Samsun Galaxy Tablet's Design, Operations, and Supply Chain Strategies Research Paper

Samsun Galaxy Tablet's Design, Operations, and Supply Chain Strategies - Research Paper Example Moreover, they are the second largest semiconductor chip manufacturer in the world at present. Many people believe that they may surpass the leader Intel in that segment also in near future itself. It is widely believed that Samsung Electronics is best positioned for the new developments in the smartphone market and will continue to expand its leadership in memory, as well as new components like AMOLED and Mobile AP. The company is more favourably positioned than before in most of its product categories: it is quickly becoming the number one player in handsets (from a distant third place behind Nokia and Motorola in 2005), it's already the dominant number one player in TV (from fourth in 2004) and it's a major player in new components like Mobile AP (part of System LSI) and AMOLED (part of Display Panel), which are relatively new businesses. It has several "stars" including smartphones, tablets, AMOLED and System LSI; a few "cash cows" such as DRAM and featurephones; and one real "do g" in LCD displays (Samsung Electronics: The Jewel of the Samsung Empire — Secrets of Success and Future Growth Engines, p.151) Even though Apple Inc is believed to be the most valuable technology company in the world, the death of Steve Jobs has opened many opportunities for Samsung to defeat Apple not only in mobile phone market but also in the tablet market as well. At present Apple Inc and Samsung are believed to be engaged in fierce battle to dominate the smartphone and tablet market. Even though Apple was successful in introducing world’s first touch screen phone (iPhone), Samsung was able to give a strong reply to iPhone with the help of their Galaxy S2 and S3 series of smart phones. Same way, Apple introduced iPad or tablets much earlier than Samsung; however, Samsung tabs are causing strong challenges to iPads even though they came little bit late in the market. Samsung Electronics Co. is so big and profitable that the measure for telling when the company is d oing better than normal is when it goes on a streak of setting record quarterly profits. It happened in 2010 and it’s happening now. Samsung’s second quarter results broke the record set in the first quarter. Some analysts think the third quarter will be even better, but that net income will drop sequentially in the fourth (Samsung 5 Lessons: The 2nd Record Edition) In short, Samsung is one of the most rapidly growing consumer electronics companies in the world at present. Samsung tablets are capturing wide public attention because of its superior performances and cheaper prices compared to the products of its competitors. The future of tablets is bright since it is a blend of mobile phones and laptops. It should be noted that mobile phones are handy; however, its capabilities are limited compared to a laptop. Same way, laptops are convenient for computing purposes; however, they are bulky and heavy weighted. On the other hand, tablets can be used as a computer as well as a smartphone. Moreover, it is handy and light weighted. In short, the future of tablets seems to be extremely bright and hence it is important to learn more about this produc

Epistemology and Skepticism Essay Example for Free

Epistemology and Skepticism Essay * Epistemology and Skepticism: How does The Matrix illustrate the challenge of skepticism about the external world? Explain, discuss, and critically evaluate the hallucination argument for complete epistemological skepticism. Be sure your essay includes a discussion of either Hospers or Crumley IIs criticism of complete epistemological skepticism. Is complete epistemological skepticism a logically coherent theory? Support your answer with a well-reasoned argument free of any major errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction. I. Introduction * The matrix questions the nature of reality. * How can we know for certain that the world is how we perceive it and not just a veil over our eyes? * Explain movie- trapped in virtual world believing they are in 21st century * Explanation proposes question, what is real? II. Main Points. * Main Character Morpheus: â€Å"What is ‘real’? How do you define ‘real’? If real is simply what you can feel, smell, taste and see, then ‘real’ is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain. † * Consequently, â€Å"How can we be sure our brain isn’t being tricked by some simulation to believe things are real, when they aren’t? This is how matrix proposes the challenge of epistemological skepticism. * Hallucination argument: Modus Tollens, question soundness (valid) 1. If we posses knowledge (K) we must be able to rule out the possibility of systematic hallucination (S). K S 2. ~S (the matrix hypothesis. ) (MT 1) 3. ~ K ( MT 1 2) * One arguer against skepticism: John Hospers * Merely verbal * Skeptics take strong sense of the word knowledge, must have proof at all times * Others use weak sense, meaning we only need proof or evidence only when someone is proving otherwise. * Doubt is an empty word. * Basic point: once a test has been done to remove doubt we have a good reason to believe it is true, thus we have knowledge. III. Conclusion * Skeptics believe knowledge is unobtainable, in this case the hallucination argument proves the premises are true through Modus Tollens. Although the argument is sound, it is self-defeating because skeptics believe they know that they don’t really â€Å"know† anything. Moreover, complete epistemological skepticism is not a logically coherent view because the argument being claimed would require the person to have knowledge to conduct such argument.

Governance And Leadership Of Project Management Commerce Essay

Governance And Leadership Of Project Management Commerce Essay The purpose of this document is to describe and evaluate the governance structure and leadership approaches currently adopted by the LEGO Group; suggest new or additional governance structures and leadership approaches that could improve the companys performance; and a reflection on the propositions made in the latter half of this document. Table of Contents Background  [1]   The LEGO Group is a family owned toy manufacturing company founded by a Danish carpenter-turned-toymaker Ole Kirk Kristiansen during the great depression in 1932. The company manufactured wooden toys because of the declining demand for building houses and furniture. In 1934 Ole combined the Danish words leg godt meaning play well to form LEGO. Ole founded LEGO with the motto Only the best is good enough (he produced toys using high quality materials and workmanship) which is still used by the LEGO Group as a guiding principle. In 1947, after World War II, LEGO acquired a plastic mould injection machine, which allowed LEGO to expand its business operations to produce a relatively large volume of plastic and wooden toys, resulting in the production of the first LEGO bricks. In 1954, Godtfred Kirk Kristiansen (one of Oles sons), found an opportunity to create toy products that were able to connect with products in the toy manufacturing industry, resulting in the birth of LEGO play-sets. In 1958, LEGO patented the improved LEGO brick design, also the year when Godtfred took over the company due to the death of his father. Between the 1960s and 2000s LEGO continuously grew into one of the worlds top largest toy manufactures, by expanding; with international sales, new innovative play-sets, sports and media licence acquisitions (i.e. franchise films, basketball, hockey, soccer), LEGO magazine subscriptions, erecting a LEGOLAND theme-park, launching a LEGO website, and LEGO videogames. However, in the early 2000s, the company experienced a decline in sales and profit: in 2003 revenues dropped 30% and continued another 10% in 2004. To overcome this crisis LEGO underwent a governance change to resolve the problems in the pre-existing management. In 2004, Jà ¸rgen Vig Knudstrop (the director of strategic development) replaced the CEO at the time, and in his first action as CEO he arranged a team to analyse the companys supply chain operations, from product development to production and distribution. The team discovered that although the newer products represented a large portion of annual revenues, newer generation play-sets were more elaborately designed and generated less profit; product designers were creating products without total consideration for material and production costs; designers used their own vendors resulting in LEGO having to deal with over 11,000 suppliers; inefficiencies in the organisation of the plastic mould injection machines, since each machine was capable of producing every type of LEGO brick retooling was required, causing downtimes resulting production facilities operating at 70% capacity. To bring the company back on track the team: reduced their product line where necessary as well as reduce the selection of colours for designs by half; used production costs of each brick to reduce expensive products, in-turn reducing the amount of suppliers needed by 80%; designers were shown the impact of using existing bricks over creating new ones for future designs; certain plastic mould injection machines were assigned specific LEGO bricks on scheduled cycles to reduce downtimes and retooling costs. These changes to product development, production and distribution implemented by Knudstrops leadership resulted in the LEGO Group earning a profit of $72 million in 2005, with profits increasing by 240% in 2006. Introduction  [2]   The LEGO Group is a privately held company based in Denmark. The company is currently owned by the 3rd and 4th generations of the Kirk Kristiansen founding family: Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen (Oles grandson) and his three children. Ownership of the company is handled through KIRKBI (an investment company) and the LEGO Foundation: KIRKBI owns 75% while the remaining 25% is held by the LEGO Foundation. As of 2012, the LEGO Group manufactures toys in more than 130 countries, has approximately 10,000 employees and is the third largest manufacturer of toys in the world (in terms of sales) after Mattel and Hasbro. Governance  [3]   The LEGO Groups approach to governance is focused on combining the strengths and benefits of private ownership with the applicable elements from good corporate governance for listed companies (Jensen, 2012). The certain requirements from listed companies (from the Danish Stock Exchange) are not all compatible for a family-owned company (Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen is majority shareholder) while recommendations of corporate governance structure and board composition still apply. The LEGO Group maintains the importance of having a strong and competent board of directors, especially because of family-ownership. To support this, the company elects a chairman among independent board members to ensure professional board management. This process is regulated via: ensuring a diverse and complementary board composition; regular board self-assessments; competitive compensation; and clear specific rules mandated for each management body. Being a family owned company, the LEGO Group is exposed to risk through the handover of ownership across generations. The mediation strategy is to highly involve the next generation in company matters pertaining to ownership. Organisational Structure The LEGO Group uses a hierarchical top-down structure with five separate departments (see Appendix A, pp. 8), this structure centralises the companys management to a functional management structure which rests the authority with corporate management the corporate management consists of the CEO, the CFO and four Executive Vice Presidents (The LEGO Group, 2010, pp. 7). The centralised functional management structure ensures consistency in organisations, as a limited number of persons are in charge causing jobs to be simplified allowing employees to be highly specialised in their work since specialisation leads to operational efficiencies where employees become specialists within their own realm of expertise (BusinessMate, 2010). This form of governance however, can result in slow decision-making processes as decisions must pass through bureaucracy in order to get through to corporate management (Riley, 2012). A disadvantage of functional management structures is that it facilitates rigid communication between employees and corporate management: employees can feel unheard and excluded from decisions that directly affect them. This lack of involvement can be detrimental to the job satisfaction, motivation and productivity of the employees (Jones and George, 2006, pp. 53-54). Leadership The current CEO (Knudstorp) emphasises a decentralised and innovative-oriented approach in contrast to the existing structure. To implement this combined strategy Knudstorp uses a managing at eye level approach, which he defined as being able to talk to people on the factory floor, to the engineers, to marketers being at home with everyone (OConnell, 2009). Knudstorp achieves this through a relaxation of the top-down management style, allowing responsibility and decision making to be pushed as far down the hierarchy as possible (OConnell, 2009), much like McGregors (1960) Theory Y where collaboration within the company relies on leaders recognising the potential of their resources and how to realise that potential. Through the realisation of the Knudstorps leadership style the LEGO Group moved away from a hierarchical organisational structure to a flatter one with: cross-functional teamwork, employee involvement, more open communication lines and styles. With open communication whe re all the members of the company are in contact with each other in some way or another the company is able to have a stronger sense of community. The LEGO Group communicates its attitude to the responsibility of its employees through communication, health safety, people and culture policies and promises. Link between Project and Corporate Strategy  [4]   The LEGO Group uses an innovation matrix a tool developed within the company to help identify, allocate resources and coordinate different innovation activities (projects) for developing new products. The strategic coordination of innovation activities is led by a cross-cultural team: the Executive Innovation Governance Group (EIGG), they determine LEGOs innovation goals and strategy; define the new product portfolio; coordinate innovation activities ensuring they are mutually reinforcing; delegate authority; allocate resources; and evaluate results to ensure that all innovation activities support the corporate strategy. Using the innovation matrix allows LEGOs management to understand what; resources to allocate, risks to monitor; and selecting who is responsible for reviewing the innovation activities. The company divides its innovation activities into eight distinct types, and distributes the responsibility for them across four different areas of the company: functional groups; concept lab; product and marketing development; community, education, and direct. Overseen by the EIGG, the four areas work to achieve innovation activities (projects) that mutually reinforce each other while providing different degrees of innovativeness back to the company. Relationship with Stakeholders/Shareholders The LEGO Group emphasises a strong focus on ensuring the balance of the value created for the owners in comparison to the value creation for the remaining stakeholders such as: consumers, employees, customers and other partners. The company believes that creating value for the companys stakeholders will result in long term value creation for the owners. It is important for us to engage in respectful stakeholder dialogue by being transparent and ensuring an open and honest dialogue. It is fundamental to us that the relationship between our company and our host communities are based on trust, mutual respect, and a cooperative spirit. (Jensen, 2012). Shareholder Relationship The CEO is the head of the company, but it is a family-owned company controlled by Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen, the majority shareholder of KIRKBI: the investment company with 75% control of the LEGO Group (The LEGO Group, 2012). Due to this power structure, the central management does not have full control, meaning that final decision do not rest solely on the CEO, but with influence from the family shareholder. Internal Stakeholders Due to the organisational structure, employees have to report back to their respective managers. However, under Knudstorps leadership the looser control system provides employees more influence a factor which can work as a motivator. The employees in the LEGO Group are the building blocks of our success today. We strive to improve the well-being and job satisfaction of our employees. (Jensen, 2012). External Stakeholders In 2005, Knudstorp identified the significance of customer involvement in the product development process. Knudstorp found that the adult enthusiasts could articulate the product strengths and weaknesses that young children may sense but cant express (OConnell, 2009). The LEGO Group actively engages customers to participate in the design and creation of new products and ideas. Although they lose come control over its system, the company gains knowledge from its most valued consumers. Suggested Governance and Leadership In 2009, Knudstorp stated that the company was pursuing organic growth, and needed to change leadership style again to continue building sales volume. Knudstorp asserted that the change is necessary as the company had become risk averse while focusing on survival, and that they needed to become opportunity driven, which requires taking greater risks (OConnell, 2009). In 2011, Hasbro, one of the companys major competitors planned to launch a new product called the Kre-O, which was designed to be compatible with LEGO bricks (Anderson, 2011). This poses a significant threat to the company due to the size and brad power of Hasbro. To mitigate threats such as competition from new/existing sources, it is important for the LEGO Group to change its governance structure to help the company formulate a corporate strategy that allows the company to maintain market dominance and financial stability/success in the future. Governance Currently the LEGO Group has combined the behaviour and outcome oriented approach in the overall governance of the company: behaviour oriented organisations are indifferent to whether projects are managed in-house or externally so long as the process conforms with the companys policies; outcome oriented organisations manage projects internally through employees with a wider skillset (Mà ¼ller, 2009). The LEGO Group works with both internal and external designers as well as customers in product development (behaviour orientation) while having a board member or the EIGG overseeing the project management, and ensuring it fits in with the corporate strategy (outcome orientation). According to Mà ¼ller (2009) there are four governance paradigms, the: flexible economist, versatile artist, conformist and agile pragmatist. The LEGO Group currently falls under the versatile artist paradigm where the company prioritises the diverse user needs using project management methods to realise the requirements of a variety of stakeholders, as well as promoting high productivity. However, the company needs to migrate to a more behaviour oriented agile pragmatist paradigm, which also accounts for the needs of the diverse stakeholders, but allows for products to develop from core functionality; to include additional features; to enhance the flexibility and user-friendliness, especially when dealing with the gaming and computer entertainment products which include successful franchises such as LEGO Star Warsà ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢, LEGO Batmanà ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢ and LEGO Harry Potterà ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢ (The LEGO Group, 2012). Leadership Although the current leadership style within the company is flatter with more open communication lines, the leadership is still quite bureaucratic, albeit the authority for decision making has been pushed down the hierarchy as much as possible, the structure remains top-down. The LEGO Group needs to be more flexible in their leadership approach, which according to Frame (2003) and Mà ¼ller (2009) bureaucratic leadership is the least flexible leadership style of the four: laissez-faire, democratic, autocratic and bureaucratic. The company may experience better performance if a democratic approach was adopted, as it allows for additional flexibility and builds on the existing flatter communication style. Reflection

Love and Licorice :: essays research papers

In order for a relationship between a man and a woman to flourish and grow, both people should be reasonably mature and honest with one another. Their goals in life should be similar. Otherwise, it is difficult to maintain a substantial base in the partnership, and inevitably, it will wither and die. Hemingway ¡Ã‚ ¯s "Hills Like White Elephants" is a very short story covering less than forty minutes in the lives of the two main characters. It doesn ¡Ã‚ ¯t take long, however, to discover that the relationship between them is not particularly deep or meaningful. Jig and her lover lead a nomadic life, spending nights here and there, as the labels on their luggage indicate. All they really do, she laments, is "look at things and try new drinks." They bicker childishly; when he warns her to "cut it out," she retorts, "you started it." In an attempt to make clever conversation, she observes aloud that the line of hills off in the distance "look[s] like white elephants." Instead of trying to make her feel "bright," Jig ¡Ã‚ ¯s companion tells her flatly, he ¡Ã‚ ¯s "never seen one." Annoyed by his lack of imagination, she attacks with "no, you wouldn ¡Ã‚ ¯t have." It seems that they must really "try" hard to "have a fine time." This is not a mature relationship. Nor is it honest. Rather than admit the fact that he doesn ¡Ã‚ ¯t want the responsibility of a baby, Jig ¡Ã‚ ¯s lover tries to flatter her by saying, "I don ¡Ã‚ ¯t want anybody but you." He also avoids taking any blame for their faltering relationship. After all, being pregnant is "the only thing" that has made them unhappy. He makes light of the abortion by telling her, "It ¡Ã‚ ¯s not really an operation" and that it ¡Ã‚ ¯s "perfectly simple," even "natural." Of course, she "doesn ¡Ã‚ ¯t" have to if she "doesn ¡Ã‚ ¯t want to," but he knows that it ¡Ã‚ ¯s "the best thing to do." Best for whom, I wonder. Jig really thinks she ¡Ã‚ ¯s ready to settle down and have a child, or she wouldn ¡Ã‚ ¯t be struggling so hard with the question of abortion. She too has trouble approaching the problem honestly. When she announces "I ¡Ã‚ ¯ll do it because I don ¡Ã‚ ¯t care about me," she ¡Ã‚ ¯s hoping that he ¡Ã‚ ¯ll feel guilty and change his mind. When he continues to resist, she tries to cut the conversation off: "I ¡Ã‚ ¯ll scream," she threatens. Jig is beginning to realize that life may not turn out the way she had planned.

Principles Of Personal Development Essay

1.1 Explain what reflective practice is It means focusing on how we interact with others. Thinking about how we could have done things differently, in a better way. This allows us to improve the action we take. 1.2 Explain the importance of reflective practice in continuously improving the quality of service provided see more:explain how standards inform reflective practice in adult social care It helps us to recognise what we do well so we can use these skills in other situations. It also helps to learn from our mistakes and to plan for future situation where we can respond better to changes. 1.3 Explain how standards inform reflective practice in adult social care By being fully aware of the standards we know exactly what to do in certain situations which also gives an opportunity to be always updated. Following the standards ensures to carry out work in the most professional way. 1.4 Describe how own values, belief systems and experiences may affect working practice My own values and belief may have a great impact on my work. It is always good to be open minded and most importantly respect other peoples opinion. Just because we have our own values, does not mean it is the right one. Always listen to the service user. If you think differently, you can always explain it in a polite way. 2.1 Explain how people may react and respond to receiving constructive feedback It can be upsetting when areas which need improvement are identified. If you get the feedback in a positive manner then you are more likely to accept it  and work harder to improve them. 2.2 Explain the importance of seeking feedback to improve practice and inform development Seeking feedback gives you an idea on what to improve. If you accept it then you can be motivated and more focused on it. It helps you to identify your strengths and weaknesses which could be really difficult. It encourages you to perform better. 2.3 Explain the importance of using feedback in improving own practice It helps you to identify the training needs you might require and to correct mistakes. After you have done everything to improve on the areas where improvement was required, you will feel confident in your work environment. 3.1 Describe the components of a personal development plan Personal development plan is a tool to set a plan which helps creating self awareness and it will lead to achieve your goals. Components: Objectives – what do I want to be able to do better? Actions – what methods will I use to achieve the objectives? Success criteria – how will I measure my improvement? Achievement date – when do I expect to achieve my objectives? Implementation – how will I practise and apply what I have learned? 3.2 Identify sources of support for planning and reviewing own development We have got an appraisal/supervision system at our workplace but other sources can be: Team meetings and discussions Working alongside with colleagues and other professionals Trainings Asking question from colleagues and other professionals 3.3 Explain the role of others in the development of a personal development plan in identifying:a) Strengths b) Areas for development The supervisors role is to support and advise you in your work and to make sure that you know and understand your rights and responsibilities. A personal development plan identifies your training and development needs. Because the plan is updated when you have taken part in training and development, it also provides a record of participation. There is no single right way to prepare a personal development plan. There are plenty of different models and styles. What matters is what is in the plan It should include: different development areas the goals or targets you have set a timescale for achieving these goals or targets 3.4 Explain the benefits of using a personal development plan to identify ongoing improvements in knowledge and understanding The personal development plan gives you an overview of what you have accomplished but also allows you to identify areas that still need improvement. Because things are always changing with Health and Social Care your training and development needs have to be continuous so your skills and abilities are always up to date.

MGTU1DB

1. Definitely not appropriate, 2. Probably not appropriate, 3. Undecided, 4. Probably appropriate, and 5. Definitely appropriate __5___ Careful study of trade journals – There is no law that prohibits the access to trade journals. Anyone with a subscription can freely peruse through journal contents. Furthermore, trade journals are reputable sources that collect data through legitimate means. __1___ Wiretapping the telephones of competitors Aside from this being against the law in most countries, it also infringes against the universal right of individuals and other entities to privacy. __4__ Posing as a potential customer to competitors Although there is nothing preventing an entity from doing this, the effort that the competition needs to exert to entertain the â€Å"fake† customer is an unethical burden to impose. This is unless the â€Å"spying† entity intends to avail of the competitor’s goods/services anyway for comparison in which case I see absolutely nothing wrong with it. __4__ Getting loyal customers to put out a phone `request for proposal` soliciting competitors` bids Since these are loyal customers, then the ‘requests for proposal’ are obviously superficial. However, it rests on the shoulders of the competitors to weed out these superficial requests and not give in to them. __5__ Buying competitors` products and taking them apart It’s called reverse engineering. If you pay for something, then you have the right to learn as much as you can from it. Of course, this is strictly on an information gathering perspective. Copying the work and selling it is subject to a whole other set of rules. __2__ Hiring management consultants who have worked for competitors I see nothing wrong with the company making this move. However, the consultants are of course subject to limitations bound by their contracts to competitors that they had worked for previously. These conditions usually include confidentiality in which case it would be futile for the company to try to get info from another company by extracting it from consultancy firms that their competitors have previously used. __4__ Rewarding competitors` employees for useful `tips` So long as the ‘tips’ are legally acquired, there’s nothing wrong with it. __3__ Questioning competitors` customers and/or suppliers There’s nothing wrong with conducting information drives to customers. Customers usually have small grievances on a competitor which could prove useful for the company. Suppliers are another matter. Suppliers especially ones that have exclusive customers by region usually do not divulge information regarding their clients. __5__ Buying and analyzing competitors` garbage It’s the same as buying the competitor’s products. __1__ Advertising and interviewing for nonexistent jobs This blatantly fools not only the competitor but also the general public. It constitutes a violation __5__ Taking public tours of competitors` facilities Since it is a public tour, then it’s perfectly alright for the company to tour competitor facilities as guided by the rules in those facilities. Violating the rules (such as taking pictures when not allowed to do so) is another matter. __2__ Releasing false information about the company in order to confuse competitors. Although the company aims to confuse competition, what it’s actually doing is also confusing the public which is generally an unacceptable business practice. There are some exceptions such as when the company bait’s competition with information that does not affect any other public or private entity aside from the competitors. These exceptions could mean something like deliberately leaving fake files in front of a competitor. __2__ Questioning competitors` technical people at trade shows and conferences Like the consultancy firms, these individuals are probably under strict contract not to divulge any pertinent information. There is no problem in questioning them, but what they reveal might even be false information that could damage the company rather than help them with the competition. __5__ Hiring key people away from competitors This is piracy. As long as the company can make offers that its competitor’s employees can’t refuse, it’s a free country. __3___ Analyzing competitors` labor union contracts It completely depends on the nature of the contracts. If it is a matter of public document, then there’s nothing wrong with procuring and analyzing it. If not, then the competitor’s privacy should be respected __1___ Having employees date persons who work for competitors If this is obligatory which is what is implied by the statement, then it violates the private life of the company’s employees. It is also most likely beyond their employees’ job descriptions. If it is voluntary, then it seems to be a matter of personal morals, although I’d still say that it is cruel. __3__ Studying aerial photographs of competitors` facilities This strictly depends on whether or not the law allows the act. I see no moral contentions outside those of mere adherence to government mandate. Reference: Gordon, H. (2003). Business Ethics. Pinedale Press: New Jersey