Trends and profitability Essay Example for Free

Trends and profitability Essay Construction has grown dramatically because of trends. It has been said By the year 2000, there were 10 times as many people on Earth as there were 300 years ago and As of October 2008, the worlds population is estimated to be about 6. 7 billion, the population of the world human population increased by 203,800 every day. Due to this reason contuctions have increased; building more homes, renewing buildings etc for the population. Clothe manufacturing has grown because of fashion, trends and profitability. So many people need clothes around the world, for this reason clothes manufacturers increase and produce more clothes they are a number of manufactures in the world which produce different style of clothing which some are fashion e. g nike and addidas for instance, nike is a globally known brand and is worn by all ages starting from children to adults this brand has become very profitable for their business. clothes manufactures grow because of the human population in the world the more people the more they sell this is why clothe manufacturing is profitable. Secondary sector-Decline Car manufacturing is declining in the UK because of technological developments and foreign imports. High tax rate is also another reason, car businesses in UK are decreasing because of various cars being imported from different countries, such as BMW, VW, Honda, Mercedes etc these cars are preferred by people living in the UK because it their high quality and economy. Other reasons is because of tax rate being too high which makes it hard to maintain a factory in the UK and car materials being too expensive to purchase and produce in this country. Some businesses in the UK buy a share of companies abroad to import cars and make profit in the UK Mini disc is a music player; you can listen to music and record sound. Mini disc manufacturers are absolute declining because of technological developments. 2-3 years ago mini disc was a fashionable item to have; everybody used them to listen to music and was very popular. Now since technology has developed audio manufactures produced new products to listen to music such as cd players, Ipods, mobile phones and MP3 some of these items are popular and known globally, a percentage of the people use these items to listen to music. Tertiary sector-Growth Online shopping is growing because of technological developments and lifestyle. Technology has developed in the last few years, online shopping has become more common and now it is easier and quicker to purchase products online, now you can buy all sorts of products on the internet clothe wears, accessories and foods, by using the internet people can shop easily. People prefer shopping on the internet rather than shopping in the markets because of long ques, spending money on travel and comfortability when shopping at home. Estate agencies are growing because of trends and profitability. The human population has risen in the last 300 years; more homes have been built for this reason. So many people intend to purchase a house, so they can have a house of their own and a number of people buy houses from agents to sell them to private individuals and make profit. The statistics say a numerous of houses are being sold every year. Tertiary sector-Decline Music retail is declining because of technological developments. 3-4 years ago in most markets they were loads of music stores available providing various kinds of music in cds, tapes, cassettes etc, now since technology has developed music stores are less of its numbers because of computers and internets; these two components are used to download and listen to music, you can listen to different type of music off the internet for free. People dont need to buy cds to listen to music anymore they can just download it off the internet from different sources for free. Analogue TV retailers are absolute declining because of technological developments and analogue TVs were very common and was used by everybody in the past. When technology developed TV manufacturers produced new high definition television with more specifications such as built in DVD players, blue ray, Radio etc. Analogues TVs are getting old and becoming unwanted products since everybody is interested in more advanced televisions. Bibliography http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Rate_of_increase http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/food_matters/fishfarming.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/food_matters/fishfarming.shtml www.wikipedia.org/wiki/fish_farm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food

Moment in the play Essay Example for Free

Moment in the play Essay What do you think makes this conversation between Biff and Linda so moving and sad at this moment in the play?  In the play â€Å"Death of a salesman†, Arthur Miller have made this conversation between Biff and Linda so moving and sad in the manner of which by displaying Linda’s unwavering devotion to her husband Willy, in stark contrast to the nature of the conflicting relationship between Biff and Willy. These points are skillfully heightened by Miller’s use of language and techniques such as characterization, dialogue and stage direction. Miller have made this conversation between Biff and Linda so moving through the context of Linda’s unwavering devotion to her husband, Willy. Whenever Biff goes against Willy, Linda seems to always be the person to stand up for her husband against her own son. This is shown through the quote â€Å"Biff, a man is not bird, to come and go with the springtime.† We can see that Linda in a sense, an infinite moral voice in the play- a woman with a good will at heart. However, here the readers can clearly see through her comparison of Biff to a bird, she is strongly against her son’s freedom not only within her own thoughts, but in the context of Willy’s false values. Linda conforms to the standard of her husband lifestyle and thoughts, and therefore preventing Biff from what he truly wants to become, to have a freedom in life. This therefore make Biff [evasively] says: â€Å"I’m not hateful, mom.† Biff is pressurized by the weight of hopes and expectations his father gave him since he was young, thus this even make the reader feels even more moving and sad due to Biff’s parents weighing him down while he himself desperately says â€Å"I’m trying Mom,† revealing the misery of the Loman family under the influence of the American Dream. Miller have also made this conversation between Biff and Linda so sad and moving through Biff’s caring attitude towards Linda through dialogue and stage direction. Here the reader can acknowledge how much Biff cares for Linda when he [touches her hair]. This action of tenderness have proven his love for his mother whose her life, have been taking care of Willy, who is a disillusioned husband.†Your hair got so grey† he said, and when Linda replied back with â€Å"Oh it’s been grey since you were in high school†. This fact gives a glimpse to the past that due to Linda’s faithful nature, she’s been suffering since the early days-and this signifies how moving all of Linda’s actions when taken into consideration, when Willy himself have been chasing the American Dream this whole time bringing Biff along with him when he â€Å"blows him full of hot air.† The audience can really inspect this from afar and sympathise the disconnection between Biff and Linda when there really shouldn’t be harmony. The audience would feel even more moving when all of this facts is caused by the ruthlessness of the capitalist system, led along by the American society. In conclusion, Arthur Miller is able to weave an intricate web of different intepretations and ideas and brings out the most sympethatic emotion could expressed for the audience during this conversation between Biff and Linda-while Linda pours all of her heart out for Willy and introduces the theme of denial where she follows along with what Willy does. Biff has become the victim of the environment, where to an extent, is forced to conform to the ideals that Willy, the American society, has created. I think what most driven the audience to feel so sad is that through this conversation, they can see how the American Dream represents false hopes and values and it’s in fact an unattainable dream that causes destruction for the Loman family- the only thing that can keep us alive.

Project Based Organization (PBO) Analysis

Project Based Organization (PBO) Analysis In todays turbulent market, a lot of organizations is still seeking for a strategic advantage over others and a lot of them has actually seek Project Based Organization (PBO) as a way to propel them for greater height and thus, gain a strategic advantage over other companies. However, there are still questions how they can best make use of this new organization structure approach to create a synergy between company business mission, strategy, and project as well as portfolio management PBOs refer to organizational forms that involve the creation of temporary systems for the performance of project tasks or activities. PBOs are gaining increased attention as an emerging organizational form, but there is very little knowledge on how PBO function in practice and what value or benefits in adopting the practice of PBOs. Needless to say, there are not many findings on how the extensive use of unique and temporary endeavors like projects can help influence the strategy and organizations design. By making using of project management best practices, PBO will help organization to become more dynamic, flexible and responsive when dealing with a turbulent environment. This PBO approach will ensure organization to be more creative and innovative when coping and responding quickly to the ever changing market demand. EMPLOYING PROJECT BASED ORGANIZATIONS In order to deploy project based management more effectively and efficiently, organization need to engage the top management to recognize this new approach of embracing project management best practices. They need to engage the right attitudes throughout the organization. In doing so, it will help the organization to fully reap the benefits of this new formidable and competitive weapon so as to fight for continue business growth and making sure the corporate will gain a better chance to survive in todays highly competitive market. Establishing executive ownership and responsibility for project based management with the organization is equated with authority in organization structures, the closer something is to the top, the higher its level of authority, acceptance, adoption and autonomy is perceived to be by the organization. It has to be a top-down approach whereby we need to engaged CEO, senior management of the company and sell them the ideas of how PBOs concept is able to propel the company to greater height. Positioning the project based management function at the top in a hierarchical organizational structure establishes its autonomy and thus ownership of the responsibility for setting up, distributing, supporting, and managing the application of project management best practices. Enterprise-wide adoption of project based management best management called for single ownership of the function. Establishing common practices across an organization at all levels is difficult, if not impossible, without a clearly established sole ownership. We do believe, however that establishing a PBO is the right thing to do, because global competition in the marketplace will continue to increase. Therefore, project based management is one of the best answers for surviving global competition. We need to first identify the roles, responsibilities of senior management team and their business function when structuring the PBO. Once we have identified their function focus and agreed upon their roles, we will then need to proceed to clarify relationships between these functions, like who is leading, supporting and following. This will help to ensure clarification on how these units can work or function together in a team. For example, typical teams in IT might include a strategic management team, an innovation management team, a project/program management team and a product management team. Each team is comprised of more than one unit and there are overlaps between the teams. The objective of this structure is to create team accountability. TRADITIONAL AND PROJECT BASED ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE AND OPERATION TRADITIONAL ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE AND OPERATION Traditional management has been applied since twenty century and is well developed on the core principles of standardization, specialization, common goal, hierarchy organization, planning and control and external-reward (Hamel et al., 2007). A traditional organization is constructed based on those core principles of traditional management and functioned through vertical and horizontal operations which are a hierarchic structure with various functional departments as the vertical operation and a work process designed for specific generalized task models by using Standard Operating Procedural to link individual functional. DISADVANTAGES Project members from each project teams are dispatched from functional departments; this normally causes conflicts between functional departments and project teams when the resources and priority of urgency are conflicting. Hard to assess employee performance since employee can belong to functional department and project teams. This will always cause confusion and unhappiness to employees involved. What project he/she participates is decided by the project manager and department head instead of self-actualization, which reduces the performance of both personal development and organizational learning. Hierarchy structure, functional department operation model and Standard Operating Procedure are characteristics of a traditional organization, which makes its disable in dealing with changes. Contention of resources between functional department and project team, which will develop conflicts within organizations, resulting in disharmony and distrust. No organizational synergy due to lack of inadaptable interactive relations between functional departments. Lack of ability to adapt to changes in related to market uncertainty or other external factors. This is caused by rigid, stagnant Standard Operating Procedures which are regulated according to generalized task model and therefore not capable of responding to any changes conditions timely. THE PBO STRUCTURE AND OPERATION A project based organization is a structure that facilitates the coordination and implementation of project activities. Its main reason is to create an environment that helps enhance interactions between team members with a minimal disruptions, overlaps and conflict. One of the important decisions of project management is the type of organizational structure that will be used for the project. Every project has its unique characteristics and the design of an organizational structure should consider the organizational environment, the project characteristics in which it will operate, and the level of authority the project manager is given. One of the main objectives of the structure is to reduce uncertainty and confusion that typically occurs at the project initiation phase. The structure defines the relationships among members of the project management and the relationships with the external environment. In PBO project managers have a high level of authority to manage and control the project resources. The project manager in this structure has total authority over the project and can acquire resources needed to accomplish project objectives from within or outside the parent organization, bind only to the scope, quality, and budget constraints identified in the project. In the PBO, project members are assigned specifically to the project and report directly to the project manager. The project manager is responsible for the performance appraisal and career progression of all project team members while on the project. This leads to increased project loyalty. Complete line authority over project efforts affords the project manager strong project controls and centralized lines of communication. This leads to rapid reaction time and improved project based organizations are more common among large and complicated projects. PBO KEY TO SUCCESS FOR TODAY ORGANIZATION INNOVATION ENABLER 10 Tips by the Worlds Best Innovators Organize yourself globally because it beats local Life treasures through communication Turn â€Å"not invented here† into a quality seal Focus on Big Ideas (there are enough small ones) Think platform Minimize time-to-test Appoint your customers as your boss Leverage design Take care of the jewel innovation organization culture that reacts to changes Use business model innovations as the turbo PROJECTS AND INNOVATION HOW THEY INTERLINKED WITH ONE ANOTHER What does PBO has to do with Innovation? We will start by defining both innovation and projects and identifying common ground in their concepts. Projects and Innovation share common roots in their definitions, both are: Temporary: they end when they become integrated to the normal routine of operations Produce unique results: the end product or service should be, in some way, different than the existing. Characterized by progressive elaboration: they cannot be understood entirely at, or before, the start, therefore the decision-making and realization phases are iterative. Many statements concerning innovation can be applied to projects and vice versa; to a certain degree, many of the characteristics of both are interchangeable. Classic definitions of innovation include: The process of making improvements by introducing something new (Wikipedia, 2007) It seems reasonable from above description that projects and innovation share a natural conceptual background. It would be hard to imagine how a traditional organization would be able to innovate since their structure only has roots in routine, repetitive works and a much predictable work output and stagnant culture. The whole philosophy and the historical background of both projects and innovation seem interlinked. A strong project outlook with proper governance structures would typically help to promote strategic goals that call for development of innovation. In their quest for innovation, many organizations have felt the need to establish social networks; the project approach has the advantage of proposing an internal network between projects if properly enhanced through program management, as well as involvement of stakeholders. Since Schumpeter (1947), many researchers have demonstrated that innovations are most often â€Å"new combinations† of existing technology. â€Å"Thus, individuals or divisions within a firm must be both able and willing to share their capabilities or resources with other parts of the organization. This author also mentions that organizations need to create common language, otherwise the ability to share knowledge will be hampered (Sampson, 2007). To counteract some of these pitfalls, several companies have found it useful to introduce systems where staff from all levels of the business can input their ideas. An interesting example of the usefulness of such systems comes from Paul Sloan (2006) â€Å"A copy-machine operator at Kinkos, a chain of copying and document services stores, noticed that customer demand for copying dropped off in December. People were too preoccupied with Christmas presents to do much copying for the office. So he came up with a creative idea: allow customers to use Kinkos color copying and binding facilities to create their own customized calendars using personal photos for each of the months. He prototyped the idea in the store and it proved popular. The operator phoned the founder and chief executive of Kinkos, Paul Orfalea, and explained the idea. Orfalea was so excited by it that he rushed it out as a service in all outlets. It was very successful and a new product custom calendars and a new revenue stream were created.† Corporate recognize that their organizations are always in danger of developing products and services with little or no market appeal. Some organizations are great at innovation like 3-M that produces 30% of its revenues from products that did not exist 4 years ago. However, others are really very bad at innovating such as Xerox who is famous for innovations it did not exploit, like fax machines and laser printers. Others, like Procter and Gamble have successfully reversed a 40 years innovation slump from their last major breakthrough (Pampers in 1961) with recent innovative products like â€Å"Swiffer† and Crests â€Å"Whitestrip† (Brooker, 1999; Moss-Kanter, 2006). Other companies just struggle with innovation like Motorola when it resisted going from analog to digital and lost its lead in cellular phones, or Kodak, when it lost its share of the camera market to Canon and Sony for having miscalculated the impact of digital camera in the mid 90s. Although organizational innovation needs more than just taking up a project view, we have to examine if the project management approach, when well integrated and focused on the broader view of project, could possibly promote principles that are conducive to innovation. Rosabeth Moss-Kanter (2006) describes four major reasons for failure to innovate: Strategy: Lack of sound innovative investment spread between breakthrough and incremental Process: Tight controls that strangle innovation and refusal of deviations from plan Structure: Lack of connections between innovation areas and the rest of the business Skills: Lack of networkers, communicators or connectors and relationships Most traditional organizations are better suited to stable environments and employ a top down approach to innovation. Strategy is formulated at the top along with the major initiatives for achieving it. Some of these initiatives will be innovative in nature, related to the development of an innovative process, product or service and often led within an RD Department, independently from the rest of the business. Top down approaches may solicit input from deeper in the organization, but the formulation of the innovative ideas remains at the top or within one of the organizational silos. Many of these organizational models are encouraging excessive control and reporting and, as Holmstrom, (1989) argued: bureaucracy, sometimes symbolic of the old hierarchical organization, can be hostile to innovation. We have seen that organizational structure and governance are determining factors in the development of human and organizational innovation and that PBOs change the nature of the traditional organizational structure. We can therefore ask ourselves: â€Å"How can a PBO structure influence innovation (either positively or negatively)?† Three recent empirical studies (Bresnen Goussevskaia Swan, 2004; Lindkvist, 2004; Dovey Fennech, 2007), have recognized that organizations that adopt a project management approach in a traditional mechanistic context, often have to deal with a choice between the flexibility and dynamism of the project approach and the desire of firms functional and strategic stakeholders to exercise control at organizational level. The authors have already reported on a case study that demonstrates evidence of such a division when an organization is moving from a more traditional model to the PBO model: â€Å"This very diverse and competent group of people had approached a new task in a most conventional manner, which seemed coherent with the ingrained performance paradigm, still a remaining legacy of the organizations historical culture and values. It was felt that one of the important emergen needs of the group was to â€Å"develop lateral, more creative thought processes and encourage a bit less conformity† to foster use of available potential and growth in this new work environment.† (Thiry, Deguire, 2004) Sampson (2007, p.382-383) argues that â€Å"the effect of the organization on innovative performance is contingent on absorptive capacity.† A program approach where strategic decisions are implemented through a series of related and interdependent projects (Thiry, 2004a, OGC, 2003) would support this approach, as change and innovative initiatives will be broken down into projects manageable, not only in technical terms, but also in absorption capability terms. The selection of investment activities through portfolio management is also essential, for example, at Apple in 1996, after Steve Jobs was reinstated as CEO, he led a massive review of the RD effort. As a result, Apple focused its resources on projects that had the greatest potential, and eventually produced the iMac, iBook, iPod, and iTunes (Vise Malseed, 2005). Most traditional organizations experience communication and resource allocation problems, especially between functional managers and project managers (Alsene, 1999; Bishop, 1999; Payne, 1993); this generates issues at the executive level, when conflicts are escalated and disturb the â€Å"political harmony† of the organization (Dovey Fenech, 2006). This last empirical study showed that even when the value of a â€Å"projectized† approach to deliver strategy is demonstrated, it can still be challenged by the organizations establishment. Many authors have confirmed that â€Å"the environment in a project-oriented organization is more dynamic and discontinuous.† (Huemann, Turner Keegan, 2004) and that the role of the project manager has evolved from that of a single person with specific technical skills to that of a team of individuals which exercise a wide ‘function that spans from strategic to technical (Frame, 2002).. The project management (PM) function is now evolving towards a co-managed business-technical partnership (Frame, 2002), which gives it authority over strategic level resources and therefore true decision-making power (Spradlin, 2004). We feel that given the nature of the project/program approach, PBOs can significantly contribute to the development of a distributed network that forms inside the organization and takes on the role of much of the innovation work. Through projects and programs, individuals become connected to the network and generate their own ideas, conduct experiments, do their own findings, build support, and help transition some of the ideas to formal pilots or direct implementation. An interesting example is Harley-Davidson, Inc. Management at Harley-Davidson has been recognized worldwide for its successful use of progressive, cutting-edge management techniques (Certo, 2003). This company has long developed its use of cross-functional teams to design new products and representatives from engineering, purchasing, manufacturing, and marketing have always had some influence on the future direction of new products. In order to achieve this, management has been committed to cross-functional teams and these team members work together daily and are totally dedicated to the new product development process on a full-time basis. We have therefore seen that innovation, for most companies, depends upon the individual and collective expertise of employees and it seems to have become more important for an organization to be cross-functionally excellent than functionally excellent. In addition to formal planning at the business level, best-practice companies are using cross enterprise initiatives on major issues in order to challenge assumptions and open up the organization to new thinking. This further enhances innovation as organizations are, for example, able to match their technological developments with complementary expertise in other areas of their business, such as manufacturing, distribution, human resources, marketing, and customer relationships. To lead these development efforts, cross-functional teams need to be formed and PBOs would make a significant difference in developing both the culture and necessary structures to help businesses in their quest towards innovation. As reported by Dhyani and Singh (2006) in the following case, most traditional mechanistic models do not endorse an innovative philosophy: â€Å"Service Delivery is based on standards, repeatability, reference architectures, proven and robust technology, guaranteed quality, efficiency and meeting SLAs. The resulting culture is inherently in conflict with innovation, which inescapably entails increased risk. SD has no processes or targets for regularly engaging in Client Innovation. It does not employ people for this purpose and has no measurements or incentive programs to perform this task and indeed expects the opposite behavior.† PBO through the consistent use of cross-functional teams presents a clear organizational advantage over the more traditional mechanistic organization as it supports individuals in its effort by policies, practices and resources that acknowledge this risk and provides space for experimentation. The organization shoulders some risk as do individuals and teams. Everyone in the innovation culture strives for success and learns from failures by documenting them and hearing about them from others. Given that this is a necessary condition for empowering different players and that sharing failures can be difficult for human beings with sensitive egos. The team setting provided by PBOs most probably allows the diffusion and publication of failure with minimal harm to individual egos and enhances organizational learning that can be used towards future innovative initiatives. If we accept the view that innovation can be seen as an organizational means to reach strategic goals, it would be interesting to explore and understand the link between the implementation of a PBO structure and culture and organizational innovation and to compare it to more traditional settings. In particular, we can refer to the fact that, since Burns and Stalker (1961), many authors recognize that traditional mechanistic organizations are struggling to adapt in todays turbulent environments. Nevertheless, in order to sustain innovation, PBOs need to be structured to foster creative synergy between vision and mission, strategy, portfolio, program and project management and be framed in a project-based governance approach; they also need to generate tangible value for the stakeholders. Rosabeth Moss-Kanter, who has conducted research and advised companies during what she terms: â€Å"four major waves of competitive challenges† (2006, p.74) since the 70s claims that successful innovation requires â€Å"flexible organizational structures, in which teams across functions or disciplines organize around solutions, [which] can facilitate good connections.† (2006, p.82) â€Å"[Innovation] is among the essential processes for success, survival, and renewal of organizations, particularly for firms in either fast-paced or competitive markets† (Brown Eisenhardt, 1995, p.344) â€Å"‘Innovation refers to a phenomenon where a new idea has been implemented into action.† (Taatila, 2005). the recognition that project management practice can and will influence organizational practices and, in so doing; that an alternate position may open a door for a redefinition of organizations through projects by supporting the adoption of new challenging organizational theories for project-based organizations; that the adoption of these new organizational models could generate higher stakeholder involvement, create more value and enable better integration between projects and strategy to sustaining innovation. CHALLENGES FACED BY IMPLEMENTING A PBO To adopt a project-based organization presents some challenges to senior managers: Project Manager has little or no â€Å"position power.† The position power which is so prominent in functional organizations will change when project-based organization is implemented. Project Manager will have minimal control over the career path of project members. Instead, project members require an independent career path over which they themselves have control and to which the project work can contribute. Senior managers need to develop project managers and project management so that the project managers can lead based on influence rather than positional authority. Conflicts arise over project member time and resource requirements. Thus senior managers must have a good plan and work schedule priority. Alternatively, senior manager need to come out with special reward scheme to allocate scarce resources-individuals that will help to maximize the value of the project. No clear Organizational boundaries. Project management often requires seamless cooperation among organizational units. If project managers/members see evidence that cooperation is not valued, then achieving cooperation is going to very hard. Senior management needs to create a structure where cooperation is rewarded Time and organizational pressures abound. Senior management must be ready to support the best practices that will help to reduce project time. This includes forming a core team system, having a project goal vision, allowing more time for project planning so as it wont interfere with project operations, facilitating communication with customers, and supplying necessary resources. Project members do not know one another. Effective project teams require a high level of trust and openness. The climate of trust and openness will need to be a top-down approach. If senior managers are not trustworthy, truthful, and open with each other, there is little chance that project members will be so with one another. Trust and openness are the antithesis of most bureaucratic organizations. Senior managers coming from a less trusting organization will have difficulty developing high levels of trust. CONCLUSIONS Having knowing that successful innovation needs flexible organizational structures, in which cross-functional teams or disciplines organize around solutions, PBOs could be a possible answer when their structures provide horizontal integration from business strategy to operational benefits and vertical integration between corporate objectives and the prioritized portfolio of projects. It is also very likely that the adoption of an integrated wide-scale project approach could enhance an organizations capacity for innovation for the following reasons: Given the nature of the project/program approach, PBOs can significantly contribute to the development of a distributed network that forms inside the organization and takes on the role of much of the innovation work. Along with these basic innovation processes, in a, PBO structure locus of control and decision making is normally decentralized through the creation of program and project teams in order to modify aspects of the culture so employees receive consistent and positive messages about initiating and implementing change and innovation. In PBO structures, the stakeholder approach is combined to the concept of value and permeates all levels of the organization by increasing the reach of both stakeholder and value concepts. An integrated vision of projects would directly link projects and programs to governance and strategy, encouraging social networks and value creation. In conclusion, we would argue that the sensible adoption of an integrated project approach should not only encourage the emergence and enactment of new organizational dynamics, but develop a stakeholder approach and innovative concepts leading to increased value creation. Finally, we can also conclude that it is not enough to set up a PBO if we use a mechanistic framework. In order to foster innovation, all the project and organizational elements must be integrated from start to realization. REFERENCES Alsene, E. (1999). Internal Changes and Project Management Structures Within Enterprises, International Journal of Project Management. 17(6): 367-377. Bishop, S. K. (1999). Cross-functional Project Teams in Functionally Aligned Organizations. Project Management Journal. 30(3): 6-10. Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A., and Swan, J. (2004). Embedding new management knowledge in project-based organizations. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1535-1555. Brooker, K. (1999) Can Procter Gamble Change Its Culture, Protect Its Market Share, and Find the Next Tide? Fortune, April 26, 1999, pp. 146-50, 152. Brown, S. L. and Eisenhardt, K. M. (1998). Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MACerto, S.C. (2002). Modern Management, 9th Ed. Burns, T., Stalker, G. M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Publications. Dovey, K. and Fenech, B. (2007). The role of enterprise logic in the failure of organizations to learn and transform: a case from the financial services industry. In print: Management Learning: The Journal for Managerial and Organizational Learning, Sage Publications. 38(3). Dhyani, A. and Singh, R. (2006) â€Å"Risk and Innovation Case for Building a Methodology Tool to Assist Informed Decision Making for Managers† (July 22, 2006). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=919180 Frame, J. D. (2002) PMNetwork, Project Management Institute. PA: Da Sylva. Gann, D.M., Salter, A.J. (2000) Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: The construction of complex products and systems. Research Policy, 29, 955-972. Hamel, G. (1996). Strategy as Revolution. Harvard Business Review. July/August 1996. Holmstrom, B. (1989). Agency costs and innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 12: 305-327. Huemann, M., Turner, R. and Keegan, A. (2004). The Role of Human Resource Management in Project-Oriented Organizations. Proceedings of the 3rd PMI Research Conference, London, July 2004. Lindkvist, L (2004). Governing Project-based Firms: Promoting Market-like Processes within Hierarchies. Journal of Management and Governance. 8: 3-25. Moss Kanter, R. (1990) â€Å"Follow-up and Follow-through,† Harvard Business Review, March/ April 1990, p. 8. Moss-Kanter, R. (2006) Innovation: The Classic Traps. Harvard Business Review, November 2006, pp.73-83) Payne, J. (1993). Introducing Formal Project Management into a Traditional Functionally Structured Organization. International Journal of Project Management. 11(4): 239-243. Sampson, R.G. (2007). RD Alliances And Firm Performance: The Impact Of Technological Diversity And Alliance Organization On Innovation. Academy of Management Journal. 50-2; 364-386. Schumpeter, J. A. (1947). The creative response in economic history. Journal of Economic History, 7: 149-159. Sloane, P. (2006) The inspiration for innovation. Computing Business 20 Jul 2006 Spradlin, T., (2004) A Lexicon of Decision Making, DSSResources.COM, 03/05/2004. Extracted from: http://dssresources.com/papers/features/spradlin/spradlin03052004.html on 12 Jan 2007 Sydow, J., Lindkvist, L. and DeFillippi, R. (2004). Project-Based Organizations, Embeddedness and Repositories of Knowledge: Editorial. Organization Studies 25(9): 1475-1489. Taatila, T.(2005) Innovation Mechanisms in Network Economy, SoL 2nd Global Forum, Vienna September 2005. Thiry, M. (2001) â€Å"Sensemaking in Value Management Practice† International Journal of Project Management, Elseveir Science, Oxford (Feb. 2001) 19 (2); 71-78 Thiry. M. (2002). The Development of a Strategic Decision Management Model: An Analytic Induction research process based on the combination of project and value management. Thiry, M. (2004a). Program management: A strategic decision management process. Thiry, M. (2004b) How can the benefits of PM Training Programs be improved? Thiry, M. and Deguire, M. (2004). Program Management as an Emergent Order Vise, D. A. Malseed, M. (2005) The Google Story. Delacorte Press. Weber, Max. (1904 [2002])

Farmer, Political Boss, and Immigrant Essay -- American History

Farmer, Political Boss, and Immigrant Various people from the late nineteenth century held diverse opinions on political issues of the day. The source of this diversity was often due to varying backgrounds these people experienced. Three distinct groups of people are the farming class, the political bosses, and the immigrants, who poured into the country like an unstoppable flood. These groups of people also represented the social stratification of the new society, which had just emerged from rapid industrialization. These three groups had large differences in many aspects such as power, amount of money, and influence in political events of the day. The political boss dominated local city governments and pretended to be Robin Hoods of industrial society, but in reality were just petty thieves, attempting to earn large sums of money. The men involved in agricultural work were in a precarious situation. They experienced countless forms of natural disasters that constantly beset them and made it a formidable task to grow crops in such a hostile environment. Crops sold for ridiculously low amounts of money, and subsistence was a challenge, a challenge that many failed to overcome. The immigrants faced some of the greatest obstacles out of any class at the time. They were discriminated against by the â€Å"native-born† Americans and had to face sharp ethnic prejudice. Many immigrants were unskilled laborers and nearly all lived in poverty. These three diverse groups lived very differently from each other and held diverse views on important issues of the time period. The new emerging modes of thought contributed to the rise of new political organizations, such as the People’s or Populist party. The farmers faced tremendous... ...rked as unskilled laborers in the new factories. Most were poor, disgruntled, and found that America was not what they had expected when they left their native countries. The city bosses provided aid to these immigrants and then gained their political support. They unfairly took advantages of the immigrants to gain power, which helped them to gain the money they were seeking. The immigrants had a difficult life because most of them were crowded into ghettos and slums. They received low wages and faced dangerous and unhealthy working conditions daily. Concentration increased and living quarter size proportionately decreased. The immigrants experienced poor sanitation and contagious diseases and most did not have any plumbing or ventilation. They had a difficult and sad life, and many were more happy in their oppressive homelands than industrialized America.

The Disadvantages Of Standardized Testing Essay -- High-Stakes Standard

Standardized tests must be improved. Instead of traditional standardized testing, random testing should be put in place and tests themselves should be reconstructed to promote fairness, reduce errors and and more accurately assess student’s knowledge. Testing should be done to random groups of students on random dates throughout the year. There will be a large enough group of students to give a good idea of how well material is being taught but a small enough group that not everyone needs to take the test. Cheating is a major problem with standardized tests. Cheating leads to inaccurate test scores (Dolezalek 71). In many cases of it is the teachers that are the ones cheating. â€Å"About 10 percent of the teachers admitted to providing hints about the answers during the test administration; about 10 percent pointed out mismarked items by students; about 15 percent of the teachers provided more time for the test than was allowed; and about 5 percent of the teachers engaged in instruction during the test† (Dolezalek 73). Teachers can also cheat by altering finished tests by filling in blank answers or fixing the answers at the end of the test which tend to be the hardest (Dolezalek 75). Teachers are often pushed by administrators who also cheat for their schools. â€Å"In July 2011 the Georgia Bureau of Investigation released a report on the Atlanta Public Schools charging a widespread cheating conspiracy over a ten year period by 178 teachers, principals and administrators to f ix answers on the statewide competency test† (â€Å"Pressure Caused Teachers to Cheat†). The fact that federal budgets can be determined by tests causes some schools and states to cheat (Dolezalek 76). Schools cheat because the system for determining budgets makes n... ...argets Has Caused Teachers to Cheat.† Standardized Testing. Ed. Dedria Bryfonski. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from â€Å"GBI Reveals Why Cheating Occurred in Atlanta Public Schools.† Teacher World. 10 July 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web 4 March 2014. â€Å"Why Can Some Kids Handle the Pressure While Others Fall Apart?† The New York Times. The New York Times, 6 Feb. 2013. Web. 10 March 2014. â€Å"Why Standardized Tests Don’t Measure Educational Quality.† ASCD. Educational Leadership, March 1999. Web. 10 March 2014. Walberg, Herbert J. â€Å"Standardized Tests Effectively Measure Student Achievement.† Standardized Testing. Ed. Dedria Bryfonski. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. of â€Å"Stop the War Against Standardized Tests.† Defining Ideas: A Hoover Institution Journal. (20 May 2011). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 7 March 2014.

Michael E. Porters Five Forces In Pepsi :: Business Strategy

  Ã‚  Ã‚   Introduction The model of the Five Competitive Forces was developed by Michael E. Porter in his book "Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors" in 1980. Since that time it has become an important tool for analyzing an organizations industry structure in strategic processes.    Porters model is based on the insight that a corporate strategy should meet the opportunities and threats in the organizations external environment. Especially, competitive strategy should base on and understanding of industry structures and the way they change. Porter has identified five competitive forces that shape every industry and every market. These forces determine the intensity of competition and hence the profitability and attractiveness of an industry. The objective of corporate strategy should be to modify these competitive forces in a way that improves the position of the organization. Porters model supports analysis of the driving forces in an industry. Based on the information derived from the Five Forces Analysis, management can decide how to influence or to exploit particular characteristics of their industry.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The Five Competitive Forces The Five Competitive Forces are typically described as follows: 1  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Bargaining Power of Suppliers The term 'suppliers' comprises all sources for inputs that are needed in order to provide goods or services. Supplier bargaining power is likely to be high when:    ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The market is dominated by a few large suppliers rather than a fragmented source of supply,  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   There are no substitutes for the particular input,  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The suppliers customers are fragmented, so their bargaining power is low,  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The switching costs from one supplier to another are high,  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   There is the possibility of the supplier integrating forwards in order to obtain higher prices and margins. This threat is especially high when  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The buying industry has a higher profitability than the supplying industry,  ·   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Forward integration provides economies of scale for the supplier,  ·   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The buying industry hinders the supplying industry in their development (e.g. reluctance to accept new releases of products),  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The buying industry has low barriers to entry. In such situations, the buying industry often faces a high pressure on margins from their suppliers. The relationship to powerful suppliers can potentially reduce strategic options for the organization.   2  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Bargaining Power of Customers Similarly, the bargaining power of customers determines how much customers can impose pressure on margins and volumes. Customers bargaining power is likely to be high when  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   They buy large volumes, there is a concentration of buyers,  ·Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The supplying industry comprises a large number of small operators

Liberal ideology Essay

How important was new Liberal ideology in leading to the welfare reforms of 1905-11? In answering this essay it is probably best to understand what is meant by ideology. Ideology is defined as a set of beliefs and aims by a group or groups of individuals who share the same common views. The word ‘liberal’ means being ‘free.’ The Liberal party is seen as a party that has an open mind over issues and follows what the majority of people want. In this essay I will explain the key issues that might have led to the Liberal party implementing these welfare reforms in Britain between 1905-11. ‘New’ something ‘-ism’ is often just a name given by a party to show that their ideologies have evolved from previous, outdated times. ‘New’ Liberal ideology is looked at in the context of older Liberal beliefs. This idea of renaming the ideology of a party was seen as an attempt by a party to gain support by claiming to bring in new, unique policies (Simon Potter). However, these thoughts cannot be used when referring to ‘New Liberalism.’ Under the leadership of politicians such as Asquith, Churchill and Lloyd-George the Liberal party seemed to break away from its past. In fact, in 1906 after two decades of political failure, the Liberal party came to power. It introduced the biggest number of social reforms of its time in Britain. It is the reasons behind these reforms that I will be looking at. The main difference between ‘Old’ Liberal thinking and ‘New Liberalism’ was that more emphasis was put on collectivism rather than individualism, which had previously been preached. People began to change their minds from earlier thinking and began to believe that it was the government’s duty to improve life for the community. These ideas as well as those of positive liberty only seemed to appeal to a small minority of Liberal ministers. However, it did appeal to influential Liberals that were in power. This included the future Prime Minister Herbert Asquith. It is my belief that increased knowledge of poverty was more important than new Liberal ideology (aka New Liberlism). Many people in Britain were poverty stricken or in need for help. The government needed to find out exactly how people were getting into poverty. Seebohm Rowntree, a historian in the 19th-20th Century, carried out a survey into poverty in York. York was more typical of the whole country rather than the East End. Seebohm calculated a poverty line (minimum income necessary to stay out of poverty) based on scientific calculations. Those people that did not have the minimum income were in primary poverty and could not achieve physical efficiency. He discovered that those people who were in secondary poverty were there because they hadn’t spent their money well enough. Seebohm’s statistical figures and results opened the eyes of many in Britain. It made many people realise how poverty had come about and how The liberal party believed that welfare reforms would make Britain more competitive and efficient with foreign countries such as Germany and USA. Britain was less advanced than these two superpowers in their army, in industry and in education. Some believed that changes to the education system and administration would make Britain on a more equal level with the two above-mentioned countries. Others believed that sorting out poverty and health would improve Britain’s national efficiency. Liberals believed that welfare reforms would help improve the standard of living of the poorer classes. These people tended to be unfit and therefore were unable to join the army. It was also the poorer people who wanted to become soldiers. By improving the lives and health of poor people, then more would be accepted into the army. Therefore, this is one area that would become more efficient and competitive. Changes to health and child reforms would also make Britain more efficient. Children were Britain’s future prospects. By improving all aspects of their lives (especially those that were coming from poorer backgrounds), children would help Britain to become an all round superpower in 30-40 years to come. They were arguably the most needy of welfare reforms, which maybe explains why the Liberal party implemented many reforms regarding them between 1905-11. The need to win working class support and beat off challenges from the Labour party was the most important reason for the introduction of Welfare reforms between 1905-11. New Liberalism was based on political beliefs, but the need to resist the Labour parties potential challenge was based on political advantages. The 1903 Lib-Lab pact made Labour more of a threat on the political stage. They gained there most number of seats in Parliament in the 1906 elections and with the support of the majority of the working class and the Trade Unions; the labour party were proving to be capable opposition.