This week I have learnt a lot. Not so much in content but from the simulation process of Mikes Bikes in relation to how executives and members feel.
Our Mikes Bikes run for making a decent SHV crashed when we became insolvent in the previous turnover. It really made me question what went wrong and how did it get to this point. Despite being eminent from the beginning about the important role of a market and sales person, our grouped seemed to try and continue without stressing its importance. As a result, we invested in markets we weren't making sales in then further investing large amounts of cash in advertising not contributing to the improvement of our brand name and eventually crashing with the release of five products into unknown markets making the assumption the markets would react exactly as our strategy had predicted. Being in charge of the finances of course made me feel horrible knowing we were insolvent and it was almost like it's my fault that I couldn't prevent this from happening. I really took on upon myself, however. By continuously asking the question "how much do you think this will generate in sales & returns?" the answer was always something positive but realistically impossible to achieve based on hunches and not estimates. I remember in our first class in Bus304 where Peter was taking us as our lecturer wasn't back yet and he asked something about the amount of a specific car in New Zealand. It was a random question considering it was our very first class and all we had covered were admin materials, but in the end he told us that, we're always going to have to make estimates and we need to be able to come up with an answer by thinking in a way that would amount to a reasonable conclusion, i.e. we started of with the population of New Zealand and further dissected our estimates. I'm bringing this into my journal because this week has been heavily based on how bad our group has performed and I feel like unless we take on board something I hoped to have got established since the beginning of this simulation, our group won't see any changes. We wanted to know how the market reacted to our products as it was released. I have no idea how to read that and so I was relying on our marketing director for insightful information, however. It seems like that because it was only the second round, it was like impossible to come up with a reasonable conclusion, and this for me ended up being the failure in our company. We essentially were competing in a market we had no understanding of. We didn't look into how our cash on hand could be allocated effectively to generate maximum returns. I'm really disappointed in our performance and it's not a matter of playing the 'blame game' because when I recall Thursday afternoons, it was a matter deep in my mind that needed solving but it wasn't important enough that I would refuse to allow the allocation of cash without having a somewhat promising estimate. So, ideally, if we let it happen, it's our fault.
Recently we've been taken over and it's really hard for me to let go. I'm not really sure what I was holding onto, I guess I just wanted not to lose the control of being completely free at our own discretion to make decisions and I was really the only one in the group who seemed to have felt that way. It's been a tough week to go through this and by speaking to our CEO I guess things like this do happen in reality- that being in the actual business world. I understand the implications of being taken over as complete lost of culture and control which really bothered me when I was being told, we would still be doing "our own thing." I didn't understand that, I guess it's probably how the game is set out and we act as a Subsidiary but essentially, we no longer exist as our own and for some reason, I became really emotional about that. It really has been a rough week in Mgmt300, however it's Friday afternoon, and well, things are looking up.
From the readings Katz (1974) three-skill approach stood out for me, basically because I think every individual in every group should develop these skills. If one does not have such strong technical skills to deal with "things" for example, activities and business processes, it becomes a disadvantage for that group when one cannot perform tasks imperative to how businesses function. It is important to recognise and allocate them into a role where they will perform at a higher level to benefit the business as a whole. That may mean those that have better human skills, in terms of dealing with people and perhaps collaborating a group of people's thoughts and ideas can develop them into an overall goal. However, to develop a strong group, it is imperative to have conceptual skills. Being able to see an organisation as one being and understanding that changes made in various functions of the organisation will affect another but also being able to visualise the relationship the businesses have with its stakeholders is important. To develop one's conceptual skills will be beneficial for a group and an organisation. The understanding will be at a higher level, and having these three skills essentially allows for efficiency in organisations, however I can't imagine these skills developing and being possessed by some but not others creating room for conflict.
Overall, this week has been interesting and a well, a mess, but it makes me wonder how I would actually deal with an event like this had it been an actual career?