Author: Elizabeth Tidd

  • Using the Simplified Strategic Planning Model in a Multi-Divisional Company

    Compass Points Talks to:

    Tapemark President, Bob Klas, Jr., and CEO, Jim Burmeister

    Note:  This article was originally published in Compass Points in April 1999.

    TAPEMARK, located in West St. Paul, Minnesota, began operations in 1952 as a producer of custom printed, self wound adhesive tape. Using its technical expertise in developing automated processes to manufacture adhesive products to very close tolerances, the company has grown into a diverse manufacturer. Its varied product line includes custom printed labels, disposable medical products, electronic and industrial components and specialty coatings. Compass Points recently took the opportunity to interview Tapemark’s President Bob Klas, Jr., and CFO Jim Burmeister about how Tapemark uses the Simplified Strategic Planning process in a multidivisional company.

    CP: Jim, how long has Tapemark been using Simplified Strategic Planning?

    Jim: We began using the process in 1995. Our planning covers a three-year period and we have just completed our planning for 1999-2002.

    CP: You have three divisions at Tapemark that are involved in different products and markets. How is the Strategic Planning structured to accommodate that situation?

    Jim: We have 3 manufacturing divisions. Each division has it’s own Strategic Planning Committee which includes division managers from manufacturing, sales and technical development as well as representatives from corporate support areas. These committees are responsible for developing strategic plans for their division. In addition, we have a corporate Strategic Planning Committee consisting of executive management and managers of the corporate support functions.

    CP: Did you consider any alternative approaches, such as having the corporate group conduct a “top down” approach to planning?

    Bob: We briefly considered just having the people at the corporate level do the planning and make decisions that they considered to be in the best interest of the company, but we rejected that approach for two reasons. First, since properly identifying each division’s strategic issues is critical, we felt that division managers were in the best position to identify those issues. Second, since so much of the success of the planning process is dependent upon work outside of the formal meetings, we felt we needed the division personnel involved to create the necessary buy in.

    CP: You’ve stated that the key corporate managers sit on each of your divisions’ Strategic Planning Committees as well as their own corporate team. This is obviously a very significant time commitment on your part. How do you justify this?

    Bob: The process itself is efficient so that the amount of time is somewhat limited. What we get out of that time commitment is more important. It presents the opportunity to provide direction where that is required. It also allows the division managers to hear firsthand whether their proposed initiatives will be supported or, if there is any doubt about the company’s ability to support certain initiatives, to get that feedback immediately.

    Jim: Another justification of the time commitment is due to the centralized nature of Tapemark’s support functions. Many of the issues that come up during the planning sessions require the expertise and input of the support area managers.

    CP: What specifically is the mission of the corporate planning group?

    Jim: Each member of the corporate group becomes familiar with the division plans. That facilitates the “roll-up” of the plans into a 3 year picture for Tapemark regarding the finance, people and systems that will be required to support future growth.

    Bob: Another aspect involves assuring that the divisions are OK to move ahead with their plans and that there are no conflicts with what another division may be planning. There also may be some strategies that have a crossover nature between the divisions. Often there is not a clear-cut structure for ownership of these initiatives so the corporate team will take ownership and drive progress. The corporate team might also need to mediate situations where two divisions approach a similar market or customer but do not share the same strategy.

    Jim: Another very important role of the corporate team is in addressing the company’s culture. We regularly assess progress towards being the kind of company we want to be and the status of initiatives that support the desired culture.

    CP: Have you encountered any pitfalls in your approach?

    Bob: We had to be very careful in defining the role of the corporate people. At Tapemark we try to provide our divisions with considerable autonomy. From the corporate perspective, we had to be careful to give input, but not to drive or dominate the division planning sessions. It took a couple of years to evolve to where there is a good balance in that respect.

    CP: Can you share some of the benefits of using Simplified Strategic Planning?

    Bob: Well we’ve been on a very dramatic climb in both sales and earnings over the past several years so that has certainly been one measurable benefit.

    Jim: Because the Simplified Strategic Planning process requires you to “live” with the plan – on a daily, monthly and yearly basis, and not just put it aside, it allows us to do a better job in focusing our resources and adapting quickly to change.

    Bob: Without the process we had a situation where strong willed people could move the company in the direction they supported. This process lets us determine the best direction in a systematic and participative manner.

    Are you a multi-divisional company?  How do you approach your strategic planning?  Attend the Simplified Strategic Planning Seminar for more instruction on how to develop achievable targets as well as all other aspects of Simplified Strategic Planning.

    © Copyright 2017 by Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI — Reprint permission granted with full attribution

  • What Happens When the Host Country Environment Changes? A Tale of Currency Devaluation You Have Successfully Outsourced – Part Three

    By Denise Harrison

    Strategic Planning Expert
    Denise Harrison

    Note:  This post is part of a series of posts from Denise A. Harrison’s article What happens When the Host Country Environment Changes originally posted in Compass Points in November 2004.  Part One introduced the topic and discussed how Competition, Customers, Technology and the Economy will respond.  In Part Two, we discussed The assumptions we made, Strategic Options, Evaluation of Strategic Options and Strategic Choice.  In this part we will discuss What Actually Happened, In the End, Lessons Learned, and the Template for Evaluation Environmental Changes.

    What actually happened?

    Competitors aggressively pursued a lower pricing strategy to gain market share. Our customers remained loyal to us due to our rebate policy; however, over time they did negotiate lower prices with us as the competition continued to offer them better deals. The rebate gave us a window of time where we could develop better information about where the peso was headed and reap the benefits of the percentage of the savings that was not rebated to the customer. Still this strategy generated a significant amount of goodwill from customers because:

      1. The rebate effectively lowered what they paid to us – and they didn’t have to ask. Many gained recognition for bringing a significant line item in under budget.
      2. Many customers thought the rebate concept exemplified a company with the business savvy to develop a strategy for an uncertain currency environment.

    In the End

    The peso continued to devalue and has stayed close to 9-10 pesos/$. We did make money during our rebate program and did not lose market share during the pricing wars that our competition introduced.

    Lessons Learned

      1. Don’t be greedy! If we had not offered the rebate we would have made a significant short term profit, but lost market share long term.
      2. When your business environment changes look at it strategically:
        1. Try to understand how it will impact all of the external forces
          1. Customers
          2. Competition
          3. Technology
          4. Suppliers
          5. Economy
          6. Regulatory
          7. It may not impact all of these areas, however it is good to take a look so that you will not be blind-sided.
      3. Develop options that allow for flexibility. Market changes may precipitate additional market changes. Try to keep from being locked in to the environment as it stands now.
      4. Think of ways to generate customer goodwill in a changing environment.
      5. Don’t operate in a vacuum. Your competitors will respond – be prepared!

    Template for Evaluating Environmental Changes

    What is the change?

    How does it impact the external forces:

    Customers/Market Segments

    Competition

    Technology

    Suppliers

    Economy

    Regulations

    What are the possible courses of action?

    What are the benefits/risks of each of the above choices?

    What is the best course of action?

    How will you implement this strategy? What are the key objectives that support this strategy?

    This is the final post in this series.  Have you successfully outsourced and the host country’s environment changed?  Attend the Simplified Strategic Planning Seminar for more instruction on how to handle this subject as well as all other aspects of Simplified Strategic Planning.

    Denise Harrison is a senior consultant for the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  She can be reached at  harrison@thestratplan.com.

    © Copyright 2017 by Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI — Reprint permission granted with full attribution.