In November , online fashion retailer Myntra bought Exclusively. It was in June when Guleria and Boparai Guleria together with some angel investors bought back Exclusively from Myntra. We saw long-term growth in the business and decided to buy it back," said Guleria. Industry experts anticipate the acquisition by Snapdeal to be a step towards getting into the business of flash sales, when products are offered at steep discounts.
Most investor and companies are looking to invest in this category. Guleria denies he has plans to get into flash sales again. The deal was closed earlier this month and the name of the company was changed from Exclusively. Skip to Main Content.
Log in Account Management. Chief Executives Organization. Prior to joining the company, Mr. He was a founding member of management of Songbird Hearing, Inc.
Tardugno began his career in with Abbott Laboratories, where he held positions in pharmaceutical operations. Tardugno holds a BS in Biology from St. A second and more likely scenario: The CEO is appointed by a person or group of people who make the right match.
For instance, a board of directors decides that their organization needs strong strategic direction. What sort of CEO will they look for? Not someone who wants to spend a lot of time guiding and empowering individual employees, but someone who loves to get inside the data, someone with a proven talent for analyzing current market conditions, forecasting future ones, and mapping the route between them.
The board will select a candidate who already acts like a chief strategist. Until scientists discover a gene for leadership—and think of the repercussions of that in business, not to mention politics—the debate about personality will persist. Even if scientists find that leadership is more a case of nurture than of nature, there will still be those who think that only classic General Patton types can lead an organization to success.
Our research indicates that leadership is more complicated than that, driven not so much by what someone is like inside but by what the outside demands. CEOs who use this approach believe that their most important job is to create, test, and design the implementation of long-term strategy, extending in some cases into the distant future.
It follows, then, that they tend to value employees to whom they can delegate the day-to-day operation of their organizations as well as those who possess finely tuned analytical and planning skills.
In marked contrast to CEOs in the above group, human-assets CEOs strongly believe that strategy formulation belongs close to the markets, in the business units.
According to these CEOs, their primary job is to impart to their organizations certain values, behaviors, and attitudes by closely managing the growth and development of individuals. These executives travel constantly, spending the majority of their time in personnel-related activities such as recruiting, performance reviews, and career mapping.
Their goal is to create a universe of satellite CEOs: people at every level of the organization who act and make decisions as the CEO would. They often focus on designing programs, systems, and procedures, such as promotion policies and training plans, that reward people who acquire the expertise and share it across the borders of business units and functions.
These CEOs tend to hire people who are trained in the expertise, but they also seek candidates who possess flexible minds, lack biases, and demonstrate a willingness to be immersed— indoctrinated is not too strong a word—in the expertise.
CEOs in this category believe that they can add the most value in their organizations by creating, communicating, and monitoring an explicit set of controls—financial, cultural, or both—that ensure uniform, predictable behaviors and experiences for customers and employees.
In addition, they devote more time than the other types of CEOs to developing detailed, prescriptive policies, procedures, and rewards to reinforce desired behaviors.
Finally, these executives tend to value seniority within the organization, often promoting people with many years of service to the corporate team and rarely hiring top-level executives from outside the company. In contrast to CEOs who employ the strategy approach, these CEOs focus not on a specific point of arrival for their organizations but on the process of getting there. Similarly, their focus contrasts starkly with that of a box leader: Control systems, written reports, planning cycles, policies, and rules do not seem to interest these so-called change agents.
They spend their days in the field, meeting with a wide range of stakeholders, from customers to investors to suppliers to employees at virtually all levels of the organization.
Not surprisingly, the people they value are usually those who could be called aggressive and independent—people who view their jobs not as entitlements but as opportunities for advancement that must be seized every day. Seniority matters little to the change agent; passion, energy, and an openness to a new, reinvented tomorrow matter much more. Executives who lead by using the change approach spend much of their time motivating employees through speeches and meetings.
In this article, we will describe the five leadership approaches in more detail and explore which business situations call for which approaches. There is, naturally, some overlap. CEOs who adopt the strategy approach might use elements of human-assets leadership, for example. Some box CEOs employ the techniques of a strategy leader to address the out-of-the-box issues that can be overlooked in control-oriented organizations. That said, however, our research suggests that in most effectively run organizations, CEOs select a dominant approach, using it as the compass and rudder that direct all corporate decisions and actions.
There will always be a point where the environment changes, the competition changes, something critical changes, and you must realize this and take the leading role in meeting change. In fact, the prevailing opinion of our subjects was that those with the most frequent and meaningful contact with customers and competitors should be responsible for strategic assessment and planning.
Nevertheless, we did encounter a distinct group of CEOs guided by the belief that their position gives them the best vantage point for making decisions about capital allocations, resource management, investments in technology, new products, and locations for doing business.
For this reason, they assert, the CEO alone although often supported by a small corporate team is equipped to determine exactly where the company in all its parts and units should go, and how fast.
What you will see is time allotted with a common theme: the collection, cultivation, and analysis of data. These CEOs devote much of their days to the activities that ultimately yield strategic decisions.
To increase their sources of data, these executives frequently use company task forces or outside consultants and eagerly draw on other sources of information and opinion, such as fundamental research, trade publications, and independent surveys. Strategy CEOs strive to understand how their customers behave and what really matters to them.
What can the company do? What are its lowest costs, highest quality, and fastest speed of delivery? How do they achieve all that? More than executives in any other category, strategy CEOs employ extensive analysis as well as reporting and planning systems that test strategic scenarios, and they often focus the work of their corporate teams around these systems. As is the case at many companies led by strategy CEOs, these kinds of sessions are supplemented by several other forums throughout the year devoted to strategy analysis and formulation.
The company, which assembles personal computers, has specially trained employees who take 50, phone calls from customers every day and document and organize their comments, which are then distributed to managers.
In addition, every Friday, Dell managers from every functional area in every plant and office around the world gather in customer-advocate meetings, in which a dissatisfied customer addresses the managers over a speakerphone. As a result of many calls from people wondering if Dell made a small, powerful notebook computer, for example, the company began assembling and distributing a megahertz Pentium-chip model.
Dell was among the first to market with the product. What makes a CEO decide to take on the role of chief strategist? Instead, one relevant issue appears to be the level of complexity in the company or industry, in terms of technology, geography, or organizational structure.
Coca-Cola, for example, has 32, employees in nearly countries around the world. The volume and pace of change seem particularly relevant as well. The less stable the situation, the more likely the CEO is to believe that he or she must be both lookout and navigator.
To play those roles well, we heard, the CEO needs all the data-driven insight that this approach to leadership generates. Finally, we found that the strategy approach is often selected by CEOs who must frequently make decisions that have enormous consequences.
Again, this approach provides the kind of information and involves the sort of testing and planning that well-calculated risk taking requires. Not every CEO who adopts the human-assets approach thinks that strategy belongs in the business units, but most do.
Instead, these executives believe that in their particular organizations, success depends on superior execution—the way members of their companies make decisions, interact with customers, roll out new products, or design programs to deflect or defeat the competition.
Accordingly, they believe that their imperative is to hire and cultivate the kind of individuals who will act intelligently, swiftly, and appropriately without direct or constant supervision.
As a group, human-assets CEOs communicate and demonstrate what they want face-to-face. I travel because I want to be sure that people who are making the decisions in, say, Argentina have the same reference base as I do for the company. I want to make sure they are all using the same ground rules I would use.
I want to see if they have the same objectives.
0コメント