Do you think Jim Sinegal has been an effective CEO? What grades would you give him in leading the process of crafting and executing Costco’s strategy? What support can you offer for these grades? Refer to Figure 2.1 in Chapter 2 in developing your answers. 4.
As such, he believed that scientific management approaches could benefit from focusing on the need to motivate workers, whilst motivational approaches could also benefit from greater managerial control. As such, he argued that theory X and theory Y simply represented different ends of a continuum of approaches to improving productivity, and managers should not fix themselves to one end of the continuum. Both theory X and theory Y state that managers are responsible for assembling and organising the various factors of production, including their employees, with the goal being to produce maximum economic benefit for the shareholders. However, they take different views around the drivers of employee behaviour. Theory X According to theory X, the average employee is lazy, does not like to work, and will attempt to avoid having to work as much as possible.
A successful Strategic Management System (SMS) not only has to focus on an organization’s external environment, it also has to take care of the organization’s internal environment as well. In 1979, Mr. Michael Porter, a young Harvard associate professor, published “How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy”. It became an instant success. Corporations, large and small, started to use his “Five Forces” analysis to form their strategic plan. The “Five Forces” are external forces that a corporation needs to consider for its business strategy to compete with other in the real world.
HISTORY OF THE BALANCED SCORECARD In 1992, an article by Robert Kaplan and David Norton entitled "The Balanced Scorecard - Measures that Drive Performance" in the Harvard Business Review caused a lot of attention for their method, and led to their business bestseller, "The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action", published in 1996. The financial performance of an organization is essential for its success. Even non-profit organizations must deal in a sensible way with funds they receive. However, a pure financial approach for managing organizations suffers from two drawbacks: * It is historical. Whilst it tells us what has happened to the organization, it may not tell us what is currently happening.
However, the policy to make purchase commitments based on maximum potential plant requirements and sell surplus on the spot market is likely not to be benefiting the company as management desires. This is due to the fact that was pointed out above; i.e. the unbalanced structure of Aloha Products. A further analysis of purchase costs and previous market exchange rate trends by Aloha products management could help their profitability rise and allow the company to maintain its competitive advantage over
1. What is the most compelling justification for attempting to calculate a return on marketing investment? a. The most compelling justification for attempting to calculate a Return on Marketing Investment (ROMI) is the discontent with traditional metrics, which does not allow managers to assess the future performance of their firm at any moment. While the traditional accounting methods are good to measure past performance and financial stature, it does not allow for managers to see the impact or value that marketing has on the bottom line.
This analysis is just one part of the complete Porter strategic models. The other elements are the value chain and the generic strategies. Porter developed his Five Forces analysis in reaction to the then-popular SWOT analysis, which he found unrigorous and ad hoc. Porter's five forces is based on the Structure-Conduct-Performance paradigm in industrial organizational economics. It has been applied to a diverse range of problems, from helping businesses become more profitable to helping governments stabilize industries.
The economic system is thought by some to be value –free. They may not be immoral, but they are amoral that is not concerned with morals. Moralizing is out of place in business. Indeed, even good acts are to be praised not in moral terms but only in the cost/benefit language of “good business”. The myth of amoral business has a corollary that makes ethical paralysis almost inevitable.
Position 1: Low Price/Low Value Firms do not usually choose to compete in this category. This is the "bargain basement" bin and not a lot of companies want to be in this position. Rather it's a position they find themselves forced to compete in because their product lacks differentiated value. The only way to "make it" here is through cost effectively selling volume, and by continually attracting new customers. You won't be winning any customer loyalty contests, but you may be able to sustain yourself as long as you stay one step ahead of the consumer (we're not going to mention any names here!)
If wants are forced to the man, it means that they are not urgent. Most importantly these wants should not be created by the production process, which is meant to satisfy them. Taking in consideration that the production process is creating wants; the justification that there is an urgency of production because of the urgency of wants is no longer valid. We do not have an urgency to produce; we need to control the production process in order to control our wants. According to Galbraith: ‘Production only fills a void that it has itself created.” He states that while producing more goods and services we are creating more wants.