Minerva is an interesting concept that I really hope it will take off. There is no doubt that many of their operational decisions adhere to their overall mission but only time will tell if the public will perceive these tradeoffs as something that will not be detrimental to their education.
I’m curious as to how they attract and retain their top talent given their constraint on staff costs. It would seem as if they would need to find a niche market for teachers who are willing to teach, for a low wage, and for only 3 years. While it may be easy to find teachers who need some extra income to do this, it probably is a lot more difficult if they are pursing top talent.
Another curious thing is their global immersion all over the world. Someone will have to pay for students to fly internationally, whether the school through the tuition, or the parents/students out of their own pockets. I’m curious as to what their rationale is for offering such an expensive endeavor.
Beyond Minerva, it would be amazing if this business model in general would prove profitable. This could potentially lower the cost of education all over the world, particularly benefiting the emerging countries.
P&G is a great example of a company that has been both innovating and delivering products to market for over a hundred years. In the first video, P&G’s troubles reminded me of the dilemma we learned in FRC wherein companies struggle to find that balance between profit, risk and growth. The company’s alignment of its business and operating models was put to the test and we learned that P&G strayed a little bit here. Once they went back to understanding what their core values were, they were able to right the ship and get the business back on track.
Despite innovation being key, it is interesting to note that this is not something that P&G is normally associated with. In a recent BCG publication, they listed their 50 most innovative companies in 2015. Unfortunately P&G was nowhere to be found.
I find this very interesting! Strategy& is the latest of the large consulting firms to have merged with an audit firm. What is interesting is that while they are (currently) last to the game, they were also one of the biggest firms prior to the consolidation. Talent will always be a consideration, but I have experienced firsthand at how aggressive their recruitment efforts have been.
Another interesting point you brought up is that their merger will allow them to offer the full service – strategy + implementation. While this is in line with the disruptive trend how would they differentiate themselves from similar partnerships (e.g. Monitor + Deloitte, Parthenon + Ernst & Young)? Do you think that these bundled offering will eventually force the big players (BCG, Bain) to follow suit?