Wiki contents

Journals

2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This week our group are group was quite nervous due to us being taken over, and not knowing how much it could affect us and what it meant for us as the firm being taken over. We found a lot of information about being the parent company but not a lot about what to do as the taken over firm. We decided that it would be a good idea to contact the company that took us over in order to get on the same page as to what we need to do to make the acquisition of our company mutually beneficial.

For our decisions, it was worrisome because we had finally fine-tuned our decisions so that our sales translated into profit and our performance was finally turning around so after being taken over we were unsure how much that would affect our sales and profit.

Bahai & Viguerie (2009) suggested that in order to discover and facilitate growth the market place and its performance must be scrutinised. Looking at our decisions and its results we always analysed the market and its activities to figure out where we need to adjust our own decisions and evaluate our performance in order to make the necessary changes for the better. Our sales and revenue was growing each year however so was our debt as we struggled to keep costs down. However upon further investigation into the reports and spreadsheets we discovered where our decisions weren’t translating into growth and where the potential growth existed within the marketplace. Davenport (2006) indicated that there are very few differences between competitors’ products and that differences in business processes are one of the few ways left to differentiate oneself from competition. This can be very useful for us in our new situation where we find ourselves working together with our parent company to try and find ways for each of us to grow. We will analyse and place the market under a microscope to find and hopefully capitalise on the areas of potential market growth. We are in a position to help each other succeed and with any luck increase our shareholder value.

Baghai, M., Smit, S., & Viguerie, P. (2009). Is your growth strategy flying blind? Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 86---96.

Davenport, T. H. (2006). Competing on analyticsHarvard Business Review, 84(1), 98--107.

2 Comments

  1. In Week 4 you described your teams problem of being slow to make decisions as all team members contribute on every decision made, you said that this was likely due to each individual not fully understand their own role- probably due to everyone being fairly new to the simulation still. You proposed a solution of clearly defining a long term team strategy.

    In this Week you describe your main concern as being takeover and a lack of clarity with what this will entail for your team. As you reflect you tried to research MikesBikes info to get a better understanding, and also decided to contact the firm taking you over- these both seem like logical steps to me to counter your fear of the unknown regarding takeovers. However, the rest of your journal then goes on to describe how your team operated and that you had just managed to review spreadsheets and find potential growth areas. Whilst this is interesting, it is backwards facing and I feel it doesn't directly correlate to your stated problem. For me you should be questioning and analysing how your team will deal with potential changes regarding the takeover- how will this affect your objectives/ decision making process?

    I think a definite improvement this week is your use references, as this not only makes your journal seem more professional but it also makes you as the writer refer to specific ideas from the readings and expand on them.

     

  2. Hi Vincent

    Looking back at my comment from week four I must apologise as I now feel that I may have given a bad comment. The problem with that journal was that you didn't elaborate enough on your points and I feel as if this is still a problem with this week's journal. There simply isn't enough detail in it for me to be able to tell that you've truly learnt something.

    I also commented that you had reached the higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy in week four. While I can see how this was technically true, I can now say that it was an excellent example of single loop learning. You focused on fixing the problem at hand instead of fixing the cause of the problem. This is also evident in this weeks reflection. It feels as if all you have said is "we were uncertain and then we weren't". 

    Furthermore, your references in your reading felt incredibly contrived, as if you had just put them in there for the sake of having some. Your references are really supposed to add something to what you have to say in your reflection, which is something I didn't feel they did. 

    I understand that I have been very critical of what you've written this week but I honestly feel that you should address these problems when writing your final summative learning journal. If you have any questions just ask.