January 19, 2011
Business Card Etiquette
The 7 P's of Business Phone Etiquette
International Business Etiquette
Doing Business in China: Tips & Etiquette
Etiquette is Essential, Also at Work!
Business Telephone Etiquettes
Proper Business Etiquette
Business Dining Etiquette
Meeting Etiquette
Meeting Etiquette
Business Dinner Etiquette
- Arriving on the scheduled time is very important during a formal function. If you are the host, it is advisable to reach the venue earlier to check the arrangement and the menu.
- If you are going to be late as a guest, call up the host and inform him well in advance.
- As a guest, Do Not ever get a gift or flowers for the host during a formal dinner.
- The gentlemen are always expected to escort the ladies and also help her remove coats or raincoats and pass it to the attendants.
- The host is required to assist the guests in sitting arrangement or inform them where they need to be seated.
- The guests, on the other hand, should not be seated before they have been informed about the sitting arrangement. However, they can be seated in case there are placards placed on tables.
- One should not place bags, cell phones, etc. on the dining table. The napkin should be placed on the lap.
- The guests should not begin the meal before everyone's served. The hosts, on the other hand, should begin eating when everyone is served as the guests follow the hosts.
- With a proper table setting, one should begin with the outermost cutlery and work one's way in. if in doubt, follow the host.
- In the European style, the the food is cut with the knife in the right hand, and eaten with the fork in the left. Whereas, in American style, the food is cut with the knife in the right hand and then eaten by switching the fork to the right hand.
- The used cutlery should never be placed on the table; rather place them back in the plate.
- It is advisable to maintain a proper pace that matches with the rest of the diners while eating.
January 13, 2011
Finding Opportunities:
As 2009 dawned, instead of the kind of high hopes and fresh starts the beginning of a year typically brings, the economy was crashing harder each day. Businesses crumbled, people lost jobs, and nearly everything lost value as spending froze and budgets dried up. 800-CEO-READ was intimately affected, as the company painfully let staff go in the downsizing of an already-lean group. Around the world, reality became surprisingly bleak, and no one seemed to have any solid answers.
Despite being bombarded by negative news regarding the economy, a counter-attack seemed to be developing and people started to come out of their temporary collective daze. Instead of giving in to the pessimism, people began to address the issues, rethinking what it means to run a business, manage a group of people, and develop and apply personal skills. For many, individuals and businesses alike, this crisis became an opportunity for change, for chasing dreams, even for just waiting out the storm as they planned for something better. Which is not to say there haven’t been painful decisions made, that there haven’t been casualties, but if change is the only certain thing, then the challenge is to transform dire circumstances into dramatic successes.
In January, Martha Finney released her timely book Rebound: A Proven Plan for Starting Over After Job Loss to encourage just such a thing. The book seemed eerily prophetic in some ways, but nonetheless offered an immediate salve to the wounded. For many, finding a new job was not at all in the plan, but the advice and insight in Finney’s book was miraculous in its ability to provide current and profound advice to those that needed it unexpectedly quick.
Rebound not only plunges headfirst into tactical advice, but also addresses financial and emotional issues, like how to manage spending during unemployment, how to explain your job loss to your children, and other issues that are often overlooked in the more common discussions about beefing-up one’s resume, networking, and refining the interview process. Those critical skills are covered, too, but it’s Finney’s knack for understanding and addressing the broad scope of the situation that makes her book stand above the rest.
In Search of Excellence
The "Greatest Business Book of All Time" (Bloomsbury UK), "In Search of Excellence" has long been a must-have for the boardroom, business school, and bedside table.
Based on a study of forty-three of America's best-run companies from a diverse array of business sectors, "In Search of Excellence" describes eight basic principles of management -- action-stimulating, people-oriented, profit-maximizing practices -- that made these organizations successful.
Joining the HarperBusiness Essentials series, this phenomenal bestseller features a new Authors' Note, and reintroduces these vital principles in an accessible and practical way for today's management reader.
What Should I Do with My Life?
Influence The Psychology of Persuasion (Revised)
"Influence," the classic book on persuasion, explains the psychology of why people say "yes"--and how to apply these understandings. Dr. Robert Cialdini is the seminal expert in the rapidly expanding field of influence and persuasion. His thirty-five years of rigorous, evidence-based research along with a three-year program of study on what moves people to change behavior has resulted in this highly acclaimed book.
You'll learn the six universal principles, how to use them to become a skilled persuader--and how to defend yourself against them. Perfect for people in all walks of life, the principles of "Influence" will move you toward profound personal change and act as a driving force for your success.
Toyota Production System
January 5, 2011
Big gains await developing countries if they raise their energy productivity, research by the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) has found: they could slow the growth of their energy demand by more than half over the next 12 years—to 1.4 percent a year, from 3.4—which would leave demand some 25 percent lower in 2020 than it would otherwise have been (Exhibit 1). That is a reduction larger than total energy consumption in China today.
Policy makers and businesses in developing regions must not be deterred from boosting energy productivity (the output they achieve from the energy they consume) because of the present weakening economic environment and falling oil prices; these do not affect the long-term projections in the study.1 Time is of the essence: developing economies will install half or more of the capital stock that will be in place in 2020 between now and then. Every building or industrial plant constructed without optimal energy efficiency represents a lost opportunity to lock in lower energy consumption for decades.
The development paradigm that brought China two decades of rapid growth and lifted millions of people out of poverty is reaching the limits of its utility. Well before the US credit bubble imploded, China’s leaders recognized that this old economic model, with its heavy reliance on exports and government-led investments, was straining at the seams.1 The global recession that followed Lehman Brothers’ collapse put the model’s drawbacks into sharp relief. When exports plunged, factories closed, and millions of Chinese migrants lost their jobs, Beijing responded with a $600 billion stimulus package and a torrent of new lending by state-owned banks.
But those remedies, while highly successful in restoring short-term growth, risk aggravating structural distortions that made China’s economy vulnerable to external-demand shocks in the first place. As the global crisis ebbs, China’s leaders realize more clearly than ever that they must unleash consumer spending to achieve sustainable growth. Stoking Chinese consumption has vaulted to the top of national—indeed global—policy agendas. But how, and how much, can it be raised?
To answer that question, the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) considered three scenarios for Chinese consumption rates over the next 15 years: a base case (no new action to raise consumption), a policy case (full implementation of proconsumption measures already announced), and a stretch case (a push beyond the current agenda to implement broad changes in the economy’s structure).
The rough guide to marketing success used to be that you got what you paid for. No longer. While traditional “paid” media—such as television and radio commercials, print advertisements, and roadside billboards—still play a major role, companies today can exploit many alternative forms of media. Consumers enamored of a product may, for example, create “earned” media by willingly promoting it to friends, and a company may leverage “owned” media by sending e-mail alerts about products and sales to customers registered with its Web site. In fact, the way consumers now approach the process of making purchase decisions means that marketing’s impact stems from a broad range of factors beyond conventional paid media.
These expanding media forms reflect dramatic changes in the way consumers perceive and absorb marketing messages.1 As a result, some strategic-marketing frameworks—such as the popular “paid, owned, earned” one—are in serious need of updating. Many marketers use this framework to distinguish different ways of interacting with consumers, forms of financing, and measures of performance for each contact. Yet the paid, owned, earned framework increasingly looks too limited. How, for example, should a marketing strategist for a company react to requests from other companies to purchase advertising space on its product sites? How should a company deal with online activists when they take hold of a product or campaign to push a negative emotional response against it?
It’s one thing for a CFO to understand the technical methods of valuation—and for members of the finance organization to apply them to help line managers monitor and improve company performance. But it’s still more powerful when CEOs, board members, and other nonfinancial executives internalize the principles of value creation. Doing so allows them to make independent, courageous, and even unpopular business decisions in the face of myths and misconceptions about what creates value.
When an organization’s senior leaders have a strong financial compass, it’s easier for them to resist the siren songs of financial engineering, excessive leverage, and the idea (common during boom times) that somehow the established rules of economics no longer apply. Misconceptions like these—which can lead companies to make value-destroying decisions and slow down entire economies—take hold with surprising and disturbing ease.
The United Kingdom should make itself the European location of choice for multinational corporations, give its cities more power to determine their economic destinies, and unshackle its education and health sectors so they can take advantage of the potential for international growth.
These are among the recommendations of a new report, From austerity to prosperity: Seven priorities for the long termpublished by McKinsey’s London office and the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI). The report identifies critical areas the United Kingdom must tackle in order to build a stronger economy:
- Productivity growth has been encouraging (exhibit), but overall levels are still 17 percent below those of the United States and 10 percent lower than Germany’s. The United Kingdom should promote improved productivity within sectors rather than trying to change the economy’s sector mix. Removing regulatory barriers, lifting land use restrictions, and improving the quality of management and the skills of employees are essential to the effort.
- Multinationals may account for less than 2 percent of UK businesses, but they drive overall economic growth. Government should work with leading multinationals on a ten-year plan to develop the skills of the workforce, ensure access to international skills through open immigration, improve the physical and social infrastructure, and create certainty about future taxation and regulation.
- Transport and energy infrastructure will require more than £500 billion in investment over the next 20 years. But private investors will participate only if there’s greater regulatory certainty and if returns improve.
Short-term doldrums aside, the world’s corporations would seem to be in a strong position to grow as the global economy recovers. They enjoy healthy cash balances, with $3.8 trillion in cash holdings at the end of 2009, and they have access to cheap capital, with real long-term interest rates languishing near 1.5 percent. Indeed, as developing economies continue to pick up the pace of urbanization, the prognosis for companies that can tap into that growth over the next decade looks promising.
Yet all those new roads, ports, water and power systems, and other kinds of public infrastructure—and the many companies building new plants and buying machinery—may put unexpected strains on the global financial system. The McKinsey Global Institute’s (MGI) recent analysis finds that by 2030, the world’s supply of capital—that is, its willingness to save—will fall short of its demand for capital, or the desired level of investment needed to finance all those projects.1Indeed, household saving rates have generally declined in mature economies for nearly three decades, and an aging population seems unlikely to reverse that trend. China’s efforts to rebalance its economy toward increased consumption will reduce global saving as well.
What must a school system that performs poorly do to become good? And what must a system with good performance do to become excellent? In a new McKinsey report, How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better, we attempt to answer these questions.
We analyzed 20 systems from around the world—all with improving but differing levels of performance—and examined how each has achieved significant, sustained, and widespread gains in student outcomes, as measured by international and national assessments. The report was based on more than 200 interviews with stakeholders in school systems and an analysis of some 600 interventions they carried out—two strands of research comprising what we believe is the most comprehensive database of global school system reform ever assembled. It identifies the reform elements replicable for school systems elsewhere, as well as those elements that are context specific, as they move from poor to fair to good to great to excellent performance.
It’s been ten years since multinationals first began turning away from joint ventures in China as the preferred way to take part in the world’s hottest growth story. Many joint ventures failed to endure, and as multinationals gained experience in China, and foreign investment restrictions loosened, multinationals found it easier in many sectors to start a business from scratch—or to acquire an existing one outright—than to negotiate, establish, and manage a joint venture in the long term.
No longer. China’s hot growth has boosted valuations and increased competition for outright acquisitions of Chinese companies that are often less interested in being acquired. That makes joint ventures a more appealing option, and so does a growing pool of healthier prospective Chinese partners. All this is prompting some multinationals to reconsider the joint-venture approach as an alternate avenue for getting a stake in the continuing strength of China’s economy.
With the number of mergers and acquisitions expected to rise over the next few years, many companies are looking for ways to improve their M&A skills—especially their ability to assess and integrate target companies successfully. We’ve all heard about deals where the stars seemed aligned but synergies remained elusive. In these cases, the acquirer and target may have had complementary strategies and finances, but the integration of technology and operations often proved difficult, usually because it didn’t receive adequate consideration during due diligence.
One reason is that executives from IT and operations often aren’t included in the due-diligence process, preventing them from offering valuable input on the costs and practical realities of integration. Executives can’t hope to forecast the savings from merged supply chains, for example, without a deep understanding of what’s required to integrate two companies’ information systems. Too often, this key information is overlooked.