4/10/15: IBM: Some Tough Numbers on Higher Education Success

IBM Institute for Business Value Higher Education Survey 2015 with results published in June 2015 has been quite an interesting read. The report “Pursuit of relevance How higher education remains viable in today’s dynamic world” is available here.

Take the following Question: “To what extent do you believe the current higher education system in your country is meeting the needs of the following groups?”

Chart below plots percentages of respondents by group across three core categories of ‘customers’: students, employers and society at large.

One thing that jumps out is that corporate recruiters are relatively more positive than education providers (excluding university staff) when it comes to assessing the education system performance.

Another conclusion that jumps out is that with exception of one sub-group in one category, overall assessment of education systems is pretty grim - no >50% support for the proposition that education system meets the needs of either students, employers or society.

Third conclusion is that, on average, higher education systems serve better the needs of students, followed by society, than industry.

More damning, “Survey results also point to higher education shortfalls in other areas. In terms of economic value, only 51 percent of industry and academic leaders believe higher education is providing value for money, and just 49 percent view it as contributing to economic growth and competitiveness.”

There is also a very interesting gap across respondents categories in terms of what is perceived to be the most important metrics of success of modern education system. Chart below illustrates:

As can be glimpsed from above, educators are literally falling over themselves in pursuit of jobs placements. While corporate recruiters and learning executives are less warm about this objective.

Very interesting findings, some counter-intuitive, some potentially arising from the sample selection biases (after all,  we don't have much to go by in terms of actual corporate leaders, and data reported is limited, as for example the chart above clearly shows). Nonetheless, the questions raised are of great importance.

17/10/2013: Customer-Activated Enterprise: External & Internal Influencers

In the previous post I covered a few quick ideas that stemmed from the recently published IBM's Institute for Business Value CxO-level study: "The Customer-activated Enterprise: Insights from the Global C-suite Study" (available here: http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/gbe03572usen/GBE03572USEN.PDF).

As I noted - this is an absolutely 'a must' read for anyone interested in the future directions for interactions between customer-driven value added activities and enterprise structures and strategies. It subtly, quietly punches beyond the 'ritualistic' tech-saves-us-all hype and into the deeper thinking inhabiting today's C-level offices. This is good. Very good. Less brand futurism, more future-focused pragmatism.

So another fascinating insight (my judgement, of course, as are the comments presented here).

Based on this guide: Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), Chief Finance Officers (CFOs), Chief Human Resources Officers (CHROs), Chief Information Officers (CIOs), Chief Marketing Officers (CMOs), Chief Supply Chain Officers (CSCOs), let's re-weight by removing 'own' functions of the CxOs:

1) Technology Factors (ex-CIOs) score 11 points
2) Market Factors (ex-CMOs) score 8 points
3) Macro-economic Factors (ex-CFOs) score 19 points
4) People Skills (ex-CHRO) score 26 points
5) Regulatory Concerns (ex-CSCOs) score 20 points
6) Socio-economic Factors (ex-CMOs) score 35 points
7) Globalisation (ex-CEOs) score 37 points
8) Environmental Issues (ex-CMOs) score 36 points
9) Geopolitical Factors (ex-CEOs) score 41 points.

So re-weighted prioritisation is:
Top tier priorities:
Top 1: Market Factors (ex-CMOs) score 8 points - Second Priority for CEOs
Top 2: Technology Factors (ex-CIOs) score 11 points - First Priority for CEOs
Top 3: Macro-economic Factors (ex-CFOs) score 19 points - Third Priority for CEOs
Second tier priorities:
Top 4: Regulatory Concerns (ex-CSCOs) score 20 points - Fifth Priority for CEOs
Top 5: People Skills (ex-CHRO) score 26 points - Fourth Priority for CEOs

The CEO position (2013) overlap is provided directly from the chart below:

Note that the CEOs priorities are not that distant from the priorities of the overall CxO suite priorities once we remove actual direct stakeholders in each priority area.

Also note that top 5 priorities today (as outlined in top 2 tiers above) are consistent themes from at least 2006 survey on. This is aligned, in my view, with the shifting nature of strategic transformation drivers and the input of external sources into strategic influence formation at the C-level:

Notice that C-suite influence is proximate in importance to Customers input and Board input. In the future, with partnerships and networks of value-added expected to both expand and deepen, including growth in customer-partnership models, this is likely to change. We can expect more heterogeneity in perceived influencing factors across the C-suite and the rise of key external business partners and non-executive senior leadership roles in contributing to strategic influence formation. I suspect the C-level and Board inputs will be downgraded.

Something to watch… but here's a suggestive sub-trend:

Can you open up the structures without bringing up the roles of key partners and internal non-execs? I don't think so...

17/10/2013: Customer-Activated Enterprise Research: Partnerships & Value-Added

I recently wrote about the upcoming publication of the IBM's Institute for Business Value CxO-level study: "The Customer-activated Enterprise: Insights from the Global C-suite Study" - the link to the original post is here: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2013/09/592013-ibm-64-of-global-cmos-want-to.html

Now the study is out and available here: http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/gbe03572usen/GBE03572USEN.PDF

Some interesting insights from it will be forthcoming over the next few days as I slowly digest the paper (slowly - due to time constraints and not due to the nature of this superb piece of research).

First instalment a chart plotting CxOs' view of major changes in the business landscape in the next three to five years.

Note the emphasis on (opinions and views are my own - on foot of my interpretation of the data presented):
1) Bigger partner network is seen as a crucial trend changer by 73% of CxO executives - which is inherently driving the strategic focus of the enterprise development toward more diversified base of partnerships and networks.
2) Social and digital interactions are displacing face-to-face interactions and this implies that social and digital platforms will have to become also key tools for development and deployment of partnerships. End result of this (1) and (2) nexus is that business models will have to expand horizontally and beyond traditional nodes of corporate management and control. Risk will rise, uncertainty will rise both in scope and complexity.
3) This is supported by the shift in the partnerships nature: from lower emphasis on efficiency-driven partnerships toward more value-adding partnerships. In other words, not sub-contracting to specific tasks, but expansion of R&D, strategy and value-adding chains beyond the bounds of the traditional enterprise. This is very exciting, but adds even more complexity and uncertainty as well as more disruption to traditional (vertical or hierarchical) enterprise structures.
4) Focus on customer as individuals focus shift suggests that the era of Big Data will be moving toward the era of Small Data - greater granularity to follow with greater customisation. These can only be delivered via fluid, dynamic, non-contractual partnerships arrangements. Networks, not managerialism.
5) Not surprisingly, operational control weakens, organisational openness rises.

Much of the same that I have been talking about at TEDx Dublin and more recently at Alltech's Presidents Club meeting. You can also see my ideas on MNCs-led partnerships by searching this blog.