Wiki contents


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

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This week has been an interesting week, as the competitions between the bikes companies are starting to heat up, new strategies needs to be developed when the markets are becoming fully competitive. One thing that spiked my interest were the China’s CEO summit, the first impression i had when I first heard about was very skeptical, however considering the summit was organized by the one team that is at the top of the performance chart, it really troubles me about what they are trying to achieve? Is it really like how they say they just want to help other teams in order to foster a healthy growing market? Or is it a way to maintain and ensure the dominance of their team. The more I think of it, the more I think the China’s CEO summit is a great move done by the other team.


WARNING the following argument is heavily biased and is all base on my personal observation and understandings of the Mike’s bike environment; my team is not in the Chinese market, therefore the information I understand maybe different compare to the teams that is actually in the Chinese market.


The reading suggested that an effective administrator should have three skills (Katz. 1955), technical, human and conceptual, taken into the case of Mike’s Bike, I totally agree with Katz’s reading and see those skills are crucial to the success in the world of Mike’s bike and the real world. However by only having those three skills, I believe will only make you a good administrator of the team, as a CEO, I believe you must also look at the outside of the organization. In Mike’s Bike, predicting the strategies of your competitor is also crucial, by hosting a China’s CEO summit the team is going beyond the three skills and looking outside of their team. I think the summit creates a perfect opportunity for that top team to identifying threats by learning the opponent’s strategies and respond to them appropriately. Which they can develop and benefit from the “shock effect” mentioned in Davies’s reading (1984), without experiencing the setbacks caused by the shocks, overall a great strategy. Once again I must say that due to the fact that I do not compete in the Chinese market I cannot say that I am absolutely right. But I am looking forward to see the outcomes of summit meeting. I think the key about developing yourself is by not limiting yourself in the box, seeing other people’s strategy and outcome also provides an opportunity for me to develop as well.






Davies, J., & Easterby-Smith, M. (1984). Learning and developing from managerial work experiencesJournal of Management Studies, 21(2), 169--182. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1984.tb00230.x

Katz, R. L. (1955). Skills of an effective administratorHarvard Business Review, 33(1), 33--42.


  1. Hi Martin

    You make some interesting points, particularly around the limitations of Katz's work. I think your journal could be improved by following Daudelin's structure, as at the moment it seemed a lot like a 'stream of consciousness'. I think the first step in this would be clearly articulating a 'problem', and the rest can flow from there. 

    I think you demonstrated good use of theory, and with a little more content, you would have been at the 'analysis' stage of Bloom's Taxonomy. 

    Finally, your writing style was a little hard to read. Your diction needed improving in places, but my main critique is the length of your sentences. I think you need to revise your comma use; you used them far too often where a semi-colon or a full stop would have been appropriate. But otherwise, you made some good points, your journal just needs some polishing and more structure. 

  2. Hi Martin,

    It is absolutely interesting to read your journal. As one of the CEO in Chinese market, the first thought came into my mind was just like what you wrote here when I got the invitation. It is a good entry point to apply Katz's three skills theory. Your journal might have reached to the level of 'analysis' of Bloom's Taxonomy; however, you could have reached the 'synthesis' or 'evaluation' level if you could come up with some critical solutions or insights. It might be limited because you're not in the China market. 

    Also, the idea you talked above, which is 'the ability to look outside of organisation' beyond the three skills, is an interesting point of view. But if you could have developed it a little bit further, the journal could be more insightful.

    Btw, your analysis about the CEO summit might be not fully correct, to some extent.  (smile)