Search results

This study of the growth history and practices of 1,238 companies over a decade by the IBM Institute for Business Value found that top growth companies excel in three vital areas: course, capability and conviction. IBM calls this the “3Cs model.”

The IBM research team developed a database of growth and shareholder return performance for companies included in the S&P Global 1200. Starting with the 2003 list, the team added the firms that “fell off” the listing over the preceding decade. The study worked with a final list of 1,238 companies with complete data over the decade. Collectively, this group recorded median annual revenue growth of 8.5 percent and median TSR growth of 8.8 percent.

The most successful growers: have a clear point of view on their industry, addressing both where it is headed and how they will create value in its new form or environment; are iconoclasts who evolve their product‐market portfolio on an ongoing basis; sustain the growth quest by developing multiple growth initiatives that are backed by ongoing cost and asset management to create funding; foster a culture that responds to the necessity of change, and a cadre of leaders with the passion and follow through to make the change stick

The article provides a sound intellectual background for researchers who want to compile in‐depth case studies.

The article advises corporate leaders to: assess their company's status against your growth ambitions and the 3C model winners follow; develop a point of view on the future and its opportunities; evolve your product market portfolio and initiatives; develop a competitive model; get to know your capabilities and align them with opportunities.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, firms with the will to be successful growers can break free of perceived constraints related to size, industry boundaries and geographic neighborhood.

Growth is the top priority on the CEO agenda, but the question they confront is “What factors constrain growth?” And, “How do successful companies drive growth?”

IBM Institute for Business Value conducted a global study that focused on three questions: Who are the successful growers and what patterns are associated with them? What do successful growers do differently? How can other companies apply what they do?

The major finding were: that limits to growth are often self‐imposed and, as such, can be overcome; firms with the will to be successful growers can break free of perceived constraints related to size, industry boundaries and geographic neighborhood; and despite the widely held belief that mergers and acquisitions inherently destroy value for the acquirer, companies that learn to become successful growers use M&A strategies effectively.

Looking at 1,238 Global S&P 1200 companies, the IBM team analyzed the patterns of revenue growth and shareholder value creation over the decade, segmenting results by four component geographies and 18 industry groups. It selected three industries (consumer products, telecom services and electronics) for detailed assessment, developing cases studies for about 20 companies in each industry, picked to represent a range of successful and unsuccessful results.

Winning the growth game requires companies to excel in three vital areas: course, capability and conviction. Successful growers set the right growth direction – the course – by forming a clear point of view on the future, evolving the product‐market portfolio without being limited by history, building a competitive model to win and pursuing reinforcing initiatives to sustain growth. They truly understand their capabilities – based on realistic assessments of their strengths and limitations – and evolve their operational model to support the growth strategy. Finally, while many companies develop excellent plans, truly successful growers build organization‐wide conviction that translates intent into action for everyone from top leaders to front line managers.

The message is clear: neighborhood is not destiny. Executives have more room to be ambitious than they tend to believe. Winning companies set ambitious growth plans regardless of industry or geographic “limits.” They aim for targets above and beyond what they and their peers typically expect.

The purpose of this paper is to explain how public sector accounting has changed and is changing due to public governance development.

This paper conducts a traditional literature review based on selected studies in the fields of accounting, public administration and management. The aim of the review is to explain how diverse forms of public governance influence the fate of public sector accounting, including accountability, performance measurement, budgeting and reporting practices.

Public governance is developing into more inclusive but also complex forms, resulting in network, collaborative and digital governance. Consequently, the focus and practices of public sector accounting have changed, as reflected in new types of accountability, performance measurement, budgeting and reporting practices.

Drawing upon literature from different fields enables a deeper understanding of the changes in public sector accounting. Nevertheless, the intention is not to execute a systematic literature review but to provide an overview and resolve the scattered body of knowledge generated by previous contributions. The areas of risk management and auditing were not included and deserve further attention.

This paper discusses the need to continually redefine and reassess public sector accounting practices, by recognising the interdependencies between different actors, citizens and digital technologies.