Category Archives: Economics homework help

Stages the Relationship has gone through

Question

We develop relationships with others to serve basic human functions and to meet our needs.  We create perceptions of the other person and attempt to get them to perceive us in certain ways through various levels of self-disclosure, using different kinds of talk (e.g. CONNECT, D.I.A.L.O.G.U.E.). To sustain a relationship, a supportive climate (the Humanistic model) must be enacted by both parties in order to encourage on-going disclosure and the movement towards deeper emotional ties, while keeping the use of defenses and game playing (from TA) to a minimum.

Climate is particularly important when we need to deal with the various levels of disagreement or conflict that inevitably emerge in our relationships. In building and maintaining relationships, how people fight is just as important as how they love. Their “fighting style” depends on their quality of their emotional self-management and conflict management skills (e.g. light or heavy CO.N.T.RO.L. vs. D.I.A.L.O.G.U.E.).

Finally, all continuing romantic relationships go through a variety of developmental phases that involve different types or levels of intimacy and love. How we respond to this cycle is shaped, in part, by the beliefs about love and romance (see additional readings on web site) we have adopted from our families and the mass media.

Sample paper

Stages the Relationship has gone through

Sam and Alex’s relationship started as a casual interaction in the university after a class. From the dialogue, the two seem to have noticed each other but have never taken the step of having a direct interaction. They both seem to know each other’s names, meaning they could have been admiring each other secretly. The causal dialogue is initiated by Alex and Sam seems grand that despite being so famous for the first time she has been approached by a person she also likes. This demonstrates hope for the development of a strong friendship or a romantic relationship. In their first direct interaction, Alex and Sam discuss the course they seem to share in common, and which they both seem to hate. The two manage to discuss a few things about the course.  The conversation seems to be inclined more into knowing about each other in terms of academic goals. This first casual interaction ends in a lunch together event, which is a sign that the two are willing to build a friendship bond.

The causal interaction advanced into deep friendship. Sam and Alex could manage to share their free time. This started with the first lunch and having a friendlier and welcoming conversation during this time, and having a movie together at night. The two demonstrated happiness and satisfaction being together. They both loved staying together and were willing to make sacrifices to share more time and to hang out with each other. The first successful interaction must have welcomed more such events in the next six months. The two shared their time and learned to do most of the social things together. They easily managed to discuss any topic and different events freely. During their friendship, the two shared personal information, feeling, and emotions that made them understand each other much better. This nurtured the seed of love between them. By the end of six months, their relationship had grown deeper into love. The two had grown to like each other, and even to consider advancing their friendship into a romantic relationship (David, n.d.).

Six months after their first encounter, Alex was ready to propose to Sam. Sam accepted Alex proposal and the two started living together. Their relationship had advanced into a romantic stage. This is where the two feel emotionally attached and highly compatible with each other in terms of likes and dislikes, and shared life goals. There is so much love and trust between them. They also managed to confess their love for each other. Sam seems to have fantasized getting engaged to Alex. Alex seemed to have made Sam’s fantasy into reality. They both seem so happy, eager, and ready to take their relationship to the next level. The two moved in together and started living as married couples.

The experience in marriage is considerably different from the courtship experience. Sam and Alex are now living together. They need to make sacrifices and compromises to accommodate each other. Their main strength is the love the share with each other. This is what is going to determine how long their marriage can last. At this stage, they also get to learn more about their likes and dislikes and to use them to send a message about their feeling for each other at different times. The two are anticipated to love each other and hence, each one of them is required to be cautious of what they do or say to avoid conflicts or fallout. The marriage has already lasted for two years. However, it has not been easy. Alex has found Sam cheating and Sam accepted and owned his mistakes. However, the act had broken Sam’s trust and killed her love toward him. To Sam, this was an act of disrespect and betrayal. She is willing to neither forgive nor forget it.

Alex infidelity pushes their relationship into chaos. Sam is so hurt that she no longer cares about Alex’s feelings. She now does things for herself and not for them. Alex is remorseful about his misdeed and he has tried to apologize. However, the trust has been broken and once broken it is hard to rebuild it. The relationship is breaking. Sam cannot share her life with Alex. The betrayal killed all the love feelings she hard for Alex. Nothing Alex can do will rebuild her trust. However, she is scared to be alone. The fear of being without him is the only thing keeping them together. Love does not exist anymore. Their happy moments are replaced by constant arguments and disagreement. While Alex has trying to rebuild what is lost for the last six months, but Sam is not interested. This results in a separation as the first step to a breakup. Currently, Sam and Alex seem to be going in separate ways, marking the end of their two years of marriage.

Cultural Beliefs about Love and Romance May have Contributed to Problems Faced by this Couple

According to Cingoz-Ulu and Lalonde (2007), culture refers to an influential factor in the conceptualization of relationships and in how people opt to handle conflict in their relationship. Culture offers the social rules and norms that guide and regulate interpersonal behaviors, and it can additionally influence vital values, relational and self-construal orientation of people. Culture can thus, influence perceptions of suitable conflict management strategies, face maintenance concerns, and modes of communication. According to Sam, the value of their relationship is long gone, however, she opts to withdraw rather than confront the problem. It is culturally believed that romantic relations must be supplemented by sexual interaction. This makes it easy to resolve most of the romantic relation conflicts. However, when sexual interaction is withdrawn in a conflicting situation, it becomes considerably hard for the couple to resolve their issues. Sam opts to withdraw her sexual interaction with Alex after learning about Alex’s infidelity. This does not go very well with Alex, although he also opts to give Sam time with the hope that she shall one day forgive him and live as a perfect couple again.  When Alex realizes that the sexual withdrawal is related to the end of Sam’s love feelings for him, he gives up the fight. Gender is another cultural aspect influencing their conflict. According to Cingoz-Ulu and Lalonde (2007), men are more confrontational than women. This makes Sam consider using other measures to send the message such as cooking what Alex does not like, withdrawing sex, and not caring other than confronting the main cause of their conflict directly. On the contrary, Alex is highly confrontational. Despite being the main cause of discord between them, he cannot take it that Sam cooked what he does not like. Instead of letting it slide, he confronts Sam and brings in their sexual life into this confrontation. The confrontation ends up with a breakup.

Gender also contributed to the conflict in that women are always negatively viewed when they walk out of a relationship. On the contrary, men’s mistakes are ignored and are always expected to be forgiven and accepted back. In some cultures, a woman is also expected to accept polygamy if the man decides. This makes Alex consider his infidelity to act as a trivial matter that ought to be forgiven and forgotten. However, Sam holds her dignity much higher, above cultural expectations. This makes it hard for her to forgive. However, the possibility of prejudice for separating with her partner increases the fear of being left alone and she decides to stay in a broken relationship than walk out. This overstaying in a place one is not happy makes Sam do intentional things against Alex just to annoy him and stir conflict.

Hamburger Fight as an Indication of the Couple Inability to Deal with Conflict

Hamburger fight is a clear indication of the couple’s inability to deal with conflict. The main conflict issue between the couple is infidelity. Alex is engaged with another partner and Sam ended finding out about them. This broke Sam’s trust and killed her romantic feelings from Alex. Alex, on the other hand, owned his mistakes, apologized and decided to change. However, the trust is broken and love is gone on Sam’s side. The main challenge is Sam not open about her real feeling or stand regarding this matter. Instead of speaking openly and giving the couple a chance to discuss the main problem, Sam withdraws and stops caring.  On the contrary, Alex still believes in their relationship and still hopes that Sam will get over the incident and rebuild their relationship. The couple has been in this state for the last six months. The spark of love is long gone, now the couple speaks to each other with anger, contempt, and sarcasm. The inability to discuss and resolve the underlying issue makes Sam to develop negative feelings, full of bitterness. Sam becomes more resentful and withdrawn, not ready to leave and not ready to abide by the norms or values that hold a romantic relationship. She seems shuttled but unable to make any decision or move that will satisfy her. Although she remains with Alex, she does it out of the fear of staying alone and not because she intends to rebuild their relationship.

The current relationship situation gives Sam a negative attitude towards Alex. She seems revengeful, but without the power to exact a satisfactory revenge. Consequently, she results in doing things to annoy him. The cooking of hamburger was a deliberate move to annoy Alex, in a quest to satisfy her emotions. She wants Alex to go hungry and she is happy when she makes him suffer for one reason or another. This is what results in the conflict. The conflict is not about cooking hamburgers, but not arranging alternative food for Alex who hates hamburgers. Her deliberate move can be easily detected in her tone and response. Alex is to eat the hamburger that she hates or go hungry. The hamburger conflict is deep-rooted. However, Alex seems unaware of it. Sam does all this to hurt Alex and to hit back for what he did six months ago. Alex, on the other hand, judges it as a normal independent act and that is why he is confrontational and angry about it. Once he realizes that the act is connected with his infidelity, he realizes that what he has been hoping may never happen. He decides to address the tough topic that Sam has been avoiding.

The hamburger fight happened six months after its main cause. This clearly shows that although the couple has been living together, it has never been able to thoroughly solve the event that took place six months ago. Since the incident, the couple has drifted apart and none of them was ready to address the main cause of this. Alex considered remaining silent as he is the main cause for the drift. He hoped that giving Sam time will help her heal and the two get the chance to rebuild their relationship. However, Sam has never intended to rebuild their relationship. On the contrary, she seems to have lost purpose in life and live just for the sake of it. Her anger and bitterness had taken control of her, making her selfish. She no longer cares about “us” but “me”. She cannot move out due to personal fears and she cannot forgive Alex due to her ego. This makes the conflict to remain unresolved for so long and only erupts when Sam clearly shows her lack of care or consideration to Alex (Visseman, Righetti, Kumashiro & Lange, 2016).

How the Fight Could Have Been Done Differently and Maybe Lead the Saga to a Different Ending

The fight could have been done differently by resolving the conflict underlying condition comprehensively. Sam and Alex should have addressed the infidelity issues comprehensively to their satisfaction. For instance, Sam should have expressed her magnitude of hurt when that event happened. Other than being quiet and withdrawing, she should have expressed her anger in all possible means. Alex and Sam could have had an intense dialogue where they would open up on their actual feeling about each other based on the event. A mediator could have been involved if need be. Comprehensive addressing of this issue could have eliminated the bitterness that Sam felts and still feels due to Alex betrayal. Alex could also have understood the magnitude of destruction caused by his action. This could have made it possible for him to show remorsefulness in the same magnitude, even if it meant punishment to satisfy Sam’s emotion (Sailor, 2013). This comprehensive addressing of the infidelity act could have reduced Sam’s bitterness and the time of holding it. By the end of the day, Sam and Alex could have managed to go through the experience conclusively, even if it involved some unpleasant extremes. Once they were able to address it, this issue could have ended completely and a new beginning takes off. As a result, Sam could not have felt necessary to continue punishing Alex for the infidelity act six months after. She could have gotten over it and moved on with life. Probably, they could have not parted ways. The anger and bitterness could have been intensely expressed in another way to the level of satisfaction. Sam could have forgiven Alex and the couple could have moved on with life without any resentfulness. This means the hamburger issue could not have taken place. The couple could have been much happier and connected than they demonstrated in the hamburger fight. The main issue is, it is easier to address a conflict effectively when it happens than postponing it or covering it up and permitting it to control an individual’s emotion over the other party.

References

Cingoz-Ulu, B., & Lalonde, R. N. (2011). The role of culture and relational context in interpersonal conflict: Do Turks and Canadians use different conflict management strategies? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31, 443-458.

David, P. (n.d.). Stages of development in intimate relationships. Retrieved from http://pauldavidphd.com/wp-content/uploads/Stages-of-Intimacy.pdf

Sailor, J. L. (2013). A phenomenological study of falling out of romantic love. The Qualitative Report, 18(37), 1-22.

Visseman, M. L., Righetti, F., KUmashiro, M., & Lange, P. A. M. V. (2016). Me or us? Self-control promotes a healthy balance between personal and relationship concerns. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(1), 55-65.

Related:

Stages the Relationship has gone through

McKenna (1991) and Klein (2000) provide very different perspectives on the role of marketing.

Question

McKenna (1991) and Klein (2000) provide very different perspectives on the role of marketing.  Using the critical thinking techniques learned in this course, compare and contrast their views, and use your analysis to support your own ideas about the marketing function.

Sample paper

Course Event

McKenna (1991) and Klein (2000) have a very different perspective on marketing. McKenna (1991) demonstrates a changed perspective of marketing where everything is controlled by the customer. Unlike traditional marketing where the marketers persuaded customers to accept their products, customers in the modern marketing are influencing the products to be made and how they should be made to address their needs. In McKenna’s views, it is the manufacturers who are changing to fit customers’ needs rather than making the customers to purchase what is in the market, customers are forcing manufacturers to make what suits them. According to McKenna (1991), there is a new marketing paradigm that relies on the marketer’s ability, experience, and knowledge to integrate the company and the customer. This new paradigm is founded on the principle s that marketing is similar to quality. Marketing is no longer a function but rather a universal way of conducting business. The other principle is that the marketing goal is not just to make sales of the product but to own the market. According to McKenna (1991) marketing is changing with the change of technology. Based on the new programmable technology, firms can promise customers anything, any time and any way. The marketing is currently changing to deliver the promise. McKenna (1991) also believes that marketing is currently more of a dialogue between customers and the company, thus customers feedbacks are highly important in the new marketing. The quality of the product is as much as important as the quality of the provided services thus high-quality product and services acts as one way of marketing.  There is also a strong relationship between marketing and technology. Embracing technological changes in manufacturing is acting as one way to fit the new products in the customers’ needs. The manufactures should thus focus on satisfying customers’ technological needs.

On the contrary, Klein (2000) based her marketing idea on the notion that customers do not know what they want and can easily be influenced by marketers through attractive branding. According to Klein (2000), a marketer can collaborate with the manufacturer by branding an existing product, influence customers to want it and then make an order for its creation after creating the market for it. This means the marketers have the whole control of the market, customers’ needs, desires, tastes, and preferences. According to Klein (2000), attractive branding will surely attract customers, irrespective of the manufacturing process. This implies that manufacturing operations and process, or manufacturing technology and quality are less important than branding. Thus, a marketer is bound to make huge sales as long as they present their product attractively.

The two authors have a very different view. Klein assumes that marketers have an upper hand in the market, and they determine what to be produced by wooing the customers with their branding. On the contrary, McKenna believes that a product cannot sell especially in a competitive market unless it satisfies the customers’ needs. Thus customers have an upper hand on what should be manufactured. In my opinion, Klein’s idea can work but not to all customers. It can effectively sell in kids’ related products where attractiveness woos the buyer. However, it cannot work in technological based products where customers know what they need and what they want. This kind of customer is likely to give a review to the product and inform the other potential customers on the product’s strengths and disappointments and why they should buy or not buy the product. McKenna’s idea of marketing is likely to work in all sectors since customer satisfaction is the key to massive sales of a product. Developing a product with customers in mind is quite different from developing an attractive product. Despite being attractive, Klein should also insist on the quality since once customers realize a product is not up to their standard or does not satisfy their needs sufficiently, they are unlikely to purchase the product again. Klein’s idea of marketing is thus limited to some product and to first time buyers who wish to taste the product due to its attractive nature. However, it is unlikely to build customer loyalty with this form of marketing. On the contrary, McKenna’s strategy is likely to build customers’ trust and to enhance the company’s sustainability in a competitive market.

References

Klein, N. (2000). No logo: Taking aim at the brand bullies. New York: Picador. (Chapter 1: New branded world).

McKenna, R. (1991). Marketing is everything. Harvard Business Review, 69(1), 65–79.

Related:

Marketing for Good or for Ill? –Part 1

Incentives Course Events

Question

Based on the week’s readings, write a brief persuasive essay describing how effective you think incentives are in shaping human behaviour, particularly in an organizational or business setting.

Sample paper

Incentives Course Events

Incentive is one of the measures used by human resource managers to influence workers’ behavior. Incentives refer to anything given to motivate or that tends to motivate people to greater effort or action. A good example is the rewards given to enhance individual or group productivity. Incentives are given to influence individuals to do what is required effectively with no need for supervision. Monetary reward is one of the most commonly used incentives in an organization. According to Sandel, the monetary incentive does influence people’s behavior positively. However, there reached there is a limitation to the extent to which monetary incentives can command individual behavior beyond which extra incentive has no effect or may even result in negative results. This shows that although monetary incentives can assist in enhancing performance, this cannot happen in all cases. Higher monetary rewards are said to result in higher performance in all cases in mechanical engagements but not in cognitive engagements1[1].

According to Herzberg, other things determine workers’ behaviors. These include the level of self-satisfaction. Individual engaged in cognitive activities appreciate getting good salaries that can cater to their needs. However, money is not everything to them. They also focus on other things that influence the growth and development of their skills. These individuals treasure achievement, responsibilities, nature of work, recognition for achievements made, and personal growth and advancement. Thus, other than money, an organization should create a work environment that is favorable for the work done. Organizations should define favorable policies that promote growth and job satisfaction. Developing good interpersonal relations, job security, good administration, and supervision, satisfying salaries, can play a great role in motivating workers other than tagging money at any activity that needs improvement[2]. This simply means that money is a viable motivation incentive; however, it has a limitation. To surpass this limitation, an organization should devise other human resource management measures that promote job satisfaction and personal growth.

References List

Herzberg, Frederick. “One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?” Harvard Business Review 65, no. 5(1987): 109–120.

Sandel, Michael J. What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2012. (Chapter 2: Incentives)

[1] Michael J Sandel, What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2012. (Chapter 2: Incentives

[2] Frederick Herzberg, “One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?” Harvard Business Review 65, no. 5(1987): 109–120.

 

Evaluate the persuasiveness of the Magretta (1998) and Rosenthal (2013) articles using the concepts outlined in Chapter 6 of the Critical Thinking

Question

Evaluate the persuasiveness of the Magretta (1998) and Rosenthal (2013) articles using the concepts outlined in Chapter 6 of the Critical Thinking… text.  Be sure to outline which aspects you find particularly persuasive and which elements you find less persuasive, and why.

Dyer, L. (2006). Critical Thinking for Business Students. Captus Press. (Chapter 6: Techniques of persuasion)

Magretta, J. (1998). Fast, global, and entrepreneurial: Supply chain management, Hong Kong style. An interview with Victor Fung. Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 102–114.

Rosenthal, C., & Berinato, S. (2013). Plantations Practiced Modern Management. Harvard Business Review, 91(9), 30–3.

Sample paper

Course Event

Magretta (1998) narrates how Li & Fung addresses the change of customers’ demands in the market by shortening the supply chain response time. Magretta sounds very convincing and persuasive in her argument since she uses the fact of things that are already happening and can be proved by data in Li & Fung sales accounts, and its current position in the global market. According to the article, Li & Fung practice effective supply-chain management by stripping away costs and time from the product delivery cycles. Magretta convincingly explains why the company opted for this measure. The need to cater for the changing of customers’ needs pushed the company to come up with a unique way to address the dissatisfactory waiting time in clothes retailing business. According to Magretta, customers have become more fashion-driven, and to remain in the market, a retailer needs to ensure customers get what they need at the right time. This is quite a convincing reason since, the change in customer behaviors is a common phenomenon in the market, and it is not only affecting the clothes industry but almost all industries, including the computer industry as mentioned by Magretta. Magretta’s arguments turn to be highly convincing because the evidence is all over for anyone interested to see. Her approach to managing the supply chain ensures that the customers’ demands are meant by working with different suppliers, millers, and factories to fasten the production process. She convincingly explains how this process reduces the production time by ensuring active retailer participation in the shrinking delivery cycle. The argument put across by Magretta is quite convincing that it is considerably hard to counter. Magretta knows all the facts involved in Li & Fung’s business to maintain its business in the dynamic market. There is no negative evidence that can be used by any critic to counter Magretta’s argument. Her evidence is strongly in support of measures taken by Li & Fung to manage the value chain in a manner that the company earns a global position. When explaining the Li & Fung approach, one feels that it is a business model that can adapt at any time and bring business success. This makes Magretta’s paper and claim to be highly persuasive (Dyer, 2006).

Rosenthal and Berinato’s (2013) article focuses on the kind of accounting done in a plantation during slavery. Different from the Magretta paper, the article can be considered to be less convincing and persuasive. This is because Rosenthal and Berinato claim that the plantation facilities used modern management methods compared to factories. This claim was supported by three main reasons. One of the reasons was the slavery did not have turnover while factories did. According to the interviewee, slavery was forced and they did not have a choice other than doing the labor, this resulted in no turnover in the slavery system. This can only mean that there no even deaths or illnesses in slavery. This is also a way of depicting humans as machines, which is not convincing since working nonstop results in fatigue-related complications that are likely to results in absenteeism. Second, the interviewee claims that the slave owners practiced a newly invented accounting method. This sounds less convincing since the new accounting method was not invented due to the slavery system, but it was invented by the slave owners. The author tries to use these accounting records invented for a different purpose to convince the reader of how the accounting systems related to the slavery system, which seems a bit conflicting. Third, the article stated that the new accounting method was to be used to assess individual slave productivity. This sounds less convincing because it is hard to find a strategy or a device that measures the productivity of an individual laborer or employee even in modern times. This also refers back to the argument that it was not due to the slavery system that the modern accounting method was invented. Then it could not have been efficiently used on measuring slaves’ productivity. This makes the argument and the provided evidence less convincing, making the paper less persuasive (Dyer, 2006).

References

Dyer, L. (2006). Critical thinking for business students. Captus Press. (Chapter 6: Techniques of persuasion)

Magretta, J. (1998). Fast, global, and entrepreneurial: Supply chain management, Hong Kong style. An interview with victor Fung. Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 102–114.

Rosenthal, C., & Berinato, S. (2013). Plantations practiced modern management. Harvard Business Review, 91(9), 30–3.

Related:

Best Ideas for the Next Management Century

Course Event

Question

Course event

For each of the assigned readings for the week (not including the Critical Thinking… text) identify one causal claim made by the author(s) and evaluate the validity or merits of that claim.  Are you able to identify alternative explanations for the phenomenon in question?

Sample paper

Course Event

Bakker based his discussion on a casual claim that accountant would save the world.  According to Bakker, the world is experiencing serious social and economic issues that it has the potential to solve effectively, only if suitable accounting rules are put in place. Bakker cited the aspect of hunger in the world. According to him, the world has enough food to feed every hungry individual in the globe, despite this, a child dies of hunger every six seconds in the world simply due to poor logistics put in place to ensure food supplies reach those who need it. According to Bakker, he once worked with the world food program (WFP) to develop a program that ensures the WFP reaches victims of natural disasters, famine, and drought. Although the program worked very effectively, there was no capturing of financial reports. The company was building social capita that based on the current accounting laws, it was not necessary to inform the stakeholders about it. This situation is replicated in many other companies where the companies are required to show what they earn in terms of revenue but not how they earned it, especially with regard to natural and social resources used to enhance the business (1). Bakker argues that most companies use social capital and natural capital to enhance their money generating activity. However, none of them is held accountable for the same. This makes most organization to enjoy high profits without paying back to the natural and social capital they used to make the money. This creates economic imbalance especially when social and natural capital fail to get their share of returns. Bakker’s argument is highly viable. The majority of organizations tend to use social resources without any accountability. Even those that are socially responsible, they do not give back equivalent to what they use. There is a need to change accountability rules and systems to ensure each organization is held accountable for natural and social capitals used in production, before counting their profit.  An alternative way would be controlling the amount of social and natural capital an organization can use. However, this is quite impossible in a capitalist world since it is likely to limit the return. This makes Bakker suggest highly powerful in ensuring social and natural capital are accounted for in any accounting process.

In “The Money Game” Korten, makes a casual claim that the inflation and deflation happening in the stock market can sometimes result in huge losses, amounting to enough money that can feed the entire world for about three years. However, this in the real sense cannot amount into even a grain of rice since the loss is measured based on assets value, despite there being no physical change in the asset appearance that would make a person consider it less valuable (2). This claim is valid in that, the stock value in the exchange market is determined by a number of factors, with the physical appearance of these assets not being one of them. For instance, the world market has already lost a huge amount of money following the spread of coronavirus in China and other parts of the world. Anything that would initiate massive sale of stock from a certain company resulting to increase in stock supply results to oversupply, while the demand remains the same or even decrease, this based on the law of supply and demand results to decline in prices, which result to general deflation of the stock value. As a result, the investors end up losing money at a very high rate. The alternative explanation for the phenomenon is that similarly, inflation can take place when the majority seeks to purchase stock from a single company for one reason or the other. This can result in the instantaneous growth of investors’ wealth. However, unless one makes a point of selling the shares to make tangible money, that wealth is just documented in the system. Such growth and deflation of wealth happen with little accountability and with little individual control. Their effects on the society are thus immeasurable.

 

References

  1. Bakker P. Accountants will save the world. Harvard Business Review. 2013 Mar 05 [Cited 2020 Feb 27]. Available from: https://hbr.org/2013/03/accountants-will-save-the-worl
  2. Korten DC. When corporations rule the world. Oakland: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc; 2013

Related:

Best Ideas for the Next Management Century

Best Ideas for the Next Management Century

Question

Based on the week’s readings, identify what you think are the three most important ideas to emerge from “the management century” that will help us manage effectively in the next management century, and write a persuasive essay to defend your choices.

Sample paper

Best Ideas for the Next Management Century

In the article “the management century” Kiechel gives a detailed explanation of management history and how management has been changing with time. According to Kiechel, the management century started when management was regarded as a science. People later started perceiving management as a professional topic due to the introduction of different new ideas to the subject. Kiechel claims that the main trend in the 1990s focused on how to profit shareholders and not stakeholders. The article illustrates how things kept on changing with time to acquire a more improved perception of management and how it can be enhanced. The three most significant ideas that can be deduced from this reading include innovation, leadership and strategic thinking[1].

One of the most important ideas portrayed by Kiechel’s article is strategic thinking. Strategic thinking, in this case, refers to a process that defines the way in which people or organizations view, assess, think about and the future of management. Strategic thinking is a very valuable and effective tool that can be applied to attain the organization’s goal more effectively and much faster. Strategic thinking benefits include enhancing the ability to maximize individual management strengths, efficiency, and defining the easiest and fastest way to attain organization goals. Strategic thinking enhances the organization’s ability to assess the current situation and how it can influence the future of an organization. It is will thus play a great role in guiding the management of organizations in the next management century.

The other important idea demonstrated by Kiechel’s article is leadership. Leadership refers to the art of inspiring a group of individuals to work towards attaining a shared goal. Leadership plays a great role in determining the direction of an organization and influencing followers to take the defined direction. Organization leadership determines the operation strategies to employ and what an organization should prioritize. Leadership assist in studying the environmental changes taking place in a business and define the new directions to be adopted by an organization to be able to cope with changes and to ensure sustainability. According to Alperovitz modern economy movement is seeking a socially responsible and increasingly green economy[2]. The organization leadership should be able to realize such changes in trends and fine-tune the organizational operations to fit into a new direction. This ensures the organization’s viability and sustainability in the future. Leadership thus has a great role to play in ensuring effective management in the next management century.

Innovation is another important idea portrayed in Kiechel’s article. Innovation refers to generating more effective ideas, products, and processes or changing processes to more productive and profitable ones. It can also involve modifying a business model to a more competitive model or employing new measures to be more adaptive to changes in the business environment for improved goods or services. With a growing level of competitiveness in the market, organizations will highly benefit from any applied level of innovativeness. This can include employing innovative ideas in businesses, such as innovative ways to employee management and innovative ways to win more customers in the market. According to Sandel, an organization can use incentives to promote innovation. For instance, offering workers in technical and administrative positions free time (time incentive) to share, discuss, and develop ideas in the manner they feel best. This is an innovative way of fostering a generation of creativity and innovation among workers[3]. It offers an organization a better opportunity to general new ways of solving problems in an organization or generating more effective operational processes. Being innovative even in the market ensures that an organization outshines its rivals and improves its competitive advantage. Innovation is thus an important managerial aspect that is likely to contribute a lot in enhancing management in the next management century.

References

Alperovitz, Gar.” Meet the Movement for a New Economy.” last modified May 26, 2011, http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/the-new-economy-movement

Kiechel, Walter. “The Management Century.“ Harvard Business Review, 90, no.11(2012): 62–75.

Sandel, Michael J. What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013.

 

[1] Walter Kiechel, “The Management Century, “ Harvard Business Review, 90, no.11(2012): 62–75.

 

[2] Gar, Alperovitz ” Meet the Movement for a New Economy,” last modified May 26, 2011, http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/the-new-economy-movement

 

[3] Michael J Sandel, What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets, New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013

 

Where are we Headed?

Question

Where are we headed?

Summary:

Based on the week’s readings and your understanding of the current business environment as discussed in this course, outline what you think are the major challenges facing business in the coming years and how business might innovate to address these challenges.

Sample paper

Where are we Headed

The business environment has been changing rapidly especially in the last few years. This has been attributed to a number of factors that include technological growth, an increase in competition, economic changes, and climatic changes that have resulted in the formation of new business laws and regulations to adhere to. Expansion of technology has resulted in globalization, an aspect that has played a great part in business growth and expansion to the international level. This ease of expansion has resulted in an uncontrollable growth of competition in business. For a business to survive in a modern environment, it must devise ways to be more competitive from its existing rivals and emerging rivals. The inability to do so has resulted in constant death of various businesses as their products become absolute within a short time, market shifts, competitors increase and technology changes.

Address the issue of high competitiveness in business, business organization need to be highly innovative (Drucker 1). An innovative business focuses on devising new ways of doing things at all times with the aim of being a technology and change leader in its market. This means the business must find a way of developing more powerful products that address a unique need of customers in a unique and highly satisfactory way for its existence. This must happen constantly to avoid competition as rival businesses copy their idea. Innovativeness serves a great role in addressing the aspect of high competition in business. However, it is important to note that innovativeness does not just exist in an organization. A business organization must identify strategies to employ the right people and to give them the right opportunity to be innovative. It should also devise a way of creating knowledge in the organization and transferring this knowledge to its workers to enhance the growth of innovative ideas. One way to encourage innovativeness in a competitive business environment is to diversify the workforce, and permit open communication, experimentation, and free-thinking in the organization. When workers are permitted to work freely to solve the problems they encounter, they are likely to come up with unique and innovative ways of solving those problems based on their level of knowledge and exposure. Effective collaboration in knowledge sharing among workers can also play a great part in promoting innovativeness in a business environment (Nonaka 1). An innovative business is highly able to drive changes in technology in its industry, and hence making it immune to negative consequences of technological changes such as having obsolete products

Another major challenge is the climatic changes brought about by extreme human activities including industrialization, clearing of land for human survival, and extensive use of fossil fuel among other things. Businesses have been the main contributors to environmental pollution and interference with people’s ways of life, subjecting the majority to complicated health issues, and change of culture among other things. To change this, today’s business environment is focusing more on being environmentally friendly and socially responsible. There has been an introduction of new business laws that dictate our means of production to conserve our environment. According to Alperovitz (1), today’s economy should focus more on being green by conserving on the environment and being more socially responsible by giving back to the surrounding communities. It should also focus on being more democratic rather than capitalist. An economy that cares about the needs of the surrounding and business impact on the surrounding, communities, and employ measures to ensure the wellbeing of the surrounding community and the environment.

Work Cited

Drucker, Peter. F. “The discipline of innovation”. Harvard Business Review, vol.63, no.3, 1985, pp. 67–72.

Nonaka, Ikujiro. “The Knowledge-Creating Company”. Harvard Business Review, vol. 85, no.7/8, 2007, pp.162–171.

Alperovitz, Gar.  “Meet the Movement for a New Economy”. Yes Magazine, 26 May 2011, http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/the-new-economy-movement. Accessed 24 November 2019.

Related:

Explain how both Ally and Jessica make the “fundamental attribution error”

 

Explain how both Ally and Jessica make the “fundamental attribution error”

Question

Perception and Cognition

(1) Explain how both Ally and Jessica make the “fundamental attribution error” by breaking the rules for “Improving the Quality of Your Interpersonal Perceptions” (Chap. 5) and then,

(2) show how their instant perceptions affected how they thought about Dave and the situation, using concepts from Chapter 6 (and the lectures on Nov. 8). Include in your answer, WYSIATI, heuristics (mental shortcuts), the inference ladder and “Errors in Cognition and Talk.”

Sample paper

Short Written Assignment

The fundamental attribution error refers to the tendency of perceivers to underestimate the effect of human behavior situational factors and to overestimate the effect of dispositional factors[1]. In this particular case, Jessica immediately concludes that Dave did something awful to Ally after finding Ally crying. By so doing, Jessica makes fundamental attribution error by assuming Dave’s misbehavior has somehow caused Ally’s situation. Jessica broke the rules for improving her interpersonal perceptions of quality by failing to listen to what Dave had to say and being unable to control her emotions. Jessica jumps into a conclusion without considering active listening to judge the situation based on what transpired. This makes her misjudge the situation. Her emotions are also highly controlled by Ally’s crying. By seeing Ally cry, Jessica felt pity and immediately conclude that Dave must have hurt her terribly as he did to all his past girlfriends. She consequently sides with Ally and reprimand Dave for his action, despite Dave being right.

Ally shows a fundamental contribution error by immediately concluding that Dave refuses to complete her work so that she may fail. Ally shows her strong manipulative traits, where she use tears and emotional outburst to get what she wants, even when she is wrong. Ally broke the rules for improving her interpersonal perceptions of quality by failing to cultivate a positive outlook on the situation. She has been into her phone for a while as Dave does her assignment. This means she was not participating in doing the assignment and was ready to hand-in Dave’s work as her own. This would imply that she would have cheated if Dave did not get tired of doing her homework. In addition, this lack of active participation in doing homework was likely to impact her school performance in the future. If she cared about her future academic performance she should have taken more interest in her homework. This lack of positive outlook is what made Ally misjudge Dave and conclude that she wanted her to fail. A positive outlook could have taken this as a call to engage her in her homework because Dave cared about her ability to do the work alone in the future. Ally also broke the rules for improving her interpersonal perceptions of quality by failing to be an active listener. If she paid attention to Dave, she could have understood why Dave was stopping working on her assignment for his. She could have understood that Dave valued her active involvement in her assignment rather than staying aside for him to work on everything. Ally broke the rules for improving her interpersonal perceptions of quality by failing to control her emotions. She was irritated after being informed to take charge of her work, which was highly out of place. Her reaction influenced Jessica’s emotions pushing her into making the wrong judgment.

Jessica’s judgment about Dave is highly distorted by instant perception. Jessica saw Ally crying and immediately perceived that Dave must have hurt her. She refused to take any explanation from Dave. She based her judgment on “what you see is all there is”[2]. Ally crying based on WYSIATI Dave must have wronged her.  Just like all other guys and just like she has been before he must have treated his girlfriend Ally inappropriately. Ally also used the WYSIATI concept to perceive that the only reason Dave abandoned her assignment is to make her fail. The WYSIATI distorted her perception that she failed to see Dave’s desire to help her learn to do her assignment for her future academic performance. Jessica heuristic way of handling the problem was to comfort Ally while reprimanding Dave, without paying attention to what happened. Ally heuristic way to handle the situation was crying and accusing Dave, without even thinking of her mistake. This made Dave to come out as the wrongdoer before the two, despite having done nothing wrong, and despite Ally having been in the wrong all along.

The approach adopted by Ally and Jessica to address the issue is thus not optimal, but it helps them reach their immediate goal. Ally’s immediate goal is to attract sympathy and force Dave to complete her assignment. She does this by attracting both Jessica and Dave’s attention by crying uncontrollably when Dave refuses to do more work for her. Jessica’s goal of comforting Ally is achieved by trying to reprimand Dave and giving Ally the assurance of things being right in the future. Jessica’s perception is also distorted by her ladder of inference. Her reasoning is highly swayed by her past observation of how Dave treated her ex-girlfriends. She strongly believes the situation at hand is a replica of the past and hence, she acts with agitation, supporting the wrong party. Her inference is also based on the notion that men always treat women badly and hence, this case cannot be an exception to Jessica. Jessica’s errors in cognition make her jump into conclusion and employ emotional reasoning to the situation. All this makes her blame the wrong person for the situation. Wrong perception resulted in unnecessary conflict between Jessica and Dave, which could have been avoided if Jessica tried to investigate the problem with a calm mind, and listen to details that led to the situation without being bias or without favoring one side.

Bibliography

Gawronski, Bertram. “Fundamental Attribution Error”.  (2007): 367-369. Accessed November 20, 2019. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281179007_Fundamental_Attribution_Error

Morvan, Camille and Jenkins William J. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. London: CRC Press, 2017.

 

[1] Bertram Gawronski, “Fundamental Attribution Error”.  (2007): 367-369. Accessed November 20, 2019. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281179007_Fundamental_Attribution_Error

 

[2] Camille Morvan and William J. Jenkins, Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, (London: CRC Press, 2017).

Related:

Marketing for Good or for Ill? –Part 1

Marketing for Good or for Ill? –Part 1

Question

Marketing for good or for ill? – Part 1

McKenna (1991) and Klein (2000) provide very different perspectives on the role of marketing.  Using the critical thinking techniques learned in this course, compare and contrast their views, and use your analysis to support your own ideas about the marketing function

Sample paper

Marketing for Good or for Ill? –Part 1

According to McKenna (1991), marketing today is quite different from marketing in the past. In the past, most producers did not experience stiff competition as it is experienced today. They did not need to employ a lot of effort to market their products as the demand was high due to scarcity. Today the situation has changed. The rate of competition is quite high and as a result, customers have gained higher bargaining power. Manufacturers according to McKenna (1991) currently need to customize their products to meet customer needs. The modern customers who are also new do not pay attention to the old rules. Their main concern is finding a company that is ready to adapt its services or product to fit customers’ strategies. This results in the development of market-driven production or company. The situation has changed from a sales-driven approach where companies centered on changing the mind of customers to accept their product to a market-driven approach where companies must change their strategies to fit customer demands or needs. Today’s marketing focuses on creating a market rather than controlling it. It is founded on continuous process, incremental improvement, and developmental education instead of on simple market-share technique, one-time events, and raw sales. The modern marketing is based on experience and knowledge which exists in an organization.

Different from McKenna’s approach, Klein (2000) claims that marketing does not involve the manufacturing part, but it is more on the image of what is to be made. Thus, one can manage to make sales by presenting customers with a quality image of the product. Thus a manufacturer creating more diverse products is likely to make more sales, as there will be more brand images to sell.  In this view, a marketer does not necessarily need to have a manufacturing plant. On the contrary, a marketer only needs to have images associated with the brand and contract the manufacturer to provide the product after striking the sales deal using the brand image. According to Klein (2000), the manufacturing process and operations are less important compared to branding. One is bound to make sales if one brands his or her products attractively.
The two authors provide two very different perspective roles of marketing. Klein regards product branding as one of the most important aspects of marketing, while McKenna regards satisfying customer needs as one of the most important aspects of marketing.

While both are right in their views, they are both likely to obtain varying outcomes for different products. McKenna’s (1991) approach is considered promising in building good customer relations, particularly in a situation where the company wants to win customer’s loyalty. A customer will always come back for a product that is highly satisfying and that addresses most or all of their needs. Klein’s approach is likely to attract first-time customers. However, to maintain these customers, the brand manufacturing process must have been of high quality to create satisfactory products that meet customers’ expectations. In a situation where the product fails to do so, it is unlikely for the product to sustain the sales unless the company engages in a process of rebranding the product now and then. In addition, Klein’s approach is likely to work for some products that do not require a lot of technology in their development or use, for instance, food products and other simple products. However, in other products such as electronics, vehicles and mobile devices, meeting customer’s expectations go far beyond the brand. A customer must ascertain that the product meets his or her expectations before making the purchase. It is therefore unlikely that branding alone will influence the customer’s decision unless the brand has a great market image and market legacy of quality. In this regard, the McKenna approach seems to be more superior compared to that of Klein.

 

 

References

Klein, N. (2000). No logo: Taking aim at the brand bullies. New York: Picador.

McKenna, R. (1991). Marketing is everything. Harvard Business Review, 69(1), 65–79.

Related:

How effective are Incentives?

How effective are Incentives?

Question

Based on the week’s readings, write a brief persuasive essay describing how effective you think incentives are in shaping human behavior, particularly in an organizational or business setting.

Sample paper

How effective are Incentives?

The success of any organization is highly determined by workers’ behaviors, commitment, and determination to meet the organization’s goals. Human resources play a great role in influencing organization performance. It is highly important for any organization to be able to control workers’ behaviors to ensure that they align with the organization’s culture and that they are focused on the attainment of the set organization goal. One strategy that the human resource department employs to influence workers’ behavior is through incentives. Incentives refer to things given by a party to encourage or motivate another party to do what this particular they want or to initiate the results they desire. In most cases, money is used as the main form of incentives in various situations. The main purpose of using incentives is to boost people’s morale and to influence their behavior toward what is highly preferred by an organization or the give1.

Incentives play a great role in determining the organization’s outcome. According RSA when monetary incentives are given to workers engaged in hand skills activities, they motivate them to improve their performance. However, this is not always the case for all individuals in an organization. According to RSA individuals working in areas where cognitive skills are applied are unlikely to be motivated by monetary incentives2. In such a situation, higher monetary incentives tend to impact the performance negatively, probably due to the investment of more time into a task, causing burnout which impacts their thinking ability. It is therefore highly important for an organization to identify the specific incentive that can be used to motivate a particular group of people based on their interest and nature of work, other than using monetary incentives in all cases. It has also been established that the higher the level of monetary incentives the lower the performance. This means there is a limit to what monetary incentives can do to motivate people. An organization should always gauge the level that works for it and not surpass it. The best strategy to employ while using money as an incentive, to promote good performance is, by ensuring that workers have enough compensation for the work done, to eliminate their financial worries. This will make workers to set their focus on work to be done, rather than thinking about strategies to make extra money. This is likely to enhance individual performance and hence general organization performance.

To motivate workers in cognitive skills demanding areas of operation, an organization should focus on incentives that are likely to stimulate their thinking. This should include freedom of using their time for personal innovation, free-thinking, free interaction and sharing of ideas. According to RSA when workers in the technology department are given free time to do anything and present the results, the organization resulted in a generation of innovative ideas that helped push its operations to another level2. This simply implies that monetary incentive is not the only thing that people need to change their behaviors or to perform better. They just need to be given what they value most to feel treasured and motivated. This rejuvenates their strength and desire to invest more in the company and enhance enhancing their general performance. This simply means that while money is important to every employee in an organization, excess of it does not always guarantee high performance. An organization should always offer reasonable compensation to all workers and add other valuable incentives to boost their work morale and motivate them.

References List

  1. Sandel, M. J. What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets. Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2012.
  2. RSA ANIMATED: Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. 2010. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

Related:

Are You Convinced?