With capabilities, again, winning is an essential criterion. Companies can be good at a lot of things. But there are a smaller number of activities that together create distinctiveness, underpinning specific where-to-play and how-to-win choices. P&G certainly needs to be good at manufacturing, but not distinctively good at it to win. On the other hand, P&G does need to be distinctively good at understanding consumers, at innovation, and at branding its products. When articulating core capabilities, you need to distinguish between generic strengths and critical, mutually reinforcing activities. A company needs to invest disproportionately in building the core capabilities that together produce competitive
advantage.
Related Quotes
To be successful, how-to-win choices should be suited to the specific context of the firm in question and highly difficult for competitors to copy. P&Gâs competitive advantages are its ability to understand its core consumers and to create differentiated brands. It wins by relentlessly building its brands and through innovative product technology. It leverages global scale and strong partnerships with suppliers and channel customers to deliver strong retail distribution and consumer value in its chosen markets. If P&G played to its strengths and invested in them, it could sustain competitive advantage through a unique go-to-market model.
Strategy as Winning â A.G. Lafley:
By the time of my election to CEO in 2000, most of P&Gâs businesses were missing their goals, many by a wide margin. The company was overinvested and overextended. It was not winning with those who mattered mostâconsumers and customers. When I visited all our top retailers in my first thirty days on the job, I found that P&G was their biggest supplier but nowhere near their best supplier. Consumers were abandoning P&G, as evidenced by declining trial rates and market share on most of our leading brands. I was
determined to get P&Gâs strategy right. To me, right meant that P&G would focus on
achievable ways to win with the consumers who mattered the most and against the very
best competition. It meant leaders would make real strategic choices (identifying what they would do and not do, where they would play and not play, and how specifically they would create competitive advantage to win). And it meant that leaders at all levels of the company would become capable strategists as well as capable operators. I was going to teach strategy until P&G was excellent at it. I wanted my team to understand that strategy is disciplined thinking that requires tough choices and is all about winning. Grow or grow faster is not a strategy. Build market share is not a strategy. Ten percent or greater earnings-per-share growth is not a strategy. Beat XYZ competitor is not a strategy. A strategy is a coordinated and integrated set of where-to-play, how-to-win, core capability, and management system choices that uniquely meet a consumerâs needs, thereby creating competitive advantage and superior value for a business. Strategy is a way to winâand nothing less.
It is tempting to believe that strategy in general, and where-to-play and how-to-win choices in particular, are needed only for outward-facing functionsâthose folks who interact with external consumers and competitors. But every line of business and function
should have a strategyâone that aligns with the strategy of the company overall and decides where to play and how to win specifically for its context. At P&G, corporate functions are all tasked with crafting their own strategies in this way. Joan Lewis, global consumer market knowledge officer, explains: âWhere to play and how to win has been a very important framework for us. Organizations are often good at one or the other without realizing that theyâre two different sets of decisions. At one point, we werenât as disciplined about our where-to-play choices. It was everywhere anybody needed consumer insight or anywhere we thought it could add value. Just like a business dilutes its focus and in turn its growth potential when you try to do too many things at a time or do things that are further away from your core strengths, we were relatively diluted in the nature of the impact we could have.
As discussed earlier, the five capabilities core to P&Gâs where-to-play and how-to-win choices are consumer understanding, brand building, innovation, go-to-market ability, and global scale. The notion of bringing these capabilities to bear on the Gillette business was top of mind. From the first meeting post-acquisition, Bergh set out to incorporate P&Gâs strategy framework into the Gillette DNA, working to articulate Gilletteâs choice cascade.
Once the where-to-play and how-to-win choices were clear, the team could turn its attention to the capabilities required to deliver on those choices.
At P&G, it boiled down to three themes that would enable the company to win, in the places and ways it had chosen, regardless of the details of individual differences between businesses:
⢠Make the consumer the boss.
⢠Win the consumer value equation.
⢠Win the two most important moments of truth.â (Lafley and Martin, âPlaying to Winâ,
p.141)
âThe first dictum, that the consumer is boss, was a reorientation to the companyâs aspirationâto improve the lives of consumers. We wanted everyone focused on the end consumer in all aspects of the business: in innovation, branding, go-to-market strategies, investment choices, and so on. We wanted to be clear about just who the most important stakeholder is and always should be. Not shareholders. Not employees. Not retail customers. But rather the end user: the people who buy and use P&G products. The second crucial theme was to win the consumer value equation. This quickly and unambiguously defined the way that P&G would win: by opening up a bigger gap between
the value it offers to consumers and the cost of delivering that value than competitorsâ gaps. This meant providing unique value to consumers (through brand differentiation and innovative products). And it meant maintaining a cost position that would let P&G offer that value to the consumer at an attractive price and still make a healthy profit. This edict turned everyoneâs attention toward the where-to-play and how-to-win choices that create sustainable competitive advantage through differentiation.