Chapter 36 Section 4 Giant's Corporate Strategy

The third is to ask me to talk about the giant's strategy. I will not discuss a few points systematically. The first point is that the giant does not set a strategic goal for itself now, whether the giant has a lofty goal now, and now we internally say that we do not have a lofty goal.We don't formulate it, especially if we don't list ourselves as one of China's top 500 or the world's top 500, and we don't make a formula if we will achieve sales of 20 billion or 10 billion in the next few years or within five years.My feeling is not necessarily right, because I think it is a bad thing to formulate this. For example, if I set for myself, within five years, my sales, annual sales (sales return) must be 10 billion, and then you will pay for this The five-year index of 10 billion is broken down.Break it down to how much I want to accomplish this year, how much I want to grow next year, and how much I want to grow the year after. It needs to be broken down.If your goal is not set high, there may be no harm. If your goal is set high, it will artificially disrupt your plan.For example, I was 1.5 billion last year. If I set myself to 3 billion this year, doubling it, then from my existing products, my existing management, and my existing funds, I don’t have the ability. But if I have this goal, I will be forced to do it, and I will have to do it unconventionally and against the rules, and the final result may not even be able to guarantee 1.5 billion.Therefore, we said to ourselves, first of all, we may not set lofty goals, but in terms of tactics, we must do everything well and do our best.

For example, for a product that is being sold in the market, it is necessary to do the best in the production process, maximize the sales input-output ratio, and maximize the advertising input-output ratio; How can I maximize sales, that is, on these tactical issues, one by one, he can achieve the highest level;Don't set yourself a lofty goal.This is a change from our previous guiding ideology. In the past, we had "10 billion plans" and so on. In fact, we may have been harmed by these in the end.This is the first one. The second point is that we have several principles in choosing our own business.The first main business is less.The main business is to concentrate most of your manpower and financial resources to do, in principle, only choose one.When the conditions for opening up a second battlefield are not met, do not open up.

When choosing the main business, there are several detailed principles.The first is to resolutely refrain from doing business in industries that you are not familiar with;Just ask yourself, if our company does the same thing as other companies, do we have any specialties?If we can do it, others can do it. I want to try not to do this, because the competition in China is too fierce; third, it is not a sunrise industry; fourth, there are not enough talents not to do it; fifth, Don't do it without funds.That's it, we set some principles. Based on these principles, we currently set ourselves a health industry as our main business.Because we are familiar with this industry, we have succeeded and failed.The health industry includes health care products, including OTC in the middle of medicine, that is, over-the-counter drugs, and this is also included in our industry.So it has been our main business for quite a long time in recent years.

Of course, we also engage in other investments, but we also have a principle for investment. First, all investment departments cannot invest their own manpower, that is, I want to ensure that all the energy of our headquarters staff is devoted to the main business.It just doesn’t require manpower, and it’s easy to cash out.So we have made some appropriate investments in this area. For example, we recently invested in Hua Xia Bank. We Hua Xia Bank invested some, and we now account for 5.6%.These are helpful to our main business.Because every industry has a cyclical development, even the main business may be in trouble one day.But if you invest in another field without spending energy, such as Huaxia Bank, you don’t have to worry about it, you don’t have to take care of it, the People’s Bank of China is taking care of it, it’s going to be listed soon, and the China Securities Regulatory Commission will still take care of it after the listing As for him, don't worry about it.You don't have to worry about it.

In addition, it should be convenient to realize the cash, that is, when there is a problem with my main business in the future, he can realize it and provide some support for our main business.But you can't put too much energy into it, this is the second. The third thing I want to talk about is the selection of items.In fact, the more actions an enterprise takes, the better. That is to say, if I invest in a project today, I will renovate the project tomorrow, and what I will do the day after tomorrow. In fact, the fewer actions an enterprise takes, the better.If you can do one less movement, do one less movement.The more moves, the greater the chance of mistakes.But if you look for a project, you will make a big shot.

Over the past few years, Giant has actually invested relatively little.Almost every day, people recommend projects, but we still rarely vote.We average probably less than one a year.That is, the fewer movements the better, but once the movements are made, try to make the movements as powerful as possible. In fact, Melatonin was already very successful in 1999, but we have not launched the second product for a long time.According to industry regulations, the second product is generally launched immediately. Others say that your industry is unique and the product life cycle is relatively short. If you don’t push it quickly, what will happen to your first product? Question, but we just don't push it.

Only recently did we launch a second product called Golden Partner, which has already been sold in Anhui, and other parts of the country started selling it this week.The two products we chose at that time were to choose as large a market as possible. When we chose Melatonin, we thought that Melatonin could become bigger.The analysis at that time is quite accurate now.Before we started, we analyzed that the annual sales of this product should be on the scale of 1 billion.It has been three consecutive years now, and it is indeed 1 billion. The golden partner we are promoting now, we feel that this product will start slowly, but the market capacity of this product is not smaller than Melatonin.

Because in the vitamin market in the United States, the annual sales of our products (because there are many types) are in the tens of billions of dollars. The United States has a population of 300 million, and almost 100 million people are taking vitamins for a long time.Because vitamins are very cheap, like the products we are promoting now, they only cost about two yuan a day, or even less than two yuan. In fact, the number of people the Chinese can afford far exceeds the total population of the United States. But this market needs to be cultivated, and the capacity of this market will be very large in the future, so our choice of this product means that we either don’t make it, or choose a big product if we want to do it, and the other actions should be as few as possible.

In this, I would like to diverge a bit, that is, what I just talked about is health care products, and I would like to talk about my views on health care products.Now people in China, especially the media, generally believe that Chinese health care products have a short product life cycle and are easy to start. I think they have not seriously analyzed this industry. If you analyze this industry carefully, what kind of industry is it actually? It is an industry where products are particularly difficult to start. It is very difficult for you to start the market for a new product. Believe it or not, you can see that within five years, because I started doing Melatonin five years ago, Melatonin is considered a success. After Melatonin, So far, the entire health care products in China have not succeeded in a single product.

You can't think of a successful one in the past 5 years.If one fails, one product fails in the entire industry; there may be one in some areas, and I mean the whole country. This is a very strange phenomenon, which is not the case in any industry.The conclusion is that it is very difficult to start the market in this industry.The second product in this industry, once successful, has a very long life cycle, not short. If you don’t believe me, look at the market, it sells well, Melatonin is the youngest one, 5 years, because there is no success here in 5 years. There are many products that are more than 10 years old, such as Mrs. Oral Liquid, Onli, and the youth treasure, and they are doing very well now.Qingchunbao has been selling for 20 years, and it is still selling at a record high.There are no products that sell well nationwide now that are less than 5 years old.

It has been 5 years for the brain white king kong, there are no products under 5 years, and the life cycle of products without products under 5 years can be called short? TV, I think any kind of TV, it is difficult for him to keep it out for five years, the computer is faster, and I don't think the washing machine will last for five years.In fact, there is a common misunderstanding about this industry, which is a divergent point. The last point I would like to talk about is the strategic issue of talent.Because the core of an enterprise actually depends on its people, and when the giants start up again, they don’t have much money, and in fact they still rely on us.People really matter. I would like to talk about several points of view of our talents. The first one is that we do not use airborne troops.Who outside is an MBA graduate, is a returnee, how capable is this person, and then he is hired as the general manager, we do not do this kind of thing.It's not that he doesn't have the ability, but because of the characteristics of many Chinese companies. Looking back now, in the past ten years, at least five years ago, the success rate of Chinese companies that used this method to attract people was very small. Why did he fail? Of course, he may be very capable, but whether he has the ability is relative.For example, a surgeon, in his operating room, is a talent. If he goes to a store and wants to be a salesman, he may not be as good as a primary school graduate.He is no longer a talent, his talent is relative. Each enterprise has its own characteristics, and each enterprise has its own unique culture.In other enterprises, it is an individual talent, which can only be said to be an individual talent in that specific environment.If you change the environment, you may not be a talent. Another one, in the process of enterprise development, you have already accumulated a team. Even if this person is an individual talent, the original team will not accept him according to the traditional Chinese culture.No matter how much your boss and chairman support him, as long as the middle-level cadres resist him, as long as everyone in his heart resists a little, his work will not be able to start.No matter how capable you are, as long as everyone resists you, there is nothing you can do.But it is also impossible for you to introduce a returnee from the sea and replace all the people in the past. In addition, there is another reason. Nowadays, people who are well-known outside are said to be talents, but in fact many of them are not necessarily real talents.Because people who are real talents are often not talkative.In fact, real talents rarely say the phrase "I am very capable". I see that among the people I have used in the past, the really capable people seldom say that my level is high, how about me, and those who directly say that my level is very high, in the end, none of them are talents, because they all Satisfied. Also from a psychological point of view, because he is not a talent, he is not at ease in his heart, so he keeps trying to make up for his psychological problems by saying that he is a talent, so I am willing to give up some opportunities. this road. This is the first, and the second is to fully empower cadres. GM does this very well.Regardless of what's wrong with it right now, I think it's doing a really good job of licensing.Because I think its analysis does make sense. For example, the production line, how to improve the productivity of the production line, the decision-making of the board of directors is not as accurate as the decision-making of an ordinary worker in the production line. What the production line workers say is that the highest position is the team leader of that production line. What they say is actually the most accurate and scientific. It is definitely not allowed for the board of directors to formulate how to transform a production line and how to improve productivity.It is tantamount to letting a person who understands the least make a decision, and the person who understands the most cannot make a decision. This will inevitably cause the human energy to not be brought out. The solution to this problem is to give decision-making power to those who know best.He has decision-making power over what he knows best, so that requires us to fully empower.So now we have been paying attention to this problem, and we may not be doing very well, but we have been paying attention to this problem. After a little attention, we found that there is indeed no internal friction in the company, and the cohesion of the cadres is also strong.Because he has power and he is respected, he feels comfortable and cohesive. Like the giants, no matter whether it is at its peak or at its trough, there is not a single traitor.When the wages were not paid, there was no traitor. I think this has something to do with our line. None of the real giant cadres came out to say anything unfavorable to the giant, which has a lot to do with the full authorization of these cadres.Full authorization is not only for this point, another point is that the company's work efficiency will be improved, and an enterprise will make a higher contribution with the same number of people. In the past, we managed the national market. When the monthly sales were 30 to 40 million, there were more than 300 people in the headquarters engaged in management. Now there are more than 1 billion sales in a year, and there are only a dozen or so people in our headquarters who actually implement management, but the management is very good, but everyone has power. One person does the work of several people, he has the power, and gets two people's wages, so he is also happy and efficient. It's about authorization issues. Another question about talents is: to introduce less strategic talents and more tactical talents.A company does not need many people who formulate strategies. If there are too many people who formulate strategies in a company, they will talk together all day long. Who is it that sets the strategy?It is the chairman of the company, he decided.Then he is responsible for inquiring about news everywhere and expanding his knowledge; if he is going to study, he will go to this economist to listen to him today, and to that entrepreneur to communicate with him tomorrow; I used to train a lot of strategic talents, but they all left later. People with low levels often call themselves strategists, because that thing is invisible, intangible, and impossible to prove.The problem with tactics is that if you can do it, you can do it, and if you can't do it, you can't do it. If there are many people who formulate strategies in an enterprise, it is easy to mix in some boastful people, misleading them.Of course, you don't have to be like us, maybe we have gone to extremes. Another problem about talents is: the problem of interest mechanism.There must be requirements for the leadership of the enterprise, such as culture, and the requirements for corporate culture should be higher.The lower you go, the more important the benefit mechanism is. For example, the more our company gets to the promotion terminal, during the peak sales season, we have more than 10,000 people in the shopping malls all over the country to promote the terminal. For these people, your requirements should not be too high.That is to ask them to sell a box of ingredients for 1 yuan or 2 yuan, but they start to have requirements for their leaders and leaders in terms of corporate culture.But no matter how high the leader is, he must link his personal contribution with the benefit mechanism. What we are using now is that the fixed salary is very low, which is the average level of the same industry or even less, but the floating rate is high. Every time I give you a little more money, from the perspective of my headquarters and the company, I am happy. Why am I willing to give you more money?Because you contributed.Actually, I'm all about quantification. Finally, if a company is in trouble or even goes bankrupt, it is seldom caused by its management mistakes, but because it has done something it should not do. For example, "Giant", it shouldn't build a building, and it consumes so much money at once.If the "giant" hadn't built a building at that time, it would not have been able to die with only brain gold, giant Chinese cards, laptops, etc., and it would not have fallen into such a big predicament all at once. Even if half of your employees or cadres have unhealthy tactics, such as taking kickbacks, the total amount is actually very limited. The internal consumption in a year adds up to several million, tens of millions of yuan.But if you invest hundreds of millions and lose everything, your waste is greater than his. So I think: a company finally fell down and got into trouble, mostly because it did something it shouldn't do.