Culture Impact On International Business

Culture Impact On International Business Whereas traditional International Business research has been concerned with economic/legal issues and organizational forms and structures, the importance of culture has become increasingly important in the last two decades, largely as a result of the classic work of Hofstede (1980). Culture has been shown to impact on International Business, especially on the aspect of group performance (Gibson, 1999). This paper mainly analyzes the impact of culture on International Business. And in order to analysis it well, firstly we will talk about the definition, levels and Hofstedes theory of culture in the section 2. Then in section 3, we discuss the adverse and beneficial impact on International Business respectively in detail. Section 4 concludes. What is culture? Terpstra and David (1991, p.6) defined culture as , a learned, shared, compelling, interrelated set of symbols whose meanings provide a set of orientations for members of a society. And the aspects of culture include value and beliefs, communication, norms of behavior, customs and art, music, dance, sport (Morrison, 2006, p.169). It is essential for us to obtain the knowledge of culture because we communicate with each other through language; anticipate how business partners and customers are likely to respond; distinguish between what is considered right or wrong, acceptable or offensive and identify with other managers, provide knowledge to meet and negotiate with them. There are at least three levels of culture: National culture Nations are distinguishable from each other by a shared cultural history, such as language, religion, ethnic or racial identity. Together, these distinguishing characteristics blend into a national culture, which influences family life, education, organizational culture and economic and political structures (Morrison, 2006, p.172). Organizational or corporate culture Morrison (2006, p.195) indicated that the characteristics of organizational culture include: Common language and shared terminology; Norms of behavior, such as relations between management and employees; Preferences for formal or informal means of communication within the company and with associated companies; Dominant values of the organization, such as high product quality and customer orientation; Degree of empowerment of employees throughout the organization; and Systems of rules that specify dos and donts of employee behavior. Professional culture Professional cultures form as people, who span individual organizations, share a set of norms, values and beliefs related to their occupation (Van Maanen and Barley, 1984; Jordan, 1990; Trice and Beyer, 1993) Morrison (2006, p.191-192) mentioned that differences in national values and attitudes have been the subject of considerable research. Hofstede (1994) has developed a theory to categorize and quantify cultural differences between nations, which allowing us to compare national cultures. The cultural dimensions are: Power distance: the extent to which members of society accept the unequal distribution of power inside organizations. Uncertainty avoidance: how members of a society cope with the uncertainties of everyday life. Individualism: the extent to which individuals perceive themselves as independent and autonomous beings (as opposed to collectivism, in which people see themselves as integrated into ingroups). Masculinity: the degree to which people prefer values of success/competition over modesty/concern for others (as opposed to femininity, which denotes sensitivity, caring and an emphasis on quality of life). Long-term vs. short-term orientation: peoples time perspectives in their daily lives. How does culture impact on International Business? International business refers to business activities that straddle two or more countries (Morrison, 2006, p.5). As the rapid growth of globalization, more and more international business such as Joint Venture have emerged and developed fast. Therefore, it is very essential to talk about the elements which influence the international business. And one of the crucial elements will be analyzed in this paper is culture. As discussed above, cultures are different from countries to countries. For international business, grasping the cultural differences between the global and the local is the key to build long-term relationship and obtain success. For example, in Asian cultures, doing business is not confined merely to working hours, but blends into social occasions such as meals together, where bonds of trust are built and where sensitivity to cultural values and norms can be critical (Morrison, 2006, p.169). The other example is in joint ventures, the need for cooperation and trust between partners is the key to long-term success. Blending the culture of different locations into a distinctive corporate culture can strengthen the sense of corporate identity, but poses considerable challenges for international managers. The global merger-between countries of different national cultures-is an illustration of the difficulties that can arise when strong national cultures clash (Morrison, 2006, p.195-196) In each case, achieving a successful outcome, in both the initial agreement and the long-term business relationship, will depend on sensitivity to differences in languages, value systems and norms of behavior between themselves and their hosts. In short, being attuned to cultural differences can directly affect the success or failure of the project (Morrison, 2006, p.168). Pothukuchi et al.s (2002) findings suggest that cultural differences stemming from national, organizational and professional cultures have influence on international alliance performance. Li, Lam and Qian (2001) also pointed out that national culture can influence managerial decision-making, leadership style and human resource management practices and all these factors influence a firms performance in acquiring and deploying resources (Puffer, 1993; House, Hanges, et al. 1999). The adverse effect of culture in International Business Sirmon and Lane (2004) explained that the influence of national culture is strong and long lasting. For example, Hofstede (1991) found that national culture explains 50% of the differences in managers attitudes, beliefs, and values. Thus, national culture differences between alliance partners can challenge the development of successful relationships. Park and Ungson (1997) supplemented that these challenges result partially from the lack of shared norms or values and this lack of common understanding may undermine the partners interpretation of each others strategic intent, which is crucial in global markets and partnerships (Hitt et al., 1995). Further, a lack of shared norms and values may reduce effective communication (Rao and Schmidt, 1998), trust (Aulakh et al., 1996; Doney et al., 1998) and knowledge sharing in joint ventures (Parkhe, 1991; Mohr and Spekman, 1994; Lyles and Salk, 1996). These problems, in turn, have been found to lead to lower alliance performance (Lane et al. , 2001). Whats more, differences in national culture can disrupt collaboration and learning between alliance partners (Lane and Beamish, 1990; Parkhe, 1991; Lyles and Salk, 1996; Hennart and Zeng, 2002). Sirmon and Lane (2004) explained this opinion in detail as following: an international alliances performance is driven by the alliances effectiveness in achieving its primary value-creating activities. Resource complementarity between alliance partners is often a necessary condition to optimize this value creation (Harrison et al., 2001). However, in order to share, combine and leverage complementary resources, the partners employees must interact effectively. And the cultural differences inhibit international alliance partners employees ability to interact effectively. Not only that national culture differences between alliance partners can challenge the development of successful relationships and the achievement of effectiveness in the alliances primary value-creating activities, but also the organizational culture differences can. Whereas national culture relates primarily to deep-seated values, organizational culture relates primarily to shared beliefs in organizational practices and processes (Hofstede et al., 1990). Sirmon and Lane (2004) found that organizational culture is important to the success of mergers and acquisitions. Weber et al. (1996) found that dissimilar organizational cultures between acquirer and target decreased top managers cooperation and increased negative attitudes toward the merger. Generally, similarity of partners organizational culture increases partner learning, satisfaction and effectiveness of interactions, whereas differences in organizational culture decrease these positive outcomes. In short, decreased learning, satisfaction and effectiveness of interactions impede the business processes used to share combine and leverage resources such as knowledge, relationships and physical assets. Thus partners with dissimilar organizational cultures will be less likely to effectively achieve the alliances primary value-creating activities. Research suggested that national and organizational culture differences between the employees of international companies affect their interactions, but Sirmon and Lane (2004) expanded the consideration of cultural differences to include professional culture differences. They stated that professional culture differences are often the most relevant and salient cultural differences that the interacting employees face, and thus professional culture differences are the most disruptive to the alliances effectiveness in achieving its primary value-creating activities. Professional cultures develop through the socialization that individuals receive during their occupational education and training (Van Maanen and Barley, 1984; Jordan, 1990) This initial socialization is then reinforced through their professional experiences and interactions that lead to a broad understanding of how their occupation should be conducted (Brown and Duguid, 1991; Lave and Wenger, 1991). Sirmon and Lane (2004) stated that it is disappointing when international alliance partners require employees from different professional cultures to interface in the primary value-creating activity of the alliance. The reason is because these employees lack a common basis from which to interact effectively due to their distinct occupational socialization and resulting professional cultures. First, individuals from separate professional cultures lack a shared set of basic knowledge because their occupational socialization involved different content material, which is reinforced by different professional experiences. Second, these individuals often lack experience communicating with an auditing audience outside their professional culture. Thus communication between individuals from separate professional cultures is impaired. Both of these factors impede the finding of common ground from which the relationship can develop and produce value (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998). In such cases, the development of basic routines is required to help establish a base of shared knowledge in order to communicate adequately. Developing such routines requires time, which leads to increased expenses and could lead to increased frustration (Park and Ungson, 1997). Even if these two obstacles can be adequately overcome, individuals from different professional cultures may still have deeply ingrained preferences in their approach to solving problems (Brown and Duguid, 1991; Lave and Wenger, 1991). These differences may be difficult to overcome, as the employees may reflect the not-invented-here syndrome, which is the resistance to the utilization of knowledge created elsewhere (Michailova and Husted, 2003). Further, attempts to compromise in the approach taken in problem-solving is likely to lead to less desirable outcomes. For example, if a compromise is reached, and members from both professional cultures abandon their preferred problem-solving approach, both effectively eliminate a significant amount of their valuable tacit knowledge. Likewise, if either member abandons their preferred problem-solving approach, the alliance has effectively lost the expertise of one half of its contributing members. The challenges discussed above inhibit the effective interaction of individuals from different professional cultures within an international alliance. This then decreases the likelihood that the alliances pooled complementary resources will be shared, combined and leveraged in a manner that effectively achieves the alliances primary value-creating activities. In one noteworthy study, Barkema and Vermeulen (1997) examined the influence of differences in partners national cultures on international alliance performance using Hofstedes (1980, 1991) dimensions of national culture. They found that partner differences in two of the dimensions (uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation) had a strong negative relationship with the survival of the collaboration over several different periods. However, the other three dimensions of national culture (individualism, power distance, masculinity) did not. Differences in uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation could represent differences in how partners perceive and adapt to opportunities and threats in their environment (Schneider, 1991; Schneider and De Meyer, 1991), and thus may be more difficult to resolve than differences along the other three dimensions, which represent attitudes towards personnel. In conclusion, cultural differences have adverse impact on the performance of international business. The beneficial effect of culture in International Business Sirmon and Lane (2004) stated that other evidence suggests that differences in national culture can be beneficial. Because managers tend to be more aware of the potential challenges when working with foreign partners, they may be more willing to spend effort on avoiding misunderstandings in international alliances than they would in domestic alliances (Very et al., 1996). In such cases, differences in national culture can lead to high-level communication and a more sustained collaboration (Shenkar and Zeira, 1992; Park and Ungson, 1997). Thus, in some cases, increased national culture differences can lead to higher international alliance performance (Morosini et al., 1998). In addition, societal culture per se may also be seen as part of a firms resources, leading to a competitive advantage (Porter, 1991; Dunning and Bansal, 1997). Porter (1991) pointed out that the competitive advantage of firms could be derived from the greater commitment. Dunning and Bansal (1997) further suggested that this greater commitment might well be based on cultural values observed in some countries, and not in others. For example, many individualistic cultures, such as US, may have an advantage in technological assets, whilst many collectivistic cultures, such as Japan, may benefit from the ways in which they organize their workforce and establish relations between contractors, suppliers and joint venture partners (Dunning and Bansal, 1997). With their different competitive advantages, firms may adopt different strategies. If manager of these firms adopt appropriate strategies by making use of the competitive advantages derived from cultural values, these firms may achieve great success. There is another example exhibit the beneficial effect on the International Business. According to Hofstedes dimensions of national culture Li, Lam and Qian (2001) stated that, long-term orientation means focusing on the future. With this long-term orientation, people in East Asia such as China are more likely to emphasize education and training, and practice persistence, thriftiness and the delay of immediate gratification. Wuhan City, which is known as Chicago in China contacted New World, a major Hong Kong developer, to negotiate a loan to complete an airport-linking expressway project. Focusing on building a long-term relationship with Wuhan City, New World soon agreed to provide the loan without discussing details traditionally seen in western-style negotiations. According to Cheng (1997), an impassioned plea for help from Wuhans public work chief, Zhang Ke Xiao, led to a handshake gamble without sight of a feasibility study or a contract. (p.30). With this relationship-oriented negotiation, New World set up good ties with the government in Wuhan City and other Chinese cities. These relationships proved very helpful during later negotiations in China. In fact, many overseas Chinese firms adopt a similar approach. Tung (1982) has also observed this long-term perspective, claiming that the Chinese have a different concept of time, as compared to that of the Western world, they are interested in building the basis for long-term relationships. Essentially, this means that once a foreign firm has gained their trust and has demonstrated its goodwill and willingness to lend assistance to the country, the Chinese will try to reciprocate in kind, whenever possible. (p. 30) In conclusion, cultural differences also have beneficial impact on the performance of international business. Conclusion This paper analyzes how culture impact on the International Business. It turns out that culture has either adverse or beneficial effect on the International Business performance. On the adverse aspect of culture, Sirmon and Lane (2004) indicated that national culture differences between alliance partners can challenge the development of successful relationships. Further, a lack of shared norms and values may reduce effective communication (Rao and Schmidt, 1998), trust (Aulakh et al., 1996; Doney et al., 1998) and knowledge sharing in joint ventures (Parkhe, 1991; Mohr and Spekman, 1994; Lyles and Salk, 1996). These problems, in turn, have been found to lead to lower alliance performance (Lane et al., 2001). Whats more, Weber et al. (1996) found that dissimilar organizational cultures between acquirer and target decreased top managers cooperation and increased negative attitudes toward the merger. Sirmon and Lane (2004) expanded the consideration of professional culture differences, which are often the most relevant and salient cultural differences that the interacting employees face. And it is disappointing when international alliance partners require employees from different professional cultures to interface in the primary value-creating activity of the alliance. The reason is because these employees lack a common basis from which to interact effectively due to their distinct occupational socialization and resulting professional cultures. On the beneficial aspect of culture, managers may be more willing to spend effort on avoiding misunderstandings in international alliances than they would in domestic alliances. In such cases, differences in national culture can lead to high-level communication and a more sustained collaboration (Shenkar and Zeira, 1992; Park and Ungson, 1997). In addition, Porter (1991) pointed out that the competitive advantage of firms could be derived from the greater commitment based on cultural values observed in some countries, and not in others. For example, the long-term orientation in China leads to a helpful long-term relationship between international businesses.

Review of related literature about billing system Essay

Create editable sequence diagram with Rational Software Architect Create editable sequence diagrams with Rational Software Architect What’s new in Rational Software Architect 8.5 and Design Manager 4 beta Notice the wording in my statement above: â€Å"Adopted 2.0 Draft Specification of UML.† It is true that the specification is still in draft status, but the key is that the Draft Specification has been adopted by OMG, a consortium that does not adopt new standards until they become pretty solid. There will be some changes to the specification before UML 2 is completely adopted, but these changes should be minimal. The main changes will be in the internals of UML–involving features typically used by software companies who implement UML tools. The main purpose of this article is to continue our focus on the essential UML diagrams; this month, we take a close look at the sequence diagram. Please note, again, that the examples provided below are based on the new UML 2 specification. The diagram’s purpose The sequence diagram is used primarily to show the interactions between objects in the sequential order that those interactions occur. Much like the class diagram, developers typically think sequence diagrams were meant  exclusively for them. However, an organization’s business staff can find sequence diagrams useful to communicate how the business currently works by showing how various business objects interact. Besides documenting an organization’s current affairs, a business-level sequence diagram can be used as a requirements document to communicate requirements for a future system implementation. During the requirements phase of a project, analysts can take use cases to the next level by providing a more formal level of refinement. When that occurs, use cases are often refined into one or more sequence diagrams. An organization’s technical staff can find sequence diagrams useful in documenting how a future system should behave. During the design phase, architects and developers can use the diagram to force out the system’s object interactions, thus fleshing out overall system design. One of the primary uses of sequence diagrams is in the transition from requirements expressed as use cases to the next and more formal level of refinement. Use cases are often refined into one or more sequence diagrams. In addition to their use in designing new systems, sequence diagrams can be used to document how objects in an existing (call it â€Å"legacy†) system currently interact. This documentation is very useful when transitioning a system to another person or organization. Back to top The notation Since this is the first article in my UML diagram series that is based on UML 2, we need to first discuss an addition to the notation in UML 2 diagrams, namely a notation element called a frame. The frame element is used as a basis for many other diagram elements in UML 2, but the first place most people will encounter a frame element is as the graphical boundary of a diagram. A frame element provides a consistent place for a diagram’s label, while providing a graphical boundary for the diagram. The frame element is optional in UML diagrams; as you can see in Figures 1 and 2, the diagram’s label is placed in the top left corner in what I’ll call the frame’s â€Å"namebox,† a sort of dog-eared rectangle, and the actual UML diagram is defined within the body of the larger enclosing rectangle. Figure 1: An empty UML 2 frame element In addition to providing a visual border, the frame element also has an  important functional use in diagrams depicting interactions, such as the sequence diagram. On sequence diagrams incoming and outgoing messages (a.k.a. interactions) for a sequence can be modeled by connecting the messages to the border of the frame element (as seen in Figure 2). This will be covered in more detail in the â€Å"Beyond the basics† section below. Figure 2: A sequence diagram that has incoming and outgoing messages Notice that in Figure 2 the diagram’s label begins with the letters â€Å"sd,† for Sequence Diagram. When using a frame element to enclose a diagram, the diagram’s label needs to follow the format of: Diagram Type Diagram Name The UML specification provides specific text values for diagram types (e.g., sd = Sequence Diagram, activity = Activity Diagram, and use case = Use Case Diagram). Back to top The basics The main purpose of a sequence diagram is to define event sequences that result in some desired outcome. The focus is less on messages themselves and more on the order in which messages occur; nevertheless, most sequence diagrams will communicate what messages are sent between a system’s objects as well as the order in which they occur. The diagram conveys this information along the horizontal and vertical dimensions: the vertical dimension shows, top down, the time sequence of messages/calls as they occur, and the horizontal dimension shows, left to right, the object instances that the messages are sent to. Lifelines When drawing a sequence diagram, lifeline notation elements are placed across the top of the diagram. Lifelines represent either roles or object instances that participate in the sequence being modeled. [Note: In fully modeled systems the objects (instances of classes) will also be modeled on a system’s class diagram.] Lifelines are drawn as a box with a dashed line descending from the center of the bottom edge (Figure 3). The lifeline’s name is placed inside the box. Figure 3: An example of the Student class used in a lifeline whose instance name is freshman The UML standard for naming a lifeline follows the format of: Instance Name : Class Name In the example shown in Figure 3, the lifeline represents an instance of the class Student, whose instance name is freshman. Note that, here, the lifeline name is underlined. When an underline is used, it means that the lifeline represents a specific instance of a class in a sequence diagram, and not a particular kind of instance (i.e., a role). In a future article we’ll look at structure modeling. For now, just observe that sequence diagrams may include roles (such as buyer and seller) without specifying who plays those roles (such as Bill and Fred). This allows diagram reuse in different contexts. Simply put, instance names in sequence diagrams are underlined; roles names are not. Our example lifeline in Figure 3 is a named object, but not all lifelines represent named objects. Instead a lifeline can be used to represent an anonymous or unnamed instance. When modeling an unnamed instance on a sequence diagram, the lifeline’s name follows the same pattern as a named instance; but instead of providing an instance name, that portion of the lifeline’s name is left blank. Again referring to Figure 3, if the lifeline is representing an anonymous instance of the Student class, the lifeline would be: † Student.† Also, because sequence diagrams are used during the design phase of projects, it is completely legitimate to have an object whose type is unspecified: for example, â€Å"freshman.† Messages The first message of a sequence diagram always starts at the top and is typically located on the left side of the diagram for readability. Subsequent messages are then added to the diagram slightly lower then the previous message. To show an object (i.e., lifeline) sending a message to another object, you draw a line to the receiving object with a solid arrowhead (if a synchronous call operation) or with a stick arrowhead (if an asynchronous signal). The message/method name is placed above the arrowed line. The message that is being sent to the receiving object represents an operation/method that the receiving object’s class implements. In the example in Figure 4, the analyst object makes a call to the system object which is an instance of the ReportingSystem class. The analyst object is calling the system object’s getAvailableReports method. The system object then calls the getSecurityClearance method with the argument of userId on the secSystem object, which is of the class type SecuritySystem. [Note: When  reading this sequence diagram, assume that the analyst has already logged into the system.] Figure 4: An example of messages being sent between objects Besides just showing message calls on the sequence diagram, the Figure 4 diagram includes return messages. These return messages are optional; a return message is drawn as a dotted line with an open arrowhead back to the originating lifeline, and above this dotted line you place the return value from the operation. In Figure 4 the secSystem object returns userClearance to the system object when the getSecurityClearance method is called. The system object returns availableReports when the getAvailableReports method is called. Again, the return messages are an optional part of a sequence diagram. The use of return messages depends on the level of detail/abstraction that is being modeled. Return messages are useful if finer detail is required; otherwise, the invocation message is sufficient. I personally like to include return messages whenever a value will be returned, because I find the extra details make a sequence diagram easier to read. When modeling a sequence diagram, there will be times that an object will need to send a message to itself. When does an object call itself? A purist would argue that an object should never send a message to itself. However, modeling an object sending a message to itself can be useful in some cases. For example, Figure 5 is an improved version of Figure 4. The Figure 5 version shows the system object calling its determineAvailableReports method. By showing the system sending itself the message â€Å"determineAvailableReports,† the model draws attention to the fact that this processing takes place in the system object. To draw an object calling itself, you draw a message as you would normally, but instead of connecting it to another object, you connect the message back to the object itself. Figure 5: The system object calling its determineAvailableReports method The example messages in Figure 5 show synchronous messages; however, in sequence diagrams you can model asynchronous messages, too. An asynchronous message is drawn similar to a synchronous one, but the message’s line is drawn with a stick arrowhead, as shown in Figure 6. Figure 6: A sequence diagram fragment showing an asynchronous message being sent to instance Guards When modeling object interactions, there will be times when a condition must be met for a message to be sent to the object. Guards are used throughout UML diagrams to control flow. Here, I will discuss guards in both UML 1.x as well as UML 2.0. In UML 1.x, a guard could only be assigned to a single message. To draw a guard on a sequence diagram in UML 1.x, you placed the guard element above the message line being guarded and in front of the message name. Figure 7 shows a fragment of a sequence diagram with a guard on the message addStudent method. Figure 7: A segment of a UML 1.x sequence diagram in which the addStudent message has a guard In Figure 7, the guard is the text â€Å"[pastDueBalance = 0].† By having the guard on this message, the addStudent message will only be sent if the accounts receivable system returns a past due balance of zero. The notation of a guard is very simple; the format is: [Boolean Test] For example, [pastDueBalance = 0] Combined fragments (alternatives, options, and loops) In most sequence diagrams, however, the UML 1.x â€Å"in-line† guard is not sufficient to handle the logic required for a sequence being modeled. This lack of functionality was a problem in UML 1.x. UML 2 has addressed this problem by removing the â€Å"in-line† guard and adding a notation element called a Combined Fragment. A combined fragment is used to group sets of messages together to show conditional flow in a sequence diagram. The UML 2 specification identifies 11 interaction types for combined fragments. Three of the eleven will be covered here in â€Å"The Basics† section, two more types will be covered in the â€Å"Beyond The Basics† section, and the remaining six I will leave to be covered in another article. (Hey, this is an article, not a book. I want you to finish this piece in one day!) Alternatives Alternatives are used to designate a mutually exclusive choice between two or more message sequences. [Note: It is indeed possible for two or more guard conditions attached to different alternative operands to be true at the same  time, but at most only one operand will actually occur at run time (which alternative â€Å"wins† in such cases is not defined by the UML standard).] Alternatives allow the modeling of the classic â€Å"if then else† logic (e.g., if I buy three items, then I get 20% off my purchase; else I get 10% off my purchase). As you will notice in Figure 8, an alternative combination fragment element is drawn using a frame. The word â€Å"alt† is placed inside the frame’s namebox. The larger rectangle is then divided into what UML 2 calls operands. [Note: Although operands look a lot like lanes on a highway, I specifically did not call them lanes. Swim lanes are a UML notation used on activity diagrams. Please refer to The Rational Edge’s earlier article about Activity Diagrams.] Operands are separated by a dashed line. Each operand is given a guard to test against, and this guard is placed towards the top left section of the operand on top of a lifeline. [Note: Usually, the lifeline to which the guard is attached is the lifeline that owns the variable that is included in the guard expression.] If an operand’s guard equates to â€Å"true,† then that operand is the operand to follow. Figure 8: A sequence diagram fragment that contains an alternative combination fragment As an example to show how an alternative combination fragment is read, Figure 8 shows the sequence starting at the top, with the bank object getting the check’s amount and the account’s balance. At this point in the sequence the alternative combination fragment takes over. Because of the guard â€Å"[balance >= amount],† if the account’s balance is greater than or equal to the amount, then the sequence continues with the bank object sending the addDebitTransaction and storePhotoOfCheck messages to the account object. However, if the balance is not greater than or equal to the amount, then the sequence proceeds with the bank object sending the addInsuffientFundFee and noteReturned Check message to the account object and the returnCheck message to itself. The second sequence is called when the balance is not greater than or equal to the amount because of the â€Å"[else]† guard. In alternative combination fragments, the â€Å"[else]† guard is n ot required; and if an operand does not have an explicit guard on it, then the â€Å"[else]† guard is to be assumed. Alternative combination fragments are not limited to simple â€Å"if then else† tests. There can be as many alternative paths as are needed. If more alternatives are needed, all you must do is add an operand to the  rectangle with that sequence’s guard and messages. Option The option combination fragment is used to model a sequence that, given a certain condition, will occur; otherwise, the sequence does not occur. An option is used to model a simple â€Å"if then† statement (i.e., if there are fewer than five donuts on the shelf, then make two dozen more donuts). The option combination fragment notation is similar to the alternation combination fragment, except that it only has one operand and there never can be an â€Å"else† guard (it just does not make sense here). To draw an option combination you draw a frame. The text â€Å"opt† is placed inside the frame’s namebox, and in the frame’s content area the option’s guard is placed towards the top left corner on top of a lifeline. Then the option’s sequence of messages is placed in the remainder of the frame’s content area. These elements are illustrated in Figure 9. Figure 9: A sequence diagram fragment that includes an option combination fragme nt Reading an option combination fragment is easy. Figure 9 is a reworking of the sequence diagram fragment in Figure 7, but this time it uses an option combination fragment because more messages need to be sent if the student’s past due balance is equal to zero. According to the sequence diagram in Figure 9, if a student’s past due balance equals zero, then the addStudent, getCostOfClass, and chargeForClass messages are sent. If the student’s past due balance does not equal zero, then the sequence skips sending any of the messages in the option combination fragment. The example Figure 9 sequence diagram fragment includes a guard for the option; however, the guard is not a required element. In high-level, abstract sequence diagrams you might not want to specify the condition of the option. You may simply want to indicate that the fragment is optional. Loops Occasionally you will need to model a repetitive sequence. In UML 2, modeling a repeating sequence has been improved with the addition of the loop combination fragment. The loop combination fragment is very similar in appearance to the option combination fragment. You draw a frame, and in the frame’s namebox the text â€Å"loop† is placed. Inside the frame’s content area the loop’s guard is placed towards the top left corner, on top of a  lifeline. [Note: As with the option combination fragment, the loop combination fragment does not require that a guard condition be placed on it.] Then the loop’s sequence of messages is placed in the remainder of the frame’s content area. In a loop, a guard can have two special conditions tested against in addition to the standard Boolean test. The special guard conditions are minimum iterations written as â€Å"minint = [the number]† (e.g., â€Å"minint = 1†) and maximum iterations written a s â€Å"maxint = [the number]† (e.g., â€Å"maxint = 5†). With a minimum iterations guard, the loop must execute at least the number of times indicated, whereas with a maximum iterations guard the number of loop executions cannot exceed the number. Figure 10: An example sequence diagram with a loop combination fragment Larger view of Figure 10. The loop shown in Figure 10 executes until the reportsEnu object’s hasAnotherReport message returns false. The loop in this sequence diagram uses a Boolean test to verify if the loop sequence should be run. To read this diagram, you start at the top, as normal. When you get to the loop combination fragment a test is done to see if the value hasAnotherReport equals true. If the hasAnotherReport value equals true, then the sequence goes into the loop fragment. You can then follow the messages in the loop as you would normally in a sequence diagram Back to top Beyond the basics I’ve covered the basics of the sequence diagram, which should allow you to model most of the interactions that will take place in a common system. The following section will cover more advanced notation elements that can be used in a sequence diagram. Referencing another sequence diagram When doing sequence diagrams, developers love to reuse existing sequence diagrams in their diagram’s sequences. [Note: It is possible to reuse a sequence diagram of any type (e.g., programming or business). I just find that developers like to functionally break down their diagrams more.] Starting in UML 2, the â€Å"Interaction Occurrence† element was introduced. The addition of interaction occurrences is arguably the most important innovation in UML 2 interactions modeling. Interaction occurrences add the  ability to compose primitive sequence diagrams into complex sequence diagrams. With these you can combine (reuse) the simpler sequences to produce more complex sequences. This means that you can abstract out a complete, and possibly complex, sequence as a single conceptual unit. An interaction occurrence element is drawn using a frame. The text â€Å"ref† is placed inside the frame’s namebox, and the name of the sequence diagram being referenced is pl aced inside the frame’s content area along with any parameters to the sequence diagram. The notation of the referenced sequence diagram’s name follows the pattern of: sequence diagram name Two examples: 1. Retrieve Borrower Credit Report(ssn) : borrowerCreditReport or 2. Process Credit Card(name, number, expirationDate, amount : 100) In example 1, the syntax calls the sequence diagram called Retrieve Borrower Credit Report and passes it the parameter ssn. The Retreive Borrower Credit Report sequence returns the variable borrowerCreditReport. In example 2, the syntax calls the sequence diagram called Process Credit Card and passes it the parameters of name, number, expiration date, and amount. However, in example 2 the amount parameter will be a value of 100. And since example 2 does not have a return value labeled, the sequence does not return a value (presumably, the sequence being modeled does not need the return value). Figure 11: A sequence diagram that references two different sequence diagrams Figure 11 shows a sequence diagram that references the sequence diagrams â€Å"Balance Lookup† and â€Å"Debit Account.† The sequence starts at the top left, with the customer sending a message to the teller object. The teller object sends a message to the theirBank object. At that point, the Balance Lookup sequence diagram is called, with the accountNumber passed as a parameter. The Balance Lookup sequence diagram returns the balance variable. Then the option combination fragment’s guard condition is checked to verify the balance is greater then the amount variable. In cases where the balance is greater than the amount, the Debit Account sequence diagram is called, passing it the accountNumber and the amount as parameters. After that sequence is complete, the withdrawCash message returns cash to the customer. It is important to notice in Figure 11 that the lifeline of theirBank is hidden by the interaction occurrence Balance Lookup. Because the interaction occurrence hides the lifeline, that means that the theirBank lifeline is referenced in the â€Å"Balance Lookup† sequence diagram. In addition to hiding the lifeline in the interaction occurrence, UML 2 also specifies that the lifeline must have the same theirBank in its own â€Å"Balance Lookup† sequence. There will be times when you model sequence diagrams that an interaction occurrence will overlap lifelines that are not referenced in the interaction occurrence. In such cases the lifeline is shown as a normal lifeline and is not hidden by the overlapping interaction occurrence. In Figure 11, the sequence references the â€Å"Balance Lookup† sequence diagram. The â€Å"Balance Lookup† sequence diagram is shown in Figure 12. Because the example sequence has parameters and a return value, its label —lo cated in the diagram’s namebox—follows a specific pattern: Diagram Type Diagram Name Two examples: 1. SD Balance Lookup(Integer : accountNumber) : Real 2. SD Available Reports(Financial Analyst : analyst) : Reports Figure 12 illustrates example 1, in which the Balance Lookup sequence uses parameter accountNumber as a variable in the sequence, and the sequence diagram shows a Real object being returned. In cases such as this, where the sequence returns an object, the object being returned is given the instance name of the sequence diagram. Figure 12: A sequence diagram that takes the parameter of accountNumber and returns a Real object Figure 13 illustrates example 2, in which a sequence takes a parameter and returns an object. However, in Figure 13 the parameter is used in the sequence’s interaction. Figure 13: A sequence diagram that uses its parameter in its interaction and returns a Reports object Larger view of Figure 13. Gates The previous section showed how to reference another sequence diagram by  passing information through parameters and return values. However, there is another way to pass information between sequence diagrams. Gates can be an easy way to model the passing of information between a sequence diagram and its context. A gate is merely a message that is illustrated with one end connected to the sequence diagram’s frame’s edge and the other end connected to a lifeline. A reworking of Figures 11 and 12 using gates can be seen in Figures 14 and 15. The example diagram in Figure 15 has an entry gate called getBalance that takes the parameter of accountNumber. The getBalance message is an entry gate, because it is the arrowed line that is connected to the diagram’s frame with the arrowhead connected to a lifeline. The sequence diagram also has an exit gate that returns the balance variable. The exit gate is known, because it’s a return message that is connected from a lifeline to the diagram’s frame with the arrowhead connected to the frame. Figure 14: A reworking of Figure 11, using gates this time Figure 15: A reworking of Figure 12, using gates this time Combined fragments (break and parallel) In the â€Å"basics† section presented earlier in this paper, I covered the combined fragments known as â€Å"alternative,† â€Å"option,† and â€Å"loop.† These three combined fragments are the ones most people will use the most. However, there are two other combined fragments that a large share of people will find useful à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" break and parallel. Break The break combined fragment is almost identical in every way to the option combined fragment, with two exceptions. First, a break’s frame has a namebox with the text â€Å"break† instead of â€Å"option.† Second, when a break combined fragment’s message is to be executed, the enclosing interaction’s remainder messages will not be executed because the sequence breaks out of the enclosing interaction. In this way the break combined fragment is much like the break keyword in a programming language like C++ or Java. Figure 16: A reworking of the sequence diagram fragment from Figure 8, with the fragment using a break instead of an alternative Breaks are most commonly used to model exception handling. Figure 16 is a  reworking of Figure 8, but this time Figure 16 uses a break combination fragment because it treats the balance < amount condition as an exception instead of as an alternative flow. To read Figure 16, you start at the top left corner of the sequence and read down. When the sequence gets to the return value â€Å"balance,† it checks to see if the balance is less than the amount. If the balance is not less than the amount, the next message sent is the addDebitTransaction message, and the sequence continues as normal. However, in cases where the balance is less than the amount, then the sequence enters the break combination fragment and its messages are sent. Once all the messages in the break combination have been sent, the sequence exits without sending any of the remaining messages (e.g., addDebitTransaction). An important thing to note about breaks is that they only cause the exiting of an enclosing i nteraction’s sequence and not necessarily the complete sequence depicted in the diagram. In cases where a break combination is part of an alternative or a loop, then only the alternative or loop is exited. Parallel Today’s modern computer systems are advancing in complexity and at times perform concurrent tasks. When the processing time required to complete portions of a complex task is longer than desired, some systems handle parts of the processing in parallel. The parallel combination fragment element needs to be used when creating a sequence diagram that shows parallel processing activities. The parallel combination fragment is drawn using a frame, and you place the text â€Å"par† in the frame’s namebox. You then break up the frame’s content section into horizontal operands separated by a dashed line. Each operand in the frame represents a thread of execution done in parallel. Figure 17: A microwave is an example of an object that does two tasks in parallel While Figure 17 may not illustrate the best computer system example of an object doing activities in parallel, it offers an easy-to-understand example of a sequence with parallel activities. The sequence goes like this: A hungryPerson sends the cookFood message to the oven object. When the oven object receives that message, it sends two messages to itself at the same time (nukeFood and rotateFood). After both of these messages are done, the hungryPerson object is returned yummyFood from the oven object.

Maersk Group (Maersk) Human Resource Development

Introduction My 48 hour exam project is a case study of A. P. Moller – Maersk Group (Maersk); the objective of my assignment is to elaborate on Maersk`s talent management challenge, focused on development. Furthermore I will describe the cosmos of Maersk learning and competence development and provide alternative angles of conducting in this cosmos, in accordance with my own perspective. My ontological standpoint for this exam is constructivism (Olsen & Pedersen, 2005). The reality perceived is therefore not objective but created, or constructed, by man’s interpretation.This does not signify that I will avoid handling theories that are ontological objectivistic in order to discuss and compliment the various learning and competence development challenges of Maersk; but rather discuss the objective views and theories, and its contrasts to my standpoint. Organizational Change at Maersk Maersk have developed from a very standardized, family run company with certain and spec ific ways of running things; to a worldwide organization that have had to change in order to keep up with the time and trends.The major change in Maersk way of dealing with their learning and competence development occurred in 2008; Maersk had before 2008 a very objective approach to learning which were aimed towards trainees (Case, Page 7). In 2008 the People Strategy Sessions (PSS) is created and a shift towards a more individual development process has begun. PSS is developed to identify individuals, primarily in top management positions, that have a necessity for learning and competence development. These individuals is identified via Key Performance Indicator (KPIs) Learning and Competence developmentHolt Larsen defines competence as a result of a learning process (Holt Larsen, 2010). Competence development is therefore the learning process where the Maersk employees’ know-how and skills are improved; where the employee becomes good at what is required, and not just real ly good, this is what Holt Larsen believes falls under qualifications (Holt Larsen, 2010). Competence development therefore results in the employee’s knowledge, within a specific area of expertise, growing deeper and more elaborate.This knowledge is then transferred into actions, the employees ability to use his or hers knowledge in concrete and unknown situations is therefore an indication on whether or not the employee is competent, hence; good at what is required. Holt Larsen elaborates on this by stating that an employee can be qualified to do his job, but if the attained knowledge cannot be transferred into action due to, for example; the company culture, what the employees are allowed or what the employee’s experience allow him to have the courage to do.Then the employee can be defined as incompetent, since the assignment is not completed (Holt Larsen, 2010). Holt Larsen mentions three learning barriers (company culture, rules and confidence) that affect some emp loyee’s ability to complete their assignment in tasks where their competences fall short. When an employee began his or her career in Maersk, they would possess formal competencies (Ellstrom & Kock, 2008) in the form of, for example, a high school or a college degree (Case, page 8).Maersk’s old way of providing learning and competence development to their employees can through my perspective be seen as a very universal, or objective, way of providing competence development. The standardized development programs were, in Maersk’s defence, designed for employees who did not possess competencies that exceeded the formal kind. The Maersk learning and competence development strategies that came after 2008 were also designed to include experienced individuals (Case, Page 7) who already possessed actual competencies.An example, based on the theory, of an employees’ actual competence development (Ellstrom & Kock, 2008) could be a result of; job rotation in the fo rm of assignments in various different Maersk departments. Furthermore internal evaluations, on the job training; informal learning in work and mentoring by superiors (Ellstrom & Kock, 2008) would be advisable to Maersk. The latter mentioned experiences can be seen as a way of developing the Maersk employee’s competences (Wahlgreen, 2002).Which one of the latter mentioned experiences that works best, is according to my standpoing depending on the individual employee that it is applied on; this correlates with the Maersk initiative â€Å"talent intimacy†, where the managers were encouraged to acquire the knowledge on how each of their individual employees learns best (Case, Page 10) In order to understand the terms learning and competence, one has to understand the similarities and contrasts between them. According to Hermann learning is a process were competencies is enabled. Learning is consequently he most important part of the competence development process (Hermann , 2003). In the case of talent intimacy Maersk is therefore able to archive competence development by the managers acting on behalf of Maersk, to learn about the individual employees; hence, the organization is learning. The latter correlates with Argyris & Scons theory of Organizational Learning (Argyris & Scons, 1996); the talent intimacy process encouraged the managers to act as agents (Argyris & Scons, 1996) which enabled Maersk to learn as an comprised entity, containing individuals.This can be seen as a shift away from the more objective way of evaluating and developing the employees that Maersk made use of before 2008, and is very much aligned with my standpoint. The learning is therefore facilitated vertically by means of the subjective way that Maersk observes its employees. In contrast, Maersk has developed an increased focus on KPIs when evaluating their employees. This objective way may hinder learning and the division of knowledge to spread horizontally throughout the o rganization. They KPIs of Maersk is linked to a reward system; according to Elkj? (2005) it can â€Å"hinder a productive organizational learning, if the behaviour in the organization influenced by defensive communication forms† (Elkj? r, 2005, Page 41). The managers can perceive that they have something to lose by sharing knowledge horizontally in the organization, if sharing could have a negative consequence on their own KPIs, or a positive influence on the KPIs on they co-workers/†competitors†. Elkj? r elaborates â€Å"win/loss behaviour draws attention away from finding and correcting errors. And instead moves the attention towards the individuals protection of themselves† (Elkj? r, 2005, Page 42).This problem can be worsened or alleviated by group size (Laezear & Gibbs, 2009), individual performance evaluation will have a tendency to distort the incentives of the individuals and therefore create fewer incentives for the Maersk employees to cooperate wi th their co-workers (Laezear & Gibbs, 2009). Regrettably measuring group or business unit’s performance increases the risk and decreases the controllability of the measurement. This learning process at Maersk, it seems, is either facilitated or hindered by the New HR processes; depending whether the processes subjective or objective.On the basis of this it would therefore be advisable for Maersk to use other angles, dimensions and parameters when identifying, evaluating and categorizing their employees, with the purpose of learning and competence development What should Maersk do with their high- and low performing employees? Concerning identifying, evaluating and categorizing; Since the development plans of the Maersk employees is based on evaluation and categorizing, it is relevant to look into various theory and ways of doing just that.Employees are often divided into top performers and poor performers, or A- and B employees (Naqvi, 2009). In the Case of Maersk the employe es are categorized as High Performers, Successful and Less Successful (Case, Page 6). According to Naqvi (2009) employees should not only be retained, but also nurtured for elevated responsibilities. Correspondingly, the mass of B employees should continuously be developed and trained for better performance, making optimal use if the employees competencies (Naqvi, 2009).The theory of Naqvi therefore corresponds with the process created by Maersk to analyse which leaders that underperform and therefore is in need of learning and competence development (Case, page 9 and 10). According to Stevens (2008) it is important to identify the skills that distinguish top- and poor performers from each other. By doing so it will become possible to; get an accurate job match with the right people getting the right jobs, to advance in succession planning, to provide a high level of job satisfaction and to accurately identify training- and competency development needs.The objective perspective; whe re talent is objectified as a size that can be measured, grouped and categorized, is very similar to the concept, talent management as fit tool (Schuler and Jackson, 2008).. Through this perspective talent is reduced to pieces of a puzzle, where it is up to the management to select, measure and assemble all the pieces in a manner that conform with the business strategy; subjectivity is thus ignored. I will elaborate on this concept later on.If the necessity to divide the employees of Maersk into groupings is inevitable due to; for example, the need to ease the top managements evaluations and discussions regarding the employees or to lower evaluation costs: A less simplified and general model could be utilized (appendix: 1) (Haskins and Shaffer, 2010). The 9 grid talent matrix is a more advanced, but still a straightforward way of evaluating an organizations talent pool. The horizontal axis considers the performance while the vertical axis considers the leadership potential. The 9 gr id alent matrix is an excellent method of identifying development needs amongst the employees. In addition it promotes dialog amongst the management team and consequently provide an adequate assessment, compared to if it was one person who evaluated the employee, as well as calibrating the different manager’s ratings and expectations. Both Maersk evaluation approach and the 9 grid talent matrix has the advantage that they are relatively easy to approach and rather inexpensive. The disadvantages of them is that they are very one-dimensional, in the sense that it the person being evaluated is only being evaluated by his or her superiors.A potential multidimensional evaluation approach at Maersk could be a 360 degree performance evaluation (Burton & Delong, 1998). In this approach the subject is being evaluated by both his superiors, co-workers, subordinates, costumers/suppliers and by himself. This evaluation system should consequently portray are more complex and adequate eval uation compared to the one-dimensioned evaluations. The 360 degree system essentially facilitates and creates individual development plans for the subject.Another advantage to the 360 degree evaluation is that it uncovers good performers that may not do well in the act of promoting themselves. Furthermore it uncovers individuals that might be a little too good at promoting themselves. A general disadvantage with subjective evaluations, one-dimensional as well as multidimensional, is that they suffer from grade inflation (Laezear & Gibbs, 2009); this implies that people are reluctant to give low ratings; it is therefore hard to distinguish performance and to show the best and worst performers.The disadvantage of the 360 degree evaluation is that it is time consuming and therefore the evaluations costs are higher, compared to the subjective ways of evaluating. This is arguable a fact that should be acceptable to Maersk to ignore, since the PSS evaluations only comprise of the top 120 positions in the company (Case) What seems obscure is that Maersk chooses to move away from the objective approach when it concerns competence development. But when choosing who to actually provide with learning and competence development they make use of something as objective as performance indicators.As one Maersk employee puts it; â€Å"Maersk Line is incredibly driven by objective settings and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and schemes that dictate behaviour† (Case, Page 7). Concerning the high performing employees at Maersk; Maersk emphasizes a great deal on performance when evaluating the individuals in the top positions of the company, but could other parameters be applied in conjunction with performance? And how should they act towards their high performing employees? It is an interesting actuality that almost all high-potential (HIPO) employees are high performers.But only approximately 29% of high performers have the potential to succeed in higher senior positio ns (Corporate Leadership Council, 2005). In correlation 47% of high performers is not HIPO`s due to shortcomings in aspiration (Corporate Leadership Council, 2005). These low performers have the highest, 44%, probability of succeeding at the next level. In comparison high performers with shortcomings in engagement consist of 48% of the high performers who are not HIPO`s, and they do only have 13% probability of succeeding at the next level.The high performers, who have shortcomings in ability, have a 0% probability of succeeding at the next level (Corporate Leadership Council, 2005). On the basis of this it would therefore be advisable for Maersk to explore the development opportunities and increase the ambition levels, amongst the high performers with short comings in aspiration. With the remaining high performers it would be advisable for Maersk to keep them motivated in their current positions.Concerning how Maersk should act regarding, improving the performance, through developm ent, amongst the employees where it is needed; Under Allen (Case) the idea for a more individualized employee training, that is applied due to low performance has been a process used by Maersk since 2008. It is a commonly expressed proposal and notion, that all companies will be able to enhance their operational and fiscal performance by developing and incorporating HRM practices with the aim of an increased performance (Kaufman, 2010).The Strategic HRM processes that are perceived as being able to increase the performance are described as high-performance work practices (HPWPS) (Kaufman, 2010). The HPWP entail various ways of increasing the employees performances as a result of providing better work conditions, by means of; introducing compensation incentives, by providing the employees with job training which will enable them in performing new ssignment, do better in their existing assignments and give the employees a greater sense of belonging at Maersk, additionally a higher lev el of job flexibility, amongst other things, should help increase the employees satisfaction, motivation and decreasing the employee turnover, thus retaining them, these aspect would all lead to a higher performance and productivity. By attempting to differentiate between the different theoretical aspects and their link between the HRM processes and the organizational performance, they are separated into three perspectives (Kaufman, 2010).Pfeffers Universalistic perspective has identified seven HRM practices that will succeed in increasing performance when implemented, in all situations, due to the fact that they are universal: employment security, selective hiring of new personnel, decentralized decision making and self-managed teams, pay-for-performance, extensive training, reduced status differentials and information sharing. The universalistic perspective can be perceived as a very objective view.The truth discovered in the factors effects are therefore according to ontological objectivity (Christensen, 2002) seen as a final, universal, absolute and concluding truth and knowledge, which cannot be distorted by the individuals subjective way of considering the findings. Via the Configurational perspective (Kaufman, 2010) the combination of the various practices and the impact of these is lesser simplified than with the universalistic perspective and would therefore enable the possibility to better grasp the angle that is required in order to archive performance enhancement amongst the employees at Maersk.The concept behind the configurational perspective is that some of the practices have a synergetic link with some of the other practices which will lead to an increased performance enhancement when combined. The practices will as a result perform better if they are equally aligned in a synergetic and parallel package, which will therefore fit horizontally. Correspondingly the practices will implement in a more optimal way if they complement and are aligned w ith Maersks business strategy in a vertical fit.The concept of fit is therefore relevant from my standpoint, as opposed to the universalistic perspective; it is meaningful in the case of Maersk to mention the proposition of the Best Fit (BF) model (Kaufman, 2010). The concept of the BF model is that the optimal practices and practice combinations vary in accordance with the unique and concrete in the specific situation. The concept of BF correlates with Allen`s and Maersk HR idea of individualized employee training the concept of talent intimacy; and consequently correlates with my standpoint. Maersk Talent management – perceived as a fit toolMaersk have through their newly developed People Strategy Session (PSS), attempted to create a process that ensures â€Å"getting the right people in the right jobs at the right time† (Case, Page 5). The talent management (TM) in Maersk can therefore be perceived as a Fit tool. According to Schuler and Jackson (2008) one of the ma in ways that international companies can archive and maintain a global competitive advantage is by effectively meeting the challenges in global TM, in core warranting that they have the right people, with the right competencies and motivation at the right time and in the right position (Schuler and Jackson, 2008).TM used as a fit tool can therefore help Maersk to archive; an optimal utilization of Maersks resources (their employees), a most advantageous productivity and a competitive advantage. According to Schuler and Jackson (2008) the concept of TM is about planning for, attaining, choosing, motivating, developing and maintaining the individuals with the right skill combinations and levels of motivation, both internally and externally, in coherence with the strategic course of the multinational organization in a vibrant and very competitive global environment (Schuler and Jackson, 2008).TM is spoken of as a part of the fit that transients throughout the entire corporation. TM ena bles the possibility to secure that the right talents are placed at the right locations – and this placement of talents should be coherent with Maersks overall strategy. In correlation with the latter mentioned, Maersk should therefore be seen as a puzzle or a jigsaw, where the objective is to get all the different pieces to fit perfectly together.In order to do so, Maersk should make use of HRM processes that can measure the talents competencies, output and abilities, and subsequently find out where they fit. In Maersk the individuals were reviewed and divided based on their performance (Case). When TM is used as a process that assures that the right employee is linked to the right job, TM can be seen as a fit-facilitator. The talent is simplified into performance and objectified as a component that has a certain and transparent internal, that can be measured and matched to a ertain job description. This assumption is only possible if one has a perspective that assumes that competences are measurable and therefore transparent; in the case of Maersk they are measured by performance. Maersk does therefore not take the intangibles or latent (Bramming, 2001) competencies into account. The latent competencies, of the individual Maersk employees, are extremely harder, more time consuming and therefore more costly to plot out. To elaborate, the intangibles (Laezear & Gibbs, 2009) are much harder to quantify.For example, the initial revenues and profit from a business unit may be high, but if the general customer satisfaction is low, it will damage the organization in the long run. A less objectivistic perspective could be that a perfect fit does not exist. No matter what position an employee is put in, he will always have shortcomings and will probably also have skills that exceeds what is required of him. The situation that demands competences that the employee does not possess will therefore drive the Maersk employee to learn (Chambers et al. , 1998) and th erefore develop his or hers competencies.If a perfect fit is avoided Maersk would therefore facilitate the employees learning and developing in their positions, and at the same time the positions would develop with the employees; thus the Maersk as an organization will learn and develop. Conclusion The optimal way of Maersk to act concerning learning & competence development is to provide it in a manner and at a time that the management and the individual employee perceives it as needed; Either in order for the employee to expand its role or performance; within its position, or when the possibility to rise to the next level occurs.It is not recommendable to provide competence development solely on the basis of unsatisfactory performance; the learning and development processes may be at a risk to be seen as a punishment, rather than a privilege and opportunity. Furthermore the increased focus on individuals KPIs will inevitably create internal competition, which will consequently hin der learning, throughout the organization.Regarding identifying, evaluating and categorizing in order to decide which high ranking employees that is in need of employee training, a more complex and adequate evaluation system is recommendable. Furthermore it should not only be the bad performers that is selected for development, through the 360 degree evaluation and dialogue a development plan should be created amongst all participants The high performing employees that do not have the ability or engagement to be a high potential, should be acknowledged for being a high performer, and encouraged and motivated to stay in their role.Concerning the high performers with lack in ambition, the development possibilities and professional reasons for lack of aspiration should be explored. Concerning increasing the performance though development amongst the employees were it is needed, it is advisable to continue to focus on the individuals reasons, the specific situation, what drives and moti vates the employee to learn and develop, and if nothing of the latter is successful, consider if the individual is the right person for Maersk.Regarding placing the right employees, in the right position at the right time; some competencies might be measurable, but some are definitely not. In order for Maersk to grow, positions should not be seen as fixed or static, of course an employee has to live up to certain qualifications in order to do the work demanded by the position. Beyond that, a slight mismatch between the employee and the position will probably lead to a growth and development of the position, as well as the employee; hence will Maersk learn and develop. ——————————————- [ 1 ]. Original text †forhindre produktiv organisatorisk l? ring, hvis adf? rd i organisationen er pr? get af defensive kommunikationsformer† [ 2 ]. Original text †En †vinde/tabe-adf ? rd† tr? kker opm? rksomheden v? k fra †at finde of rette fejl†. Og flytter den i stedet hen pa individers beskyttelse af sig selv† [ 3 ]. A survey of more than 11,000 employees at 59 global organizations

The, Oklahoma, By John Steinbech Essay - 1977 Words

In the weathered cornfields of Sallisaw, Oklahoma, where everything has been destroyed by recent years of harsh weather, the author, John Steinbech, paints a very descriptive picture; he describes the land as been filled with thick dust causing the farmers to wear their handkerchiefs over the mouths and noses. The dust is so thick that at night it blocks out the stars. In a region of the country that once possessed laughter, love, and crop growth is now filled with tears, sadness, and dying corn. Now, most local families are scrounging to survive. The economic downfall of the nineteen-thirties forces migrants to move westbound to California, setting vagrants against local people and landowners against the poor. Farmers forced off their land by bankers causes finger pointing all around and in some sense makes everyone a victim; the farmers blame the landowners, yet the landowners are people too and need revenue to pay the bank representatives and therefore, they blame the bank represe ntatives. The bank representatives are trying to earn a living too, so they in-turn blame the next hierarchy and so forth. The Dust Bowl economic tragedy has divided the rich from the poor, and upper class form lower. Steinbech toggles between different points of views to ensure all viewpoints are captured. The Joads assume the position of the typical individual displaced and through them, Steinbeck words are visualized by the reader. The summarized story starts with the main character Tom Joad,