There are different types of Mergers, firms go for Mergers as
a part of In-organic growth for the firm.
Reasons of Mergers are mainly three or four.
Market Opportunity.
Technological Know Hows.
Financial Leverages.
Avoid Competitions.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
GLOBALIZATION 3.0,triggering effect for Change Management.
"The World is Flat" from Tom Friedman the NYTimes journalist
wrote after visiting B'lore in 2004,there has been a paradigm
shift in the attitudes all the firms and global corporates.
With price arbitrage in the global market place and
scouting for cheap labour both in manufacturing
and services, the trans national corporations
took dramatic and very smart management
decisions to to procure vendors both for production
and services, to remain competitive.
Identification of vendors, grooming vendors , keeping
in mind labour cost is known as OUT SOURCING.
Suddenly jobs flying out from Boston to B'lore to
make sure the U.S.MNC's remains financially fit ,
and can make the WALL Street happy.
Ruthless acquisition and mergers happens , many Asian
conglomerate buys EEU and American MNC at cheap price
Vi's a Vi's European and U.S MNC.
There was a mad rush for going Global, some firms
has been very successful, some failed miserably.
The Three Era Of Globalisation .
wrote after visiting B'lore in 2004,there has been a paradigm
shift in the attitudes all the firms and global corporates.
With price arbitrage in the global market place and
scouting for cheap labour both in manufacturing
and services, the trans national corporations
took dramatic and very smart management
decisions to to procure vendors both for production
and services, to remain competitive.
Identification of vendors, grooming vendors , keeping
in mind labour cost is known as OUT SOURCING.
Suddenly jobs flying out from Boston to B'lore to
make sure the U.S.MNC's remains financially fit ,
and can make the WALL Street happy.
Ruthless acquisition and mergers happens , many Asian
conglomerate buys EEU and American MNC at cheap price
Vi's a Vi's European and U.S MNC.
There was a mad rush for going Global, some firms
has been very successful, some failed miserably.
The Three Era Of Globalisation .
E-nabling an organisation is a Re-engineering task for smart management.
E-enabling an organisation is a real re-engineering process
in an organisation, with electronic media and the global mobile
revolution taking place, more and more firms are looking out for
e-enabling their firm to remain competitive or loose out to their
competitors.
With GLOBAL vision in mind, now all corporates develops
products and services, which are to be sold across Globally.
Categorically speaking the PLACE concept has dramatically shifted
from locally/nationally to globally.
Here where the Globalisation 3.0 has set in and with the net/www
it has been very proactive,"the world in shrinking".
in an organisation, with electronic media and the global mobile
revolution taking place, more and more firms are looking out for
e-enabling their firm to remain competitive or loose out to their
competitors.
With GLOBAL vision in mind, now all corporates develops
products and services, which are to be sold across Globally.
Categorically speaking the PLACE concept has dramatically shifted
from locally/nationally to globally.
Here where the Globalisation 3.0 has set in and with the net/www
it has been very proactive,"the world in shrinking".
Re-enginnering vesrses Re-structuring
There has always been a great confusion between re-engineering and
re-structuring of the firm. Often managerial experts makes mistakes in finding
the clear difference between the two terms , and think they are synonymous.
In re-structuring the firms gets a small leverage , on the contrary in
re-engineering it's a quantum leap on the productivity and the
scale of portability.
The very concept of the two words are clearly defined in
http://leadership.wharton.upenn.edu/structure/tools_for_design_and_change/restructuring_and_reengineering.shtml
Some times the firm's financial engineering crisis leads to financial
restructuring, according to INVESTOPEDIA
"When a company is having trouble making payments on its
debt, it will often consolidate and adjust the terms of the
debt in a debt restructuring.
After a debt restructuring, the payments on debt are
more manageable for the company and the likelihood
of payment to bondholders increases.
A company restructures its operations or structure by
cutting costs, such as payroll, or reducing its size
through the sale of assets.
This is often seen as necessary when the current situation
at a company is one that may lead to its collapse."
Other from of re-structuring are in the case of downsizing ,rightsizing,
smartsizeing, keeping the fixed cost minimum, and increasing the variable
and semi-variable cost.
re-structuring of the firm. Often managerial experts makes mistakes in finding
the clear difference between the two terms , and think they are synonymous.
In re-structuring the firms gets a small leverage , on the contrary in
re-engineering it's a quantum leap on the productivity and the
scale of portability.
The very concept of the two words are clearly defined in
http://leadership.wharton.upenn.edu/structure/tools_for_design_and_change/restructuring_and_reengineering.shtml
Some times the firm's financial engineering crisis leads to financial
restructuring, according to INVESTOPEDIA
"When a company is having trouble making payments on its
debt, it will often consolidate and adjust the terms of the
debt in a debt restructuring.
After a debt restructuring, the payments on debt are
more manageable for the company and the likelihood
of payment to bondholders increases.
A company restructures its operations or structure by
cutting costs, such as payroll, or reducing its size
through the sale of assets.
This is often seen as necessary when the current situation
at a company is one that may lead to its collapse."
Other from of re-structuring are in the case of downsizing ,rightsizing,
smartsizeing, keeping the fixed cost minimum, and increasing the variable
and semi-variable cost.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Organisational Structures-Informal,Formal, Matrix based and Fuctional.
Key characteristics of the informal organization:
• evolving constantly
• grass roots
• dynamic and responsive
• excellent at motivation
• requires insider knowledge to be seen
• treats people as individuals
• flat and fluid
• cohered by trust and reciprocity
• difficult to pin down
• essential for situations that change quickly or are not yet fully understood .
Key characteristics of the formal organization:
• enduring, unless deliberately altered
• top-down
• missionary
• static
• excellent at alignment
• plain to see
• equates “person” with “role”
• hierarchical
• bound together by codified rules and order
• easily understood and explained
• critical for dealing with situations that are known and consistent .
Interesting characteristic of a FLAT Organization.
Flat organization (also known as horizontal organization) refers to an
organizational structure with few or no levels of intervening management
between staff and managers. The idea is that well-trained workers will
be more productive when they are more directly involved in the decision
making process, rather than closely supervised by many layers of
management.
This structure is generally possible only in smaller organizations or
individual units within larger organizations. When they reach a critical
size, organizations can retain a streamlined structure but cannot keep
a completely flat manager-to-staff relationship without impacting
productivity. Certain financial responsibilities may also require a
more conventional structure. Some theorize that flat organizations
become more traditionally hierarchical when they begin to be geared
towards productivity.
The flat organization model promotes employee involvement through
a decentralized decision making process. By elevating the level of
responsibility of baseline employees, and by eliminating layers of
middle management, comments and feedback reach all personnel
involved in decisions more quickly. Expected response to customer
feedback can thus become more rapid. Since the interaction between
workers is more frequent, this organizational structure generally
depends upon a much more personal relationship between workers
and managers. Hence the structure can be more time-consuming to
build than a traditional bureaucratic/hierarchical model.
MATRIX Management.
The matrix organization is an attempt to combine the advantages of
the pure functional structure and the product organizational structure.
This form is identically suited for companies, such as construction,
that are project-driven?.
For further notes: http://omblues.com/10.html
• evolving constantly
• grass roots
• dynamic and responsive
• excellent at motivation
• requires insider knowledge to be seen
• treats people as individuals
• flat and fluid
• cohered by trust and reciprocity
• difficult to pin down
• essential for situations that change quickly or are not yet fully understood .
Key characteristics of the formal organization:
• enduring, unless deliberately altered
• top-down
• missionary
• static
• excellent at alignment
• plain to see
• equates “person” with “role”
• hierarchical
• bound together by codified rules and order
• easily understood and explained
• critical for dealing with situations that are known and consistent .
Interesting characteristic of a FLAT Organization.
Flat organization (also known as horizontal organization) refers to an
organizational structure with few or no levels of intervening management
between staff and managers. The idea is that well-trained workers will
be more productive when they are more directly involved in the decision
making process, rather than closely supervised by many layers of
management.
This structure is generally possible only in smaller organizations or
individual units within larger organizations. When they reach a critical
size, organizations can retain a streamlined structure but cannot keep
a completely flat manager-to-staff relationship without impacting
productivity. Certain financial responsibilities may also require a
more conventional structure. Some theorize that flat organizations
become more traditionally hierarchical when they begin to be geared
towards productivity.
The flat organization model promotes employee involvement through
a decentralized decision making process. By elevating the level of
responsibility of baseline employees, and by eliminating layers of
middle management, comments and feedback reach all personnel
involved in decisions more quickly. Expected response to customer
feedback can thus become more rapid. Since the interaction between
workers is more frequent, this organizational structure generally
depends upon a much more personal relationship between workers
and managers. Hence the structure can be more time-consuming to
build than a traditional bureaucratic/hierarchical model.
MATRIX Management.
The matrix organization is an attempt to combine the advantages of
the pure functional structure and the product organizational structure.
This form is identically suited for companies, such as construction,
that are project-driven?.
For further notes: http://omblues.com/10.html
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Speed At Which Strategy has To Be Implimented.
An organization's ability to learn, and translate that
learning into action rapidly, is the ultimate competitive advantage -Jack Walsh
Jack talking on leadership which drives an organisation and
strategic implementation.
learning into action rapidly, is the ultimate competitive advantage -Jack Walsh
Jack talking on leadership which drives an organisation and
strategic implementation.
McKinseys 7-S Framework Is Still Applicable In Todays Very Complex Corporate Envoirnment For A Firms Strategic Success.
Still today in a very complex economic scenario the McKinseys 7S
Framework is very much is use, the model has been re designed
and re defined .
In 1983 Bob Waterman and Tom Peters worked with this systems
and found it very successful, management experts and strategist
all over the world has worked with this Strategic models and
have found is a path breaking event in the
corporate performance management enhancement systems.
Shared Value which is in the centricity of the the models ,
has been redefined by Prof Porter.
This is a case study if HP and its success models keeping
shared value in the centre.
Corporates Social responsibility has also been a part of
Shared Value.
Prof Porter also advocated this in a broader term.
Framework is very much is use, the model has been re designed
and re defined .
In 1983 Bob Waterman and Tom Peters worked with this systems
and found it very successful, management experts and strategist
all over the world has worked with this Strategic models and
have found is a path breaking event in the
corporate performance management enhancement systems.
Shared Value which is in the centricity of the the models ,
has been redefined by Prof Porter.
This is a case study if HP and its success models keeping
shared value in the centre.
Corporates Social responsibility has also been a part of
Shared Value.
Prof Porter also advocated this in a broader term.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Business Process Reengineering-A clear defination
This video is a very clear definition of BPR, it's absolutely a radical process of redesigning the business for greater efficiency and productivity and value addition for the customers benefits and in turn satisfaction given to the customers and command a position in the industry and retain the market share and gaining market share, instead of loosing market share.
This an unique strategy all firms are adopting.
This an unique strategy all firms are adopting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)