SPEAKER_00 0:15

Hello. Uh welcome to our second QA. And it'll it'll be a short one because we've only got three questions, just three questions, but they're all good ones. So I'm gonna roll through those. Two from Jessica Hamilton and one from our house. So you're obviously all very busy on the SIM, which is good. So first up from Jessica, I think relates to the SIM actually. And the question is how exactly is cumulative shareholder return calculated? Um so cumulative shareholder return, CSR, is a uh is a it is a calculation, obviously, and based on a formula, which is the ending price plus the cumulative dividends received divided by the beginning price minus one, and then multiplied by 100 to get a percentage. So what I'll do actually, Jessica, is I'm gonna put this in the LinkedIn chat as a calculation so you can see it. I'm gonna give you an example. Um, so if you have a share price that starts at 10 pounds and a share price that ends at £13.50, and the dividends over the period were 80p, it's £13.50 plus ATP divided by 10 minus one equals 43% cumulative shareholder return. Um, and I realize that verbally that's quite a difficult thing to grab hold of, so I will put that calculation in the chat on LinkedIn. And for our simulation, we do calculate it exactly the same way. Um, but in our case, and it's important to say this, we do have Jessica also asked whether there were any other factors that were taken into account. And what we do to calculate your final score is we have a moderating score based on time spent on the simulation itself. Now, the reason that we do that is that we are well aware that some people are having to work in much more sort of competitive universes than others. I mean, we try to control that as much as we can, but you know, it's up to this is a this you you're a free agent, so it's up to you when and how you partake. So, what we do is we add a moderating score based on time spent to even out the um the difference that um different competitive um universes would make to people. Uh so Jessica, I hope that answers the question. If it doesn't, just drop a note in the uh in the LinkedIn uh chat and I'll I'll answer it again or email me. Also from Jessica is a question about innovation, which comes out of Anna Marie's module. And you will remember that in Anna Marie's module, she talks about four types of innovation: routine, radical, disruptive, and architectural. Um, and Jessica's question is: would it be possible to provide an example of a company in each one of those? Well, I've got a couple of points to make here. Firstly, most companies aim to innovate across all the different types of innovation. So most companies, especially large companies, which have an overarching innovation strategy that aims to keep all in play, very often working to different timelines. So they'll have an overarching strategy about what they're trying to achieve overall in an innovation, an innovation platform, for example. And then they will have a route, what that means for routine or incremental innovation, what that means for radical or bold innovation, what that might mean for disruptive innovation. And for some, but not all, I suppose architectural innovation is the one that you might see less often. And that raises a second point, which is as with so many concepts in marketing, language often differs. So do look out for that within your own businesses. So most often I would see, I think in our world, we talk about incremental innovation, and by that uh it's meant routine, uh, in the model that Anna Marie gave you. And radical is often referred to as bold. Disruptive has a highly specific um definition, usually via the Clayton Christensen model. And architectural, um, that's that's quite unique to the model that she used, actually. But so just be aware of that. What I thought might be quite useful to bring those concepts to life would be to look at it through the lens of one company who I think uh are extraordinary in how they innovate, and that would be Red Bull, energy drinks. So if you think about that, routine innovation is when your is existing competences and existing business model. So for Red Bull, that would be where we've seen them introduce new flavours through their additions, and where perhaps the flavor has really taken off, so they keep it. So I think watermelon is one that they've they've had a lot of success with, so they keep it. So that's classic routine or incremental innovation. Then radical innovation. So that's when you've got you you develop new competences, but you've got the existing business model. An example of that within Red Bull might be when they innovated into water or coke. Now, what I would say is interesting about that is unsuccessfully, you know. So uh I that that would fit into this model of new competence existing business model. But and the reason I put it as new competences is because it's not an energy drink anymore, it's like a cola or a water. And I would say their competences, they've grown them enormously, started within energy drinks. So they've tried it, but I think failed in um in product execution. Interestingly, you could argue that their core competences now go beyond uh pure energy drinks because of I think the uh disruptive innovation. And I'm gonna say it's disruptive because I think they bought uh energy drinks into uh um uh into sports events. So I think you know, because of their distribution model was different anyway, they they were very much kind of through um experiential. So that's a new business model, but existing competence is just about. I'm kind of making this work, you would call that disruptive innovation. But their example of architectural innovation, so that's new business model, new competences, would be when they developed Rebel, Red Bull Media and Red Bull Media House. And actually, they've probably been more successful with um Red Bull Media House and looking at sort of more kind of bold innovation there than perhaps they have with the core product of the drink. So sort of loosely applying the concepts, but I think it's quite interesting to look at it through the lens of one company. And now actually, Red Bull have launched a clothing line, uh, which I would also say is architectural innovation. Um but what I would encourage is if you're working within the business and using this terminology, you're you're gonna find that uh your fellow leaders might have a different interpretation of those what those mean. Uh, and it's worth making sure that everyone's agreed on what they mean and then developing your innovation strategy. And different companies have different different types of terminology, but you will find the classic, like incremental, you know, bold, disruptive almost in every business. Um so I hope that's useful from Jessica. And the last one is from Emma Howe. Um, and it's about are we am I able to give or are we able to give examples of supply chain case studies in industries where there's no tangible products? Um yeah, you'd be right to say that I think a lot of what Gad focuses on when he's talking about the principles of supply chain is is in a in the tangible world. But actually, um your question, of course, is relevant to a lot of modern businesses where the where where there isn't a tangible product like you know, Spotify, Netflix, B2B, Salesforce, B2B Professional Services. So uh it's a great question. I think a lot, I was actually flicking back through Gad's lecture myself, and I think a lot of the principles remain, you know. So if you think about a business like Spotify, it has artists, processes, platform. Um, I think a lot of those principles that Gad talked about, about needing to think about your variables of price, quality, time, and variety, I think those still apply when you're thinking about your supply chain, even if it's intangible. But what I would add, and there's been quite a lot of thinking around this, is that very often in intangible supply chains, those supply chains operate more like ecosystems, where you might join the ecosystem or join together. It's less a straightforward kind of value chain, if you like. Um, now, Professor Michael Jacobides, who works with me at London Business School, is a real expert on supply chain as ecosystems. Um, and so what I will do, Emma, is I'm gonna post, I was looking for an article from him on this that's that's free. There's a great Harvard Business School article, but you would have to pay for it. But I found one that's free that I'm also gonna put in the LinkedIn chat that I think would be really helpful. And that is it. That is our three questions. Please do keep posting questions if you have them as they come up over the next few uh modules. We have one more QA um at the very beginning of July, which can be a sweep up across all of the modules. So if you've got any questions for when you've gone back, please do post them. Don't think, oh, I can't put anything up about finance. Happy to answer those. Um, and I hope everyone's enjoying the simulation and and um looking forward to seeing the results from that as well. So um thanks very much, and I'll see you at the next QA.