Byte Production
BYTE Products Case Study
Shawn Kelly
Bryant & Stratton College
BUSS450JS1 - Strategic Management
L. Seay
September, 12th, 2012
1. The proposal at first glance was a great way to offset their issues and seemed to be a great way to continue to provide service and products to the market. After the recess was ended, I too, would’ve changed my votes because the decision to create and eliminate the community’s market would not be an ethical or moral win for the company or the community. If there’s one thing that I’ve learned is that there is always a better way or a more productive way to a conclusion. 2. I believe that any company should be upfront with their intentions especially ones that will carry or include a great impact to the community. To withhold your intentions such as the temporary plant could easily be leaked to the media and thus giving the company a bad reputation. 3. The impact of a plant closing in a town such as Plainville could mean a thriving town turned into a ghost town overnight. The resources would be minimal and this could lead to mass poverty in the area leading to a much higher crime rate. The employees may need to relocate to other regions and or communities in order to provide for their families. One employee could impact 6 people and then if you multiply that by 1,200 you’d quickly impact over 7,200 people. The impact of losing a job can be overbearing for some and even critical for others. 4. I feel that the company could continue to use the plant to make secondary needs of their products but the staffing of the company would need to be minimal in order to drive down cost or they could even forget the whole project and possibly start buying out some of their biggest competitors who currently have the resources that BYTE company requires. 5. I feel that rushing a decision would only lead to possible future failures and a dedication to quality is better yet served with patience. A later vote would give
Shawn Kelly
Bryant & Stratton College
BUSS450JS1 - Strategic Management
L. Seay
September, 12th, 2012
1. The proposal at first glance was a great way to offset their issues and seemed to be a great way to continue to provide service and products to the market. After the recess was ended, I too, would’ve changed my votes because the decision to create and eliminate the community’s market would not be an ethical or moral win for the company or the community. If there’s one thing that I’ve learned is that there is always a better way or a more productive way to a conclusion. 2. I believe that any company should be upfront with their intentions especially ones that will carry or include a great impact to the community. To withhold your intentions such as the temporary plant could easily be leaked to the media and thus giving the company a bad reputation. 3. The impact of a plant closing in a town such as Plainville could mean a thriving town turned into a ghost town overnight. The resources would be minimal and this could lead to mass poverty in the area leading to a much higher crime rate. The employees may need to relocate to other regions and or communities in order to provide for their families. One employee could impact 6 people and then if you multiply that by 1,200 you’d quickly impact over 7,200 people. The impact of losing a job can be overbearing for some and even critical for others. 4. I feel that the company could continue to use the plant to make secondary needs of their products but the staffing of the company would need to be minimal in order to drive down cost or they could even forget the whole project and possibly start buying out some of their biggest competitors who currently have the resources that BYTE company requires. 5. I feel that rushing a decision would only lead to possible future failures and a dedication to quality is better yet served with patience. A later vote would give