Crocs Organizational Structure Essay Example

Crocs Organizational Structure Essay Running Head: Crocs Crocs Jess R. Vasquez Colorado State University – Global Campus ORG 500 Foundations of Effective Management Jama Bradley, Ph. D. 21 November 2009 Abstract Crocs Inc. , was founded in 2002 and immediately realized success. The company had a great idea and moved quickly to capitalize upon it. Early in 2006 the company entered into its IPO, it too was a huge success. â€Å"At the height of the real estate market, in 2006, the company sold shares to the public, raising more than $200 million in the biggest stock offering in shoe history† (Mui, 2009).These successes were due in large part to the fact that the product had a large appeal and the supply and production models used were revolutionary to the apparel industry and were incredibly efficient. However, was too much focus and importance put on building a strong supply and production model and too little emphasis placed on understanding the importance of managing its value chain? The supply chain crea ted was one which was developed in three stages. First, the company moved to purchase the manufacturer of the product in order to have proprietary rights to the raw materials.The second stage was to begin to use contract manufacturers in different countries. Third, the company moved to bring some of the global operations which had been contracted out, in house. This was accomplished by developing company-owned manufacturing sites and warehouses located in strategic areas depending on need (Holloway amp; Lee, 2007). Value Chain: Industry Differentiation Crocs is a unique company as it is manufacturer, distributor, and retailer of its own product. This operation has obvious advantages; most important is the ability to lower overall cost to the end use customer. The company as certainly profitable. In 2005 and 2006 the company’s net profit margin of 18. 2%, led the industry; Deckers Outdoors had the second highest margin at 10. 4%. Crocs aggressive manufacturing and distribution strategies clearly gave it a competitive advantage. The company had successfully introduced a supply chain model never before used in the footwear industry, but did this success possibly give management a false sense of being â€Å"bullet proof† to changes? Traditional Value Chain Typically the requirements of a successful value chain include these areas: * Coordination and Collaboration Technology Investment * Organizational Process * Leadership * Human Resources * Organizational Culture and Attitudes (Coulter amp; Robbins, 2007) Crocs seemed to follow this general template in the development of their value chain. It was certainly coordinated in its production and supply efforts. The leadership was right for where the company was trying to go and that was to become more of a global presence. The culture would have been influenced by this aggressive leadership style. The company had invested heavily in machinery to increase production.It had also developed a system that coul d quickly adjust its manpower requirements as was necessary. It relied heavily on the fact that the shoes were selling themselves, so the company did not seem to invest resources in improved technology, e-commerce. Apparel Global Value Chain Within the apparel value chain like the traditional method is a series of key steps: The level of marketing requirements often varies with the business model being deployed by a company. It can be virtually non-existent or it can be the main driver of competitive advantage.The marketing department is typically responsible for: * Assisting the design team to understand market trends, end consumer profiles, changing market needs and new opportunities; * Developing programs to keep brands fresh and relevant to the end consumer; * Monitoring competitor activities and providing input on product prices, styling, etc; * Developing and implementing promotional or public relations campaigns aimed at retailers or end consumers; * Organizing product launch es; Identifying sales leads and new channels of distribution; * Developing pricing and in-store promotion strategies to encourage retailer and consumer purchases (The Apparel Global Value Chain, 2009). This model addresses the fact that in fashion, change happens quickly, sometimes within months. The ability to constantly adapt to new styles, market interruptions, and pricing is paramount in this industry. Crocs had a solid product base and had also begun to develop other products and acquire existing companies to compliment their growth strategy.With a very solid profit margin provided by the supply and production efficiency it steadily increased market share. Energized Value Chain This chain, like the others, relies on everyone contributing ideas and sharing insights across the organization. â€Å"Building an energized value chain is not corporate restructuring. It is more like reawakening and repositioning the current organizational and operational practice to thin uniquely from the perspective of the brand† (Gerzema amp; Lebar, 2008).This model encompasses the strengths from the other models but builds upon them. It includes the finance department as well allows for constant reevaluation of existing business models. One example of this is Geico. It too was a director marketer of a product but realized it had to constantly change in order to not loose customer interest. It stimulated â€Å"engagement† with the famous free quote campaign called the â€Å"fifteen minute challenge. † It also used different approaches to present the product from celebrities, to cavemen and geckos (Gerzema amp; Lebar, 2008).When Crocs went public it immediately became even more aggressive with its growth initiatives. Market Downturn Forces Change The stock reached its high point in August of 2007 at just over $60 per share, its IPO price was $14. 25. The company began to take on more debt as it continued to build and operate more facilities. The real estate collapse followed by the financial market collapse coincided with the high stock price, which it did most companies, but because Crocs had a huge surplus of inventory and debt the downturn was nearly fatal. They had added a huge amount of infrastructure to meet this demand going forward, said Jeff Mintz, an analyst with Wedbush. Demand fell off, and they had way too much capacity and way too much supply of product. The company swung from a profit of $168. 2 million in fiscal year 2007 to a loss of $185. 1 million last year. In its annual report, Crocs said that an independent auditor expressed concerns about conditions that raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue† [ (Mui, 2009) ]. Its stock price has plummeted 76 percent.The company began to sell off subsidiaries, reduce employees and take other cost cutting measures to combat this downturn. Today the company’s stock has made some small gains, Since inception, CROX has delivered $2. 6 billion in revenue w ith $41 million in cumulative net income and the market has punished the stock accordingly. However, $510 million in year to date revenue, with 9. 5 million units sold in Q3 alone, is compelling evidence of a brand with the potential for staying power. The fact is that the shoes are comfortable and durable, much of the world knows about them and some people like them.Recent sales performance seems to imply that the brand has survived and CROX appears to have another chance to re-build an enduring and profitable business† [ (Big Charts, 2009) ]. In Retrospect There are several additions to the value chain which Crocs could have focused on and invested in which may have lessened the downturn in the market: * Leadership should have put more attention to marketing the product in multiple ways but it seemed to focus on just the supply chain and aggressive growth. This was a good model to follow initially.Value chain leaders are wary of the success trap. Successful chains naturally tend to repeat the strategies that have led to success. Value chain leaders remain vigilant on the performance of the total system; they continue to improve chain metrics and develop capabilities, reinforce shared meanings and shared information, and are prepared to modify the underlying business design when required (OKeefe). * With its huge investment in manufacturing equipment it at times had idle machines. The company was in a solid position to begin to produce products for other companies.It could have also leased some of the machinery to companies who needed products made from the proprietary material. * The company had a very comfortable profit margin. However it never reduced prices as the profit margin grew larger. This could have added to net income as consumers would be more willing to purchase more than one pair of the shoes. * More attention to marketing trends would have predicted the fact that most buyers purchased one pair due not only to cost, but also due to the fa ct that the shoe was extremely durable.Conclusion Crocs future is unclear, but it is taking positive steps to recover from the economic set back. It has changed leadership in a key role, â€Å"Early this year, Crocs’ chief executive Ron Snyder was replaced by John Duerden, who vows to change the company’s marketing strategy [ (Roberts, 2009) ]. The company is investing more in technology. It has contracted with a company which specializes in global branding and will use its website and other measures to sell the product and gather customer information and feedback. The new site is the first of multiple ecommerce sites that Crocs will roll out on the Demandware platform in various international markets over the coming months. The new Crocs. com features a fresh new design to showcase the companys vast product line of casual footwear, along with several drastic improvements that greatly enhance the online experience for customers† [ (Big Charts, 2009) ]. The stock price has shown small, but positive movement as evidenced by the Q3 filings; (CROX 5. 45, -0. 08, -1. 5%) shares soared 29% after the shoemakers quarterly results and forecast, reported late Thursday, topped Wall Streets outlook [ (Big Charts, 2009) ]. The company has a solid infrastructure established and with a focus on a complete value chain, Crocs has an opportunity to once again be an innovative, diversified company.References Big Charts. (2009, November 12). Retrieved from Big Charts: http//www. bigcharts. marketwatch. com Coulter, M. , amp; Robbins, S. P. (2007). Management. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc. Gerzema, J. , amp; Lebar, E. (2008). The Brand Bubble. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Holloway, C. , amp; Lee, H. (2007). Crocs: Revolutionizing and Industrys Supply Chain Model For Competitive Advantage. Stanford: Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Mui, Y. Q. (2009, Jluy Thursay). Once trendy Crocs could be on their last legs. Washington P ost , p. 16. OKeefe, M. (n. d. ). LeaderExcel. com. Retrieved from Leadership Excellence: http://leaderexcel. com Roberts, C. (2009, July 16). 100 million foam clogs later. New York Daily News . The Apparel Global Value Chain. (2009, July 9). Retrieved from Industry Canada: http://www. ic. gc. ca

Understanding of Contemporary Labor Market by Marxist Concept of Exploitation

Understanding of Contemporary Labor Market by Marxist Concept of Exploitation Introduction The labor market is equivalent to any other market. In fact, it is where labor is traded for wages. Inherently, there are assumptions that guide the labor market. For instance, there is a direct correlation between human resource (labor) and income distribution (wages and profits). Hence, different theories have been advanced regarding labor markets.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Understanding of Contemporary Labor Market by Marxist Concept of Exploitation specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Theories developed Marxists tend to advocate for fair distribution of income between the employer and the employee. However, this is rarely the case given that those who receive the highest rewards do so based on merit. Marx theory of rebellion and labor relations encounters considerable criticism although it is not analyzed directly in international research. The theory persistently attracts class theory that is boos ted by uninspiring alternatives presented in sociology (Parkin 119). Marx held the position that proletarian rebellion would take place in first world countries including the United States and European countries. Other theories hold the meritocracy perspective where those who are lowly waged possess the least labor market value. This paper examines the extent at which Marxist concept of exploitation is useful in understanding the contemporary labor market. Marxist ideas Marx presented his audience with two sets of ideologies. The first was the theory of society. The theory explains how the community functions in view of the nature of capitalism. The view is relevant in describing what is happening to the society. Conversely, Marx considered capitalism as extremely unsatisfactory. He sought to have capitalism abolished through violent revolution. He advocated for the establishment of a communist society. The success of his idea would have seen employees have better working conditions with an increase in remuneration. Marx within the framework of ‘factory despotism’ viewed conflict in class between informal employment and white-collar employment.Advertising Looking for essay on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The conflict intimately matches the social confrontation regarding the sharing of rewards and prerogatives of command (Robertson 160). This is particularly the case in industrial situations where even the low status of white-collar personnel is cast in the position of administrative subalterns (Boswell and Dixon 545). Within the context of capitalism presented by the distinctive industrial organizations, the sociological model of class holds the position that recommends capitalism as a substitute of the view constructed around the right of individuals to employment. Few people in the western societies do not support Marx idea of violent revolution. Some thin k that capitalism is desirable. Marx concepts are useful in understanding the community without accommodating Marxists condemnation of capitalism. The advocacy for violent revolution illustrates his opinionated values in respect of politics. Marx ideas are limited to the relations between financial exchanges under circumstances where the right to capital is not rationalized. He viewed capitalism as a means by which individuals earn wealth simply by virtue of holding property. Non-standard work The contemporary labor markets across the globe in the last three decades have been marked by changes in the nature of job. The traditional features of the nature of work include its open-ended nature. In fact, the temporal specificity in the nature of work does not apply to the wide range of workers. According to the view expressed by Marx, workers in capitalist economies are no longer regarded as contributing sufficiently to their work. Consequently, the employees are either underpaid or giv en more duties to perform at workplace. The form of contemporary employment presents employers with the opportunity to adjust labor usage with respect to the changes in labor requirements. In the wake of the 21st century in the United Kingdom, part-time employees, those in informal employment and impermanent workers comprised of more than 40 percent in comparison with less than 30 percent in the 1980s. Currently, non-standard workers in the United States are estimated to be 30 percent, which is an increase of threefold compared to the 1980s (Cuneo 290).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Understanding of Contemporary Labor Market by Marxist Concept of Exploitation specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Marx and exploitation Many scholars question whether Marx aimed to make any ethical use of the exploitation ideas. In fact, Marx sought to highlight ethical utilization of exploitation but his definition of exploitation failed to render this end. He gave an ethical definition of exploitation that is resistant to a wide range of standard objectiveness. The shortcomings of Marx explanation of exploitation within capitalist organization are less precise to capitalist societies. The post-war expansion of the communal sector has gradually given rise to an increasing range of non-manual groups in government circles and welfare organizations (Cuneo 290). The definition offered by Marx regarding exploitation is typically given in terms of the concept of surplus values. In turn, the concept of surplus value is perceived to depend on the labor concept of value. The concept that the significance of any product is proportional to the quantity of ‘socially necessary’ labor exemplified in it holds with regard to Marxists’ perspective. With respect to the view on the creation of value, there is typically nothing unique about labor. Some scholars such as Robert Nozick argue that the collapse of the l abor concept of value means the collapse of the Marxist theory of exploitation. The exploitation concept from Marx perspective is the disparate exchange of labor for products (Nozick 257). The swap is unequal if the amount of labor involved in the production of commodities that the employee can buy with the income is less than the quantity of labor used to make the income. Rationally, treating the intermediate and lower white-collar employees as part of a governing class implies that the governing groups typically identify themselves with the interest of resources and management as opposed to the interests of planned labor. The treatment of workers in the private sector is easy to accomplish compared to the public sector. Economic sub-structure Marx extended the argument that financial situation is the most essential determinant of all other communal aspects. These include institutions and ideas such as justice systems, schooling and ethics.Advertising Looking for essay on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Such elements fall at the core of the societal ‘super-structure’. In view of contemporary employment, Marx can be regarded as a materialist with strong intuition for material possession, which is a reward for work. He opposed the viewpoint of Hegel that regarded thoughts as the most fundamental verifiers of accounts (Trainer 1). Marx held the position that leading ideologies were the result of materialistic situations. Marx was opposing the restructuring that presented the plan that sheer amendments in thought could transform the humanity. According to Marx, capitalist communities comprise of industrialists who owned and run the productive supplies. The employees only own labor and work for the industrialists. Thus, the industrialists own the goods and sell at a profit. The workers are exploited through meager pay for the work done. Consequently, the workers remain in abject poverty while the capitalists continue to accumulate capital. In the industrialist community, ca pital, equipment, plants and other resource are the essential productive elements. The industrialists exploit the society given that the members of the society do not own the productive factors. It is the different perspective involved in capitalism that drives the workers to view the differences between them and the capitalists as conflict that require violent revolution. In industrialist societies, the industrialists gain the most. They receive a disproportionate share of affluence, authority, advantage and rank. The situation according to Marx serves the interest of the capitalist thus elevating the conflict between the employers and the employees. Marx highlights the need to understand that a majority of the people own some riches including houses and small portions of land. However, this is not capital. A small number of individuals own capital including money and industrial units. The proportion is estimated to be below 2 percent of the global population. Marx’s Predict ions Marx viewed history as the principle that explains the vibrancy of the past. The basic ideology involved is the Hegelian ideology of dialectical development. In this situation, a thesis exists. Another idea develops which opposes the initial idea (antithesis). Eventually, the ideas are determined by a ‘synthesis.’ The resulting thesis becomes the novel thesis. In view of history the class conflict involved in capitalist societies between the capitalists and the employees ends through some kind of revolution. The conflict is determined upon the emergence of a new social order, which eventually stabilizes. This was the case during the early capitalist era. History is hence a fundamental element of material and social relations. The correlations between the type of industrial knowledge in use, the communal correlations and the running of these kinds of production are what determine the characteristics of capitalist communities. These relations move social settings fro m one to another. Marx believed that this recurring cycle would cease at some point. The idea of capitalism and the ideology of the working class will result into a synthesis that will see the attainment of a classless society. This is with respect to the fact that the continuation of class conflict between industrialists and the employees has generated change for centuries, which will have to cease in a classless community. However, this does not mean the end of additional change. Political change may also occur according to Marx. The changes in employment emanating from capitalist perspectives and the idea of exploitation will not end so long as there is conflict of interest. The drivers of production in the industrialist communities include the factory method and rigorous machine knowledge. This mode demands that huge investments of resources be put in factories. The knowledge required demands that the potential employees compete for the limited employment opportunity. Consequent ly, the capitalists will take advantage of the situation to hire knowledge workers at lower wages. This aspect is observable in multinational companies that shift production offshore in countries where skilled workers are paid cheaply. Social correlations of production in industrialist communities is between the ownership of capital and the running of entities attained from the exploitation of communities’ productive resources by the few who invest only if they know that profit will be made. In the contemporary labor market, the concept of exploitation applies where community members are required to sell labor to the industrialists. They have to recognize commands at workplace. The employees consequently have no stake in the manufacturing process above the pay packages (Doogan 70). Marx argued that only labor should earn money. Conversely, Marxists maintain that the resources generated must hardly have the capacity of generating additional funds. This means that Marxists hold the idea that wealthy individuals should not get interested in their investment. The argument is extended from the reasoning that capitalists get more income without participating in the production. Fundamentally, Marxists believe that industrialist profit making is composed of employees. When the industrialist vends goods produced by the employees and gets more for the commodity than originally paid for to produce, the capitalist takes the value created by the employees. The employees’ labor facilitates the creation of value attained from the sale of the product but only get a percentage of the value. This means that the industrialist who runs the production processes exploits the employee. However, the industrialist does not work when creating the commodity. It is this perception that Marxists insist that capitalist should not receive income as interest earned on the investment. Marxists’ disagreement appears to be obvious with respect to the stakeholders hardly hav ing any connection to the production. They only invest capital in the company and consequently generating returns devoid of carrying out the jobs. Marxists urge that it would be desirable to organize the community in a way that every individual owns and runs the productive resources. Additionally, no one should get an income he or she has not worked for during the production process. In the modern labor market, this argument puts capitalists and workers in a collision course. The neo-classical model on the labor market holds a different view on the argument given that it is typically applied in the contemporary labor market. Typically, the neo-classical perspective holds the view that the labor market functions in a way similar to that of the commodity market. The labor offered by the employee in diverse sector is ‘sold’ by the employee and ‘bought’ by the industrialist. The cost of labor is primarily set by the law governing supply and demand. The labor ma rket inherently seeks to establish its own accord and equilibrium (Gomme 18). The principle of neo-classical in the labor market holds that when there is an over-supply of one type of labor say barbers, the wage of such labor significantly falls. This is due to an increase in the competition among workers who offer it. The compensation for labor is driven down when employers pursue their interest characterized by profit maximization. The capitalists enjoy a large pool of potential labor suppliers who offer labor at the lowest prices. Conversely, when there is limited kind of labor such as pilots the potential employees with necessary expertise, competences, familiarity and training have the opportunity to demand for higher price for labor including improved working conditions, enhanced benefits and high remuneration. In this regard, the capitalists compete with each other through offering higher wages to ensure the necessary supply of labor from a considerably small pool of workers. The imbalance between barbers and pilots will be redressed as people attracted by high wages choose to train and acquire experience in flying. Similarly, the excess in barbers will be redressed as the career becomes less attractive due to low wages. A balance between supply and demand will consequently be restored. Marxist model and the surplus value The contemporary labor market is influenced more through the neo-classical perspective than the Marxists’ perspective. Marxists hold the view that the correlation between the ‘value’ created by employees and the respective ‘rewards’ offered for such labor is significantly multifaceted than that advocated by neo-classical theorists. Marxist labor economists hold the position that the true value of labor is never returned to workers in capitalist markets. They insist that employees in the modern labor market are exploited as they receive only a portion of the actual value of their labor. This notion often leads the employees to seek employment that is highly demanding to be able to receive higher reward for the labor offered (Kalleber 482). Conversely, the employers in the industrialist productive systems exploit workers to create ‘surplus value’ for the labor. The surplus within the capitalist labor markets inherently flows to the capitalist instead of the workers. According to Marxist theorists, waged labor is caught in a ‘trap’. The salary is never able to realize the actual value generated. A good example in this situation would be an employee hired to make caps using a cap-making machine. The worker is paid $15 per hour. In every hour, the employee produces 10 caps. The market value for each cap is $7. The capitalist thus pays the worker $15 dollars for work that produces a value of $70. There is a difference of $55. However, the capitalist must deduct overhead costs and supplies. The overheads may be an additional $15 per hour hence leaving the capita list with a whopping $40 per hour of surplus value. In a non-capitalist labor market the worker would have hand-woven his own caps. He would also have owned both the tools (means of production) and the resulting caps (labor products). The complete value of labor could be exchanged for other commodities and services. Unfortunately, according to Marxist perspectives, in a capitalist labor market the worker owns neither the products nor the means of production and materials utilized in producing the commodities. In this context, the worker holds no claim to the surplus value created. In order to reword Marx, the worker only owns his ‘hide’. As such, the worker can only get a ‘hiding’. The worker only owns his labor, which notwithstanding its net value to the capitalist is compensated at a reduced rate than the authentic value it creates. According to Marxists’ view, the greater the ‘value’ a worker can generate from labor the weaker the wor ker develops interest in an industrialist labor market. The additional ‘value’ is fitted as surplus, which nevertheless is not given to the worker. In this regard, the Marxist perspective concerning income distribution hardly follows the differences in ‘human resources’ but the correlation between the worker and the means of production (Wolff 14). Capitalists who have owned the means of production reap the greatest rewards and monetary returns. The employees who have no access to the means of production are forced to sell labor power for remuneration. They are consequently denied the opportunity to secure the true value of their labor. In Marxists’ perspective, the contemporary labor market is unfair besides being highly structured. The current employment platform requires more than investment in human resources to escape from the deprived positions in the labor market. It demands further essential social changes that address the organizational dispa rity in the industrialist labor market (Tilly 14). The urge to accumulate resources according to Marxists is the determinant of what happens in the community. The differences inherent in capitalist societies between the employer and employee are contributed by the urge of the employee to establish own businesses. As a result, many individuals opt to enter into sole-proprietorships to avoid taking orders from employers but create profits to better their lives. When such moves fail to yield, individuals resort to other means of ensuring access to the true value of their labor such as joining unions. There is unending pursuit of profitability not only among employers but also among the employees. The profits realized by capitalists are ploughed back to attain more profits. This creates a never-ending twist of resources accumulation. The quest to accumulate capital leads to inventiveness, social and technological change. The reason why there is a McDonald in every street and increasing manufacturing in Australia is the aforementioned reasons. The changes have come given that the firms are competing with each other to increase profitability. In addition, employees are utilizing innovation to remain relevant to the employer. Knowledge workers are contemporarily required by the contemporary capitalist labor market. It has become essential for any person seeking employment to possess requisite training, skills, knowledge, competence and proficiency (Wolff 115). Conclusion The labor market comprises of a discriminatory playing field. Provided the labor market is allowed to operate without hindrances, the potential employees enter the market with an opportunity that is determined purely by human capital one has to offer. This one determinant influences whether or not an employee will receive considerably high value for the labor they offer. Marx’s theory is currently overtaken by events in the labor market. The trends in the contemporary labor market reflect that there is a significant change of approach regarding the relationship between employers and employees. The employees currently recognize the merit that will present them with the opportunity to receive the rewards in terms of wages that they deserve. The pursuit of relevant education, competences, skills and abilities by prospective employees reflect a change in attitude from Marx’s theory. Boswell, Terry and William Dixon. â€Å"Dependency and Rebellion: A Cross-National Analysis.† American Sociology Review, 55.3 (1990): 540-559. Print. Cuneo, Carl. â€Å"Exploring Exploitation.† Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 15.2 (1978): 284-300. Print. Doogan, Keller. â€Å"Long-Term Employment and the Restructuring of the Labor Market in Europe.† Time and Society, 14.1 (2005): 65-87. Print Gomme, Peter. â€Å"What Labor Market Theory tells us about the ‘New Economy.† Economic Review, 34.3 (1998): 16-24. Print. Kalleber, Alex. â€Å"Orga nizing Flexibility: The Flexible Firm in a New Century.† British Journal of Industrial Relations, 39.4 (2001): 479-504. Print. Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State and Utopia, Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell, 1974: 253-262. Print. Parkin, Frank. Marxism and Class Theory: A Bourgeois Critique in Social Class and Stratification: Classic Statements and Theoretical Debates, Maryland, USA: Rowman Littlefield, 1998: 1-269. Print. Robertson, John. â€Å"Transaction Cost Economics and Cross-National Patterns of Industrial Conflict: A Comparative Institutional Analysis.† American Journal of Political Science, 34.3 (1990): 153-189. Print. Tilly, Catherine. â€Å"Labor Market Inequality, Past and Future: A Perspective from the United States.† Gender Segregation, 2.2 (2006): 13-28. Print. Wolff, Jonathan. â€Å"Marx and Exploitation.† Journal of Ethics, 3.2 (1999): 109-120. Print.

Being Apple Steve Jobs Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Being Apple Steve Jobs - Essay Example Though Jobs did not express command-and-control leadership style, though he is known to have been quite abrasive, he does take accountability for Apple’s success by modelling his behaviours against very high standards and then visibly trying to live up to them. Charismatic attitude and inspiration for the rest of the organisational culture is where Jobs maintains transformational leadership style. This style is about building a harmonious, dedicated organisation through ethical behaviours and social charisma. By establishing Apple’s vision to be revolutionary and innovative, he uses his personality as a means to gain support and dedication to achieving greatness for the company. His rock star-modelled speeches at Apple conventions is another aspect of his transformational leadership style that defies the norms of business and puts the company as a leader in change management. Jobs’ leadership style can be analysed using many different leadership templates, such a s change management, innovation management, and many other qualitative tools associated with management theory. Jobs is a people-centred individual when it comes to their autonomous roles at Apple, thus empowering individuals through transformational interactions. Jobs also utilises the public relations word-of-mouth about Apple values, vision and principles as a means to measure his leadership style as a benchmark against other companies that follow these same leadership standards. His transformational leadership style is evident in nearly all of his values and beliefs and how he goes about representing them in all of his interactions with subordinate employees and peers. He even looks to the external markets for opinion and better labour to ensure that the company is equipped to handle ongoing change, another factor that drives transformational style. Jobs should be considered a benchmark for transformational style by other company leaders. Jobs and culture His style can be compar ed to other companies that have more rigid, centralized hierarchies of control where information is disseminated from the top layers without much employee feedback or innovation involvement. Steve Jobs’ leadership style transcends the normal business structure which builds a better organisational culture. Even though he provides an informal and innovative-minded environment to empower his managers and employees, he still maintains strict standards by which employees must live up to. They are either rewarded for their successes or punished (a transactional approach) if they fail to meet his performance standards. This is somewhat duplicitous, a blend of transformational and transactional leadership that is contingent on success. The freedoms he provides, such as casual dress and environments where free movement is tolerated, build more dedication and loyalty to meeting performance and innovation goals. Jobs is able to build a positive organisational culture by taking personal accountability for actions and then applying these same standards to everyone else. Jobs, himself, recognises that his standards include firing individuals who do not meet up to Apple performance obligations, however humanely. This shows that even though individuals experience these considerable