Search results

This article is an edited version of the author's keynote presentation at the Strategic Leadership Forum's 1999 Conference. He discusses the new dynamics of change, or the way change changes; his vision of how thinking will be organized in the future; and the new rules for succeeding in a world of chaos. Using examples from historical events, he proposes that civilization is again entering a time of supreme discontinuity. Living successfully in this time of absolute change requires a kind of cultural schizophrenia in which one virtually lives in two worlds at the same time without feeling any inconsistency.

In this summary of the key speakers at the Strategic Leadership Forum's 1999 Conference, the author poses answers to a number of questions:What does the year 2000 mean for business enterprises? Is it a turning point in any sense beyond a calendar? What are the key uncertainties facing business leaders at this historical juncture? What are the central issues for business strategy that arise from these uncertainties? And what concepts and tools can help companies manage the transition to a new era?

This paper focuses on the role of scenarios in planning research and development (R&D). R&D programs often focus on the technology, which is relatively forecastable. But the products that are the ultimate output of R&D programs will have to succeed a world in which lifestyles and society are changing. By using scenarios to explore alternative views of the future, R&D programs can be designed to anticipate change, to watch for signs of the changes, and to be more robust. The paper describes in some detail an example of using scenarios for an information and communication technology R&D program. The implications for corporate planners are detailed.

Reports a survey by GfK Ad Hoc Worldwide on new trends in youth culture and language; this shows a new generation of youngsters, dubbed Generation Search, which is searching for more meaning in life, and has different expectations of brands and advertising. Outlines these attitude changes in relation to femininity and masculinity (notably a general preference in both sexes for the “planet of femininity“); the world of the media and interconnection; multiculturalism; the importance of brands; what makes good advertising (humour, naturalness, openness, harmony, aesthetics, provocativeness, and vision marketing); and the social role of companies.

As the traditional mainstays of American business have collapsed around them, companies have begun searching for ways to become more competitive—and to stay alive.

Could you use a little Extra Century Perception (the ability to foresee the next 100 years or more)? (Stack apologizes to New York magazine for adapting the idea.) The authors in this month's Stack suggest they have: the crystal ball itself, the instructions to building one, or the instructions for interpreting what you see in the ball.

“While we were once perceived as simply providing services, selling products, and employing people, business now shares in much of the responsibility for our global quality of life. Successful companies will handle this heightened sense of responsibility quite naturally, if not always immediately. I see a future in which the institutions with the most influence by and large will be businesses.” These are the words of the late Robert Goizueta, chairman of the Coca‐Cola Company. They were quoted in an article by Theo Lippman Jr in The Baltimore Sun on July 5, 1998. This quote and the remaining article triggered my thinking about the need to bring this strategic concern to the fore in Strategy & Leadership.

Integration is a key theme of what is being called the New Economy. It reflects itself not just in industries, but in new global alliances of organizations which were once competitors. This trend is reflected in universities as well as in business. Today alliances between the university and business are crucial to the survival of the university as one of humanity’s oldest institutions serving nation states. Technology and alliances are changing the very nature of the university experience, its content, and its delivery. The “Business” model is changing old adversaries into newly allied partners. Distinguishing best practices, the TQM benchmark, as operations rather than strategy is essential in the university domain, as well as in business. Operational effectiveness vs strategic positioning is a key agenda difference. Schools of business in the university world mirror this issue for the university as a whole. The new clicks and bricks alliances of a cradle‐to‐grave learning world turn attention to education as product rather than process. As the core business concept of monetizing information rules concepts of education, the very core issue of quality education is challenged.