They make commitments every day – investments in research and development, public promises to achieve growth goals, hiring decisions, joint ventures. Each includes actions taken today that will bind your business in a way that will be a must tomorrow. Thomson Corporation`s dramatic transformation is a good example of the process. Today, Thomson is a global leader in specialized information for professionals in a wide range of fields, including financial services, law, education, scientific research and health. The company, with 2002 sales of approximately $8 billion, has operations in 46 countries and owns several prestigious brands, including First Call, Yale, Westlaw and PDR (Physicians` Desk Reference). More than 50% of revenues come from electronic products and services, and more than 70% come from subscriptions and other renewable sources that offer more predictable profit streams than advertising. The success of an alliance depends in large part on the effectiveness of coordinating the capabilities of the companies involved and the total commitment of each partner to the alliance. There is no uncompromising partnership, but the benefits must outweigh the disadvantages, as alliances are made to fill gaps in the capabilities and capabilities of others. Poor target orientation, performance metrics and a clash of corporate cultures can weaken and limit the effectiveness of the alliance. Some key factors that need to be taken into account in order to manage a successful alliance are:  Policy frameworks are common mental models that influence how leaders and employees view the world. Entrepreneurs shape their organizations by committing themselves to certain worldviews. You can explain, for example, the possibilities of the company, how a technology will develop, what competitors the company should worry about and how the company will make money. Clear policy frameworks prevent employees (and entrepreneurs themselves!) from dissolving their focus and energy through too many opportunities.
At the same time, they exclude many commercial options. But while Kim and other Daewoo executives saw the changes – developments are not to be overlooked – they responded by taking actions that matched Daewoo`s formula. They continued their aggressive expansion, as if they were still confident that the government would save them if their bets failed. They continue to be South Korean politicians. They have invested heavily in developing and acquiring production and marketing capabilities in developing countries such as China, Vietnam, India, Sudan and several Eastern European nations, where Kim has forged personal ties with local politicians to ensure favourable trading and investment conditions. In Uzbekistan, for example, Daewoo received a free factory site and customs protection in exchange for a significant investment in car production; Commentators joked that the country should be renamed “Daewooistan.” At the same time, enhanced commitments inevitably make companies more rigid and less adaptable. Think by analogy about the evolution of a road system. First of all, it is just a network of body paths marked in the mud. These are like the definition obligations that were set early in the history of a company. With the installation of the roads, they are redesigned as unpaved roads and finally paved into motorways. Strengthening commitments is the need to transform informal business lanes into formal highways.
On the one hand, they make a business much more productive – you can drive much faster on a highway than on a trolley road. On the other hand, they make it less flexible – the route determines your destination and your itinerary. To overcome the forces of organizational inertia – not to mention the skepticism that greets almost all change management efforts – managers must aggressively promote the new anchor and take concrete steps to secure it.