Palestini (2009) states that the organisations should put the above in situations that fit with their style. Fiedler (1987, cited in Palestini, 2009) said that fix the situation into the design leadership in organisations but it usually changes an individual’s or collective’s leadership style to support design leadership is usually easy to say but difficult to practice. Visibly, there are some criticisms of the Fiedler theory. Fiedler believed that changing the leadership style to develop people to provision design leadership carries the challenges of the leaders to develop the most effective solution because the changes of tasks, relationships and positions with a fixed leadership
That was my overall idea of the meaning of the firm but after having a few classes I acquired more deep understanding of the term through economic perspective. The first paper, which we discussed in class regarding this question was the Coase’s “The Nature of the Firm”, which ignores important factors for the meaning of the firm such as relevant costs, uncertainty and risk. In his paper Coase is trying to explain why do they exist and how are they determined in the sense of the scale and scope. The general observation of the firm is that they are assumed to exist and they are characterized by production function, demand and cost curves such as the Neoclassical Model, which main objective is the selling of the products. The firms exist in order to transform inputs into outputs, having their employers and employees.
1. Since the expense allocations system should mirror the real company world, we should check if the current company´s organization works efficient. As AXE Life Company has a functional organi-zation structure with different cost centers in each function, we have to review if our costing sys-tem fits to the organizational needs. Due to the current system with an allocation at function level, there are no clear accountabilities at the product level. This lack of essential information about product expenses shows up, that we need more detailed information to control accountability at product level.
Many may cling to their habits, and curb the adoption of agility. Change habits Agile methods are above all a change of state of mind. It is therefore important from the outset to explain clearly the strategy put in place, and to show how, from a practical point of view, on the ground, the bases of agility will be put in place. It is only once this information is assimilated that the existing processes can be really switched to an agile method, with all the necessary tools of communication, sharing and support. It is only when the agile mind, even more so than the method, is adopted and spread in the enterprise, that success and benefits will emerge.
Article 1: Operations strategy: a firm boundary-based perspective Operations strategy is concerned less with individual processes and more with the total transformation process that is the whole business. It is concerned with how the competitive environment is changing and what the operation has to do in order to meet current and future challenges. It is also concerned with the long-term development of its operations resources and processes so that they can provide the basis for a sustainable advantage (Slack & Lewis, 2011). If a business does not fully appreciate the strategic impact that effective operations and process management can have it is missing an opportunity. Perhaps more significantly, many of the businesses that seem to be
Theory X and Theory Y were first explained by McGregor in his book, 'The Human Side of Enterprise,' and they refer to two styles of management authoritarian which is (Theory X) and participative (Theory Y). This is the one of the theory that some of the organisation can apply, if believe that any of the organisation team members dislike their work, do not perform well and have little motivation, then, according to McGregor, an organisation can use an authoritarian style of management which means this approach is very "hands-on" and usually involves micromanaging people's work to ensure that it gets done properly and McGregor called this as Theory X. On the other hand, if believe that an organisation people take pride in their work and see it as a challenge then it’s more likely adopt a participative management style. Managers who use this approach trust their people to take ownership of their work and do it effectively by themselves and help in increasing the company’s outcomes with their performance it’s called as Theory Y. CONTENT I.
In order to be an entrepreneur, an individual must create something new and different from the existing products/services or of transmuted value. The success of any Innovation is built on the strengths and work of the entrepreneur executing it. In terms of (Schumpeter and Clemence, 1989) an entrepreneur plays a major role in the ‘Creative destruction’ process, by constantly assimilating unused knowledge in order to set up improved production functions and forms for the production and marketing the new products. Thus for any entrepreneur to demonstrate innovation as its key strength, it must execute the concept of the idea into practical usage by infusing sufficient resources such as capital and undivided support of the institutional leadership. (Bessant and Tidd, 2007) discuss in book Innovation and entrepreneurship talk about how Entrepreneurship and innovation can’t be assumed to be all about a bright idea.
Business plans, if we consider the more important aims of their drafting, should be ranked among the most valuable documents of a company in any case. This type of plan namely - regarding its principle - serves as the guideline when managing a company, provides the basis in measuring performance, informs and instructs, it is a fundamental communication and PR means. Considering any purpose of the business plan it is a general requirement that it should be sincere in content that is the values should be seen, which the company lays the foundations of its future operation on. In practice though, values cannot be found in business plans: first of all because the management of companies keep them secret deliberately. Why does this situation evolve?
They know how to acquire and house all relevant information and then build models to anticipate future results. Traditional information managers have historically taken a deductive approach by creating data warehouses, going through several rounds of consolidating systems, and working toward achieving one version of the truth. The newer avant-garde big data professionals understand the corporate strategy or a concrete business question as the starting point; however, they look at it with a bottom-up approach. They believe that the innovation is in the data themselves and that exploring this will lead to new business strategies, new business opportunities, and new business questions. They don't agree with the deductive approach of traditional business intelligence; instead, they favor an inductive approach.
Management is a wide-ranging, complex, and to some extent a vague concept and praxis, which makes it difficult to understand (Kleppestø, 2016 & Hill, 2011). Mintzberg (1990), showed us the new way of understanding the practice of management by actually observing how and what managers manage. This also led to the identification of additional string activities managers do. The next fundamental question was, what it takes or requires to successfully manage, and led to the discussion of managerial competence seen as a combination of knowledge, skills, and mindsets. The objective of this paper is to reflect on the most essential knowledge, skills, and mindsets according to me, followed by my strengths and weaknesses associated with them.