Time Pacing Versus Event Pacing

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Complexity theory helps in offering a new set of tools which helps to explain the changes and differences in companies experiencing globalisation. It contains a challenge to a lot of forms of accomplishment in sociology and offers new and various ways of thinking about diverse inequalities and social change in a global era (Walby, 2003). Complexity theory gives new mediums of thinking about some of the classic problems in social science, engaging with the heat between the search for general theory and the need for contextual and specific reasoning (Calhoun, 1998), which dwells at the heart of the tension between the realist (Bhaskar, 1997) and post-modern (Cilliers, 1998) approaches (Walby, 2003).

COMPLEXITY AND TIMING

Time Pacing involves a strategy for competing in quick changing, unpredictable markets by organizing change in predictable time intervals e.g., Intel. Although few organizations will enjoy the position of the market like Intel’s, where managers can learn a big lesson experienced by the world’s premier chip maker. Intel is definitely the most visible-but by no means the only-practitioner of time pacing (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1998). For example, about every 9 months, Intel adds a new good facility to its operations. Small and large companies, high and low technology alike, can derive from time pacing in markets that won’t stand still. In quick shifting industries, time pacing can help managers notice change and perhaps, like Intel, set the steps and need for change. But even in organizations where the rate of change is lower than warp speed, then time pacing can change the tendency of managers naturally to wait for long and move too slowly in which they lose momentum (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1998).

TIME PACING VERSUS EVENT PACING

Event pacing consists of the familiar and natural hierarchy of things. Organisations change in response to events like moves by the competition, change in technology, inadequate or lack of financial performance or new customer demands. Event pacing is simply about creating and introducing a new product when technology emerges from the R&D (Research and Development) laboratory, going into a new market in response to a decision by a competitor because an inviting target is in existence (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1998). Managers who event pace, practice a plan and deviate from it when performance becomes weak. In markets which are stable, event pacing is an effective way to deal with change. Time pacing refers to creating new products or services, introducing new businesses, or going into new markets according to the calendar (Connie, 1998). Even though time-paced organizations can be extremely fast, it is necessary not to contradict time spacing with speed. Time pacing is regular, proactive and rhythmic, e.g. 3M dictates that 30% of revenues will emerge from new products each year, Netscape launches a new product every 6 months, British Airways changes its service classes every five years & Starbucks Coffee opens 300 stores yearly to meet the goal of 2,000 outlets (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1998).

COMPLEXITY AND LEARNING

Complexity of learning is approached as a generic organizational phenomenon that subsumes organizational learning techniques such as Business Process Redesign, but also refers to processes such as imitating, experimenting, simulating, networking etc. Traditionally, organizational learning has been articulated in the language of systems theory. For example, Morgan (1986) refers to the metaphor of a brain as an information processing system in order to describe organizational learning. (Argyris & Schon, 1978) explicitly refer to various forms of feedback loops. (March & Olsen, 1976) talk about environmental response and individual adaptation, where (Senge, 1992) bases his learning ideas on Forester's theory of systems dynamics.

They distinguish incremental adaptive learning (which they label single loop learning) from learning which affects the fundamental organizational theory-in-use (which they label double loop learning) and deutero learning (which means learning how to learn) (Senge 1990). Single loop learning occurs when error correction proceeds by changing organizational strategies within a constant framework or norms of performance. Double loop learning involves restructuring of organizational norm and restructuring of strategies and assumptions associated with those norms (Senge 1990). It involves fundamental changes in the organizational frame of reference or 'theories- in-use' prevalent within the organization (Senge 1990). The likelihood of double-loop learning is enhanced, and effectiveness should increase over time.

There is a distinction between Adaptive learning and Generative learning; Adaptive learning is about coping with the environment and can be seen as the ‘adaptive’ perspective on learning (Senge 1990). Generative learning is about creating as well as about being dependent on the environment. It needs new ways of discovering the world. Generative learning will be reached by means of creative tension. The idea of generative learning can be seen as another formulation of (Argyris & Schon, 1978) idea of double loop learning. The learning organization concept has several strong points which may partly explain its present popularity. One of the major strengths is that the perspective has provided a bridge between theoretical, academic writings on learning and the practice of organizations as perceived by consultants, managers and human resource practitioners. Another strong point which is lacking within most other perspectives is its focus on 'generative learning'. Organizations not only learn in an adaptive manner, organizations also learn more proactively (Senge 1990).

In which there are six perspectives on learning. The adaptation perspective is one of the oldest perspectives and considers learning as a process of adapting to environmental demands. The incremental innovation perspective understands learning as the diffusion of external knowledge; its success is influenced by the organization's past history. The assumption sharing perspective is mainly cognitively oriented and assumes that learning takes place when individuals share their private beliefs and question organizational frames of references. The organizational knowledge perspective perceives learning as an information processing phenomenon during which organizational knowledge is developed. The learning organization perspective focusses on a specific organizational form that is able to promote successful outcomes of learning. The social constructivist perspective emphasizes informal learning processes that take place during day to day activities within communities of practice.

COMPLEXITY AND FLEXIBILITY

Patching integrates dynamic adjustment and coupling. Patching is the strategic process by which corporate executives routinely re-map businesses to changing market opportunities. It can take the process of joining, adding, splitting, transferring, removing, or joining bits of businesses. Patching is not really critical when markets are not changing, thereby when the market is changing; patching becomes crucial (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999). Patching changes are usually small-scaled and made frequently. Managers at patching organisations pay extreme attention to the business size, which should be little enough for agility and enormous enough for efficient use. It has also been learnt that patching will not work without the right infrastructure: business bits should be modular, the level of business unit metrics should be fine grained and complete, also compensation in the company needs not to fluctuate but should be consistent. Finally, it is known that implementation of patching follows certain principles. Patching must be quickly done. The emphasis is mainly on getting the patch roughly right and fixing problems later (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999).

Hewlett-Packard is not the only corporation that has relied on patching to sustain long-term growth and reinvention. Patching is an important and necessary factor in the success of several traditionally high-performing companies like 3M and Johnson & Johnson. For example, 3M’s managers grew their highly successful micro replication operations by combining, adding and moving businesses around market applications as diverse as computer privacy screens and reflective guardrails. Patching also is part of the repertoire at new-economy stars like Dell Computer, Intuit, and Cisco Systems (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999). And it’s the next step in the reinvention strategy of companies like British Petroleum (BP), AlliedSignal & Lucent Technologies, in which managers have divided their traditional bureaucracies to create a patchwork of unique businesses. BP’s CEO, for example, Sir John Browne, started his turnaround of the enormous petroleum giant by splintering the bureaucracy into ninety businesses. Also, Richard McGinn re-established Lucent’s 4 sprawling businesses into 11 tightly focused ones (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999).Companies that patch well can outperform the most efficient capital markets.

CONCLUSION

Complexity theory has emerged with different ways to deal systematic relations, which includes the nature of systems and the nature of change. Although, time pacing is not the solution for businesses, most organisations especially those in emerging markets that cannot ignore it as a part of the strategy.

Organizational learning is a concept that has become common in both corporate and academic worlds. With time, what is needed first of all is to try to understand the various ideas surrounding learning. This is especially important since every single perspective on learning talks about different yet important aspects of the concept

Patching is not just another name for reorganizing; patchers have a unique and effective mind set. Traditional managers see structure as stable; patching managers believe structure is simply unstable. Traditional managers set corporate strategy first and on the other hand patching managers keep the company on the right set of business opportunities and let strategy emerge from individual/personal businesses. Even if the main point of patching is flexibility, the process itself follows a certain pattern. Patching changes are always small-sized in scale and made frequently. Patching should immediately be done; the emphasis is on getting the patch about right and solving the problems later. Patches requires a test drive before they're formalized but then be tightly scripted after they've been put to work. And patching won't work without the right infrastructure

‘Stakeholder management is a key to the notion of effective Corporate Social Responsibility’. Discuss with the use of examples.’

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the stakeholder approach are important concepts when studying the business role in a society, but their relationship is being studied and much debated for decades (Kakabadse et al, 2005). Relationships between business and society have been examined for decades with outcomes being influenced by the economic paradigm at a specific time (Moir, 2001). There is no fixed definition for Corporate Social Responsibility. But according to Jones (1980), "corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the ability that corporations have an obligation to constituent groups in society other than stockholders and beyond that prescribed by law and union contract". Baker (2003) defined corporate social responsibility (CSR) as the way companies manage the business processes to yield a splendid positive impact in the society.

According to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2003), "Corporate Responsibility involves the ‘fit’ businesses develop with the societies in which they operate. […] The function of business in society is to yield adequate returns to owners of capital by identifying and developing promising investment opportunities and, in the process, to provide jobs and to produce goods and services that consumers want to buy. However, corporate responsibility goes beyond this core function. Businesses are expected to obey the various laws which are applicable to them and often have to respond to societal expectations that are not written down as formal law".

CSR Europe (2003) also stated that; "Corporate Social Responsibility is the way in which a company manages and improves its social and environmental impact to generate value for both its shareholders and its stakeholders by innovating its strategy, organisation and operations".

STAKEHOLDER

Stakeholders can be defined as persons or groups who will decide and influence planning options. Till now, researchers have not agreed on the scope of the stakeholder theory (Harrison and Freeman, 1999). Yet, Hillman et al (2001) states that "although a unified stakeholder theory with general acceptance has yet to emerge among stakeholder researchers, there does appear to be some agreement regarding the general concepts embodied in the stakeholder theory". The other stakeholder theorists stated the two basic principles defining the stakeholder concept as follows: "that to perform well, managers need to pay attention to a wide array of stakeholders, and that managers have obligations to stakeholders which include, but extend beyond, shareholders" (Jones et al., 2002). From a business view, a stakeholder’s theory depends on three premises: "organisations have stakeholder groups that affect and are affected by them; these interactions impact on specific stakeholders and the organisation; and perspectives of salient stakeholders affect the viability of strategic options" (Simmons, 2004).

Stakeholder management is nowadays a common expression in the business world – yet this concept and its practical implications on the way stakeholders’ relationships are and should be managed is still at the center of an unconcluded discussion, that crosses different disciplines, which includes; business ethics, management theory, corporate law and organization theory (Colle, 2005). On a broader level, stakeholders are any identifiable individual or groups who can affect or is affected by organizational performance in terms of its policies, products and work processes which means public protest groups, interests groups, government agencies, local communities, competitors, trade associations, press and unions are organizational stakeholders (Freeman, 1984).

There are two main types of stakeholders namely;

PRIMARY STAKEHOLDERS

Primary stakeholders are the ones in which continued association is absolutely necessary for a firm’s survival; these consists of customers, employees, shareholders and investors, as well as the communities and governments that provide necessary infrastructure (LGAQ, 2001). Some firms take actions that can damage relationships with primary stakeholders. For example, General Motors diluted pensions of salaried employees and cut medical benefits to retired employees who are primary stakeholders. Primary Stakeholders consists of investors, shareholders, customers, employees, government, suppliers and communities in which business infrastructures, laws and regulations, markets would not exist (LGAQ, 2001).

Primary stakeholders include people who (LGAQ, 2001):

Payment of services that are being provided which occurs as a project result (Customers)

Specify project constraints and standards (Regulators)

Sign off on capital works, investment programs or budget allocations (Business Owners)

Contribute financially to the project

Define planning constraints and parameters (design, construction, operational and financial Staff)

SECONDARY STAKEHOLDERS

Secondary stakeholders include the media and a wide range of social interest groups who may affect or influence the work of the business or corporation. Secondary stakeholders do not necessarily engage in transactions with an organization and thus are not necessary for its survival; they are the trade associations, media and also the special-interest groups (LGAQ, 2001).

Secondary stakeholders will include (LGAQ, 2001):

The people that represent the interest groups and minority only indirectly connected to the matter being addressed

Consumers or Service users that are not paying customers or shareholders.

SHAREHOLDERS (STOCKHOLDERS)

Shareholders are the important group of stakeholders driving management and corporate activity (Katherina, 2010). The main way shareholders engage corporations on their social performance have undergone changes both in their prevalence and their characteristics (Katherina, 2010).

STAKEHOLDER POWER MATRIX

A stakeholder analysis allows assessing the relative importance of each potential stakeholder group in order to manage their impact on the strategy process.

Stakeholders attain power from:

Formal authority (manager, director etc.)

Organisational structures and procedures (particularly in bureaucracies)

Control of knowledge and information (knowledge and information are sources of power as they are important to the achievement of competitive advantage)

Winstanley et al (1995)'s stakeholder power matrix can be used to understand where a stakeholder group might hold or have power. It is a matrix with quadrants and continuums for criteria power and operational power. There are four different powers involved which include;

Quadrant A – Arm’s Length Power: This is where a stakeholder has little direct power but some indirect power.

Quadrant B – Comprehensive Power: This is where a stakeholder has a lot of power and influence.

Quadrant C – Operational Power: This is where a stakeholder has a power within certain constraints.

Quadrant D – Disempowered Power: This is where a stakeholder has a little or no power.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate governance indicates the policies and procedures applied by firms to attain certain sets of corporate missions, objectives and visions concerning employees, stockholders, suppliers, customers and different regulatory agencies and the community at large (Wise & Ali, 2009). Corporate governance is gaining importance among entrepreneurs, policy makers, stakeholders, business personnel and related companies. One technique that is being increasingly introduced to measure corporate social responsibility of firms is Triple-Bottom-Line (TBL) accounting (Wise & Ali, 2009). The triple bottom line captures an expanded spectrum of values and criteria for measuring organizational (and societal) success and includes information on environmental, social and sustainability issues (Wise & Ali, 2009).

GREENING AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

An environmental management system (EMS) can be defined as a set of processes and practices that enable an organization to lead to a decrease in its environmental impacts and increase its operating efficiency (Gupta, 1994). Corporate environmentalism includes a range of programmes and practices which may include articulating environmental policy statements, developing environmental strategies, creating environmental staff functions, implementing aggressive pollution-prevention programmes, initiating environment-related performance measures and developing green technologies, processes and products (Gupta, 1994).

Greeno (1989) found that world-class companies are incorporating an environmental, health, and safety perspective into their strategic planning as well as their daily operations-management decisions in order to ensure that their operations are not only in compliance with legal requirements but also are managed in an environmentally sound and responsible manner.

The main objective of Environmental Audit is to design an Environmental Management System in order to facilitate management and control of environmental practices as well as to assess compliance with corporate policies regarding environmental issues (ICC, 1988). A properly designed Environmental Management System ensures that SWOT analysis and Environmental Audit are conducted within a structured management system in order to address all aspects of desired environmental performance, and integrated with overall long-term corporate goals (BSI, 1992).

Kleiner (1991) suggested that a company wanting to be green should address three fundamental questions pertaining to operations:

product planning (i.e. what products should a company bring to market, how should it package them, and what materials should it include in them)

disclosure policy (i.e. how much open disclosure of pollution and health information should companies support, how good are their data gathering systems, and how can these systems be used to solve operations problems)

Pollution-prevention programmes (i.e. how can they engage in pollution prevention programmes, and how companies can reduce waste at the source).

CONCLUSION

Because the concepts of CSR and stakeholder work hand in hand, the two approaches have been looked into, in order to study their principles to a larger study of the relationships between business and society. However, as the study demonstrates that individuals and some leaders have an important role to play in promoting environmental performance of their organisations. If organisations are too expectant towards greater responsibility, people should first reflect positions, value system, behaviour and expectations within organisations and society.

3b. Develop an IT Business Process diagrams - Levels 1, 2, 3 for the ‘Document Control’ task for accompanying ‘Sweetwater’ Case study. Make and state any reasonable assumptions you take.

Sweetwater Document Control Level 1

Sweetwater Document Control Level 2

Sweetwater Document Control Level 3

3a. Compare the BPI methodology to the SAP ERP package.

Function

BPI

SAP

1

Integration to existing legacy IT / Business systems

BPI enables companies to have a high degree of visibility and control over strategic business processes; it operates as a single point of orchestration for human and computing services that exist across disparate technologies, and it leverages the value of previously implemented integration technology. It also provides the means for enterprises to inject agility into their business processes, making them flexible and able to meet new market requirements. Enterprises can at last deliver on the expected business results of integration through BPI (Vitria, 2003).

Maximized value from legacy assets: The amount of effort needed to integrate SAP with legacy systems can be reduced, ensuring maximized value from investment in existing applications.

Low risk: Rely on integration technology that is certified for the SAP® Exchange Infrastructure and proven for business critical mainframe environments (Software AG, 2007).

2

Revolutionary/Evolutionary implementation path

Its implementation path is revolutionary

Its implementation path is evolutionary

3

Market share of international ERP market

In BPI, the need to economize and quickly gain efficiencies resulting out of the mergers instead of focusing on improving the market share as well as customer satisfaction too.

SAP has close to 20% market share in the international ERP market

4

Provision of a ‘total’ turnkey solution,

BPI recognises the usefulness and benefits of removing waste from their business processes as their on-going commitment to improve business processes has delivered a great performance gains which has led to higher levels of efficiency and profitability

A provision of a total turnkey solution has been integrated on SAP on time and under budget

5

Application that serves the total IT / Business needs of the Organisation.

Application of Lean, Six Sigma and BPR together with Kaizen, TQM and systems thinking (Radnor & Bucci, 2008).

There are other applications apart from SAP that serves the needs of an organisation. They include; Customer Relationship Management, Product Lifecycle Management, Supply Chain Management, Supplier Relationship Management.