Market structure Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Market structure - Research Paper Example This implies that product differentiation exists and each one is capable of satisfying divergent consumer needs. Barriers to entry are few thus explaining why the competitors are many in number (Makiw, 2008). The oligopolistic market structure is one in which a small number of players operate, and they can control the market. Usually, these players are large enough and account for a substantial market share. They make decisions interdependently and are highly motivated by the need to cooperate. Therefore, players exert a degree of control over market conditions. Furthermore, this model is characterized by many barriers to entry. A monopoly is a market in which only a single producer exists. The person is therefore capable of exercising considerable control over the market. Products sold do not have close substitutes thus prompting consumers to stick to them. Normally, the monopoly thrives in water distribution, electricity and gas industries. Barriers to entry are also quite high. 2. Real life example of a market structure in my local city A Shell retail outlet is an example of an oligopolistic market in my city. The organization has relatively few competitors in the gas pump market. Retail outlets may be high in number but the number of companies controlling those outlets is relatively few. Furthermore, Shell is a large company that accounts for about 20% of the market share. This degree of concentration in the oil retail industry makes Shell gullible to collusions with its rivals. For a number of times, the company has been accused of setting artificial prices that do not relate to world oil prices. Regardless, the organization’s products are often sold for a price that is relatively close to market rates. In oligopolistic markets, this is typical for many organizations as competition based on price could lead to inefficiencies. Barriers to trade are also substantial as certain restrictions exist. Shell has control over oil as a natural resource. It is also a vertically integrated firm in which other aspects of oil production take place. The facilities and equipment needed to carry out this work are quite expensive. Therefore, new entrants would not have the economies of scale needed to make significant profits in the market. They would have to raise their prices in order to cover production costs, yet this would drive away consumers who would seek inespensice alternatives. Shell also enjoys large revenue streams from its elaborate business model. Therefore, it is likely that a competitor interested in entering the market would have difficulties advertising or matching Shell’s marketing expenditure (Frank and Bernanke, 2009). 3. How high entry barriers into markets influence long run profitability Entry barriers may come in the form of patents, government licensing, benefits that accrue from economies of scale or resource control. Industries with high entry barriers will not have many alternative suppliers. Therefore, mark et forces will be weakened. Profitability will mostly depend on the supply side of the equation. Usually, when a seller sets their prices, they normally do this on the basis of their costs. Marginal costs refer to those additional expenditures incurred when a seller makes an additional item. In markets with low entry barriers, sellers will price their commodities on the basis of

Psychology Prediction Essay Example for Free

Psychology Prediction Essay According to one of my favorite philosophers, Yogi Berra, Its hard to predict, especially the future†. He’s right but it doesn’t stop many people from trying. In fact predicting the future is essential to many aspects of our lives – in business, and beyond. Many professionals have the need to accurately predict outcomes of the future to be successful in their jobs. And many have occupations where predicting the future actually is their job, one way or another. As an analyst at Gartner, I am of course a good example of this. Some of this is common sense. Some is controversial. Some goes completely against what most think and against what people are taught even at organizations who train people to do predictive type jobs. But it works for me. Here are my ten guiding principles for accurate prediction: 1.Care about being right. This sounds obvious but circumstances and other requirements often get in the way. Professionals whose job involves making predictions face pressures to have an opinion, no matter what, and to generate visibility. This can lead to quickly formed opinions and overstating and over hyping things. While these things may in fact need to be part of a strategy, they do not have to be the primary goal. Tempering such behavior by placing the goal of being right at a higher priority is one of the real keys to accurate prediction. You can’t be afraid to be wrong, but you can’t place being right at lower priority and expect to be good at predicting. 2.Be an â€Å"innumerate†. Be extremely skeptical of any numbers. Many believe that numbers don’t lie. They don’t of course, but people do. And they state the numbers that they want to state to make their case. And they get things confused. Numbers are more useful in looking back at history than in predicting (looking back at history is helpful and numbers can help). Be especially wary of survey data. Often the questions are poorly formed and the respondents not necessarily knowledgeable. There is no substitute for talking directly to people to make sure that you understand context and that they understand the question. And follow-up is possible. 3.Ask yourself â€Å"Why are they telling me this?† Understand the motivations of sources of information. Everyone you meet has some type of agenda. Sometimes it is truly to educate you, usually not. It is critical to understand what the source of information wants you to think to put the information into context. 4.Ask yourself â€Å"What would I do†? Put yourself in the shoes of the CEO or key decision maker of the entity if possible. This is a key tool to predicting how companies and organizations will behave. If the prediction is about that company, this is the major key. If it is more general, putting yourself in the shoes of multiples and playing out scenarios is helpful. 5.Recognize that most of the time, you will know less than your sources. The world is full of specialists. Depending on circumstance, you may know as much as your sources but there is almost always someone who is more of an expert than you. So you need to develop strategies for assessing the credibility and honesty of a source. A useful tactic is to lead a discussion towards an area in which you do know a lot and test the source’s honesty and credibility. This can help determine what weight to give the source 6.Don’t jump to conclusions. Whenever possible take your time. When pushed for an opinion, it is best to say â€Å"if I had to have an opinion I would lean towards x†, but not highlight these types of things as â€Å"predictions†. 7.Find â€Å"bubbles†, conventional thinking and poke at assumptions. Try to understand why most people have a certain belief and figure out what assumptions they have. Look for misunderstandings, confusion, motivations and social trends. 8.Get information you’re not supposed to have. Basic networking is essential to knowing your subject and to getting information you’re not supposed to have (Obviously those subject to â€Å"insider trading† types of issues need to tread carefully here). Listen for slip ups. Put the pieces together. Fill in the holes. Speculate. 9.â€Å"You’re only paranoid if you’re wrong†. Explore conspiracy theories. While they usually won’t be the prediction, the exercise of examining possible conspiracy theories often is fruitful. Remember At the very least there is bound to be some aspect of the theory that has some truth to it and may point the way towards a good prediction. However, it is far more likely that stupidity or laziness, rather than conspiracy, is the cause. 10.Constantly test, validate and refine. Every chance you get to talk to a person whose opinion you respect, test new theories. Every chance you talk to a source of information, test your theories and gauge their reactions. Be open to tweaks.

Mordecai Richler’s The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz Essay -- Appren

Mordecai Richler’s The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz Cunning though he is, Duddy Kravitz fails to learn the tricks of his trade and, consequently, fails to become a whole person. In Mordecai Richler’s The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, Duddy’s peers succumb to his antics, thereby becoming deficient as Duddy’s teachers. Duddy’s amoral business associates are masters of ruthlessness and deceit, and his family members are enfeebled by the society they live in. Trained at the hands of these cripples, Duddy Kravitz is unable to complete his apprenticeship. Duddy Kravitz’s apprenticeship takes place where "the boys grew up dirty and sad, spiky also, like grass beside the railroad tracks." (The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, 46) At the Fletcher’s Cadets Parade, the boys whom Duddy learns from in his early years tell crude jokes and defect to buy rye. Duddy is also the president of room forty-one at Fletcher’s Field High School. He learns from his peers that the vulnerability of others can be used to his own advantage. From singing songs with lewd lyrics to tormenting his class masters and the rabbinical college students, Duddy elicits positive reaction from his peers. No one dares to accuse Duddy of lying, though his classmates see the outrageousness in his tales of Bradley’s exploits in Arizona. His peers humour him and stroke his ego. They applaud his pranks, but Duddy is a coward – he does not take responsibility for his wrongs. Whether it is writing hurtful comments on the board or phoning MacPher son’s wife Jenny – thus causing her death – Duddy learns that he can use his peers to relieve his conscience, "We’re all in this together, you understand?" (40) As the leader of the "Warriors," Duddy learns that his weak peers ... ...and is nobody," and not explaining fully to the boy what he means, Simcha fires the boy’s imagination and lust for land. Surrounded by emotional and psychological cripples, Duddy mistakens his goals in his apprenticeship and does not complete what he should do in order to become a complete person. Duddy’s peers, business associates, and family members all have distorted views of how to approach life, therefore they are unsuitable to preside as Duddy’s masters in Duddy’s apprenticeship in the field of life. Works Cited Richler, Mordecai. The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. Ed. Malcolm Ross. Toronto: McClelland, 1969. Works Consulted Wainwright, J.A. "Neither Jekyll nor Hyde: In Defence of Duddy Kravitz." Canadian Literature 89 (1981): 56-73. McGregor, Grant. "Duddy Kravitz: From Apprentice to Legend." Journal of Canadian Fiction 30 (1980): 132-40.

Hostile is outsourcing: The story of Manufact Essay

This case study is concerned with issues of Hostile IS Outsourcing. It describes the situation which developed in May 1996 as problems with communication and careful planning within the organisation, resulted in a key department being outsourced. This had many implications which had a negative â€Å"knock-on† effect throughout the company. I am going to highlight these and look at issues which may minimise the risks in taking such important decisions. The ManuFact Company is a mid-sized (SME) European company in the kitchen hardware industry. (The company consists of 3500 employees of which 39 of them work in the IS department) It has a total o of 3500 employees, mainly in production and distribution and an IT department with 39 people whose budget is $4 million and a largely mainframe based portfolio. A key person in this company is Smith who was the IS director for ManuFact until March 1997, who reorganized the IS capability from a marginally successful semi-independent subsidiary to an internal department. He received good feedback about his ability to keep IT costs down and maintain a satisfactory level. What we have to keep in mind at this point is that Smith was excellent at his job, trusted within the company and was recognized and valued in the organisation. The other key person in this case is Lawler who in May 1996 became Smith’s boss. Lawler had a background as chief council for ManuFact and was a member of the board. He was part of a three-person top management committee with responsibility for administration, personnel, and legal issues as well IS departments. However we have to note that Lawler had â€Å"little† IT experience. Therefore we can make a judgement that for key decisions within this IS department, the right thing for Lawler to do would be to consult a person with the right understanding and specialist knowledge for decision making purposes. Later on we will see that this was not as such and the whole structure of the IS department was affected, due to the lack of communication with the right people and high risk decision made. Within this case study we see that Lawler was interested in â€Å"downsizing† and â€Å"facilities management†. What do these terms mean? Downsizing is a reduction in the staffing requirements of businesses which can follow after privatisation for a variety of reasons such as competitive pressures or the need to increase the profitability of the business by cutting costs1. Facilities management is the Management and operation of a part of a client’s IT facilities under a contract extending over several years2. The definition of Outsourcing is an arrangement whereby a 3rd party provider assumes responsibility for performing Information Systems functions a pre-defined price and according to pre-determines performance criteria. It can also be defined as the purchase of a good or service that was previously provided internally. With IT outsourcing an outside vendor provides IT services traditionally provided internal MIS department3. In the case Lawler requests Smith to research companies about outsourcing, of which three main companies are contacted, one being ISCorp. After initial consultation with the company Smith advises Lawler that there is a potential to save $275,000 but realistically they would break-even due to transition costs. Hence Smith warns that this solution would not be feasible. So assume that this is an accurate judgement by Smith as he knows best about the department due to his experience working within the IS department. However Lawler is approached directly by ISCorp and is informed that there is potential to save $6million to which he feels obliged to accept the offer. He therefore falls into a â€Å"big trap† and believes the biased portrayal of the vendor, by not appreciating the views of Smith and the careful analysis he conducted. From the information we have we can assume that Lawler has not planned the contract correctly to his benefit. A reason for this could be that he had insufficient IS experience. Lawler could have considered selective outsourcing which is when company decided to outsource, despite possible disadvantages, it must always decide whether to pursue it fully or selectively. Full outsourcing means, that all its IS functions from desktop services to software development are outsourced4. A company would outsource everything if it did not view IS as a strategic advantage that needs to be developed internally. This may be the case with ManuFact, and Lawler may have made this decision on that basis, however we do not know that. Had Lawler known about selective outsourcing he may have considered that. Selective outsourcing is where a company chooses which IS capabilities to retain in house and which could be given to an outsider. Areas which could fall into this category could be Web site hosting, business process application development, help desk support, networking, communications and data centre operations5. Reasons to outsource selectively could also be that a particular area or a segment can’t be improved and would only be perform better if completed externally. It provides greater flexibility and better service due to the competitive market. Lawler should have looked at some outsourcing models such as the classic outsourcing model. This dictates that an enterprise should outsource only those functions that do not give it competitive advantage. This would result in all the ManuFact IS employees being made redundant and offered new jobs within ISCorp. The ManuFact IS staff felt de-motivated and not wanted as later on in the case they all leave except two. As a consequence expertise knowledge was lost from within the company. Now ISCorp were worst off as they had to find new staff to replace existing members which meant they were not only less experienced, but also were not familiar with the existing systems resulting in higher costs for both training and recruitment. No new development took place for nine months. ISCorp had the cheek to demand an extra $1.5 million to cover work not specified in the contract .This indicates that the contract was not as ManuFact sought after as careful analysis of the problem was not thoroughly thought out. Therefore there were â€Å"loopholes† in the contract which ISCorp took advantage. On ManuFact’s part, lawyers should have been present when agreement of this contract took place to ensure ManuFact got exactly what was required. Another problem with regards to the ambiguity of the contract was that the amount of systems development hours specified by ISCorp was only half of what the IS department was currently putting in; but each hour was billed considerably higher. Therefore the current IS department would have been less expensive than ISCorp’s had they calculated with the same number of hours. However Smith was not successful in outlining this point with Lawler. ISCorp benefited from this and ManuFact lost out. Nine months on the systems were running fine, but new systems development still had not started. This could have an effect in other areas of the company or it could be that it has had a â€Å"knock-on† effect through the company already. (E.g. Company X produces Pokemons in the assembly line. The packer is waiting for the producer, so he can load the stock in the warehouse. If the producers are delayed then this has a knock-on effect as the packer is delayed, therefore the delivery is behind schedule and the consumer won’t get his Pokemon) Complaints had already been received from line organisation about ISCorp’s lack of customer service and also there were criticisms about the aging technology. As the contract did not contain any provisions for upgrading technology, ManuFact were effectively locked with the same technology infrastructure for the next five years. Recently Smith had heard that some of the subsidiaries were trying to break out of the contract so they can move on to newer and better technology. This would be difficult but if it was possible, it would be very costly for ManuFact as assumptions are made that ISCorp are well guarded for such an occurrence. On the side of ManuFact, if in the contract there was a clause that that would enable them to â€Å"backsource† or â€Å"in-Source† as it sometimes called, ManuFact could bring it’s IS team back internally. However they themselves may not want to consider this option due to previous experienced staff having gone elsewhere. Due to their previous problem, ManuFact are afraid of losing their staff members again which would mean they lose 18 months of skill, time and know-how which is currently in the â€Å"hands† of ISCorp; whom ManuFact are reliant on. In this particular case I feel that the disadvantages outweighed the advantages and my reasons are given above. ManuFact fell in many pitfalls such as focusing their negotiation solely on price. As the contract was not clear cut, it looks like many key areas such as planning were not looked at before deciding. As the savings looked very attractive Lawler didn’t carefully evaluate and appreciate his own company’s and staffs capabilities, not to mention thorough evaluation of the outsourcer’s capabilities. By checking the credibility of the vendors claims, ManuFact may not have got itself into the position it has because it would have meant ISCorp justifying themselves on many points and it could have â€Å"clicked† to Lawler and probably made him think twice. The main pitfall was that Lawler did not make the decision to consult the right people The recommendations I would like to give to ManuFact are to look into the contract and find any areas which have not been fulfilled and seek compensation if possible. If they want to completely backsource try to lure ISCorp staff to stay and work them. They could offer them incentives such as better pay but at least it would retain the specialist staffs that have trained on its systems for nine months. If this is not possible try and re-negotiate the contract ensuring that there are contract managers and lawyers present so ManuFact get the best or at the minimum, exactly what they want from the contract. Given the complexities of this case I would make sure that whatever decisions are made the staff currently working on the systems, STAY. To conclude I would like to say that Before deciding to outsource the top level management of a company really need to weigh up its pro’s and con’s. It needs to foresee where the company is going and see what measures it should take to achieve them. They should consider the possibility of selective, full or not to outsource at all if need be. Full or selective outsourcing allows an organisation alternative top-performing IS services in-house. Cost savings or filling gaps in the organisation’s IT skills are powerful drivers for outsourcing. The numerous risks involved in outsourcing arrangements must also be carefully assessed by IS and general manager alike. The Company ought to enforce a buy-out clause, if a company decides to outsource make sure the right specialist people such as lawyers are present to make sure things go according to plan, and finally: If a company decides to outsource ALWAYS check the fine print. Bibliography Person, K.E, and Saunders, C.S.,2004, Managing and Using Information Systems: A Strategic Approach Oates, D 1999, Outsourcing and the Virtual Organization: The Incredible Shrinking Company Willcocks, L.P and Lacity, M.C., 1999 Strategic Sourcing of Information Systems: Perspectives and Practised. Yaseen Adam Strategic Management and Information Systems

Case Study Toyota crisis Essay

Organizational Crisis negatively effect organization’s name and image, as well as adversely impact employee by instilling doubt, insecurity and distrust (Tahmicioglu, 2010). Employees are directly effected by the crisis, as they are the primary stakeholders (Obston, 2014) and brand ambassadors of the company. Thus, to ensure wellbeing of employees, especially in time of catastrophe, they should be well informed and fostered under the guidance of company’s leaders. Leaders at Toyota should take an immediate action; start with early internal crisis communication, take accountability and show their commitment to resolving the crisis. Male (2004) suggests, being proactive and transparent lessen doubt and distress among employees. It will be beneficial if a live talk is set up with the employees. Live podcast will personalize the message, and will allow employees to directly hear compassion and empathy in the leader’s voice. Establishing an active feedback loop is also very effective (Miller, 2014), an online forum on company’s intranet will be a great way to facilitate two-way dialogues between employees and executives. The forum will be pivotal in giving direct feedback to employees’ questions and concerns, and for consistently providing updated information. Along with starting communication, hotlines dedicated for crisis should be provided as part of employee assistance program; employees should be encouraged to actively use the services to get professional help they need for dealing with crisis. Lack of immediate dialogue leads to speculation (Miller, 2014), and when the magnitude of the crisis is as big as Toyota’s recall, consistent media scrutiny and amplification of negative news can further fuel anxiety and uncertainty among employees (Cole, 2011). Therefore, its imperative leaders eradicate uncertainty by giving timely crisis communication that precedes external news and provide continuing support to employees. An early two-way dialogue is a good start to lessen the chaos among distressed employees. However, in addition to continuing practice of honest internal communication, for the long run, leaders will need to establish processes specific to employees’ welfare to restore lost trust.  Organizational strategy needs to improve to rectify behaviors that effected employees’ welfare in past. Toyota’s work philosophy which Liker (2004) described as â€Å"The Toyota way,† was known for continuous improvement and people development; however, aggressive focus on rapid growth (Cole, 2011) resulted in detrimental practices, such as, reward system based on cost control versus quality control, poor training, declining working conditions and work overload (Sullivan, 2010; McNeill, 2013; Cole, 2011). These practices were not only damaging to employees trust, but also clearly violated psychological contract (Rousseau, 1995) of Toyota employees. To rebuild eroded trust caused by the violation of contract, leaders need to validate employees wellbeing is not compromised again. Gillespie and Dietz (2012) recommend implementing a strategy that will safeguard against future untrustworthy actions. This can be done by articulating and enacting a system instilled with high ethical standard, clearly communicated processes and better working conditions. Providing flexible working hours, manageable workload and regular training programs will prove leaders mean well; consistently incorporating employees voice will assure their role is imperative in recovery of company image. Lastly, proactively engaging in regular evaluation of processes will result in improved performance and ultimately recapturing the reputation. References: 1. Cole, R. E. (2011). What Really Happened to Toyota. MIT Sloan Management Review – The New Business of Innovation. 2. Gillespie, N., & Dietz, G. (2012). The recovery of trust: Case studies of organisational failures and trust repair. Institute of Business Ethics: London. 3. John, S. (2010). A think Piece: How HR caused Toyota to Crash. Retrieved from http://www.ere.net 4. Liker, J. (2004). The Toyota way 14 Management Principles from the World’s Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill 5. Male, B. (2010). How to handle a product recall. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com 6. McNeill, D. (2013). Cover-up: Toyota and Quality Control. The Asia Pacific Journal, Vol 11, Issue 36, No. 1, 7. Miller, J. (2014). 4 Tips to help leaders communicate during a crisis. Retrieve from http://smartblogs.com 8. Obston, A. (2014). 5 ways to communicate with employees during a crisis. Retrieved from http://www.ragan.com 9. Tahmicioglu, E. (2010). Surviving your company’s mistake. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com 10. Rousseau, D. (1995). The psychological contract: Violations and Modifications. The Organizational Behavior Reader. 8th ed.