Planning v. Dumb Luck

Planning is key to success, but anyone that tells you that dumb luck is not part of the equation for success is a liar. Everyone at some point gets lucky. Stars align and something takes place that greatly benefits your situation. Purely relying on dumb luck would not be a prudent decision, but business people need to understand that circumstances outside of your control can sometimes come together and greatly assist you in your situation. The key is that managers still have a well-developed plan and leave themselves open to the benefits of dumb luck.

Another Outsourcing Question

When thinking about the future of outsourcing, the question of expense could have a very interesting answer. Outsourcing has always been looked at as the cheaper way to do many business operations. If trends continue, businesses will continue to use outsourcing to cut costs. Historically, the more popular something becomes the more expensive it becomes. In a capitalistic society, what trend would bow first? One would have to think that outsourcing would become the more expensive option.

Outsourcing

I feel that as a manager you need to be making the decision if your business will be outsourcing. IT can give you the necessary information you need to decide if you will outsource, but the final decision needs to be made by the manager.
When it comes to the question of whether to use best of breed or single-sourcing in terms of IT, I feel that the decision is clear. When using a best of breed approach, you are creating a great deal more work for managers. Managers have to keep up with multiple businesses that are responsible for your company's IT. Not only do managers have more work to do, but the different companies that perform various IT functions may not work together harmoniously. These issues show that a single sourcing approach is the safer option for a corporation.

Outsourcing and Virtual Offices

Outsourcing is obviously a great way to take a business process that is not one's core competency and let another person, or group of people, handle that task in a sufficient manner. Outsourcing can also be a way for companies to save money by assigning certain tasks to a cheaper workforce. Although their are these obvious benefits, outsourcing can lead to some very serious problems. British Petroleum is the perfect example of the failures that can arise with outsourcing. Outsourcing is all about relationships. When you delegate a certain task to another organization, you are giving them the responsibility to represent your interests. In other words, their mistakes become your mistakes. BP's failure to track performance, safety, and a variety of other factors led to problems with the Deepwater Horizion.

Another interesting topic is the subject of virtual offices. A company goes virtual when they no longer perform their normal day-to-day operations in a physical location, instead choosing to work from home and use an office as a home base for activities such as client meetings. I have a friend that works for a company that uses a virtual office. He designs web pages, which he could much easily do at home. They use their office as a home "hub" that allows them to have a meeting place for clients, employees, and contact. The idea of a virtual office is one that may gain popularity due to the rise in technological jobs.

IT Transformation

Dr. Stephanie Mills talk on the new types of IT implementation at OLOL was an intriguing topic. Doctors are a group of people that are not very open to new ways of doing things. With that being said, it seems to be a tall order to implement a new IT system that combines, automates, and archives many different types of hospital activities. Where as a hospital seems like a likely place to implement comprehensive technology,   doctors and hospital employees might make it difficult to implement such technology. Dr. Mills really showed the benefits of the new technology, while illustrating the difficulties in getting the medical community at OLOL to "buy in."

Change

It seems like many companies get stuck in their ways and refuse to adopt technologies that would most certainly help their business. The first step has to be someone that sees the benefits of change and brings new, helpful technology to the attention of decision makers. Many people are just not willing to change and the only way they will adopt a new technology is if they are sold on it. The tactics are not going to change, the difference between an organization that accepts change as a part of business and an organization that stubbornly refuses to adopt new technology usually comes down to one or a few decision makers. How that company moves forward depends on how persuasive a proponent of change can be toward those decision makers. The best way to convince one of those decision makers is to show them the bottom line of accepting new technology. Accepting "system A" will streamline "process B" and save you this much money. Other than drawing people a picture of the benefits, most people are unwilling to change what they see as a "good thing."

Finding Your "Game Changer"

First of all, when it comes to whether or not a company should invest in IT, the choice will usually be invest. The benefits of using the most state of the art technologies greatly outweigh using a creative or "maverick" approach. Although that answer seems clear, a company like Zara blurs the lines of whether an investment in IT is actually the right move. Personally, I couldn't deal with that sort of shopping experience. I want to get in and get out, easily finding what I need and getting the help I need. I also like my clothing to last more than a week, but hey that's just me. Zara, though, has found a market that is the anti-me. A company must look at their core competencies and decide if a move toward updated, state of the art IT goes with those core competencies. Although I would push for Zara to institute some sort of hybrid IT system that would still allow them to be innovators as far as their trendy approach goes, I think Zara might be one of those companies that is better suited to being a "maverick" in the clothing industry.
I think that one of the important things that companies must do is try to make the new competition move closer to them. Creating a system that works for you is important. Creating a system that others see as a system that they must make work for them is a game changer. IT or no IT, if something makes you the industry leader go with it... for a while. Always be fine tuning your system. Zara had no IT, everything was on the racks and all styles were "first come, first served." A hybrid system is a way in which Zara can keep their trendy system in tact, while jointly making their system more error free. Their system was a game changer giving them control of the market. The addition of IT is a way for Zara to maintain that hold.

From Our In-Class Discussion

The first question asked talked about the balance between control and freedom and wondered if strategic control is the best option. I believe that while every manager should seek to have a good amount of control over the entity that they are involved with, no one person knows the right way to do everything. Personal freedom, in certain circumstances, goes into making the most viable business. Looking at Mrs. Field's Cookies, strategically controlling your operations is important to any business. The problem arises when you stop accepting that other people or businesses might know what they are talking about. As a manager, you must give people the freedom to do the job. They might just solve a problem better than you would of. It is key that as a manager, one find the balance between control and freedom that works best for their business.
Just as we need a balance between control and freedom, we also need a balance between centralization and decentralization. A successful company must be centralized in order to make strategic decisions. Everyone in an organization has to be on the same page and those decisions need to be made by the uppermost decision makers in a firm. In correlation with that though, a firm must be decentralized when it comes to things like global expansion. Different countries have different customs and ways of doing things. A CEO must known that they can not possibly be the foremost authority on knowing how to do everything and will need the help of others in making those decisions in circumstances which they do not understand.

Social Networking and the Mobile Web

I, for one, am a person that is always on my phone. I am constantly texting, calling, checking email, looking up information on the internet, etc. Since I took the plunge into the smart phone world, my data usage has increased every month. And the statistics don't lie, I am not alone. The changes in society have made it a necessity that we are constantly connected to everything around us. If someone needs the latest information, they have to have a way to access it. The mobile web, most commonly smart phones, has become an essential part of participating in the world today.
One of the things that I use my phone to do is check Facebook. Facebook has become such a remarkable entity compared to when I began my undergraduate career at LSU 6 years ago. I remember people talking about students trying to bring Facebook to LSU, talking about how "cool" Facebook was. When LSU was finally on Facebook, I created a profile just "because." The newest trend has now become a staple of today's society. And with the popularity of Facebook growing daily, more and more SNS's have appeared.
Businesses almost have an obligation to take advantage of these enterprises and find strategic benefits to using them. Many companies set up fan pages on Facebook to gain interest in their company. LinkedIn has become an important tool for professionals to connect to one another.
With all these trends, the future of technology and the way people connect to each other will be very interesting.

Technology Overload

I thinks its obvious that companies are only going to continue to move downstream and get as close as possible to the consumer. New check-in apps and other tech creations like Facebook Places are just the beginning of companies becoming completely ingrained in everything that we do. The only way to deal with all of these new technologies is to allow them in and see how they can enhance or improve your life.

I'm not the kind of person that gets all excited about everyone knowing where I am at a given moment or being asked to perform challenges to earn points for a future purchase at a moments notice, i.e. burrito origami. Even though those particular technologies don't interest me does not mean that companies never-ending attempts to move more and more into my life can not, in some way, enhance my life.

I hate shopping. Absolutely hate it. And I hate malls. But reading the Wall Street Journal article "Luring Shoppers To Stores" showed how the future of shopping might be more up my alley. By making it easier to find the things I need at the right price, new shopping techs could be downstream activities that I welcome with open arms. I also never really want someone to know where I am at all times. It almost seems like I am being willingly cyber stalked, but how about apps like Foursquare that can sign you in depending on location and can give you great places that you would like to eat. Menus, reviews, and where to go in my hand in seconds, sounds pretty great.

Technology is all about how you perceive it and maybe I can continue to look at some of these new techs and learn to love what they can provide.

Starting Off

I just started my blog for BADM 7050. Lets see how it works out.