Adidas CEO Kasper Rørsted explains how to align business strategy and execution

I try to add value whenever I reach out or post rather than just regurgitate some else’s opinion but I came across two articles which I thought merited standing by themselves for your reflection.

The first article is the new Adidas CEO Kasper Rørsted discussing strategy and the way forward; clearly with the Business Excellence Model in mind. If you’d like to discuss how this might translate into your business and how you would benefit from this perspective, call, I’d be only too pleased to  share a coffee.


“Think high-profile consumer goods, and sports apparel comes quickly to mind. It has the most memorable slogans, the most famous brand ambassadors, and a rapid-fire, trend-catching production cycle for sleek new products. The sports apparel category is also expected to grow fast, at about 4 percent a year — a reflection of the increasing global interest in health and fitness. The market, with its dizzying array of custom footwear, is set to have annual sales of nearly US$190 billion by 2020.

For the past few years, the fastest-growing major sports apparel enterprise has been the German company that founded the sector in 1924: Adidas. The CEO overseeing Adidas’s flourishing is Kasper Rørsted, a man who spent the first half of his career in the tech industry and is known in business circles for his ability to link strategy and execution. He was hired in 2016 from the top post at Henkel, a manufacturer of laundry and beauty products, where he had led an eight-year turnaround that tripled the company’s share price.

Adidas CEO Kasper Rørsted

Rørsted, originally from Denmark, is an avid athlete who once played on his country’s national youth handball team. Now, with the motto “Through sport, we have the power to change lives,” he is positioning Adidas as a globally influential enterprise. The Adidas strategy — speed, a focus on a few trendsetting cities, and open source innovation — was introduced in 2015 by Rørsted’s predecessor, Herbert Hainer, who had retired after running Adidas for 15 years. Rørsted continued promoting all three strategic priorities, and focused on execution. On his watch, Adidas reorganized its operations and launched two innovative “Speed factories,” or rapid-production plants making customized athletic shoes, in Ansbach, Germany, and Atlanta. Its roster of celebrity partners includes musicians Kanye West (whose Adidas line has persisted through all of his public ups and downs) and Pharrell Williams, and designers Stella McCartney and Alexander Wang. Rørsted is also putting in place innovative management practices, including one of the few comprehensive employee stock ownership plans introduced by a major company in recent years.

Adidas has long been known for innovation. Founder Adolf (Adi) Dassler was a cobbler and amateur athlete in Herzogenaurach, a small Bavarian town where Adidas headquarters is still located. Dassler invented some of the first specialized footwear — for example, lightweight spiked shoes for football (soccer) and other sports.

When Adidas announced that the well-respected Rørsted was joining the company, its market cap gained about $1 billion. In conversation, the CEO is direct, matter-of-fact, and self-effacing. In August, he sat down with strategy+business at Adidas headquarters to talk about leadership in the digital age. Chief corporate communications officer Jan Runau also participated.

S+B: When you arrived at Adidas, you inherited your predecessor’s strategy. Many CEOs would have been tempted to change direction.
 I believe that you should change a company’s strategy only if there is a strong rationale for the change. From a numbers standpoint, our strategy was clearly successful. Instead of changing it, I tried to understand our approach to it more completely. We had made three strategic choices. Were we actually executing according to what [was] needed?

S+B: What were the three choices?
 Open source innovation, cities, and speed.

Open source innovation means that we look at all kinds of collaborative creation as valuable — not only within our company, but with external partners as well. This includes our branded relationships with well-known creative figures; our partnership with Parley for the Oceans, the environmental group, to create shoes from recovered ocean plastic; and [our partnership] with Daniëlle Cathari, a 23-year-old designer who was a student at the Amsterdam Fashion Institute when we began working with her.

S+B: How do you integrate that external innovation with your own internal R&D?
 We see them as complementary. We are clear about the borders of our brand, because the brand is sacred to us. But we also recognize that if we have only the inspiration and creativity of people within our own organization, we miss a lot of what’s going on in the marketplace. Our thought was: How do we complement internal with external innovation to get the best products?

A few of our in-house designers needed to get used to the fact that they were not competing with outsiders; they were being complemented. We articulated this point by saying that we need to be consumer-obsessed and to create the best product for the consumer. If that is your endgame, then you have to be able to confront sacred cows, and open yourself up to ideas that you might not have been open to in the past.

Think Cities, Act Global

S+B: What is the Adidas cities strategy?
 The world has become much more open than it’s ever been. Trends with origins in the big cities have a fundamental global impact, fuelled by the reach of digital devices. When something occurs in Shanghai or New York, kids all over the world see it immediately. This means that we can focus our marketing in just a few of the world’s major cities.

We did not have that view before. Our perspective had been based on countries. In our company, every country had its own marketing strategy. Now we have become more prescriptive: We can launch all our key products in just a few cities and the countries will pick this up. We identified six key cities to start with: London, Paris, New York, Los Angeles, Shanghai, and Tokyo. We realized that if we can dominate those cities, not only in terms of market share and customer loyalty, but also by capturing creative ideas coming up in them, we can have a much greater impact on our global markets. Any trend coming out of these cities, whether it’s fashion or technology, will have global impact. And conversely, if we’re not where the trends originate, then we’re most certainly going to miss some of them.

S+B: You recently opened a store in New York.
 On Fifth Avenue. We’re about to open one in London, we’re developing one in Paris, and we just opened one in Shanghai. We use these stores as activation vehicles for product launches, to capture brand exposure more than commercial value. For instance, last year we created the largest basketball event we’ve ever held, called 747 Warehouse St., in Los Angeles. And in our physical store in New York we launched our 4D Carbon line, which is a shoe made through digital light synthesis. New York represents only 6 percent of the U.S. GDP, but the impact of New York from a global fashion standpoint is huge.

S+B: Tell us about your speed strategy.
 How do we enable our supply chain to respond to rapid changes in consumer demand? Our supply chain had been more rigid than most. That meant the demand forecasts for any given item were always wrong — either too high or too low. Now we use technology to speed up our operations. We built our two Speed factories, in Germany and Atlanta, using digital technologies like 3D printing to enable faster production and get closer to a real-time supply chain.

S+B: You’re talking about making shoes to order.
 Eventually, yes. But the difference between us and a car manufacturer is that last year, we manufactured a billion products and 400 million pairs of shoes. For some of those, we are getting closer and closer to making them to order. In a Speed factory, with 3D, the order-to-deliver time can be days instead of months. But that is not at volume. At high volume, we’re currently in a 30- or 60-day time frame. And if we see demand picking up, we need to be able to change our volumes.

S+B: Does manufacturing at higher speed reduce your costs?
 Yes. One of the biggest costs we have is returns. We order a million pairs of shoes, and if they don’t sell, we sit with 800,000 pairs in inventory. Add to that opportunity cost when we don’t actually satisfy customer demand. Nonetheless, our speed strategy is not primarily about reducing costs. The goal is to meet demand better by delivering more speedily to the consumer.

Accelerators for Strategy

S+B: Do you see these three strategic choices as imperatives for every successful company?
 For Adidas, they are highly relevant. But I couldn’t say that these initiatives would be equally relevant for every company. Open source, yes. Speed, to a lesser extent. It would depend on the dynamics within the industry, and also, the strategic position of different elements within the company.

S+B: How do you translate your strategic priorities into day-to-day execution?
 Shortly after I came in, we defined four “accelerators” of the strategy. These are operational elements that ensure that we become very disciplined in getting things done. They are generating significant value for our company. The first is reviewing our portfolio. The second, improving our position in North America. Third is “One Adidas”: being best in class in operational excellence and getting more scale into our business model. And the fourth is digital.

S+B: What are you doing with respect to your portfolio?
 We define our portfolio in terms of subgroups, entities organized by brand, country, and strategic business unit. On a quarterly basis, we look at the 10 lowest-performing entities in terms of profitability, and put action plans in place for them. Then we review our progress on a quarterly basis by country.

One example was Brazil. Before 2012, everybody expected Brazil to rule the sports world. It had the World Cup and Olympics coming up. So we overbuilt our organization there. Later, we put a restructuring plan in place to get Brazil back to profitability.

Another example was our outdoor [apparel] business, which we didn’t believe was getting the right level of focus within the organization. We put it into a different building, and gave those people freedom to change their operating model. A third example: We decided we didn’t want to be in golf or hockey equipment, so we sold those businesses.

S+B: Every company tries to focus its portfolio. Not everyone succeeds. How does one make it work?
 Being disciplined about what you say you’re going to do. Putting in key performance indicators to which you hold people accountable, including their compensation. For the restructuring of Reebok (the U.K.-origin athletic footwear and apparel company that Adidas acquired in 2005), the management board is accountable; we go through the numbers rigorously each quarter, driving accountability and rewarding people accordingly. That can be an uncomfortable process. But it’s the only way you can succeed, because people don’t like to do things that are uncomfortable, even when they have to be done.

S+B: Why did you decide you needed a separate accelerator for North America?
 It is the single biggest market in the world — and the only global market of any significance where we are underrepresented. Ninety percent of the size difference between us and Nike comes back to the difference in our North America businesses. Years ago, we sent over European executives who didn’t understand American sports. We didn’t know baseball, basketball, and American football; we didn’t appreciate that sport in the U.S. originates in high school and college instead of in clubs (as it does in Europe). We created products that were great for Europeans but not necessarily for Americans.

We had already begun to change this before I arrived. But I looked at it again and concluded that we needed to overinvest in America over a longer period of time, to ensure that we could build market share and margin.

In other regions we have different strategies, because we have different goals. We’re trying to defend a high market position in Europe; in China, we’re trying to grow a strong market position but defend our margin.

Focused Execution

S+B: It sounds like your strategy is oriented toward long-term investments.
 There is no long term without the short term. You need to get both right. You can be oriented toward quarterly results and still have long-term goals. Our management board compensation has two components: long-term incentives based on our 2020 targets and short-term incentives. It’s like being in university; you have to pass every exam along the way. You can’t just wait until the last quarter and try to catch up.

Not every decision can be long-term. If a market suddenly slows down, as Europe is right now, you need to act [in a way that’s] relevant to that change. I think a lot of companies underestimate the importance of getting the daily job done in a way they can be proud of. Leaders think they get famous for strategy, and they don’t really focus on the everyday execution, because they think you don’t get famous for that. But unless you have good execution in place, you will struggle with growth, because the operational foundation on which you grow is fragile.

For example, we have outgrown our infrastructure in the United States. During the second half of last year, we missed revenue because our distribution system simply couldn’t keep up with our demand. In a sense, this was a self-created problem. We saw it coming, and nobody dealt with it. It’s cumbersome to create new warehouses. Then, suddenly, we had a problem. That’s why operational excellence — our One Adidas initiative — is so fundamental for our company. It helps us avoid creating problems for ourselves.

S+B: What’s involved in the One Adidas initiative?
 Our company has always been very good at generating top-line [results], but without leverage over costs. We added €9 billion (US$11.6 billion) to our top line between 2008 and 2016 with no change in operating margin. One Adidas is about improving operational excellence, so we get scale into our business model. And we are building consistency into our data sets.

RUNAU: Adidas historically operated through strong country-based organizations. It grew basically from the bottom up, and each country created its own systems. We are bringing them together. Thus, for example, in 2014, we had more than 50 different intranet sites around the globe. Now we have one.

RØRSTED:  If I have a message to send employees, for example, to describe a decision the board has made, I send one message globally. In 2014, our system couldn’t do that. Back then, employees didn’t really know what was coming through the system.

Digital Best in Class

S+B: You mentioned wanting to be “best in class” in operational excellence. What’s an example of something you’d want to be known for?
 That takes us to our fourth accelerator: digital. We called out digital as an enabler because we did not have enough of a company-wide focus on it, or frankly the right competencies on board. So we created a digital leadership team to look at all of the projects across the company. We did not want to have one comprehensive digital agenda. Instead, we split the digital agenda into important projects that we could execute quickly and meaningfully. If you try to build Rome all at once, it never happens in time.

Digital has a tremendous impact on the way that you can tailor your product to individual athletes. You can have a customized midsole in your running shoe, adjusted for the shape of your foot. This type of customization will grow more popular over time, starting at the high end. We produced 5,000 pairs of those customized shoes in 2017, and we’ll probably make almost 100,000 in 2018. Eventually, we’ll be producing a million a year.

S+B: Will you use 3D printing to produce shoes to order, sold right from pop-up digital factories? And if you don’t, are you afraid that a competitor or a retailer might?
  You’ll see that technology coming up more and more, but consider the numbers. We made 402 million pairs of shoes in 2017. Our Speed factories, when they are fully running, will make 500,000 pairs each, annually. Local pop-up factories will happen, but they will be marginal in the bigger picture. I don’t think new competitors or private labels will be a threat for branded athletic wear. People still want the three stripes and the swoosh, and I don’t think that will change.

S+B: Given the growth of platform manufacturing, will the factory and the brand split apart, with operations shared across the industry?
  That’s almost happening today. All our manufacturing is outsourced. And if you go to Vietnam, you will find the same suppliers making products for us and for Nike and other sports brands. The value creation takes place in design and in the materials and functionality. Less in the physical build of the product.

We are also improving consumer experience. We launch new products every week, and the most effective way of launching products is through digital media. We’re particularly interested in mobile devices. We have to be world class at that; if we’re not, we can’t win, because at the end of the day, we are a consumer company. And our primary engagement vehicle is the smartphone.

We gave our e-commerce group — the group that manages and — a target. We had sold €700 million (US$777 million) through our site in 2015, about €1 billion (US$1.1 billion) in 2016. We set a target of €4 billion (about US$4.6 billion) in annual revenues by 2020. To meet that target, the team has control over its hiring, organizational structure, and compensation system. We don’t know if it is achievable, but we know that by putting a very aggressive plan in place, we will drive the right mind-set.

In 2016, we said publicly for the first time that our online store was our most important store globally — period. This made it clear to everyone in the company that we were changing our priorities. We would start deliberately cannibalizing our own infrastructure. It also provokes conflict with partners. We sold the World Cup jerseys this year exclusively on for the first two weeks. Our wholesale partners were shouting: “Why are you doing this?” The answer, of course, was that it was necessary: We have to be where the consumer is — and this is online.

In general, the clearer we can be in formulating and articulating our strategy, and the clearer we become in saying, “Here is what ‘good’ looks like,” the easier it is to go through this change. For example, any new product now must be launched either online by itself or online in combination with our six key cities. Not everybody will like this.

S+B: It sounds like you see the company’s chances for success as less a matter of external threats or trends, and more a matter of your own decisions and execution.
 We know the sports apparel industry will continue to grow. Sports are increasingly popular around the world. The need to combat obesity is driving people to be more athletic. And there are trends toward leisure and more relaxed clothing in the office. In contrast to other sectors, we are not seeing consolidation; we’re seeing accelerated growth. If we were in another industry, growing 2 percent per year, we would need to raise our leverage and look for a larger market. But if you’re in an industry that is growing 5 percent or more, like ours, then your biggest opportunity is to get your company in top shape, because the market will be there.”


Author Profiles:

  • Ulrich Störkis chairman of the management board for PwC Germany and a partner based in Frankfurt.
  • Nadia Kubisis a director with PwC Switzerland and global director of the Capabilities-Driven Strategy and Growth platform.
  • Art Kleineris editor-in-chief of strategy+business.

My thanks to PWC Germany for the Article.

Posted in Business Excellence, Business Management, Business Plannng, Business Strategy, Managers Toolkit, Strategy | Leave a comment

Where’s the Added Value?

Knock on the door.. ”Window Cleaner!” he announces, without any prelude or nicety.

Caught somewhat off guard as my mind had been buried deep into a piece of work, I replied in an equally perfunctory way, “Sure- yes- crack on.. Thank you”

I smiled to myself at his brusqueness, glanced at the time and sat down to pick up where I had left off.

Outside I heard the noise of the water pump that the cleaner had fitted into the back of his van and a few minutes later the outside of the house became deluged with a torrent of water.

The noise continued and then all went quiet.

Knock, knock..

“Finished Guv- £20 please – want a receipt?”

Now I reckon I’m pretty good at job costing, with an appreciation of time, effort, direct and indirect costs but I didn’t need a calculator to work out that the cleaner had just charged me £80 hour.

I have no problem with paying for hard graft, time, expertise and I recognise the investment made by the entrepreneurial window cleaner in his pump but for whose benefit?

I acknowledge I didn’t have to pay for the water or the fuel to drive the pump, wear and tear, depreciation on the van or perhaps even liability insurance, but I was irked.

I have the same problem with the Electricity Company telling me how beneficial a smart meter is for my house – no, it’s not for me, it is for you, the Electricity Company- no meter reader costs, reduced billing cycle, accounting accuracy and so on; that’s not win-win.

“Fit our smart meter and we will give you £100 off your next quarter’s bill” – now that’s added value or rather shared value.

A Customer is only a Customer when they come back, in my book and a Customer buys from me because they receive benefit or added value.

So this morning’s thought is “What is it that we do, that is good (of value) for my Customers and what is of value for me? should we share our benefit or just harvest it?

Perhaps worthwhile to put a slot in the diary to have a think about your business’ value chain?

Posted in Added Value, Business Analyst, Business Management, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Parched Soil in Suffolk

I’m going to ask you to write something down, so reach for your pen and pad.

Here in Suffolk, I guess like your part of the world, we’re enjoying some really fantastic hot weather and the ground is suffering, becoming parched and brown.

Whilst out walking the dogs last night, I came across this plant standing vibrant green, resilient and apparently impervious to the arid soil around.


Now I’m no agriculturist so can’t give you a reason as to why it survives whilst all around wilt, but it did set me thinking about how nature had provided this species with the ability to, not only survive, but also flourish and herein my thoughts turn to my opening question.

Write down, what makes your business unique, what is its compelling value proposition and is it sustainable in your market?

More thoughts here..

Competitive Positioning

How did you get on?

Have productive and thoughtful day.

Posted in Business Plannng, Business Strategy, Strategy | Leave a comment

“Think-Forward” a Business Management Toolkit

It’s been nearly two years in the making, though backed by over twenty five years of experience; last month we successfully launched the “Think-Forward” Business Management Toolkit.

Designed specifically for Directors and Senior Managers to implement strategy and drive business performance improvement.

Based on the four pillars of the Business Excellence Model, Strategy, Operational Process, Learning and Development and Performance Management the “Think-Forward Programme” provides a framework for consistently driving performance initiatives throughout the business, thereby improving growth, customer satisfaction and increasing profitability.

The Programme may be used in isolation or in conjunction with any other business development initiative that the business uses.

If you would like to know more and how it may benefit your business, then call today for a no-obligation discussion.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Conviviality PLC- Spreadsheets and Risk Management

This week, Accounting Web ran the news story that Conviviality, one of the UK’s largest drinks wholesalers, had entered in administration.

“The business has been in a death spiral since the beginning of March, when the retailer said its adjusted EBITDA would be 20% lower than the £70m market expectation. The company later confirmed an expected range of adjusted EBITDA of £55.3m – £56.4m.

£5.2m of that £14m came thanks to “a material error in the financial forecasts”. The error, it later admitted, was “a spreadsheet arithmetic error”. The tumult didn’t end there, though, days later, Conviviality announced it hadn’t budgeted for a £30m tax bill, due at the end of March.”

Source : Accounting Web Conviviality PLC

I think that there are a few items from this news story that are worthy of pondering.

Initially I groaned at hearing that, once again, a spreadsheet error had caused a major problem.

To err is human but to really foul up requires a computer perhaps, but, garbage in = garbage out.

It left me pondering how as to how many critical processes within this large business were run on spreadsheet, were all the data feeds into the ERP/MRP systems spreadsheet based?

Ask any Senior the definition of the SWOT acronym and for most, the answer will be swiftly delivered, but ask when the SWOT model was last used and a swerve appears in the conversation saying that “that’s the domain of Risk Management and Compliance.”

That risk element should of course be covered in the process section of the Risk Management Framework; it’s the bright ones that pick that up.

If I put the above comments aside, my next thoughts were about reporting and budget variance.

As a Senior, would you not want to be diving into the nuances of any variances and I do mean deep dive and then wanting answers and a remedial plan?; I’m assuming that the Chart of Accounts bore some semblance to the trading Organisation structure; the KPI’s , they are the control loop aren’t they? Where were the voices from the rest of the team when looking at the Dashboards or Scorecards?

Next up was the announcement that there was no provision for the £30m tax bill, was this also a reflection on poor reporting and consequential action or an evasion of a financial cash black hole that the Directors wanted to keep covered up?; there would have to be a lot of people in that party, to sweep that one, under the carpet.

My final thought was regarding the AIM share price collapse. Initially I thought “typical short term investing and vision again” but then I thought perhaps not.

The collapse has undoubtedly left many with a huge loss, not least HMRC- my question is  “who has defrauded who? is this competence displayed in the free market, in that the financiers are running from risk, or is it a reflection of incompetence, in both managing the business (clearly) and a lack of foresight to rally around it to support it following a massive blunder?; easier to take the hit and move on to the next business that my trading dashboard lights up as green.

Where do you stand, what are your thoughts?

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, Finance, Risk Management, Root Cause Analysis, Systems | Leave a comment

Carillion and Ted Welch

A few years ago, I was lucky to meet a Gentleman; lucky, because I think that, in the passage of grey hair that I’ve acquired, I haven’t met many, and this man resonates with my soul.

He’s called Ted, Ted Welch, an East London man, now 76 yrs age, who grew up in poverty and austerity and built his own successful garage business in Leytonstone to employ over 15 men and one of who’s proudest moments was to collect the Queen’s Rolls Royce from Buckingham Palace in London and deliver it to the Royal Yacht Britannica, in Scotland.

The same man who, he tells me, used to look out of his school window and fret when the rain came down because his shoes had no soles and he used to slip sheets of paper into them so that he could walk home without his feet becoming wet.

There are of course,and I say that without sanguine, many such children the world over who have passed along the same footpath (sic) as Ted; I was lucky, one of the fortunate I guess, my father and family were comfortable, a position which today I respect and admire my father for, and along with that, question my own ability, to reach his standards.

In measuring my success or failure, I try to imbue the lessons learnt into my own two boys, my treasures as I call them, but as I write, why the soliloquy about Ted? -Well, perhaps a little context.

Ted, is what I what I would call a “Petrolhead”, whatever the car, the engine, the plane, the pump, the Meccano set or spanner, Ted is there, in bliss, with a smile, a kindred spirit indeed, but it’s not that makes him the Gentleman, it’s his personae and his attitude and his reverence to others, irrespective of their background or creed; I believe in an attitude personified in Aretha Franklin “Respect”

We have a lot to learn from the older generation. I’ve recently finished reading a book of short stories by the late A.A Gill, more anon, and he writes with piercing truth about how we engage with our elders, or rather fail too; we have a lot to learn as we travel, in our so called, modern, society.

Ted brings it home to me when I talk to him; it’s not a high brow philosophical discussion about the temporal things or the topical discussions about Brexit, the dollar exchange, the Bosnian crisis or even what even Bernini was thinking when he sculptured his Damned Soul, it’s more grounded, more tangible, more real, for me.” Have you spoken to you Mother this week?

The questioning comes with a jolt sometimes. I’ve commented before, on the desire to wear the latest fashion icon, drive the latest car and wear the sharpest suit, perhaps it’s my older age where the “stuff” just doesn’t matter any more and a sharpness of focus is acquired about what really is of value in life.

I often leave visiting Ted with a sense of Xmas future, wondering and questioning if what I do in my Consultancy practice is indeed of value, if indeed I have led, enlightened and bettered those that I serve?; I hope that I do, I try to; I hope that one day, I too, can perhaps, in my own vain, egotistical way, be also looked up to as one who tried to be a Gentleman upon this earth.

The auditors who served the Carillion Directors and their forefathers before, in serving Enron, Tyco and Worldcom were no different to those who served a local SME company to me, who’s Directors were betrayed over eight years and £80,000 by their trusted Bookkeeper- as Ted asked…. “How much did they pay them to do their job?”

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Gravity Racers & Student Engineering

A number of years ago I was approached by a local Technology & Design teacher, David Ackroyd, (brother of John Ackroyd, the Thrust SSC designer) seeking sponsorship to build a Gravity Soapbox race kart; the objective was to encourage students into engineering.

Along with other local companies, I duly obliged and the result was the “Nimbus”, rather generously, named after my own business, which, when it wasn’t out racing or at school, we proudly displayed in our reception.

The kart went onto gain sponsorship from Vauxhall Motors, was raced at Goodwood, featured on C5 “The Gadget Show” and shown across the UK gaining, along the way, the land speed record of over 100kmph at Eastborne, a record still held today.

I caught sight of the local news recently and delighted that David’s idea has flourished, his partner suppliers has grown and the number of schools now involved exceeds over 200.

I grew up surrounded by boxes of Meccano and the sounds of Mothers exclamations as she hoovered up yet another set of misplaced screws from the carpet.

Today my love of all things mechanical and engineering based is undiminished and from a commercial and economic point I see the need for engineering and manufacturing support with equal passion.

If your local school or perhaps your own business, would like to get involved, then I’m sure that David would be delighted to hear from you.

Links here:

Have a great weekend!

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, Engineering, Gravity Racer, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Simple Tale of Slippers and Batch Control

So who would like a laugh at my expense?

On Wednesday I bought a new pair of slippers – nothing of particular interest except that they were too tight.

Quick check of the label said they were my size- “I’ll let them stretch a little”.. but alas it soon became apparent that they had been incorrectly labelled.

I mused whilst standing at the returns desk as to where in the manufacturing process the error had been introduced.

At this point I must have had brain fade because I exchanged them for the next size up-logical right?

Nope! I now flip flop around the house with a pair that are too big.

So a lesson for Carr – back to Go, past QC, do not collect £200, and remember to collect your books on SPC on your way there lol!

I guess the lesson learnt is don’t assume that you know root cause and propose a solution until you know all of the facts.

Anyone want to buy a nearly new pair of slippers – size extra-large?

Posted in Manufacturing Process, Quality Control, Root Cause Analysis, SPC Batch Control, Systems | Leave a comment

John Clarke RIP

Well no sooner had I posted the previous short piece mentioning the brilliant satirist John Clarke, then news reached me that he has died .

Apparently whilst out bush-walking in Victoria he died from natural causes . He was aged 68.

Thank you John for your brilliance and humour. RIP.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

#PM Brexit Letter# Understanding Grexit

So today, our Prime Minister, signed the letter that will inform the EU of our intention to leave the European Union.

The events leading up to today have been a colourful twist of hyperbole, dis-information, naievity and political snakes and ladders inter-twined with cliques and cabals, a play out, worthy of the Bard himself rising to script this masterpiece for the 21st Century.

Where it leaves us, is firmly in our own hands, the ultimate in self actualisation in a global economy we’ve done it before and delivered handsomely, albeit we might need to blow the cobwebs off that particular book.

We now have a different generation at the helm of GB PLC, one unfettered by constrictive practices and a recalcitrant workforce. As a lean advocate, I think that stripping away bureaucracy and maybe even walking away from toxic EU debt cannot be anything but a good thing and it has certainly forced a re-think of strategy.

From what I read in my daily  news, what appears to have emerged is a healthy realisation of opportunity tempered with pragmatism – would it be anything less? perhaps not but it should certainly galvanise a call to action, to lift our heads and think, really seriously about where our future business is going to come from – wasn’t it Benjamin Franklin who is quoted as saying ” Failing to plan is planning to fail”

I’ll leave with a more light-hearted perspective at the European position as admirably discussed by Clarke & Dawe. – Enjoy!

The Greek Economy


Posted in business planning, Business Strategy, Strategy, Uncategorized | Leave a comment