Beginning last week and continuing this week, I've been blogging about software for running vs. managing the business. Check out my other posts on this topic first: Day 15 and 16 – Software for Running vs Managing the Business Day 17 and 18 – The Differences Days 19 – 21 – Differences in Data Volumes Here's my post on the difference in user interface: Continuing on with the differences in software for running vs managing the business, we move to difference #2 which I refered to previously as: “The user interface flexibility and generalized customizations for software to run the business is significantly less than those required to manage the business.” In rethinking this, user experience flexibility would have been more accurate than user interface flexibility. I say this because the flexibility has to go a lot further than just the interface itself in management software, since the goal is typically to detect deviations from the plan (exceptions) and determine what to do about it short-term (response management) and longer-term (strategic planning). In most cases, enterprises really drive their compitive advantages in their marketplace through these management processes of early detection, correction and strategy setting and less so through execution of operational processes (Of course there are exceptions to this rule, such as Wal-Mart who out-execute most all retailers. But even in this case, Wal-Mart in part does this by having world-class analytics to drive decision-making.) Stepping back for a minute, it is almost impossible to manage the business without consistency in operational processes. In terms of software, this means that although a company will likely want to do some customization before going live, once the software is in production changes should be minimal. Again, this might seem obvious, but it is not always the rule. As an example, an enterprise deploys SFDC for its’ client-facing folks. If the SFDC application changes frequently, as it often does, it will have negative impacts of adoption (as the experience changes and takes away from time with customers for users) and will make it hard to manage that part of the busines (as there will almost certainly be different data collected at different times of the year leading to bad assumptions off that data – or the data being ignored!). Compare this to what is needed on the management software side … different functions will require different analytic visualizations (dashboards), different analytics driving planning scenarios, alerting rules, dynamic collaboration networks, views by various business dimensions, customized “what-if” scenario creation and more. Each of these rules and views are going to be different by type of business, functional area in the business, and in most cases, customized all the way down to the individual business user to allow him/her to “discover” breakthrough opportunities for the enterprise. To net this out, it really comes down to the point that software to manage the business needs a very high degree of flexibility to give enterprises true breakthroughs.
今日のグローバルサプライチェーンリーダーは、想定外の事態を予想すべきことを理解しています。自然災害、規制が突然変更になること、社会的および経済的変化、さらにはサイバー攻撃に備えています。ただし、事象によっては他の事象と比べても、かなり破壊的なものがあります。最近の新型コロナウイルスの大発生はコミュニティを動揺させ、中国の武漢の生産施設での製造に依存する企業を危険にさらしています。この地域の施設が生産遅延の可能性に直面しているので、グローバル企業は代替のサプライヤーを検討しています。新型コロナウイルスの症例数は増え続けており、この地域は封鎖され、輸送および商品の流れが制限されています。その影響も今後のタイムラインも全く不明なため、計画はさらに難しい状況です。非常に多くの人々の生活と健康への支障をきたしているので、企業はその影響をコントロールするために迅速に行動したいという思いを強めています。病気の大発生が今後も予測不能性なことと相まって、より早く知り、より速く動くニーズに新たな緊急性が加わりました。 順次計画における不適切な予後診断 最良のシナリオで...