. Quickscan entrepreneurship Step 1 of 8 12% Is the distinctive entrepreneurship of your organization and your management team sufficiently stimulated and guaranteed? By going through the following questions you will get an indication.The members of our management team are currently focused on:*The daily operation and short-term operational objectivesRealizing the strategic objectives of the own departmentFormulating and realizing the overall strategic business objectives together The members of the management team are mainly focused on the daily operation and the short term. A risk that every manager has to watch out for is too great a focus on daily operations and too little time and attention for strategic choices and the longer term. A management team meeting can, without being aware of it, lapse into an operational work meeting if one does not consciously put the strategic issues on the agenda. Especially in times of rapid growth, organizational changes and other large projects, the focus can quickly be very internally focused on managing processes. A possible consequence of this is that insufficient attention is paid to external signals and the anticipation of important developments. A lot of time and attention goes to "doing the right thing" and insufficiently to the question of whether people are still "doing the right things." This has the necessary consequences for the distinctive entrepreneurship of the members of the management team. The members of the management team are mainly focused on achieving the strategic objectives of their own department. As soon as a company reaches a certain size and leaves the pioneering phase, there is a growing need for more intensive internal communication and more structured management. The members of the management team are given more responsibilities and powers. With a (mainly rapid) growth of the company, and therefore the span of control, the organization runs the risk that island formation will arise and the focus is primarily on ensuring that its own part runs smoothly. This is recognizable in situations where several business units have to coordinate with each other, but people tend to "throw things over the fence". In the meantime, the so-called "cross-departmental" strategic projects are often delayed because they have to outweigh the department-specific projects in terms of priority in their daily operations. In such situations, it is very important that you maintain a sufficient helicopter view of the interests of the entire organization and not just your own department. Distinguishing entrepreneurship is generally better developed when people have a good helicopter view and are not only focused internally. The members of the management team are primarily focused on jointly formulating and achieving the overarching corporate objectives. The distinctiveness of the members of a management team is generally best encouraged and guaranteed in organizations where conscious attention and time is invested in jointly formulating and realizing a strategic framework and overarching business objectives. Companies whose management regularly leaves the operation and consciously pays attention to the strategic considerations on which the strategic framework and objectives are based, have a higher anticipatory capacity and can switch faster because signals are picked up and taken into account more quickly. Distinguishing entrepreneurship, or being able to make a difference in the market and towards customers, requires that the members of a management team constantly think about the choices they make and whether these choices benefit the entire company and not just their own department. They must work together to achieve the main objectives and take into account the needs of their colleagues, even where this is sometimes to the detriment of their own department. If your management team places the priority in achieving the general main objectives rather than only its own departmental objectives, you are one step ahead of other companies in this area. If your management team places the priority in achieving the general main objectives rather than only its own departmental objectives, you are one step ahead of other companies in this area. The management team mainly develops its strategic and entrepreneurial capabilities by:Means of external education, training, workshops and congressesMeans of a training program, under the guidance of an external agency/external coachActive networking with colleaguesAd hoc promotions. There is no conscious policy in this area The management team develops primarily through external education, training, workshops and congresses. This can be a very valuable method to supplement management competences. However, such an approach is only really successful if a number of conditions are met: Selection of suitable education, training, workshop or congress that sufficiently meets the needs of the company and the individual manager. Customization is sometimes not possible or very expensive. The relevant manager must free up enough time to successfully complete the education or training. The learned theory must be translated into and applied to one's own practice. It is rare that all the aforementioned conditions can be actively guaranteed by the company. It is even too common that people do not evaluate afterwards what a particular education or training has produced for the company. The distinctive entrepreneurship of a manager is thus not always sufficiently stimulated and guaranteed. The management team develops primarily through a training program, under the guidance of an external agency / coach. This method of development generally offers more possibilities for customization than attending seminars, workshops or congresses, although every agency or coach will often use a certain methodology. It is therefore also important in this case to choose the right training program and the right coach. Care must be taken during this process that there is too much internal focus on individual development and insufficient on the contribution that this must make to the entire organization. How can one use what has been learned to make a difference externally? Although such a training program can therefore be very valuable for the team building and personal development of certain competences, distinctive entrepreneurship is only sufficiently stimulated or guaranteed if this program also ensures that what has been learned can be applied in practice. The management team mainly develops by consciously and actively networking with colleagues. A lot can be learned from the knowledge and experiences of other companies and there are various possibilities to get in touch with companies, within and outside their own sector. However, the necessary hooks and eyes must be taken into account. For example, meetings of industry associations can be very valuable, but people often sit at the table with competitors and generally do not show the back of the tongue. It is often sticking to success stories and people rarely go into depth to share valuable "trade secrets" with each other. Also in networks in which companies from other branches are represented, people often stay on the surface, because many companies also participate with a commercial purpose. Another factor to take into account is that the quality of the conversation partners present is not always sufficiently guaranteed and the distance between a (medium) large company and, for example, a sole trader can be very large. This approach can therefore be very valuable, but it takes a lot of time and attention to separate the wheat from the chaff and find the right sparring partners. Stimulating and safeguarding distinctive entrepreneurship in this way requires a great deal of effort on the part of individual managers, certainly those for whom the range in their field is rather limited. It is tempting to pay insufficient attention to this in the issues of everyday life, as a result of which the distinctive entrepreneurship is insufficiently stimulated or guaranteed. The management team mainly develops through ad hoc campaigns. There is no conscious policy with regard to management development. The extent to which a manager's distinctive entrepreneurship, vision and helicopter view is stimulated in this case largely depends on his personal ambition. Do people regularly break free from the operation, do they have access to high-quality network meetings in their own field and do they then make optimum use of the contacts they have made? Experience shows that it is very difficult for individual managers in certain sectors and fields to build a personal "circle of excellence" where they can present their strategic issues in complete security and confidentiality. Companies where this is actively facilitated and encouraged generally have a step ahead of companies where they do not have the tools or the space to do so. Distinguished entrepreneurship is therefore often at a higher level here, if only because the strong managers feel supported in their ambitions. In the current labor market, with increasing competition, good managers in particular are attracted and it is becoming increasingly important as a company to make a difference in retaining and captivating valuable MT members. In the absence of a conscious policy with regard to management development, not only is distinctive entrepreneurship insufficiently guaranteed, but there is a greater risk of losing the more ambitious, often success-determining, managers. The company benchmarks itself:*Occasionally ad/hocRegularly on operational and / or financial figuresRegularly on strategic policy aspects The company benchmarks itself occasionally/ad hoc A benchmark that is often used is a comparison with the largest competitors. However, the quality and topicality of a competition analysis can vary considerably per organization. Where some analyses are limited to relying on 'gut feeling', gained through meetings of the trade association and incidentally received signals, other companies go a lot further. For example, the management team performs a competition analysis together with Marketing, Sales and sometimes even Operations. This may even include looking at the strategies the competitors are following, what their distinguishing characteristics are according to customers, and comparing SWOT analyses. This can be very valuable for companies that are not yet leaders in their own industry, but if this is already the case, this benchmark provides limited opportunities for improvement, making it more difficult to develop distinctive entrepreneurship to a higher level. It can be very interesting for these front runners to benchmark themselves with companies outside their own sector. One may wonder whether it is possible to benchmark companies from different sectors, but in non-comparable sectors the companies do have similar management processes. However, such a benchmark requires a more structured approach, so that one can learn from the best practices of other companies. An ad hoc approach is not sufficient to guarantee distinctive entrepreneurship in the longer term. The company regularly benchmarks itself on operational and/or financial figures A benchmark on operational and financial figures can act as a motivating factor to implement improvements. On the operational and financial level, companies generally benchmark against companies from the same industry. However, such a benchmark does not necessarily identify the underlying success factors that can ensure better results at these companies. It is precisely these success factors that can explain why other companies are doing better in certain areas. This type of information is generally not made public, and especially in industries where there is a strong competitive struggle, people are very careful about sharing such strategic information. Distinguishing entrepreneurship can therefore be given a good boost by regularly implementing an operational benchmark, but it is then difficult to translate this into concrete steps for improvement. The company regularly benchmarks itself on strategic policy aspects Having good relationships, perhaps through a local/regional network of non-competing companies, can give the distinctive entrepreneurship of management a big boost. A condition is that these companies operate at a sufficiently comparable level to be able to set a good example. Companies that are part of larger groups sometimes also have the opportunity to compete strategically with sister companies and learn from them. The chance of this is greater in groups that are active in various sports and where there is no competition between them. However, if one acts as the model company in the group, it can still be difficult to stay sharp and to continue to promote distinctive entrepreneurship. The level of ambition of the members of the management team is:*Limited: largely focused on maintaining the status quo and being "in control" of the organizationReasonable: focused on achieving controlled growth and operational efficiencyHigh: focused on achieving strong growth, innovation and continuous improvement and professionalization of all aspects of business operations The level of ambition of the members of the management team is limited: largely focused on maintaining the status quo and being "in control" of the organization If a business is doing well commercially, for example due to a monopoly position, a rapidly growing new market and an improving economy or a gap in the market, the management team runs the risk of 'resting on the laurels' . The old "hunger" with which they have managed to reach the leading position disappears and the law of the inhibiting lead comes into effect. The ambition to constantly mirror and differentiate is less stimulated, because people are already at the top in their own sector / niche market. Maintaining distinctive entrepreneurship as a leader or market leader is the wish of every company, but it has been proven several times that this is very difficult. One way to stay sharp is by mirroring and being inspired by leaders in other industries. No matter how well people think they are doing at that time, it is not a guarantee that they will still do the right things in the future. Certainly in these dynamic times with rapidly developing technologies and a rapidly changing society, managers who continue to benchmark themselves are one step ahead of others. When a company finds itself in a difficult situation, this can also have a negative effect on the ambition level of management. One can lose heart especially in situations that have persisted for some time and seem hopeless, for example a "special management" at the bank. This effect is enhanced when the setbacks apply to the entire industry and one all has the same problems and comes up with the same solutions. Then it can be very valuable to get in touch with companies from other industries that have been in a similar situation and have recovered. One must then ask yourself whether it is possible to inspire managers who have lost their ambition to excel again. The level of ambition of the members of the management team is reasonable: focused on achieving controlled growth and operational efficiency In general, people have a reasonable level of ambition when they are part of a management team. This ambition must then be used to achieve continuity, results and add value for the entire company. However, not every manager constantly asks himself whether they can do better and whether they still do the right things. The companies where the pursuit and assurance of continuous improvement are embedded in policy and corporate culture, the real "learning" organizations, can continue to distinguish themselves in the market. In some branches it is sufficient to have a reasonable level of ambition, whereby sufficient success can be achieved to achieve the objectives in the coming years, without the continuity being threatened. However, one must always wonder whether this will also be the case in the longer term, certainly in periods of strong social, technological and political changes. The level of ambition of the members of the management team is high: focused on achieving strong growth, innovation and continuous improvement and professionalization of all aspects of business operations Companies whose management has a high level of ambition generally have a huge lead over their competitors. They know how to distinguish themselves in the market. However, they can also run greater strategic risks by, for example, growing sales so quickly that the organization can no longer cope. It can also be very difficult in certain companies and sectors to retain the very ambitious managers. Turnover within management and management teams has increased considerably in the recent period. This may be partly due to the tightening of the labor market, but also due to the different wishes and needs of the new generation of managers. Companies that do not take this into account will find it very difficult to bind and fascinate younger managers in particular. Companies that pursue a conscious policy to support the success-determining managers in their ambitions and give them the space and tools to develop further, have a greater chance of not only stimulating distinctive entrepreneurship, but also safeguarding it for their own organization.