| Digg It |
Hubs | Hubbers | Topics | Request |
| #1 in Business | Subscribe Email Print |
|
You are here: Home > Business > Management > So What is Ownership? |
|
Digg It - So What is Ownership?
Peter A Hunter, author of Breaking the Mould looks at the concept of ownership and argues his case for why change the British Airways way doesn’t always fly. In order to create a performance improvement we have to do something different. If we don't how can we possibly expect to make a chan According to USFDA, a combination product is one composed of any combination of a drug and device; biological product and device; drug and biological product ge? So our problem is finding out what it is that needs changing. Many management models have been tried all with varying levels of success, from Kaizen to Six Sigma, TQM and a host of others. These models are not wrong, but they all suffer from the same failing. Somewhere in each instru ; or drug, device, and biological product and fixed dose combination would include two or more combinations of drug. Examples of combination products may in tion book there is a phrase that equates to the following: “The key to the successful implementation of this model is ownership.” Then we turn the page and begin the new chapter without ever coming across the instruction that tells us how to create that ‘ownership’. Ownership is a concept lude drug-coated devices, drugs packaged with delivery devices in medical kits, and drugs and devices packaged separately but intended to be used together. hat has been used and abused for years but very few people are able to give it any meaningful definition. Without understanding what it is, how is it possible to create the conditions to allow it to happen? I prefer to think of ownership as the way that we feel about something. If it is m here is enormous increase in the number of combination products entering the market in the recent years. Combination products have proven advantages but fixe ne, I own it, I will take care of it. If it is not mine I won’t take care of it, why should I? I don’t own it! The problem we have just created is that we have just defined ownership as the ability to care about something. That concept may be very well in a soft, pink, cuddly way but it h d dose combinations are still in the process of convincing regulatory authority on their advantages over the single ingredient formulations. Combination pro rdly has a place in a business conversation.
We want to talk about percentage points, hard savings, value add and other assorted sexy business type words. Businessmen don’t want to talk about caring. But wait a minute! How many people ever wash a hire car? Not many. Why should they? If ucts have become life saving products for the pharmaceutical companies who doesn’t have many innovative molecules in their product pipeline and have been inc the hire car doesn’t belong to me, why should I care? And yet most of us take care of our own cars. They don’t come with washing instructions and nobody tells us to wash them, but we do and lovingly maintain and care for them because they are ours. After two years the hire car that we di easingly used in the product life cycle management. Even the companies having product patents are trying to extend their product life cycle through the combi not wash has a residual value of practically zero because nobody will buy a car that has been driven for two years by people who did not care for it. The hire car company has no option, the hire car is scrapped. Meanwhile and in the same time period your car has attained its own residual nation products and maximize the revenues. But the companies involved in this practice are overlooking that they are burdening the patients both economically alue.
It is worth ten or twelve thousand pounds. You can realise that value by selling the car or you can continue to use it reliably for another ten years. Suddenly the care that we gave the car has paid off. We can now say that the value of that care is the cars residual value of ten o and physically. They need to rightly judge the benefits of the combination products and they have to even look at the risks involved when combining the produ twelve thousand pounds. A residual value that the car we did not care for does not have. Now we have a solid measurable effect on the bottom line that is directly attributed to our ability to care. The suggestion at the beginning of this article is that we have to first understand what w ts. Some of the combination products were well accepted by physicians while others suffered. Companies involved in development of combination products are fi have to change before we can figure out how to change it. I suggest that what we have to change is the way that people feel about their work. We have to allow them to start to care about what they do. The first reaction to the suggestion that we can change the way people feel about their ding difficulty in defining their combination products and facing various challenges from selecting a combination to marketing it. Following aspects would a work is that it is nonsense. How on earth can we change the way people feel and where is the profit in it? We have already seen where the profit is, and changing the way that people feel about their work is something that happens every day and is as often as not reported on the news, exce dd to the challenges in developing combination products: Which markets to tap where the combination products can do fairly well? Which combination prod t that we don’t recognise it for what it is. Several years ago I watched an interview with Rod Eddington, the then Chairman of British Airways(BA). He was understandably complaining about the market share that he had lost to Ryanair, Easyjet and the other budget airlines. But he was also cts are meaningful and rational? Which therapeutic categories to select? Which Combinations can address unmet needs of the patients? Do combin eing quite bullish about it. He explained that in the previous three years he had reduced British Airways operating costs by five per cent. What he didn’t admit to was in those same three years he had also made sixteen thousand of his staff redundant. So how did the remaining British Airwa tions increase the patient compliance? What would be the developing cost? How to tackle the risks encountered during combination product developmen s staff feel when they found out that 16,000 of their colleagues had been made redundant? Did they feel good about it? Did it make them feel secure? Did it increase their trust in BA? I don’t think so. But think back a few years to the time before the redundancies. What sort of person use t? As combination products don't fit into the traditional categories of drugs, medical devices, or biological products, the USFDA is in the process of devel to work for a company like BA? Well they were the types that had dreamt about being a pilot since a young age or the stewardess whose flippant answer to the question: “Where are you going for the weekend?” was truthfully and smugly, “Barbados”. British Airways staff were people who compet ping new procedures for reviewing their safety, efficacy and quality. Professional from academic institutions, pharmaceutical industries, health care indust ed for their jobs and having won, were living their dreams and getting paid for it.
They were proud, motivated, and they cared about what they did. Three years later and the redundancies had changed the way they felt about their ‘dream’ jobs. This is the sort of change that occurs with mo y and representatives from various regulatory agencies are working out to design the regulatory requirements for manufacture and sale of combination products otonous regularity in industry. A caring and productive workforce is changed by what is done to them by their managers into one that turns up for the pay check and has no other interest in being there. British Airways changed the way their staff felt about their jobs. But they changed in . As there is an increasing trend of the combination products companies manufacturing such products should be able to tackle the problems involved in the de he wrong direction. They are not the only organisation to have done so. To create a sustained performance improvement we need to change the way people feel, but we have to do it in the right direction. We have to allow staff to start to care about what they do. If this sounds difficult, elopment. They need to be wiser in analyzing the market trends and the regulatory requirements. Companies that provide selfless information through particip onsider, most people want to do a good job, they want to care about what they do. The only thing that stops them from caring is what is done to them in the work place. To make the change all we have to do is to find out what is stopping the workforce from caring, then stop doing it to them tion in industry events and feedback to regulatory authorities would be able to face the challenges and will be successful in developing combination products
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
Related Articles:Why Financial Statements Are Important: A Beginner's Guide
|