Management
Management
Table of Context
1. Planning 1 2. Organizing 3 3. Leading 5 4. Controlling 6 References 8
1. Planning
In the case that we are studying, Don Anglos and Pinnacle have to make the decision whether Pinnacle Machine Tool Co. should acquire Hoilman Inc. or not. Don Anglos, the CEO of Pinnacle Co, Jennifer Banks, services division head and Sam Lodge, CFO, are taking the steps to make the most appropriate decision.
According to many economists (Anderson et al., 2008), the steps in the decision making process are the following: 1. Identify and define the problem. 2. Determine the set of alternative solutions. 3. Determine the criteria that will be used to evaluate the alternative solutions. 4. Evaluate the alternative solutions. 5. Decide the most appropriate solution.
Taking into consideration the above steps we will analyze the case study of the Pinnacle Machine Tools Co.
First of all, Don Anglos has defined the problem, which is the decrease of the company’s profits. The company had tried to gain more market share through an aggressive price policy. This attempt was successful, but the lower prices had affected the profit margins. That is exactly the problem, which Don Anglos is about to solve: the increasing of the company’s profits. Of course, in decision making process, the identification of the issue has to be more carefully analyzed. A more detailed study of the problem may emerge alternatives, which might have been ignored, otherwise. (Keeney & Howard, 1976)
The solution, which Don Anglos suggests, is the acquisition of the Hoilman Inc. Such a diversifying strategic alliance, will give to the Pinnacle the opportunity to extend their business to the field of services. The disadvantage of Don Anglos’ suggestion is that it has only one alternative. A group of more than one solution, that could be evaluated and compared, would be more effective in such a case. A multi-alternative project could prevent mistakes and
Table of Context
1. Planning 1 2. Organizing 3 3. Leading 5 4. Controlling 6 References 8
1. Planning
In the case that we are studying, Don Anglos and Pinnacle have to make the decision whether Pinnacle Machine Tool Co. should acquire Hoilman Inc. or not. Don Anglos, the CEO of Pinnacle Co, Jennifer Banks, services division head and Sam Lodge, CFO, are taking the steps to make the most appropriate decision.
According to many economists (Anderson et al., 2008), the steps in the decision making process are the following: 1. Identify and define the problem. 2. Determine the set of alternative solutions. 3. Determine the criteria that will be used to evaluate the alternative solutions. 4. Evaluate the alternative solutions. 5. Decide the most appropriate solution.
Taking into consideration the above steps we will analyze the case study of the Pinnacle Machine Tools Co.
First of all, Don Anglos has defined the problem, which is the decrease of the company’s profits. The company had tried to gain more market share through an aggressive price policy. This attempt was successful, but the lower prices had affected the profit margins. That is exactly the problem, which Don Anglos is about to solve: the increasing of the company’s profits. Of course, in decision making process, the identification of the issue has to be more carefully analyzed. A more detailed study of the problem may emerge alternatives, which might have been ignored, otherwise. (Keeney & Howard, 1976)
The solution, which Don Anglos suggests, is the acquisition of the Hoilman Inc. Such a diversifying strategic alliance, will give to the Pinnacle the opportunity to extend their business to the field of services. The disadvantage of Don Anglos’ suggestion is that it has only one alternative. A group of more than one solution, that could be evaluated and compared, would be more effective in such a case. A multi-alternative project could prevent mistakes and
References: Anderson, D.R., Sweeney, D.J., Williams, A.T. & Martin, K., 2008. An Introduction to Management Science: Quantative Approaches to Decision Making. 12th ed. USA: Thomson South-Western. Basu, A., Blanning, R.W. & Shtub, A., 1997. Metagraphs in hierarchical modeling. Management Science, 43(5), p.623–639. Basu, A. & Kumar, A., 2002. Research Commentary: Workflow Management Issues in e-Business. Information Systems Research, 13(1), p.1–14. CabinetOffice, 2004. Archived Policy Documents. [Online] (6.1) Available at: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/govtalk/archive/policy_documents_1_of_1/e-gif.aspx [Accessed 10 November 2010]. Dutta, A., 1997. The physical infrastructure for electronic commerce in developing nations: historical trends and the impact of privatization. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), pp.61-83. Grefen, P., Aberer, K., Hoffner, Y. & Ludwig, H., 2000. CrossFlow: Crossorganizational workflow management in dynamic virtual enterprises. International Journal of Computing Systems Science, 15(5), p.277–290. Hammond, R., Keeney, L. & Raiffa, H., 1999. Smart Choises: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions. Boston: MA: Harvard Business School Press. Hofstede, G., 1991. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. UK: McGraw Hill. Kaplan, S.N. & Minton, B.A., 2008. How Has CEO Turnover Changed? USA: Ohio State University. Kaplan, S. & Sawhney, M., 2000. e-Hubs: The new B-2-B marketplaces. Harvard Business Review, 78(3), p.97–103. Keeney, R. & Howard, R., 1976. Decisions with Multiple Objectives. Cambridge: University Press. Kornov, L. & Thissen, W., 2000. Rationality in decision and policy making: Implications for strategic environmentla assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 18(3). Noorderhaven, N., 1995. Strategic Decision Making. Wokingham: Adison-Wesley. Tonn, B., English, M. & Travis, C., 2000. A framework for understanding and improving environmental decision making. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 42(2), pp.163-83.