BUSI 610: Discussion #1 (HF):
How do you think planning in today’s organizations compares to planning in an organization 25 years ago? Do you think planning becomes more important or less important in a world where everything quickly changes, and crises are a regular part of organizational life?
In the last 25 to 30 years the world has changed dramatically and rapidly. There has been a rapid rate of globalization, technological advances, and innovation. Customers are more educated and demanding. The world is a chaotic place. In the current environment that is constantly changing organizational forecasting and time planning is more crucial to keep the organization ready to respond quickly and in a coordinated way (Daft, 2016). Organizations of the past did not have to deal with the amount of regulatory oversight and the rapid exchange of knowledge and data over the internet. Organizations today need to be ready to quickly address any issues that arise and control any damage. There are various foresight practices and techniques are available to support strategic planning in these fast-paced environment to assist decision-makers deal with uncertainty (Vecchiato, 2015). Organizations in previous decades dealt with a slower-paced and could focus more on organizational issues and day to day efficiency.
Planning is much more important in today’s world because everything changes so quickly and there is not time to plan and execute a solution. Organizations need to have contingency plans for all foreseeable issues to quickly address them. In the past the dissemination of information was much slower, and news didn’t travel as quickly so there was time to brainstorm and react. Organizations of today have to react globally, deal with governmental regulations on a local and international level and deal with environmental issues. Being prepared in this chaotic world is essential for businesses in order to succeed.
Is changing the organization’s domain a feasible strategy for coping with a threatening environment? Can you think of an organization in the recent news that has changed its domain?
Changing an organization’s domain is a feasible strategy to deal with environmental issues and has been successful for many companies on the brink of failure. A domain is the environmental field, targeted population, or market that an organization targets for its goods and services (Daft, 2016). It is often referred to as a niche. As stated previously the world is changing rapidly and companies must adapt to remain in business. Organizations must continuously monitor their environment and adapt to changes identified. The rapid development of technology may cause some products or services to become obsolete and businesses to fail. The only strategy in this situation is to change the domain. There have been many examples over the years.
Netflix is an example of a company that changed its domain several times and became very successful. Netflix was founded in 1997 as a DVD rental company. In 1998 Netflix offered a monthly subscription for unlimited DVD rentals. Netflix then used members ratings to predict movie choices. When DVD sales began to decline due to online streaming services and on-demand movies offered by cable companies Netflix jumped on that platform and offered a streaming service. The streaming service not only contained movies, but Netflix began streaming original content both TV series and original movies. Netflix changed with the environment and survived while competitor Blockbuster did not and closed its doors. Netflix is now a key player in the streaming market attracting big stars and winning industry awards. Netflix changed their offered services several times as the market needs changed.
Compare the descriptions of the transnational model described in chapter 6 to the elements of the learning organization described in chapter 1. Do you think the transnational model would work in a huge global firm?
A learning organization is an organization that fosters learning and continually improves itself. It creates a nurturing atmosphere that fosters new patterns and people are continuously learning how to learn together. The transnational model is similar in that there is a sharing of knowledge across the organization and that innovation is embraced in every section of the organization.
The transnational model would work for a large global firm because this approach is designed to meet the demands of a complex international environment that changes rapidly. The transnational model seeks to build global efficiency, local responsiveness, and global learning simultaneously instead of focuses on one aspect at a time. It provides subsidiaries with a feeling of involvement, with sharing of information, knowledge, and new technology. It creates an integrated network, linking together operations to achieve organizational goals. The philosophy of transnational management is based on interdependence.
It would work in the global market because the structure is based on:
Assets and resources are dispersed worldwide, and operations are linked together through relationships that are interdependent.
Structures and flexible
Subsidiary managers initiate strategy and innovation that become strategy for the entire corporation
Coordination and unification are achieved through corporate culture, shared values, and management style not through structures and systems.
This model unites all parts of the corporation worldwide, makes every subsidiary feel that they are part of the team, and they are being heard, and information, knowledge and innovation is shared across the organization.
In todays knowledge economy corporations need to nurture employees continuously to gain and sustain a competitive advantage and this is especially true in knowledge-based industries like IT.
How should a biblical worldview be applied?
“The body is not one member but many” 1 Corinthians 12:14 (Bible.com, n.d.). This verse is about teamwork and working together toward a united goal. In the discussion in both the learning organization and the transnational model learning across the organization is stressed, information and knowledge is shared and innovation is encouraged. Employees are united to achieve corporate goals and everyone is part of that process.
BUSI 610: Discussion #2 (CT)
How do you think planning in today’s organizations compares to planning in an organization 25 years ago? Do you think planning becomes more important or less important in a world where everything quickly changes and crises are a regular part of organizational life? Why?
There is no doubt that while planning remains an important aspect of a business organization, it has changed from 25 years ago. Particularly with the explosion in technology since then, planning has become a more dynamic and fluid task than it previously was. Planning, in fact, is more important now than ever before because of the fact that business is moving at a more rapid rate. It could be said that planning was less important 25 years ago because the landscape was more predictable and moved at a steadier pace; a plan could be set and it would not need much adjusting or deviations from the plan. Today, plans can fall apart as quickly as they can be made and the need for contingency planning is also required for businesses since a change in plans must almost be seen as inevitable. In uncertain environments, planning becomes even more vital because organizations need to be prepared for shifts in direction while maintaining their organization (Daft, 2020).
A vital reason why planning is more important in the current, rapidly changing environment is because it improves the process of employees working together (Allison & Kaye, 2015). The companies that do the best during periods of change are the ones that keep everybody closely in touch together (Daft, 2020). An important way of mitigating potential issues with a shift in direction is to already have a solid communication and collaborative structure between departments and employees. Companies today often face negative consequences when they fail to change and adapt to the times. Consumers are changing their tastes and desires faster than ever, and the landscape can change on a moment’s notice. Failure to have implemented contingency plans to address these potential issues can mean the demise of the company. A current plan may not last long, but proper planning in today’s world never stops.
Is changing the organization’s domain a feasible strategy for coping with a threatening environment? Can you think of an organization in the recent news that has changed its domain? Explain
An organization’s domain is said to be the chosen field in which the organization operates, which defines the organization’s niche as well as the external sectors in which the organization will interact with (Daft, 2020). Change is inevitable in business, and in today’s world it can happen quicker than ever. Some organizations certainly reach a point where they either change with the environment or face the possibility of allowing the environmental changes get the best of them. When an organization starts to lose the ability to control the external sectors to any degree, it would be in their best interest to change their domain. Organizations that have had long-lasting success within their domain tend to be the ones that are able to maintain a level of control of the external sectors (Adali et al., 2018). Environments today are becoming increasingly threatening for a variety of reasons; however the Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated many of the threats which have left businesses scrambling. Without the pandemic, the unprecedented level of competition in today’s global market has also led to many companies needing to reposition in order find their niche within industries.
Skyworks Solutions has gone through multiple domain changes as a way to counter that very scenario. Their first change was to move into semiconductors, or microchips, that are used in just about every mobile and wireless phone, as well as other modes of communication (Skyworks, 2021). Skyworks had carved out an effective niche for themselves in the exploding world of communications at the time, and their rising stock price and stature in the industry was proof of a positive change in domain. Perhaps the Covid-19 pandemic provided Skyworks with the impetus for another domain change, albeit a less dramatic one than they previously had undergone, but Skyworks felt the need to at least expand the boundaries of their environment as they recently moved into the electric vehicle industry (Skyworks, 2021). Skyworks is responding to their current threats by leveraging their expertise and moving into a different sector, as it has proven successful for them in the past.
Compare the descriptions of the transnational model described in Chapter 6 to the elements of the learning organization described in Chapter 1. Do you think the transnational model would work in a huge global firm?
A transnational company is one that has its headquarters in one country while having many other interdependent subsidiaries in other countries. The transnational model was created to address the increased complexity of the global environment while also requiring high levels of coordination, learning, and transfer of knowledge (Daft, 2020). There is much compatibility between the transnational model and the learning organizations, as both require a high amount of coordination, communication, and of course knowledge sharing. Particularly with businesses operating outside their “home” country, knowledge sharing goes beyond the actual product or service the business is offering. There are different laws and regulations, cultural norms, and other unique aspects of different nations that the business must be aware of. There have been hugely successful companies that floundered in overseas market because there was a failure of understanding the behavior of the local consumers and their culture in general.
A learning organization can be defined as one that places a greater emphasis on communication and collaboration to ensure all employees are engaged in solving problems (Garg & Malik, 2017). This approach allows more operational flexibility, as the continuous improvement may take on various forms depending on the problem. Particularly in this day in age, where technology has allowed businesses to behave quicker with more efficiency, learning organizations allow managers to oversee a more adaptive culture to answer for the increased speed required (Daft, 2020). Adopting a transnational model in a huge global firm will present its challenges, however it is certainly possible. The biggest challenge is in the number of employees and departments that will need to be on the same page. Typically, huge firms tend to have more layers of bureaucracy which are slow to move, as information flows through a very controlled hierarchy. Freeing employees from such procedures would be the best way to effectively open up the lines of communication and participation from all employees across departments.
How can/should a biblical worldview be applied?
There are many instances in the Bible where planning is mentioned, and the importance of planning. Much like building a home requires a blueprint, a solid organization cannot exist without proper planning. Proverbs 21:5 says, “the thoughts of the diligent tend only to plenteousness; but of everyone that is hasty only to want” (King James Bible, 2021). The passage is a good reminder about the benefits of planning, and the consequences of failing to do so. Those that fail to plan tend to act on impulse, which can lead to trouble often. However, those who do plan will be able to foresee potential problems and avoid them, as well as the benefit of the organization knowing which direction everyone must pull in to achieve goals.
The post BUSI 610: Discussion #1 (HF): How do you think planning in today’s appeared first on PapersSpot.
