Great Expectation Essays - English-language Films, British Films

Great Expectation Great Expectations The novel, Great Expectations, presents the story of a young boy growing up and becoming a gentleman. He must learn to appreciate people for who they are, not shun them for who they arent. Nicknamed Pip, Philip Pirrip, the main character, goes through many changes in his personality, as he is influenced by various people. Pip experiences tough times as a boy and a young man, but at the end he has become a fine, morale young man. In the beginning, Pip, an orphan, considers himself to be a common laboring boy, but he has a desire to improve his station in life. He is raised by his sister, and her husband, Joe Gargery. Then Pip meets Estella, the adopted daughter of Miss Havisham, an old lady who is bitter and eccentric. Estella taunts Pip and is very cruel to him, but he still falls in love with her. Miss Havisham is teaching Estella to hurt men, because she herself was deserted by her fianc? on her wedding day. One day, Mr. Jaggers, a lawyer, reveals to Pip, that there are Great Expectations for Pip. He is given the money to become a gentleman and receive a good education; he assumes that his benefactor is Miss Havisham. In London, Pip makes many new, high-society friends. When Joe Gargery comes to visit Pip in his new way of life, Pip is ashamed of Joe, because he is a commoner. At this time, Pip is around twenty years old. Estella is still the center of his attractions. When she comes! to London, he meets her, but she tries to warn Pip to stay away from her because she might hurt his feelings. She is being kind to him in the only way that she knows how. Around the same time, Pip receives a letter telling him that Mrs. Joe Gargery had died. A man from Pips past steps out, an ex-convict, named Magwitch, who he had fed many years ago; this man is his true benefactor. Pip finally knows the truth about this man. Magwitch is Estellas father, and Mr. Jaggers housekeeper is Estellas mother. A short time later, Estella is wed to Bentley Drummle, but she is very unhappy. Pip falls ill, and Joe comes to take care of him. While he is being nursed back to health, Pip starts to appreciate Joe and begins to look past the fact that he is common. He receives the news that Miss Havisham is dead. Pip visits Joes home and is told that Joe and Biddy, Pips friend, are married. Pip then returns to London and continues his life for eleven more years. Pip finally goes back to Joes house, to find that Joe and Biddy have a son, and they have named him Pip. During that last visit, he returns to Miss Havishams old run-down home. There he meets Estella, grown into a woman, her husband dead. There, Estella asks Pip to for! give her, he does, and all is well. So the story ends, with grown Pip and a changed Estella both at peace with each other. In conclusion, I thought that this was a very well written book. It took me a while to get into it and understand the plot, but now I see that Dickens wrote Great Expectations with a very complex plot and well described characters. From Joe Gargery to Miss Havisham, I really got to know the characters as if they were people. I would describe this book as a delightful story with a sprinkle of mystery and a handful of romance, with a pinch of fun all mixed in. English Essays

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 Cost Justification and Benefits

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 Cost Justification and Benefits Free Online Research Papers Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 Cost Justification and Benefits Information Technology Essays The problem with today’s authentication is the ability to electronically prove and provide confidence in a person’s identity. Authentication focuses on confirming an individual’s identity based on reliable credentials. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD) was created to solve this problem and provide better identity management security at federal agencies. The HSPD 12 directive requires the development and agency implementation of a mandatory, government-wide standard for secure and reliable forms of identification for Federal employees and contractors. This directive signed by President Bush in August 2004 established an official federal government policy for the issuance of a common identity verification standard. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how agencies justify the costs involved in complying with the HSPD 12 mandate, what benefits agencies expect in return for their investment, and the risks associated with identity management. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) determined that secure and reliable forms of identification need to be both physical and logical for entry into federal buildings and technology data centers. NIST decided the standard would include the use of smart cards with embedded biometric fingerprints, and public key infrastructure (PKI) that links an individual to a specified public key for electronic signing (See Appendix A). NIST created the Federal Information Processing Standard Publication 201 (FIPS 201) and Personal Identity Verification (PIV). According to NIST, the FIPS 201 includes two parts called PIV I and PIV II, and states the following (See Appendix B): The requirements in PIV I support the control objectives and security requirements described in FIPS 201, including the standard background investigation required for all Federal employees and long-term contractors. The standards in PIV II support the technical interoperability requirements described in HSPD-12. PIV II specifies standards for implementing identity credentials on integrated circuit cards (i.e., smart cards) for use in a Federal system. FIPS 201 requires agencies to: 1. Establish roles to facilitate identity proofing, information capture and storage, and card issuance and maintenance. 2. Develop and implement a physical security and information security infrastructure to support these new credentials. 3. Establish processes to support the implementation of a PIV program. (GSA, 2005a) The notion behind these standards is to provide enhanced security at Federal facilities and information systems. Cost Justifications: One way an agency can justify the cost of identity management is the fact that it enhances security by safeguarding access to buildings, secure areas, and electronic systems. Conventional authentication can be easily forged, stolen or altered to gain unauthorized access. This type of security breach can lead to identity theft that has the potential to cost individuals and agencies large financial losses. The Federal Trade Commission in 2004 conducted 4,057 interviews with individuals who incurred losses associated with identification theft and estimated the costs to them. The loss estimates were compiled from the data gathered from the interviews and was said to cost nearly $10,200 per incident and $33 billion total for agencies, businesses and financial institutions. The frequency of these incidents indicates a growing problem of theft and loss. Examples of compromised records include 1.4 million credit card numbers from DSW Shoe Warehouse, 200,000 client files from Ameritrade, reco rds for 30,000 students and staff at George Mason University, 59,000 student records at a California University, Bank of America tapes with information on 1.2 million government employees, University of California laptop stolen with 100,000 identities, 280,000 possible victims at LexisNexis, 145,000 social security numbers at ChoicePoint, (FTC, 2003) and most recently the social security numbers of 26.5 million veterans. The use of smart cards developed pursuant to the NIST PIV II standard would provide enhanced security authentication. What a smart card offers is a plastic device about the size of a credit card that contains an embedded hardware computer chip that is separate from the computer. (See Appendix C). If a compromised computer is infected, the smartcard itself would not be affected. Smart cards operate in their own separate space, which make them less susceptible to being compromised, thus making them a more robust method for authentication as well. A second way government agencies can justify the cost associated with smart cards is that they provide the hardening of logical security. This could prevent thieves from unauthorized access and help address the concerns associated with identity theft. The unique advantage that smart cards have over traditional cards with simpler technologies like magnetic stripes or bar codes is that they can exchange data with other systems and process information. (See Appendix D). Older card versions were static and could not exchange data. By securely exchanging information, a smart card can help authenticate the identity of the individual possessing the card in a far more thorough way than is possible with traditional identification cards. A smart card’s processing power also allows it to exchange and update many other kinds of information with a variety of external systems, which can facilitate applications such as financial transactions or other services that involve electronic record- keeping. (GSA, 2005b) This enhanced security reduces the risk of identity theft and financial losses. A third way government agencies could justify the costs associated with smart cards would be through enhanced security for remote authentication. (See Appendix E) Most agencies have developed systems to allow remote access even though it provides an alternative method for non employees to gain access. Normally, controlled computer environments like those found at federal agencies, banks, financial institutions and physical stores have security measures in place to stop malicious behaviors. This is not always the case when people work at home using their own computers. These computers are usually directly connected to the internet and are outside controlled settings. Because of this, the potential risks are significant when data is left unprotected. Using PKI public key cryptography can help solve the problem with unprotected data. This encryption technology stores a person’s digital certificate and has the ability to thwart thefts by safeguarding identities. Many agencies have looked at smart cards and the PKI model to include key management. When a certificate is created, there is a multistage process involved. Typically, for authentication and digital signature key pairs, the keys are generated locally on the smart card. The private key never leaves the smart card, while the public key is exported for inclusion in a certificate request. There are four key components for PKI to be successful: 1. Registration/Enrollment: To create a digital certificate, PKI systems require a secure process for verifying the persons identity. PKI products supported multiple methods of making sure that applicants for certificates were legitimate and actually were who they were claiming to be. The same secure registration process is needed for granting access to customer identity information. 2. Repository: PKI required both a trustable public repository for public keys and a secure repository for backup of private keys. Protecting stored identity information requires a secure repository, as well. 3. Revocation: For digital certificates to be meaningful, a process was needed to inform those relying on certificates that a certificate had expired, had been revoked or was, for whatever reason, no longer valid. Revoking access to customer identity information when that access no longer has business justification is a critical requirement. 4. Reliability: PKI systems included mechanisms for archiving and backing up encryption keys, had guidelines for protecting the PKI infrastructure, and had auditable mechanisms (defined in certification practice statements) for defining the security processes that would be employed to maintain the trust of the entire PKI. Systems that handle sensitive identity information should have standard formats for documenting similar assurances. (Pescatore, 2005a) Using the public key infrastructure (PKI) components described above has the ability to save government agencies time and money by mitigating the risks associated with identity theft. (See Appendix F) The recent incident involving the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that compromised the identities of up to 26.5 million veterans and some spouses provides plenty of justification of the cost for better identity management security. Gartner research evaluated costs related to identity thefts similar to the ones being publicly announced. They estimated that data breaches will cost companies 50 percent more than data protection will. Gartner states the following: A company with at least 100,000 accounts to protect can spend, in the first year, as little as $6 per customer account for just data encryption or as much as $16 per customer account for data encryption, host-based intrusion prevention and strong security audits combined. These unit costs will be reduced drastically if these strategies are applied to protecting millions of customer accounts. This compares with an expenditure of at least $90 per customer account when data is compromised or exposed during a breach. Likewise, these costs may escalate dramatically if proposed legislation mandating fines up to $11,000 per exposed and damaged customer account is imposed. (Pescatore, 2005b) According to Gartner research, nearly all data theft attacks could have been prevented if the sensitive data was encrypted and the encryption keys were properly protected. For large environments such as government agencies with over 100,000 records to safeguard, Gartner estimates the costs associated with equipment, integration and maintenance to be about $6 per person in the first year. The estimates of using PKI encryption would decrease each year and cost approximately $1 per account per year in recurring costs. Gartner research’s evaluations show there are significant losses associated with not protecting data. Their cost estimates for data encryption show a cost savings in comparison, and should help agencies decide whether to move forward with this technology. Benefits: One of the benefits of this technology is the ability to consolidate personal identity requirements. Consolidating logical and physical security controls into a single, card connected system has the potential to save money and reduce security costs by 40 to 60 percent over traditional approaches, while enabling an agency to control a greater percentage of its access points. A single system eliminates the costs of installing and wiring traditional access points. It also reduces the considerable expense of traditional architectures and system for access control at remote locations. These savings would allow agencies to expand the number of locations and systems that are electronically secured. Agencies can also benefit from using a single interface to control both wired and card-connected access points. This would allow administrators to manage a large number of users and locations more efficiently. Each smart card credential securely carries the roles and privileges of the individual from wired to standalone access points, creating a card-connected environment. The benefit is realized when the cardholders become an extension of the physical access network, and their cards carry information to and from the readers. By following this model, security is increased significantly at a fraction of the normal cost. For example, if an employee leaves the agency, rather than replace door locks and wiring (at a cost of $5,000 each, as well as time delays), the card permissions can be immediately revoked and the employee can no longer access the facility or information networks. (Electronic Government: Agencies Face Challenges in Implementing New Federal Employee Identification Sta ndard: GAO-06-178, 2006) A second benefit of this technology is electronic authentication. This provides simpler access to multiple agency applications through the re-use of credentials and established identities. Using a single central credential permits access to multiple systems without having to key in multiple passwords. An example of an industry leader providing easier access to multiple systems is UBS, a global financial company headquartered in Switzerland. They accomplished identity authentication by the successful implementation of PKI. This company implemented the use of digital certificates that linked their employees to a specified public key for electronic signing. They used the PKI security architecture as a method to address efficient and secure authentication. UBS concluded that the processes and technology that had worked in a centralized environment were no longer effective in a decentralized one. Major concerns were increased inefficiency, rising costs and the reduced ability to control r isk. Their problems included the following: 1. The network of open production systems could be reached from anywhere, putting critical data at significant risk. 2. Existing applications were not designed to function within such an environment. User authentication by plain old passwords was increasingly seen as providing an unacceptably low level of protection against illegitimate access in such an environment. 3. The bank had almost half a million different passwords in use: The average user had to remember at least 15 passwords, making it inevitable that many users would write down their passwords. Additionally, significant help desk resources were devoted to resetting forgotten passwords. (Noakes-Fry, 2005b) The technologies and processes that were in place prior to moving towards PKI could not eliminate or reduce the three problems indicated above. The company predicted the problems would only worsen as the network continued to grow. UBS decided it needed to change in order to provide a strong, reliable, and human-accessible user authentication to information resources. Identity authentication objectives at UBS were defined by a single sign-on process. This allowed each user to only remember a single PIN and authenticate once per login session to access all systems. The company used smart cards that permitted user access to the computer and authentication to additional systems. The public-key infrastructure (PKI) was the key component to support stronger user authentication and identity management in the environment. Cost savings were realized because UBS was able to reduce the number of help desk calls for password support. According to UBS, many hours were spent each retrieving or resetting users passwords which resulted in the loss of productivity. Since implementing single sign on the company has increased security, improved functionality and reduced help desk expenses. A third benefit of this technology is the ability to move away from paper signatures and towards public key digital signatures. This move has the potential to reduce the amount of time normally spent processing paperwork and transform business electronically. Moving away from paper records and towards electronic forms supports the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA). This act recommended that federal agencies establish electronic forms to provide immediate feedback from data submitted online. It stated that forms should be electronically fill-able, file-able, and signable, and a model of user friendliness and efficiency. Signed records can be stored and retained for the purposes of retrieving them for later use, either as part of a related business process or a legal proceeding. Some records may be retained for decades. This move was successful in the case of a student loan company with a portfolio of more than $2 billion that implemented an online application process for consolidation loans using digital signatures. According to Gartner research, the company met its goal of having electronically fill-able applications in place before the huge wave of applications began arriving in June. These electronic applications were signable with digital signatures and received immediate acceptance from borrowers. Gartner noted that the company experienced a significant reduction in cost and reduction in turnaround time for each application: It previously cost $12 to send an application via FedEx (and including a prepaid FedEx envelope cost another $12), but it now costs $1.35 to send. Under the old system, the company received 35 percent of the applications back with signatures; 65 percent of electronic applications are returned with digital signatures. Using previous delivery methods, it took 10 days to get the application back; with digitally signed electronic applications, turnaround is one day. (Noakes-Fry, 2005a) Risks: There are several risks involved with implementing HSPD 12. These risks include the cost and the looming October 2006 deadline for agencies to meet compliance. Cost is always a big concern at federal agencies, and implementation can be prohibitively expensive for any one agency to bear all of the expenses. Many federal agencies and contractors are already stretched for funding and resources. HSPD-12 is an initiative that requires interoperability between complex federal government systems, the reevaluation of business processes, and unprecedented collaboration between IT, human resources, and physical security staffs. Looking at the requirements for PIV card use, the implementation includes digital certificates, the PIV Cards, printing, middleware software, IDMS, a card management system (CMS), and an OCSP capability. These costs were estimated using models identified by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Larger departments estimate that the first year costs per person are between $90 – 110. It is anticipating that out years costs at larger departments will decrease to approximately $60 for initial year based on deployments exceeding 500,000 users. It is anticipated in time these cost will decrease even further. (GSA, 2005a) The recommendation from OMB states smaller agencies need to align themselves with larger federal agencies to lower the total costs of ownership. Moreover, there are a number of costly infrastructure components and processes that an agency may be required to purchase. This would include the expenses associated with physical access control systems that can link multiple agency locations together. These costs may exceed the amount agencies can afford and can absorb by themselves. The concern arises if a single agency were to out source the entire implementation to commercial vendors with its current employees and contractors. If this were to occur, OMB says the costs per person could easily exceed $200. The guidance from OMB proposes waiting until the larger agencies such as the Department of Defense implement smart card use. This way smaller agencies can align themselves with other large volume agencies to take advantage of volume discounts. The United States Government Accounting Office published key findings in the February 2006 report entitled, â€Å"Agencies Face Challenges in Implementing New Federal Employee Identification Standard.† This report provided guidance about smart card technology planning and budgeting activities. There were several concerns raised in the report with regards to the smart card technology. The concerns involved the time frame for effective planning, information gathering about risk, and cost benefit information. The GAO noted the following: As part of the annual federal budget formulation process, agencies are required to submit their budget requests 1 year in advance of the time they expect to spend the funds. In addition, in the case of major IT investments, which could include new smart-card based credentialing systems, OMB requires agencies to prepare and submit formal businesses cases, which are used to demonstrate that agencies have adequately defined the proposed cost, schedule, and performance goals for the proposed investments. In order for agencies to prepare business cases for future funding requests, they need to conduct detailed analyses such as a cost benefit analysis, a risk analysis, and an assessment of the security and privacy implications of the investment. However, agencies have lacked the information necessary to conduct such reviews. For example, agencies have not had reliable information about product costs and cost elements, which are necessary for cost-benefit analyses. In addition, without FIPS 201 compliant products available for review, agencies have been unable to adequately conduct risk analyses of the technology. Most importantly, the lack of FIPS 201 compliant products has inhibited planning for addressing the investment’s security and privacy issues. (Electronic Government: Agencies Face Challenges in Implementing New Federal Employee Identification Standard: GAO-06-178, 2006) The GAO did provide three recommendations that would be helpful in addressing the concerns and enable agencies to move forward with the HSPD 12 mandate. The report discussed the following key activities regarding the compliance standard and recommended the following three actions: 1. Provide specific deadlines by which agencies implementing transitional smart card systems are to meet the â€Å"end-point† specification, thus allowing for interoperability of smart card systems across the federal government; 2. Provide guidance to agencies on assessing risks associated with the variation in the reliability and accuracy among biometric products, so that they can select vendors that best meet the needs of their agencies while maintaining interoperability with other agencies, and 3. Clarify the extent to which agencies should make risk-based assessments regarding the applicability of FIPS 201 to specific types of facilities, individuals, and information systems, such as small offices, foreign nationals, and volunteers. The updated guidance should (1) include criteria that agencies can use to determine precisely what circumstances call for risk-based assessments and (2) specify how agencies are to carry out such risk assessments. (Electronic Government: Agencies Face Challenges in Implementing New Federal Employee Identification Standard: GAO-06-178, 2006) Conclusion: With little more information than a social security number, an identity can be stolen. As the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) points out â€Å"Social Security numbers play a pivotal role in identity theft. Identity thieves use the Social Security number as a key to access the financial benefits available to their victims.† (FTC, 2003) Identity theft is growing rapidly and has become a serious threat. It is easy to open fraudulent lines of credit in the name of some unsuspecting victim. The FTC statistics for 2004 indicate that credit card fraud (28%) was the most common form of reported identity theft, followed by phone or utilities fraud (19%), bank fraud (18%), and employment fraud (13%). Other significant categories of identity theft reported by victims were government documents/benefits fraud and loan fraud. (FTC, 2003) Congress is considering several measures to prevent the crimes identified by the FTC and among them is the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) introduced the bill. He wanted the measure to require a review of federal sentencing guidelines to allow a maximum penalty to be imposed on identity thieves and impose financial penalties on data brokers for allowing data breaches to occur. The bill also outlines procedures for data brokers and consumers to follow to correct incorrect information contained in personal records, and increases criminal penalties for computer fraud involving personal data, unauthorized access to personal information. It also makes it a crime to intentionally conceal a security breach involving personal data. (Moye, 2006) The HSPD 12 implementation requires Federal agencies to make investments for secure and reliable forms of identification. HSPD 12 was formed to resolve problems associated with identity management and provide enhanced security at federal agencies. Government agencies will be asked to justify the costs involved in complying with the HSPD 12 mandate and understand what benefits it can expect in return for their investment along with the associated risks. Moving forward with the mandate will involve both logical and physical changes. These changes will most likely include costly infrastructure components and smart card readers for computers logging onto the network. Additionally, desktop computers will need to be equipped with smart card readers for logging onto the network and for accessing network resources. Moreover, the badging process will require additional physical security for buildings and secure areas. The conventional method of proving your identity will need to change to accommodate the enhanced public key infrastructure (PKI) components. Authentication to agency resources will involve the combination of biometrics, digital certificates, and passwords for single sign on capabilities. The technology has the ability to provide simpler access to multiple agency applications through the re-use of credentials and established identities. It also allows each user to only remember a single PIN and authenticate once per login session to access all systems. This will provide a relatively high level of security because it relies on multiple layers of specific information prior to authentication. The benefit to the user results in eliminating the need for multiple cards, remembering multiple PINs and login information. Like insurance, the real value can be measured against the cost and impact of the bad things that could happen if you do not protect yourself. Electronic Government: Agencies Face Challenges in Implementing New Federal Employee Identification Standard: GAO-06-178. (2006). GAO Reports, 1. FTC. (2003). STATEMENT OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WAYNE ABERNATHY ON THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIONS IDENTITY THEFT SURVEY REPORT, FDCH Regulatory Intelligence Database. GSA. (2005a). Federal Identity Management Handbook: GSA. GSA. (2005b). GOVERNMENT SMART CARD HANDBOOK: GSA. Moye, S. (2006). Congress Assesses Data Security Proposals. Information Management Journal, 40(1), 20-22. Noakes-Fry, K. (2005a). Case Study: Loan Company Uses E-Signatures to Cut Costs and Save Time. Gartner Research(G00129945). Noakes-Fry, K. (2005b). Case Study: UBS Manages IDs with PKI-Based Smart Cards to increase Security and Reduce Costs. Gartner Research(G00130280). Pescatore, J. (2005a). Apply the Lessons of Public-Key Infrastructure to Protecting Customer Information. Gartner Research(G00126768). Pescatore, J. (2005b). Data Protection is Less Costly than Data Breaches. Gartner Research, G00130911. Research Papers on Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 Cost Justification and BenefitsOpen Architechture a white paperNever Been Kicked Out of a Place This NiceThe Project Managment Office SystemIncorporating Risk and Uncertainty Factor in CapitalTwilight of the UAWGenetic EngineeringQuebec and CanadaPETSTEL analysis of IndiaResearch Process Part OneMarketing of Lifeboy Soap A Unilever Product

Business Ethics and Social Responsibility Case Study

Business Ethics and Social Responsibility - Case Study Example   This is made possible for the various forms of interrelationships established in the organization as persons interact with one another in the different levels of its structure, carries with it the core belief that each member of the organization are working towards the achievement and realization of the organization’s goals as they achieved human development and excellence in their field of expertise. And that actions performed by all its players are considered as within the purview of the organizations good. Thus, it is assumed as given and therefore not questioned the truism of the belief that workers and employees do not just perform their tasks in an excellent manner in order to yield a good product but that they have a sense of loyalty to the organization where they are members. However, the relationship between the organization from the management level and the employees is not always a bed of roses. Critical issues demanding decisive actions and decision making some times arise as some factors and judgments may tend to disturb the â€Å"harmonious† balance of the organization. Business has always been considered as â€Å"amoral.†(De George, 1999, p5) Implying that basically business enterprises have no other interests than to gain profit. Thereby, presenting the notion that businesses do not bother itself to question of right or wrong which is the interests of morality and ethics but are, instead, concerned with the question of how companies will be able to increase its gains and profits. This view, in fact, is also held by the Noble Laureate Milton Friedman that â€Å"the only social responsibility of business was to increase profit.†(Davies, 2000, p 99)  Ã‚  

Apple and samsung Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Apple and samsung - Essay Example Apple and Samsung companies are doing very well and they have several things in common. The objective of this writing is to compare and evaluate the two major competitor corporations, Apple and Samsung. According to Wagstaff & Kim (2012), it is undeniable that both companies are similar in terms of size though were founded in different periods. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founded Apple in 1976 while Samsung was founded in 1938 by a Korean businessperson, Byung-Chull Lee. Even though Samsung started as a vegetable and fruit company, it later started back in 1969 as an electronic company. Apple’s personal computers were amongst the best but later experienced a decrease in sales after the high competition in electronics began. The company then started to produce new product iPod that largely enhanced her revenues. On the other hand, Samsung was developing slowly through introduction of various products in the market prompting it to change her mission statement to keep pace with its growing global operations, changes in the world economy as well as escalation from well-established companies. Moreover, Apple prides herself on innovation and is known for taking 8 years to develop a single product before releasing it to market. Worstall (2013) explains that Apple’s culture is to release products that are not perfect and once released, they make major updates hardly, confident that their original work is the best. This technique ensures a fascinated tech press and awed public, which compels a certain level of security as well as secrecy that segregates the company from attaining valuable market feedback prior to launch. This further raise the stakes of every product launch to the market changing and checking on any of their recent launches such as iPhone 5 and iOS7, it is nearly impossible for Apple live up to the demand for their products. Samsung however, releases a less than perfect product and iterate their way to success, which conforms, to their hi story of releasing new products that are far from perfect. The company does not make massive splash, instead the first generation product is meant to gauge interest and test capabilities since they are content to iterate their way to successful products. It is worth noting that Samsung uses less resources in product launch compared Apple although they are both at the top of the global smartphone market (Worstall, 2013). Although Samsung is a vast industrial conglomerate that manufacturers several things such as refrigerators and semiconductors, most people identifies it with smartphones, which is actually powering her growth. The company’s stunning fourth quarter results saw her profits rising to 87%. It is apparent that the phone division contributed to half of the profit and it does not break out smartphone revenues (Gupta, Kim and Levine, 2013). In 2011, Samsung sold almost 63.5 million in the quarter of which 40 million came from Samsung Galaxy S3 although the market seem to reach saturation in developed countries and the competition is high in developing countries. In the last quarter of 2011, Apple saw a remarkable profit of $13bn, which included 48 million of iPhones outpacing the Samsung Galaxy S3. Apple is even more dependent for profits for profits on smartphones compared to Samsung and Apple still takes a vast share of the mobile phone

Cause marketing costs Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Cause marketing costs - Essay Example However, there are emerging issues even as multinational companies seek to maximize profits. Corporate social responsibility, international labor law, ethical issues and level competitive ground are the realities that companies have to address. Owing to the relatively tight competition in different industries, for-profit companies have to embrace non-price competitive strategies. Reconciling the increasing cost of production and profit margin explains the redefinition of value chain process. The source of the product does not matter in the current society as long as the brand is known. The companies are majoring on marketing and brand quality. Exploiting technology differences, labor and input factor cost variations across countries has become useful in surviving by the companies(Cullen & Parboteeah, 2014). Public image of the company is closely related to its product brand and this can be evidenced in the market size scramble by firms of the same products like Nike, Puma and Adidas among others in the sports and apparel industry. It can therefore be noted that globalization has restructured the socio-economic and political behavior of people which is reflected in the companies’ competitive trend and consumer

Strategic Organizational Leadership in Capstone Paper

Strategic Organizational Leadership in Capstone Paper Overview Chrysler Group LLC is the third largest American Automobile manufacturer and fifth largest in the American market with an 8.79% market share on sales of 931,402 units. (Chrysler, 2010) The Chrysler Group LLC was created in 2009 through a 20% purchase of Chrysler LLC by The Fiat Group. The Chrysler Group LLC consists of Chrysler, Jeep, Ram, Dodge, Mopar and Global Electric Motorcars (GEM) brands of vehicles and parts. The recent alliance between the Fiat Group and Chrysler Group LLC is said to better position both companies in the global market (Chrysler, 2010). Chrysler Group LLC dates date to 1925 when it was founded by Walter Chrysler. The original Chrysler Corporation merged with Daimler-Benz in 1996 to form Daimler-Chrysler. In 2007 the Chrysler division of Daimler-Chrysler was purchased by Cerberus Capital Management to form Chrysler LLC, the precursor to the current Chrysler Group LLC. Fiat Group was started in 1899. Both companies have a unique history of innovative and storied products (Chrysler, 2010). Having survived a brief Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in 2009, the company position is positioning itself for an automotive resurrection by choosing a back-to-basics alliance with Fiat. The collaboration gives Chrysler access to the Italian companys small-car expertise and global markets, while still manufacturing its Chrysler brands, including Dodge, Jeep, and Ram vehicles. Chryslers trademarked MOPAR (MOtor PARts) division, with its 30% market share, carries over 280,000 parts, options, and accessories for vehicle customization; it expanding to incorporate Fiat parts. Chryslers GEM (Global Electric Motor Cars) makes neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs). Headquartered in Auburn Hills, Mich., Chrysler Group LLCs product lineup features some of the worlds most recognizable vehicles models, including the Chrysler 300, Jeep Wrangler and Ram Truck. Fiat will contribute world-class technology, platforms and powertrains for small- and medium-sized cars, allowing Chrysler Group to offer an expanded product line including environmentally friendly vehicles. History In 1920, the president of Buick and Vice President of General Motors (GM) resigned his positions in the GM Corporation following political differences with founder and then-president of General Motors William Durant. This former automotive Vice President was promptly approached by a group of investors to focus his business acumen in the fledgling automotive industry on a small, financially troubled New York company called Maxwell Motor Corporation. The one-time automotive vice president was installed as president of Maxwell Motor Company (Hyde, 2003). The mans name was Walter Percy Chrysler. In short order, Walter Chrysler brought the Maxwell Motor Corporation out of bankruptcy. The financial improvement was due in large part to Mr. Chrysler introducing a new Maxwell model- the Chrysler Six (Hyde, 2003). This car was very well received by the automobile buying public and went on to sell 32,000 units in its first year, generating a profit of over $4 million for the small company. On the heels of the success of the Chrysler Six, Walter Chrysler changed the name of the Maxwell Motor Corporation to the Chrysler Corporation. Capitalizing on the success of the initial Chrysler model, Walter Chrysler introduced 4 additional Chrysler models know as the Chrysler 50, the Chrysler 60 the Chrysler 70 and the Chrysler Imperial 80. Interestingly the model numbers were derived from the top speed of these new vehicles as gauged on level ground. As a point of reference, Fords Model T was, until the introduction of the new Chrysler models, the fastest road car with a top speed of 35mph. I t was these new Chrysler models that caused Henry Ford to notoriously shut the doors of the Ford Motor Company for nine months to create a replacement for the Model T. By the time Ford closed its doors to redesign its offering, Chrysler had established itself as formidable competition. With sales of 192,000 of these new models, Chrysler officially became the fifth largest automobile manufacturing company in the industry (Hyde, 2003). Walter Chrysler determined that to achieve the greatest manufacturing cost efficiency, he would have to build his own plants to produce the various parts needed for his vehicles. The capital expenditure required to do this was estimated at $75 million. While successful, the Chrysler Corporation could not afford this capital expense and so Walter Chrysler contacted the banking firm of Dillon Read and Company in New York; a firm that fatefully had just purchased the Dodge Corporation from the widows of the late Dodge Brothers. Dillon Read and Company was eager to do business with the well known Chrysler Corporation. As part of the arrangement, the Dodge Corporation became a division of the Chrysler Corporation. This merger effectively increased the size of the Chrysler Corporation fivefold. Shortly after the merger, the Chrysler Corporation unveiled its new, low cost Plymouth and Desoto models. In a reversal of strategy, Walter Chrysler ended his drive to bring all manufacturing in-house. He was wise to see that the speed with which the automotive industry was growing demanded greater flexibility that in-house manufacturing could provide. Outsourcing automobile components was more expensive but allowed for greater flexibility and a more rapid development cycle in designing new models. In this same period, Walter Chrysler made research and development a budgetary priority. Research and Development persevered at the presidency of Chrysler was This foresight allowed Chrysler to weather the Great Depression and emerge in a more sound financial position than many others in the automotive industry (Curcio, 2000) In 1931, Joseph E. Fields assumed the presidency of Chrysler from Walter Chrysler and in 1936 Walter Chrysler fully handed of the daily operation of the company. At the beginning of the 1940s the Chrysler Corporation, along with most other large American manufacturers switched to wartime production. The Chrysler Corporations Dodge, Plymouth and Chrysler models were put on hold while the company contributed to the production of wartime necessities including small ammunition, submarine nets and, perhaps most notably, B-29 bomber engines (Hyde, 2003). As American industry adjusted to post-war production needs, the Chrysler Corporation started to falter and performance began to wane. The vivacity and forward momentum that Walter Chrysler imparted to the company were no longer present. After the automotive technology boom of the 20s and 30s, the rate of innovate in the industry began to slow. Post-war Americas tastes began to change toward streamlined, nontraditional models and, at times, at the expense of reliability and built quality (Hyde, 2003). To some extent, flashy advertising was influencing buying decision more than quality, features and nameplate. Chrysler was detrimentally slow to react to this new America. In 1950, a long-time legal counsel for the Chrysler Corporation by the name of L. L. Colbert became president. He immediately took the reins of the company to institute managerial reforms with the help of a professional management consulting firm. Colbert concentrated on three areas; expanding into international markets, centralizing corporate management and refocusing the engineering department on innovation. Despite his decisive changes, Colberts efforts did little to improve Chryslers position in the industry. In two short years, Colbert was replaced as head of Chrysler by Lynn Townsend. In charge of the struggling company, Townsend proved to be more successful in his revival attempt. He sold, closed or otherwise divested of unproductive manufacturing facilities and downsized the labor force thereby improving efficiency. He purchased a single early model IBM computer which helped workforce reduction efforts by eliminating the need for almost 800 employees. The early 1950s saw the dawn of Total Quality Management Theory lead by pioneers in the field including W. E. Deming and A. V. Feigenbaum (Kreitner, 2007). Townsend seemed to take notice of this movement as his most notable achievement was a focused quality improvement effort that did boost sales and allowed Chrysler to offer a warranty unprecedented in the industry thus far. To further the momentum,. Townsend undertook an aggressive marketing campaign touting the new, improved quality of Chrysler vehicles. Where Colbert had failed, Townsend succeeded; Chrysler was again a stable, financially healthy and expanding corporation. As might be expected, with this new success came growth. In the midst of the American space age of the 1960s, Chrysler expanded to include an aerospace division and became a principal subcontractor for NASAs Saturn rocket program. Townsends consistent push to grow international business resulted in Chrysler plants in 19 countries by the end of the decade. At the onset of the 1970s, the American car market was feeling the effects of a rising consumer price index, increasing competition from foreign auto manufacturers, and the first signs of the crude oil crisis. In 1969, Chrysler reported losses of almost $5 million dollars and, with an infrastructure to support he growth of the 1960s, was operating at only 65% of capacity. Chrysler met this changing market climate with a product stable that included large, expensive, gas thirsty vehicles as well as smaller more economical cars. The company seemed more content to contend with the traditional American competition than to assess the changing market demand and consequently, Chrysler was faced with an excess inventory of the vehicles the market wasnt buying and a severe shortage of the vehicles the market was demanding. Despite significant price reductions to move its excess inventory, Chryslers financial fortune continued to slide. Chryslers presidency was assumed by John Riccardo. Ricardo, with an accounting background was intent on cutting operating costs. Total employment, payroll and individual budget area were affected by the cost cutting measures. This period also marks the first efforts to import and sell vehicles manufactured overseas. Chryslers shortsightedness with regard to market demand was not over. Despite the inconsistency between what the company was manufacturing and the market was demanding, Chrysler continued to make larger, less efficient models right into the Arab oil embargo. In 1974, Chrysler reported an unprecedented budget deficit of over $50 million. In 1975, the damage was five times as great at over $250 million in losses. The American auto market was severely impacted by several factors including inflation and the Arab oil embargo but Chryslers significant foreign interests were still showing a profit. This profit served to offset the domestic losses however, in 1978 Chrysler again reported losses of over $200 million. Riccardo continued to cut costs, consolidate the various divisions of the Chrysler Corporation and direct manufacturing efforts toward smaller, more efficient vehicles but the Chrysler Corporations financial health continued an unsustainable slide. Chrysler ended the 1970s on the brink of bankruptcy. The company was spared bankruptcy proceedings by federal intervention in the form of a $1.5 billion lifeline loan guarantee. This loan came with conditions including the requirement that Chrysler raise $2 billion in additional money on their own and they make significant management changes. This last requirement ended the tenure of J. J. Riccardo as president of Chrysler. Riccardo was replaced by charismatic industry veteran Lido Anthony Lee Iacocca. Where Riccardo was an accountant, Iacocca was adept at public relations and marketing. He employed these skills in communicating to both the workforce at the Chrysler Corporation and the public at large the need for federal intervention By the mid-1980s, the company was back on track and stronger than ever before. Chrysler benefited from the combined impacts of strong industry demand and shifting consumer preferences toward pickup trucks and minivans, products that dominated Chryslers lineup. By 1997, Chrysler reported annual sales of 2.9 million vehicles, record revenues of $61 billion, and record earnings of $2.8 billion. Chryslers year-end market capitalization was $22.8 billion and its US market share crossed over 16%. Chrysler had become one of the most profitable automotive companies in the world and had roughly $7.5 billion in cash on hand.2 Nick Colas, an analyst with Credit Suisse First Boston, declared: Chrysler has a better business model for building and selling cars than General Motors and Ford do.3 As profitable as Chrysler was, however, the company was not capitalizing on the growth of the global automotive industry. Since the company had made limited investments in overseas markets up to this point, finding a partner made the most strategic sense. On May 7, 1998, Chrysler merged with Daimler, the leading German luxury car manufacturer, for $36 billion of Daimler stock, the largest trans-Atlantic merger in history. The merger was orchestrated in order to create an efficient and lean automotive powerhouse that would better compete in the global marketplace. The transaction was reported as a merger of equals in the business press. The combined company would have a market capitalization close to $100 billion. In 1997, Daimler reported revenues of $62 billion and net income of $1.8 billion. Though Daimler was soundly profitable and had a strong foothold in the European market with its Daimler, Mercedes-Benz, and Smart Car brands, Daimlers US market share was less than 1%.4 Daimlers management hoped that Chrysler would give the company greater inroads into the lucrative US automotive market with its extensive dealership network and powerful brand name. During the early 1980s, Iacoccas skills as a superb television salesman were of crucial importance as Chrysler lost nearly $1.8 billion in 1980the largest loss ever for a U.S. companyand another $475 million in 1981, before returning to the black in 1982. In August 1983 Chrysler was able to pay off the government loan guarantees seven years early, with the government making a $350 million profit on its investment. Chryslers road to recovery was a difficult one, demanding the closure of several plants and the reduction of the companys workforce. Once restructured, Chrysler scrapped its plans to diversify and divested the Gulfstream Aerospace unit it had purchased five years earlier, selling it to a New York investment firm for $825 million in early 1990. Two other units in the companys Chrysler Technologies subsidiaryElectrospace Systems and Airborne Systemswere slated for divestiture as well, which underscored Iacoccas intent to create a leaner, more sharply focused company. Meanwhil e, there were two key developments in the 1980s that helped form the foundation for the 1990s resurgence: the introduction of the minivan in 1984 and the acquisition three years later of American Motors Corporation and its Jeep brand for $1.2 billion. Reorganized as such, Chrysler entered the 1990s braced for a full recovery, but the economy did not cooperate. The decline in automotive sales during the fourth quarter of 1989the companys first fourth quarter decline since 1982portended a more crippling slump to come, as an economic recession gripped businesses of all types, both domestically and abroad. Net income in 1990 slipped to $68 million, then plunged to a $795 million loss the following year, $411 million of which was attributable to losses incurred by the companys automotive operations. Mired in an economic downturn, Chrysler appeared destined for more of the same, rather than headed toward recovery as Iacocca had hoped, but part of the reason for 1991s losses also led to the companys first step toward genuine recovery. Partly to blame for the $795 million loss in 1991 were the high preproduction and introduction costs associated with Chryslers new Jeep Grand Cherokee and increased production costs at the companys St. Louis minivan plant. These two types of vehiclesminivans and sport utility vehiclesrepresented the key to Chryslers recovery. The popularity of these vehicles, coupled with significant price advantages over Japanese models, fueled Chryslers resurgence. In 1992, Chrysler turned its $795 million loss the year before into a $723 million gain. It was a signal achievement, accomplished in Iacoccas last year as CEO. Taking over during 1992 was Robert Eaton, who was hired away from GM, where he was head of European operations. Chrysler then went on to enjoy its most successful year ever, with 1994 earnings of $3.7 billion on revenues of $52.2 billion. The good news at Chrysler continued into the late 1990s, after the company managed to fend off a $22 billion buyout proposed by billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian in 1995. The long prosperity and low gasoline prices of the middle to late 1990s created a huge demand for large vehicles, and Chrysler was producing hot models in each of the hottest segments: the Dodge Ram pickup truck; the Town Country minivan; and several sport utility vehiclesthe Jeep Grand Cherokee, the Jeep Wrangler, and the Dodge Durango. Questions about the quality of Chrysler products continued to pop up, but the companys share of the U.S. auto market reached as high as 16.7 percent in 1996, the highest level since 1968. In 1996, the year Chrysler moved into new headquarters in Auburn Hills, Michigan, sales reached $61.4 billion. The Creation and Early Years of DaimlerChrysler Daimler-Benz Chief Executive JÃ ¼rgen Schrempp had concluded as early as 1996 that his companys automotive operations needed a partner to compete in the increasingly globalized marketplace. Chryslers Eaton was drawing the same conclusion in 1997 based on two factors emerging around the same time: the Asian economic crisis, which was cutting into demand, and worldwide excess auto manufacturing capacity, which was looming and would inevitably lead to industry consolidation. With annual global overcapacity as high as 18.2 million vehicles predicted for the early 21st century, it became clearer that Daimler-Benz and Chrysler could survive as merely regional players if they continued to go it alone. After several months of negotiations, Daimler-Benz and Chrysler reached a merger agreement in May 1998 to create DaimlerChrysler AG in a $37 billion deal. The deal was consummated in November 1998, forming an auto behemoth with total revenues of $130 billion, factories in 34 countries on four continents, and combined annual unit sales of 4.4 million cars and trucks. The two companies fit well together geographically, Daimler strong in Europe and Chrysler in North America, and in terms of product lines, with Daimlers luxurious and high-quality passenger cars and Chryslers line of low-production-cost trucks, minivans, and sport utility vehicles. Although this was ostensibly a merger of equalsthe company set up co-headquarters in Stuttgart and Auburn Hills, naming Eaton and Schrempp co-chairmenit soon became clear that the Germans were taking over the Americans. DaimlerChrysler was set up as a German firm for tax and accounting purposes, and the early 2000 departures of Thomas Stallkamp , the initial head of DaimlerChryslers U.S. operations, and Eaton (who was originally slated to remain until as late as November 2001) left Schrempp in clear command of the company. During 1999 DaimlerChrysler concentrated on squeezing out $1.4 billion in annual cost savings from the integration of procurement and other functional departments. The company organized its automotive businesses into three divisions: Mercedes-Benz Passenger Cars/smart, the Chrysler Group, and Commercial Vehicles. In November 1999 DaimlerChrysler announced that it would begin phasing out the aging Plymouth brand. The Debis services division was merged with Chryslers services arm to form DaimlerChrysler Services, while DASA was renamed DaimlerChrysler Aerospace. Late in 1999 the company reached an agreement to merge DaimlerChrysler Aerospace with two other European aerospace firms, the French Aerospatiale Matra and the Spanish CASA, to form the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS). DaimlerChrysler would hold a 30 percent stake in EADS, which would be the largest aerospace firm in Europe and the third largest in the world. In early 2000, DaimlerChrysler set the lofty goal of becoming the number one automaker in the world within three years. The companys most pressing needs were to bolster its presence in Asia, where less than 4 percent of the companys overall revenue was generated, and to gain a larger share of the small car market in Europe. Filling both of these bills was DaimlerChryslers purchase of a 34 percent stake in Mitsubishi Motors Corporation for $2 billion, a deal announced in late March. The company later increased its interest in Mitsubishi when it purchased a 3.3 percent stake from Volvo. In another key early 2000 development, DaimlerChrysler agreed to join with GM and Ford to create an Internet-based global business-to-business supplier exchange named Covisint. DaimlerChryslers lofty goal would remain unrealized however, as the company faced a host of challenges. The Chrysler Group division was plagued by high costs and weak sales which ultimately cost James P. Holden his CEO position. Buoyed by its strong sales in the mid-1990s, Chrysler had spent heavily on product development in the late 1990s and bolstered its work force while costs were skyrocketing. By the second half of 2000 Chrysler lost $1.8 billion while spending over $5 billion. Dieter Zetsche was tapped to reorganize the faltering U.S. division. He launched a major restructuring effort in February 2001 that included cutting $2 billion in costs, making additional cuts in supplier costs, slashing 20 percent of its workforce, and making changes to Chryslers product line that included the elimination of the Jeep Cherokee (the Grand Cherokee remained in the product line) and the launch of the Jeep Liberty. At the same time, global economies began to weaken in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. To entice customers, car makers began offering buyer incentives that began to wreak havoc on profits. Industry analysts began to speculate that the 1998 merger may have been a mistakeSchrempps proclamation that the deal would create the most profitable car maker in world had indeed fallen short. In fact, the companys market capitalization was $38 billion in September 2003. Before the union Daimlers market cap had been $47 billion. Meanwhile, the companys Mercedes division plugged along launching the E-Class sedan, the SLK roadster, and the Maybach luxury vehicle. In 2003, Chrysler launched the Crossfire, a roadster developed with Mercedes components, and the Pacifica, a SUV/minivan. It also began to heavily market its powerful Hemi engine, which could be purchased for the Dodge Ram pickup and its passenger cars. In early 2004, Chryslers 300C sedan and the Dodge Magnum sports wagon made their debut. Competition remained fierce in the auto industry prompting DaimlerChrysler to make several changes in its strategy. In December 2003, the company sold its MTU Aero Engines business. That year the firm acquired a 43 percent stake in Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus Corporation hoping to cash in on Asias growing truck market. Perhaps its most drastic move, however, came in April 2004 when DaimlerChryslers supervisory board voted against providing funds to bailout Mitsubishi Motors, which by now was struggling under losses and a huge debt load. Mitsubishi played a crucial role in Schrempps Asian expansion strategy and it developed the platforms for Chryslers compact and midsize cars. The failure to provide funds put a strain on the business relationship between the two and threatened to result in huge problems for Chrysler, which had cut back on engineering capacity as it relied on Mitsubishi to develop its small and mid-sized cars. At the same time, DaimlerChrysler moved ahead in the Chinese marketwithout Mitsubishi and without another partner, Hyundai. To bolster is presence in the region, DaimlerChrysler restructured its joint venture with Beijing Automotive Industry Holding Co. Ltd. and set plans in motion to tie up with Chinese Fujian Motor Industry Group and the Taiwanese China Motor Corporation to launch several cars in the Chinese market by 2005. Rumors circulated that DaimlerChryslers relationship with Hyundai was faltering as a result, and in 2004 the company signaled that it would sell its interest in the South Korean automaker. By 2004, Schrempps DaimlerChrysler was a far cry from what the 1998 merger promised to deliver. The companys financial record was lackluster, bogged down by Chryslers $637 million loss in 2003. DaimlerChrysler remained the worlds number three car maker, leaving the 2000 goalto become the number one auto company in the worldunfulfilled. Whether the merger would provide the hoped-for results remained to be seen. Literature Review Leadership is the process through which one individual influences the attitudes perceptions and motivations of other members of a group toward the achievement of a specific group or organizational goal (Greenberg Baron, 2008). Strategic leadership, by extension, is a leaders ability to foresee and proactively act on external conditions, and empower group members to implement change toward the strategic plan as necessary (Kreitner, 2007). Strategic change therefore is that change that happens as an organization moves toward the attainment of their strategic plan. (Kreitner, 2007). Strategic leadership is serves several functions, includes extending managerial influence through other group members, and makes organizations more able to successfully meet the need for change that is brought by ever quickening change in the market and market forces (Nickels et al., 2002). The ability to understand and analyze internal realities as well as market forces is a necessary component of strategic leadership. With this information in-hand, it is then necessary to perform complex information analyses. Appling a strategic management process successfully will aid in bringing about effective strategic leadership (Hitt and Keats, 1992). As this description suggests, strategic management is not without complexities, but it is critically necessary for successful strategic leadership. Many organization in todays business environment fall victim to the over-managed, under-led paradigm and so the understanding and successful implementation of strategic leadership is more important than ever (Kreitner, 2007). The successful application of strategic leadership starts at the top. By virtue of his or her position, the CEO should not consider delegating this specific duty to lower management. Once the CEO is effectively practicing strategic management, his or her methods may be adopted by other managers to effectively implement strategic management in the various divisions of an organization (Hitt, Ireland, and Hoskisson, 1995). Hitt, Ireland, and Hoskisson (1995) formulated a strategic leadership model which consists of six components; Determining strategic direction, exploiting and maintaining core competencies, developing human capitol, Sustaining effective corporate culture, emphasizing social responsibility and ethical practices, and establishing strategic controls. (1) Determining strategic direction; (2) Exploiting and maintaining core competencies; (3) Developing human capital; (4) Sustaining an effective corporate culture; (5) Emphasizing social responsibility and ethical practices; and (6) Establishing strategic controls. Determining strategic direction of an organization involves using all information available on market, competition, core competencies and well as foresight and vision to clearly define long range goals for the organization (Kreitner, 2007). Strategic intent means leveraging the firms internal resources, strengths, opportunities and core competencies to accomplish the goals that have been defined in the strategic planning process. Strategic directions give the members of the organization a clear path to attainment of the set goals (Kreitner, 2007). An organizations efforts can be considered strategic intent exists when all members of the organization or united in their pursuit of the specific benchmarks set forth by the strategic plan and belive that these goals are attainable and attainment will enable the organization to have a competitive advantage over other organizations in their industry. (Kreitner, 2007). Intel, Canon, and Xerox Microsoft are good example of corporations that have clearly discernable strategic intents (Loeb, 1993). Clear strategic intent requires effective strategic planning and effective strategic planning requires long range vision and foresight, usually five to ten years into the future. This long range vision must incorporate organizational and human resource strategy, design strategy, product planning strategy and information use and information system strategy and, finally, it must provide for a system of strategic control (Hunt, 1991). Exploiting and Maintaining Core Competencies is the second of the six components. Core competencies are the internal and external resources and the body of capabilities and expertise that give an organization its identity in the market and ultimately, its competitive advantages. Usually, core competencies relate to an organizations ability to produce their main products, be they material of informational. Some examples might include industrial manufacturing, research, customer interfaces and customer service, retail sales, technology or even specific patents held by the company. Unique market positioning, and unique customer benefits or product value are results of core competency and so, these things should be analyzed when determining core competency. A good question to ask is: why do our customers do business with us?. A main responsibility of strategic leaders in business today is to first identify, and then strengthen and grow their core competencies. Once core competencies are identified, they can then be utilized. As strategic leaders, corporate managers make decisions intended to help their firm develop, maintain, strengthen, leverage, and exploit core competencies. Exploiting core competencies involves sharing resources across units. In general, the most effective core competencies are based on intangible resources, which are less visible to competitors because they relate to employees knowledge or skills. Effective strategic leaders promote the sharing of intangible resources across business units in their firms (Hitt and Keats, 1992). In many large, diversified firms, core competencies are developed and applied across different units in the organization (economies of scope) to create a competitive advantage. Miller Beer, for example, has applied marketing and promotion competencies across its multiple businesses (Maruca, 1994). In many multinational corporations, the development, nurturing, and application of core competencies also facilitate managing complex relationships across business operating in different international markets. Whirlpool has emphasized competency across country borders (Lei, Hitt, and Bettis, 1990). 3. Developing Human Capital Human capital refers to the knowledge and skills of the organizations work force employees as a capital resource (Hitt, Ireland, and Hoskisson, 1995). Much of the development of American industry can be attributed to human capital. One-third of the gr

Analysis of The Scarlett Letter Essay -- Literary Analysis

Nathaniel Hawthorne was a man of business, politics, nature, morals, dedication and imagination who was greatly haunted by the actions of his Puritan ancestors (Gollin 360). Being one of the pioneers of noteworthy American literature, Hawthorne used the issues of his time and the history of Puritan New England as his settings. He was the son of Nathaniel Hathorne and Elizabeth Manning and was born on July 4, 1804 in Salem, Massachusetts. After his father’s death, Hawthorne and his family moved to their mother’s house. Later, he went to Bowdoin College and graduated in 1825. Here, he became friends with future U.S. president Franklin Pierce. He lacked interest in medicine, ministry and law, so he chose to write (Gollin 358). Perchance in shame of sharing a tie with men like John and William Hathorne, he then added a w to his last name. His early works were short stories put into periodicals and eventually into the Twice Told Tales which earned him fame. Then, he spent a year at both the Boston Custom House and the utopian Brook Farm. Both of these experiences stifled his imagination, and so he left. After marrying Sophia Peabody and having children, Hawthorne became destitute. So, he earned through Democratic Party ties a stable job at the Salem Custom House but lost it when the Whigs took over. So, he began to write again and produced his greatest acclaimed works. Eventually, President Pierce appointed him as the U.S. consul in Liverpool. From Liverpool, he moved to Italy, where he wrote a novel, back to England and finally back to Concord, Massachusetts. There, he died on May 19, 1864. Hawthorne covered the literary gamut with children’s books and short stories to powerful novels. Ultimately, Hawthorne represents how the issues ... ...Book Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. Chicago: World, 2009. 114-115. Print. Delaney, Bill. â€Å"Hawthorne, Nathaniel.† Magill’s Survey of American Literature. Rev. ed. Pasadena: Salem, 2007. Literary Reference Center. Web. 23 Dec. 2010. . Gollin, Rita K. â€Å"Hawthorne, Nathaniel.† American National Biography. Ed. Garraty and Carnes. Vol. 10. New York City : Oxford UP, 1999. 356-363. Print. Hawthorne, Nathaniel. â€Å"Nathaniel Hawthorne.† Preface. The Scarlet Letter. By Hawthorne. New York City: Bantam, 1988. N. pag. Print. - - -. The Scarlet Letter. 1850. New York City: Bantam, 1988. Print. Liukkonen, Petri, and Ari Pesonen. â€Å"Nathaniel Hawthorne.† Kirjasto. N.p., 2008. Web. 23 Dec. 2010. .