# Patent

## Title
Retail high performance capability assessment

## Abstract

A capability analysis structure helps a modern business meet the challenges of the global marketplace. As a result, the business can achieve the clarity, consistency, and well-defined execution of its core processes that reduce inefficiencies and waste due to unnecessary process complexity and exceptions. In addition, the capability analysis structure helps the business to identify specific areas in which improvements may be made and understand how to make the improvements, and establishes levels of capability along the way to reaching an ultimate capability goal.

## Background
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
This application claims the benefit of priority from co-pending application Ser. No. 11/823,112, filed on Jun. 25, 2007, entitled Capability Analysis Structure and System. Application Ser. No. 11/823,112 is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Technical Field
This disclosure relates to analyzing organizational capability and identifying where the organizational capability exists on a scale of representative capabilities.
2. Related Art
Modern businesses operate in an increasingly competitive environment. To survive, businesses must adapt to this environment and execute in a clear, consistent, and efficient manner. Furthermore, the global nature of many businesses greatly increases the complexity and difficulty of surviving on a day to day basis, let alone growing and prospering.
Despite the need for a modern business to meet the challenges of the global marketplace, it is still often the case that the business lacks clarity, consistency, and well-defined execution of its core processes. These shortcomings severely constrain the business, and lead directly to inefficiencies and waste due to unnecessary complexity, process exceptions, and customer dissatisfaction. At the same time, it can be very difficult to identify specific processes to which improvements may be made, either because the business itself does not have the expertise to identify the processes or because the complexities of the business frustrate attempts to clearly delineate the processes to be improved.
Even if the business, on its own, could identify one of the many processes that it needs to improve, the business would not necessarily know how to improve the process or be able to identify a concrete and measurable improvement goal. Another difficulty exists in determining whether there are any intermediate goals that should be reached along the way. As a result, businesses struggle to meet the demands of the modern marketplace and fail to identify opportunities for margin improvement, category expansion, portfolio optimization, multi-channel execution, selling performance, and to reach other important goals.
Therefore, a need exists for a comprehensive capability analysis model and capability analysis system.
SUMMARY
A capability analysis structure helps a modern business, such as retail businesses, meet the challenges of the global marketplace by defining a scale of mastery along which the business may locate its current practices. The capability analysis structure accelerates the discovery of hidden process overlaps and process or capability gaps within business operations. In addition, the capability analysis structure helps the business to identify specific areas in which improvements may be made, how to make the improvements, and how to establish levels of capability along the way to an ultimate capability goal. As a result, the business can achieve the clarity, consistency, and well-defined execution of its core processes that reduce inefficiencies and waste due to unnecessary process complexity and exceptions.
The capability analysis structure includes a key factor dimension and a capability scale dimension. The capability scale dimension defines multiple capability levels. The capability levels may form a scale of increasing organizational capability. On example of such a scale includes a ‘Basic’ capability level, followed by a ‘Progressive’ capability level, followed by a ‘Leading’ capability level, followed by an ‘Emerging’ capability level.
The key factor dimension establishes a consistent set of key analysis areas in which to analyze business processes. Examples of key analysis areas include a process participation key analysis area, a process creation key analysis area, and a process frequency key analysis area. Additional examples of key analysis areas include a process inputs key analysis area, a process outputs key analysis area, a process automation key analysis area, and a process integration key analysis area.
Representative practice data populates the capability analysis structure. The representative practice data may be specific to any one of many different business processes. For example, a capability analysis structure for corporate strategy includes representative practice data for corporate strategy at each of the capability levels along the capability scale dimension and in each of the key analysis areas along the key factor dimension. Any number of pre-defined capability analysis structures may be defined and stored in a process detail pool for subsequent retrieval and application to a business under examination. Accordingly, the capability analysis structure provides a flexible and adaptive scale of mastery against which business practices may be compared to ascertain where the capabilities of a business under examination fall along the scale.
Other systems, methods, features and advantages will be, or will become, apparent to one with skill in the art upon examination of the following figures and detailed description. All such additional systems, methods, features and advantages are included within this description, are within the scope of the invention, and are protected by the following claims.



BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
The capability analysis structure and system may be better understood with reference to the following drawings and description. The elements in the figures are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the capability analysis techniques. In the figures, like-referenced numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the different views.
FIG. 1 shows a specific example of a capability analysis structure.
FIG. 2 shows a generalized capability analysis structure.
FIG. 3 shows two key analysis areas of a corporate strategy capability analysis structure.
FIG. 4 shows two additional key analysis areas of a corporate strategy capability analysis structure.
FIG. 5 shows three additional key analysis areas of a corporate strategy capability analysis structure.
FIG. 6 shows a process detail pool that includes multiple pre-defined capability analysis structures.
FIG. 7 shows a capability analysis system.
FIG. 8 shows a flow diagram for establishing capability analysis structures.
FIG. 9 shows a flow diagram for retrieving and applying capability analysis structures.



DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS
FIG. 1 shows a capability analysis structure 100. The capability analysis structure 100 specifies seven analysis dimensions, referred to below as key analysis areas 102. In particular, the key analysis areas 102 include a process participation key analysis area 106, a process creation key analysis area 108, and a process frequency key analysis area 110. In addition, the key analysis areas 102 include a process inputs key analysis area 112, a process outputs key analysis area 114, a process automation key analysis area 116, and a process integration key analysis area 118. Tables 1-7, below, provide an explanation of each of the key analysis areas 106-118.
The capability analysis structure 100 also defines multiple capability levels 104. The capability levels 104 establish a scale of increasing organizational capability. In FIG. 1, the capability levels 104 start with a ‘Basic’ capability level 120, that is followed by a ‘Progressive’ capability level 122, that is followed up by a ‘Leading’ capability level 124, and that ends with an ‘Emerging’ capability level 126. Accordingly, the capability analysis structure 100 establishes a scale of mastery 128 along which a business process may be located and categorized with reference to representative practice data. More specifically, the business process under evaluation may be assigned a capability position 130 along the scale of mastery 128 (e.g., the business process falls into the ‘Leading’ capability level). Tables 8-11, below, provide an explanation of each of the capability levels 104.
Representative practice data populates the capability analysis structure 100. The representative practice data captures criteria, characteristics, or other features of a business process at a specific capability level in a specific key analysis area. For example, FIG. 1 shows that each capability level at each key analysis area may include representative practice data. FIG. 1 specifically labels ‘Basic’ process participation representative practice data 132, ‘Progressive’ process frequency representative practice data 134, ‘Leading’ process outputs representative practice data 136, and ‘Emerging’ process integration representative practice data 138. Specific examples of representative practice data for retail organizations are given below.
A capability analysis structure with representative practice data provides a tool for determining where a process under examination falls along the scale of mastery 128. For example, business consultants may interview a business to determine, measure, or otherwise ascertain the characteristics, criteria, and other features of a particular process as it is implemented at the business. The business consultants may then use their expertise to compare the determined characteristics to the representative practice data in the capability analysis structure and arrive at a capability position 134 for the process under examination. In doing so, for example, the business consultants may identify where the process under examination falls in terms of capability level in each of the specific key analysis areas, then determine an overall position on the scale of mastery 128 for the process under examination.
The following Tables 1-7 provide an explanation of each of the key analysis areas 106-118:







TABLE 1





Process Participation Key Analysis Area


















Description:
Describes who participates in the process execution




or approval. 



Criteria: 
Number of participants involved or informed -




having more participants is generally considered 




a characteristic of greater mastery. 




Level of internal (within the company) and external 




(outside the company) collaboration among the 




participants - greater collaboration is generally 




considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 




Number of functional/process areas represented by 




the participants - more representation is generally 




considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 




Degree of participation across levels - senior 




executives, directors, managers, and other levels - 




a greater participation across levels is generally 




considered a characteristic of greater mastery.

















TABLE 2





Process Creation Key Analysis Area
















Description: 
Outlines how the process is executed and 



highlights the key points that serve as 



differentiators in process capability and 



sophistication across the scale of mastery. 


Criteria: 
Is the process standard and repeatable (generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery) 



or non-standard and inconsistent (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery)? 



Is the process transparent and visible across 



the organization (generally considered a 



characteristic of greater mastery) vs. 



isolated and not clearly understood (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery)? 



Are results reviewed, iterated, and approved 



(generally considered a characteristic of greater 



mastery), or is there no governance or no ability 



to influence or change (generally considered a 



characteristic of lower mastery)? 



Is the process flexible and adaptable (generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery), 



or is the process inflexible and rigid, difficult to 



change (generally considered a characteristic of 



lower mastery)? 



Does executing the process and the results 



generated contribute significantly to business 



performance (generally considered a 



characteristic of greater mastery), or does 



execution have a little or unknown impact on 



business performance (generally considered a 



characteristic of lower mastery)? 
















TABLE 3





Process Frequency Key Analysis Area
















Description: 
Describes the number of times and frequency at 



which a process is executed, or the number of 



iterations allowed prior to completion. 


Criteria: 
Low frequency versus high frequency, with higher 



frequency generally considered a characteristic of 



greater mastery where it facilitates or demonstrates 



ease of execution, and results in more rapid continuous 



improvement or adjustment that is meaningful. 



Ability to iterate more frequently and more 



often, as opposed to a single chance, with more 



iterative capability generally considered a



characteristic of greater mastery. 



Speed and accuracy at which a process is completed -



with higher speed and accuracy generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



The frequency at which a process is measured 



and refined to ensure optimal execution, with more 



frequent measurement generally considered a 



characteristic of greater mastery. 



Frequency driven and executed by process 



needs is generally considered a characteristic of 



greater mastery, rather than frequency driven by 



calendar constraints which is generally considered a 



characteristic of lower mastery.
















TABLE 4





Process Inputs Key Analysis Area
















Description: 
Data, intentions, decisions, objectives, materials, 



information, events, and outputs from other processes 



are all considered possible inputs into a process. 


Criteria: 
Quality and accuracy of inputs - higher quality 



is generally considered a characteristic of 



greater mastery. 



Consistency of inputs - greater consistency is generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Frequency of inputs - greater frequency is generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Variety of or detail of inputs - broader considerations 



or more granular information is generally considered 



a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Timeliness of inputs - the timeliness of inputs from a 



cutoff or deadline, recency, and process alignment 



standpoint. 



Using more timely inputs is generally considered 



a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Understanding of inputs - a greater understanding 



of the inputs improves process effectiveness 



and is generally considered a characteristic 



of greater mastery.
















TABLE 5





Process Outputs Key Analysis Area
















Description:
Decisions, status, events, actions, information, 



materials, sub assembly, finished product, service 



delivered, and other process outputs. 


Criteria: 
Quality and accuracy of outputs - higher quality is 



generally considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Consistency of outputs - higher consistency is generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Frequency of outputs - greater frequency is generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Variety of or detail of outputs - broader considerations 



or more granular information is generally considered 



a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Timeliness of outputs - the timeliness of outputs from 



a cutoff or deadline, recency, and process alignment 



standpoint. Using more timely outputs is generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery. 



Understanding of outputs - a greater understanding of the 



outputs improves process effectiveness and is generally 



considered a characteristic of greater mastery.
















TABLE 6





Process Automation Key Analysis Area
















Description: 
Extent of automation or tools used to shape, 



enable, or execute the process. 


Criteria: 
Single instance of an application (generally considered 



a characteristic of higher mastery) as opposed to 



multiple disparate versions of applications (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Routine, repetitious tasks are highly automated (generally 



considered a characteristic of higher mastery) as opposed 



to being manually executed (generally considered 



a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Higher number of users of automation (generally 



considered a characteristic of higher mastery) as 



opposed to a lower number of users (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery).



Automation used as a competitive differentiator 



(generally considered a characteristic of higher mastery) 



as opposed to automation only as a common necessity 



(generally considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Level of automated data and its ease of accessibility 



(generally considered a characteristic of higher mastery) as 



opposed to limited data automation and complicated access 



(generally considered a characteristic of lower mastery).
















TABLE 7





Process Integration Key Analysis Area
















Description: 
Extent of integration the process has with other 



processes, systems, tools, people, or 3rd parties. 


Criteria: 
Degree to which processes are integrated through timely 



execution and sequencing or parallel activity (generally 



considered a characteristic of higher mastery) as opposed 



to un-timed or out of sequence execution (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Degree to which processes share information in real or near 



real time (generally considered a characteristic of higher 



mastery) as opposed to batched or manual data sharing 



(generally considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Degree to which decisions are made jointly with 



and uniformly communicated to appropriate business 



areas (generally considered a characteristic of 



higher mastery) as opposed to isolated or unrepresented 



decisions and disparate communication (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Degree to which systems share data seamlessly and 



source it from a common or “virtually” common database 



(generally considered a characteristic of higher mastery) as 



opposed to multiple data sources that are not connected 



(generally considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Degree to which common applications or processes are 



used to execute the same task and achieve the same results 



(generally considered a characteristic of high mastery) as 



opposed to different applications or processes are 



used in an attempt to execute the same task, and often 



different, unintended results are achieved (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery). 



Degree to which different applications have the same



or similar interface and have a single access point/logon



(generally considered a characteristic of higher 



mastery) as opposed to disparate applications with 



multiple logons and different interfaces (generally 



considered a characteristic of lower mastery).









The following Tables 8-11 provide an explanation of each of the capability levels 120-126:







TABLE 8





‘Basic’ Capability Level
















Description:
Capability mastery at a basic level is indicative of a high level,



unclear, undisciplined, or unsophisticated ability to execute the



capability or process in a consistent, traceable, and repeatable



manner. For non-core, low priority, new, or early adoption of certain



process capabilities, a basic level may be acceptable to the



organization or the organization may not have the resources to



expand beyond the basic capability level. A basic level of mastery



often indicates that an organization is lagging behind its competitors



in its ability to execute the capability.
















TABLE 9





‘Progressive’ Capability Level
















Description:
Capability mastery at a progressive level is indicative of a



conservative ability to execute the capability in a fairly consistent,



traceable, and repeatable manner with proven techniques, tools and



commonly accepted practices that are readily available and



maintained. This capability mastery may be a strategic decision by



the organization to be a follower or “good enough” operator in many



respects or may be an interim step that organizations aspire to move



beyond to achieve a leading mastery of the given capability. A



progressive level of mastery often indicates that an organization is



performing consistently with its competitors in its ability to execute a



capability.
















TABLE 10





‘′Leading’ Capability Level
















Description:
Capability mastery at a leading level is indicative of a highly detailed,



clear, and often iterative and sophisticated ability to execute the



capability. The leading capability is the recognized and referenced



benchmark of continuous improvement and high performance for a



given process capability. The leading process capability has been



optimized for efficiency and effectiveness, is well understood,



traceable, and consistently executed to the point of being



competitively differentiated or at the top level of peer to peer



comparison.
















TABLE 11





‘Emerging’ Capability Level
















Description:
Capability mastery at an emerging level is indicative of a clearly



differentiated ability to execute the capability that is ahead of,



unavailable to, or risky for the competition. The emerging process



capability is characterized by innovation, integration, and thought



leadership that looks to raise or change the standard set in the



leading category of mastery, and over time become a required



capability for sustained competitiveness, scale, and high



performance. Emerging capability mastery is flexible in its



characterization, as an organization may be considered as having



an emerging capability mastery, even though it is only in limited



production due to its uniqueness or early adoption, and has not yet



“mastered” the capability at scale - but are far enough in advance of



the competition that they will benefit from the lessons learned and



early iterations of developing the capability.









The capability analysis structure 100 is not limited to the form shown above in FIG. 1. Instead, the capability analysis structure 100 may be adapted and modified to fill a wide variety of analysis roles. In that regard, FIG. 2 shows a generalized capability analysis structure 200.
The generalized capability analysis structure 200 is organized along a key factor dimension 202 and a capability scale dimension 204. ‘M’ key analysis areas (e.g., 7 key analysis areas) are defined along the key factor dimension 202. One of the key analysis areas is labeled 206. Similarly, ‘N’ capability levels (e.g., 4, capability levels) are defined along the capability scale dimension 204. One of the capability levels is labeled 208. The scale of mastery 128 spans the key analysis areas along the capability scale dimension 204.
Representative practice data may populate the generalized capability analysis structure 200 in whole or in part. FIG. 2 labels a specific instance of representative practice data as the representative practice data 210 for capability level 2 for the key analysis area 2. The generalized capability analysis structure 200 and the representative practice data may reflect any desired business process, at any desired level of granularity along the key factor dimension 202 and capability scale dimension 204. FIG. 1 shows a specific instantiation of the generalized capability analysis structure 100 with seven key analysis areas and four capability levels.
FIG. 3 shows a specific example of the process participation and process creation key analysis areas for a corporate strategy capability analysis structure 300. In particular, FIG. 3 shows that for each of the ‘Basic’ capability level 120, ‘Progressive’ capability level 122, and the ‘Leading’ capability level 124, representative practice data exists in the structure 300. One specific example is the representative practice data 302, which provides a baseline for ‘Basic’ level process participation. Specifically, the representative practice data 302 establishes that ‘Basic’ level process participation for corporate strategy is characterized by “Little or no executive participation beyond the CEO. Board of Directors or Equity Partners may set or heavily influence the strategy.”
FIG. 3 also shows the leading representative practice data 304 that provides a baseline for progressive level process participation. Specifically, the representative practice data 304 establishes that progressive level process participation for corporate strategy is characterized by “C-level/executive team participation—strategy is determined collaboratively. Board of Directors or equity partner review and approval if necessary.” Accordingly, a process under examination may be mapped onto the scale of mastery 128 at any one of the multiple key analysis areas, with the structure 300 and providing a well defined set of capability levels, criteria for reaching each of the capability levels, and intermediate capability level goals defined between substantially different capability levels. FIG. 3 also illustrates that it is not necessary to have representative practice data for every combination of capability level and key analysis area. Specifically, FIG. 3 shows that the corporate strategy capability analysis structure 300 need not include ‘Emerging’ level process participation or process creation representative practice data. However, the corporate strategy capability analysis structure 300 may be revised to add such representative practice data as it is identified and standardized for application to corporate strategy processes.
FIG. 4 continues the example started in FIG. 3. In particular, FIG. 4 shows specific examples of process frequency and process inputs key analysis area representative practice data. Thus for example, the representative practice data 402 establishes baseline ‘Basic’ level process frequency characteristics. Similarly, the representative practice data 404 establishes ‘Progressive’ level process frequency characteristics. FIG. 5 shows that the corporate strategy capability analysis structure 300 also includes the process outputs key analysis area, the process automation key analysis area, and a process integration key analysis area. As specific examples, the representative practice data 502 establishes ‘Progressive’ level process outputs characteristics, while the representative practice data 504 establishes the ‘Leading’ level process outputs characteristics for corporate strategy.
As noted above, the capability analysis structures may be adapted for any desired business process. Furthermore, the individual capability analysis structures may be collected and stored for future retrieval and possible modification in a process detail pool. FIG. 6 illustrates a process detail pool 600 that includes multiple predefined capability analysis structures, two of which are labeled as the first capability analysis structure 602 and the last capability analysis structure 604.
The process detail pool may include as many or as few predefined capability analysis structures as desired. As a result, the process detail pool 600 captures a significant and important depth of experience that may be consulted when analyzing organizational capability in any particular process area. Each capability analysis structure in the process detail pool 600 may be populated with predefined representative practice data. Alternatively or additionally, the process detail pool 600 may store one or more capability analysis structure templates that are dynamically populated with the most up-to-date representative practice data upon retrieval and presentation (e.g., to a business analysis consultant). Such representative practice data may be retrieved from a representative practice data database or other information source.
Tables 12-17, below, provide examples of six different populated capability analysis structures for business processes ranging from corporate strategy to brand strategy to format strategy. While the examples below are specific to the retail process industry, capability analysis structures may be defined for and applied to any particular business industry.
Table 12 shows an example of a capability analysis structure suitable for Corporate Strategy analysis.







TABLE 12







Corporate Strategy Scale of Mastery Structure


<========================SCALE OF MASTERY======================== >








High-Level, No 
Detailed, Iterative, 


Clear Process 
Clear Process












Basic
Progressive
Leading
Emerging





Process
Little to no
C-Level/Executive
C-Level/Executive Team



Participation
executive
Team participation-
determines strategy with



Who
participation
strategy is
managed input from non-




beyond the CEO.
determined
executive influences such as




Board of Directors
collaboratively.
employees, customers, and




or Equity Partners
Board of Directors or
suppliers.




may set or heavily
Equity Partner





influence the
review and approval





strategy.
if necessary.




Process
Strategy process is
A process for
A clear and consistent



Creation
not defined or is
strategy
strategy development



How
loosely defined.
development is
process is documented and



What
Largely developed
followed, but may
followed for both annual and




in isolation and
vary from year to
long range plans. The




dictated to
year and is
strategic process includes a




leadership, with
inconsistently
refresh of the corporate




inconsistent
applied or executed.
goals, business scope and




communication to
The annual plan is
plan, operating model,




the organization.
emphasized, with
growth intent, and major




The annual plan is
the long range plan
change programs.




emphasized, with
being done at 3 or 5





minimal long range
year intervals.





planning detail.





Process
No iterations, no
Iterations are done
Both long range and annual



Frequency
set timeframe, but
during development.
planning is conducted. A



Number of
generally an annual
Process is done
revision/refresh/performance



Iterations
restatement or
annually or in
schedule is developed as



Frequency
reiteration of the
defined periods (3 yr
part of the planning cycle.



Revisions
strategy.
increments with






annual refreshes).




Process
Inputs are unclear
Process inputs
Process inputs include



Inputs
to the organization,
include C-
everything in the



Describe
general reliance on
Level/Executive
progressive category, plus



Inputs to
past performance
Team direct input,
solicited input from the



Process
factors and
historical and
organization and external




historical reports.
forward looking
parties.





business






performance






indicators, and






limited market






relevant trend






inputs.




Process
Outputs are often
A strategy document
A strategy document is



Outputs
unclear, with
is produced and
completed, with strategic



Describe
strategic intent and
communicated to
targets and expected



Outputs of
strategic motivators
the organization, but
methods to be deployed,



Process
not well defined or
often lacks specific
and is communicated to




communicated.
targets and methods
stakeholders.




Output is generally
for strategy





focused on sales lift
achievement.





and cost reduction






messages.





Process
Little to no
The process defines
Automated reports and data



Automation
automation is used.
standard inputs and
analysis tools are used in



Describe
May involve
formats for strategy
strategy, development, along



Tools or Level
presentation
material. The
with syndicated or



of Automation
software such as
system is used to
subscribed data services for



Required in
PowerPoint, Excel
generate reports
market and industry insights.



Process
spreadsheets, and
and conduct data or
Common templates are




email.
comparative
used to capture and





analysis used in
communicate strategy inputs





strategy
and outputs.





development.




Process
Integration points
The process is
This strategy development is



Integration
are generally email
integrated into the
integrated into the long



Describe
or meeting driven,
periodic planning
range and annual planning



integration
between CEO and
calendar, but
calendars to coincide with



points
Board of Directors
generally no
fiscal year budgeting, and



between this
or Equity Partners. 
automated or other
refreshes or updates are



process and

process integration
done to coincide with major



other

is intentional,
shareholder meetings or



processes,

beyond perhaps an
analyst communications.



tool, systems,

annual budgeting




and other

cycle.




elements.









Table 13 shows an example of a capability analysis structure suitable for Customer Strategy analysis.







TABLE 13







Customer Strategy Scale of Mastery Structure


<========================SCALE OF MASTERY======================== >








High-Level, No Clear 
Detailed, Iterative,


Process 
Clear Process












Basic
Progressive
Leading
Emerging





Process
Primary input coming
C-Level/Executive
Customer centric



Participation
from marketing group,
Team sets the
thinking is led by C-



Who
with little input other than
customer strategy
Level/Executive




review and approval
with input from the
Team and they are




from C-Level/Executive
leadership of stores,
directly involved in




Team or stores.
marketing, and
setting the





customer service.
customer strategy






collaboratively with






inputs from






customers, stores,






marketing, sales,






and customer






service.



Process
Unsophisticated process
Some customer
Deep customer



Creation
for assessing customers
segmentation
centric analysis is



How
with little to no
analysis is done,
done and used to



What
segmentation, limited
offers are aligned
drive business




data inputs or fact basis,
with customer
activities including




offers tend to be product
segments and
assortments and




and service driven rather
customer
services, customer




than based on customer
performance is
feedback is




preferences, little to no
tracked and used in
frequently captured




customer measurement.
future planning.
and growth plans






by customer






segment and






cluster are






developed and






followed.



Process
Customer strategy is
Customer strategy is
Customer strategy



Frequency
only iterated during long
incorporated into
is set annually, but



Number of
range or annual
annual planning
customer wants



Iterations
planning. Typically
process and
and needs are



Frequency
customer strategy is
seasonal refreshes
tracked quarterly



Revisions
looked at once during
are incorporated for
with revisions or




the year and rarely
seasonal product.
enhancements




revised.

evaluated






throughout the






year.



Process Inputs
Limited customer
Customer data is
Extensive customer



Describe
insights and data are
available and used in
attributes and



Inputs to
available, largely driven
strategy process,
customer value



Process
by historical customer
though may be dated
analysis is done.




purchase behavior vs.
due to system
Forward looking




forward looking
constraints or
customer insights




customer wants and
inadequate analysis
and near real time




needs.
capability.
customer purchase






behavior is






integrated into the






strategy process.



Process
Customer strategy is
Customer strategy is
Customer strategy



Outputs
broadly defined and not
defined by segment
is defined at



Describe
detailed at customer
along with growth
customer segment



Outputs of
segment level. Overall
targets and
and cluster level,



Process
customer growth is
measurement
with growth targets




identified, but little to no 
expectations.
and sources of




measurement approach

growth, value




is included.

contribution, and






measurement






approach






articulated in the






strategy.



Process
Little automation is used,
Online customer
Customer feedback



Automation
other than ad-hoc
feedback is captured
automation is



Describe Tools
customer reports, in-
via the retailer
deployed via in-



or Level of
store manual surveys
website,
store kiosks and



Automation
and limited point-of-sale
incorporated into
company websites



Required in
analysis as input into the
strategy
to capture direct



Process
strategy development
development
customer insights




process.
process.
for strategy






development.






Common online






templates are used






across






departments to






capture customer






centric ideas.



Process
Limited integration
Customer strategy is
Customer strategy
Customer growth,


Integration
points across the
developed in parallel
is integrated into
loyalty and


Describe
organization, customer
with corporate
the corporate
satisfaction tied to


integration
strategy is set and
strategy areas and
strategy processes
group and individual


points between
cascaded down through
influences strategic
and provides
incentives for


this process
the organization
outcomes.
customer centric
performance against


and other
inconsistently.

direction/context for
customer strategy.


processes,


all strategic



tool, systems,


development



and other


areas. Point-of-



elements.


sale information is






integrated into






strategy process,






along with






customer loyalty






and purchase data,






demographic and






syndicated data.









Table 14 shows an example of a capability analysis structure suitable for Brand Strategy analysis.







TABLE 14







Brand Strategy Scale of Mastery Structure


<========================SCALE OF MASTERY======================== >








High-Level, No 
Detailed, Iterative,


Clear Process 
Clear Process












Basic
Progressive
Leading
Emerging





Process
Chief Marketing
Chief Marketing
C-Level/Executive



Participation
Officer and
Officer and Chief
Team collaboration



Who
marketing
Customer Officer with
facilitated by Chief




department, with
review by C-
Marketing Officer




review by CEO
Level/Executive
and/or Chief




and/or Board of
Team and Board of
Customer Officer.




Directors.
Directors.
Review by Board of






Directors.



Process
Marketing evaluates
Leadership evaluates
Leadership



Creation
brand image against
brand position
evaluates brand



How
business
against competition,
components by



What
performance and
business
market, image,




customer feedback.
performance, and
performance, and




Brand strategy
customer feedback.
competition.




consists of
Brand strategy
Review retail offer




recommended
includes short and
pipeline and




changes to brand
longer term
customer feedback




based on historical
recommendations for
to assess future




information.
brand enhancement.
brand positioning






and strategy






reflects near term






and future






adjustments at the






brand component






level.



Process
Annually
Annually
Annually, with



Frequency


quarterly feedback



Number of


from performance



Iterations


metrics to assess



Frequency


in-season



Revisions


marketing






opportunities or






adjustments.



Process Inputs
Historical business
Historical business
Retail offer



Describe
performance and
performance,
pipeline, future



Inputs to
customer feedback.
competitive position, 
customer and



Process

customer feedback.
market trends,






competitive activity,






business






performance, and






customer feedback.



Process
Brand strategy
Brand strategy
Brand strategy that



Outputs
consisting of
consisting of short
describes at the



Describe
recommended
and longer term
component level



Outputs of
changes to
brand enhancements.
near term and



Process
branding.

future brand






position, linkage to






other strategy






components, and






brand






measurements for






target goals.



Process
No automation
Some limited access
Automated brand



Automation
utilized in process
to online survey or
performance



Describe Tools
beyond presentation
feedback tool
metrics, survey or



or Level of
software and system
capability and system
feedback tools, and



Automation
reports.
reports.
media or 3rd party



Required in


reporting for brand



Process


performance and






perception






analysis.



Process
No process
Some process
Direct integration



Integration
integration
integration with other
with overall



Describe

strategy development
company strategic



integration

efforts, sharing of
processes,



points between

information, and
performance



this process

system tools.
reporting, and



and other


customer feedback



processes,


mechanisms.



tool, systems,






and other






elements.









Table 15 shows an example of a capability analysis structure suitable for Portfolio Strategy analysis.







TABLE 15







Portfolio Strategy Scale of Mastery Structure


<========================SCALE OF MASTERY======================== >








High-Level, No
Detailed, Iterative,


Clear Process
Clear Process












Basic
Progressive
Leading
Emerging





Process
Chief Merchant and
C-Level/Executive
Portfolio executive



Participation
Chief Financial
Team collaboration
team - often



Who
Officer.
facilitated by Chief
consisting of Chief





Merchant and/or
Merchant, Chief





Chief Financial
Marketer, Chief





officer.
Customer Officer,






and Chief Financial






Officer, with






collaboration across






C-Level/Executive






Team and category






leads.



Process
Portfolio strategy is
Portfolio strategy is
Portfolio strategy



Creation
limited in
developed with some
leverages fact



How
development,
level of role definition
based analytics,



What
focusing mostly on
by category, basic
roles are clearly




individual
analytics are used to
defined, target




assortments by
determine category
financial goals are




category with little or
targets, but little
specific and




no role definition,
sophistication is used
resource allocation




rather than a
to allocate resources.
is commensurate




portfolio view across
Multi-year view and
with targeted goals.




categories.
emerging businesses
Portfolio strategy





usually not included.
includes a multiyear






view and addresses






emerging






businesses.



Process
Portfolio strategy is
Portfolio strategy is
Portfolio strategy is



Frequency
done annually, but
done annually, with a
done annually but



Number of
little to no revisions
mid-year checkpoint
with a multi-year



Iterations
are completed due
for revision.
view for emerging



Frequency
to lack of in-season

businesses, with



Revisions
performance

quarterly refreshes




tracking and no

or adjustments




understanding of

based on current




overall portfolio

performance,




sensitivity across

forecast, competitor




categories is

actions, and market




available.

trend data.



Process Inputs
Corporate strategy
Corporate strategy
Corporate strategy



Describe
components and
components, overall
components, overall



Inputs to
overall financial
financial targets,
financial targets,



Process
targets, current
customer insights,
customer analytics,




assortment, and
product historical
competitor




historical
performance, and
analytics, future




performance.
projected assortment.
trends, current and






future assortment,






resource capacity






and constraints, and






supplier






intelligence.



Process
Portfolio strategy
Portfolio strategy with
Portfolio strategy



Outputs
with assortments
assortments, financial
with assortments,



Describe
and financial targets
targets, category
financial targets,



Outputs of
by category.
roles, and
category roles,



Process

performance metrics
category intent,





by category.
performance






metrics, and major






special projects






identified, along






with multi-year view






and emerging






business






opportunities.



Process
No automation is
Some automation
Automation is used



Automation
used in the process,
used to perform basic
to perform business



Describe Tools
other than
analytics, along with
performance



or Level of
presentation
system reports and
modeling and



Automation
software and system
presentation
simulation,



Required in
reports.
software.
comparative data



Process


and trend analysis,






forecasting, and






financial analysis.



Process
Little to no
Portfolio strategy is
Portfolio strategy is



Integration
integration with
integrated into
integrated with



Describe
other strategic
strategic planning
other strategy



integration
planning, or
process and service
development, is



points between
operational functions
as in input to
data driven with



this process
such as supply
merchandise financial
analytics, and



and other
chain or stores.
planning, category
includes other



processes,

plan management,
functional areas



tool, systems,

and assortment
such as supply



and other

planning, but
chain, talent



elements.

integration with
management, and





analytics and
store operations





operational practices
insights for





is limited or not 
optimizing category





emphasized.
roles and target






performance.






Merchandise






financial planning






and category plan






management are






closely linked to






execute and






optimize the






portfolio strategy.









Table 16 shows an example of a capability analysis structure suitable for Channel Strategy analysis.







TABLE 16







Channel Strategy Scale of Mastery Structure


<========================SCALE OF MASTERY======================== >








High-Level, No Clear
Detailed, Iterative,


Process
Clear Process












Basic
Progressive
Leading
Emerging





Process
Executive
Executive leadership
C-Level/Executive



Participation
participation for
within sales,
Team leadership



Who
review and approval,
marketing, and
and collaboration




but largely driven by
customer service
on channel strategy




marketing only.
develops strategy,
development,





with C-
facilitated by sales





Level/Executive
and marketing





Team review and
leadership.





approval.




Process
Executive
Executive leadership
C-Level/Executive



Creation
participation for
within sales,
Team leadership &



How
review and approval,
marketing, and
collaboration on



What
but largely driven by
customer service
channel strategy




marketing only.
develops strategy,
development,





with C-
facilitated by sales





Level/Executive
and marketing





Team review and
leadership.





approval.




Process
Annual process with
Annual process with
Annual process



Frequency
revisions occurring
mid-year checkpoint
with quarterly



Number of
reactively when
to assess
review and



Iterations
business issues arise.
performance and
refreshes based on



Frequency

areas for
performance,



Revisions

improvement or
competitive





retirement.
actions, and in






some cases,






technology






changes or pilot






decision points.



Process Inputs
Corporate strategy
Corporate strategy,
Corporate strategy,



Describe
and customer
customer strategy,
customer strategy,



Inputs to
strategy, assortment
portfolio strategy, and
portfolio strategy



Process
information and
format strategy,
and format strategy




historical channel
historical
components,




performance.
performance and
historical





technology
performance and





availability.
target expectations,






technology






advancements and






availability.



Process
Channel strategy that
Channel strategy that
Channel strategy



Outputs
includes financial
includes channel
that includes



Describe
targets by channel
roles, channel
channel roles,



Outputs of
and resource
operating guidelines,
cross channel



Process
allocation/prioritization
financial targets,
integration




by channel.
performance KPIs,
components,





and resource
financial targets,





allocation.
resource






allocations,






performance






calendar and KPIs,






channel standards






and channel






leadership roles.



Process
Limited automation for
Automation used for
Automation used
Sophisticated


Automation
historical performance
historical
for channel
automation for


Describe Tools
analysis.
performance analysis
performance
modeling of channel


or Level of

and limited
analysis - historical
performance and


Automation

forecasting of future
and forecast
optimization,


Required in

channel performance.
modeling.
including integrated


Process

Also, select channel
Automation used
channel performance




KPIs are automated
for in stream
and channel




for capture and
channel
sensitivities.




tracking.
performance






against role and






KPIs.



Process
Channel strategy
Process is done in
Process is done



Integration
process reflects
concert with overall
collaboratively and



Describe
corporate and
strategy planning
in sync with overall



integration
customer strategy and
effort at corporate
strategy planning,



points between
is integrated into
level. Channel
and has the ability



this process
existing or required
strategy is
to influence other



and other
formats and
constrained based on
strategy elements



processes,
operations.
level of and support
based on



tool, systems,

for integrated
integrated



and other

analytics.
analytics.



elements.









Table 17 shows an example of a capability analysis structure suitable for Format Strategy analysis.







TABLE 17







Format Strategy Scale of Mastery Structure


<========================SCALE OF MASTERY======================== >








High-Level, No
Detailed, Iterative,


Clear Process
Clear Process












Basic
Progressive
Leading
Emerging





Process
Marketing with
Marketing collaborates
C-Level/Executive
Collaboration of input


Participation
review and approval
with real estate to
Team collaboration
between internal and


Who
by CEO.
develop proposals for
across functions to
external functional




C-Level/Executive
optimize format
and design groups




Team to review and
performance and cost
with heavy customer




select.
balance.
focus group research






and competitive






analysis.


Process
Customer and
Customer and channel
Customer and channel
Leverage of


Creation
channel strategy are
strategy are leveraged,
strategy are leveraged,
“designer


How
leveraged, format
format differentiation is
supplemented with
personalities or


What
differentiation is
determined based on
additional competitor
design firms” to



assessed and
competitor assessment
analysis to derive store
integrate design



construction costs
and store clusters are
clusters and to
expertise into format



are evaluated.
developed.
determine desired
decisions and link to




Construction
customer shopping
brand image or drive




constraints are applied
experience, format
format innovation.




and a single or multi
options are developed,





format approach is
construction





determined. Alliance
implications are





partners and
assessed, and a single





concessionaires assist
or multi-format





in shaping or are
approach is defined.





responsible for format
Alliance partners





of in-store shops
responsible for format





where applicable.
of in store shops






where applicable.



Process
3-year planning
3-year planning cycle
Short (annual) and
Dynamic in-season


Frequency
cycle
with annual revisions.
long term planning
or “time of day


Number of


cycles, annual
shopping occasion”


Iterations


revisions and ongoing
formats with mobile


Frequency


yearly pilots for
fixtures and flexible


Revisions


iteration and feedback.
merchandise sets.


Process
Corporate,
All strategy platform
All strategy platform
All strategy platform


Inputs
customer, and
components.
components.
components.


Describe
channel strategy
Construction and real
Construction and real
Significant customer


Inputs to
components.
estate trends and cost
estate trends and cost
focus group


Process
Construction and
forecasts.
forecasts.
research, external



real estate costs.
Technology trends and
Technology trends and
trend analysis, deep




availability/affordability.
availability/affordability.
brand image





Format performance
assessments,





against plan and local
competitor analysis,





market specifics.
and local market






specificity and






influences.


Process
Format strategy that
Format strategy that
Format strategy that



Outputs
describes single or
includes channel
includes channel



Describe
multi format
specific formats, media
specific formats,



Outputs of
approach and
requirements,
sensory stimulants,



Process
standards.
standards by channel.
format standards, and






local market variants.



Process
Financial modeling
Store design software
Store design software,



Automation
software for
and financial modeling
financial modeling



Describe
construction costing.
software.
software,



Tools or Level


planogramming



of Automation


software for fixture



Required in


modeling and



Process


adjacency analysis,






and flow path software






for traffic patterns.



Process
Integrates with
Integrates with all
Integrates with all



Integration
corporate, customer
strategy components,
strategy components,



Describe
and channel
real estate
real estate



integration
strategy.
expectations, and
expectations, cross



points

information
functional operations,



between this

technology.
and information



process and


technology.



other






processes,






tool, systems,






and other






elements.









FIG. 7 shows a capability analysis system (“system”) 700. The system 700 includes a processor 702 and a memory 704. Several databases support the operation of the system 700, including a capability practices database 706, a measured practices database 708, a process detail pool database 710, and an analysis results database 726. The system 700 may include a local display 712 and input/output interfaces 717 (e.g., including a keyboard, mouse, microphone, speakers, or other device), and, through the communication interface 714 and networks 716, may communicate with remote devices 718 and remote displays 720. The networks 716 may be any combination of external networks (e.g., the Internet) and internal networks (e.g., corporate LANs). The displays 712 and 720 may, for example, present capability analysis structures 722 that the system 700 retrieves from the process detail pool database 710 for review, modification, and application by business consultants or other individuals. With regard to local access or access by the remote devices 718, the system 700 may include a login processing program 724 to authenticate and/or authorize access to the system 700. To that end, the login processing program 724 may include username/password verification, private/public key encryption, or other validation and data protection capabilities.
The capability practices database 706 stores representative practice data. As will be described in more detail below, the system may populate capability analysis structures with representative practice data suited to any particular business process at one or more capability levels across one or more key analysis areas. The measured practices database 708 may store the determined, measured, or otherwise ascertained characteristics, criteria, and other measured practice data of a particular process as it is implemented at a business. The measured practices data may be obtained through interviews with business consultants, through online questionnaires, through manual or automated analysis of business data (e.g., year end operating reports), or in other manners. The process detail pool database 710 stores the process detail pool 600, which includes pre-defined capability analysis structures 722. The analysis results database 726 may store capability analysis structures and determined capability positions for specific business processes that have been analyzed.
The system 700 facilitates the review, modification, creation, and application of capability analysis structures. In that role, capability analysis structure manipulation logic (“manipulation logic”) 746 in the system 700 creates, retrieves, and stores capability analysis data 728 in the memory 704. The manipulation logic 746 may establish capability analysis data 728 in the memory 704, including a capability analysis data structure 730 with multiple capability levels (“CL”) 732 organized along a capability scale dimension, multiple key analysis areas (“KAA”) 734 organized along a key factor dimension, and representative practice data (“RPD”) 736 that populates the capability analysis structure 730. The manipulation logic 746 may vary widely in implementation, and, as one example, may include data storage logic that saves data in memory and user interface logic that accepts capability level specifications, key analysis area specifications, and representative practice data inputs to create new capability analysis structures, modify existing capability analysis structures, delete capability analysis structures, or retrieve capability analysis structures for review.
The capability analysis data 726 may also include a capability position specifier 738. The capability position specifier 738 may record the capability position along the scale of mastery, as determined for any particular business process. Thus, when the capability position has been determined, it may be stored for future retrieval and review in the system 700 in the analysis results database 726 or elsewhere.
The data population logic 740 (e.g., a data population program executed by the processor 702) may populate template capability analysis structures. For example, the data population logic 740 may include input logic that accepts an input specifying the specific business process for which a capability analysis structure is requested, query logic that executes database queries (or prompts a user for input) to obtain the corresponding representative practice data, and storage logic that adds the retrieved representative practice data to the template capability analysis structure. The data population logic 740 produces populated analysis structures 742 that may be stored in the process detail pool database 710.
In addition to the manual analysis process described above, the capability analysis system 700 may provide an automated analysis of the determined characteristics to the representative practice data. As one example, the capability analysis system 700 may implement capability analysis logic 744 that includes comparison and/or matching logic that analyzes the determined characteristics with respect to the representative practice data to determine where the process under examination exists at each capability level and at each of the specific key analysis areas.
Furthermore, the capability analysis logic 700 may determine an overall position on the scale of mastery 128 (e.g., the capability position specifier 738) for the process under examination given the knowledge of where the process under examination falls in each capability level and in each specific key analysis area. Thus, for example, the capability analysis logic 700 may determine an overall capability level corresponding to the capability level for the majority of the key analysis areas, or it may apply a weighted analysis technique to give more emphasis to some key analysis areas and others in determining the overall position on the scale of mastery 128. As another example, the capability analysis logic 700 may implement an expert system (e.g., based on a neural network trained on prior determinations) that analyzes the determined characteristics with respect to the representative practice data and that ascertains where the process under examination falls along the scale of mastery 128 for each of the key analysis areas, or overall on the scale of mastery 128.
FIG. 8 shows a flow diagram 800 for creating capability analysis structures. The structure creator (e.g., the manipulation logic 746) establishes a key factor dimension for the capability analysis structure (802). As one specific example, the structure creator establishes, in the key factor dimension, seven key analysis areas: a process participation key analysis area (804), a process creation key analysis area (806), a process frequency key analysis area (808), a process inputs key analysis area (810), a process outputs key analysis area (812), a process automation key analysis area (814), and a process integration key analysis area (816).
The structure creator also establishes a capability scale dimension for the capability analysis structure (818). The capability scale dimension may define a scale of increasing organizational capability. For example, the structure creator may create a ‘Basic’ capability level (820), a ‘Progressive’ capability level (822), a ‘Leading’ capability level (824), and an ‘Emerging’ capability level (826).
The structure creator also populates the capability analysis structure with representative practice data (828). A process detail pool may be formed to hold multiple tailored capability analysis structures (830). The structure creator may store the populated analysis structure in the process detail pool for subsequent retrieval and analysis (832).
FIG. 9 shows a flow diagram 900 for retrieving and applying capability analysis structures. A selection of a business process to be analyzed is obtained (902). For example, the system 700 may accept input from a business consultant that specifies the business process (e.g., corporate strategy) for analysis. The system 700 may query a process detail pool 600 for a corresponding capability analysis structure (904). The corresponding capability analysis structure may be pre-defined in the pool (e.g., for corporate strategy), or the data population logic 730 (or other actor) may populate a template capability analysis structure that the system newly creates, or that is retrieved from a data store, such as the process detail pool database 710.
Practice data is obtained for the process under examination in the specific business under review (906). For example, a business consultant may interview the business to determine how the business currently executes the process under review. As another example, a representative from the business may complete a questionnaire, submit business data for analysis and parameter extraction, or otherwise provide the characteristics of their current process execution.
The determined practice data is compared to the representative practice data in the capability analysis structure (908). For example, a business consultant may use his or her expertise to arrive at a determination of capability position for the business and the process under examination (910). Alternatively or additionally, the capability analysis logic 744 may perform an automated analysis of the determined practice data and ascertain the capability position on the scale of mastery (910). The system 700 may store the analysis results, including the determined capability position, for future reference in the analysis results database 726 or other location (912).
Although selected aspects, features, or components of the implementations are depicted as being stored in computer-readable memories (e.g., as computer-executable instructions or capability analysis structures), all or part of the systems and structures may be stored on, distributed across, or read from other computer-readable media. The computer-readable media may include, for example, secondary storage devices such as hard disks, floppy disks, and CD-ROMs; a signal, such as a signal received from a network or received at an antenna; or other forms of memory, including ROM or RAM, either currently known or later developed.
Various implementations of the system 700 may include additional or different components. A processor may be implemented as a microprocessor, a microcontroller, a DSP, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), discrete logic, or a combination of other types of circuits or logic. Similarly, memories may be DRAM, SRAM, Flash or any other type of memory. The processing capability of the system may be distributed among multiple system components, such as among multiple processors and memories, optionally including multiple distributed processing systems. Parameters, databases, and other data structures may be separately stored and managed, may be incorporated into a single memory or database, may be logically and physically organized in many different ways, and may implemented in many ways, including data structures such as linked lists, hash tables, or implicit storage mechanisms. Programs may be combined or split among multiple programs, or distributed across several memories and processors.
While various embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that many more embodiments and implementations are possible within the scope of the invention. Accordingly, the invention is not to be restricted except in light of the attached claims and their equivalents.

## Claims

1. A method for capability analysis comprising the steps of:
providing a processor operatively coupled to memory, the memory having a capability analysis structure further comprising:
a key factor dimension comprising any combination of two or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area; and
a process integration key analysis area;
wherein each of the key analysis areas includes a retail industry specific key analysis area;


providing a capability scale dimension comprising multiple capability levels, including:
a ‘Basic’ capability level specifying a ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Participation criteria where little to no executive participation beyond the CEO exists and the board of directors or equity partners set or heavily influence strategy;
a ‘Progressive’ capability level specifying a ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Participation criteria where strategy is determined collaboratively and the board of directors or equity partners review and approve if necessary;
a ‘Leading’ capability level specifying a ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Participation criteria where an executive team determines strategy with managed input from non-executive influences including employees, customers, or suppliers;

generating, using the processor coupled to data population logic in communication with the memory, a populated analysis structure from the capability analysis structure;
receiving, by the processor, an input specifying a key analysis area corresponding to a retail business under examination;
searching, by the processor, the populated analysis structure for criteria that matches the key analysis area corresponding to the retail business under examination;
analyzing, by the processor, the matching criteria; and
obtaining, by the processor, a resultant performance level of the retail business under examination corresponding to the capability scale dimension.

2. The method product of claim 1, where the capability scale dimension comprises a scale of increasing organizational capability.

3. The method of claim 1, where the logic is further operable to:
obtain the representative practice data from a capability practices database; and
populate the capability analysis structure with the representative practice data.

4. The method of claim 1, where the logic is further operable to obtain and store a capability position specifier associated with the capability analysis structure.

5. A capability analysis method comprising the steps of:
providing a processor operatively coupled to memory, the memory defining a capability analysis structure having a key factor dimension for the capability analysis structure, the key factor dimension comprising any combination of two or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area; and
a process integration key analysis area;
where each of the key analysis areas includes a retail industry specific key analysis area

establishing, in the memory, a capability scale dimension for the capability analysis structure, the capability scale dimension comprising multiple capability levels, including:
a ‘Basic’ capability level specifying a ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Creation criteria where strategy process is not defined or is loosely defined and largely developed in isolation and dictated to leadership, with inconsistent communication to the organization and where an annual plan is emphasized, with minimal long range planning detail;
a ‘Progressive’ capability level specifying a ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Creation criteria where a process for strategy development is followed but may vary from year to year and is inconsistently applied or executed and where an annual plan is emphasized, with the long range plan being done at 3 or 5 year intervals;
a ‘Leading’ capability level specifying a ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Creation criteria where a clear and consistent strategy development process is documented and followed for both annual and long range plans and the strategic process includes a refresh of the corporate goals, business scope and plan, operating model, growth intent, and major change programs;

generating, using the processor coupled to data population logic in communication with the memory, a populated analysis structure from the capability analysis structure;
receiving, by the processor, an input specifying a key analysis area corresponding to a retail business under examination;
searching, by the processor, the populated analysis structure for criteria that matches the key analysis area corresponding to the retail business under examination;
analyzing, by the processor, the matching criteria; and
obtaining, by the processor, a resultant performance level of the retail business under examination corresponding to the capability scale dimension.

6. The method of claim 5, where establishing the key factor dimension comprises:
establishing any combination of three or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area; and
a process integration key analysis area.

7. The method of claim 5, where establishing the key factor dimension comprises:
establishing any combination of five or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area; and
a process integration key analysis area.

8. The method of claim 5, further comprising:
storing the capability analysis structure in a process detail pool comprising multiple capability analysis structures, each tailored for analysis of a specific business process.

9. A capability analysis system comprising:
a processor operatively coupled to memory, the memory having a capability analysis structure further comprising:
a key factor dimension comprising any combination of two or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area;
a process integration key analysis area;
where each of the key analysis areas includes a retail industry specific key analysis area;


a capability scale dimension comprising multiple capability levels, including:
a ‘Basic’ capability level specifying a ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Participation criteria where little to no executive participation beyond the CEO exists and the board of directors or equity partners set or heavily influence strategy;
a ‘Progressive’ capability level specifying a ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Participation criteria where strategy is determined collaboratively and the board of directors or equity partners review and approve if necessary;
a ‘Leading’ capability level specifying a ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Participation criteria where an executive team determines strategy with managed input from non-executive influences including employees, customers, or suppliers; and

data population logic coupled to the processor and in communication with the memory, configured to generate a populated analysis structure from the capability analysis structure;
the processor configured to:
receive an input specifying a key analysis area corresponding to a retail business under examination;
search the populated analysis structure for criteria that matches the key analysis area corresponding to the retail business under examination;
analyze the matching criteria; and
obtain a resultant performance level of the retail business under examination corresponding to the capability scale dimension.

10. The system of claim 9, where the memory further comprises:
capability analysis logic operable to compare the populated capability analysis structure against the measured practices data and determine a capability position specifier.

11. The system of claim 9, further comprising a capability practices database comprising the representative practice data.

12. The system of claim 9, further comprising a measured practices database comprising the measured practices data.

13. The system of claim 9, where the multiple capability levels comprise an ordered sequence of capability.

14. The system of claim 9, where the data population logic is operable to:
accept a capability selection from a set of capabilities of interest;
retrieve the representative practice data specific to the capability selection; and
generate the populated analysis structure based on the representative practice data specific to the capability selection.

15. The system of claim 9, further comprising:
a process detail pool database comprising multiple capability analysis structures, including the populated analysis structure, each tailored for analysis of a specific business process.

16. A capability analysis system comprising:
a processor operatively coupled to a memory, the memory having a capability analysis structure comprising:
a key factor dimension comprising any combination of two or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area;
a process integration key analysis area;
where each of the key analysis areas includes a retail industry specific key analysis area;

a capability scale dimension comprising multiple capability levels, including:
a ‘Basic’ capability level specifying a ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Creation criteria where strategy process is not defined or is loosely defined and largely developed in isolation and dictated to leadership, with inconsistent communication to the organization and where an annual plan is emphasized, with minimal long range planning detail;
a ‘Progressive’ capability level specifying a ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Creation criteria where a process for strategy development is followed but may vary from year to year and is inconsistently applied or executed and where an annual plan is emphasized, with the long range plan being done at 3 or 5 year intervals;
a ‘Leading’ capability level specifying a ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria for a corporate strategy includes Process Creation criteria where a clear and consistent strategy development process is documented and followed for both annual and long range plans and the strategic process includes a refresh of the corporate goals, business scope and plan, operating model, growth intent, and major change programs;

data population logic coupled to the processor and in communication with the memory configured to generate a populated analysis structure from the capability analysis structure;
the processor configured to:
receive an input specifying a key analysis area corresponding to a retail business under examination;
search the populated analysis structure for criteria that matches the key analysis area corresponding to the retail business under examination;
analyze the matching criteria; and
obtain a resultant performance level of the retail business under examination corresponding to the capability scale dimension.

17. A capability analysis system comprising:
a processor operatively coupled to memory, the memory having a capability analysis structure comprising:
a key factor dimension comprising any combination of two or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area;
a process integration key analysis area;
where each of the key analysis areas includes a retail industry specific key analysis area;

a capability scale dimension comprising multiple capability levels, including:
a ‘Basic’ capability level specifying a ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria for a customer strategy includes Process Participation criteria where primary input comes from a marketing group, with little input other than review and approval from a C-Level/executive team or stores;
a ‘Progressive’ capability level specifying a ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria for a customer strategy includes Process Participation criteria where a C-Level/executive team sets customer strategy with input from the leadership of stores, marketing, and customer service;
a ‘Leading’ capability level specifying a ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria for a customer strategy includes Process Participation criteria where customer centric thinking is led by a C-Level/executive team and they are directly involved in setting the customer strategy collaboratively with inputs from customers, stores, marketing, sales, and customer service;

data population logic coupled to the processor and in communication with memory, configured to generate a populated analysis structure from the capability analysis structure;
the processor configured to:
receive an input specifying a key analysis area corresponding to a retail business under examination;
search the populated analysis structure for criteria that matches the key analysis area corresponding to the retail business under examination;
analyze the matching criteria; and
obtain a resultant performance level of the retail business under examination corresponding to the capability scale dimension.

18. A capability analysis system comprising:
a processor operatively coupled to memory, the memory having a capability analysis structure comprising:
a key factor dimension comprising any combination of two or more of:
a process participation key analysis area;
a process creation key analysis area;
a process frequency key analysis area;
a process inputs key analysis area;
a process outputs key analysis area;
a process automation key analysis area;
a process integration key analysis area;
where each of the key analysis areas includes a retail industry specific key analysis area;

a capability scale dimension comprising multiple capability levels, including:
a ‘Basic’ capability level specifying a ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Basic’ capability assessment criteria for a customer strategy includes Process Creation criteria using unsophisticated an process for assessing customers with little to no segmentation, limited data inputs or fact basis, and offers tend to be product and service driven rather than based on customer preferences, with little to no customer measurement;
a ‘Progressive’ capability level specifying a ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Progressive’ capability assessment criteria for a customer strategy includes Process Creation criteria where some customer segmentation analysis is done, offers are aligned with customer segments, and customer performance is tracked and used in future planning;
a ‘Leading’ capability level specifying a ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria wherein the ‘Leading’ capability assessment criteria for a customer strategy includes Process Creation criteria where deep customer centric analysis is done and used to drive business activities including assortments and services, customer feedback is frequently captured and growth plans by customer segment, and clusters are developed and followed;

data population logic coupled to the processor and in communication with the memory, configured to generate a populated analysis structure from the capability analysis structure;
the processor configured to:
receive an input specifying a key analysis area corresponding a retail business under examination;
search the populated analysis structure for criteria that matches the key analysis area corresponding to the retail business under examination,
analyze the matching criteria; and
obtain a resultant performance level of the retail business under examination corresponding to the capability scale dimension.