apotso

Αρχείο για Ιουνίου, 2006

Content vs Technology…

In Globalization, Media, Technology, Διάφορα, Ρίξτε μια ματιά on 26 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 10:41 πμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

Since 20 years ago when I was studying computer information systems, I had an understanding of technology as a context to deliver results efficiently and effectively shortening the workflows of the traditional manufacturing and analogue environment.

Many things happened since, the Internet, the servicization of operations, the automation of workflows, the mobility in the communications and the convergence in technology as well as in the end user demands.

I was lucky enough to observe from a well positioned stand the cutting edge changes which occurred in the 90’s and become one of the change agents in the process of the internet integration to the firm as well as the digitization projects toward the shift of the value chain closer to the digital environment.

As a media professional, closer to the productions rather than technology, I tended to believe that content is the king and that technology will eventually become a commodity. After a long and painful trip in the balancing of the projects I took over, I formed a different understanding for both issues.

Content is the king but content is not defined only as the final product of the media, rather it includes the metadata which leads to the final product which indeed is far more valuable than the product itself and may create several added value economic cycles. So I started to challenge my journalist ideas, and found that my products were less valuable from the way I performed them… from the both the cost and the value perspectives. The way I performed my workflows in both physical and digital assets was more valuable than the results of this process… and that is an opportunities for the consultants.

Technology on the other hand has not been commoditised 100% yet, and it maybe never does, but technology includes two different perspectives, the commodity perspective and the strategic perspective. The commodity perspective draws strength and value from the end user who wants things simple and easy to use, as well as from the business people who want to cut costs and avoid creating small IT production factories with devices that become obsolete in fewer years than their pay out. The strategic perspective is more or less confronted as witches did in the middle ages, nobody want to talk about it because nobody has a clue of what it is and how to tackle with it. And this is an opportunity for consultants.

Centralcasting, servicization of operations management and globalization…

In Globalization, Media, Technology, Διάφορα on 21 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 3:39 μμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

A theory perspective 

Author: Apostolos Tsorakis

Operations management focuses on carefully managing the processes to produce and distribute products and services. Slack et al, (2001), clarifies that the operation function of the organization is the arrangement of those resources which are devoted to the production and delivery of its products and services however, not all types of organizations will necessarily call the function with this name. Under this perspective, and beyond operations, there are core functions, such as marketing and product/service development, and support functions such as the accounting/finance and human resources. The core functions according to Slack et al, (2001) will be found in all organizations since they fulfill fundamental needs of selling their products, satisfying their customers and create a sustainable relation with them, while the support functions enable the core functions to operate effectively.

These are the legacy of the changes that have taken place over the last 200 to 300 years from the use of home-based craft production systems to the relatively more efficient modern industrial systems of today. The application of these techniques has resulted in a “relative abundance of physical goods at low cost, available in a fantastic range of items undreamed of by our ancestors” (Buffa, 1976).

Skinner (1985) challenged the role of operations as being solely concerned with the internal efficiency and effectiveness. The challenge has specifically been taken up in the development of “manufacturing strategy” and recently “operations strategy”. This subject has been concerned with the fact that while operations has a key role to play in implementing corporate strategy, it should also be involved in the formulation of strategies to provide competitive advantage (Hayes and Wheelwright, 1984).

This subject has become concerned not only about its integration with corporate strategy but also its relationship with other functions such as finance, marketing and organizational behavior. Fitzgerald et al., 1991 described the link of the operational measures of performance with financial measures while Bateson, 1985 described the link between operations and marketing and the customer interface. Finally Mills and Morris, 1992 wrote about the motivation and role of operations personnel in dealing with customers.

Another related development of the subject has been the focus of recent debate is the servicization of operations management. This interest in service activities is relatively new, despite the existence of service operations for at least as long as production activities. During the 1970s there has been recognition from theorists that services are important to the economy and that service is a competitive advantage for many organizations, both manufacturing and service organizations. The mutual concern over similar issues has led to the evolution of a new area that became known as “service management”.

There is a significant factor though in 1970s and 1980s which is linked with the service sector and has to do with the widespread introduction of the use of computers into organizations, which in 1990s was underpinned by the telecommunication breakthrough and led to the Internet era. The 1980s and 1990s have also seen the acceptance and implementation of the “new” management philosophies of just-in-time and total quality management. These are now the mainstream functions of production practices in many manufacturing firms, while the information liberalization followed by internet breakthrough, introduced the knowledge based competition.

Knowledge according to Johnson and Scholes (2002), is awareness, consciousness or familiarity gained by experience or learning. The information that is unleashed by the digital technology leads to a knowledge-based competition, where the ability of an organization to develop, nurture, and mobilize its intangible assets is critical for success. (Kaplan and Norton, 1996) Interestingly though, some technology experts and academic scholars have observed that there is no direct correlation between IT investments and business performance or knowledge management. For instance, Erik Brynjolfsson, a professor at MIT Sloan School, notes that: “The same dollar spent on the same system may give a competitive advantage to one company but only expensive paperweights to another.” Hence a key factor for the higher return on the IT dollar is the effective utilization of technology. (Malhotra, 1998)

Trends towards the globalization of communication, technology, the markets and finance have resulted in unprecedented business competition, especially for small firms. Globalization has accelerated a process of “industrialization of cultures”, closely linked to technologies and the formation of global conglomerates involved in media, entertainment and sometimes other industries. Economic globalization on the other hand, is a historical process, the result of human innovation and technological progress. It refers to the increasing integration of economies around the world, particularly through trade and financial flows. (Knight and Cavusgil, 1996).

In the broadcasting industry a television station’s business is to source and broadcast programs, whether these are produced in-house, commissioned to outside producers or acquired. A Television channel could be considered an intense data production facility. It is required to broadcast 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, totaling 8760 hours of continuous scheduled footage broadcasts on the television screen.

The television operations can be modeled according to Slack et al, as the processing of input transformed resources such as sitcoms, one hour dramas, live shows, news, sports etc which are being utilized by the input transforming resources such as studios, cameras, staff, hardware etc. to be scheduled for broadcasting along with channel ID’s, interstitials, trailers (advertising what viewers can watch in the near future) and advertisements. Content is created in studios, newsrooms, and by specialty producers. The channels nowadays are delivered over a variety of networks— cable, satellite, terrestrial, and recently via broadband Internet. The audience that gathers around the content is attractive to third parties such as advertisers.

About five years ago some broadcast group owners began to see that the trends in the industry would never reverse and sought ways to cut costs to stall the decline in broadcast cash flow and began to toy with the idea of moving air operations to centralized sites, with the thought that the savings in labor would be more than the cost of interconnection lines. Simply defined, central casting is “the management of various aspects of broadcast operations, including technical, accounting, and programming support for multiple broadcast facilities from a central location.” (ETVCookbook.org. “Centralcasting,” April 25, 2002)

Targeting to the opposite of the central casting model, matrix organizational structures as Graham (2002) point out attempt to combine the benefits of decentralization (e.g. closeness to markets, speed of decision-making and implementation) with those of co-ordination (e.g. achieving synergies across business units, territories and products).

It has been observed that in the media industry many family groups own significant portion of interests. Mandel describes that the complexity of family business is appropriate to be examined from various perspectives of management, psychology, and finance. Family businesses are different because the principals make decisions based on the complex interaction among business, family, and ownership systems. (Mandel, 2001) There are though some differences among family businesses due to the degree of inclination of business-first or a family-first philosophy (Cromie et al., 1995).

Bibliography

Bateson, J.E.G. (1985), “Perceived Control and the Service Encounter”, in Czepiel, J.A., Solomon, M.R. and Surprenant, C.F. (Eds), The Service Encounter, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.

Buffa, E.S. (1976), Operations Management: The Management of Productive Systems, Wiley, New York, NY.

Cromie S., Stephenson B. and Monteith D., (1995) The Management of Family Firms: An Empirical Investigation, International Small Business Journal, 13, pp11-34.

Fitzgerald, L. et al, (1991) Performance Measurement in Service Businesses, CIMA, London.

Globalization: Threat or Opportunity? By IMF Staff April 12, 2000 (Corrected January 2002)

Hayes, R.H. and Wheelwright, S.C. (1984), Restoring our Competitive Edge, Wiley, New York, NY.

Johnson, G. and Scholes K. (2002), Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and Cases, 6th ed., Pearson Education Limited, England

Kaplan, R and Norton, D, 1996, Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press

Kienzle, C., (2004)  Centralcasting: Few Takers, Many Skeptics

Knight, G.A. and S.T. Cavusgil (1996) ‘The born global firm: a challenge to traditional internationalization theory’, Advances in International Marketing, 8, 11–26.

Malhotra, Yogesh. “Deciphering the Knowledge Management Hype,” The Journal for Quality & Participation, July/August 1998 (Special issue on Knowledge Management), published by the Association for Quality & Participation.

Mandel, S., The business journal of the Greater Triad Area website: Much can be learned from family business strategies,

Mills, P. and Morris, J. (1992), “Some Moderating Effects of Client-interaction Need on Perceived Technology and Structure in Service Providers’ Tasks”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 4-13.
Morgan, G, (2002) Thinking globally yet acting locally

Skinner, W. (1985), Manufacturing: The Formidable Competitive Weapon, Wiley, New York, NY.

Ward, J. L., (1987). Keeping the Family Business Healthy. San Francisco, CA, Jossey Bass.

Metadata: the mental mapping tool for a new Television audience

In Globalization, Media, Technology, Διάφορα on 17 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 12:23 μμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

Author: Apostolos Tsorakis

So what is happening with television and its digital integration… so many things that the end user, customer, viewer, consumer don’t have a clue about. But why should he have a clue. The coach potato viewer, mobile phone owner and pc user is the same person? And if so what the developers, producers, programmers, engineers, telecom specialist etc. offer him. Nothing more than problems and devices accompanied by tons of RTFM ‘s (read the fucking manual stupid). And the poor individual helpless pays all of his precious money to be always streamlined with the technology the trends and the marketing fuzz.

The traditional coach potato viewer though (the person who created this tremendous large media sector with a huge value chain for more than 60 years) is dead… Yes he is, after 60 years of television he is better programmer, producer, scripter, caster and whatever else consist the TV value chain. He knows better to judge, decide, leverage the content than any other vertical educated professional, after all he was the object of a continuous training by all the professionals together as well as in person. So stop producing and programming for him, he is not here and the statistics and measurements justify it.

So who is the guy that will accept all this industry traditional products, well no-one… its hopeless to search for a substitute that does not exist (sorry maybe apes would be a solution ;-) ).The industry, this brat proprietary engineered driven middle-aged, should reset its existence, it should learn to fit, identify opportunities in the new environment and adapt resources and competences so as to take advantage of these. In plain words it should return to its adolescent or just pretend so because nowadays customers are misdoubt. Technology, as marketing has succeed to position, is just a commodity, it should be there as air, sun, electricity and eventually it should serve the customer 100% otherwise it is obsolete. 

Television is undergoing the most significant era in its 60 years life, the conversion and management of media into digital assets together with the automation of scheduling, traffic management and play out, is the new millennium evolution that dominates a change to the back end of the broadcasting value chain introducing a front end user interface to the media products consumers. The time where the media consumers participate in the media production and programming is emerging (Big Brother reality formats, live voting interactive systems etc.) But this is only the surface, what is happening with the future, where this entire thing headed…?

Apparently the final end user not only viewer, will define the future and not only the traditional professionals. Internet and telecommunications has contributed to this case not only from technology aspect but also from a more sociological perspective that of offering the carriage of participation and knowledge acquisition to the mass.

Eventually the infolust of the individuals and the path of cyberspace which offer it for more or less free, have made them to become more demanding on any kind of purchases asking for a value for money offering (after all even viewing free television is a purchase, viewers spent time which costs to see) . Profit for the business will no longer be a matter of stressing value to the acceptable limits of the market. Because there are not acceptable limits in the market, the market, you and me, want the best quality in both products and services, because after all the commoditized technology is offering it to us. Yesterday I was (as all men do) watching the mundial games, but… in my country, Greece, the rights handler has bought the cheapest package, which is awful, so, although I do not represent the majority to threaten them, I damped them and just watched the game from ZDF from my DST (Digital Satellite Transmission) subscription with the highest possible quality.

It is the time for the broadcasting industry to stretch, leveraging the resources and competences of both the consumers, end users, viewers and contributors of its value chain to provide competitive advantage and yield new opportunities. It is about time to define some new strategic visions and intents in order to route the strategy for achieving tangible results.

One simple approach that may become a vision or a strategic intent is that of defining the “object” of the strategy in all levels, corporate, business or SBU keeping the end user in the hart of any development. The contemporary end user of the TV products is a multi-user of different complementally devices that serve him to its three basic social needs: work, entertainment, and communication. The connecting glue of all these devices is the metadata that they produce. Because,  the contemporary working environment is mostly digitized, the entertainment (TV, DVD, and PC) is also digitized while the communication was always electronic but nowadays is eventually bits and bytes.

So where is the catch? All these devices practically are digital asset carriers each one dedicated for one purpose (the traditional proprietary dictator) but all of them serve one individual at a time or many in combinations. So the catch is, that whoever can accomplish to leverage the market balances and share the value creation of a unique ubiquitous device with an open market and technology platform, will occupy the position to become the driver of the final frontier change of the industry with a customer driven innovation spirit. In humans language when the mobile phone, the zapping device, the USB storage and applications utility, the video camera, the photo camera and whatever else produce or consume digital assets for a person become unified under a certified protocol, then change will be initiated for both the industry standards as well as the end users. The secret is to harness the metadata power and volumes in order to create an exchange of information available to make the end users life easier. After all the same fingers use all the devices and support the needs of the same brain which is perfectly mapped in the metadata log files.

 


 

 

Dedicated to those who were given birth before 1980!!!

In A theory of life, Diary, Personal, Ρίξτε μια ματιά on 14 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 10:24 πμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

The truth is that I do not know how we managed to survive all these years. We are the pending generation, we lived our childhood waiting for: two hours after eating to swim, two hours midday sleep to get rest, and during Sundays we should wait foodless until we were given the Eucharist. Even when we were in pain, waiting was the suggested cure.

Recollecting the past, it is difficult to believe that we are still alive. We used to travel in cars without seat belts and airbags!!! We were travelling for 10 and 12 hours, five individuals in a small Fiat and we never suffered from any kind of syndrome!!! We never had special doors, windows, cupboards and safety bottles for children!!! We were riding the bicycles without helmets and protective bandages; we were hitch-hiking, riding motorcycles without license!!! Swings were made from metal and they had edgy corners!!!

Even our games were violent; we used to stay for hours building self-made cars to compete each other rolling down from hills discovering that we forgot to install brakes in our cars!!! We were playing leap frog and nobody had any kind of orthopaedic problems (amazing)!!! We were running out of our house playing all day long and we never returned back home before we get exhausted!!! No one could find us and we never get lost or kidnapped (wow)!!! We were breaking our bones and teeth in the absence of custody laws and nobody ever got charged for it!!! We were playing war games with wooden guns, stones and mud and we used to hit our heads several times per day!!! The magic medicine of those days was the iodine tinctures some stitches and a newspaper on top!!! Nobody was blaming anybody else apart himself!!! We had strong fights and we were jeering each other forgetting everything with a magic way!!! We were eating candies and we were drinking refreshments but we were not obese or fat!!! Some of us might be a bit over weighted but nobody cared. We were using the same bottles, we were drinking the same water, and refreshments and nobody had problems of catching a virus (a nightmare)!!! We used to share our crab louses in the school and our mother confronted this problem by just washing our heads with vinegar…

We never had playstation, or Nintendo 64, or 99 TV channels, video tapes, DVD, Dolby surround audio, pc, laptops and internet (a real hell)!!! We just had friends (f-r-i-e-n-d-s)!!! We were talking to each other and we were wandering around to solve the universal problems (and we did)!!! Sometime we just met each other in the roads hiding, running or just flirting(you know a girl and a boy…)!!! We had lost thousands of footballs, we were drinking water form the faucets –some of us literary touching our tongues to the faucet- and not a bottled one from a spring in Alps(how inappropriate)!!! We were chasing lizards and birds with our air-guns, and we were never accused as criminals. We were alone in the country and although we were under aged no adults were supervising us… oh God!!!  
We were communicating shouting each other or just ridding our bicycles to our friends’ houses. Imagine we never had mobil phones and we were never asking our parents permission to play around, all alone out there… in this cruel world… without any adult to be responsible for our actions… how we ever made it!!!

In school everybody was participating in the games we were playing and those of us who were cut off, we just had to live with it and not visit the first pedo-psychiatrist!!! Some of us were not so good students and had to repeat the course, there were no special tests to force them pass the course… how horrible!!!

We were on vacations for three months every summer spending 16 hours in the beach without sun care cream with protection index of 70 we were not taking lessons of sailing, tennis or golf. We were building imaginary castles in the sand and we were fishing using hooks… and fishing lines… We were flirting and groping girls, physically without being accused for sexual harassment, and not by chatting in a chat room using idiot signs like J, ;-) , : D : P, lol, gg

We were free to fail, to succeed, to be responsible or irresponsible and through this process we learned and grew up. No wonder why nowadays children are so immature spoiled and slap happy. If you are though one of the “old fashioned” and you grew up in similar ways… congratulations… you had the opportunity to grow up as a human being… a child…

Is television news reality a bitch… or it is just screwing everybody…?

In Diary, Globalization, Media, Technology, Διάφορα, Ρίξτε μια ματιά on 13 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 12:01 πμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

What I will try to describe in the following paragraphs is a consideration of the television journalism and news casting, which describe the nowadays TV regime. And I am starting from this word ‘regime’. As wikipedia explains:

A regime (occasionally spelled “régime”, particularly in older texts) denotes any system of social control, or more specifically, a form of government, especially an authoritarian one, such as one closely associated with a specific individual (e.g., “the Saddam regime”, the Clinton or Bush regime, “the Lukashenko regime”, or “the Salazar regime”), or based on a particular ideology (eg. “a communist” regime”, “a socialist regime”, “a fascist regime”, or “a military regime”).In theory, the term need not imply anything about the particular government to which it relates, and there are political scientists who use it as a neutral term. But the term is often used in a pejorative manner as a reference to governments believed to be repressive, undemocratic or illegitimate, such that in these contexts the word conveys a sense of moral disapproval or political opposition. For example, one is less likely to hear of a “democratic regime”.Political scientist Fred Judson, defines a regime as the “relationship between the state, society, (the) market, and global insertion”. 

On the other hand wikipedia defines journalism which is responsible for the news constitution as follows:

Journalism is a discipline of collecting, analyzing, verifying, and presenting information regarding current events, trends, issues and people. Those who practice journalism are known as journalists.News-oriented journalism is sometimes described as the “first rough draft of history” (attributed to Phil Graham), because journalists often record important events, producing news articles on short deadlines. While under pressure to be first with their stories, news media organizations usually edit and proofread their reports prior to publication, adhering to each organization’s standards of accuracy, quality and style. Many news organizations claim proud traditions of holding government officials and institutions accountable to the public, while media critics have raised questions about holding “the press” itself accountable. 

Now why did I referred to these terms and tried to define them from an objective perspective (wikipedia)? Well I feel that viewing a TV news bulleting in my country these definitions become blurring and scramble my mind in a way that I clearly see that the “officials” to be accountable are doing the job of the journalists, which means that they “collect, analyze, verify, and present information regarding current events, trends, issues and people” in order to avoid to be accountable when journalists from a podium in a studio or a live stream from the field exercise their “democratic regime” prerogatives to enhance their “relationship between the state, society, (the) market, and global insertion”.

The fourth estate, the traditional term to address press power, when we refer to its television form, has become the first where its members are not accountable for what they say, how they say it and what effects does this have to ”the state, the society, and the market”. Have you see them how they attack to anyone who disputes their authority in such a way that may be characterized as “repressive, undemocratic or illegitimate” targeting to enforce a “system of social control” consecrating their role as the “Robin Hoods” of social morality? The power of the mass passive “coach potato” televiewing offers to TV news a base to develop a particular ideology which eventually acts as the tool to establish a regime of free-floating viewers.  

Don’t take me wrong but this exactly the way I feel when I see TV news casts where the typical verification does not exist in the altar of getting the story first, with more blood, more sperm and more glamorous… Lots of talking heads in television windows shouting things that nobody can or afford to understand, verify, or validate and no one from an official position willing to back the ground…I can envision the discussion of an incompetent news director who shouts to its editors for more “first page” stories otherwise he will screw them with his lengthy qualifications… the result is what we see and we don’t want to see. What really happens is that the audience is exposed to those who really influence the incompetent news professionals. And usually those are the representatives of the parastate, a bunch of semi-legal varmints who survive in any kind of state change and dominate any kind of state, social or market balances.

It is an oxymoron but in Greece, and I presume in other countries too, the national television has achieved to be characterized from the audience as the most trustworthy as far as its news. The national television which is dominated by the officials of the traditional state authorities (those who have the power to create a regime or represent a regime) and they have achieved to turn the course of the news market in favor of them.   

Imagine Montesquieu to wake up as a coach potato viewer during the broadcast of news bulletin today… Montesquieu proposed the division of political power between an executive, a legislature, and a judiciary. Under this model, each branch has separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility; however, each branch is also able to place limits on the power exerted by the other branches. He would be shocked to death after 30 or 45 minutes of this uncontrollable power which derives its authority by itself and the magnetic waves that transmit it.  

Well since he was largely responsible for the popularization of the terms “feudalism” and “Byzantine Empire”, I presume that he would also be very happy to find out that although his articulation of the theory of power may not be alive in the 21st century but his other two kids are here to rule the world through the TV context.

Corporate values and vision

In Globalization, Media on 12 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 6:17 μμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

It has been concluded that people within an organization share common values however, most of the time this is done unconsciously. Core values can be the strong belief in “cooperation and trust within the organization”, the desire for “hard work and continuous self-improvement”, the “focus on innovation” or the “results orientation”. Each company can define more than one but certainly less than six core values.  Surprisingly, usually people who stay in a company are people who are compatible with the company’s core values. This fact certainly increases the power of values since it results in a very coherent organizational environment.

Corporate values as Collins and Porras  define them, are therefore,  “a small set of timeless guiding principles” providing “the glue that holds an organization together through time”.

Detert  argues that values have to do with the belief in the power of coordinated action. This means that according to him, employees acknowledge that joining forces can lead to success and this belief is so powerful that it can make individuals willing to sacrifice some autonomy for the sake of organization-wide goals, because doing so will lead to superior outcomes. 

Organizational researchers  note also that top management constitutes an important and sometimes defining source of cultural values. According to Hofstede et al.  “the values of founders and key leaders undoubtedly shape organizational cultures… Founders’ and leaders’ values become members’ practices”.

It seems that core values stand not only the test of time but this of space as well and are able to bind together even dispersed branches of the same organization: Collins and Porras  note that “even global organizations composed of people from widely diverse cultures can identify a set of shared core values”.

From the above it is clear that corporate values are extremely helpful in the implementation of change, particularly when among them there are beliefs in “the need for hard work and continuous self-improvement” which are aligned with the goal and big effort change implies. Their existence connects all parts together and makes the mechanism work in the desired way.

Corporate vision is another important factor enabling change implementation. According to Kotter , vision is a “picture of the future”; it clarifies the direction in which an organization needs to move. The existence of corporate vision is tightly connected with the success of change efforts. As previously mentioned, change has to do with the goals an organization wants to achieve and therefore, the need for change comes after the definition of corporate vision.

The vision needs to be clear and make sense to the employees. As Kotter argues “without a sensible vision, a transformation effort can easily dissolve into a list of confusing and incompatible projects that can take the organization in the wrong direction or nowhere at all ”. It is important therefore, that people are clear about the direction the company is going and the reasons it has to do that. The existence of corporate values that are in accordance with the vision will hold people together and stimulate them to work for the achievement of the specific goals.

However, defining the vision is not enough; communicating the vision efficiently is equally crucial for change initiatives to succeed. Once the message is transmitted, it is important that the need for change and the steps to reach it are repeated in every occasion. People won’t pay attention to something which is not stressed out adequately and which doesn’t become a “way of living and thinking” within the organization. Needless to say, it is the leader’s job to make sure that people don’t loose focus.

Communication however, is not something done only by words, the leader’s behavior transmits a loud message and thus, words should be consistent with actions. Subordinates will pay attention to any deviation and this will undermine the success of change since “opposition” forces will grasp the opportunity to attract followers.

The future of marketing for a company’s international strategy

In Globalization on 9 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 12:12 πμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/ 

Author: Apostolos Tsorakis 

Marketing is the function which stimulates the demand for the company’s products. A social definition of marketing system describe it as a societal process by which persons and groups acquire what they seek through creating, offering, and exchanging products and services of value freely with others. Peter Drucker, a leading management theorist, says that “the aim of marketing is to make selling superfluous. The aim of marketing is to know and understand the customer so well that the product or service fits him and sells itself. Ideally, marketing should result in a customer who is ready to buy.”
 
Definitions of marketing however, count for little if businesses do not develop a process, culture and set of operational procedures to actually “do” marketing (Cravens, 1998; Piercy, 1998). The textbooks promote a process which hinges on marketing analysis, marketing strategy, marketing mix tactics and internal program controls.

During the last decades though, the world has dramatically changed, new patterns that had not been seen earlier became evident all of a sudden. Towards the seventies the information revolution started to transform organizations. There were however greater structural differences to come. Traveling between different countries for pleasure on a regular basis became normal, watching television programs from around the whole world became reality, and the introduction of the Internet to the masses brought the world together.

Therefore, it is nowadays possible to follow, with a slight delay, what happens in almost all the countries of the world. The environment in which companies compete has also changed considerably during the last decades, actions taken by international bodies, governments and businesses have provoked an internationalization and globalization of the industries. (Nordström & Vahlne, 1993)

Drucker believes that the internationalization is no longer utopia, and that the earlier stage is regionalism. A regionally structured world brings different countries together, and considers the different regions as local markets. He also suggests that when the industrialisation started, labour and capital were scarce resources. The society has gradually changed and the scarce resource in organisations nowadays is knowledge. The change towards a more knowledge oriented world makes it possible for firms with limited capital to successfully compete, not only on the domestic market, but also on the international market.

Johanson and Wiedersheim-Paul (1975) discuss how a firm that is already internationalised extends its degree of internationalisation; at the same time as the perceived risk of internationalisation is smaller, the firm is exposed to more offers and demands to extend its operations which logically stimulate it. The firm is also stimulated by an increased need to control sales. Johanson and Wiedersheim-Paul (1975) believe that since firms are risk-avert they will start exporting to neighbouring countries and countries that are relatively similar in.

Porter (1986) writes that the mid-1950s was a period of fundamental change in the international competitive environment. He argues that the literature gives a guidance to how incremental decisions to enter a new market are taken, but it gives only at best a partial view of how to describe a firms overall international strategy, and how this strategy should be chosen. Porter argues that the analysis should start from the industry, because the industry is the arena in which competitive advantage can be won or lost.

Porter uses the value chain to explain the sources of competitive advantage on a national, as well as on an international level. There are various activities that a firm performs, these include selling the product, performing repairs, process design etc. Porter argues that these activities are physically quite distinct, thus creating the need for a less aggregated view of the firm to be able to see the competitive advantage.
 
Under this system there are two key dimensions that describe how a firm competes internationally: configuration and coordination. The configuration is related to where the company has chosen to establish its activities in the value chain. The coordination dimension is related to how the firm coordinates its activities that are similar between different countries.

A purely domestic firm focuses only on its home market, has no current ambitions of expanding abroad, and does not perceive any significant competitive threat from abroad. Such a firm may eventually get some orders from abroad, which are seen as an irritation (for small orders, there may be a great deal of effort and cost involved in obtaining relatively modest revenue). As the firm begins to export more, it enters the export stage, where little effort is made to market the product abroad, although an increasing number of foreign orders are filled. In the international stage, as certain country markets begin to appear especially attractive with more foreign orders originating there, the firm may go into countries on an ad hoc basis—that is, each country may be entered sequentially, but with relatively little learning and marketing efforts being shared across countries. In the multi-national stage, some efficiency is pursued by standardizing across a region (e.g., Central America, West Africa, or Northern Europe). Finally, in the global stage, the focus centers on the entire World market, with decisions made optimize the product’s position across markets—the home country is no longer the center of the product. Porter (1986) claims that a firm’s success of internationalization depends on how it coordinates its marketing and sales activities.

Segmentation according to Kotler (2000) is the cornerstone of marketing—almost all marketing efforts in some way relate to decisions on who to serve or how to implement positioning through the different parts of the marketing mix. For example, one’s distribution strategy should consider where one’s target market is most likely to buy the product, and a promotional strategy should consider the target’s media habits and which kinds of messages will be most persuasive. Although it is often tempting, when observing large markets, to try to be “all things to all people” this is a dangerous strategy because the firm may lose its distinctive appeal to its chosen segments.

Further more Kotler suggests that market segmentation aims to increase a company’s precision marketing. In contrast, sellers that use mass marketing engage in the mass production, distribution, and promotion of one product for all buyers. Henry Ford epitomized this strategy when he offered the Model T Ford “in any color, as long as it is black.” Coca-Cola also used mass marketing when it sold only one kind of Coke in a 6.5-ounce bottle. The argument for mass marketing is that it creates the largest potential market, which leads to the lowest costs, which in turn can lead to lower prices or higher margins. However, many critics point to the increasing splintering of the market, which makes mass marketing more difficult.

According to Regis McKenna, “Consumers have more ways to shop: at giant malls, specialty shops, and superstores; through mail-order catalogs, home shopping networks, and virtual stores on the Internet. And they are bombarded with messages pitched through a growing number of channels: broadcast and narrow-cast television, radio, on-line computer networks, the Internet, telephone services such as fax and telemarketing, and niche magazines and other print media.”

This proliferation of media and distribution channels is making it difficult to practice “one size fits all” marketing. Some observers even claim that mass marketing is dying. Therefore, to stay focused rather than scattering their marketing resources, more marketers are using market segmentation. In this approach, which falls midway between mass marketing and individual marketing, each segment’s buyers are assumed to be quite similar in wants and needs, yet no two buyers are really alike.

General considerations

Marketing is strategically concerned with the direction and scope of the long-term activities performed by the organization to obtain a competitive advantage. The organization applies its resources within a changing environment to satisfy customer needs while meeting stakeholder expectations. Implied in this view of strategic marketing is the requirement to develop a strategy to cope with competitors, identify market opportunities, develop and commercialize new products and services, allocate resources among marketing activities and design an appropriate organizational structure to ensure the performance desired is achieved.

There is no unique strategy that succeeds for all organizations in all situations. In thinking strategically about marketing many factors must be considered: the extent of product diversity and geographic coverage in the organization; the number of market segments served, marketing channels used, the role of branding, the level of marketing effort, and the role of quality. It is also necessary to consider the organization’s approach to new product development, in particular, its position as a technology leader or follower, the extent of innovation, the organization’s cost position and pricing policy, and its relationship to customers, competitors, suppliers and partners.

The marketing and sales activities must consider what product lines they want to offer, and in which markets. Much of the success of a firm’s internationalization can depend on how it coordinates its marketing and sales activities. Therefore the firm must decide whether it will use the same brand name worldwide or not. It is also important to decide if the channel and product positioning should be similar between the different markets.

The use of the same type of channels in different countries, together with special demands about how, and where the products should be sold, has made it possible to distinguish the firm from its competitors. It is possible to claim that the firm started off using a global strategy, selling the same products to every country, but over the years the firm has become more aware of what product are popular in different markets, and it has therefore started to use a more export based strategy with decentralized marketing. This means that the firm designs its products for different countries, but still all agents are welcome to buy these products. This strategy takes into account consumer taste, thus generating a source of competitive advantage for the firm, since it seems as this is a source of competitive advantage related to differentiation vis-à-vis its competitors. Rather than being a rapid shift from a global to a more decentralized strategy, the firm has evolved slowly. This observation is important, since this can be seen as the result of increased knowledge from the firm’s current business activities.

Conclusions

In today’s reality, change is occurring at an accelerating rate and under this perspective companies will have to consider three new realities:
• Globalization will continue to affect businesses
• Technology will continue to advance and amaze people
• There will be a continuing push toward deregulation of the economic sector

These forces have created new behaviors and challenges:
• Customers demand higher quality of service and some customization
• Brand manufacturers are facing intense competition from domestic and foreign brands
• Store-based retailers are suffering from an over saturation of retailing

Given these changes, companies are doing a lot of internal searching, and many firms are adjusting in a number of ways. As the environment changes and companies adjust, marketers also are rethinking their philosophies, concepts, and tools.

It is necessary thus companies to be aware of the effect of globalization, technology, and deregulation. Rather than try to satisfy everyone, companies should start with market segmentation and develop a market offering that is positioned in the minds of the target market since products will be successful only if they deliver value to customers.

The combination of technology, globalization, and deregulation is influencing customers, brand manufacturers, and store-based retailers in a variety of ways. The challenge of marketing within the internationalization process is, therefore, to manage this complexity and to reconcile the influences of a changing environment in the context of a set of resource capabilities.

References – Bibliography

Bennett, P. (1995) Dictionary of Marketing Terms, 2d ed., (Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1995)

Cravens, D. (1998), “Implementation strategies in the market-driven era”, Academy of Marketing Science Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 237-41.

Drucker, P. (1973) Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), pp. 64–65.

Johanson, J. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F., 1975, “The Internationalisation of the Firm-
Four Swedish Cases”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 305-
322

Kotler, Philip. Marketing Management: The Millennium Edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International, Inc., 2000.

Nordström, K.A. & Vahlne, J.E., 1993, “The internationalization process: impact of
competition and experience”, The International Trade Journal, Vol. 7, No. 5 Fall,
pp. 529-548.

Piercy, N. (1998), “Marketing implementation: the implications of marketing paradigm weakness for the strategy execution process”, Academy of Marketing Science Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 222-36.

PORTER, M.E., 1986, “Changing patterns of international competition”, California Management Review, Vol. 28 No. 2, 1986, pp. 9-40.

PORTER, M.E., 1986, Competition in Global Industries (1986). Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.

PORTER, M.E., 1990, The Competitive Advantaqe of Nations (1990). London : The MacMillan Press.

Regis McKenna, Relationship Marketing (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1991)

ROTH, K.,. (1992), International Configuration and Co-ordination Archetypes for
Medium-Sized Firms in Global Industries, Journal of International Business
Studies, Third Quarter, 1992, pp. 533-549

SYLVERBERG, T, 2004 The internationalization process of the firm – a case study, Linköping, 2004

Sørensen, O, 1994 The Porter Approach, Aalborg Univeristy Centre for International Studies January 1994, 10th June 2005

Conceptual frameworks of Power in organizations

In Globalization, Media on 8 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 6:47 πμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/ 

Author: Apostolos Tsorakis

The concept of human societies and human organizations entails the concept of power in a wide range of interpretations. Power is seen as the ability to influence, an ability to affect, an ability to mobilize, a capacity to exert influence, the ability to employ sanctions and so on. There is a range of definitions that the meaning of power, influence control, domination, and authority are not sharply cut off from one another. (Pheby, 2004)

Power in organisations is classically represented by Weber (1947) and is directly concerned with hierarchy or structure and legitimacy. At times of change however, illegitimate power is recognised as of considerable significance. ‘Insiders are not always obedient’ Minzberg (1983).

One of the major theories of power, exchange theory, has as its central assertion in the exchange theory as it appears in economics and has been the notion of the market that is called catallaxy. A catallaxy is a market order without planned ends, characterized by the ‘spontaneous order’ which emerges when individuals pursue their own ends within a framework set by law and tradition. (Hayek, 1982) In a broader organisational context, emphasis on the interpersonal relationships between manager and subordinates or leader and followers can offer an insight into the complicity of power and organisation. The figure shows the sources of power in an organisation and the effects of the Exchange Theory. 

power.jpg 
Reward Power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour by rewarding their desirable behaviour. Coercive Power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour by means of punishment for undesirable behaviour. Legitimate Power most frequently refers to the manager’s ability to influence subordinates’ behaviour because of the manager’s position in the organisation hierarchy. Expert Power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour because of skills, talents or specialised knowledge possessed by the individual. Referent Power is an individual’s ability to influence others’ behaviour as a result of being liked or admired.

The hierarchical relationship between manager and subordinate is not the only dimension of power in an organisation. Power can exist from situations created from the design of the organisation, the type of departmental structure, the opportunity to influence, access to powerful individuals and critical resources. In general, structural and situational sources of power are created by the division of labour and departmentalisation, which naturally result in unequal access to information, resources, decision-making, and other individuals and groups. Knowledge as power means that individuals, groups or departments that possess knowledge crucial to attaining or meeting the organisational goals have power. Resources as power suggest that groups or departments or individuals who can provide critical or difficult to obtain resources acquire power in the organisation. Decision making as power means that individuals or groups acquire power to the extend that they can affect some part of the decision making process. Networks as power imply that various affiliations and coalitions, both inside and outside the organisation, represent sources of power.

It may be argued that users of technology gain power themselves due to a lack of technological training amongst more senior members of the organisation but it is in the information, not the technology that power lies. The use of technological know-how to misrepresent or manipulate data will inevitably be exposed and the use of standard software packages and ‘open systems’ reduces the chance to possess unique knowledge.

Knowing what is going on is what enhances power and the knowledge that such a capability exists clearly enhances subjugation. This seems to be the pivot of the relationship between technology and the labour process in an organisation and explains the change from the industrial bureaucracies of the pre-computer era to the modern information based organisation.

Sources of power are multi-various but the acquisition of power, the loss of power or shifts in the balance of power are likely to occur during times of heightened political activity within an organisation. Strategic and tactical moves are most likely to be made during periods of change and the disruptive effect of implementation of change (especially new technology) creates many threats and opportunities. The concept of ‘early adopters’ was explored by Burkhardt and Brass (1990). They predicted that early adopting individuals (those who readily embrace the new technology) increase their centrality and power within the organisation regardless of the success of the technology industry wide.

When the organisations decision is correct in that it adopts industries eventual dominant design, individual adopters will maintain and ever strengthen their power and position. When the decision is wrong (ie an alternative design becomes dominant in the industry) individual increases in power and centrality may be temporary and last only until the organisation makes the decision to abandon and replace the unsuccessful technology.

A useful summary of cause and effect with respect to early adopters and organisational structure and power is:
• If early adopters are more central than late adopters prior to technological change the existing structure will be reinforced.
• If early adopters are less central than late adopters prior to the change then a structural change will occur.
• If early adopters are more powerful than late adopters prior to the change a redistribution of power is unlikely.
• If early adopters are less powerful than late adopters prior to the change a redistribution of power will occur.

The changes brought about by the implementation of new technology create a climate, if not the need for shifts of centrality and power and engender a rewarding environment for the politically astute.

Engleman, R. and Van de Ven, A. (2002), Motivating and Enabling Conditions of Effective Organizational Change,

Kotter, J.P. (1996),  “Leading Change, Why Transformation Efforts Fail”, Harvard Business Review on Change, HBS Press (1998)
 
Duck, J.D. (1993), Managing Change The Art of Balancing, Harvard Business Review on Change, HBS Press (1998)

Detert, J. R. (2000), A Framework for Linking Culture and Improvement Initiatives in Organizations, Academy of Management Review, vol.25, issue 4, p850.

Strebel, P. (1996), Why Do Employees Resist Change? Harvard Business Review on Change, HBS Press (1998), p.141

Slack et al (1995) Operations Management, Pitman Publishing: London

F A Hayek, (1982), Law, Legislation and Liberty London, 1982

Cromie S., Stephenson B. and Monteith D., (1995) The Management of Family Firms: An Empirical Investigation, International Small Business Journal, 13, pp11-34.

Mandel, S., The business journal of the Greater Triad Area website: Much can be learned from family business strategies, website:

Kerley, R., (2003),  Management of Change, University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business, 2003

Change, family business, television

In Globalization, Media on 7 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 10:01 πμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/ 

Author: Apostolos Tsorakis 

The Television Business and contemporary trends

The television operations can be modeled, according to Slack et al (1995), as the processing of input transformed resources such as: sitcoms, one hour dramas, live shows, news, and sports etc. which are being utilized by the input transforming resources such as: studios, cameras, staff, hardware etc. to be scheduled for broadcasting along with: channel ID’s, interstitials, trailers and advertisements
 
Content is created in studios, newsrooms, and by specialty producers. The channels nowadays are delivered over a variety of networks— cable, satellite, terrestrial, and recently via broadband Internet. The audience that gathers around the content is attractive to third parties such as advertisers.

About five years ago some broadcast group owners began to see that the trends in the industry would never reverse and sought ways to cut costs to stall the decline in broadcast cash flow and began to toy with the idea of moving air operations to centralized sites, with the thought that the savings in labor would be more than the cost of interconnection lines. Simply defined, central casting is the management of various aspects of broadcast operations, including technical, accounting, and programming support for multiple broadcast facilities from a central location usually supported by digital technologies.

Targeting to the opposite of the central casting model, matrix organizational structures as Graham (2002) point out attempt to combine the benefits of decentralization (e.g. closeness to markets, speed of decision-making and implementation) with those of co-ordination (e.g. achieving synergies across business units, territories and products).

The Family business culture

It has been observed that, both in Greece as well as in international level, many family groups own significant portion of interests in the media industry. Mandel describes that the complexity of family business is appropriate to be examined from various perspectives of management, psychology, and finance. Family businesses are different because the principals make decisions based on the complex interaction among business, family, and ownership systems. (Mandel, 2001) There are though some differences among family businesses due to the degree of inclination of business-first or a family-first philosophy (Cromie et al., 1995).

Family businesses furthermore foster clan culture which assumes that people can be better managed through teamwork and employee development, customers are conceived as partners, the organization is a friendly work environment and the major task of management is to empower employees and facilitate their participation, commitment and loyalty. The leader is parent-figure, team-builders, facilitators and supporters. The company is held together by loyalty or tradition.

Change Literature

What makes change a particularly complex situation is mainly the fact that it involves the organization as a whole: each company acts as a complete mechanism and none of the parts can be seen in isolation; on the contrary each piece adds to the balance of the system and has to be given special attention.  Change therefore, cannot be broken into small pieces. Managing balance means connecting all the pieces and balancing them in such a way so that to achieve the set goals. (Duck, 1993)

Many researchers have tried to identify the change management errors that may lead a change initiative to a disaster. Kotter (1996) argues that the first things managers have to do are: establish a great sense of urgency about the need for change, and then assemble a group of people powerful enough to lead the change effort. Taking these first two steps in the wrong direction may condemn the whole effort. Lacking of vision, and under-communicating the vision, are two of the most common errors managers do.

Other researchers argue that the effectiveness of organizational change is a function of the extent to which employees are motivated and enabled to implement organizational initiatives. (Engleman and Ven, 2002). This means that in order for change to succeed people are important: not only they should be adequately informed and persuaded about the need for change but they should also be provided with an “enabling context”. As “enabling context” one can define the necessary elements within the organization that will support the change efforts and which managers have to make sure they are there when attempting to enact change, those are: corporate values and vision, cooperation and trust, effective leadership and rewards & recognition. (Kotter, 1996)

From the employees’ point of view, change is disruptive because it upsets the balance. (Strebel, 1996). Adding to the above the fact that change involves the organization as a whole and that for change to occur in any organization, each person must think, feel or do something different, (Duck, 1993) it is easily being understood that change destroys established equilibrium while managers and employees need to navigate the turmoil of metamorphosis.

For many people the first reaction to change will be unhappiness, resistance, and possible attempted rejection, the cycle of change though has a number of clear and distinct stages: Denial – typical first reaction, Defiance and rejection – the disbelief aspect of denial, Acceptance – gradual acceptance, Adapting – learning about the new system and Adoption – partially acceptance of the change as an improvement and not as dissolve of previous arrangements. (Kerley, 2003)

Power in organizations

The concept of human societies and human organizations entails the concept of power in a wide range of interpretations. Power is seen as the ability to influence, an ability to affect, an ability to mobilize, a capacity to exert influence, the ability to employ sanctions and so on. There is a range of definitions that the meaning of power, influence control, domination, and authority are not sharply cut off from one another. (Pheby, 2004)

One of the major theories of power, exchange theory, has as its central assertion in the exchange theory as it appears in economics and has been the notion of the market that is called catallaxy A catallaxy is a market order without planned ends, characterized by the ‘spontaneous order’ which emerges when individuals pursue their own ends within a framework set by law and tradition. From this perspective, there are two requirements necessary to sustain catallaxy: a) then need to enforce agreements to guard against the excesses of egoism and b) the need to prevent monopoly in order to maintain competition. Having these two conditions satisfied, power relations follow a free process of exchange.  (Hayek, 1982)

Given that the organisations comprises of humans, there are numerous combinations that might occur in practice as a result of their interactions in the way they manage change since people are apparently reluctant debtors but willing lenders. A person who supplies services to others obliges them to provide some return. If those who accept his services cannot provide any acceptable return, they must, in order to fulfil obligations and to ensure continuance of supplies, comply with his wishes, in other words submit to his power. (Lively cited in Pheby, 2004)

Cromie S., Stephenson B. and Monteith D., (1995) The Management of Family Firms: An Empirical Investigation, International Small Business Journal, 13, pp11-34.

Detert, J. R. (2000), A Framework for Linking Culture and Improvement Initiatives in Organizations, Academy of Management Review, vol.25, issue 4, p850.

Duck, J.D. (1993), Managing Change The Art of Balancing, Harvard Business Review on Change, HBS Press (1998)

Engleman, R. and Van de Ven, A. (2002), Motivating and Enabling Conditions of Effective Organizational Change,

Hayek, F. A. (1982), Law, Legislation and Liberty London, 1982

Kerley, R., (2003),  Management of Change, University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business, 2003

Kotter, J.P. (1996),  “Leading Change, Why Transformation Efforts Fail”, Harvard Business Review on Change, HBS Press (1998)

Mandel, S., The business journal of the Greater Triad Area website: Much can be learned from family business strategies, website:

Pheby, K., (2004), Power and organizations, University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business, 2004

Slack et al (1995) Operations Management, Pitman Publishing: London

Strebel, P. (1996), Why Do Employees Resist Change? Harvard Business Review on Change, HBS Press (1998), p.141

TV News

In Globalization, Media on 6 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 8:14 μμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/ 

Television news is awash in a sea of change brought about by disruptive innovations in technology. In order to see the real future, one must step away from the forest and get away from all the noise, because these changes are really all about people, and not merely the technology. Our culture is changing, and unless and until we can see that, any attempt to “correct” for change will ultimately prove to be shortsighted at best. But if we can see it, that knowledge will alter our plans — even those for tomorrow — because there is certainly a place for television and television news in a Postmodern world.

  • Premodern: I believe, therefore I understand
  • Modern: I reason, therefore I understand
  • Postmodern: I experience, therefore I understand

Postmodernism is the Age of Participation. Postmoderns distrust institutional authority figures and intuitively trust those who’ve actually experienced the things that Modernists only study. It is through these experiences — and to a great extent, shared experiences — that people are forming their tribes.

The television industry’s obsession with celebrity and the easy marketing thereof is meaningless in a today’s world that has demystified the industry and its hype, rejects elitism and doesn’t need its information spoon fed by good-looking faces anyway.

  • Firstly, time is precious to today’s viewers.
  • Secondly, viewers prefer to have the reporter who was there to give them his or her take on it than somebody sitting in a studio.
  • Thirdly, the only “personalities” viewers care about are those who share their beliefs and provide the arguments that viewers need to communicate with other members of their “tribe.”
  • Finally, viewers have little time or respect for people on pedestals, especially those who don’t have a clue as to what they are going through.

The pejorative term “media elite” is generally used by conservatives to slam those with a liberal bias, but, for today’s viewers, it goes way beyond that.  In a Postmodern world, where the power is with the information consumer, this elitist gap is a huge liability. Today’s viewers disdain for elites has little to do with counterculture energy, as some believe.
 
In other ways, the TV industry itself is guilty of erecting the pedestal that separates news people from viewers. For example, the TV news consulting firm, Audience Research and Development (AR&D) coined a phrase that has been used for years in positioning anchors with the audience — the Command Anchor. The talent side of what used to be AR&D is now called “Talent Dynamics.” Here’s what their marketing material says about the concept: “I will guide you through this newscast. You’ve been busy with your life all day, but you want to know what else is going on in your world. I’ve been here watching and investigating for you. Sit back, relax, watch and listen; I’ll see to it that you are brought up to date.” “Viewers form a relationship with their news anchors. The greater the perceptions of an anchor in “command” of the newscast content, the stronger the relationship and, therefore, the bond. Longevity in a market is a sure path to Command Anchor status, but we can speed up the process.”

In a passive audience environment, this is terribly smart. We build newscasts in such a way that the audience believes the anchor is in charge. Story intros and outros are crafted, so that the most important facts of the story are given to the anchors, not the field reporters. When there’s “team coverage,” guess who leads the team? Anchors recap or summarize big stories to further the notion that they are in command. They thank and congratulate people in the field, which leaves the impression that the work was done for them. People follow people, the old saying goes, and that’s a critical factor in the marketing of television news. Local television anchors are often the celebrities of the communities they serve. The more popular they are, the greater the likelihood the community will watch their newscasts. So what’s wrong with positioning them as such? The problem is the world is changing, and these strategies are actually driving people away. The audience is no longer passive, and the very attributes that help boost an anchor to Command status are those that create the air of elitism that viewers find so repugnant.

The video news people of tomorrow will be very different than those of today. They’ll write, shoot and edit their own material. The ability to write will be paramount, for — in an on-demand world — people will read the words before they watch the video. The compensation will be based on the work, not the appearance.

These are exciting, pioneering times for television news and for the people who work in it. What may appear on the surface to be a tragedy is actually a doorway to incredible opportunities, both for those who do the news and those who consume it. And as the consumer guides himself through the news of the day, reporters will have their stories all to themselves.

10 ideas for consideration

The traditional audiences share a universal faith in logic and science. Today’s audience sees the realism of limitations. So how does anyone “do news” for today’s audiences? The following ideas are open for discussion:

1. Firstly, there are no news except television (better: “video”) news. Viewers want to see and hear for themselves, not read about it from a distance.
2. News must be available 24/7. Gone are the days when people will tune in at a specific time to be “given” the news.
3. There’s no such thing as a newscast in a postmodernist world. Stories must be available simultaneously, with the viewer able to select at random. Viewers don’t believe they should have to wait for anything.
4. News must not be afraid to present the absurdities and contradictions of life as parts of the reality of a multi-cultural, diverse world.
5. News must include everybody’s perspective, identify the organization’s own perspective, or give none at all. The artificial journalistic hegemony known as objectivity is dead. It never was real and TV viewers see through it.
6. News must give up its obsession with stardom and celebrity. Today’s viewers reject authority and elitism (newscasters and reporters) in favor of participation and the knowledge acquired therein.
7. Reporters could and perhaps should represent the various tribes. This would provide sort of a global view from which viewers could pick and choose. “Now what?” is an important question for the viewers, but only insofar as they can make up their own minds.
8. ”Live” is hypercritical, for the viewers wants to participate more than anything else.
9. News must be interactive, but the goal is participation, not driving viewers to goals or solutions.
10. It’s time for TV stations to spin their news departments out as wholly owned subsidiary companies and permit them to seek their own distribution outlets. Create a licensing arrangement with the parent company for broadcast rights, and let the laws of the market determine who continues and who doesn’t. Despite their similarities, broadcasters are not Web people, because their interests conflict. Consequently, TV stations only play with the Internet, and in so doing, they miss the point of the technology. They also deny and ignore the primary conduit to the whole postmodernist movement. It will stay that way unless the news becomes its own master, complete with the option to decide how best to distribute its product.

10 things that can be done in accordance with the above considerations: 

1. Get off pedestal. The anchor-in-charge-of-everything image is offensive to viewers, who shun authority as nothing special. Elitism is fingernails-on-the-chalkboard to viewers. We’re just not as important as we think we are, and climbing off the pedestal helps us view our audience with the respect they now demand.
2. Get out of the box, and let people get out of the box.
3. Get relevant! And start by defining relevance. There are a lot of reasons young people don’t watch the news, but the biggest one is there’s nothing on that’s relevant to them. Today’s viewers have information needs. What are they? How do you meet them?
4. Get involved in the community. Why are we so afraid to take a position on an issue and go after it? Today’s viewers see through the artificial journalistic hegemony called objectivity, so why can’t we? They like a little argument with their information, as evidenced by the variety of information portals Internet users seek to develop their own opinions. Local news Websites aren’t among them.
5. Get local! Forget about what “worked” in other countries or towns. The homogeneity generated by news consultants has taken the local out of local news and replaced it with franchised fear.
6. Empower your viewers to participate. Get your audience involved in what you do day in and day out. Today is the Age of Participation.
7. Rethink and reinvent the art of the tease. You can’t force people to move from one daypart to another anymore. It’s insulting to viewers, who want what they want when they want it, and you’re pushing people away while trying to attract them.
8. Seize control of the Website. The technology exists to do quality Video News on Demand online.
9. Think multi-media at all levels in the news gathering process. TV News and Newspaper news are converging online. The greatest future threat is not the television competitors, but the local paper, assuming they’re actively pursuing an online business model.
10. Embrace electronic news gathering by putting small cameras and laptop edit systems in the hands of journalists. Stations that embrace the technology will find new opportunities and a staff more inclined to reporting than entertaining.
New Contemporary Ideas

Dan Gillmor, SiliconValley.com blogger and tech columnist for the San Jose Mercury News, writes, “OhmyNews is transforming the 20th century’s journalism-as-lecture model — where organizations tell the audience what the news is and the audience either buys it or doesn’t — into something vastly more bottom-up, interactive and democratic.”

OhmyNews may not be THE model for news in the 21st century, but it bears consideration for an industry that’s going nowhere fast. It’s a simple and relatively inexpensive concept for TV stations to try. Somebody’s going to do it, soon. Here are five suggestions to jump start the idea.

1. Create a reality show wherein viewers “compete” to be citizen reporters. Make a big deal of it. Winnow the field down to, say, twelve finalists, and build the show around them. Let each go out and do a story and have your audience “vote” on the five or six that will become your citizen journalists.
2. Equip them with consumer level digital video recorders and laptop editors. Give them the training they need and turn them loose. You’ll obviously want to maintain editorial control, but give them as much room as you can to report stories their own way. Pay them a stipend for each piece they generate.
3. Mix their stories into your news with or without fanfare. You could flag each story for what it is, or let it stand on its own. If the OhmyNews experience teaches anything, it’s that the professional will be surprised by what these people turn up.
4. Make one newscast a ‘citizen’ newscast. It doesn’t have to be in some highly visible daypart. People will find it. Stream this program and make it available on your Website.
5. Get them together as a panel to comment on news regularly. Let these people represent the folks on the other side of the glass. Put them in a studio setting and roll tape. It would make a great Sunday feature.

Porters model of international strategy

In A theory of life, Globalization, Media, Technology, Διάφορα, Ρίξτε μια ματιά on 1 Ιουνίου , 2006 at 12:53 μμ

https://www.openbc.com/hp/Apostolos_Tsorakis/  

Author: Apostolos Tsorakis 

1. Porter’s Basic Concepts

The concept of “industry”, as it has been recorded in all of Porters writings, is the field where different factors, forces and dimensions influence and shape competition. Porter strongly believes and supports that the structures of industry and the forces of competition drive the wins or losses of the firm. Defining hence the firm’s goals in the industry environment he is equally committed to the concept of “strategy” with a firm’s strategy based on the creation of competitive advantage. As his aim is to devise company strategies and as the ways in which firms create and sustain competitive advantages provide the necessary foundation for the role of the home nation, his understanding of the concept of a firm is critical. Porter does not discuss explicitly the objective of the firm rather he assumes that this is the maximization of long-term return on investments where the exact profit does not represent the firm’s goals in a micro economic manner. His main concern though, is how does the company create and sustain competitive advantage. His understanding of the goal of a firm is that of “profit orientation”.

According to Porter the organization of the firm is viewed as nine generic activities comprising the “value chain” where those activities form an interdependent system with linkages among them. The performance of one activity influences the performance of the others in a dynamic situation. A major managerial task aroused by this situation is that the connected activities have to be coordinated in content, over time and space. Competitive advantage thus is gained by carrying out the activities at lower cost, better value and superior coordination.

Porter identified the “value chain” as a means of analyzing an organization’s strategically relevant activities in order to understand the behaviour of costs. Competitive advantage comes from carrying out those activities in a more cost-effective way than ones competitors, an achievement which becomes a challenging managerial task where innovation takes the place of the key concept. Porter defines innovation in a way to include both product and process innovations and innovations in relation to all nine generic activities. According to Porter, competition is determined by five competitive forces making up the structure of the industry where the profit potential and the strategy of the firm are determined by them. Five forces looks at five key areas namely the threat of entry, the power of buyers, the power of suppliers, the threat of substitutes, and competitive rivalry. 

Following the overall determination of the competitiveness of an industry, Porter has developed a tool to analyze the rivalry among the firms of the industry. By means of the concept “strategic group”, the firms within the industry are sub-divided into groups pursuing the same strategy. A competitive strategy furthermore, according to Porter, is seen as a broad formula for how a business is going to compete which is defined by “three generic strategies” for achieving above average performance in an industry. Those strategies are: cost leadership, differentiation, and focus.Following the overall determination of the competitiveness of an industry, Porter has developed a tool to analyze the rivalry among the firms of the industry. By means of the concept “strategic group”, the firms within the industry are sub-divided into groups pursuing the same strategy. A competitive strategy furthermore, according to Porter, is seen as a broad formula for how a business is going to compete which is defined by “three generic strategies” for achieving above average performance in an industry. Those strategies are: cost leadership, differentiation, and focus.

2. Porter’s International Strategy model

The central point in Porter’s International Strategy is the value chain: the nine generic activities and their manipulation from a company, country, or person to thrive in the international and domestic economies. Competition for Porter is the key to excellence. The major question thus is what happens to the nine activities in the course of internationalization and how these provide the necessary competitive advantage? Conceptualizing international competition Porter provides a useful two dimensional framework (Figure 3) in which he categorizes internationalization as involving:

  • configuration: where and at what scale are primary activities (Inbound logistics, Operations, Outbound logistics, Marketing and Sales and Services) conducted, and
  • coordination: to what extent and how are activities coordinated

Configuration issues concern where in the world each activity in the value chain is performed, and in how many places each activity is performed. Coordination issues concern the coordination of each activity when it is done in more than one place. For example, if the company has three plants: in the US, Finland and Taiwan, how do the activity at each plant relate to each other? Thinking in Porter’s terms of configuration and coordination, companies will try to configure and coordinate their operations in a way that is most efficient cost-wise and quality-wise. For example, they may centralize large-scale production of products to achieve economies of scale. The use of this configuration/ coordination matrix identifies both geographic positioning and the integration of value activities as determinants of competitive advantage in global industries.

According to the figure, there could be many different kinds of global strategies, depending on a firm’s choice about these dimensions throughout the value added chain. Porter identifies four broad combinations of configuration and coordination and hence four variations in international strategy:

  • The “export-based” strategy revolves around a geographically concentrated configuration with low coordination of activities. Under this perspective a company is attempting to gain benefits in the upstream activities (Inbound logistics, Operations, Outbound logistics) by focusing them on a single or limited number of sites and also a significant part of value creation takes place in the downstream  (Marketing & Sales and Services) section of the value chain (usually decentralised marketing).

  • The “country-centred” strategy has few coordinated activities and geographically dispersed configuration. In this case a reduced size replica of the parent company operates as though it was a local firm, but without the necessary autonomy. Significant diversity is possible within the miniature facsimile class, so it is further subdivided into adopters, adapters and innovators. 

  • Combining high levels of co-ordination with geographically dispersed activities results in a strategy that Porter terms “high foreign investment” with extensive co-ordination among subsidiaries. High levels of coordination between different sites are expensive. 

  • Geographically concentrated activities combined with high co-ordination of activities describes the “purest global” strategy. This term refers to a range rather than a single strategy, it characterises a company seeking to gain competitive advantage from its international presence both by concentrating its configuration and having a high level of co-ordination of international activities. Such a strategy is likely to involve a chain where most of the value is created in upstream activities, with downstream operations being co-ordinated for cost effectiveness.

3. Real cases in relation to Porter’s model

The Carrefour case

Founded in France in 1960, Carrefour is the largest retail company in France and seventh in the world. Carrefour operates in a variety of retail formats such as mini-markets, automotive centres, supermarkets, and warehouse stores. However, its main emphasis is hypermarkets which sell various goods including food, clothing, consumer goods and household appliances. These stores have a large open marketplace atmosphere and provide excellent prices. This formula has proved to be a successful format; however, Carrefour’s domestic expansion was restricted by French legislature. The limitation on hypermarket development led to Carrefour’s international expansion through profitable joint ventures.

Carrefour has strong experience and capabilities in operating on a global level as a high degree of profits are internationally generated. Also, they have the ability to operate on low profit margins. Historically, they have differentiated themselves in the hypermarket sector by focusing on cost leadership, multi-specialisation and private labels. Carrefour has 119 stores in France, 96 stores across the world and a number of regional distribution centres (physical resources). The company’s philosophy has been one of decentralisation, while the human resources department has acquired a vast amount of knowledge, experience and skills in operating within international markets, in strategic alliances and operating on low profits. Carrefour has a number of intangible resources including a good corporate image and a strong private label. The value chain analysis (Figure 4) assesses Carrefour’s competencies through the examination of its primary and support activities.

This analysis concentrates on inbound and outbound logistics, the marketing and sales of the company. In terms of procurement or inbound logistics, Carrefour concentrates on host country purchasing. This can benefit the company as purchases will be made in the same currency as sales allowing the company to meet local government regulations or standards. However, it may prove to be a disadvantage to the company if raw materials may be acquired at a cheaper price from outside the country. Regional distribution centres facilitate the gathering and distribution of merchandise to the stores. The centres facilitate inbound and outbound logistics. As it pertains to marketing and sales, Carrefour operates and is experienced using heavy promotion in international markets. This indicates experience with marketing products within different countries and cultures. 

The MLN case MLN is a privately owned Indonesian garment manufacturer that produces various styles of ladies wear, from fairly plain casual wear to high fashion dresses with a lot of accessories (embroidery and sequins). Their customers range from independent shops or boutiques in Germany, Japan or USA to Italian fashion houses such as Gucci or La Ricci. As is common practice in this type of industry, MLN starts its operations every year by generating ideas and making samples of products for the next summer season. The whole design process is conducted by the company. When samples of product are ready, wholesaler then screen the samples and organize an exhibition where potential customers (agents for boutiques, shops or fashion houses) can see the company’s latest creation. As soon as the potential customers see the samples, MLN starts to forecast the amount of materials needed for the production.

The company’s principal material is cloth or fabric, which they buy in the grey state from their suppliers in China. Following the sample and exhibition period customers will usually place firm orders, which start the production process. The production stages, which include cutting, sewing, putting on accessories and finishing, are labour intensive. In each stage of production a quality check is conducted. However, in most cases the customer will do another quality check. Finished garments (unlabelled) from MLN are shipped by the wholesaler’s logistics company and after putting on their own labels wholesaler sell them to end customers via shops and boutiques. For the MLN supply chain, the other members in the chain are wholesalers that act as their direct customers, and agents – which distribute the products to the end customers. Sometimes, agents can deal directly with MLN without the presence of wholesaler.

Assessing MLN from the perspective of Porters model of internationalization, it seems that the advantage to be gained by doing international business is low labour cost. None of the company’s products are targeted principally at the local market and the labour content in its operations is relatively high.  MLN appears to deal directly with the planning, procurement, and production stages in the supply chain, while the intensity of coordination increases greatly. The supply chain of MLN, coordination between the company and their customers take place only in the sampling process. In addition, customers may also order certain types of materials and therefore co-ordination is necessary in procuring the right materials.

When an order has been placed and material is agreed, the customer does not tend to get involved in production. The customer however will do a second quality check on the finished garments.  Considering the above two cases it seems that the coordination, no matter on the geographic dispersion, also is the distinctive feature of global strategy. If a firm is to sell in Mexico, it must be close to buyers, and have downstream activities (offices, showrooms, stock, sales and repair teams) in Mexico; while it may also have production facilities in Mexico. Downstream activities create country-specific advantages, like the firm’s reputation (Carrefour good corporate image and a strong private label), brand name (KFC), trademark (Sheffield silver) or service network (IBM). Upstream activities can be decoupled from buyers or wholesalers (MLN), and they create competitive advantages which can be utilized in many different countries.

References – Bibliography

ER, M., MACCARTHY, B., Configuration and coordination in international supply chains: Preliminary Findings from International Manufacturing Companies in Indonesia University of Nottingham NG7 2RD UK

MORRISON, A., ROTH, K., 1993, “Relating Porter’s configuration/coordination framework to competitive strategy and structural mechanisms: analysis and implications”, Journal of Management, Winter1993; 19: 797-818

PORTER, M.E., 1986, “Changing patterns of international competition”, California Management Review, Vol. 28 No. 2, 1986, pp. 9-40.

PORTER, M.E., 1986, Competition in Global Industries (1986). Boston, Mass.: Harvard BusinessSchool Press.

PORTER, M.E., 1990, The Competitive Advantaqe of Nations (1990). London : The MacMillan Press.

ROTH, K.,. (1992), International Configuration and Co-ordination Archetypes for Medium-Sized Firms in Global Industries, Journal of International Business Studies, Third Quarter, 1992, pp. 533-549

SYLVERBERG, T, 2004 The internationalization process of the firm – a case study, Linköping, 2004, http://www.ep.liu.se/exjobb/eki/2004/iep/026/, accessed 10th June 2005

Sørensen, O, 1994 The Porter Approach, Aalborg Univeristy Centre for International Studies January 1994, http://www.business.aau.dk/ivo/publications/study/sms6.pdf , 10th June 2005

Bekkhus, R., 1993, Carrefour: Opportunities in Mexico, http://www.business.no/artikkel_final_strategic.htm, 10th June 2005