Information Technology for Managers Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words - 1

Information Technology for Managers - Essay Example Also Microsoft Inc. sells the Xbox video game console, along with games and peripherals. Its online businesses include the MSN subscription and the MSN network of Internet products and services. The companys seven product segments are: Client, Server and Tools, Information Worker, Microsoft Business Solutions, MSN, Mobile and Embedded Devices and Home and Entertainment. (John 1; Reuters 7) Headquartered in Redmond, Washington, USA, its most popular products are the Microsoft Windows operating system and the Microsoft Office suite of productivity software, each of which has achieved near-ubiquity in the desktop computer market. Microsoft possesses footholds in other markets, with assets such as the MSNBC cable television network, the MSN Internet portal, and the Microsoft Encarta multimedia encyclopaedia. The company also markets both computer hardware products such as the Microsoft mouse as well as home entertainment products such as the Xbox, Xbox 360 and MSN TV. (Wikipedia 8) The website of Microsoft Inc. declares that the company values integrity, honesty, openness, personal excellence, constructive self-criticism, continual self-improvement, and mutual respect. The website states that they are committed to their customers and partners and have a passion for technology. The company takes on big challenges, and pride itself on seeing them through. Also the website declares that staff of Microsoft Inc. hold themselves accountable to their customers, shareholders, partners, and employees by honouring their commitments, providing results, and striving for the highest quality. (Microsoft 5) Stating proper goals and objectives is extremely important for the company. Founder of Microsoft Bill Gates writes that identifying the primary, focused objective of any process is the way to begin solving process problems. Whether for production processes or internal business processes, the goal should always be a fundamental kind of simplification.

The impacts of structural and infrastructural elements to service o

The impacts of structural and infrastructural elements to service o I. INTRODUCTION With the ever-changing nature of a global business operation that requires firms to adjust rapidly, operations flexibility capability has become more influencing, underpinning the strength of an organization. World-class service organizations rely on right strategies and practices to enhance their operations flexibility. In Malaysia, for instance, the world best budget airline, AirAsia, applies certain principles, practices and procedures that align with its operations objectives to achieve appropriate level of flexibility in their operations that suited its market segments requirements [1] [2]. In another example, there was a lot of confusion on the part of the passengers and employees of Jet blue airlines in Florida when weather conditions delays flights. In any eventualities, organization must plan ahead on how to deal with the changing circumstances that will affect their operations. Some of the impact of changes must be dealt at the source through some standardization of products, services and process delivery. The remaining must be dealt with at the point of impact using robust structural and infrastructural resources deployment strategies. Among the most essential move to establish and eventually enhance the operations flexibility is the use of technology especially the IT to better communicate internally within organizational units and externally with their customers thus providing flexibility in their operations. Others may rely on smart networking with clients and suppliers so that they will handle the uncertainties together as a group. At the same times, having a flexible workforce will ensure certain level of variability will be absorbed by tactically reassign the workforce. In summary, the changing nature of the environment requires flexibility to be one of the primary competitive components to be applied and considered seriously. To enhance the flexibility capability, firms need to strike a balance with structural and infrastructural decisions. In this paper, we will evaluate the dimension of structural and infrastructural elements and service operations flexibility and their relationship in a multivariate outlook. Few important questions need to be addressed here namely: What is service operations flexibility; what are the important structural and infrastructural elements and how they affect the operations f lexibility of service organization. II. LITERATURE REVIEW It is widely argued that operations flexibility is very much related to changing the structure and infrastructures of the organizations. However, the discussion on the important elements that fall into each category is debated. In following the definitions given by Hayes and Wheelwright [3], and Schroeder [4] suggested structure resources include capacities, facilities, process technology, and vertical integration whereas infrastructures include people, information system, organization, production and inventory control, and quality control system. Slack [5] suggested labor and technology as structural resources that must be supported by infrastructural assets such as the system, relationship and information couplings. Relating the structural and infrastructural elements to operations flexibility, there have been several studies done to address the issue. One of the important studies conducted by Correa and Gianesi [6] associated the broader term of flexibility as being able to respond effectively to unplanned change. They linked uncertainty and variability with unplanned change, which require firms to understand the concept of unplanned change. Managing unplanned change can be divided into two dimensions. One is labeled as flexibility in dealing with change after the unplanned change has occurred. The second dimension is the ability to deal with a certain amount of change and reducing the effect of change. This can be done by finding ways to control the changes by implementing strategies like forecasting technique, maintenance system, parts standardization, and manufacturing focus. These strategies are to prevent and avoid the change before it occurs. This is where the structural and infrastructur al elements play their roles. For example, in order for service firms to be able to implement the chosen strategies both before and after the occurrences of unplanned changes, firms ought to have suitable structural elements such as integration and technology supported by systematic infrastructural elements such as quality leadership and teamwork activities. Harvey et al [7] explained that a flexible firm is the one that can handle variability with minimum penalty and suggest the difference between internal robustness and external flexibility. Internal robustness must be dealt with minimum efforts due to the fact that it will not create value to customers. Harvey et al [7] suggested that in order to deal with the internal variability, firms may require organizational arrangement such as cross-functional teams, empowering contact personal, and building a flat organization, which factors are related to infrastructural elements of operations as well as modifying the structural elements such networking capability. It is the external flexibility that must be managed carefully in order to gain competitive advantage. Central to the issue, Harvey et al [7] proposed the use of structural element, mainly IT technology in order to manage flexibility. This is also supported by Bucki and Pesqueux [8] who also proposed the components of operations strategy on structural and infrastructural elements that contribute to operations flexibility. Adler [9] agreed that flexibility in organizations is a useful tool to improve firms competitive position as related to the use of technologies in implementation and the decision- making process. Upton [10] supported the idea and added that firms should create an infrastructure to allow for system flexibility. As a result of technological improvement and changes in customer preferences, service operations have become flexible and this requires adjustment in the delivery process. Upton [10] also pointed out that customers expect and prefer to get services at their convenient time and location, therefore capability on the part of the service provider to be flexible is imperative. One specific example on how structural elements such as technology and integration play an influencing role in service operation flexibility is the use of ATM machines. Banks that have ATM services have been providing convenient services to customers for years. In accordance with this, ATM services have improved over time. Two of the improvements mentioned include the increase in the limit of the amount in withdrawal transactions and the multiplication of ATM units strategically situated in many convenient locations. In elaboration, ATM services nowadays are not solely restricted to bank premises but can also be found at airports, petrol stations, bus stations, fast food restaurants and many others. The change in the way banks deliver services indicates the degree of flexibility in service operations that benefits banks and customers alike. ATM technology may require some investment on the banks side, but in the long run, it reduces operating costs by decreasing the number of staff a t counter services. Davis and Heineke [11] concluded that reduction in customers waiting time at counter services by improving better services management of process design can certainly reduce customers dissatisfaction and defection and technology could help to achieve this goal. Technologies have proven to be able to offer more opportunities in improving services processes. Collier [12] in a study on electronic devices for check-in and check-out systems in the hotel industry, automatic toll booth in transportation, electronic fund transfer in banking services, the practices of e-ticketing in the airline business have given huge impact on the ticket purchasing system, airport checking process, and service industries as well. Therefore, in responding effectively to customers demand variations, improving services process design by using technology is another approach to increase flexibility of the service system. Based on the above discussion, we have recognized several elements that must be considered in enhancing flexibility capability of a firm which could be further divided into structural and infrastructural elements. Among the most cited structural elements in discussing the service flexibility is technology, particularly the ICT, integration, and facility. With regards to the infrastructural elements, some of the most important factors cited in the literature are team management, worker empowerment, and quality leadership. As for the dimensions of service operations flexibility, we incorporate the types given by Correa and Gianessi [6] who suggest service flexibility capability as design, package, volume, delivery time, delivery location, system robustness and customer recovery with Harveys internal robustness and external flexibility[7]. Thus, we hypothesize; H1: Structural elements consists of facility, location, technology, integration/networking positively influence the external flexibility; H2: Structural elements consists of facility, location, technology, integration/networking are positively influencing the internal robustness, H3: Infrastructural elements consists of teamwork management, worker empowerment, and quality leadership positively influence the external flexibility, H4: Infrastructural elements consists of teamwork management, worker empowerment, and quality leadership positively influence the internal robustness We also propose that the infrastructural elements are more dominant in service industries as the soft power related to human potential are the silent forces that determines the operations flexibility, H5: Infrastructural elements have a greater influence on both external flexibility and internal robustness as compared to the structural elements. III METHODOLOGY This research uses a survey approach. We employed several techniques leading to the final large scale survey. First we conducted a thorough literature review on topics leading to the development of items to measure structural and infrastructural decisions and operations flexibility. Subsequently, the researchers conducted several interviews with operations managers in selected service companies namely; hotel, port management, and airline, to check if the factors found in the literature are relevant to the practical ideas of the managers, particularly in the Malaysian business environment. This technique allows the researcher to explore any relevant ideas pertaining to the issue. The interview will also provide some valuable information on the keywords or the indicators from the Malaysian perspective since the literature is too replete with studies from the different environments of western countries. Each session usually takes more than an hour. Combining the literature review and the interviews, an instrument was developed to measure structural and infrastructural elements, and operation flexibility. The structural and infrastructural elements are mainly adapted from the instruments developed by Boyer and McDermott [13]. The items to measure operations flexibility capability are taken from Correa and Gianessi [6] and Harvey et al. [7]. In summary, the instrument consists of (A)Infrastructural elements divided into worker empowerment(7 items), quality leadership(6 items), team management (4 items) (B) Structural elements consists of location(2 items), integration(5 items), technology(6 items) and capacity(2 items) (C) external flexibility (6 items) and internal robustness (5 items).  A sample of questions is given as follows; Technology: Indicate level of investment in the latest technology relevant for enhancement of the business operations (e.g. latest scanning system for hospital or new ATMs for banks) Capacity: Indicate the level of investment in upgrading / improvement of existing facilities Several workshops and discussion were conducted leading to the final version of the instruments. Before conducting a pilot study, we pre-tested the instrument on our MBA students, whose backgrounds included experience working in service organizations to identify potential problems with respect to the ability of the respondents to understand the questions asked, and clarify the instruments when it is necessary. No major change was made. Consequently, a pilot test was done to test the reliability and validity of the instrument. This is also done to minimize the administration of the questionnaires in the real study. 30 companies were conveniently selected to test the instruments. 25-100 observations were thought adequate for this purpose [14]. The reliability of the instrument was assessed before we proceed with the large scale study. We employed the Cronbach alpha method in gauging the reliability of the scale. All constructs show the alpha coefficient of greater than 0.7. We conclude d that the measurement scale is reliable and thus, will maintain all items measures. The large scale study that involved companies from 9 service industries was followed subsequently. Instead of using mail, which often result in poor response in an emerging economies countries such as Malaysia, we sent enumerators to operations managers or equivalent positions whom we had contacted earlier and expressed their desire to participate in the study. To choose the companies, we used the appropriate directory when it is available. For example, for the hotel industry, we utilized the Malaysian Hotel Association directory and select hotels with the rating of three stars and above. The selection represented both low contact and high contact category [15] :(a) Hotels (Service factory);(b) Fast foods (service factory);(c) Auto repair (Service shop);(d) Private hospitals (Service shop);(e) Private colleges; (f) Retailing (stores) (Mass service);(g) Retailing banking (mass service);(h) Accountant(Professional);(i) Architect firms(Professional).   The total final response was 254 firms. We then analyzed the data using the appropriate statistical techniques such as Factor Analysis and Regression Analysis TABLE 1 SERVICE CATEGORIES Sectors Frequency Percent Hotel Fast Food Private Hospital Auto repair Retail stores Retail banks Private colleges Architect Accountant Total 31 30 24 26 30 30 30 30 23 254 12.2 11.8 9.4 10.2 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 9.1 100 III. RESULTS Descriptive Statistics: We had about equal numbers of respondent across the 9 industries as shown in Table 1. With regards to the years of operation, more than 30% of all companies have been in operations for more than 10 years. Of all respondents, close to 60 percents are managers or above with 7.1 percentile hold top management positions. Most firms (about 60%) do business locally or nationally whereas about 25 % cover international market. Factor Analysis: A series of factor analysis was conducted to establish uni-dimensionality of the variables and to reduce the independent variables (structural and infrastructural elements) and the dependent variables (external flexibility and internal robustness) to appropriate factors. In doing this, there is an opportunity to redefine or reduce the number of factors according to the commonalities within the variables. SPSS provides the test for the appropriateness of the use of factor analysis and the adequacy of the sampling size. Bartlett tests indicate that factor analysis is suitable and the KMO test calculated that the sample is enough to conduct factor analysis. The first analysis on the structural elements resulted in three factors with percentage variance explained 74.674 percent. We define the factor as facilities related factors (capacity and location),technology, and integration/networking. We then run the second factor analysis for the infrastructural elements and foun d only two factors with 64.958 percent cumulative variances included and name the factors as teamwork management and quality leadership. Finally a separate analysis for external flexibility and internal robustness, as suggested from the theory, maintain most of the items that measures both constructs. The results of exploratory factor analysis shed light on structural, infrastructural elements and the service operations flexibility: external flexibility and internal robustness. The previously mentioned separate structural factor; facility and location, were remerged into one factor that we could call a facility related factors. Examining the items that measures capacity and locations seem to highlight the facility issues and the merging is not totally surprising. Meanwhile, worker empowerment from the infrastructural elements was diluted as some of the items are highly correlated with the team management. This is also justifiable as the team needs some forms of empowerment to be abl e to work effectively. We however intend to cut short the detail discussion of the result s of the factor analysis as the emphasis of this study is on the impacts of the independent variable to service operations flexibility. Multiple Regression: The first model with internal robustness () as the dependent variable has a good fit with R = 0.662 and R square = 0.439. The strongest factors to influence the dependent variable seem to be the structural elements, with technology ( Ã‚ ¢ = .387; t = 6.839), capacity location ( Ã‚ ¢ = .320; t = 5.706), integration/networking ( Ã‚ ¢ = .180; t = 3.353) show the highest beta-coefficient consecutively. Only team management, one of the two factors of infrastructural elements significantly influences the dependent variables. ( Ã‚ ¢ = .156; t = 2.609). The second model has also a good fit with R = 0.686 and R square = 0.471. This time, technology also plays an influencing factor ( Ã‚ ¢ = .342; t = 6.219), followed by capacity/location ( Ã‚ ¢ = .299; t = 5.499), integration/networking ( Ã‚ ¢ = .197; t = 3.783), team management ( Ã‚ ¢ = .187; t = 3.215), and quality leadership ( Ã‚ ¢ = .151; t = 2.678). Here, it seems that quality leadership fac tor play a significant role in delivering the external flexibility of a service firm. We also notice a reducing degree of influence of structural elements (except integration/networking) to affect the external flexibility of the service firms. Further, it is also quite surprising to observe the structural elements enforcing a higher degree of influence to the service operations flexibility where as we hypothesize that the soft elements of infrastructural should lead the list. The results enable us to confirm H1, H2, H3, and H4 but H5 which it is partially confirmed. This requires further explanations that will be discussed in the next section. IV. DISCUSSION This study confirms the importance of structural and infrastructural elements to the service operations flexibility. As suggested from Harvey et al [7] that the variability will have to be dealt with organizational arrangement such as cross-functional teams, empowering contact personal, and building a flat organization, which factors are related to infrastructural elements of operations as well as modifying the structural elements such as networking capability. Our study not only supported the literature but also specifying which factors contribute the most to the operations flexibility. Contrary to our belief that the soft elements will impact more on the operations flexibility of service firms, we found that the structural part especially the element of technology show a greater influence. We believe this is not totally unexpected as the infrastructural parts have also been found in the literature to play a supporting role in the operations effectiveness. Idris and M Ali highlighted the importance role of quality leadership and best practices in steering the effectiveness of firms [16]. Idris et al. [17] emphasizes quality leadership as an important component of organizational capability to drive company performance. Hussain et al [18] also proposed the prime role of leadership in their Excellence model. Further, regarding a reducing degree of influence of structural elements (except integration/networking) to affect the external flexibility of the service firms, this study highlights the role of infrastructural elements on the enhancement of the external flexibility. External flexibility usually deals with the customer demand that require more involvement on the part of the human resource to bring about the needed adjustments whereas more structural elements such as technology is needed to provide consistent internal results in the form of less confusion and glitches. Implying the results, service companies must invest in the structural elements such as technology and networking capability to boost the operations flexibility. These initiatives must also be back up with the human dimension in the forms of team management, and quality leadership. By recognizing the five factors prescribed in this research, a service company would be able to develop and strengthen the operations flexibility of their firms. There is no further analysis of the categories of service companies that may moderate the level of deployment of structural and infrastructural resources. For example, it is a possibility that a low contact service firms will utilize higher level of technology as compared to professional services. Thus future studies should highlight the issues. In addition, the importance of having operations flexibility may also be moderated by the competitive priorities of the companies and the categories of firms themselves. It is presumed that those companies who strive to make flexibility as their top agenda will deploy higher level certain structural and infrastructural resources as compared to those who have cost minimization as their operation objectives. Finally, this study uses managers perception to assess the operations flexibility. Other objectives measures should be explored for future studies V. CONCLUSION In this study, we investigate the relationship between structural and infrastructural elements and their effects on service operations flexibility. We divide the structural elements decisions into capacity, location, integration/networking, and technology while infrastructural elements decisions include worker empowerment, quality leadership, and team management. Service operations flexibility is divided into internal robustness and external flexibility. An instrument to measure all the factors is designed and pre-tested on 30 MBA students with slight changes as required. Thereafter, a pilot study was directed to operations managers of 23 Malaysian service organizations to check the reliability of the instrument. All items used to measure the studied factors are found to be reliable. Factor analysis readjusts our independent factors. With the new defined factors, we regresses them against the internal and external flexibility. We also found the dominant influences of structural and t he supporting influence of infrastructural elements to the service operations flexibility. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This research is supported by a research grant of National University of Malaysia (UKM GUP EP 07 18 113)

Censorship is NOT Good Essay -- Censor

Censorship Censorship, a controversial word that has been with us since who knows when. Ancient dictators would burn books because they didn’t like them and force people to believe what he did. The question I ask myself though is if censorship in Libraries and schools is justified. My answer is no, and that is what I will try to convince you. Censorship is ridiculous, unfair and selfish, and censors are hypocritical, intolerant, and arrogant. What I mean when I say censorship is ridiculous is exactly that. In Censorship Opposing Viewpoints, it states that the American Heritage Dictionary was banned from Anchorage, Alaska because of words dubbed obscene, like bed, tail, ball, and nut. At first we laugh at it, but we stop when we hear it has also been banned in Cedar City, Indiana, and Eldon, Missouri. % other dictionaries were banned in Texas. These people that ban them call themselves People for Better Education. I thought dictionaries help you learn? An article in Scholastic Update entitled â€Å"The Case of the disappearing Books† it says last year there were 338 cases of parents trying to remove books, among these was the classic Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. A teacher was fired because she assigned a book with a lesbian as a main character. A parent, Ruth Somoro, said this was being intolerant of religious beliefs, and schools aren’t supposed to promote religious beliefs. Hmm, I don’t get it. The Supreme Court ruled books couldn’t be removed because they dislike ...

Dell’s Marketing Strategy

Dell’s marketing strategy In the realm of enterprise IT, Dell is often viewed as having a singular strategy-build and sell products cheaper and more efficiently than competitors, and thereby grow both market share and revenue. While that deceptively simple plan lies at the heart of Dell’s approach for customers, its overall enterprise strategy, like its presence in the enterprise market, it maturing, growing stronger and becoming more complex with each passing year.Dell has crystallized its long-term strategy for business customers in a vision it calls the Scalable Enterprise, which has many similarities with the dynamic computing strategies of its competitors—IBM (On Demand), Hewlett-Packard (Adaptive Enterprise), and so forth. Scalable Enterprise is centered on Dell products, services and alliances—all of which are rooted in industry standards and cloaked in the famous Dell direct model. The company has been promoting and marketing this vision for only a few years, but it has quickly become a focal point for how Dell rationalizes its product and services roadmaps.And it intersects with Dell’s overall view that the industry will continue to leverage clusters of high-performance, industry-standard servers and operating environments, and move away from larger-scale, proprietary systems. More important, the Scalable Enterprise vision also gives Dell a method for speaking with customers about its overall value proposition, and how it can help customers migrate to the long-term dynamic computing vision.Dell’s Services employees, in particular professional services, play a critical role in evangelizing the value of the Scalable Enterprise and in engaging customers in discussions as to how to make the vision real in their IT environments. Dell has never aspired to grow its professional services business to rival those of IBM Global Services (IGS) or the global systems integrators (GSIs). However, the company does recognize th at services are a linchpin for helping customers use Dell products to address both their IT and their business challenges, and convincing them that Dell’s products and solutions are truly enterprise-class.To that end, Dell has refocused its professional services portfolio (and its entire services roster), placing overall customer satisfaction, â€Å"lifecycle† services and the Scalable Enterprise at the core. In this report, I am examining how Dell is trying to leverage professional services to drive its Scalable Enterprise vision. We begin with an overview of how customers view Dell’s Scalable Enterprise vision, based on data from a recently completed Summit Strategies survey.We then briefly review the tenets of the Scalable Enterprise strategy and drill down into Dell’s services portfolio, with a particular focus on professional services and some of Dell’s newer offerings. We conclude with suggestions about steps Dell can take—in particula r with enterprise services partners—to further enhance its professional services strategy and spread its Scalable Enterprise vision throughout the market. We first explored Dell’s services strategy two years ago (see our January 2003 report, Can Dell Find Success in Enterprise Services? ).Then, Dell was still refining its services strategy—particularly, how it would move ahead in enterprise services. At that time, many of Dell’s executives were concerned that customers did not view the company as a strategic enterprise vendor, or thought that Dell lacked enterprise-level expertise for designing and deploying IT environments. What a difference two years can make. We recently asked IT buyers—enterprise and SMB—to identify their most strategic IT vendors, both for overall IT strategy and in a variety of different IT areas, including infrastructure software and implementation and support.As shown in Figure 1, when we asked all respondents how im portant various vendors would be to their organizations’ overall IT strategy during the next three years, Dell ranked fourth (19%) among those vendors identified as most strategic—behind Microsoft (36%), IBM (21%) and Cisco (21%). Dell ranked ahead of Hewlett-Packard (HP), Oracle, Sun Microsystems, SAP, and some global integrators and outsourcers. Another 28% named Dell as one of their top two or three most strategic vendors.In another survey data point, among large enterprise customers (with 1,000 or more employees), Dell ranked as the fifth most strategic vendor (20%), with Oracle moving ahead of Dell. The news was even better for Dell when respondents were asked about strategic vendors for their server and storage strategies during the next three years. Dell came out on top among enterprise customers—ahead of HP, IBM, EMC and Sun (see Figure 2). Dell also outpaced IBM among small and medium businesses (SMBs), a market that both companies view as a strategic p riority.While these two data points do not directly relate to the robustness of Dell’s services capabilities, they do demonstrate that Dell’s profile as a provider of enterprise-caliber solutions has gone up considerably in the past few years. In addition, when we asked our survey audience to select their most strategic vendor for IT support and implementation services in the next three years, Dell placed fourth among total respondents—again behind Microsoft, Cisco and IBM—and fifth among enterprise respondents.It’s also clear that Dell’s contention that lower-cost, standards based systems can handle IT functions previously reserved for higher-end, proprietary systems is resonating with customers. Also, Dell may benefit from its high-profile consumer business, with familiarity in consumer markets breeding a similar familiarity at the corporate customer level—although there is no conclusive evidence about a linkage. The momentum is hel ping propel Dell and its Scalable Enterprise strategy into a leadership position in enterprise IT environments (see Figure 3).Based on an unwavering belief that IT customers want simplicity, optimization and better management, Dell’s Scalable Enterprise vision encompasses Dell’s mission to standardize core elements of IT datacenters to deliver these capabilities. It emphasized de facto standard products, open standards specifications, customer choice, lifecycle services and the advantages of Dell’s direct model. The Scalable Enterprise encompasses some, but not all, of the characteristics of Summit Strategies’ dynamic computing framework.This framework tightly aligns IT and business goals through the use of new infrastructure components and virtualization capabilities, automated and policy-based service management capabilities, and optimized business processes. Dell is positioning itself to focus on many of the infrastructure hardware elements of dynamic computing—and is bringing in partners to solve the major infrastructure software, management and business process challenges of the dynamic computing equation (although some Dell-developed management capabilities are becoming increasingly strategic for the vendor).IBM and, to a lesser degree HP, talk to customers about their ability to deliver dynamic computing solutions from either the bottom-up (aiming to make the IT infrastructure more flexible and adaptable) or the top-down (analyzing business processes and then changing the underlying infrastructure to better support them). Dell, however, approaches customers with a more narrowly-focused value proposition that stresses a phased approach to drive standards and scalability within an enterprise datacenter—which will lead to better IT support and adaptability for usiness processes over time. In fact Dell believes that its Scalable Enterprise vision will not come to full fruition until 2008, when the company plans to d eliver more automated policy-based capabilities, self-monitoring tools and dynamic resource allocation for heterogeneous systems. Of course IBM, HP and others would say they can provide a greater array of dynamic computing solutions now, and that customers have no need to wait several years to take advantage of them.However Dell believes customers will be more comfortable with their longer-term, phased-in approach that emphasizes standards—and that by leveraging its direct model; customers will see Dell’s approach as more affordable as well. When we profi led Dell’s services business two years ago questions lingered over whether Dell could sustain its services business and how strategic services would play into the company’s future (Scalable Enterprise had not yet been introduced).Today, with services as one of the three main pillars for the Scalable Enterprise strategy, there is little doubt about services’ overall importance to Dell. Services cur rently generate about $4 billion in annual revenue and it is one of the fastest growing parts of the company’s business. In fact professional services revenue has doubled over a two-year period, with significant growth in both the U. S. and overseas markets.As referenced previously, Dell’s services reflect the company’s overall philosophy that customers want more standard, less custom and more lifecycle IT solutions. Dell’s approach has been to slowly expand beyond traditional support services (which still generate the majority of Dell’s services revenue) with more repeatable, higher value-add professional and managed services, both directly and through partners. To address this Dell is attempting to highlight its business-centric expertise in existing and new professional services offerings.

Leadership in organizational behavior Essay

Leadership is the process of influencing people and providing an environment for them to achieve team or organisational objectives. As a property, Leadership is the set of characteristics attributed to those who are perceived to use such influence successfully. Leadership involves neither force nor coercion. It is widely believed in the world of business that leadership is the key ingredient in the recipe for corporate achievement. Typically, when we speak of leaders we are referring to people who influence others without threat, using non-coercive means. In fact, this characteristic distinguishes a leader from a dictator. Whereas dictators get others to do what they want by using threats of physical force, leaders do not. Subordinates accept influence from leaders because they respect, like, or admire them as well as because they hold positions of formal authority (that is, leaders may have both position power and personal power). We need to caution against the everyday practice of using tile terms leader and manager interchangeably. The primary function of a leader is to create the essential purpose or mission of the organization and the strategy for attaining it. In contrast, the job of the manager is to implement that vision. He or she is responsible for achieving that end, taking the steps necessary to turn the leader’s vision into reality. The confusion between these two terms is understandable insofar as the distinction between establishing a mission and implementing it is often blurred in practice. This is because many leaders, such as top corporate executives, are frequently called upon not only to create a vision, but also to help implement it. Similarly, managers often are required to lead those who are subordinate to them while also carrying out their leader’s mission. With this in mind, it has been observed that too many so-called â€Å"leaders† get bogged down in the managerial aspects of their job, creating organizations that are â€Å"over managed and under lead. † Leadership Perspectives Goal Attainment : influence function of leadership and deals the mechanisms that motivate members’ behaviors towards the group’s goals. Adaptation : helps the group to define its goal in a way that is consistent with the demands of the environment in which operates. Integration : some mechanism must coordinate the activities of group members towards the common goal e. g – Communication and conflict resolution Maintenance : mechanism to maintain their morale and keep them interested in staying in the group THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP: There are three major approaches to leadership: a) trait theories, b) behavioral theories, c) situational theories. Trait theories highlight that there exists a finite set of individual traits or characteristics that distinguish successful from unsuccessful leaders. Behavioral theories highlight that the most important aspect of leadership is not the traits of the leader, but what the leader does in various situations. Successful leaders are distinguished form unsuccessful leaders by their particular style of leadership. Situational theories outlines that the effectiveness of the leader is not only determined by his or her style of behavior, but also by the situation surrounding the leadership environment. Situational factors include the characteristics of the leader and the subordinates, the nature of the task and the structure of the group. THE TRAIT APPROACH: ARE SOME PEOPLE REALLY â€Å"BORN LEADERS†? Common sense leads us to think that some people have more of â€Å"the right stuff’ than others, and are just naturally better leaders. And, if you look at some of the great leaders throughout history, such as Martin Luther King, Jr. , Alexander the Great, and Abraham Lincoln, to name just a few, it is clear that such individuals certainly have characteristics in common that differ from ordinary folks. The question is â€Å"what is it that makes great leaders so great? † Leaders have certain traits, e. g. Honesty and Integrity : Trustworthy ; reliable ; open Intelligence Self – Confidence : Trust in own abilities Emotional maturity Stress tolerance Task – relevant knowledge : knowledge of business, relevant technical matters Ambition and high energy : Desire for achievement ; tenacity ; initiative Desire to lead : leadership motivation – desire to exercise influence over others to reach shared goals Research suggest that traits contribute less than 10% of what makes a successful leader Leadership Grid (Robert R. Blake & Jane Mouton) Impoverished Mgmt (1,1): Exertion of minimum efforts to get the required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership. Country Club Mgmt (1,9): Thoughtful attention to the needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable organizational atmosphere and work tempo. Middle Of The Road Mgmt (5,5): Adequate organizational performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work with maintaining morale of the people at satisfying level. Authority Compliance (9,1): Efficiency in operational results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree. Team Mgmt (9,9): Work accomplishment is from committed people; inter dependence through a common stake. In organization purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect. Managerial Grid: The five basic approaches to management identified by Black and Mouton are based on the two dimensions of concern of people and concern for production that are associated with leaders. A managerial grid is formed based on these two dimensions which are rated on 9 point scale. If manager is securing the lowest score on these two dimensions I,I is identified as impoverished style of managers who are low on both their concern of people and production, 1,9 or country club style is designated to those managers who are having high concern for people but low concern for production. The 5, 5 or the middle-of-the road style concerns the moderate levels of concern for both people and production. The 9,1 or task management style is one where there is a high concern for production but very little concern for people and finally, 9,9 or team management style is one where the manager has high concern for both people and production. According to Black and Mouton the one best style for all mangers is the 9,9 or team management style. Fiedler’s Model Effective groups depend on a proper match between a leader’s style of interacting with subordinates and the degree to which the situation gives control and influence to the leader. LEADER SITUATION MATCH A task oriented leader is appropriate for a very favorable or very unfavorable situation. Relationship oriented behavior is predicted to work best when situation is moderately favorable or unfavorable. /* only read Favorable Situation: The situation is considered as highly favorable if it possess a high level of positive interpersonal relations between leaders and members, a well defined task structures and a leaders perceive that they are bestowed with strong perceived positional power. In such type of situation the leader will have a great deal of control over situations and will simply have to make sure that he gives the necessary instructions to get the task done. There is no need for him to waste time talking to each employee in order to be perceived as friendly. A task-oriented style will be effective in such situation. Unfavorable Situation: The situation is considered as highly unfavorable if it possesses a low level of interpersonal relationship between leaders and members, a poorly defined task and a relatively a weak perceived power. The leader of a task-force committee which is appointed to solve problems encountered in the work setting is likely to find him in such a situation. In such type of situation, the leader is in highly vulnerable situations and there is no other way to enforce a strict discipline and order to bring the situation in normalcy than following relationship oriented style. Moderately Favorable Situation: Here the leader might find herself in a mixed situation. For instance, a manager might have good relationship with her workers, but the task structure and position power of the leader may be low. For example, a bank officer may have a good relationship staff member, but the task structure or the power to control the staff members (either to reward or punish members) is not strong enough. In such situations, the manager will be very successful and get the desirable results if he follows more of relationships oriented style than task oriented task style. */ PATH GOAL THEORY PATH GOAL THEORY believes that a leader can change subordinates expectancies by clarifying the path between the subordinates’ action and the outcome, which is the goal which the employee wants to achieve. Whether leader’s behavior can do so effectively also depends on situational factors. Path-Goal Leadership Model Path-Goal Leadership Behaviour Directive Leadership Behavior: This deals with planning, organizing, controlling and coordinating of subordinates activities by the leader. It is similar to the traditional dimension of initiating structure in that the leader’s emphasis is on letting the subordinates know what is expected of them. Supportive Leadership Behavior: This concerns giving support consideration to the needs of the subordinates, displaying concern for their well-being and welfare and creating a friendly and pleasant environment. Participative—a pattern in which the leader consults with subordinates, permitting them to participate in decision making. Achievement-oriented—an approach in which the leader sets challenging goals and seeks improvements in performance. The benefits to the company of the achievement-oriented leader approach include greater employee confidence and commitment, more employee decision making, increased employee creativity, more challenging objectives, and reduced supervision for employees who work best independently. SITUATIONAL FACTORS Employee Contingencies Locus of control A Participative leader is suitable for subordinates with internal locus of control. A directive leader is suitable for supportives for external locus of control. Self perceived ability Subordinates who perceive themselves as having high ability do not like directive leadership. Environmental Contingencies When working on a task that has a high structure, directive leadership is redundant and less effective. When a highly formal authority system is in place, directive leadership can again reduce worker’s satisfaction. When subordinates are in a team environment that offers great social support, the supportive leadership style becomes less necessary TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP Definition: It’s the process of leading for change rather than for stability. Transformational leaders Leading — changing the organisation to fit the environment Develop, communicate, enact a vision. It is exercised when the leader intellectually stimulates the subordinates, excites, arouses and inspires them to perform far beyond what they would have thought themselves capable of. By providing a new vision, the transformational leader transforms the followers into people who self-actualize. Charismatic leadership is central to transformational leaderships. These kinds of leaders guide or motivate their follower’s in the direction of established goals by clarifying role and task requirements. Transformational leaders arouse strong emotions. They also help transform their followers by teaching them, often serving as mentors. In so doing, transformational leaders seek to encourage followers to do their own thing. In contrast, charismatic leaders may keep their followers weak and highly dependent on them. A charismatic leader may be the whole show, whereas a transformational leader does a good job of inspiring change in the whole organization. Many celebrities, be they musicians, actors, or athletes, tend to be highly charismatic, but they do not necessarily have any transformational effects on their followers. As such, although some people may idolize certain rock stars, and dress like them, these celebrities’ charisma will unlikely stimulate their fans into making sacrifices that revitalize the world. When you think of it this way, its easy to see how charisma is just a part of transformational leadership.