2. What people, organizational, and technology factors contributed to these problems? Contributing to these problems was management’s unwillingness to spend the appropriate amount of money on the needed software to ensure security, the lack of training of their employees, almost non-existent procedures, and outdated software. With proper management and procedures in place, the employees would not have been so sloppy in their work, the software would have been updated and perhaps the firewall would not have been breached. 3.
• Though there was a Robust ERP system, the system failed due to major inconsistency of important information across different parts of the corporation. This made it difficult for executives to monitor and compare performance. • Even with Data warehouse initiatives, there were issues of the technical expertise required to extract meaningful data from the warehouse and data useful for predicting the future. • SYSCO’s competitive advantage was dependent of the decision of Twila Day to implement the BI Software, which would give SYSCO an advantage over its competitors. Initiative Objectives/Benefits No Objectives Benefits 1. Business Intelligence Software gave users access to data that was relevant to them • Avoid the need for employees to write complicated database queries or engage in programming tasks.
Mr. Lassiter realized that new information systems for MSCC would have to be eventually implemented. Unfortunately, the MSCC was limited in funding and unable to acquire new systems in order to expand their computing capabilities. Mr. Lassiter was able to continue operating under the current infrastructure, but he was committed to the improvement of MSCCs systems functions. Over the course of time, the MSCC began to acquire a stable financial foundation due to the success of Mr. Lassiter and Mr. Ed Wilson, the Operations Division Manager. Mr. Wilson was responsible for accounting control of MSCC funds and didn’t share Mr. Lassiter’s vision of better automating the organization.
Attorneys for the family against the machine manufacturer (AECL) The Therac-25 design eliminated many of the hardware safety features that been built into previous designs, assuming the software was functioning correctly and eliminated the need for safety features. Prior machines had been known to have software issues that would frequently shut down the machine. No overdoses were given because the hardware intervened. These features were eliminated in the Therac-25, an obvious example of poor judgment on the part of the manufacturer. The manufacturer of the machine responded irresponsibly in investigating incidents and in failing to make changes immediately after the very first incident.
It was partly Klemets fault why the globalization did not produce the outcome that was expected. What should Klemets have done differently and how could he correct the errors that were made? We will also take a closer look at how Raisio decided to take their product global. Did Raisio use a global standardization strategy, localization strategy, transnational strategy or an international strategy? The first problem that Raisio faced when they decided to take Benecol margarine global was their lack of experience of taking products global.
This strategy was rejected by EMI management. Management at EMI believed that their technical expertise and patent protection would provide a significant barrier to entry by other competitors. Their expectation was that these competitive advantages would give them three or four years to establish a solid market position. It was asserted that licensing of the product through major x-ray equipment suppliers would result in lack of promotion of the product. It was felt that CAT SCAN would compete with standard x-ray equipment and thereby not get the promotion it needed by the licensees.
Strategic Design at Dynacorp CCWe)re too slow, too unresponsive to the market, and too undisciplined about costs. And the main reason is how we)re m;ganized-it just isn)t working any more. We)ve outgrown the old design in so many ways, but we)re still trying to manage with the same structure we had when we started the company.)) -Dynacorp product manager cCThere)s a lot of talk now about changing our organization design. But we should be careful that we)re not throwing the baby out with the bath- water.
As such, I feel that Ford and Firestone handled stakeholder issues poorly, and although certain measures were implemented after the incident, I feel that they were insufficient, tardy and unhelpful in regaining customer loyalty. As a result, outcomes of the crisis were less than desirable. From this, we are able to gain many valuable lessons so that these mistakes would not have been made in vain. The largest shortcoming of how Ford and Firestone handled the situation was that they refused to accept responsibility for the product failure. Instead, they shifted the blame to each other, citing the wrong tyre pressure as a reason.
Analysis: Although Green is willing to achieve a high selling growth for the company, he concentrated too much on achieving the goal instead of observing the surrounding situation. Moreover, Green did not have enough managerial experiences so he was not able to deal with issues based on a structural and long-term view; that's why he decided to avoid interactions with Davis instead of making improvements or rebuilding his relationship with Davis after Davis first criticized him. Their divergence in work style and personalities also contributed to the problem. For example, Davis prefers using memos or presentations when a meeting is set up, while Green would rather talk to his client directly or talk about things face to face. In addition, lack of communication further deteriorated the situation between Davis and Green.
They didn’t want to change the way they work and most of all they don’t want to be led by someone who is so young and inexperienced. Oliviera was very qualified but that was not enough in such a challenging environment. When the employees were not doing the work assigned to them, he was not able to cajole, convince, or charm them into changing their behavior which signaled that they could get away with more of it. He was not assertive and clear with people when their performance didn’t meet the standards. Moreover, he was not able to motivate the employees.