Original
What do you think is the best method for selecting employees: application forms, tests, interviews, or something else? Explain why.
After the HR department has located that there exists a demand for employees and knows whether it uses internal or external recruiting, it now has to decide how to select the best candidate out of the already attracted applicants who will be the most successful in his job. In order to measure this future performance the HR department has a few options which are the following.
First of all the candidate has to fill out an application form. In this document the company can gather general, but important information concerning the candidate’s educational background, his work history as well as other basic info like the date of birth or place of residence. In addition to that he is also sometimes asked to give a specific amount of what he expects to earn per month. With the filled out application form the employer can see if the candidate accomplished the basic requirements needed for the job.
If that is the case the second step could be the personal interview which is very common although it can be affected very easily by other factors than job related ones, for example sympathy. Furthermore its validity is not very high because the candidates usually have the chance to prepare themselves before the interview takes place and so could gather superficial knowledge which in order could impress the interviewer. To make an interview more valid it has to be structured and the interviewer has to ask all candidates the same questions.
Other techniques to select employees are for example intelligence, ability or skill tests, in which every candidate has to have the same test under the same conditions again. Personally I think that tests and specifically application forms should be used as pre-selection methods in the first place, because after having used these methods you can really evaluate if the candidate has enough knowledge, education or work experience, but you don’t know him personally. Even if the personal interview is not valid enough I think it is the most important technique to find out which applicant is the best one. In case the interviewer is not a hundred percent sure that one candidate is the right one, he can invite him for a “Schnuppertag”, during which he could let the candidate make some very practical tests. Moreover the HR can see whether the applicant “fits” into the company and how well he gets on with all the other employees and how he or she can deal with the new situation. From my point of view I think a “Schnuppertag” is a very good chance for the employer to closely observe the candidate in order to make the right decision on the on hand, but on the other hand it is also a great opportunity for the candidate himself, to see, if this job is really the right one for him. All in all every method has its advantages and disadvantages. The HR department has the difficult challenge to select a method – which I think depends on the job itself – and then choose the PERFECT EMPLOYEE.
511 words Korrektur[/font]
After the HR department has determined that there is a demand for employees and knows whether it will use internal or external recruiting, it now has to decide how to select the best candidate out of the already attracted pool of applicants who are most likely to be successful in a certain job. In order to measure this future performance, the HR department has a few options, which are the following.
First of all, the candidate has to fill out an application form. In this document, the company can gather general but important information concerning the candidate’s educational background, his work history as well as other basic info like the date of birth or place of residence. In addition to that, he is also sometimes asked to specify a specific amount that he expects to earn per month. With the filled out application form, the employer can see if the candidate accomplished the basic requirements needed for the job.
If that is the case, the second step could be the personal interview, which is very common although it can be affected very easily by other factors than job related ones, for example sympathy. Furthermore, its validity is not very high because the candidates usually have the chance to prepare themselves before the interview takes place and so can gather superficial knowledge which subsequently could impress the interviewer. To make an interview more valid, it has to be structured and the interviewer has to ask all candidates the same questions.
Other techniques to select employees are, for example, intelligence, ability or skill tests, in which every candidate has to again take the same test under the same conditions. Personally, I think that tests and specifically application forms should be used as pre-selection methods in the first place, because after having used these methods, you can really evaluate if the candidate has enough knowledge, education or work experience, but you don’t know him personally. Even if the personal interview is not valid enough, I think it is the most important technique to find out which applicant is the best one. In case the interviewer is not a hundred percent sure that one candidate is the right one, he can invite him to an open door day, during which he could let the candidate take some very practical tests. Moreover the HR department can see whether the applicant “fits” into the company and how well he gets on with all the other employees and how he or she can deal with the new situation. From my point of view, I think an open door day is a very good chance for the employer to closely observe the candidate in order to make the right decision on the on hand, but on the other hand it is also a great opportunity for the candidate himself to see if this job is really the right one for him. All in all, every method has its advantages and disadvantages. The HR department has the difficult challenge to select a method – which I think depends on the job itself – and then choose the PERFECT EMPLOYEE.
What do you think is he best method for selecting employees: application forms, tests, interviews, or something else? Explain why.
To begin with I would like to give a short explanation of all these terms.
First the application form is an efficient method of gathering information about the applicant’s previous work history, educational background, and other job-related demographic data.
Second these tests are tests of ability, skill, aptitude, or knowledge that is relevant to a particular job.
And last but not least the interviews that are sometimes very poor predictors of job success, because of judgements at the first meeting.
Concerning my opinion all of these three methods cover parts of the aim for selecting employees. The main objective is to find the perfect person that fulfils all the requirements and has the right experience and personality to do the specific job.
To emphasis the problem with application forms is that everybody can write what he wants in the hope that nobody realizes, that it’s a lie. For example a lot of applicants write in their CV that they write English perfectly and speak it fluently or even affirm that it’s their second mother tongue. That’s what a survey, shown on TV found out.
Applicants think that the personnel manager won’t test them during the upcoming interview. Furthermore a lot of them are thinking of the job interview and are the opinion that it’s anyway embarrassing for HR managers to test a language.
What is a bit more difficult to find evidences for, is the education. If applicants write, that they graduated with an A-Level and they have no evidence for that, HR managers can assume that they never did that. Or if they have no official confirmation/evidence of courses they say that they have done. What is more is that you can call their references if they have any. That is more common if the person already has a work experience, not like students, who have just graduated from university.
As a rule there should never be ONLY an application form for valuing applicants’ future performances. There is always a job interview that follows.
Let’s now take a look at the tests. I would like to mention that there even was such a test during the recruiting of the students, that applied for the university of applied science, as I did.
I think it’s a well-known and appreciated method to find the right candidates. In detail this means that you can ask specific questions that are useful for the future job (or university) and test certain skills or knowledge. Using this method it’s easier to see who really is interested and tries his best to get the job.
If I was a HR manager, I would combine all of these methods, because the advertising and recruiting of staff is very expensive.
Normally all applicants need to write an application form including a detailed CV. The HR department makes a first decision and invites them for the test. Depending on the results the best candidates will get the chance to come the job interview. This is very important, because during the interview you can clarify all of the open questions and persuade the HR manager with your personal appearance.
In conclusion, all HR managers want to have success with their methods for selecting employees. That means that they can be proud to say that they found the right person for a specific job. It would be too costly to repeat it again and would need a lot of time.
Korrektur
To begin with, I would like to give a short explanation of all these terms.
First, the application form is an efficient method of gathering information about the applicant’s previous work history, educational background, and other job-related demographic data.
Second, these tests are tests of ability, skill, aptitude, or knowledge that is relevant to a particular job.
And last but not least, the interviews are person-to-person methods of obtaining information that are sometimes very poor predictors of a candidate’s potential job success, because of subjective judgements at the first meeting.
Concerning my opinion, all of these three methods support part of the task of selecting employees. The main objective is to find the perfect person that fulfils all the requirements and has the right experience and personality to do the specific job.
The problem with application forms is that everybody can write what he wants in the hope that nobody realizes that it’s a lie or at least an exaggeration. For example, a lot of applicants write that they write English perfectly and speak it fluently in their CV, or even affirm that it’s their second mother tongue. That’s what a survey, shown on TV, found out.
Applicants think that the personnel manager won’t test them during the upcoming interview. Furthermore, a lot of them think about the job interview and are the opinion that it would be embarrassing for HR managers to test a language.
What is a bit more difficult to find evidence for is the education. If applicants write that they graduated with an A-Level and they have no evidence for that, HR managers can assume that they never did. Or if they have no official confirmation/evidence of courses they say that they have taken, HR managers will also be suspicious. What is more is that you can call their references if they have any. That is more common if the person already has work experience, not like students, who have just graduated from university.
As a rule, an applicants’ future performance should never be forecasted ONLY on the basis of an application form. There should always be a job interview that follows.
Let’s now take a look at the tests. I would like to mention that there was even such a test during the recruiting of the students that applied to the University of Applied Sciences, as did I.
I think it’s a well-known and appreciated method to find the right candidates. In detail, this means that you can ask specific questions that are useful for the future job (or university) and test certain skills or knowledge. Using this method, it’s easier to see who really is interested and is trying his best to get the job.
If I werean HR manager, I would combine all of these methods, because the advertising and recruiting of staff is very expensive.
Normally, all applicants need to write an application form including a detailed CV. The HR department makes a first decision and invites them to the test. Depending on the results, the best candidates will get the chance to come to the job interview. This is very important, because during the interview, you can clarify all of the open questions and persuade the HR manager with your personal appearance.
In conclusion, all HR managers want to have success with their methods for selecting employees. That means that they can be proud to say that they found the right person for a specific job. It would be too costly to repeat it again and would need a lot of time.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Essay: Your best employee is considering leaving the company. What motivational steps would you consider in order to retain the employee. Why?
The main topic of this essay is what you as employer could do if your best employee is considering leaving the company. You have to think of what motivational steps you would consider to keep the employee in the company. First of all you have to analyze why the employee wants to leave the company. There can be several reasons why the employee does not longer want to work for the company. One reason could be that he is not satisfied with his work. In detail, this means that he maybe does not have enough responsibilities and the tasks he has to do are not challenging for him. Otherwise it could be that he isn’t satisfied with his salary and thinks that he has to much work and gets not enough money for it. In my opinion it is often not only one factor that leads an employee to quit the job. In my personal situation I often had planned to leave the company because of many factors which had not been motivating for me. In regards to the above mentioned scenarios, there are different possibilities to solve these problems. If the problem is that the employee is not satisfied with his work and the responsibilities he has, there are many tactics to change his job. The following methods can be specified: job redesign, job enrichment, team management and reinforcement. In this special case I would choose job enrichment or job redesign to motivate him to stay with the company. Job enrichment means that you increase job satisfaction by adding one or more motivating factors to the job activities. A good example for job enrichment is job rotation. Job rotation occurs when an employee “rotates” through the different positions and workplaces in the same company. So the employee can get to know many other tasks and he wouldn’t be bored anylonger. Furthermore, if he does his job good and is higher motivated a pay raise could be the next step in the motivating process. On the other hand, job redesign means to increase the satisfaction by combining tasks or forming natural work groups. Combining tasks means to enlarge jobs and increase their variety. Forming natural work groups occurs when people who do different jobs on a project work togehter as a team with different tasks and functions. Upon closer examination, I would choose the other method. In my opinion, job redising by enlarging the job is not very motivating, if the employee does not get more money in addition. So job enrichment is the best way to “hold” the employee in the company. I had the same problem in the company where I work – I was dissatisfied with my work, it was not motivating any more. Then I had the performance appraisal and told my employer the situation. His idea was to introduce job rotation and I was the first employee who did it. It was really very motivating and I am now much mure satisfied with my job and the employer. All in all, there are many different possibilities to motivate employees – but you have to choose the right motivation strategy for the unique person, because every employee has other expectations to his job.
Korrektur
The main topic of this essay is the question of what you as an employer could do if your best employee is considering leaving the company. You have to think of what motivational steps you would consider to keep the employee in the company. First of all, you have to analyze why the employee wants to leave the company. There can be several reasons for why the employee does not longer want to work for the company. One reason could be that he is not satisfied with his work. In detail, this means that he might not have enough responsibilities and the tasks he has to do might not be challenging for him. On the other hand, it could be that he isn’t satisfied with his salary and thinks that he has too much work and is not getting enough money for it. In my opinion, it is often not only one factor that leads an employee to quit their job. In my personal situation, I have often planned to leave the company because of many factors which were not motivating for me. In regards to the abovementioned scenarios, there are different possibilities through which to solve these problems. If the problem is that the employee is not satisfied with his work and the responsibilities he has, there are many tactics through which to change his job. The following methods can be specified: job redesign, job enrichment, team management and reinforcement. In this special case, I would choose job enrichment or job redesign to motivate him to stay with the company. Job enrichment means that you increase job satisfaction by adding one or more motivating factors to the job activities. A good example for job enrichment is job rotation. Job rotation occurs when an employee “rotates” through the different positions and workplaces in the same company. By doing so, the employee would get to know many other tasks and he wouldn’t be bored any longer. Furthermore, if he does his job well and is more highly motivated, a pay raise could be the next step in the motivating process. On the other hand, job redesign means increasing the satisfaction by combining tasks or forming natural work groups. Combining tasks means enlarging jobs and increase their variety. Forming natural work groups occurs when people who do different jobs on a project work together as a team with different tasks and functions. Upon closer examination, I would choose the other method. In my opinion, job redesign by enlarging the job is not very motivating, if the employee does not get more money in addition. So job enrichment is the best way to “hold” the employee in the company. I had the same problem in the company in which I work – I was dissatisfied with my work, it was not motivating any more. Then I had the performance appraisal and told my employer the situation. His idea was to introduce job rotation and I was the first employee who did it. It was really very motivating and I am now much more satisfied with my job and the employer. All in all, there are many different possibilities through which to motivate employees – but you have to choose the right motivation strategy for the unique person, because every employee has other expectations concerning his job.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Can companies really ‘create’ needs by means of new products or do they merely build on existing needs? Please give arguments supporting your answer.
Needs are usually described as something that people "must" have. In this case we shouldn't forget that needs can’t always be satisfied by tangible goods, they could rather also be met by services or just counseling. Therefore there are many different kinds of needs such as those which are in short found in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
To fulfill their infinte number of needs people just watch out for those goods and services which are able to meet their desires. Needs are also known as lack of satisfaction. Considering the fact that similar groups of people want to have similar things, firms should take advantage of providing them what they want. Therefore it's essential and vitally important for companies to create required high-value products by using limited resources. This theory is connected to Philip Kotler's statement that "sutlers don't create needs, because they already exist. Traders, environmental factors and consumer behavior just influence them."
If we want to answer the question "Can companies really create needs?" and defeat Kotler's theory, we have to consider some current examples:
The "Yo-Yo need"
Most people above 18 years have played with Yo-Yos yet. During the 60's, 70's and 80's the Yo-Yo craze spread throughout Europe because firms started an expensive advertising campaign including TV spots and created the need to buy it. Before the 1960's nobody had known it and some years later 45 million of those stress relievers were sold. At the beginning of the 1990's people's need to possess a Yo-Yo declined rapidly and fell into oblivion. The Yo-Yo's great comeback and, therefore the recreation of a need, were in the late 90's. And nowadays again most children and young people don't know what a Yo-Yo is. That was a small insight into the story of the ups and downs of the Yo-Yo in our needs and wants-society.
The Red Bull story
Nobody had known Red Bull, which had actually been invented in Thailand, before Mateschitz started his advertising campaign in Western Europe. That was definitely a creation of a need. People hadn’t wanted that soft/energy drink before because they hadn’t heard anything about that stimulant. Mateschitz and his partners created a brand that makes people feel sad if those popular canned drinks are out of stock. This is also an important requirement for a need to be created.
The need to support charitable institutions
Another example that a company was really able to create needs is charities. By using TV-spots including poor people, and especially children, companies want to create the need or rather want to raise the awareness of the importance to donate.
To compare the creation of needs with existing needs we also have to consider the facts of needs, which we know of that they are present. One example of existing needs is convenience goods such as food, drugs or hygiene items. If people feel like using a new shower gel, companies have to recognize that and then they usually modify their chemical composition.
The main difference between newly created needs and already existing ones seems to be that people expect firms to naturally fulfil their existing needs and wants on the one hand but they don't expect companies to "create" needs and demand by themselves on the other hand.
Of course they can...
In my opinion, all examples mentioned above of creating new needs were already deeply rooted in people's minds and were already thought before companies worm them out. If we want to believe that companies really create needs, we actually would have to neglect this theory, otherwise we would have to agree on it and Kotler's statement that we can only influence them. The problem is that companies mostly don't know exactly what our needs are and we don't know some of our needs ourselves too because we don’t think of energy drinks, Yo-Yos or donations until firms stimulate our minds and make us feel that we need to have them necessarily. Therefore it's legitimate to argue that companies can definitely create needs by means of goods and services according to Maslow's "What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself."
Korrektur
Needs are usually described as something that people "must" have. In this case, we shouldn't forget that needs can’t always be satisfied by tangible goods, they could rather also be met by services or just counseling. Therefore, there are many different kinds of needs such as those which are in short found in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
To fulfill their infinite number of needs, people merely look for those goods and services which are able to meet their desires. Needs can also be seen as a lack of satisfaction. Considering the fact that similar groups of people want to have similar things, firms should take advantage of the opportunity to provide them with what they want. Therefore, it's essential and vitally important for companies to create required high-value products by using limited resources. This theory is connected to Philip Kotler's statement that "sutlers don't create needs, because they already exist. Traders, environmental factors and consumer behavior just influence them."
If we want to answer the question "Can companies really create needs?" and falsify Kotler's theory, we have to consider some current examples:
The "Yo-Yo need"
Most people above 18 years have played with Yo-Yos. During the 60's, 70's and 80's, the Yo-Yo craze spread throughout Europe because firms started an expensive advertising campaign including TV spots and created the need to buy them. Before the 1960's, nobody had known of them and some years later, 45 million of those stress relievers were sold. At the beginning of the 1990's, people's need to possess a Yo-Yo declined rapidly and fell into oblivion. The Yo-Yo's great comeback and, therefore the recreation of a need, was in the late 90's. And nowadays, once again, most children and young people don't know what a Yo-Yo is. That was a small insight into the story of the ups and downs of the Yo-Yo in our needs and wants-society.
The Red Bull story
Nobody had known Red Bull, which had actually been invented in Thailand, before Mateschitz started his advertising campaign in Western Europe. That was definitely a creation of a need. People hadn’t wanted this soft/energy drink before because they hadn’t heard anything about this stimulant. Mateschitz and his partners created a brand that makes people feel sad if these popular canned drinks are out of stock. This is also an important requirement for a need to be created.
The need to support charitable institutions
Another example that organizations were really able to create needs are charities. By using TV-spots including poor people, and especially children, aid organizations want to create the need to or rather want to raise the awareness of the importance of donations.
To compare the creation of needs with existing needs, we also have to consider needs of which we know that they are present. One example of existing needs are convenience goods such as food, drugs or hygiene items. If people feel like using a new shower gel, companies have to recognize that and then they usually modify their chemical composition.
The main difference between newly created needs and already existing ones seems to be that people expect firms to naturally fulfil their existing needs and wants on the one hand, but they don't expect companies to "create" needs and demand by themselves on the other hand.
Of course they can...
In my opinion, all examples mentioned above for creating new needs were already deeply rooted in people's minds and were already considered before companies wormed them out. If we want to believe that companies really create needs, we would actually have to neglect this theory, otherwise we would have to agree with it and Kotler's statement that we can only influence them. The problem is that companies mostly don't know exactly what our needs are and we don't know some of our needs ourselves, either, because we don’t think of energy drinks, Yo-Yos or donations until firms stimulate our minds and make us feel that we need to have them. Therefore it's legitimate to argue that companies can definitely create needs by means of goods and services according to Maslow's "What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself."
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Which benefits programs should an Austrian organization offer and why? (retirement plans, health care, etc.)
Nowadays people expect more than money for their work because not every need can be satisfied by money. Therefore many companies diversify their offer for qualified staff.
Companies are aware of the importance of healthy employees. Consequently they have installed basic healthcare facilities. For example some duties of a medical officer are health checks, flue shots, checks of the workplace ergonometric and they give general advice in the medical context for employees.
Another important point which contributes to the employee’s health is regular and nutritious meals. This can be managed by every company regardless of their size. Large companies with many employees can introduce their own cafeteria where they prepare the meal for the employees. For small and medium sized enterprises it is hardly profitable to maintain such facilities. For this reason these companies should do a co-operation with surrounding restaurants. Regular lunch is not only important for physical health furthermore it’s also support psychological health. Eating lunch with your colleagues helps to socialize. The informal framework of this meeting makes it easy to exchange information about the company. In addition employees can leave behind all their work in the office. This distance generates more opportunities for new ideas.
The next point leads us to retirement plans. The importance of good private retirement plans is nowadays necessary due to uncertain development of the social security system.
In addition more and more employees would like to combine work and family life. So companies have to respect the need for child care facilities and should provide such facilities for their workers.
According to the health program of healthy food and medical care a company should offer the possibility to do some sports for employees. First of all they can have their own facilities like tennis courts, soccer fields, multipurpose indoor courts or a special workout room where people can workout their bodies. For smaller companies it is recommended to do co- operations with self-acting sport centers. Generally sports help to reduce stress and to enhance the general fitness level of employees.
The next point leads us to the fact that not every employee can afford to go on vacation. Therefore companies should supply their employees with cheaper vacation possibilities. Relaxed employees are more productive, creative and more motivated.
In addition a company should regular organise events because this events contribute to the affiliation of employees. Examples for this are Christmas parties, summer festivals, carnival balls or work outings.
The next point to be dealt with is retraining. For an employee it is important that he or she can improve his or her soft skills as well as hard skills. The management should help employees who would like to attend workshops or courses to enlarge their knowledge both with financial means and with mental aid.
Moreover a lot of other benefits exist which a company can offer. Examples for this could be an own company car, Christmas presents, special bonuses and many more. For companies it is important to mix the different benefits because of the individual character of the employees.
Korrektur
Nowadays, people expect more than money for their work because not every need can be satisfied by money. Therefore, many companies diversify their offer for qualified staff.
Companies are aware of the importance of healthy employees. Consequently, they have installed basic healthcare facilities. For example, some duties of a medical officer are health checks, flue shots, checks of the workplace ergonometric and giving general advice in the medical context for employees.
Another important point which contributes to the employee’s health are regular and nutritious meals. This can be managed by every company regardless of its size. Large companies with many employees can introduce their own cafeterias where they prepare the meal for the employees. For small and medium sized enterprises, it is hardly profitable to maintain such facilities. For this reason, these companies should co-operate with neighboring restaurants. Regular lunch is not only important for physical health, furthermore it also supports psychological health. Eating lunch with your colleagues helps you to socialize. The informal framework of this meeting makes it easy to exchange information about the company. In addition, employees can leave behind all their work in the office. This distance generates more opportunities for new ideas.
The next point leads us to retirement plans. The importance of good private retirement plans is nowadays necessary due to uncertain development of the social security system.
In addition, more and more employees would like to combine work and family life. Therefore, companies have to respect the need for child care facilities and should provide such facilities for their workers. Together with the health program of healthy food and medical care, a company should offer the possibility to do sports for employees. First of all, it can have its own facilities like tennis courts, soccer fields, multipurpose indoor courts or a special workout room where people can work out their bodies. For smaller companies, it is recommended to co- operate with independent sport centers. Generally, sports help to reduce stress and to enhance the general fitness level of employees.
The next point leads us to the fact that not every employee can afford to go on vacation. Therefore, companies should supply their employees with cheaper vacation possibilities. Relaxed employees are more productive, creative and more motivated.
In addition, a company should regularly organise events because these events contribute to the devotion of employees. Examples for this are Christmas parties, summer festivals, carnival balls or work outings.
The next point to be dealt with is retraining. For an employee, it is important that he or she can improve his or her soft skills as well as hard skills. The management should help employees who would like to attend workshops or courses to enlarge their knowledge both financially and with mental support.
Moreover, a lot of other benefits exist which a company can offer. Examples for this could be an employee’s own company car, Christmas presents, special bonuses and many more. For companies, it is important to mix the different benefits because of the individual character of the employees.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
ESSAY
What the hell is marketing? What does the general public associate with the term? Then define marketing in your own words. How can it help improve the results of an organization?
According to Griffin/Ebert, marketing is “the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion and distribution of ideas, goods and services to create exchanges that satisfy individual and organizational objectives” or in other words “finding a need and filling it”. The most convenient definition in my opinion is the definition suggested by the American Marketing Association, that “marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders".
Whatever definition, the most important point for me is value and satisfaction not only for the customer, but also for the organization.
Customers only buy products that offer the most value to them. So they compare the product’s benefits with its costs. If they believe the benefits to be greater than the costs, they will purchase the product. It’s that easy.
So the most important job of marketing experts is to find out how to increase the perceived benefits of a product an thus enhance its value. In the long term this is only possible by improving the product continuously.
They should also determine what is potential customer desire and then focus on fullfilling the needs.
This leads to two major factors of marketing, the recruitement of new customers and the retention of existing customers to be precise.
Therefore, marketers have to build relationships with their customers, nurture their connection and not lose touch with them.
Marketers make use of many different sciences, such as psychology, sociology, economics and strategy. People often think marketing is the promotion of products. But for a successful marketing plan, the for Ps are crucial: Product, Price, Promotion and Place. These four elements are referred to as the marketing mix.
First of all the right product is very important, because it has to fullfill the customer’s needs and expectations. Then the right price for this product has to be found. Customers should be satisfied after having purchased a product, so they will come again and buy more. But they will only be satisfied when the price fits the perceived value of the product. Marketers can use market research to find out how much potential customers would agree to pay for a product.
Another important P is promotion, that includes advertising, sales promotion, public relations, personal selling, and so on.
Last, but not least, place refers to how the product gets to the customer in the end. Place includes point of sale placement or retailing.
After having heard that much about marketing, my point of view is, that marketers use their knowledge to influence and control the environment to the advantage of their company. Nevertheless, by gaining an advantage for themself, they also create value to their customers and employees.
Korrektur
According to Griffin/Ebert, marketing is “the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion and distribution of ideas, goods and services to create exchanges that satisfy individual and organizational objectives” or in other words “finding a need and filling it”. The most convenient definition in my opinion is the definition suggested by the American Marketing Association, that “marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders".
Whatever definition, the most important point for me is value and satisfaction not only for the customer, but also for the organization.
Customers only buy products that offer the most value to them. So they compare the product’s benefits with its costs. If they believe the benefits to be greater than the costs, they will purchase the product. It’s that easy.
So the most important job of marketing experts is to find out how to increase the perceived benefits of a product and thus enhance its value. In the long term, this is only possible by improving the product continuously.
They should also determine what a potential customer desire is and then focus on fullfilling the needs.
This leads to two major elements of marketing, the recruitment of new customers and the retention of existing customers to be precise.
Therefore, marketers have to build relationships with their customers, nurture their connection and not lose touch with them.
Marketers make use of many different sciences, such as psychology, sociology, economics and strategy. People often think marketing is the promotion of products. But for a successful marketing plan, the four Ps are crucial: Product, Price, Promotion and Place. These four elements are referred to as the marketing mix.
First of all, the right product is very important, because it has to fullfill the customer’s needs and expectations. Then, the right price for this product has to be found. Customers should be satisfied after having purchased a product, so they will come again and buy more. But they will only be satisfied when the price fits the perceived value of the product. Marketers can use market research to find out how many potential customers would agree to pay for a product.
Another important P is promotion, which includes advertising, sales promotion, public relations, personal selling, and so on.
Last, but not least, place refers to how the product gets to the customer in the end. Place includes point of sale placement or retailing.
After having heard that much about marketing, my point of view is that marketers use their knowledge to influence and control the environment to the advantage of their company. Nevertheless, by gaining an advantage for themselves, they also create value for their customers and employees.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Which motivation theory is most/ least useful for you? Describe it briefly and give reasons for your opinion, mentioning at least 2 less/more useful theories as well.
In my opinion motivation is an absolute key factor for efficient working. It makes the difference between just doing your job and trying hard to be successful. As the great impact of motivation has been recognized, most managers try to understand the reasons of their employees’ behavior to bring out the best in them.
The theories of employee motivation are numerous. The most common are McGregor’s Theory X and Y, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Model, the Expectancy and the Equity Theory.
While the others really seem to explain motivation in the workplace, I think that the hierarchy of human needs model is appropriate for the general explanation of human behavior.
According to Maslow, human needs are hierarchical and lower-level needs must be met before a person will try to satisfy higher-level needs. The basis in the hierarchy of needs are physiological needs (like eating, drinking, sleeping,..) followed by the security needs that can be fulfilled through a safe place to live or insurances. Next steps concern family and relationships, called the social needs, and the aim to reach a certain status, the esteem needs. On the top of the pyramid there are the self-actualization needs.
In general I believe in Maslows theory, although I think that different needs sometimes occur at the same time. But as already mentioned for me the hierarchy of needs explains general behavior and is not fitting perfectly as an guideline for motivating employees.
The expectancy theory seems to have a realistic approach for motivation, also in the workplace. According to this theory motivations depends on two factors; the wish to gain a certain reward and the chance of obtaining it. I am convinced that most of the working people would work harder if they knew that this effort is connected with a pay raise or other rewards.
The equity theory shows that a balance of giving and taking is also important for the relation between company and employee. The contributions of the employee like for example time, education or effort is compared with the outputs, like salary, benefits and security that the workforce receives. A balance of these two forces leads to satisfaction on both sides, keeping in mind that job satisfaction is a main factor for motivation. As the own ratios are also compared with those of other employees, it is necessary that the fixing of the salaries is reasonable and understandable for everybody. The level of salary should be based on the education, the length of working for the company and the individual effort. What I regard as difficult concerning this theory is the objective estimation of the own effort. As far as my experience goes some people tend to overestimate their own performance while others in contrast underestimate it, what may leads to unjustified feelings of inequity.
Also the McGregor’s Theories X and Y may help to find an appropriate way of leading and motivating people. According to Theory X people are naturally lazy and try to cop out of work while Theory Y claims that people are self-motivated and willing to be productive. Depending on which theory a managers prefers he either controls his employee Argus-eyed and punishes when necessary (Theory X) or he lets his employees work on their own, believing in their self-responsibility. Mc Gregor believed that Theory Y managers are more likely to have satisfied and motivated employees, which is also my opinion. But as each employee is different, a strategy is not optimal for everyone. And there lies the difficulty, in choosing the right leading style for each employee.
I both appreciate the expectancy theory as well as Mc Gregor's Theories X and Y, but to my mind X and Y is only realizable with a very small number of employees and due to this I estimate the expectancy theory as most useful.
Korrektur
In my opinion motivation, is an absolute key factor for efficient working. It makes the difference between just doing your job and trying hard to be successful. As the great impact of motivation has been recognized, most managers try to understand the reasons of their employees’ behavior to bring out the best in them.
The theories of employee motivation are numerous. The most common are McGregor’s Theory X and Y, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Model, the Expectancy and the Equity Theory.
While the others really seem to explain motivation in the workplace, I think that the hierarchy of human needs model is appropriate for the general explanation of human behavior.
According to Maslow, human needs are hierarchical and lower-level needs must be met before a person will try to satisfy higher-level needs. The basis in the hierarchy of needs are physiological needs (like eating, drinking, sleeping,..) followed by the security needs that can be fulfilled through a safe place to live or insurances. Next steps concern family and relationships, called the social needs, and the aim to reach a certain status, the esteem needs. On the top of the pyramid there are the self-actualization needs.
In general, I believe in Maslows theory, although I think that different needs sometimes occur at the same time. But as already mentioned, for me, the hierarchy of needs explains general behavior and does not fit perfectly as a guideline for motivating employees.
The expectancy theory seems to have a realistic approach towards motivation, also in the workplace. According to this theory, motivations depends on two factors; the wish to gain a certain reward and the chance of obtaining it. I am convinced that most of the working people would work harder if they knew that this effort was connected with a pay raise or other rewards.
The equity theory shows that a balance of giving and taking is also important for the relation between company and employee. The contributions of the employee like, for example, time, education or effort are compared with the outputs, like salary, benefits and security that the workforce receives. A balance of these two forces leads to satisfaction on both sides, keeping in mind that job satisfaction is a main factor for motivation. As the employee’s own ratios are also compared with those of other employees, it is necessary that the fixing of the salaries be reasonable and understandable for everybody. The level of salary should be based on the education, the length of time an employee has worked for the company and the individual effort. What I regard as difficult concerning this theory is the objective estimation of one’s own effort. As far as my experience goes, some people tend to overestimate their own performance while others in contrast underestimate it, which may lead to unjustified feelings of inequity.
Also the McGregor’s Theories X and Y may help to find an appropriate way of leading and motivating people. According to Theory X people are naturally lazy and try to cop out of work while Theory Y claims that people are self-motivated and willing to be productive. Depending on which theory a managers prefers he either controls his employee Argus-eyed and punishes when necessary (Theory X) or he lets his employees work on their own, believing in their self-responsibility. Mc Gregor believed that Theory Y managers are more likely to have satisfied and motivated employees, which is also my opinion. But as each employee is different, a strategy is not optimal for everyone. And there lies the difficulty, in choosing the right leading style for each employee.
I both appreciate the expectancy theory as well as Mc Gregor's Theories X and Y, but to my mind X and Y is only realizable with a very small number of employees and due to this I estimate the expectancy theory as most useful.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Which management style to use
A key component of job satisfaction is the relationship between managers and their staff. This, in turn, is influenced both by the people and management styles involved.
“Management style” is a term often used to describe the “how” of management.
A manager is generally responsible for a project or a team of people and, essentially, must be able to communicate, negotiate and influence. However, these skills can be performed in different ways.
For a while it was believed that there were only two basic management styles: autocratic and democratic.
An autocratic style is used to instruct and command. Managers who use this style impose their decisions on staff and expect or demand compliance. Most bosses find this method very easy to use. This style, however, does not come easily to everyone.
A democratic style allows decisions to emerge from a consensus and therefore requires good two-way communication between staff and managers.
Nowadays the list of management styles is much more extensive. Some styles, however, are more used than others – for example the free-rein style, where the manager is only adviser. Employees have much responsibility and can make decisions on their own. A manager using this style works alongside staff as a colleague and offers constructive feedback and improvement suggestions.
Management styles are functions of behaviour and linked to personality. In my opinion most managers have a preferred style but a good performer will use a variety of styles depending on the specific situation.
The autocratic style is good for people who have some competence but lack commitment or need supervision because of their lack of experience. Sometimes this style is the best for all staff. When an emergency or crisis develops within an organisation, employees expect their manager to show direction. In this case a democratic or free-rein style would not be appropriate. Another example – If a member of staff fails to turn up for work, the manager is expected to take responsibility and find a solution without consulting the other staff.
Managers should adopt the democratic style for people who have competence but lack confidence or motivation. In some situations the democratic approach is the only right decision. An example for this – In a hospital undergoing change in management structures or implementing a new staffing structure, employees should be involved in the decision-making process. However, the manager has to make the final decision.
The free-rein style is only for people who have both competence and commitment and who are able and willing to work on a project by themselves with minimum supervision. Team members of a children-aid program may find a free-rein style most effective.
For me the key strength of a manager has to be the ability to use the most appropriate style at the most appropriate time (Contingency Approach to Leadership). This can be very hard for managers because it’s not easy to change the style from person to person or from situation to situation - but it’s learnable.
The different styles can be developed through formal training but, more importantly, through experience.
511 words
Korrektur
A key component of job satisfaction is the relationship between managers and their staff. This, in turn, is influenced both by the people and management styles involved.
“Management style” is a term often used to describe the “how” of management.
A manager is generally responsible for a project or a team of people and, essentially, must be able to communicate, negotiate and influence. However, these skills can be performed in different ways.
For a while it was believed that there were only two basic management styles: autocratic and democratic.
An autocratic style is used to instruct and command. Managers who use this style impose their decisions on the staff and expect or demand compliance. Most bosses find this method very easy to use. This style, however, does not come easily to everyone.
A democratic style allows decisions to emerge from a consensus and therefore requires good two-way communication between staff and managers.
Nowadays the list of management styles is much more extensive. Some styles, however, are more used than others – for example the free-rein style, where the manager is only an adviser. Employees have a lot of responsibility and can make decisions on their own. A manager using this style works alongside the staff as a colleague and offers constructive feedback and improvement suggestions.
Management styles are functions of behaviour and linked to personality. In my opinion, most managers have a preferred style but a good performer will use a variety of styles depending on the specific situation.
The autocratic style is good for people who have some competence but lack commitment or need supervision because of their lack of experience. Sometimes, this style is the best for the entire staff. When an emergency or crisis develops within an organisation, employees expect their manager to show the direction. In this case, a democratic or free-rein style would not be appropriate. Another example – If a member of staff fails to turn up for work, the manager is expected to take responsibility and find a solution without consulting the other staff.
Managers should adopt the democratic style for people who have competence but lack confidence or motivation. In some situations, the democratic approach is the only right decision. An example for this is as follows– In a hospital undergoing change in management structures or implementing a new staffing structure, employees should be involved in the decision-making process. However, the manager has to make the final decision.
The free-rein style is only for people who have both competence and commitment and who are able and willing to work on a project by themselves with minimum supervision. Team members of a children-aid program may find a free-rein style most effective.
For me the key strength of a manager has to be the ability to use the most appropriate style at the most appropriate time (Contingency Approach to Leadership). This can be very hard for managers because it’s not easy to change the style from person to person or from situation to situation - but it’s learnable.
The different styles can be developed through formal training but, more importantly, through experience.
Question: Is “customer relationship management” (CRM) a new concept that will still be applied in ten years from now or is it merely a phase? Why or why not?
“CRM. Those aspects of a business strategy which relate to techniques and methods for attracting and retaining customers.” (source: www.investorwords.com)
According to the definition above, CRM is linked to a technique to enhance the use respectively realisation of the 4 Ps. A good CRM should assist mangers to offer the right products not only at the right price and place but further to the right people. Of course, a CRM system would provide more information than only preferences of specific customers, such as payment behaviour, annual turnover, etc.
However, to answer the opening question whether CRM is a new concept and if it would be still relevant in ten years from now, it might be the easiest way to survey this on the basis of preferences.
From my point of view, CRM is not a new concept at all. Customer relationship management has always been a part of all kind of businesses, even though nobody might have called that way. A butcher giving a sausage to a child or telling the customer what “specials” are on sale by knowing the client and offering only products of interest could be considered as CRM. Due to the fast growth in business and affiliated groups have taken over most of the supply in this sector, the personal contact to the customers is not possible anymore. Attending more and more mostly anonym customers a personal relationship to each individual customer was not possible any longer.
Facing an excess supply of goods and services as well as a multitude of communication media, supplier of all business segments got in trouble. As it has become more complicated to reach the customers and most products face several substitute products CRM seems to rekindle again. Business has changed from a seller’s market to a buyer’s market again and the relationship to the customers might be the only differentiator in many sectors in the future.
Business is tough and it is not likely to change. Due to the above mentioned circumstances marketing expenses to acquire customers have risen dramatically in the recent years. No company could risk loosing a customer and therefore has to be very attentive listen to its customer’s needs.
Finally this should answer the question at the top, although customer relationship management should not be considered as a new concept it is definitely not a merely phase but a key performance indicator for the future. Creating and maintaining relationships with customers, identifying important factors to clients including but not limited to a well organized and successful customer support will be essential to run a lucrative business.
Those companies neglecting or even worth refuse the necessity of CRM will fail in the markets.
In a nutshell, CRM is not a phase and it is not new. Customer care might have been forgotten for a while but will never drop out of business processes as all customers want to be treated as individuals and would choose the supplier fulfilling their needs better than others.
Korrektur
“CRM. Those aspects of a business strategy which relate to techniques and methods for attracting and retaining customers.” (source: www.investorwords.com)
According to the definition above, CRM is linked to a technique to enhance the use respectively realisation of the 4 Ps. Good CRM should assist managers in offering the right products, not only at the right price and place, but further to the right people. Of course, a CRM system would provide more information than only preferences of specific customers, such as payment behaviour, annual turnover, etc.
However, to answer the opening question of whether CRM is a new concept and if it will still be relevant in ten years from now, it might be easiest to survey this on the basis of preferences.
From my point of view, CRM is not a new concept at all. Customer relationship management has always been a part of all kind of businesses, even though nobody might have called it that. A butcher giving a sausage to a child or telling the customer what “specials” are on sale by knowing the client and offering only products of interest could be considered as CRM. Due to the fast growth in business and affiliated groups that have taken over most of the supply in this sector, personal contact to the customers is not possible anymore to the same degree. When attending more and more mostly anonymous customers, a personal relationship with each individual customer is not possible any longer.
Facing an excess supply of goods and services as well as a multitude of communication media, suppliers of all business segments got in trouble. As it has become more complicated to reach the customers and most products face several substitute products, CRM seems to have been rekindled again. Business has changed from a seller’s market to a buyer’s market again and the relationship to the customers might be the only differentiator in many sectors in the future.
Business is tough and it is not likely to change. Due to the abovementioned circumstances, marketing expenses to acquire customers have risen dramatically in the recent years. No company can risk losing a customer and therefore every company has to be very attentive and listen to its customer’s needs.
Finally this should answer the question at the top, although customer relationship management should not be considered as a new concept it is definitely not merely a phase but a key performance indicator for the future. Creating and maintaining relationships with customers, identifying important factors for clients including but not limited to a well organized and successful customer support will be essential to run a lucrative business.
Those companies neglecting or even flat out refuting the necessity of CRM will fail in the markets.
In a nutshell, CRM is not a phase and it is not new. Customer care might have been forgotten for a while but will never drop out of business processes as all customers want to be treated as individuals and will choose the supplier fulfilling their needs better than others.
Briefly describe the managerial styles you know of and explain which one you feel is best and worst, giving reasons why.
The different managerial styles try to describe the various forms of leadership which are found in the present companies. The main differences can be seen in the leader's personality, the setting objectives, the communication as well as team culture. Every managerial style covers both advantages and disadvantages which following overview shows.
Beginning with the autocratic style, the main indicator is the strict leadership which is characterised by an authoritarian manager who makes all decisions and sets the objectives his employees are expected to reach. The team is structured hierarchically. Therefore the clear benefits lie in the constant business direction and the comprehensible thread of decision-making. On the other side human resources may not be utilised due the fact that teaming is not supported.
Moreover, the democratic style ranks among the commonly used managerial forms. It is described by two essential characteristics: Firstly, employees take a main part in decision-making. Therefore everything is agreed by the majority. Secondly, communication plays a significant role in democratic leading methods. Banking on specialists' opinions and team skills lead to a general improvement by employees' satisfaction which is the advantage of this style.
Lastly, the free-rein style makes list of managerial forms complete. Also known as the Laisser-faire leadership style, it is characterised by the peripheral role of the leader and the autonomous management of the staff. The communication as well as the structure is horizontal, meaning that it is equal in both directions from leaders to subordinates. So the style counts on the scope for development and the employees' independence. However s drawback may be that the management loses sight of direction.
To sum up, every style can convince with its pros and cons. From my point of view, it basically depends on the company, its sector, its size as well as its leaders. The managerial challenge is to find an authentic way to combine the staff's needs and resources as well as the strategic objectives. So it may be the right way to take an intense look at the company that has to be led to prevent wrong and possibly irreversible decision. In my company the style is a mix between the democratic and the free-rein style. However this is only feasible as a result of the strong personality of the managing director.
Korrektur
The different managerial styles try to describe the various forms of leadership which are found in present day companies. The main differences can be seen in the leader's personality, the setting of objectives, the communication as well as team culture. Every managerial style contains both advantages and disadvantages, which the following overview shows.
Beginning with the autocratic style, the main indicator is the strict leadership which is characterised by an authoritarian manager who makes all decisions and sets the objectives his employees are expected to reach. The team is structured hierarchically. Therefore, the clear benefits lie in the constant business direction and the comprehensible thread of decision-making. On the other side, human resources may not be utilised due the fact that teaming is not supported.
Moreover, the democratic style ranks among the commonly used managerial forms. It is described by two essential characteristics: Firstly, employees take a main part in decision-making. Therefore everything is agreed upon by the majority. Secondly, communication plays a significant role in democratic leading methods. Banking on specialists' opinions and team skills lead to a general improvement by employees' satisfaction which is the advantage of this style.
Lastly, the free-rein style makes the list of managerial forms complete. Also known as the Laisser-faire leadership style, it is characterised by the peripheral role of the leader and the autonomous management of the staff. The communication as well as the structure is horizontal, meaning that it is equal in both directions from leaders to subordinates. So the style counts on the scope for development and the employees' independence. However s drawback may be that the management loses sight of direction.
To sum up, every style can convince with its pros and cons. From my point of view, it basically depends on the company, its sector, its size as well as its leaders. The managerial challenge is to find an authentic way to combine the staff's needs and resources as well as the strategic objectives. So it may be the right way to take an intense look at the company that has to be led to prevent wrong and possibly irreversible decisions. In my company, the style is a mix between the democratic and the free-rein style. However, this is only feasible as a result of the strong personality of the managing director.
Original
The main topic of this essay is the question whether companies can create new and undiscovered needs through their products or if they only build on already existing needs.
To answer this question we have to look at the main aspects of needs in general - the psychological background, the cultural and social change and especially the alteration of customer’s values in the past decades. Furthermore a brief look at how companies try to gain advantage through their marketing activities towards the well-balanced use of customers needs will be essential too.
To begin with, every marketing student learns in the very first lecture that the key role of marketing and marketing disciplines is to identify consumers’ needs and then to satisfy them in the most profitable way. This is still probably one of the clearest definitions of the role of marketing. But once marketers come to believe that they are done with existing needs – are they able to create ‘new’ ones?
Generally, it can be said that every human being holds a broad and complex set of needs from the beginning of his life till his death. Psychologist Abraham Maslow proposed a hierarchy of needs back in the 1960s. He classified the following five main groups of needs: physiological needs, safety needs, social or belonging/love needs, esteem needs and self-actualization needs. Even though this theory is set up in the environment of motivation theories, there is a fundamental connection regarding to this essay question.
These core needs that drive a human being are practically the same across time and geography. Furthermore it can be assumed that they will still be driving human behaviours in years to come. However, the main issue is that the manifestation of these needs and its implication on people’s behaviours and expectations will evolve and vary.
Let’s have a closer look at one particular need - the need for human sociability. The mobile telecommunication sector for example constantly has been growing the past 15 years. But not due to the fact that clever marketers were able to create a ‘new’ need – rather the basic and fundamental need to connect with each other as individuals and groups was the determining factor for this success. The need itself has existed since the beginning of humans but today’s manifestation is taking totally different dimensions. People are more squeezed for time, and they travel much more. Therefore staying connected all the time is a bigger challenge than ever. The way mobile telecommunication responds to the social need has created a positive impact on all involved parties.
The way these evolving deep needs will be answered is subject to social, cultural and economic parameters and would take a different form from one area to another. To highlight once again, the core needs remain the same, but their manifestations take an ever-evolving form that reflects the spirit, technology and style of a certain specific culture and era.
To sum up, in my point of view the job of marketers is to deal with and react to these changing manifestations of consumers’ needs – not to try to create new ones.
Korrektur
The main topic of this essay is the question of whether companies can create new and undiscovered needs through their products or if they only build on already existing needs.
To answer this question, we have to look at the main aspects of needs in general - the psychological background, the cultural and social change and especially the alteration of customer’s values in the past decades. Furthermore, a brief look at how companies try to gain advantage through their marketing activities towards the well-balanced use of customers needs will be essential, too.
To begin with, every marketing student learns in the very first lecture that the key role of marketing and marketing disciplines is to identify consumers’ needs and then to satisfy them in the most profitable way. This is still probably one of the clearest definitions of the role of marketing. But once marketers come to believe that they are done with existing needs – are they able to create ‘new’ ones?
Generally, it can be said that every human being holds a broad and complex set of needs from the beginning of his life till his death. Psychologist Abraham Maslow proposed a hierarchy of needs back in the 1960s. He classified the following five main groups of needs: physiological needs, safety needs, social or belonging/love needs, esteem needs and self-actualization needs. Even though this theory is set up in the environment of motivation theories, there is a fundamental connection regarding to this essay question.
These core needs that drive a human being are practically the same across time and geography. Furthermore, it can be assumed that they will still be driving human behaviours in years to come. However, the main issue is that the manifestation of these needs and its implication on people’s behaviours and expectations will evolve and vary.
Let’s have a closer look at one particular need - the need for human sociability. The mobile telecommunication sector for example has constantly been growing the past 15 years. But this has not been due to the fact that clever marketers were able to create a ‘new’ need – rather the basic and fundamental need to connect with each other as individuals and groups was the determining factor for this success. The need itself has existed since the beginning of the human era but today’s manifestation is taking totally different dimensions. People are more squeezed for time, and they travel much more. Therefore, staying connected all the time is a bigger challenge than ever. The way mobile telecommunication responds to the social need has created a positive impact on all involved parties.
The way these evolving deep needs will be answered is subject to social, cultural and economic parameters and would take a different form from one area to another. To highlight once again, the core needs remain the same, but their manifestations take an ever-evolving form that reflects the spirit, technology and style of a certain specific culture and era.
To sum up, in my point of view the job of marketers is to deal with and react to these changing manifestations of consumers’ needs – not to try to create new ones.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Could you imagine taking part in a work sharing program? What is your opinion of flextime? What advantages do these models have and what problems could arise?
Nowadays a lot has been said about feminization, equal position of males and females, and so on. Of course for the law all people are equal, but the real life often shows that not by an accident the nature has differentiated between two kinds of human beings, giving them special body building, special nerve system, different acceptance abilities, etc…
The modern life and the developing of infrastructure have changed some stereotypes: men start to take an active part in the household, not only earning money and watching TV; women become much more recognition in the business field, showing the highest level of intelligence and earning often even more than their life-partners.
But there is one natural process, that can’t be replaced simply by changing the “social roles”: building a family and getting children. It is the noblest task of each woman to be a mother. It means also refusal of the working place, at least for a couple of years that leads to a professional degradation. And this is the greatest contradiction of the modern world: women don’t want to be only “moms”; they need also their working sphere for personal development. As following people need to solve a dilemma: children versus carrier.
Companies and firms meet this dilemma also. In case of maternity they can lose one of the talented employees for a certain period of time, or even for ever. New technologies and techniques, information, conditions, demands are bombarding the market each day. The task to correspond and properly react is of vital importance. And even a year pause could bear a tragic consequence for a person, sometimes also for a company.
The solution of this problem is as unique as simple: a work sharing program that allows 2 people to share a single full time job. It is a good variant for people who have small children to combine the happiness of being parents and also not to lose their high qualification. There is also a back side of the program: job-share employees generally receive fewer benefits and may be the first to be laid off when cutbacks are necessary.
The other program “flextime” is also genius in its simplicity and philanthropy: the possibility to adjust work schedules on a daily or weekly basis. But certain core hours are demanded, that allows everyone to reach coworkers at a specified time of day. Otherwise it could cause a lot of chaos, misunderstanding, work delay, etc.
These programs are beneficial for both sides of the business process: the employers increase job satisfaction meeting the needs of their employees, the company may reduce turnover but save on the costs of benefits; and employees appreciate the company’s attention, and have time to enjoy their life.
Life is rather short, and to spend the time only at the office is really not worth of it. It is impossible to earn all the money, but it is possible to lose all really valuable things in attempt to do it. That’s why I could easily imagine myself taking part in one of such programs.
Korrektur
Nowadays a lot has been said about feminization, the equal position of males and females, and so on. Of course, under the law, all people are equal, but real life often shows that nature has not differentiated between two kinds of human beings by accident, giving them special body forms, special nerve systems, different acceptance abilities, etc…
Modern life and the development of infrastructure have changed some stereotypes: men have started to take an active part in the household, rather than only earning money and watching TV; women have gained much more recognition in the business field, showing the highest level of intelligence and often earning even more than their life-partners.
But there is one natural process that can’t be replaced simply by changing the “social roles”: building a family and getting children. It is the noblest task of each woman to be a mother. It also means absence from the work place, at least for a couple of years, which leads to a professional degradation. And this is the greatest contradiction of the modern world: women don’t want to be only “moms”; they also need their working sphere for personal development. It follows that people need to solve a dilemma: children versus career.
Companies and firms encounter this dilemma, also. In case of maternity they can lose one of their talented employees for a certain period of time, or even for ever. New technologies and techniques, information, conditions, demands bombard the market each day. The task to correspond and properly react is of vital importance. And even a one year leave could bear a tragic consequence for a person, sometimes also for a company.
The solution to this problem is as unique as it is simple: a work sharing program that allows 2 people to share a single full time job. It is a good variant for people who have small children to combine the happiness of being parents and also not to lose their high qualification. There is also a down side to the program: job-share employees generally receive fewer benefits and may be the first to be laid off when cutbacks are necessary.
The other program, “flextime”, is also genius in its simplicity and philanthropy: the possibility to adjust work schedules on a daily or weekly basis. But certain core hours are demanded, which allows everyone to reach coworkers at a specified time of day. Otherwise it could cause a lot of chaos, misunderstanding, work delay, etc.
These programs are beneficial for both sides of the business process: the employers increase job satisfaction meeting the needs of their employees, the company may reduce turnover but save on the costs of benefits; and employees appreciate the company’s attention, and have time to enjoy their life.
Life is rather short, and to spend the time only at the office is really not worth it. It is impossible to earn all the money in the world, but it is possible to lose all the really valuable things in an attempt to do so. That’s why I could easily imagine myself taking part in one of such programs.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Business Administration 3
Essay
Question 20): How would you evaluate electronic retailing?
The modern way of doing business
by Phil Pöll
“For the first time the net profit of Amazon exceeded 52 million dollar in the second quarter of 2005” (Pressetext Austria)
As the most well-known and most successful electronic retailer, Amazon shows what enormous chances the e-retailing market could offer. The company started to create an online platform in 1994 to sell its products easily to people all over the world. This essay describes the main advantages of using the Internet as an efficient distribution channel, but also shows up the risks which may arise.
Electronic home shopping is, without a doubt, one of the most sensational developments to hit the retailing world since the advent of mail order shopping in the nineteenth century. A lot of companies use the Internet to interact with customers like informing, selling to and distribute to them. As more and more people are online, firms can reach a lot more people than on the “conventional” way. The possibility of presenting the products to the whole world and the easy and quick handling with online-stores is one major advantage. But also in terms of marketing activities more efficient campaigns can be started. By analyzing the surfing behaviour of potential customers specified advertisements can be shown. It is easier to communicate directly to the target group than reaching them via TV-spots for example. Usually online-stores are also cheaper for companies than salesrooms because of not having to pay several costs such as product displays, additional salesmen or the rent for the building.
As marketing focuses on the needs of consumers, electronic retailing leads to more comfort and saving of time for the customers while interacting with the company. Especially older people that used to order goods by catalogue shopping would (in theory) appreciate to order goods fast and save via the Internet. But here is where the problems of Internet-based stores start. Many people do not trust Online-stores, particularly the payment transaction. It is not always trustworthy to tell someone you do not know what your credit card number is, even though the security of the payment-transaction-process is extremely high at certified shops. To guard against this problem a lot of companies offer the “cash on delivery” type of payment.
Another important point to mention is that many people want to see and try out the product which they are likely to buy. This is not only a problem of electronic retailers but in this case electronic catalogs with comprehensive picture material can be provided to present the product in the best way.
Mainly younger people are more likely to buy products in Online-stores. Probably because of the involvement of the Internet in every-day-life, fears like “the hacking of personal data” are hardly present among the “cyber-generation”. That is why the biggest and most successful
e-retailers are bookstores (Amazon), music and entertainment stores (iTunes), and travel businesses targeted specially on teenager and “young-remained” people.
All in all Online-stores can be a great opportunity for businesses to increase sales especially in the times of globalisation, but professionally managed business premises are a hundred times better than unprofessionally managed Online-stores!
Korrektur
“For the first time the net profit of Amazon exceeded 52 million dollar in the second quarter of 2005” (Pressetext Austria)
As the most well-known and most successful electronic retailer, Amazon shows what enormous chances the e-retailing market can offer. The company started to create an online platform in 1994 to sell its products easily to people all over the world. This essay describes the main advantages of using the Internet as an efficient distribution channel, but also shows the risks which may arise.
Electronic home shopping is, without a doubt, one of the most sensational developments to hit the retailing world since the advent of mail order shopping in the nineteenth century. A lot of companies use the Internet to interact with customers in order to inform, sell to and distribute to them. As more and more people are online, firms can reach a lot more people than in the “conventional” way. The possibility of presenting the products to the whole world and the easy and quick handling via online-stores is one major advantage. But also in terms of marketing activities, more efficient campaigns can be started. By analyzing the surfing behaviour of potential customers, specified advertisements can be shown. It is easier to communicate directly to the target group than by trying to reach them via TV-spots for example. Usually online-stores are also cheaper for companies than salesrooms because of not having to pay several costs such as those for product displays, additional salesmen or the rent for the building.
As marketing focuses on the needs of consumers, electronic retailing leads to more comfort and saving of time for the customers while interacting with the company. Especially older people that used to order goods by catalogue shopping would (in theory) appreciate ordering goods fast and safely via the Internet. But here is where the problems of Internet-based stores start. Many people do not trust Online-stores, particularly the payment transaction. It is not always trustworthy to tell someone you do not know what your credit card number is, even though the security of the payment-transaction-process is extremely high at certified shops. To avoid this problem a lot of companies offer “cash on delivery” payment.
Another important point to mention is that many people want to see and try out the product which they are likely to buy. This is not only a problem of electronic retailers, but in this case, electronic catalogs with comprehensive picture material can be provided to present the product in the best way.
Mainly younger people are more likely to buy products in Online-stores. Probably because of the involvement of the Internet in every-day-life, fears like “the hacking of personal data” are hardly present among the “cyber-generation”. That is why the biggest and most successful
e-retailers are bookstores (Amazon), music and entertainment stores (iTunes), and travel businesses targeted specially atteenagers and people that have remained young at heart.
All in all, Online-stores can be a great opportunity for businesses to increase sales, especially in the times of globalisation, but professionally managed business premises are a hundred times better than unprofessionally managed Online-stores!
Is Job Redesign really always a motivational tool for employees, or do companies mostly use it to add extra work in a new package?
First of all I would like to explain that job redesigning is mentioned as a way to motivate people. Many managers think that employees, who are unhappy with their job and their given tasks could be motivated by changing the tasks of their jobs. But there is a difference in job enlargement, job redesign and job enrichment. Job enrichment means to give the employees more interesting and motivational tasks instead of the tasks they had to perform before. Job enlargement means to give an employee additional tasks. This always has to be done carefully. Not many employees can handle the pressure to perform more tasks, sometimes even more challenging ones. Job Redesign means that the employees often get a complete new scope of duties to deal with. This could be seen as a challenge, but it also could be seen as a punishment. The colleagues could believe that the employee made too many mistakes in his former job, or he was to slow with his performance and something else.
For the management it should be clear that the fitting between workers and their jobs should always be perfect. If there are any new tasks to be performed, they have to be stuck to any employee. If there is more then one new task it should be thought about the possibility to redesign jobs, to get the best fitting between employees and jobs for the best possible performance.
In this case it should be possible for the employees to perform their jobs in nearly the same time as they did before, to really motivate them with the new tasks, instead of demotivating the employee with more working hours.
Job redesign should not be done to often, because the employees should get the chance to become acquainted with the job.
If the management needs to redesign an employee’s job, they should not, just do it, they should talk to the employee, and explain them the reasons for the redesigning. In many cases the employee will see the necessity and except it as a possibility instead of seeing it as a punishment. In some cases the employee will not see the reason of this measurement and will react with resistance. In this case it would be better not to redesign this employee’s job. It could be tried again to redesign it after a period of time, but not now.
Job redesign should really just be used as a motivational tool and as a tool to bring together employee’s tasks they have to perform with their skills.
Job redesign should not be used to confuse the employees with new tasks, so that they don’t realise that they just got more work to do.
Korrektur
First of all I would like to explain that job redesigning is mentioned as a way to motivate people. Many managers think that employees who are unhappy with their job and their given tasks could be motivated by changing the tasks of their jobs. But there is a difference between job enlargement, job redesign and job enrichment. Job enrichment means giving the employees more interesting and motivational tasks instead of the tasks they had to perform before. Job enlargement means giving an employee additional tasks. This always has to be done carefully. Not many employees can handle the pressure of performing more tasks, sometimes even more challenging ones. Job Redesign leads to a scenario in which employees often get a complete new scope of duties to deal with. This could be seen as a challenge, but it also could be seen as a punishment. The colleagues might believe that the employee made too many mistakes in his former job, or he was too slow in his performance or something else.
For the management, it should be clear that the fitting between workers and their jobs should always be perfect. If there are any new tasks to be performed, they have to be given to the employee. If there is more than one new task, the possibility to redesign jobs should be considered in order to get the best fitting between employees and jobs for the best possible performance.
In this case, it should be possible for the employees to perform their jobs in nearly the same time as they did before, to really motivate them with the new tasks, instead of demotivating the employee with more working hours.
Job redesign should not be implementedtoo often because the employees should get the chance to become acquainted with the job.
If the management needs to redesign an employee’s job, it should not just do it. Instead, it should talk to the employee, and explain to him the reasons for the redesign. In many cases, the employee will see the necessity and accept it as a possibility instead of seeing it as a punishment. In some cases, the employee will not see the reason for this measurement and will react with resistance. In this case, it would be better not to redesign this employee’s job. Redesign could be tried again after a period of time, but not immediately.
Job redesign should really just be used as a motivational tool and as a tool to bring together those tasks that employees have to perform based on their skills.
Job redesign should not be used to confuse the employees with new tasks, so that they don’t realise that they only got more work to do.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
What do you think is the best method for selecting employees: application forms, tests, interviews, or something else? Explain why.
Managers are used to making decisions - decisions that can impact a business for years. One of the most important decisions comes when hiring a new employee. As a clever manager once said, “I do not worry about hiring a great employee and having him leave in three months. I worry about hiring a bad employee and having him stay for three years.” This essay discusses the selection process within a company and compares the pros and cons of all methods for selecting employees. The following methods can be specified: application forms, tests, interviews and other techniques like physical exams or drug tests.
Application forms are the first step in the whole process. The candidates are asked to fill out an application form that provides information about their personal details, professional experiences, educational background and other job-related facts. The main advantage of application forms is that candidates can be easily compared with each other due to the standardized form. So it is possible to make a preliminary decision whether or not a candidate is suitable to meet the requirements of the job.
A further method for selecting candidates is to test the ability, skills or knowledge that are important for the job. These tests are very common because they are easy to carry out and the examination is also simple. However, to get a representative result it is substantial that the test conditions are always the same.
Furthermore, interviews can be a great way to get to know an applicant. Managers should use open questions concerning the technical and also social skills of the candidate. To improve the validity it is necessary to structure the interview. This means that interviewers follow a standardized question list with each candidate. A structured interview provides the possibility to compare employees much better and shows whether or not an applicant has the personality, skill and attitude to be successful within the job.
Last but not least, other selection techniques like physical exams or drug tests are getting more and more popular, especially when drug-related problems could cause security holes.
Which of these methods is the most effective? From my point of view it depends on the position and the personalities of the people who are responsible for the selection. Certainly, using a combination of the previous mentioned methods is the most successful strategy. From my view the perfect selection process starts with an application form to get basic details about the candidate. In addition to this, a test that emphasizes on the general intelligence, skills and knowledge of the applicant follows the application form. All in all, the process ends with a structured interview. I think that this is the best method for selecting candidates. Upon closer examination, an interview is the only way to get an impression on the personality and attitude of an applicant. Additionally, solely the interview provides the possibility to assess the communication abilities and social skills of the candidate.
In conclusion, if none of the candidates meets the requirements of the job, managers should not hesitate to find new applicants within a further application process. It is sometimes better to leave a position open rather than hire someone who is not suitable for the position.
Korrektur
Managers are used to making decisions - decisions that can impact a business for years. One of the most important decisions comes when hiring a new employee. As a clever manager once said, “I do not worry about hiring a great employee and having him leave in three months. I worry about hiring a bad employee and having him stay for three years.” This essay discusses the selection process within a company and compares the pros and cons of all methods for selecting employees. The following methods can be specified: application forms, tests, interviews and other techniques like physical exams or drug tests.
Application forms are the first step in the whole process. The candidates are asked to fill out an application form that provides information about their personal details, professional experiences, educational background and other job-related facts. The main advantage of application forms is that candidates can be easily compared with each other due to the standardized form. So it is possible to make a preliminary decision whether or not a candidate is suitable to meet the requirements of the job.
A further method for selecting candidates is to test the ability, skills or knowledge that are important for the job. These tests are very common because they are easy to carry out and the examination is also simple. However, to get a representative result, it is essential that the test conditions always be the same.
Furthermore, interviews can be a great way to get to know an applicant. Managers should use open questions concerning the technical and also social skills of the candidate. To improve the validity, it is necessary to structure the interview. This means that interviewers follow a standardized question list with each candidate. A structured interview provides the possibility to compare employees much better and shows whether or not an applicant has the personality, skill and attitude to be successful within the job.
Last but not least, other selection techniques like physical exams or drug tests are getting more and more popular, especially when drug-related problems could cause security breaches.
Which of these methods is the most effective? From my point of view, it depends on the position and the personalities of the people who are responsible for the selection. Certainly, using a combination of the previous mentioned methods is the most successful strategy. From my view, the perfect selection process starts with an application form to get basic details about the candidate. In addition to this, a test that emphasizes the general intelligence, skills and knowledge of the applicant follows the application form. All in all, the process ends with a structured interview. I think that this is the best method for selecting candidates. Upon closer examination, an interview is the only way to get an impression of the personality and attitude of an applicant. Additionally, solely the interview provides the possibility to assess the communication abilities and social skills of the candidate.
In conclusion, if none of the candidates meets the requirements of the job, managers should not hesitate to find new applicants within a further application process. It is sometimes better to leave a position open rather than hire someone who is not suitable for the position.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Which element of the marketing mix do you consider to be most / least important and why?
The main topic of this essay is the question of whether there is one element which is more important than the others or not. To start with, it is essential to give a short definition what the marketing mix is and contains. The marketing mix should include four main elements: product, price, place and promotion. By combining these marketing tools, the marketing mix allows a company to sell its products. The important thing is to get the right type of marketing mix. Therefore, the careful examination of each element and a following adoption to the customer’s needs is necessarily to be successful.
But which of these four tools is now most or least important?
For marketers it is widely known that a product, which ensures to be attractive and needed, is of paramount importance to start creating the right marketing mix, simply because if there is no product to sell, the marketing mix is not needed. Furthermore, the place is important to describe how the company wants to reach the consumer. In addition, the pricing strategy will have heavy consequences not only on the promotion but also on the success or failure of the whole business. Last but not least, the promotion strategy should make sure the creation of interest and awareness for the product. In light of the fact that each tool of the marketing mix has become a ‘sine qua non’ in the modern marketing era, it is almost impossible to give a definite answer to this question.
As was previously mentioned, a product is a precondition for having the possibility to create the right marketing mix. However, for me personally, the product is not the most important tool. A company could have the worst product ever, which nobody needs. But with the right price and the right promotion strategy, by creating a need and making the product more than just attractive for the consumers, also this product could have the chance to become a rising star on the product sky.
Moreover, with the element ‘promotion’, which is the most highly visible component of the marketing mix, it is possible to create a brand and therefore product loyalty and product awareness. But marketers also have to consider, that a promotion strategy also has to fit with the price and the distribution system. Even though many companies have very good advertising campaigns to get the right positioning, wrong pricing could be a death sentence for the new product and therefore also for the company as the price simply does not fit with the advertising’s statement. Nevertheless, it should not be ignored that just sales bring in the money. Specifically, this means that making the access to a product for a customer as easy as possible.
Finally to say, the most essential fact is: all four elements need to be targeted at the right people, the right time, the right place and the right price in order to sell a company’s products and services as successfully as possible.
Korrektur
The main topic of this essay is the question of whether there is one element which is more important than the others or not. To start with, it is essential to give a short definition of what the marketing mix is and contains. The marketing mix should include four main elements: product, price, place and promotion. By combining these marketing tools, the marketing mix allows a company to sell its products. The important challenge is to choose the right type of marketing mix. Therefore, the careful examination of each element and a following adoption to the customer’s needs is necessary in order to be successful.
But which of these four tools is now most or least important?
For marketers, it is widely known that a product that is both attractive and needed is of paramount importance to start creating the right marketing mix, simply because if there is no product to sell, the marketing mix is not needed. Furthermore, the place is important in order to describe how the company wants to reach the consumer. In addition, the pricing strategy will have heavy consequences not only on the promotion but also on the success or failure of the whole business. Last but not least, the promotion strategy should ensure the creation of interest for and awareness of the product. In light of the fact that each tool of the marketing mix has become a ‘sine qua non’ in the modern marketing era, it is almost impossible to give a definite answer to this question.
As was previously mentioned, a product is a precondition for having the possibility to create the right marketing mix. However, for me personally, the product is not the most important tool. A company could have the worst product ever, which nobody needs. But with the right price and the right promotion strategy, by creating a need and making the product more than just attractive for the consumers, this product could also have the chance of becoming a rising star on the product sky.
Moreover, with the element ‘promotion’, which is the most highly visible component of the marketing mix, it is possible to create a brand and therefore, product loyalty and product awareness. But marketers also have to consider that a promotion strategy also has to fit with the price and the distribution system. Even though many companies have very good advertising campaigns to achieve the right positioning, wrong pricing could be a death sentence for the new product and therefore also for the company as the price simply does not fit with the advertising’s statement. Nevertheless, it should not be ignored that only sales bring in the money. Specifically, this means that access to a product for a customer must be as easy as possible.
Finally, it should be said that the most essential fact is: all four elements need to be targeted towards the right people, at the right time, in the right place and at the right price in order to sell a company’s products and services as successfully as possible.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
The consumer buying process
For a marketing and sales student it is really essential to understand the consumer buying process. Without that knowledge it is not possible to influence people efficiently. To analyze this in greater detail it is the best thing to refer to Griffin/Ebert’s book “Business Communications” because they defined certain stages of the consumer buying process in chapter 10 “Understanding Marketing Processes and Consumer Behaviour” which I totally agree with.
The first stage is the recognition of a need. Imagine a person walking through a rainy and cold night. The wind blows and your clothes get wet. Everybody will feel a lack of dryness and warm. A need has been recognized. Even at this basic stage of the consumer buying process marketing can have an impact on. Just go back to the situation of the rainy and cold night. Humans in situations like that are easy to reach with an ad for cars or jackets, showing lucky people enjoying a drive or a walk in the rain. At this point consumers start to think about their situation and want to be lucky too. The next stage is information seeking. Consumers look for possibilities to fulfil their needs. In the above mentioned scenario they might remember the ads with the cars and the jackets. There are a few possibilities to solve consumers’ problems and every one of the above mentioned comes with its own pros and cons. This leads us directly to the next level evaluating alternatives. Humans start to think which one fits them best and which is the right solution for the problem. The role of Marketing at this level of the consumers buying decision is to prove that one product is the best and no other products are as perfectly made as that for one individual. Depending on personal preferences and budget consumers compare possibilities before entering the next stage the buying decision. According to the product they are looking for, marketing can influence this decision up to a certain grade. The more often they come in contact with a brand or product, the higher is the possibility that the consumer decides to buy it. It is necessary that persons are familiar with a brand or a product. That rises the probability that products were bought. After purchasing according to Griffin/Ebert consumers enter the postpurchasing evaluation phase in which they compare their expectations with the real value they get out of the product. Marketing can improve the picture of a product at this stage by offering postpurchase services, like special warranties or a helpline. This creates a good picture of a brand.
To put that in a nutshell it is obvious that marketing has a big influence on the whole consumer buying process especially at the information seeking and evaluating the alternatives stages. Marketing is the heart a company and without it a company can not maximize earnings today. The theory of the consumer buying process helps to create a successful marketing plan.
Korrektur
For a marketing and sales student, it is really essential to understand the consumer buying process. Without that knowledge, it is not possible to influence people efficiently. To analyze this in greater detail, it is best to refer to Griffin/Ebert’s book “Business Communications” because they defined certain stages of the consumer buying process in chapter 10 “Understanding Marketing Processes and Consumer Behaviour” which I totally agree with.
The first stage is the recognition of a need. Imagine a person walking through a rainy and cold night. The wind blows and your clothes get wet. Everybody will feel a lack of dryness and warm. A need has been recognized. Even at this basic stage of the consumer buying process, marketing can have an impact on the consumer. Just go back to the situation of the rainy and cold night. Humans in situations like that are easy to reach with an ad for cars or jackets, showing lucky people enjoying a drive or a walk in the rain. At this point, consumers start to think about their situation and want to be lucky too. The next stage is information seeking. Consumers look for possibilities to fulfil their needs. In the above mentioned scenario, they might remember the ads with the cars and the jackets. There are a few possibilities for how to solve consumers’ problems and every one of the above mentioned comes with its own pros and cons. This leads us directly to the next level evaluating alternatives. Humans start to think which one fits them best and which is the right solution for the problem. The role of Marketing at this level of the consumers buying decision is to prove that one product is the best and no other products are as perfectly suited as that one for an individual. Depending on personal preferences and their budget, consumers compare possibilities before entering the next stage, the buying decision. According to the product they are looking for, marketing can influence this decision up to a certain degree. The more often they come in contact with a brand or product, the higher is the possibility that the consumer decides to buy it. It is necessary that persons are familiar with a brand or a product. That raises the probability that products are bought. After purchasing, according to Griffin/Ebert, consumers enter the postpurchasing evaluation phase in which they compare their expectations with the real value they get out of the product. Marketing can improve the picture of a product at this stage by offering postpurchase services, like special warranties or a helpline. This creates a good picture of a brand.
To put that in a nutshell, it is obvious that marketing has a big influence on the whole consumer buying process especially during the information seeking and evaluating the alternatives stages. Marketing is the heart of a company and without it, a company can not maximize earnings today. The theory of the consumer buying process helps to create a successful marketing plan.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
What the hell is marketing? What does the general public associate with the term? Then define marketing in your own words. How can it help improve the results of an organization?
Nowadays, often advertisement or commercial spots are associated with the term marketing. The global understanding is that marketing includes everything what is noticed by the customers to promote a product or a service. But what does marketing indeed means?
So many different definitions do exist to describe marketing but it always depends on the point of view from which the topic is considered. In my opinion, marketing is a unique instrument to create new ideas. Furthermore, it has a communicational function. Marketing is often used to forward the ideas to the departments of an organization like promotion or distribution which are necessary to realize them.
In which way can marketing influence the results of an organization? Most of the managers which are dealing with the success of an organization have asked themselves this question at least once. As mentioned before, ideas for products or services are found by the help of various processes in the marketing department. Therefore, it is of particular importance to focus first of all on the marketing environment. For this reason all factors of influence and forces are mentioned which affect an organization form the outside. One of the main factors are the customers. A company really has to search out and analyze the wishes and needs of their target group. Nevertheless, one’s attention has to be turned on the competitors activities to see what is going on at the market and what possibilities do an organization have to enter it. Also, information about legal foundations must be collected to see which laws have to be observed.
If a structure is found, the next step in the process should be to incorporate all the collected information about the marketing environment into the marketing mix or the so called 4 P’s. That means that the organization has to think in detail about the price, the place, the promotion, and the product. The main point is that a unique product has to be found which can create new needs of customers or fulfill still existing needs and wishes.
Another fact which has to be focused on is the duty of marketing to communicate a product’s unique selling proposition to the prospective customers.
For all steps which were mentioned before to create and find new product, to discover needs and wishes of the customers, and all the other things, marketing is the driving force. The whole process is influenced from the beginning till the end by marketing. So, by the efficiently use of marketing a rise in the results of an organization can clear be found.
Korrektur
Nowadays, advertisement or commercial spots are often associated with the term 'marketing'. The global understanding is that marketing includes everything that is noticed by the customers to promote a product or a service. But what indeed does marketing mean?
So many different definitions exist to describe marketing but it always depends on the point of view from which the topic is considered. In my opinion, marketing is a unique instrument to create new ideas. Furthermore, it has a communicational function. Marketing is often used to forward ideas to the departments of an organization, like promotion or distribution, which are needed to realize them.
In which way can marketing influence the results of an organization? Most of the managers which deal with the success of an organization have asked themselves this question at least once. As mentioned before, ideas for products or services are found by the help of various processes in the marketing department. Therefore, it is of particular importance to first of all focus on the marketing environment. For this reason, all factors of influence and forces are mentioned which affect an organization form the outside. One of the main factors are the customers. A company really has to search out and analyze the wishes and needs of its target group. Nevertheless, one’s attention has to be turned to the competitors' activities to see what is going on in the market and what possibilities an organization has to enter it. Also, information about legal foundations must be collected to see which laws have to be observed.
If a structure is found, the next step in the process should be to incorporate all the collected information about the marketing environment into the marketing mix or the so called 4 P’s. That means that the organization has to think in detail about the price, the place, the promotion, and the product. The main point is that a unique product has to be found which can create new needs of customers or fulfill existing needs and wishes.
Another fact which has to be focused on is the duty of marketing to communicate a product’s unique selling proposition to the prospective customers.
For all steps which were mentioned before (e.g. to create and find new product, to discover needs and wishes of the customers) marketing is the driving force. The whole process is influenced by marketing from the beginning till the end. So, by the efficient use of marketing, a rise in the results of an organization can clearly be found.
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Could you imagine taking part in a work sharing program? What is your opinion of flexitime? What advantages do these models have and what problems could arrive?
As far as flexibility plays a huge role in our nowadays working live, many types of working contracts and especially of working conditions have arose during the last few years. Organisations are beginning to realize, that human beings in fact are their most important resource, as without their contribution business could not exist any more.
Many companies perceive, that flexitime is a method of increasing job satisfaction within their employees by allowing them to adjust work schedules on a daily or weekly basis. According to this realization, both can be prosperous with the new situation, the employee as well as the employer. Employees receive the feeling of recognition of their needs and are therefore even more motivated to perform well. The consequence of which is that the company also benefits in that way.
As far as I am concerned, the possibility of the usage of flexitime plays especially for woman and modern family constructions an important role. Why should a woman abstain from holding down a job which satisfies her personally, if managing family next to working life is that easy today? It is no longer difficult for a family to manage their family concerns in a tolerable way. Moreover the lines between working life and home life are often blurred. Families can now adapt their daily working time with the schedules of their children. If a child for example needs to go to the doctor one day, the mother can stay one hour longer and leave therefore the office later that day, without a problem. Or if a child has a birthday, the mother has the possibility to start very early, so that she can be back for the birthday party at two. Despite the stress the mother might have sometimes, she certainly will be happy one day that she hasn’t given up her personal goals to satisfy the needs of the rest of the family.
The only problem which might occur with flexitime is that there could be some difficulties with the coordination of meetings or if one employee needs information from another. Also this problem can be easily solved, the only thing to do is to fix a range of time at which everybody has to be available.
From my point of view flexitime is a great step into the right direction.
In my opinion taking part in a job sharing program can also be a very interesting chance for many people. However personally I would prefer working part time instead, because then the social benefits, which a company has to pay for their employees does not need to be shared with another person. Concerning insurance for example, what happens if one of the two is ill for two weeks, the other however keeps on working. I am not sure if the insurance will accept these circumstances. This is only one of many problems which may occur. I am absolutely convinced that everybody should have his own area in his working environment, may it be the competences or something else. From my personal experience I can tell, that two people working at one and the same objective in most of the cases bring more disadvantages than advantages. It is almost impossible to divide the tasks that strictly, and if it was then the people could also work part time each itself as well. As far as I am concerned work sharing programs bring a lot of difficulties. One may always need information from the other and a lot of work will be done twice, just because of the fact that one is not certain if the other has already done it and so forth. I am not convinced that this type of working will find the approval of the Austrian population.
All in all it really should be recognized that there is a lot of change going on. The former motives to perform work are not valid any more. Job satisfaction is an essential component of our life. According to that, the fact that an average employee stays in a company for 5 years, shows that people are aware of the possibilities the employment market offers us.
Flexibility is always required from employees, why should we not claim from employers either?
Korrektur
As flexibility plays a huge role in our current working lives, many types of working contracts and especially of working conditions have arisen during the last few years. Organisations are beginning to realize that human beings, in fact, are their most important resource, as without their contribution, businesses could not exist any more.
Many companies perceive that flexitime is a method of increasing job satisfaction within their employees by allowing them to adjust work schedules on a daily or weekly basis. According to this concept, both can benefit from the new situation, the employee as well as the employer. Employees receive a feeling of recognition of their needs and are therefore even more motivated to perform well. The consequence of this is that the company also benefits through the additional performance.
As far as I am concerned, the possibility of the usage of flexitime plays an important role especially for women and modern family forms. Why should a woman abstain from holding a job which satisfies her personally, if managing a family next to working life is that easy today? It is no longer difficult for a family to manage its family concerns in a tolerable way. Moreover, the lines between working life and home life are often blurred. Families can now adapt their daily working time to the schedules of their children. If a child, for example, needs to go to the doctor one day, the mother can stay one hour longer and therefore leave the office later that day without a problem. Or if a child has a birthday, the mother has the possibility to start very early, so that she can be back for the birthday party at two. Despite the stress the mother might have sometimes, she certainly will be happy one day that she hasn’t given up her personal goals to satisfy the needs of the rest of the family.
The only problem which might occur with flexitime is that there could be some difficulties with the coordination of meetings or if one employee needs information from another. This problem can also be easily solved, as the only thing to do is to fix a range of time at which everybody has to be available.
From my point of view flexitime is a great step in the right direction.
In my opinion taking part in a job sharing program can also be a very interesting opportunity for many people. However, personally, I would prefer working part time instead, because then the social benefits which a company has to pay for its employees does not need to be shared with another person. Concerning insurance for example, what happens if one of the two is ill for two weeks, but the other keeps on working? I am not sure if the insurance will accept these circumstances. This is only one of many problems which may occur. I am absolutely convinced that everybody should have his own area in his working environment, may it be the competences or something else. From my personal experience I can tell that two people working towards one and the same objective in most of the cases brings more disadvantages than advantages. It is almost impossible to divide the tasks that strictly, and if it were, then the people could also work part time by themselves as well. As far as I am concerned, work sharing programs bring a lot of difficulties. One may always need information from the other and a lot of work might be done twice just because of the fact that one is not certain if the other has already done it and so forth. I am not convinced that this type of working will find the approval of the Austrian population.
All in all, it really should be recognized that there is a lot of change going on. The former motives to perform work are not valid any more. Job satisfaction is an essential component of our life. According to that, the fact that an average employee stays in a company for 5 years shows that people are aware of the possibilities the employment market offers us.
Flexibility is always required from employees, why should we not claim it from employers as well?
Re: MARS 2009 EssaysOriginal
Could you imaging taking part in a work sharing program? What is your opinion of flexitime? What advantages do these models have and what problems can arise?
Before I start sharing my view on job sharing with you I would like begin with a brief definition.
It is the method of increasing job satisfaction by allowing two or more people to share a single full-time job.
Personally I cannot imagine taking part in a job sharing program. It is very complicated because you have to make a daily handing-over to your college to update his/her status of the day before.
This is a big disadvantage because a daily handing-over takes too much time. But this depends on your working area. I am sure that there are existing a range of jobs where you can establish work sharing more easily than in other jobs. A personal disadvantage for me is that I like to work on my own projects and I want to take on responsibility for my daily work.
A totally different aspect of modified work schedules is the point: “Flexitime programmes”.
I would really prefer working with flexitime because I hate to stand up early in the morning. But this is just one positive site effect of flexitime. Moreover you can organise your working time however you like. It is clear that you have still certain core hours which is normally from 9 a.m. to 3 or 4 p.m. .
This also depends on the type of business and on each job position. I personally think that flexitime is an advantage for both. The employees have more freedom in organising their working time, they can deal with private things in the afternoon or in the evening earlier if necessary. As a result of this they are more satisfied and so they are more relaxed and this is why they can concentrate on their work in the company much better.
The employer profits from this positive effect because the work output has a high quality. Because of the core time the employer knows that at 9.a.m. everybody is on the work place.
Another form of flexitime is “Telecommunicating” which allows people to perform some or all of a job away from standard office settings.
The key to tele communicating is TECHNOLOGY which is more or less the INTERNET.
There are so called virtual offices. They have redesigned conventional office space to accommodate jobs and schedules that are for less dependent on assigned spaces a personal apparatus.
On the one hand these models have a range of advantages for the employee and also for the employer but on the other hand many new problems can arise with this new modified work schedules.
Flexitime and work share programs mean more freedom for the employees. He/she can plan better around schedules of family and this comes along with less stress.
Moreover they can improve their personal productivity.
Two negative aspects for the employees are the more complicated coordination wit colleges and they are away from the social context.
But the Company also profits from this. Because of the fact that the employees work at home, traffic congestion is reduced and so there is less lost work time.
Another point is that there are higher levels of commitments and job satisfaction. A disadvantage for the company is that pay is more difficult because of the different and real working times of the people.
This could be a real challenge for the company to find an appropriate solution for payment which is fair to the employees and to the company too.
To sum up you can say that a successful implementation of these different forms of work schedules depends on the company, the type of business and on the job position.
Moreover I think that most people want to have a “job life” and a “private life” and so most people prefer working in a “normal operation cycle.
Korrektur
Before I start sharing my view on job sharing with you, I would like begin with a brief statement. One method of increasing job satisfaction is by allowing two or more people to share a single full-time job.
Personally, I cannot imagine taking part in a job sharing program. It is very complicated because you have to carry out a daily briefing of your college to update his/her status of the day before.
This is a big disadvantage because a daily briefing takes too much time. But this depends on your working area. I am sure that there are a range of jobs for which you can establish work sharing more easily than in other jobs. A personal disadvantage for me is that I like to work on my own projects and I want to take on responsibility for my daily work.
A totally different aspect of modified work schedules is the point: “Flexitime programmes”.
I would really prefer working with flexitime because I hate to get up early in the morning. But this is just one positive side effect of flexitime. Moreover, you can organise your work time however you like. It is clear that you have still certain core hours, which are normally from 9 a.m. to 3 or 4 p.m. .
This also depends on the type of business and on each job position. I personally think that flexitime is an advantage for both employers and employees. The employees have more freedom in organising their work time, they can deal with private issues earlier in the afternoon or in the evening if necessary. As a result of this, they are more satisfied and so they are more relaxed and this is why they can concentrate on their work in the company much better.
The employer profits from this positive effect because the work output has a high quality. Because of the core time, the employer knows that at 9.a.m. everybody is at their work place.
Another form of flexitime is “Telecommunicating”, which allows people to perform some or all of a job away from standard office settings.
The key to telecommunicating is TECHNOLOGY, which is more or less the INTERNET.
There are so called virtual offices. They have redesigned conventional office space to accommodate jobs and schedules that are far less dependent on assigned spaces and personal apparatus.
On the one hand, these models have a range of advantages for the employee and also for the employer, but on the other hand many new problems can arise with these new modified work schedules.
Flexitime and work share programs mean more freedom for the employees. They can plan better around the schedules of the family and this is accompanied by less stress.
Moreover, they can improve their personal productivity.
Two negative aspects for the employees are the more complicated coordination with colleagues and the fact that they are away from the social context.
But the Company also profits from this. Because of the fact that the employees work at home, traffic congestion is reduced and so there is less lost work time.
Another point is that there are higher levels of commitment and job satisfaction. A disadvantage for the company is that pay is more difficult because of the different and real working times of the people. It could be a real challenge for the company to find an appropriate solution for payment which is fair to the employees and to the company, too.
To sum up, you can say that a successful implementation of these different forms of work schedules depends on the company, the type of business and on the job position.
Moreover, I think that most people want to have a “job life” and a “private life” and so most people prefer working in a “normal operation cycle.
Per Email an einen Freund
Topic Commands
Anklicken, um Email-Benachrichtigung bei neuen Antworten zu bekommen 
Anklicken, um Email-Benachrichtigung bei neuen Antworten einzustellen