Shyam's Slide Share Presentations

VIRTUAL LIBRARY "KNOWLEDGE - KORRIDOR"

This article/post is from a third party website. The views expressed are that of the author. We at Capacity Building & Development may not necessarily subscribe to it completely. The relevance & applicability of the content is limited to certain geographic zones.It is not universal.

TO VIEW MORE CONTENT ON THIS SUBJECT AND OTHER TOPICS, Please visit KNOWLEDGE-KORRIDOR our Virtual Library

Showing posts with label #Shyamsunder Panchavati. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #Shyamsunder Panchavati. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

Bridging the Sustainability Gap 07-09

Bridging the Sustainability Gap

There’s a growing disconnect between the importance of sustainability to many corporate strategies — and its lack of relevance to mainstream investors. Bridging that gap between companies and investors will require a new approach to sustainability reporting.


entally innovative products” in 2012, up from 13% in 2011. Identifying this increase, which far outpaces overall revenue growth, is essential to communicating the relevance of sustainability strategy. These designations take time and effort to develop and apply, but they are among the most critical signals a company can send to analysts and investors who are looking for evidence of the materiality of sustainability.
  • Once revenue categorizations are in place, investors can gauge how much of a company’s total revenue mix comes from these sustainability-related products and how quickly such product revenues are growing in comparison to the company’s overall revenue growth rate. Understanding the scope of sustainability-driven growth may offer investors critical insight into a company’s ability to meet its future revenue forecasts.

  • While current reporting provides ample anecdotal evidence about how a specific facility or process reduces costs while improving sustainability-related outcomes, few companies report what most analysts would really want — that is, the total dollar value of savings from all sustainability-related initiatives for a given reporting period. In most cases, calculating productivity gains from sustainability requires aggregating data from disparate groups and functions across the enterprise for the amounts to reach material value. Understanding which cost savings to include, how to monetize resource efficiencies and how to calculate sustainability-driven productivity gains in a timely and consistent fashion to be relevant to investors is the key challenge. 

  • With modern enterprise resource planning (ERP) technologies and software, it’s a solvable problem if management has the will.Finally, while the current data provide literally hundreds of risk metrics on thousands of companies, it’s often difficult for mainstream investors to know how to assess these indicators. Measuring sustainability-related risk for mainstream investors is about focusing on those factors critical to meeting strategic and financial objectives. Spotlighting and tracking those risks is specific to each business and requires analytic judgment. However, showing investors that the key risks have been identified and are being effectively mitigated is necessary to get their attention.

  • DuPont’s Sustainability Performance

  • DuPont is an example of a company that has taken some steps to enable investors and other interested parties to track its progress in transforming into a next-generation provider of sustainable business solutions through reporting about the business. In addition to absolute reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and total water use from the company’s 2004 baseline, DuPont has reported two key sustainability-driven revenue growth metrics for the 2007-2012 period:

  • Revenue from products that reduce greenhouse gas emissions rose from $100 million in 2007 to $2 billion in 2012.

  • Revenue from products based on nondepletable resources doubled, from $5.9 billion on a 2007 revenue base of $29.4 billion to $11.8 billion on a 2012 revenue base of $35 billion.

  • The success of DuPont’s sustainability-driven growth strategy can be seen in the substantial increase in its revenue from what we call sustainability-advantaged products. For example, DuPont’s revenue from products based on nondepletable resources increased 100% over the six-year period — compared to revenue growth of about 18% for the company as a whole during that time. In other words, the ratio of revenue growth from products based on nondepletable resources to the company’s overall revenue growth was more than 5:1. Through such calculations, any investor or analyst seeking to understand the revenue dynamics at DuPont can easily see the role being played by sustainability-advantaged products. 

  • This should provide both strong incentives for investors to understand the strategy and confidence that DuPont has and will continue to gain competitive advantage from its investments in sustainable solutions. DuPont backs up its outlook for the future with a report on R&D spending to create sustainability-related products; such R&D spending has grown from $322 million in 2007 to $879 million in 2012. These simple data points convey the current and likely future materiality of sustainability to DuPont’s revenue momentum and brand value.

  • In terms of productivity gains from sustainability, data on precise gains per year are harder to come by. DuPont has reported $6 billion in aggregate cost avoidance from energy-saving efforts between 1990 and 2010. That level of savings suggests a material impact during that period on DuPont’s net income, which was $3 billion in 2010. Ideally, data on sustainability-related productivity gains should be analyzed and reported at least annually, as some companies are doing now, so that we have a clearer assessment of earnings impacts. But even seeing the big picture on a multiyear basis is a step forward in terms of understanding the financial impact of sustainability on productivity.

  • In addition to providing extensive sustainability data in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative framework, DuPont’s sustainability-related risk management reporting highlights six key factors that the company believes provide insight into current and future potential exposure, including absolute levels of (and future goals for) greenhouse gas emissions, water use, water use in water-stressed locations, air carcinogen emissions and manufacturing plant certifications. Sustainability-related risk factors will vary by company and industry. While the absolute performance on these risk factors is critical, many investors would be interested in the relationship of these factors to revenue growth. 

  • For example, consider “water consumption in water-scarce or -stressed locations,” which DuPont reports declined from 6 billion to 5 billion gallons between 2007 and 2012. We compute a stressed water intensity of revenue that relates water use to revenue growth and find a 30% decrease from 0.20 to 0.14 gallons/dollar of revenue for DuPont for this period — a significant shift. Through such calculations, considered alongside the absolute impacts, investors can better assess the rate of change in risk exposure from key business processes for each of the key risk factors on DuPont’s scorecard.

  • There are many companies that, like DuPont, do extensive sustainability reporting and have integrated sustainability into their strategy. Such companies are now positioned to strengthen confidence in their business outlook by referencing the success of their sustainability strategies as a source of added value. For these companies, connecting the sustainability dots in ways that resonate with mainstream investors represents a big opportunity.
  • Closing the Gap Between Companies and Investors

  • How should companies start to report their sustainability results in ways that will put their sustainability performance on the agenda of mainstream investors? Most companies would be well-advised to begin with reporting metrics related to revenue growth. Some companies, such as DuPont, Pirelli, GE, Siemens, Philips and Kimberly-Clark are already reporting the power of their “green” portfolios to accelerate revenue growth.

  • Still, these data, even when made public, are often hard to find except by the most determined analysts. If your company currently tracks top-line revenue impacts from sustainability-designated products and services, consider creating a sustainability-driven growth metric (S/G). Include the metric in your primary business performance reporting on at least an annual basis. If, on the other hand, your company hasn’t yet begun to identify which of its products and services are worthy of a sustainability designation or the potential growth opportunity from developing sustainability-enhanced solutions, you have many excellent role models. It takes time to climb the learning curve, and the time to start is now. This is especially true if you see sustainability factors playing an important role in your company’s business sector.

  • If leading companies that are already obtaining material business benefits like revenue growth, productivity improvements and risk mitigation from their sustainability strategies report these results clearly, then many more mainstream investors will pay attention and act. Many separate efforts are underway to address this gap. We see interest in the S/GPR approach emerging in global initiatives such as the UN Global Compact and Principles for Responsible Investing.

  • Given that the expected steady increases in the impacts of climate change, regulatory pressures and evolving consumer attitudes are likely to make sustainability strategy even more important going forward, we believe mainstream investors will reward companies that demonstrate business gains from sustainability — provided investors can easily spot the sustainability winners. The greatest opportunity for such a “sustainability premium” is during the early stages of a comparatively new phenomenon such as the emerging sustainability imperative. That’s when superior performance creates the best chance for differentiation from competitors. Over time the field will tighten, as it has with past management trends such as quality and technology — and maintaining a lead will be even more challenging.

  • Now is the time for sustainability innovators to capitalize on the opportunity to gain greater investor interest in the payoff from sustainability investments. It will never be easier. To capitalize on this opportunity, companies must systematically capture and report the sustainability-driven business impacts they are already seeing, and those they aim to generate, in terms that mainstream investors comprehend. In a world facing decades of natural resource constraints, pollution damage and potentially severe climate change impacts, as well as changing customer expectations and brand exposure connected to sustainability pressures, there will be winners and losers. Investors seeking to capitalize on these forces must be able to distinguish companies that are pursuing carefully structured and successfully implemented sustainability strategies that deliver actual material business advantages from those with less well-designed or well-executed strategies.
Reproduced From MIT Sloan Management Review 

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

How Making Robots Captivates Kids' Imaginations 08-14

How Making Robots Captivates Kids' Imaginations

Building robots inspires such passion in high school seniors Violet and Kjersti that they've begun mentoring younger robotics teams to teach STEM skills -- and save their school's robotics program.


    How Making Robots Captivates Kids' Imaginations (Transcript)

    Violet: I think school would be a lot more engaging if we were asked to solve complex problems. Building a robot and seeing it run and seeing it complete tasks is definitely more satisfying than any schoolwork I've ever done. Getting an A on the test, that's cool, but seeing something I have built with my own hands move is way more satisfying.
    So I'll try connecting a one-ten-nine. I'll put a jumper underneath.
    Man: Yeah, just don't overlap them, right? Start with three.
    Woodie: I think a reasonable way to think about robotics is birthing a machine that can be over there and do something that you either taught it to do, or that you're commanding it to do now. But something that you created that's apart from you that does your bidding.
    Violet: So do you guys know how to test a motor with a battery?
    Girl: Not really.
    Violet: Okay, here.
    So I grew up in a really geeky family. My dad is one of those super geeks. He always showed me sci-fi movies and so he's the one who kinda showed me into what robots are.
    Kjersti: You could do it like that, or you could do it to the top here, so that way the hub would be on the outside.
    It was something completely new for me. It was something that I'd never heard about before, especially heard about kids being able to do. And it was really hard, which was something that was exciting for me, a challenge.
    Woodie: One of the things that makes robotics an ideal thing for young people to do is that that child obeying the parent's command is a real thrill. When you first see someone build something and they get it together and then they wiggle the joystick. "Wow, it works, it works!"
    Violet: I think the fact that I'm kind of a stubborn person contributed to me being a good robotics engineer. When I see a problem, I wanna find a solution, I wanna figure it out. And if I run into a few failures on the way, I'm not gonna let that stand in my way. I'm gonna keep trying at it and keep going until I've found a solution.
    Kjersti: Just feel over all of the little cables back here to make sure that none of them are loose or sticking out a little bit. Drive train, make sure that none of the chains are off, 'cause that's a problem that we've encountered.
    Some of the ways that we've gotten better at building robotics are just in very simple mechanical ways, like being really good at constructing simple things and knowing which screws to use in which situation, so that things don't fall apart later on when you're using your robot. And then other things are very elegant designs. You have to see the problem in front of you and go through a bunch of different designs before you get to the one that looks the best and functions the best.
    Violet: So one of the main parts of the game for this year is, you have to lift these rings up to different pegs and put them on the pegs. We use pulleys that are controlled by a winch. The lift comes up.
    We use rectangular tubing here, along with your average drawer slides.
    The way this robot moves around is the drive train right here,
    There's a chain connecting each of the motor to the wheels,
    We have two motors for each side,
    We have an IR, infrared seeker,
    This is what we call the brick,
    And actually, brick is where all our programming goes, and it has wires going up to all the sensors.
    The brick talks to the motors and tells them to run essentially.
    I think that that's pretty much our robot.
    Violet: I would like you guys to do, in this extra meeting time that we have, is try to see how many challenges you can complete.
    After last year, I started just looking back, thinking back to all the effort I had put into robotics and all the time I spent doing it. And I realized how much I had changed, how much I had grown more confident in myself.
    Okay, so for how about right now, you start from over here? And drive up and try to balance on the bridge.
    I wanted to give that to other people, so that's why I started mentoring robotics students, trying to get people to understand why this is such a great thing.
    Kjersti: The first thing I said to myself when I decided I was gonna be a teacher was that I wasn't gonna give them any answers, and I wasn't gonna build the robot for them.
    Girl: Because one to six was not fast enough, right?
    Kjersti: Yes.
    I try to be better at guiding them towards an answer using their thought processes instead of my thought processes.
    Check the sensor cables, so just go over these guys. Just pretty much make sure everything is plugged in and then--
    I'm teaching them things, but more than that, I'm giving them a real problem to solve and I feel like I'm really giving them the skills to accomplish this certain problem.
    Man: All set?
    Announcer: Looks like we have the checking now, all the teams are set for match number six, here in Daly City.
    Woman: Controllers please.
    Woodie: There is a lot of failure in robotics work, but it's not total failure and you don't feel like a fool. When you're going through the loops, designing something, the first time you try it, it probably didn't work and what that teaches you is how to do the next loop to get better and better.
    Announcer: You have less than one minute left. Four-four-seven-five in danger of tipping over.
    Kjersti: Learning the art of failing is sort of a key aspect of robotics because if you don’t know how to recover from the failure, then you're not gonna be able to build a robot that encompasses all those failures and turns it into something beautiful that works really well at what it does.
    Announcer: Six-zero-zero-one is moving very fast, flipping to block.
    Woodie: If you follow textbooks only, you think there's a set of problems at the end of the chapter that have unique answers. That's very, very unlike real life. So learning about how to fail and bounce back is a fundamentally important thing to know about life. And learning that the people that come back and try again are the ones that are gonna get ahead.
    Announcer: And that's a match, great match everybody.
    All:
    Violet: I think that robotics would be really good for those kids who just think school's a waste of time. I know a lotta kids who are really smart, but get bad grades 'cause they just don't see the point, and with something like robots, it's so captivating and exciting and addicting, obviously, that I think it would engage people a lot more and make people more willing to put more effort into their schoolwork.

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Entrepreneurs Shouldn't Pitch Their Ideas To Venture Capitalists!!!! 05-03




Entrepreneurs Shouldn't Pitch Their Ideas To Venture Capitalists


John Greathouse
(courtesy Forbes)



Although it is tempting to overly intellectualize modern-day venture capital, its underlying construct has been part of human society for thousands of years. From the earliest days of seafaring traders, affluent dilettantes have been entrusting their capital to less-affluent, enterprising workers willing to share a portion of the resulting gain with their benefactors.



Two early venture capitalists were King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, who backed Christopher Columbus. The traits these royal investors sought in Columbus are surprisingly similar to the characteristics modern investors look for when evaluating startup teams.

Ideas are infinite, and in the absence of competent execution, they are worth nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. Conversely, money in pursuit of outsized returns is plentiful. Thus, if both ideas and money are abundant, what is the scarce constraint in the fundraising equation?

Trust.

Skilled entrepreneurs bring ideas and money together by building a bridge of trust.

If you are fortunate to pitch a sophisticated investor in person, assume they already believe in the veracity of your idea, the market and the underlying technological trends. Unless an investor specifically asks you to educate them regarding your space, focus your pitch on why you and your team are uniquely qualified to exploit the opportunity and turn the idea into a lucrative, self-sustaining business.

In too many instances, when entrepreneurs come to Rincon Venture Partners’ offices to pitch me and my partners, they waste valuable time attempting to sell us on the opportunity, often even after we say, “we believe in the opportunity, now tell us why we should place a bet on you.”

Grubbing For Money

“Grubstake” is a very American word, combining “grub” meaning “food” with “stake” meaning “a share or interest in a commercial enterprise.” A grubstake often involved the financier or Grubstaker funding the Grubstakee entrepreneur’s food, lodging and tools.

Modern venture capital differs only slightly from the grubstaking that was commonplace in the Western United States during the latter portion of the 1800s.  Frontier financiers put credence in the same characteristics valued by Ferdinand, Isabella and 21st century investors.

Informal Education – Consideration of a Grubstakee’s formal education was usually irrelevant. If the Grubstakee had any “book learning,” it was seldom directly applicable to the nature of the grubstaked venture.

As a VC, I do not care if you attended an Ivy League school, a community college or if you only have a high school degree. What concerns me is the depth of the knowledge and experiences you can apply to your venture.

Stewardship – Because the Grubstaker was directly footing the Grubstakee’s bills. A miserly approach to spending was a prized Grubstakee trait. I likewise value an entrepreneur who treats my money like their own and understands the difference between spending and investing.

Clean Backtrail – Without email, LinkedIn, Twitter or even an iPhone, Grubstakers were still able to verify a Grubstakee’s propensity toward honesty, integrity and hard work. By asking a few well-placed questions to the folks who had previously crossed paths with the Grubstakee, the Grubstaker could confirm whether or not their trust was well placed.

No matter how much trust an entrepreneur builds during our interactions, I always verify the veracity of their claims and prior accomplishments by speaking to people with whom they previously worked. Confirmation from people whom the entrepreneur did not cite as a reference is vital.


No B.S. – A firm handshake, coupled with direct eye contact, was often the only contract underlying a Grubstake deal. As such, communication had to be clear, open and direct.

I have no interest partnering with an entrepreneur who only communicates positive information, while obfuscating negative issues. As such, part of our diligence process includes assessing how clearly and honestly the entrepreneur communicates.


Sticktoitiveness – Most Grubstakees felt honor-bound to do everything within their control to repay the grubstake, even if their venture never generated a profit. I similarly seek entrepreneurs who perceive failure as a personal affront and refuse to walk away from a venture, even when success seems remote.

Shared View Of Success – The Grubstaker was rewarded when the Grubstakee succeeded. Such alignment minimized the risk that self-dealing, by either party, would derail the venture.

To this end, I spend significant time discussing the definition of success with our entrepreneurs to ensure that we share similar expectations regarding an acceptable exit.

Fear Of Failure – A grubstake was intended to facilitate the Grubstakee’s basic survival while he pursued his venture. If the grubstake was too large and the Grubstakee was not adequately motivated, the venture would fail. Effective Grubstakees were sufficiently dissatisfied with the lifestyle afforded by the grubstake and did not consider free room and board “success.”

In the same vein, I seek entrepreneurs who celebrate product, customer and partner victories and do not consider fundraising milestones a measure of their success.

Think Stewardship

The second time Christopher Columbus pitched Ferdinand and Isabella (two years after his initial presentation – raising money has always taken patience and persistence), he did not need to convince them that locating a shortcut to the spice routes of India was a good idea. Rather, he had to belie their primary concerns: was he honest, tenacious and competent enough to execute the journey?

The same precept holds true today. If a VC grants you an in-person meeting, it is doubtful they need to be sold on your idea. Thus, use such high-touch interactions to build a bridge of trust and convince your would-be investors that you will be a trustworthy and capable steward of their money.