Posted on

Examine three (3) of Karl Marx’s contributions to economic theory and determine how they still impact contemporary economics Answer

Examine three (3) of Karl Marx’s contributions to economic theory and determine how they still impact contemporary economics.

Karl Marx’s contributions to economic theory

1) An ideal economic system would involve exchanges of equal value for equal value, where value is determined simply by the amount of work put into whatever is being produced. Capitalism interrupts this ideal by introducing a profit motive — a desire to produce an uneven exchange of lesser value for greater value.

2) A laborer might produce enough value to feed his family in two hours of work, but he keeps at the job for a full day, in Marx’s time, that might be 12 or 14 hours. Those extra hours represent the surplus value produced by the worker. The owner of the factory did nothing to earn this, but exploits it nevertheless and keeps the difference as profit.

3) In this context, Communism thus has two goals: First it is supposed to explain these realities to people unaware of them; second it is supposed to call people in the labor classes to prepare for the confrontation and revolution.

Karl Marx contributed to economic theory the centralization of capital and concentration of wealth. He stated the falling rate of profit is but one of the insoluble problems of capitalism (Brue & Grant, 2007) . Second the tendency for increasingly sever business crises. (Page 182) He also contributed his theory of “The Law of Motion of Capitalism” and the labor theory of value. He argues that labor is the source of all value and is the starting point to his theory. Marx’s approach to the tendency of the rate of profit to fall was unique. It is rooted in his distinction between constant capital, which merely conserves its existing value—hence the term constant capital—and variable capital, which not only reproduces its existing value but produces surplus value, the sole source of profits and rents including interest and all the secondary incomes that derive from them. There are various forces that counteract the fall in the rate of profit. The rise in the productivity of labor tends to lead to a rise in the rate of surplus value that counteracts the fall in the rate of profit. Second, as the productivity of labor rises, the elements—the commodities—that make up the constant capital, also fall in value.

References:

Deepankar Basu, Panayiotis T. Manolako (2007). Is There a Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall? Econometric Evidence for the U.S. Economy. University of Massachusetts – Economics Department Working Paper Series Economics.

Karl Marx appeared to have very similar ideas as it relates to the rate of falling profit. He appeared to agree with not only Ricardo but also Adam Smith and Mill to some extent. Karl Marx believed that the potential destruction of capitalism would be due to a falling rate of profit. Ricardo, Smith, and Mill also predicted that a rate of profit would also fall but over an extended period of time. Marx recognized that under capitalism wages were determined by labor markets, Marx concluded that wages would at first increase and reduce profits, but that capitalists would then eventually use laborsaving technology to to put human workers in competition with machines, thereby driving back down the price of labor.

Posted on

bell rings, signaling a new day in Mrs. Brooks’ 2nd grade classroom. As the students quietly enter the room Answer

In the following scenario, determine which level of behavior management is addressed and describe the factors involved that led you to these conclusions:    Scenario Two – DQ2 The bell rings, signaling a new day in Mrs. Brooks’ 2nd grade classroom. As the students quietly enter the room, they go directly to their lockers, put away all of their personal items, and take out their daily folders, which they place in a special daily folder basket next to the doorway. Students then choose a book for independent, silent reading at their desks until the morning announcements begin. Mrs. Brooks moves around the room handing out tickets (which may later be traded in for prizes) to students who are on task. After the announcements, Mrs. Brooks calls the class to the rug in an open area of the room for the morning meeting. Josh is chosen from a set of cards as the Student of the Day. Michael is upset that Josh is chosen over him, and complains that it is unfair. Mrs. Brooks moves into close proximity to Michael and reminds him that everyone will get an opportunity to be the Student of the Day and that his turn will be coming soon. As Michael continues to complain, Mrs. Brooks calmly gives him a warning, which is the next step in her classroom behavior management plan, then proceeds with the routine. Michael continues to interrupt the class and is instructed to turn his card from green to yellow, meaning that he will miss 10 minutes of recess later in the day. For the rest of the morning meeting, Michael behaves appropriately  

 

 

 

 

This scenario is seated firmly in the first level, inclusive proactive management activities. Several factors are present which led to this belief. Routines are firmly established and have specific steps, the teacher is calm and all seems well organized. A system of positive behavior recognition is in place. The teacher is alert, uses proximity control with a positive reminder and then, after that is unsuccessful, utilizes an established tangible behavior management plan to which the rules and expectations have been explained.

 

Posted on

How do you manage requirements and prevent “scope creep”Answer

Project foundations (operational requirements, system requirements, design constraints, and software requirements) determine the scope of work to be accomplished in a project. I have seen situations where the project was constrained by scope and schedule. How do you manage requirements and prevent “scope creep?”

Scope creep is every project team’s nightmare. Scope creep happens when a project team is no longer capably of controlling the growth or changes defined in the scope. This is why is very important to define and have all the stakeholders understand and agree to the scope of the project, including what’s out of scope. We all do understand that there may be requirement and requested changes that may occur during the life cycle of the project. But the project team should have a well defined change control policy in place to help address such situations. Request changes should be well documented in a change control log which should then be reviewed and addressed by the change control team. Final decisions should be made on not just if the changes fall within scope but also the impact of the requirement and or requested change on the overall timeline and cost.

scope creep is the worst thing that can happen in a project. Although all things are inevitable, situations occur that are out of our control, we must know that there are risk involved, no matter how hard we try to keep the project within its deadlines. When you working within a project scope you have a set schedule that is provided within a budget. Everything you do within a project is accounted for based on you WBS (work breakdown structure). If something is added by the client, this will cost the project money. If the supplier/vendor/manufacturer is not on time with a shipment and the project has a deadline, this will create additional cost for the project. Once the scope, schedule and budget have been impacted you have a major problem.

Project Scope creep has many different names such as focus creep, feature creep, function creep, and requirement creep. Project scope creep in project management refers to uncontrolled changes or added objectives in a project’s scope. This phenomenon can occur when the scope of a project is not properly documented, defined, or controlled. It is generally considered a negative occurrence, and thus, should be avoided.

I do agree that Scope Creep can be a nightmare. If requirements change, I would evaluate the project and look at deadlines, deliverables, costs, etc. Most important is to evaluate how the change in requirements will affect the critical path aka the key indicator to determine if the project will be on schedule or will be late. If Scope Creep causes the critical path to change so the project will be late, I would call a meeting to look at options: Increase resources, cut back on features, adjust schedule for resource optimization, etc. Key is good communication and coordination. If stakeholders and sponsors understand and accept the consequences of their new requirements, then the project can be adjusted accordingly.

Scope creep is unavoidable, but it can be mitigated. By fully understanding the project vision and priorities of the stake holders then scope creep can be relegated. Having clear deliverables and milestones goes a long way in preventing scope creep.

Sometimes scope creep sneaks up on us and sometimes we simply don’t focus enough! Either way it is the same ending….   over schedule, over budget and quality may be greatly impacted! how often do you update the team on milestones and tasks? Do you hold regular meetings? What seems to be the best time for your team to meet?

Milestones and task updates should happen at every scheduled meeting. It should be included in the agenda with the expected completion date and a status. Meeting times should be defined and agreed on by the project team as part of the communication plan. Project team should decide on a date and time that works for the majority of the team members as a start. But the project team may have to change the times down the road so it works for the stakeholders that may be involved at that stage of the project.

Based on a study, one of the best times is Tuesday 3pm.

When Is the Best Time to Conduct Meetings and Important Business?

In most of the training sessions I attended, they recommend mid-morning meetings work best. At my current job, meeting occur anytime. In my experience, any meeting at the end of the day is worst and most likely to be cancelled or skipped.

Scope Creep is a possibility anytime you have people involved. So that is pretty much always. It is very likely that a project is planned out and ready to start work and the requirements change or like Villa stated the vendors are late or don’t have the part. Scope creep only becomes a problem when the customer is sitting around waiting for a deadline that has been blown out of the water. An article I read on projectmanager.com sums up five steps to help eliminate scope creep.

  1. The requirements must be documented. Especially if the requirements have changed. These notes are important to note that way everyone is on the same page.
  2. A change Control must be set up. This way changes are not just flying by the seat of the pants.
  3. Create a clear project schedule. This eliminates surprises.
  4. Verify the scope with stakeholders
  5. Talk with the project team

http://www.projectmanager.com/5-ways-to-avoid-scope-creep.php

How does scope creep happen? Are we not managing to requirements? or are we managing to the customer?

Poor planning will eventually lead to a potential scope creep. Lack of knowledge of what you want and what it will take to get the job done and the absence of a well defined change control are the major causes of scope creep. There is no doubt that managing scope creep can be challenging but allowing it to spin out of control can be disastrous to the project as well. Every opportunity should be explored to help minimize if not eliminate uncontrollable situations. I also think managing the requirements is as important as managing the customer. Expectations should be set at the start of the project with all the stakeholders. poor planning has the biggest impact of scope creep.   Knowing so much information from the beginning what the customer wants somehow can prevent some of the scope creep. But life is not perfect and customers wont really know what they really want until project start start to become reality. On the other hand, I think we are managing to the customer more that we should which I really do understand. Now a days, cash is hard to find so anything to save a project we will do. Sponsors do not grant extra funds that easily in scope creep cases so Brenda has a good point with proposing her disagreement.

To be brief the scope creep is a result of poor scope management. Any insufficient effort on the following listed processes will enhance the risk of scope creep while managing projects. But scope creep could be considered as one of the project risks and a contingency plan to be developed for any given risk of scope creep .The required budget could be set aside in project contingency if a scope creeps happens.

1) Not having a sufficient/practical scope management plan.

2) Unclear scope management process

3) Insufficient collect requirements process from stakeholders

4) unclear and not well completed WBS and work breakdown dictionary (the work breakdown structure can best be thought as an effective aid for stakeholders communication)

I addition, the process of verifying scope (the process of a progressive scope verification in compliance with the stakeholders requirements) and control scope is in most when preventing scope creep.

Scope creep usually is a combination of both, but when the customer becomes uncontrollable with changes scope creep becomes a huge factor. Without putting in boundries such as change control mechanisms the customer can change the requirements and scope of the project day to day so to speak. So managing to the customer is can get you in trouble once the requirements have been defined and agreed upon.

Scope creep can happen a number of ways. Below are some situations that can cause scope creep:

Poor Requirements Analysis: Customers don’t always know what they want

Not Involving the Users Early Enough: Thinking you know what the users want or need

Underestimating the Complexity of the Project: Nobody knows what to expect, there are no lessons learned and no one to ask.

Lack of Change Control: it is important to design a process to manage these changes

Gold Plating: This term is given to the practice of exceeding the scope of a project in the belief that value is being added

How can monitoring the project help to minimize this?

Controlling the scope of your project begins before the first line of code is written. Every development effort should have a corresponding project plan or project agreement, regardless of the situation. Even if you’re just one developer trying to make the boss happy, you’ll benefit greatly from documenting your efforts before you begin them. Use the following guidelines to set yourself up to successfully control the scope of your project:

1.Be sure you thoroughly understand the project vision. Meet with the project drivers and deliver an overview of the project as a whole for their review and comments.

2.Understand your priorities and the priorities of the project drivers. Make an ordered list for your review throughout the project duration. Items should include budget, deadline, feature delivery, customer satisfaction, and employee satisfaction. You’ll use this list to justify your scheduling decisions once the project has commenced.

3.Define your deliverables and have them approved by the project drivers. Deliverables should be general descriptions of functionality to be completed during the project.

4.Break the approved deliverables into actual work requirements. The requirements should be as detailed as necessary and can be completed using a simple spreadsheet. The larger your project, the more detail you should include. If your project spans more than a month or two, don’t forget to include time for software upgrades during development and always include time for ample documentation.

5.Break the project down into major and minor milestones and complete a generous project schedule to be approved by the project drivers. Minor milestones should not span more than a month. Whatever your method for determining task duration, leave room for error. When working with an unknown staff, I generally schedule 140 to 160 percent of the duration as expected to be delivered. If your schedule is tight, reevaluate your deliverables. Coming in under budget and ahead of schedule leaves room for additional enhancements.

6.Once a schedule has been created, assign resources and determine your critical path using a PERT Chart or Work Breakdown Structure. Microsoft Project will create this for you. Your critical path will change over the course of your project, so it’s important to evaluate it before development begins. Follow this map to determine which deliverables must be completed on time. In very large projects, I try not to define my phase specifics too early, but even a general plan will give you the backbone you need for successful delivery.

7.Expect that there will be scope creep. Implement Change Order forms early and educate the project drivers on your processes. A Change Order form will allow you to perform a cost-benefit analysis before scheduling (yes, I said scheduling) changes requested by the project drivers.

http://www.techrepublic.com/article/seven-steps-for-avoiding-scope-creep/

Posted on

Which of the four lead time elements discussed on page 279 might cause the most difficulty Answer

Which of the four lead time elements discussed on page 279 might cause the most difficulty? Why? Why might other lead time elements be less important?

Queue time frequently accounts for 80 percent or more of total lead time; it’s the element most capable of being managed. Reducing queue time means shorter lead time and, therefore, reduced work-in-process inventory. This reduction requires better scheduling. Queue time can be compressed with good PAC design and practice.

Reference: Textbook

Out of the four elements queue would cause the most difficult of all. Since queue time is the period of time during which the product awaits transfer to a workstation, undergoes further inspection and subsequent manufacturing processes. It is the single largest element in the overall lead time and its elimination is critical for successful drive toward manufacturing process. The reason why other lead time elements be less important than queue time is because queue is the amount of time a lot must wait at a work center before the operation is set up and production begins.

What does the textbook say about queue time that may not make it the most difficult to manage? And since it may not be the most difficult, which of the remaining three elements is the most difficult to manage? And why?

I think run time would be the hardest to manage, because how ever long it takes to run the lot size is how long it takes(5 seconds per lot or 5 hours per lot), the run time is pretty much set . Managers can not make the machines go faster . Run time is typically the most difficult to manage because you have a plethora of factors that impact how effective the “run” or the “process” is. Some of these include employee skill sets, employee experience, machine/equipment slippage, process slippage, documented procedures vs. tacit knowledge, time of day, time of week, status of customer satisfaction, etc.

I think that all four elements have their own individual challenges and obstacles that will need to be overcome. The Run time does seem to me to be the most difficult to alter or speed up. You can only run a machine as fast as it is designed to handle. There is always the option of upgrading equipment when available to get faster results from them. The likely hood of being able to purchase upgraded equipment is not good so therefore keeping your equipment well maintained and running at optimal speed is the best that can be expected to keep things running smoothly.

With most of the process parameters being fixed, the run time is the most difficult to manage. This is followed by the setup time. These are pretty much technology/process dependent and there is a little room for change/improvement. Mostly, the change would come with the upgrade in the equipment or chane in the process which is a costly affair. Probably the move time and queue time is easy to manange as there is a lot of room for process improvement here and Textbook also mentions that Queue time frequently accounts for 80 percent or more of total lead time; it’s the element most capable of being managed.

 

If queue time and move time are easy to manage, what does it do to the overall lead time?

Move and queue time can be compressed with good PAC design and practice. Reducing queue time means shorter lead time and, therefore, reduced work-in-process inventory. Queue time represents slack that permits the choice of alternative schedules. This slack can be removed by good SFC practice. With the ability to manage queue time and move time it will allow you to tighten these areas if you need to make up time to meet deadlines. So having areas that can be altered easily or contained will allow you to make up in areas that are not so easily maintained.

However, move time would be the next easiest. Queue time and Move time are the two elements most capable of being compressed. Does this make sense?

Of the four elements of lead time, which element might cause the most difficulty, and why? Also, why might other lead time elements be less important?

 

What would cause the delays with move time? Also, isn’t the actual delay considered queue time?

I think there is a fine line between queue time and move time because they seem to be ralated to each other in a way. If there is less queue, move time will be minimal. On the other hand, if there is a long queue, the delay cause by the queue will mean that it will take a longer time to transition from one work center to another.

A delay in move time could be caused by an issue that has happened in the next work center such as a machine breaking down or resources not being available to further the production. Move time differs from queue time in that move time is the delay of waiting to be moved plus the time spent moving from one work center to another where as the queue time is the time spent waiting to be processed at the work center. Queue time is the most critical because it usually counts for 80% or more of the total lead time in production. In order to reduce lead time you must reduce queue time or work-in process which requires good scheduling

Jacobs, Berry, Whybark and Vollmann. Manufacturing Planning and Control for Supply Chain Management, 6th Edition. McGraw-Hill Learning Solutions, 2011.

Queue, move, and setup time are dependent on run time. Additionally, with queue time…, it is the only element that does not directly relate to the product being produced. It can be the cause of any of the other 3 elements. Remember, queue time is wait time for something to occur; and that can be caused by delays, lengthier than normal run times, backlogs, etc.

Run time is typically the most difficult to manage because you have a plethora of factors that impact how effective the “run” or the “process” is. Some of these include employee skill sets, employee experience, machine/equipment slippage, process slippage, documented procedures vs. tacit knowledge, time of day, time of week, status of customer satisfaction, etc.

Posted on

Provide a description the internal and external feedback mechanisms of the Welfare System Answer

Provide a description the internal and external feedback mechanisms

Provides a description of the information generated from feedback

Discuss how the program has been changed as a result of the evaluation

APA format

 

Feedback and Evaluation of the Welfare System

Over time there has been a need for policy implementation based on public reasons. Many years of different types of government have found ways to created public policy for issues that needed some applied regulations or laws. The federal welfare system is one of the policies that often needs’ continual evaluation. Over time public policy revealed some regulation and terms from the original thoughts of implementation, to changes that may be useful based on the needs or failures of the original policy. In the process of evaluation once a policy has been initiated there are key factors that tie in the success of policy involving internal and external mechanisms through evaluators. Public policy and program evaluation is a newer addition in the last 50 years to the history of the nation’s chain of attempts to use the brainpower from scholars, research experts, and scientists to further the interests of the state and constituents. Evaluation is asked to provide retrospective assessments (feedback) of the implementation, output, and outcome of government measures in order to create deeper understanding and well-grounded decisions involved through government operations such as the welfare system. The feedback initially grants the reason for policy change in the welfare system or other factors related. This paper details internal and external feedback mechanisms found in the welfare system, information generated from the feedback, and any program changes as a result of the evaluation of the history of welfare.

Original Implementation of Public Welfare Program

The welfare system was first established as a federal program, taking place during the Great Depression where Congress enacted an Aid to Dependent Children, also known as the ADC. This was originally created as a modest program to focus on widows, orphans, divorced or deserted mothers, and their children (Welfare, 2011). The creation had much to do with the loss of the husbands and availability to support the household with only the women home because the men provided the sole income and support of the household. By 1939 the ADC program covered only about 700,000 people and at least two-thirds of eligible children were not covered (Welfare, 2011). By 1960 the welfare program had grown to provide assistance to close numbers of over three million people. As the growth accelerated from the 1960’s and 70’s the program name had been changed to “Aid to Families with Dependent Children” (AFDC), which would again be changed in the future from evaluations. The program changes that were affected in the history through the current implementation of the program from state to state had many factors involved that included internal and external feedback to warrant some changes.

Internal and External Feedback Mechanisms

            Experiences with implementing many programs during the 1960’s, such as welfare, suggested the need for careful appraisal of the impact of such programs (Theodoulou & Krafinis, 2008). Many people believe that the evaluation of a policy is reached at the end of policy cycle. However, according to Theodoulou and Krafinis (2008), “such a viewpoint would neglect the consequences of policy evaluation as well as how the old policy often leads into a new policy cycle.” The federal government wants to know how much money is spent for a particular program, amount of persons to service the program, service cost, and effectiveness of the program in relationship to the cost, known as internal factors. Of all factors the one most important to evaluating a program is whether the program resulted in positive benefit or made the problem worse. Each component of the process is related to a type of evaluation relating to feedback and often uses the impact evaluation or policy evaluation to measure outcomes.

The appraisal and evaluation of program implementation involves internal and external mechanisms. The welfare policy in America comes from an evolution of societal perceptions and expectations driving the “culture” for a deliverance of system that will provide services and benefits to those who need the program. The internal feedback mechanisms involve the budgets, policy actors, reaching intentions of the policy, and policy applications according to each state. Because the budget must be met with good reason evaluation often reveals the ability of keeping the program active or changes needed. The impact evaluation mechanism may be useful at this point to give internal evaluators proper details to compare program outputs and inputs such as the General Accounting Office (GAO) or such offices Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to evaluate the program expenses versus original intent. The ability to establish communication linkages through internal mechanisms can help provide feedback to policy-makers and program administrators at several points of the welfare system and how it is delivered. This includes the front-line, middle managers, and other service providers that may include non-governmental partners. The internal mechanisms provides continual reassessment’s based on the aspect of the original vision and the policies to see what works best and what may need revision.

Although internal feedback mechanisms are vital and found to be a necessity, the external evaluator can also provide valuable input for the policy makers. The value of the information relates to social areas and cultures that depend on the support of the welfare system. How the people detail feedback based on what needs were met can feedback what is needed to improve the program. The external feedback mechanisms reveal the constituents, program users, and outcome of the policy feedback in use, based on social areas or public interest, and economic situations.

Information Generated from Feedback

            Information generated through feedback may be warranted but not always welcomed in practical thought from the management of the program. However, a major advantage of internal evaluation is that insiders will have the detailed knowledge of what is involved in delivering the policy or program (Theodoulou & Krafinis, 2008). One evaluation taken was the need for cost efficiency of the 60’s to push for reform and again in the 90’s. The original implementation of welfare was to help the widow and children but over time through evaluation the policy implementers began to address the issue of other needs for the program. This happened in the early 1990’s when welfare reform of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act was created (Welfare, 2011). This added additional guidelines based on evaluation changes that had become evident by the growth rate of participants on the welfare program through the years.

Based on the internal and external mechanisms of evaluation, change is warranted and the shifting of the welfare policy created a reason to initiate that participants take self responsibility and get a job. There are also disadvantages, such as the insiders may not have the specialized skills to do a good evaluation and evaluation may be affected by the insider’s un-willingness to make major changes. This is because they have a specific stake in the maintenance of the program status such as becoming un-employed and changes suggested may not be welcomed. The program recipients were not happy with the regulation changes set forth by President Clinton because some people would be forced to seek work. Both internal and external evaluators deliver information that communicates’ particulars that stimulate a need for change. Time reveals what may be needed as economic shifting takes place. The programs will endure shifting to create the change even if not be welcome, but needed.

Program Evaluation and Changes

Evaluation is often a controversial and hard-to-understand strategy of public governance, decision-making, and control. The public policy and evaluation of a program is a mechanism for monitoring systems and government programs. The results help constituents and policy actors to act accordingly and move with changes warranted. Times of need in the public policy realm changes often and may have determining factors that place constraints on policies, such as the economic conditions of the nation (unemployment rate) and guidelines of change One of the ways to evaluate program is known as the evaluation rationality. The models of evaluation and theories such as the impact theory relating to how the program impacts or process evaluation theory are all part of social investigation. Pre-experimental Designs and One-shot case studies are both analyses of what happened at some level of the policy process to determine if change is warranted based on the behavior of the condition. The welfare program has changed from being a main support of widows, children, and single mothers to being a conjoined effort program that aids the needy people and poorer areas of society. In 1992 President Bill Clinton was elected and promised to end welfare as people knew it and in 1994 based on evaluation of more than 14.2 million welfare recipients, a figure of change was warranted. The change added that jobs become part of the programs intent and maximum of three years of continual program usage be placed to regulate some cost control and still help the needy. Evaluation has much to offer policy makers, but is used less often due to competing pressures of interest. As the welfare system has changed over the last 50 years continual evaluation reveals that change will be continual based on world factors. This change also indicated that people needed to example more self-responsibility and may generate a more confident level of social existence in that area of society to create a chain of leadership for changing culture. As a result of the evaluation, changes placed were successful and lowered the amount of people who were on welfare overall. Evaluation is the process of distinguishing the worthwhile from the worthless, the precious from the useless; evaluation implies looking backward in order to be able to steer forward better and the changes made to the welfare system demonstrate a nonlinear shift.

References

Welfare.(2011). Retrieved November 10, 2012, from Almanac of Policy Issues:

http:/www.policyalmanac.org/social_welfare/welfare.shtml

Theodoulou, S., & Kofinis, C. (2004). The art of the game: Understanding American public policy making. Belmont, CA: Thomson.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Explain what is meant by the term “value” in a supply chain Answer

Explain what is meant by the term “value” in a supply chain. How can it be best measured in a supply chain? How does increasing value in a supply chain help align supply chain operations to the business mission?  Respond to at least two of your fellow classmates’ postings.

 

Explain what is meant by the term “value” in a supply chain.

Value can be added, or viewed in many different forms.  Probably the most well-known is shareholder’s value.  Shareholders value is created anytime, by any legal method,   which adds to the overall financial wellbeing of the company.  Value for the stockholder is created when their return on investment (ROI) in your company is greater than it would be in a comparable risk investment.

How can it be best measured in a supply chain?

In managerial finance there are many ways to measure value but, the best way is to use ratio analysis combined with other data.  You can make a ratio out of any two or more numbers by dividing them in some form into each other.   In managerial finance there are many standard ratios that are used to analyze value of a company, or investments, for example: net present value (NPV), Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Investments (ROI) and many others.  “Return on investment is an important measure that is widely used to assess shareholders value” (Harrison & Van Hoek, 2012, p. 75).  ROI is profit * 100/capital employed or a different formula that is the outcome of profitability and asset utilization is:   ROI = 100 * profit/sales * sales/ capital employed.

ROI can also be used as a great tool to show “The Boss” that an individual project or improvement is cost effective and profitable. Another way of stating ROI is: the ratio derived from   the sum of the improvement benefits divided by the sum of the costs of the improvement. A 40-to-l ratio, for example, means $40 of benefits was derived from every $1 of cost.  ROI   can help justify the cost of quality improvement projects, determine the value of continuing a project already under way and determine the overall organizational effectiveness of an implemented quality initiative.  How does increasing value in a supply chain help align supply chain operations to the business mission?

 

Managing supply-chain operations is critical to any company’s ability to compete effectively. The supply chain has traditionally been managed as a series of, compartmentalized business functions. It was driven by manufacturers who managed and controlled the pace at which products were developed, manufactured and distributed.  However, customers have   forced increasing demands on manufacturers for options/styles/features, quick order fulfillment, and fast delivery.  With the long-time competitive differentiator of manufacturing quality   starting to be non-differentiated across the board, meeting these customer demands has emerged as the next critical opportunity for competitive advantage by efficient supply chain management.  Maintaining competitive advantage likewise forces constant redirection and enhancement of product features, quality, cost, options and services.  “Supply-chain   effectiveness has therefore joined product quality and time-to-market as a key competitive differentiator. Success for many companies now depends on their ability to balance a stream   of product and process changes with meeting customer demands for delivery and flexibility. Optimally managing supply-chain operations has therefore become critical to companies’ ability to compete effectively in the global marketplace” (Gordon, 1997, para. 1).  In today’s world you cannot compete effectively without a well-developed supply chain.  Emphasizing the importance of supply chain operations will develop value by eliminating non-value added steps.  To develop an efficient supply chain that adds value to the company and shareholders as well as meeting the needs of today’s customers and supply chain partners all sections of the supply chain must share common goals, and concentrate on the end

References

Gordon, S. (1997). Supply-chain Operations. Logistics Information Management, 10(2). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/docview/220041033?accountid=32521

Harrison, A., & Van Hoek, R. (2012). Logistics Management & Strategy (4 ed.).  London, England: Prentice Hall Financial Times.

mission of customer satisfaction .

 

Posted on

How has the FCC functioned as an “enabler” and “promoter” for the development of “advanced telecommunications services Answer

How has the FCC functioned as an “enabler” and “promoter” for the development of “advanced telecommunications services”?

The FCC does both (enable and promote). The FCC at first even promoted monopoly and then they enabled AT&T to stay in control of the industry after the monopoly was dissolved.  It encourages infrastructure and it also promotes the public’s best interest  by promoting the  Universal Service Fund.

If the FCC is the source of regulation of telecommunication and other media plateaus. The FCC have the power of control and censorship. With the ability to control regulations you create a market or rules that cater to their specifications and want. It has the ability to allow what they deem to be appropriate and they can promote what meets their expectations.