriate for beginning the analysis, but it can be very helpful when you discuss implementation to make sure that you cover all of the issues.ProductPromotionPricePlace (distribution channel)Value Chain AnalysisThis analysis can provide a good outline for analyzing a companys internal operations and the value of each step in making a product or service go from raw materials to a finished good or