Retail financial services

Basic Chemicals (7.50) Computer Hardware (3.22) Confectionery (4.36) Healthcare (3.50) Power Water (6.14) Telecommunications (1.50) Retail Distribution (2.63) Retail Financial Services (3.40)... 

That said some industries appear to value the use of strategy tools and techniques more than others. The top performance scores for both firm and function combined were recorded in the Basic Chemicals (0.80), the Confectionery (0.78), the Computer Hardware (0.76), the Media Entertainment (0.75), IT Solutions (0.73), and Construction (0.71) industry sectors. The lowest combined performance scores were reported in the Publishing (0.43), Transport Equipment (0.56) and Aerospace (0.57) sectors. In the middle performance rank came Power Water (0.62), Retail Financial Services, Telecommunications and Tourism Leisure (all scoring 0.63), Retail Distribution (0.65), Oil Gas (0.66) and, finally. Healthcare (0.69). 

Basic Chemicals (5.75) Computer Hardware (4.09) Confectionery (5.63) Healthcare (4.00) Powers Water (7.67) Telecommunications (1.11) Retail Distribution (5.00) Retail Financial Services (4.14)... 

Basic Chemicals (4.86) Computer Hardware (4.22) Confectionery (6.66) Healthcare (3.57) Power Water (3.00) Telecommunications (3.25) Retail Distribution (2.00) Retail Financial Services (4.33)... 

It is also interesting to note that in two industry sectors respondents -Confectionery and Publishing - claimed to have no strategic objectives whatsoever and that 100% of their objectives were directed towards operational effectiveness. High levels for operational effectiveness objectives were recorded in virtually all of the process-based industry sectors Basic Chemicals (65%), Computer Hardware (85%), Confectionery (100%), Healthcare (76%), Power Water (81%), Telecommimications (69%), Retail Distribution (86%) and Retail Financial Services (84%). 

Beyond this most respondents were reasonably satisfied with the performance of their tools and techniques, reporting satisfaction scores in the 0.50 to 0.70 ranges consistently. There were, however, some industry sectors that were relatively less satisfied within this general appreciation of the benefits of implementing tools and techniques in this functional area. Thus, at the firm level Retail Financial Services only reported a performance satisfaction score of 0.35 and Power Water scored only 0.46. At the function level the Publishing sector was least satisfied with a performance score of 0.43, most of the other sectors appeared, however, to be reasonably satisfied with the performance of the tools and techniques used for performance improvement at the functional level. 

Basic Chemicals (4.55) Computer Hardware (3.70) Confectionery (3.82) Healthcare (4.90) Power Water (5.44) Telecommunications (1.40) Retail Distribution (1.33) Retail Financial Services (4.50)... 

Table 9.9 outlines the findings from a series of questions focused on the extent to which tool and technique inadequacy or internal barriers where responsible for failures of implementation. At the group level only the Process/Combined (with 61%) and the Project/Combined (with 57%) groups blamed tool inadequacy more than internal barriers for failures of implementation. All of the other groupings tended to blame internal barriers rather than tool and technique inadequacy as the primary cause of failure. At the industry sector level there was a wider differentiation. Those most blaming tool and technique inadequacy included Telecommunications (88%), Oil Gas (76%), Basic Chemicals (64%) and Computer Hardware (59%). Those most blaming internal barriers included Aerospace (78%), Retail Distribution (75%), Tourism Leisure (71%), Retail Financial Services (68%), Publishing (67%), IT Solutions (57%) and Confectionery (55%). 

At the specific industry sector level there are wider differences but cultural factors against internal change was the major factor for most respondents. Certain sectors did report other factors as more important than cultural resistance to change, but in virtually all cases cultural opposition is normally the second biggest obstacle. The Oil Gas (with insufficient resource at 61%) the Aerospace (29% for unrealistic expectations), the Retail Financial Services (71% for insufficient resource), the Transport Equipment (35% for unrealistic expectations), the Basic Chemicals (25% for unrealistic expectations) the Telecommunications (with 33% for imrealistic expectations), the Healthcare (24% for disruptive reorganisation) and the Computer Hardware (30% for disruptive reorganisation) sectors all had a somewhat different rank ordering of barriers. 

The remaining industries - Aerospace, Healthcare, IT Solutions, Retail Distribution, Retail Financial Services, Telecommunications and Transport Equipment - can be characterised as experiencing Medium Sourcing Risk. This may be somewhat arbitrary but it is clear that the Project/Manufacturing sectors (Aerospace and Transport Equipment) do not have the same levels of regular and routinised process requirements of some industries, nor are they normally as heavily outsourced as the more process-based manufacturing companies, and they may not be as heavily locked into suppliers and have, therefore, have lower switching costs on a project by project basis. The... 

---