is profit before interest and tax ..!
why? because both lenders and borrowers are rewarded from the profit before deduction of interest and tax.
Getting myself into the finance department group at the residential after all wasn't a bad idea. The discussion kicked start my brain to start thinking "ratios" again.
Friday, 23 July 2010
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
how to pay lah ??
I'm scratching my head thinking the strategy to pay for my next two modules. Ironic enough, it's for B820 Strategy and B821 Financial Strategy. The total cost of the two is over 10K CHF, an amount I simply do not have now. I have applied to withdraw some money from my EPF (Malaysia Employee Provident Fund) account but this will take some time within the next 3 weeks or so before I receive the cheque. Totaling up the major commitments I have between now and October, it's a huge challenge:1. 1000 CHF up-front for revision of family health insurance (although this results in lower future monthly premium) ... due next month
2. 1400 CHF final payment for renovation of my apartment unit in KK ... due next month
3. 18K CHF for 2010 provisionary tax by 31 October
How much is in the bank? About 19K CHF.
Forecast saving from now till end October:
2K CHF x 4 months = CHF 8K
Expected from EPF = CHF 7,4K CHF
So ..
What I have now: 19K CHF
Minus course fee: 11K CHF
Minus contractor: 1.4K CHF
Minus insurance up-front: 1K CHF
Balance: 5.6K CHF
EPF Withdrawal: 7.4K CHF
Balance: 13K CHF
Saving until October: 8K CHF
Balance: 21K CHF
Minus tax: 18K CHF
Balance: 3K CHF <------- DANGER POINT!!!!
Saving until April 2011: 12K CHF (2K x 6 months)
13th month salary Dec 2010: 10K CHF
Balance: 25K CHF
Minus course fee: 9K CHF (FINAL PAYMENT !!! - if I don't fail anything!)
Balance: 16K CHF
Bonus: 8K CHF
Balance: 24K CHF
Saving until October 2011: 12K CHF (2K x 6 months)
Balance: 36K CHF
Minus Tax: 18K CHF
Balance: 18K CHF
13th month salary Dec 2011: 10K CHF
Balance: 28K CHF
Saving until October 2012: 20K CHF
Bonus: 8K CHF
Balance: 56K CHF
Minus Tax: 18K CHF
Balance: 38K CHF
13th month salary Dec 2012: 10K CHF
Balance: 48K CHF
Saving until October 2013: 20K CHF
Bonus: 8K CHF
Balance: 76K CHF
Minus Tax: 18K CHF
Balance: 58K CHF
13th month salary Dec 2013: 10K CHF
Balance: 68K CHF
Saving until October 2014: 20K CHF
Bonus: 8K CHF
Balance: 96K CHF
Minus Tax: 18K CHF
Balance: 78K CHF
13th month salary Dec 2014: 10K CHF
Balance: 88K CHF
Saving until October 2015: 20K CHF
Bonus: 8K CHF
Balance: 116K CHF
Minus Tax: 18K CHF
Balance: 98K CHF
13th month salary Dec 2015: 10K CHF
Balance: 108.4K CHF
Saving until October 2016: 20K CHF
Bonus: 8K CHF
Balance: 136K CHF
pergh! at the current rate it'll take another five years before I surpass 100K CHF savings!
Monday, 19 July 2010
Block 1: The freaking references!! God help me to memorise!
A number of writers referenced in the block are important:
Maslow (year ?) - Pyramid of needs - basic, physiological, and ???
Anthony et. al. (1998) and Young (1999) - organisational responsibilities - profit centre, discretionary cost centre, standard cost centre, revenue centre, investment centre
ANTON, who is YOUNG finished Uni and continue to work at Nexus responsible for COST CENTRE and other centres.
Freeman (1984) - Stakeholder definition - any group or individual who can affect or is affected by achievements of organisation's objectives
Being a FREE MAN in standard 2 could affects or be affected by objectives of the big man !
Rowley (1997) - Organisations respond to interactions of multiple stakeholder, not just one.
ROWING in 3rd year requires many to respond to the lead.
Pappas and Hirschey (1989) - Questioned if managers really works to maximise income of their company (or minimise cost in the context of the non-profit, public organisations). Don't they have any agenda and intentions such as position, prestige etc.? i.e. do they really strive to find the sharpest needle in the haystack?
My pappa bought me hirschey chocolate when I was in form 1 and throw it into the haystack
Sawyer (1991) - organisation has mutiple objectives due to various interest groups within it. If all want to maximise the results of their objectives, conflict of interest is likely to take place. Thus, naturally they will tend to only achieve satisfactory level.
Stewart (1998) - The model of management from commercial organisations cannot apply fully to public organisations. Although there opinions that inclince towards making the two compatible, it is based on simplified perspective. Public organisations do not have customers as such in private organisations. The provision of service is based on assessment of need rather than demand indicator.
Elcock (1995) - There are five categories of users in public sectors: citizens, subjects, consumers, customers, clients. The application of terms from commercial organisations is therefore very loose. This opens up different level complexity of managerialism in public service sector. Citizenship alone does not explain the relationship between users and public service agencies - the relationship is more complex than this. A user is not necessarily a citizen.
The elephant cock in form 2 shot five group of public users.
####
Maslow (year ?) - Pyramid of needs - basic, physiological, and ???
Anthony et. al. (1998) and Young (1999) - organisational responsibilities - profit centre, discretionary cost centre, standard cost centre, revenue centre, investment centre
ANTON, who is YOUNG finished Uni and continue to work at Nexus responsible for COST CENTRE and other centres.
Freeman (1984) - Stakeholder definition - any group or individual who can affect or is affected by achievements of organisation's objectives
Being a FREE MAN in standard 2 could affects or be affected by objectives of the big man !
Rowley (1997) - Organisations respond to interactions of multiple stakeholder, not just one.
ROWING in 3rd year requires many to respond to the lead.
Pappas and Hirschey (1989) - Questioned if managers really works to maximise income of their company (or minimise cost in the context of the non-profit, public organisations). Don't they have any agenda and intentions such as position, prestige etc.? i.e. do they really strive to find the sharpest needle in the haystack?
My pappa bought me hirschey chocolate when I was in form 1 and throw it into the haystack
Sawyer (1991) - organisation has mutiple objectives due to various interest groups within it. If all want to maximise the results of their objectives, conflict of interest is likely to take place. Thus, naturally they will tend to only achieve satisfactory level.
Stewart (1998) - The model of management from commercial organisations cannot apply fully to public organisations. Although there opinions that inclince towards making the two compatible, it is based on simplified perspective. Public organisations do not have customers as such in private organisations. The provision of service is based on assessment of need rather than demand indicator.
Elcock (1995) - There are five categories of users in public sectors: citizens, subjects, consumers, customers, clients. The application of terms from commercial organisations is therefore very loose. This opens up different level complexity of managerialism in public service sector. Citizenship alone does not explain the relationship between users and public service agencies - the relationship is more complex than this. A user is not necessarily a citizen.
The elephant cock in form 2 shot five group of public users.
####
Block 1: The perspectives .. .so, what is it about then?
Having read the whole perspective book of Block 1, here is the summary of my understanding of what it attempts to address:
The block introduces a selected few topics which either the OUBS or business shools in general consider as important, necessary or interesting for MBA. In no particular order and not in the same wordings and categorisations given in the books, they are:
The block attempts to instill the idea of reflecting what ones learn (theories, models, frameowrks) against real scenarios. It also challenges the readers to be critical to the models, theories, frameworks - i.e. why some of them do no work in reality - in some organisations, in some circumstances, in some culture, in some age etc..
There seems to be a strong emphasis (given that it's mentioned many times in the block) that organisations need to look beyond their internal environment and be sensitive to changes in the external environment. Managers cannot be simply reactive, but instead beware of potential disruptions from the external environment --> There is a theory called chaos theory that addresses this.
The block introduces a selected few topics which either the OUBS or business shools in general consider as important, necessary or interesting for MBA. In no particular order and not in the same wordings and categorisations given in the books, they are:
- Stakeholders management (internal, external, satisficing)
- Organisational behaviour
- Organisational structure
- Organisational culture
- External environment (interfacing with organisations, volatility)
- Internal environment
- Human resource management (HRM) - soft HRM model, hard HRM model, european perspective
- Motivation - Maslow's pyramid of needs and .. two others I don't remember now, damn!
- Job Design
- Performance Management Systems
- Social responsibility of commercial companies
- Management control / accounting
- Profit centre, discretionary cost centre, standard cost centre, investment centre, revenue centre
- Conflict management
- Control systems (mechanistic, organismic, closed, open, integrated)
- Information management
- Knowledge management
- Financial analysis - balance sheet, profit and loss, cash flow statement
- Financial ratio analysis (ROCE, ROI etc.)
- Contingency theory
- Marketing - segmentation, targeting, positioning, shift of power to customers, impact of internet, capitalism, socialism, customer satisfaction
The block attempts to instill the idea of reflecting what ones learn (theories, models, frameowrks) against real scenarios. It also challenges the readers to be critical to the models, theories, frameworks - i.e. why some of them do no work in reality - in some organisations, in some circumstances, in some culture, in some age etc..
There seems to be a strong emphasis (given that it's mentioned many times in the block) that organisations need to look beyond their internal environment and be sensitive to changes in the external environment. Managers cannot be simply reactive, but instead beware of potential disruptions from the external environment --> There is a theory called chaos theory that addresses this.
Block 1: The perspectives - Human Resources Management
For human resources management, there are only two points that are important to remember - soft HRM model and hard HRM model. Soft HR model looks at HR management from the point of view of the people. It puts strong emphasis on the needs of employees and their effort in running the business to achieve its objectives in exchange for rewards such as salary, bonus, career development etc.. Hard HRM model on the hand view people purely as resources (or rather machines) to the organisations - the needs of the people are secondary to meeting to the company's objectives. Hard HRM is more common in North America. In Europe especially countries such as Germany and France, the needs of the people are highly protected by unions, hence soft HRM is practised more widely.
Block 1: The perspectives - Financial Management
Management control is management accounting (cost centre control, business control). It sits in between strategic planning (at the top) and operating control / tasks control (in the bottom).
Operating control is about internal control. This to ensure day to day operations are done in accordance with the rules and regulations (internal or external), for examples rules of segregation of duties for critical tasks - a simple example would be the person to records invoice in an ERP system should not be the same person approving it.
For management control to be effective, there needs to be clear financial responsibilities defined in the structure of the organisation. This comes in the form of discretionary cost centre, standard cost centre, revenue centre, profit centre and investment centre.
Operating control is about internal control. This to ensure day to day operations are done in accordance with the rules and regulations (internal or external), for examples rules of segregation of duties for critical tasks - a simple example would be the person to records invoice in an ERP system should not be the same person approving it.
For management control to be effective, there needs to be clear financial responsibilities defined in the structure of the organisation. This comes in the form of discretionary cost centre, standard cost centre, revenue centre, profit centre and investment centre.
Sunday, 18 July 2010
Block 1: The perspectives - Marketing
On marketing, the perspective has been focusing on the importance in involving customers in organisation marketing strategy. A satisfied customer is likely to become a loyal customer. With loyalty comes attractions to new customers and retention of existing customers. The way to address the needs of customers to reach the level satisfaction they need is through customer segmentation. A segment is a cluster or a group of customers that have the same or similar needs.
The main argument of this section is that although the concept of segmentation is highly supported and regarded by marketing specialists, it is nothing more than a snapshot of the situation at a that particular time. The world changes and moves so fast that customers needs continue to evolve while a segment is identified. Hence, it is important for organisations to adapt to this.
The main argument of this section is that although the concept of segmentation is highly supported and regarded by marketing specialists, it is nothing more than a snapshot of the situation at a that particular time. The world changes and moves so fast that customers needs continue to evolve while a segment is identified. Hence, it is important for organisations to adapt to this.
Block 1: The perspectives - Information and Knowledge
Data needs to be converted before it becomes information, and information needs to be put together in some sensible / logical manner to make up knowledge. The reasons why it is often said that organisations with control over information have advantage over the others are:
1. With global competition increases, sources of other competitive advantage becomes scarce
2. Advancement of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) allows capture of and accessibility to information to be done very easily.
With information management comes issues of ethics. Selling information about your customers' preference in purchase isn't illegal as long as it is kept to a level that exact details of individuals are not disclosed. However, it is viewed as unethical. The question of what encompasses unethical act remains unanswered. Within the world of internet, there is an ethics vacuum that is until today unaddressed.
With information comes knowledge. Organisations that manage knowledge effective could benefits from it. For examples:
1. They will be able to avoid expensive mistakes when previous mistakes are recorded (the cause, how to prevent, how to fix etc).
2. Knowing more about the market, about your competitors and customers will help you to speed marketing of your products and win new businesses.
1. With global competition increases, sources of other competitive advantage becomes scarce
2. Advancement of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) allows capture of and accessibility to information to be done very easily.
With information management comes issues of ethics. Selling information about your customers' preference in purchase isn't illegal as long as it is kept to a level that exact details of individuals are not disclosed. However, it is viewed as unethical. The question of what encompasses unethical act remains unanswered. Within the world of internet, there is an ethics vacuum that is until today unaddressed.
With information comes knowledge. Organisations that manage knowledge effective could benefits from it. For examples:
1. They will be able to avoid expensive mistakes when previous mistakes are recorded (the cause, how to prevent, how to fix etc).
2. Knowing more about the market, about your competitors and customers will help you to speed marketing of your products and win new businesses.
Saturday, 17 July 2010
Block 1: The perspectives - Organisational Behaviour
THREE KEY THEMES: Stakeholders, contingency theory and external environment
Key points:
Traditional argument that external environment is uncontrollable, that organisations simply need to adapt as and when external forces change. More contemporary opinions suggest that it is possible for organisations to predict what could happen 10, 20 years down the road, and therefore do the necessary preparations. Thus, it is important for managers to allocate sufficient time looking at the external environment to understand the behaviour and potential change of course.
Environment Volatility
The more we understand the behaviour of external environment and its level of volatility the more we could prepare ourselves for and impacts coming from it. It is argued by academics that rationality, and structured approach to business and organisational management is not a competitive advantage within environment that is volatile. In fact it is a hindrance to success. It should also be noted that environment changes and volatility offers threats as much as opportunities. Good managers are able sense and detect opportunities as well as threats resulting from external changes early enough to make the right decisions.
In ATS, the business division of AP I work with, the business in strong anticipation of business opportunities in some key markets such as Russia, China and Asia Pacific (Malaysia and the surrounding), decided to either open new offices or expand the existing units. Many new engineers as well as other support personnel were hired. To this point, none of these locations have won any new projects. Malaysia has gone from around 150 employees in 2006 to close to 800 today - in 6 months if they remain without any project, chances are that some people will need to go. Likewise Russia and China continue to exist with minimum number of people, hoping to hit a small jackpot some day.
Working environment is essentially a system consisting of environment, people, technology and organisation. It cannot be look at solely as either technical system or social system - the combination of the two that makes it work, i.e. socio-technical.
Emery and Trist (1965) produced 4 classifications of environment:
Contingency Theory and Organisational Structure
Contingency theory says that there is no one best solution to every management problem and needs. It all depends on the industry, forces of external environment, organisational structure, dominant nationality, strategic direction of the organisation and various other factors. There are debates on whether organisations aligns its structure of the external environment or to its strategy. The traditional view of organisation structure classifies into two - mechanistic structure and organismic structure. The former is used by organisations that exists in a stable environment whereas that latter in fast changing world (more about the two structures is explained in this post).
Sector
Every organisation is different. For small organisations, the role of managers is more loosely defined, and responsibilities are quite broad. In larger organisations, this is more specifically linked to narrower defined responsibilities. Although there are arguments that every sector and every organisation is different and therefore management theories cannot be applied to all, there are however common problems across all organisation irregardless of size and sectors that can be addressed by the same management theories and frameworks.
Nationality
This simply says that culture of nationality of the people in an organisation could influence the way it is organised and operates. In Germany, the labour law is strong and pro employees that the personnel development plan and performance management system (PMS) simply cannot be implemented. Taking an example of restructuring the IT entity of A in 2008, we could see that it is not easy to change the status quo because there are so many of the employees based in France - and the Workers Union did not make it easy for A. Specifically on culture, it's clearly observed in A that French managers are more relaxed and take more time to complete tasks than the Swiss. Organisation structures in in French units are less flat than those in Switzerland.
Control Systems
Control systems range from totally personal such as supervisor closely monitoring his subordinate, semi impersonal such as through KPIs and balanced scorecards, and totally impersonal through control of machines in an assembly lines. Control systems are also either integrated or fragmented. An example of the former is set of bottom up KPIs or balanced scorecards that are based on a single framework. With the latter, each department may have its own way of managing KPIs and measurement of performance; this will require some sort of consolidations and alignment of tasks report them to top management. The problem with fragmented control systems is that they usually cause conflict with each other. An example in ATS is the recent split of the supplier monitoring group into expediting and quality control. In the past the two functions were done by the one person belonging. Today, we need two persons, each will fight to get his priority and objective done - one will fight to get parts released ASAP by supplier to meet project deadline and the other will do his best to check and make sure only with the right quality can it be shipped (this may need more time than the expeditor could allow). So, who will win ?
A system takes inputs, execute some processes for conversion and produces output and releases it to environment. There are also some systems that take some parts of the outputs and feedback to the input and conversion process - this is called closed loop system. Example of this is budget process.
A closed system does not interact with its external environment whereas open system does. An example of a closed system is the old China that was self-sufficient, not depending on others to survive. Many other systems are open, depending on the external environment for input and use of the output.
Katz ajnd Khan identified 5 sub systems in an organisation:
Managing Conflicts
Conflicts can happen because of diversity (in terms culture, nationalities, gender etc.) and also authority, power. Although diversity usually promises better chance of finding solutions to problems as we tend to have higher level of creativity and many ways of thinking, it also often causes arguments and frictions in a team especially when time is essence and other pressures involved.
Conflicts don't usually show themselves. In most cases these are clear from exchange of strong words, body language, foul language in some cases etc.. But there are situations when conflicts are suppressed - this is dangerous and it's important for managers to be able to detect them (read between the lines? perhaps). Factors why some conflicts are not disclosed or shown are 1) Fear of consequences, 2) Ideas of legitimacy (i.e. one side thinks the other acting legitimately), 3) Exclusion (stakeholders having interest in the issue are not included in discussion), 4) Taken for granted assumptions (i.e. the unhappy person decide to simply go with the decision made as he thinks it's not critical to interject).
Key points:
- Organisational behaviour depends on it structure, sector, nationality, control systems, organisational culture, size, environmental change and strategy. These factors also determine the level of differences between different organisations.
Traditional argument that external environment is uncontrollable, that organisations simply need to adapt as and when external forces change. More contemporary opinions suggest that it is possible for organisations to predict what could happen 10, 20 years down the road, and therefore do the necessary preparations. Thus, it is important for managers to allocate sufficient time looking at the external environment to understand the behaviour and potential change of course.
Environment Volatility
The more we understand the behaviour of external environment and its level of volatility the more we could prepare ourselves for and impacts coming from it. It is argued by academics that rationality, and structured approach to business and organisational management is not a competitive advantage within environment that is volatile. In fact it is a hindrance to success. It should also be noted that environment changes and volatility offers threats as much as opportunities. Good managers are able sense and detect opportunities as well as threats resulting from external changes early enough to make the right decisions.
In ATS, the business division of AP I work with, the business in strong anticipation of business opportunities in some key markets such as Russia, China and Asia Pacific (Malaysia and the surrounding), decided to either open new offices or expand the existing units. Many new engineers as well as other support personnel were hired. To this point, none of these locations have won any new projects. Malaysia has gone from around 150 employees in 2006 to close to 800 today - in 6 months if they remain without any project, chances are that some people will need to go. Likewise Russia and China continue to exist with minimum number of people, hoping to hit a small jackpot some day.
Working environment is essentially a system consisting of environment, people, technology and organisation. It cannot be look at solely as either technical system or social system - the combination of the two that makes it work, i.e. socio-technical.
Emery and Trist (1965) produced 4 classifications of environment:
- Placid, randomised - relatively unchanging and homogeneous whose demands are randomly distributed.
- Placid, clustered - relatively unchanging, but its threats and rewards are clustered. Example, monopoly whereby its existence is dependent of ability to hold over the market it serves.
- Disturbed, reactive - there are competitions between organisations including hindering tactics
- Turbulent field - dynamic and fast changing environment in which organisations must adapt fast to survive
Contingency Theory and Organisational Structure
Contingency theory says that there is no one best solution to every management problem and needs. It all depends on the industry, forces of external environment, organisational structure, dominant nationality, strategic direction of the organisation and various other factors. There are debates on whether organisations aligns its structure of the external environment or to its strategy. The traditional view of organisation structure classifies into two - mechanistic structure and organismic structure. The former is used by organisations that exists in a stable environment whereas that latter in fast changing world (more about the two structures is explained in this post).
Sector
Every organisation is different. For small organisations, the role of managers is more loosely defined, and responsibilities are quite broad. In larger organisations, this is more specifically linked to narrower defined responsibilities. Although there are arguments that every sector and every organisation is different and therefore management theories cannot be applied to all, there are however common problems across all organisation irregardless of size and sectors that can be addressed by the same management theories and frameworks.
Nationality
This simply says that culture of nationality of the people in an organisation could influence the way it is organised and operates. In Germany, the labour law is strong and pro employees that the personnel development plan and performance management system (PMS) simply cannot be implemented. Taking an example of restructuring the IT entity of A in 2008, we could see that it is not easy to change the status quo because there are so many of the employees based in France - and the Workers Union did not make it easy for A. Specifically on culture, it's clearly observed in A that French managers are more relaxed and take more time to complete tasks than the Swiss. Organisation structures in in French units are less flat than those in Switzerland.
Control Systems
Control systems range from totally personal such as supervisor closely monitoring his subordinate, semi impersonal such as through KPIs and balanced scorecards, and totally impersonal through control of machines in an assembly lines. Control systems are also either integrated or fragmented. An example of the former is set of bottom up KPIs or balanced scorecards that are based on a single framework. With the latter, each department may have its own way of managing KPIs and measurement of performance; this will require some sort of consolidations and alignment of tasks report them to top management. The problem with fragmented control systems is that they usually cause conflict with each other. An example in ATS is the recent split of the supplier monitoring group into expediting and quality control. In the past the two functions were done by the one person belonging. Today, we need two persons, each will fight to get his priority and objective done - one will fight to get parts released ASAP by supplier to meet project deadline and the other will do his best to check and make sure only with the right quality can it be shipped (this may need more time than the expeditor could allow). So, who will win ?
A system takes inputs, execute some processes for conversion and produces output and releases it to environment. There are also some systems that take some parts of the outputs and feedback to the input and conversion process - this is called closed loop system. Example of this is budget process.
A closed system does not interact with its external environment whereas open system does. An example of a closed system is the old China that was self-sufficient, not depending on others to survive. Many other systems are open, depending on the external environment for input and use of the output.
Katz ajnd Khan identified 5 sub systems in an organisation:
- Production or technical - basically sub systems directly involved in productions; in the context of A, these are engineering and construction / commissioning
- Supportive - these are supporting functions such and procurement and logistics, HR.
- Maintenance - sub-system supporting breakdowns of activities of production and technical (or even support)
- Adaptive - sub-system concerned with future (looking what future would hold, challenges etc and prepare the organisation to face it.
- Managerial - controlling and coordination. In the context of A, the sectors are essential managerial sub-system.
Managing Conflicts
Conflicts can happen because of diversity (in terms culture, nationalities, gender etc.) and also authority, power. Although diversity usually promises better chance of finding solutions to problems as we tend to have higher level of creativity and many ways of thinking, it also often causes arguments and frictions in a team especially when time is essence and other pressures involved.
Conflicts don't usually show themselves. In most cases these are clear from exchange of strong words, body language, foul language in some cases etc.. But there are situations when conflicts are suppressed - this is dangerous and it's important for managers to be able to detect them (read between the lines? perhaps). Factors why some conflicts are not disclosed or shown are 1) Fear of consequences, 2) Ideas of legitimacy (i.e. one side thinks the other acting legitimately), 3) Exclusion (stakeholders having interest in the issue are not included in discussion), 4) Taken for granted assumptions (i.e. the unhappy person decide to simply go with the decision made as he thinks it's not critical to interject).
Residential is nearing
Five more days and I will be in attending the residential school for B713 in Dublin. It shall start on Friday after lunch and finish Monday mid-day. Some of the guys who went to the one in Brussels just returned a few days ago. I heard it was good. Hopefully Dublin will be as good.
Looking at the schedule for the four days, it looks very hectic. After registration on Friday, it's pretty much non-stop activities, workshops, presentations, discussions until the very last day. And days start at 9 AM and finish 9 PM or later.
Looking at the schedule for the four days, it looks very hectic. After registration on Friday, it's pretty much non-stop activities, workshops, presentations, discussions until the very last day. And days start at 9 AM and finish 9 PM or later.
It took my quite some time to understand how the groups are structured. Only after reading a number of times that it clicked. Each student will be assigned to a group of 8 persons, representing the management members of the Gelati ice cream company. Within the group, there will be four pairs - each pair will take up the role of a functional department within the company. Each pair will need to work on tasks assigned to the department. At certain points of time, the pairs are required to present their deliverables to other departments (i.e. to the 8-persons management group). On the final day, the management group will be required to present to 2 other 8-persons management group. Sounds confusing .. indeed very confusing.
The case study: Gelati Ice Cream Company
The business was set up in England by two Italian brothers Remo and Mario Lucca in the 1930s. By 1939, the managed to have had opened 6 ice cream parlours cum cafe in a town called Branwick and the surrounding areas. The ice cream was special that it was made on site and thus fresh and had the special touch of "home made". The family recipe was also special and became the talk of the towns and very popular. The company until today is called Gelati.
The case study: Gelati Ice Cream Company
The business was set up in England by two Italian brothers Remo and Mario Lucca in the 1930s. By 1939, the managed to have had opened 6 ice cream parlours cum cafe in a town called Branwick and the surrounding areas. The ice cream was special that it was made on site and thus fresh and had the special touch of "home made". The family recipe was also special and became the talk of the towns and very popular. The company until today is called Gelati.
Sunday, 23 May 2010
Organismic vs Mechanistic Control Systems
Extract from http://www.change.freeuk.com/learning/business/mechorga.html:
In organismic control system, a continual adjustments and flexibility in individual tasks is emphasised. Knowledge is collaborative rather than restricted into specialisms. Communication is horizontal, vertical and diagonal as required by the types of work involved. An organisation chart would depend on the job being done and what process it involves, and it may not last long. Everyone should consult and consider the overall aims of the company as the situation keeps changing.
Here - http://www.bookrags.com/research/mechanistic-organizations-eom/, there is a clear explanation of mechanistic control system minus comparison with organismic control system. The term mechanistic suggests that organizational structures, processes, and roles are like a machine in which each part of the organization does what it is designed to do, but little else. What's interesting here also is that it explains why mechanistic organisation is not synonymous to bureaucratic organisation despite very close similarities. A mechanistic organisation is usually bureaucratic, but a bureaucratic organisation is not necessarily mechanistic. Mechanistic implies efficiency; but most bureaucratic organisations are far from efficient. Here, there are more explanations about the difference.
Related links:
Mechanistic Organisation: McDonald
In organismic control system, a continual adjustments and flexibility in individual tasks is emphasised. Knowledge is collaborative rather than restricted into specialisms. Communication is horizontal, vertical and diagonal as required by the types of work involved. An organisation chart would depend on the job being done and what process it involves, and it may not last long. Everyone should consult and consider the overall aims of the company as the situation keeps changing.
Here - http://www.bookrags.com/research/mechanistic-organizations-eom/, there is a clear explanation of mechanistic control system minus comparison with organismic control system. The term mechanistic suggests that organizational structures, processes, and roles are like a machine in which each part of the organization does what it is designed to do, but little else. What's interesting here also is that it explains why mechanistic organisation is not synonymous to bureaucratic organisation despite very close similarities. A mechanistic organisation is usually bureaucratic, but a bureaucratic organisation is not necessarily mechanistic. Mechanistic implies efficiency; but most bureaucratic organisations are far from efficient. Here, there are more explanations about the difference.
Related links:
Mechanistic Organisation: McDonald
Saturday, 15 May 2010
Resource based approach to strategy
Resource based approach to strategy takes a look at the strengthening the internal resources of an organisation and how the resources could be transformed into a competitive edge that is not easily copied by others. It is argued in the topic that there are five attributes of resources that could lift an organisation to the level of internal strength - The resources collectively should be able to form capabilities that are:
1. Inimitable (not easy to imitate)
2. Durable (that could last very long)
3. Relevant (that is relevant in the context of current time)
4. Appropriable (this one I'm not sure what it exactly means)
1. Inimitable (not easy to imitate)
2. Durable (that could last very long)
3. Relevant (that is relevant in the context of current time)
4. Appropriable (this one I'm not sure what it exactly means)
Thursday, 13 May 2010
Market based approach to strategy
This topic of block 3 of B713 touches on how strategy can be put together based on the understanding of the forces in the market. This is the case if an organisation intends to venture into a new market segment or region. There are two key theories relevant to this; the Porter (1980) market five forces and an extension of it by David McKevitt (2000) that takes a slightly extended view on public organisations, in particular those that have direct interaction / interfaces with the people.
Porter theory is most relevant in the context of free market. Understanding the forces - existing competitors, (bargaining power of) suppliers, (bargaining power of) customers, (level of) barrier of entry, and (potential) new entrants provide - allows an organisation to come up with the right strategy. For example, in a market that is highly driven by brands, it is important that the right level of investment is allocated to introduce a new brand.
In this topic of market based strategy approach, what is most key is that how an organisation is adapts to the changes in the market and alter and align its strategy accordingly. What is more important is its sensitivity to indicators of these changes to react early enough.
Porter theory is most relevant in the context of free market. Understanding the forces - existing competitors, (bargaining power of) suppliers, (bargaining power of) customers, (level of) barrier of entry, and (potential) new entrants provide - allows an organisation to come up with the right strategy. For example, in a market that is highly driven by brands, it is important that the right level of investment is allocated to introduce a new brand.
In this topic of market based strategy approach, what is most key is that how an organisation is adapts to the changes in the market and alter and align its strategy accordingly. What is more important is its sensitivity to indicators of these changes to react early enough.
Monday, 29 March 2010
online discussion ... "First Class"? far from it
Thanks to Adr for reminding me about the online discussion started to today. For some reason I thought the first session was to take place tomorrow.
I have to say it was done in a funny way, using email with everyone posting replies to the question. Not the right way to do it, let alone effective way. From the beginning I hated it. It's not even forum tool. You will be lost half way through the discussion not knowing where it began and where it progresses to. Apparently there is proper tool for such a discussion, including voice feature available and we can use it for our third session on Wednesday. It puzzles me why this was not used today.
The topic discussed revolved around organisational performance and critique of balance scorecard (BSC). I had a few ideas in mind having seen BSC used in my organisation and had met with the person responsible in rolling it out and managing it this afternoon. The key question I posed was if the BSC was created based in cascaded objectives coming top down. The answer to this was Yes, indeed the case. Corporate sent a challenge letter to Sector, and Sector down to business. Based on this, KPIs were chosen to be the basis of the BSC covering four areas namely processes, finance, people, and ... I don't remember the fourth. The use of the BSC is no more than to provide a quick, simple way of monitoring mainly key operational areas. This can be used to be proactively anticipate and handle issues in projects or organisation.
I have to say it was done in a funny way, using email with everyone posting replies to the question. Not the right way to do it, let alone effective way. From the beginning I hated it. It's not even forum tool. You will be lost half way through the discussion not knowing where it began and where it progresses to. Apparently there is proper tool for such a discussion, including voice feature available and we can use it for our third session on Wednesday. It puzzles me why this was not used today.
The topic discussed revolved around organisational performance and critique of balance scorecard (BSC). I had a few ideas in mind having seen BSC used in my organisation and had met with the person responsible in rolling it out and managing it this afternoon. The key question I posed was if the BSC was created based in cascaded objectives coming top down. The answer to this was Yes, indeed the case. Corporate sent a challenge letter to Sector, and Sector down to business. Based on this, KPIs were chosen to be the basis of the BSC covering four areas namely processes, finance, people, and ... I don't remember the fourth. The use of the BSC is no more than to provide a quick, simple way of monitoring mainly key operational areas. This can be used to be proactively anticipate and handle issues in projects or organisation.
Thursday, 25 March 2010
TMA03 Marks
Today I got back the marks for my fourth TMA - number 3. I knew it wasn't gonna be good, having rushed to complete it in the last minute. let me see .... fewhh!! Thank god. Not that bad.
Mr Tutor commented that I did not use enough the principle of Theory - Interpretation - Evaluation in question a on organisational performance. Precisely what went wrong. I wouldn't disagree a single bit. I mentioned very little of the theory, hence no interpretation of it. Evaluation was quite poor. In terms of collaboration, I got involved a lot in the TGF but did not make use of it so much in the answer. To be honest I got a lost in the forum --- the forum tool is to be blamed. Extremely poor functionality and miles from being user friendly.
Question 2 on financial ratio which I thought I was gonna do pretty good did not turn so ... darn it! The comment: "you probably needed to thin down what you offered, as the extent of what you contributed somewhat obscured the detail of what the anser needed - a case of too much, basically.". I went over board in my rationale of the ratios? Hard to believe. I've asked Mr Tutor to provide clarification.
Mr Tutor commented that I did not use enough the principle of Theory - Interpretation - Evaluation in question a on organisational performance. Precisely what went wrong. I wouldn't disagree a single bit. I mentioned very little of the theory, hence no interpretation of it. Evaluation was quite poor. In terms of collaboration, I got involved a lot in the TGF but did not make use of it so much in the answer. To be honest I got a lost in the forum --- the forum tool is to be blamed. Extremely poor functionality and miles from being user friendly.
Question 2 on financial ratio which I thought I was gonna do pretty good did not turn so ... darn it! The comment: "you probably needed to thin down what you offered, as the extent of what you contributed somewhat obscured the detail of what the anser needed - a case of too much, basically.". I went over board in my rationale of the ratios? Hard to believe. I've asked Mr Tutor to provide clarification.
Friday, 8 January 2010
Finance
For the past one week I have been working hard on Finance topics. The brought back memories of the struggling times I had with Accounting when I was in high school. Once, I screwed up a paper and got and "F" for it, probably the only failed test/exam I ever had in my entire life.
I'm getting the grasps of the topics. So far so good. Numbers and reasons.
The TMA seems to look quite straight. Hope I'll score some good marks.
I'm getting the grasps of the topics. So far so good. Numbers and reasons.
The TMA seems to look quite straight. Hope I'll score some good marks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)