LETTER | My experience with corporate business planning goes back a long way, more than 20 years. For I have not only formulated, prepared and assisted, scrutinised and analysed, assessed and evaluated, but beyond all the nitty-gritty, I have been involved in monitoring and making sure that the results from a business plan were achieved as stated in a firm's targets and objectives.

Normally, business plans in the corporate sector are undertaken by the CEO on a yearly basis so that the revenue will always be ahead of the costs, new business opportunities are rigorously pursued, marketing plans are implemented and executed well and that senior managers and key staff throughout the firm fully understand, commit and are all geared towards meeting the set targets.

Only in this structured manner can the key objectives of the business plan be ultimately achieved. These are some of the common successful factors that have been constantly managed and monitored at the board level in many successful firms so that ultimately, their yearly plans will come to fruition and growth of the firm is assured.

It sounds simple enough but many existing CEOs will agree with me that they are not so easy and so straight forward to implement. Still the main basic fundamental is that the business plan must be formulated, prepared and executed.

It does not matter that a business plan is not the best; it is always better to have a yearly business plan than not to have one at all. Not having a business plan means a firm operates on an ad hoc basis, opens itself to volatile market forces, has no strategy to fight off their nearest competitors and likely is not able to price its product or services according to the market demand, share and position.

Having a wrong pricing mechanism and strategy directly affects sales revenue and ultimately your bottom line.

There is a parallel similarity between managing a firm and managing a country. A country may be larger than a firm, however, the basic fundamentals are still the same. A government is like a corporate entity, and the PM is like the CEO.

Managing a country also requires the CEO to be in possession of a yearly business plan in order to:

• generate sufficient revenue (income) from all form of taxes including corporate taxes and individuals.

• be aware of its cost elements both in terms of production and human resources.

• successful in servicing its market demand (clients or voters) and market share.

• be aware of new market opportunities (new projects and FDIs) that would generate new income and employment opportunities in order to expand their market base (more clients or voters).

Under the Pakatan Harapan government, it was obvious that they did not have a business plan for the country to move forward. It sounds very easy and simple, but the truth is, the respective leaders in the five-party coalition did not demand to see such a plan from the PM (CEO).

As a board of directors, Harapan party leaders failed to demand a vital business plan for the country from the CEO, leading to the country to not having any targets or objectives. Not having a business plan meant the CEO was left to his own devices with no clear and well-defined direction.

The Harapan CEO:

• operated on his own ideas,

• managed the country on an ad hoc basis, 

• brought in irrelevant projects (eg. third national car) that was not demanded by their clients,

• lost market focus and priorities,

• was confused between their own clients and that of their competitors,

• priced the services either too cheap or too high, and

• eventually lost its market position and collapsed from servicing the market altogether.

PN can therefore learn a good lesson from the failure of Harapan.

Though so far they have failed to plan, more likely due to the current Covid-19 pandemic, they should be seriously looking at formulating a plan.

A plan that will secure their market share within the sphere of their client base is crucial as PN is a new, unproven brand with no established brand loyalty.

Their current market position is not very stable and widely open to competition. PN has also been derived from old brands that have matured over the years, showing a decline in sales and loss-making strategies which the market has once rejected already.

The board of PN should therefore demand that a more creative business plan be formulated by the CEO for the purpose of setting the right targets and objectives.  Board members and senior staff holding various positions do not guarantee sales and revenue.

Failure to have a viable business plan will likely result in the replacement of the CEO and possibly the changeover of the shareholders too.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.