see attachment
Respond to post # 1 (250 words) Dan Bur
Part I
A critical question to consider when starting a small business is: "What is the long-term market demand for the product or service I plan to offer, and how can I differentiate my business within a competitive landscape?" Evaluating whether there is sustainable demand is essential for long-term success, particularly as shifts in consumer preferences often require ongoing innovation (Cao et al., 2024). Differentiation is equally vital, as it enables businesses to form meaningful connections with customers, create value, and foster brand loyalty (Jerab & Mabrouk, 2023). One valuable resource for addressing this question is the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), which offers a variety of market research tools, industry insights, and competitive analysis frameworks that assist entrepreneurs in assessing market conditions and building a robust, competitive business model.
Part II
A managerial decision that I agreed with, both from an effective and personal perspective, involved an organizational president’s choice to terminate the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) due to her inability to effectively manage her team and drive the organization toward forward-thinking initiatives. From an operational standpoint, the CFO struggled to lead her department, which hindered organizational progress and innovation. Personally, I supported the decision because she often appeared to make decisions based on emotions which created volatility within the team and across departments, which impacted morale and collaboration. Additionally, her inability to build meaningful personal connections, a crucial skill for any executive, made it difficult for her to foster trust and cooperation within the organization.
Although her departure initially caused chaos, as the team struggled to maintain momentum without sufficient documentation or guidance, the long-term effect was positive. Another employee, who had previously demonstrated strong leadership and relationship-building abilities, stepped up, uniting the team and ultimately securing the CFO position. This new leadership brought stability, improved inter-departmental collaboration, and led to a more cohesive, forward-thinking approach, benefiting the organization as a whole.
A managerial decision that I did not agree with involved two senior leaders promoting an underperforming IT professional with the intention of "inspiring him to rise to the challenge" of a managerial role. This individual had ongoing issues with accountability, lacked technical expertise, and struggled with attention to detail and forward-thinking. Despite these concerns, the decision to promote him was made during my military leave, which prevented me, as HR, from advising against it. From an effectiveness standpoint, promoting someone who consistently underperformed in key areas created more problems, as his shortcomings were further exposed in a role that required higher responsibility and visibility. The decision also negatively impacted team morale, as it undermined the hard work of other employees who performed well but did not receive the same recognition.
Personally, I disagreed with the decision because I had previously experienced sub-par support from this individual, and promoting him felt unjust to those who were more deserving. The promotion not only failed to inspire better performance but also inflated his ego. This resulted in an absurd situation where, as we were preparing to terminate him for ongoing poor performance, he approached HR with a demand for a 30% raise. The consequences of this decision were damaging to the team's dynamic, as it became clear that promoting underperformers could lead to further problems and dissatisfaction among other staff members. Ultimately, the promotion did not achieve its intended goal and led to the individual's eventual dismissal.
For my classmates, in what ways have poor managerial decisions impacted your work motivation or stress level within the workspace?
References
Cao, J., Jiang, H., Ren, X., & Shi, J. (2024). Consumers’ risk perception, market demand, and firm innovation: Evidence from China. PLoS ONE, 19(5), 1–26. https://doi-org.libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0301802
Jerab, D. A., & Mabrouk, T. (2023). Strategic excellence: Achieving competitive advantage through differentiation wtrategies. Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4575042
Respond to post # 2 (250 words) Art Hil
Part I:
A significant question would be, “How can you effectively differentiate a business from competitors to establish a sustainable competitive advantage?” A solid resource is the eText associated with the course, Hatten, T.S. (2021). Small Business Management: Creating a Sustainable Competitive Advantage Interactive Edition. This resource provides insights into strategic planning, differentiation, and market positioning, helping you identify unique strengths and strategies to set your business apart in a competitive market. It also offers interactive tools and case studies for practical application.
Part II:
As President of a marine-based firm, a subsidiary of a larger global company, I encountered several managerial decisions that shaped the company's direction. Some of these decisions aligned well with my vision and understanding of the business, while others led to disagreement, particularly regarding the firm's potential for diversification and growth.
A Managerial Decision I Agreed With
One key decision I agreed with was related to the merger of our firm with a local company in Houston. Our firm was established over 80 years ago, primarily in the marine sector. However, despite our long-standing history, we lacked a strong presence in the Houston market, which is crucial for success in this industry. As an energy and marine hub, Houston had many local competitors that had built deep client relationships over the years. Our corporate entity in London had set high revenue expectations, and without strong local connections, it wasn't easy to meet these goals.
From an effective managerial perspective, the merger was a strategic move. We could penetrate the Houston market more effectively by partnering with a local firm that had established credibility and relationships. This allowed us to meet corporate revenue goals and gave us a much-needed foothold in a highly competitive region. The merger also brought additional resources and expertise to the table, ensuring we were well-equipped to handle our existing business and future growth opportunities.
From a personal perspective, I fully supported the merger because it was a pragmatic decision that recognized the limits of our market presence and addressed them head-on. The merger enabled us to continue growing and meeting corporate expectations without losing sight of our core competencies in the marine sector. It clearly understood the competitive landscape and acknowledged that adaptation was necessary for success in a new region. This decision made sense professionally and personally as it aligned with the firm’s long-term survival and growth.
A Managerial Decision I Disagreed With
In contrast, one managerial decision I disagreed with involved our firm's refusal to expand beyond the marine industry into the energy sector. I had a vision for our firm to capitalize on the vast opportunities in Houston's energy market, and the initial expansion into this sector was extremely lucrative. Although I presented a solid business plan that outlined the potential for growth in the energy side of the business, the corporate office in London was hesitant. They argued that the energy sector was not our core business, and they were concerned about the industry's cyclical nature. As a result, they resisted my efforts to hire new talent to grow this side of our business despite the promising revenue projections.
From an ineffective managerial perspective, the decision to block the expansion into the energy sector was short-sighted. Houston is widely regarded as the world's energy capital, and the energy sector's client base often overlaps with our existing marine clients. Expanding into this sector could have diversified our revenue streams and insulated us from the fluctuations of the marine industry alone. The decision not to invest in new hires limited our ability to scale, even though the energy side of the business had already demonstrated strong initial success. The London office's lack of foresight and flexibility resulted in missed opportunities for growth and diversification, ultimately stunting the firm’s long-term potential.
On a personal level, this decision was particularly frustrating. I had a clear vision of how expanding into the energy sector could benefit the firm, and my resistance from the corporate office felt like a lack of confidence in my leadership. Given that Houston's economy is so heavily centered on energy, the failure to embrace this expansion seemed like a wasted opportunity to leverage our location and client base. The corporate office's unwillingness to adapt to the local market's strengths also made me feel as though they were disconnected from the realities on the ground in Houston, which further added to my frustration.
Consequences of the Decisions
The merger I supported had positive consequences for the firm. It enabled us to establish a strong presence in Houston and meet corporate revenue targets. By aligning with a local entity with deeper client relationships, we overcame one of our major challenges and secured long-term stability.
In contrast, the refusal to expand into the energy sector had negative consequences. The firm's growth potential was hampered, and we missed lucrative opportunities that could have provided a more diverse revenue stream. The decision also resulted in internal friction, as I felt unsupported in my efforts to steer the company toward a more profitable direction. This disagreement ultimately highlighted a disconnect between the corporate office's understanding of local market dynamics and the realities we faced on the ground.
In summary, while the merger decision aligned with my personal and professional expectations for the firm’s growth, the resistance to expanding into the energy sector proved to be a missed opportunity. It was a clear example of how ineffective managerial decisions can stem from a lack of adaptability and trust in local leadership, ultimately limiting a business's potential.
Question for Class: What are some effective strategies a small business can use to differentiate itself from competitors in a saturated market, and how can these strategies contribute to long-term success?
References:
Gaughan, P. A. (2017). Mergers, Acquisitions, and Corporate Restructurings. John Wiley & Sons.
Hatten, T. S. (2021). Small Business Management: Creating a Sustainable Competitive Advantage (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Respond to post # 3 (250 words) Art Hil T&I
Shadow IT has the potential to boost a company’s value by fostering innovation and flexibility in the environment of today’s evolving business landscape. In this paced setting, employees frequently encounter issues that demand prompt resolutions. Empowering staff members to discover and apply their methods and tools will enable them to tackle these challenges. This capacity to address requirements boosts efficiency and stimulates the adoption of novel technologies that could potentially advantage the organization in the long run. Employees may come across tools that simplify work and boost teamwork while increasing productivity. Also, teams can solve issues faster when they manage their own tasks. Think of ideas that traditional IT systems might not have allowed.
On the side of the coin, shadow IT offers some advantages. It also brings many risks, especially concerning security and compliance. Because these tools function independently from IT oversight, they open the organization to vulnerabilities. For example, if employees handle data using apps that lack proper security features, it could result in data breaches. Moreover, the adoption of shadow IT might lead to violations of regulations if staff unknowingly use platforms that do not align with industry norms or legal mandates. Integration problems may occur when unauthorized tools do not perfectly match with systems and cause inefficiencies or system failures that interrupt business operations.
Effectively managing shadow IT within an organization’s operations landscape demands adherence to two fundamental principles. Transparency and collaboration are pillars of this endeavor. Transparency plays a role as it grants stakeholders insight into shadow IT activities and facilitates monitoring and control measures to be put in place accordingly. One way to achieve this is by establishing a platform where employees can disclose their tools, empowering IT departments to evaluate risks and enforce appropriate protective measures. Equally significant is fostering collaboration between IT teams and business units, ensuring alignment and synergy across functional areas. By collaborating as a team, these groups can pinpoint the shadow IT tools and incorporate them into the company’s overall technology plan securely and efficiently. This joint effort reduces risks and nurtures an environment of creativity where staff members are encouraged to boost efficiency.
To enhance collaboration, with shadow IT within IT departments effectively requires developing expertise in adaptability, understanding of business operations and communication proficiency. Being adaptable enables IT specialists to adjust to technologies while keeping abreast of emerging trends and tools that employees may seek to utilize. Understanding business operations aids IT teams in comprehending the requirements and objectives of departments, ensuring that technological solutions are in harmony with the organization's overarching goals. Moreover, effective communication skills play a role in fostering relationships across different departments. Conversations with departments within a company can help IT build the trust and teamwork necessary for handling shadow IT efficiently.
Overall, it can be said that shadow IT offers various possibilities and obstacles for organizations. Still, those that deal with it openly and cooperatively can make use of its flexible nature effectively by providing IT teams with the required abilities and promoting a culture of teamwork to manage risks and empower employees to contribute to the company’s achievements, effectively adopting shadow IT systematically can result in a livelier responsive and ultimately prosperous organization.
Question for Class: How can organizations balance the need for innovation through shadow IT while minimizing the risks it poses to security and compliance?
References
Gartner. (2023). How to manage shadow IT. Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/en/documents
McKinsey & Company. (2021). The digital workplace: Balancing innovation and control. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/mckinsey-digital/our-insights
Smith, J.D.M.H. A. (2021). IT Strategy & Innovation (5th ed.). Prospect Press. https://online.vitalsource.com/books/9781943153947
