Using the Internet read at least 2 articles each on Transactional Vs Transformational Leadership. Summarize the articles in 300 words or more.

Provide appropriate reference.

Does Nestle business units/divisions trade or exchange resources? Why? How?

NETWORKING: A KEY TO SUCCESSFUL TEAMWORK

a. Consider the different teams. How do the teams manage their team boundaries? What are the trade-offs between internal cohesion and external ties within each type of team? Support your discussion with at least two (2) external sources.

B. Consider the list of common roles for team members which of these roles do you think you play in your own team or group? Why?

need answer in 400 words.please provide references also

What has been the financial impact of the transportation industry at an industrial and organizational level?

"

This report is primarily intended to analyze and present the potential financial success and profitability of Zivago Private Limited, an online media portal which is proposed to be launched in the local market in Singapore. The content of the report mainly highlights the following points: A brief description of the services to be provided by the company, identification of the target consumer group, the proposed marketing and advertising strategies based on an overall market research covering the prominent global and local competitors and the potential revenue model that will be implemented following the same.

Zivago has been conceived to be a comprehensive online medial portal where viewers can watch their favourite commercial shows, movies, documentaries, live features covering a wide range of categories such as drama, comedy, suspense/myestery, sports, news and journalism and much more. Aside from the popular local shows and movies, the portal also contains various programmes from almost over 25 countries in different languages and substitles. Additionally, Zivago also features original shows in all these languages that are produced exclusively by Zivago and presenting popular actors/actresses from the local media insustry.

Based on a private and other government conducted market and consumer studies in Singapore, it has been estimated that more than half of the consumers in the media industry is increasingly preferring online videos and private streaming. In this regard, viewership is not only limited to only popular local shows but majorly include foreign ones as well. However, in this regard, only few portals have been able to access the international entertainment arena and although few have, they are not able to cater to the ethnically diversed population group in the country which includes native Chinese Singaporean, Malay, Bangaladeshi, Indian and various Middle Eastern. As an example, VIU an Starhubs predominantly feature some of the popular Japanese and Chinese drama based shows but not much services considering the diversed population group. The main impediments in this case are lack of penetration into the international media market and language barrier. Zivago is intended to address both the issues and in the process generate higher viewership.

Secondly, the studies indicate that the OTT viewership in Singapore has steadily increased among children and young adults and the most popular genres include drama, movies, sports, animation/cartoons and other entertainment and variety. In this context, Zivago specifically targets the children audiences and sports viewers by streaming various South Asian animation and cartoon shows and popular global sport events such as NFL,NBA,American Football etc. Such services are very much limited and expensive both by local and global competitors.

As internet and social media is gaining ever increasing prominence in Singapore, the company is looking to rely on digital marketing for marketing and promotional services. The studies reveal that Youtube, Facebook and Instagram users in Singapore are highest among the OTT viewers in Southeast Asia. Zivago mainly relies on online advertising and e-marketing through these social media and online platforms which features the most popular shows and promos and a brief description of the membership details. Zivago also conducts various promotional activities in local shopping malls and popular commercial centres across the city which will be featured at the official Facebook and Youtube page. A one minute promo of all the popular shows and movies will be displayed in the official Youtube page and Zivago online app which can be downloaded for free in both Playstore and IOS.

Zivago follows Subscription Revenue Model under E-commerce Revenue Model System. Unlike most other local and global counterparts including Zulu and Netflix, Zivago offers a free viewing of all its original shows for one week in the app as well in its Youtube and Facebook page, All the trailers and initial promos will also be available in app, Youtube and Facebook. The viewers can choose if they would like to continue watching further and subcribe.Under the subscription model, a free one month trial period is provided to potential viewers where they can watch unlimited shows (both original and local/global), movies and all other available contents. Following the expiration of the trial period, 3 subscription options will be provided based on monthly, 6 moths and yearly basis at reasonale pricing that are evidently less than some of the popular portals such as Netflix, VIU, HULU and Starhubs."

Based on the report, answer the question mentioned below:

The Strategy: From your channel description, do the following:

(i) Develop the programming strategies you used. Cite at least THREE (3) programming strategies and explain why you used them

(ii) Formulate your promotional strategy. How will you make your channel known?

Include at least THREE (3) traditional and new media strategies.
(iii) Evaluate the possible risks of such a service. Explain how you can effectively mitigate these risks.

Choose a concept or theory from the reading this week and respond to the following:

The Concept is :Social Media and Personal Identity

1. Why did you choose this theory or concept? What is the theory or concept important to you?

2. How does this theory or concept relate to your idea of communication competence?

3. Reflect on any aspect of this theory you find interesting or relevant to your relationships.

In your response, please include an explanation of the theory or concept with a citation. Your response should be a at minimum 2 pages.

how we can make sure that the evaluation of training have achieve the desired results

What can be done to motivate companies to evaluate training programs

Please provide the answer for the question of LA Fitness from external resources (the internet).

Is LA Fitness's approach a suitable response to low-cost competitors? What should they do differently according to the consultants A.T. Kearney?

With these topics "Choosing Innovation Projects" and "Collaboration Strategies" and answer the following questions:

1. Why might a firm want to consider quantitative and qualitative assessments of a project? Can you cite and example?
NOTE: Please cite it also give an example.

2. When, in the course of establishing a strategic firm's direction, would you consider going Solo- as opposed to a collaborative effort? Can you Do both?

You are a companies' sales representative the company is an exotic rental car company in south florida called VIP rental exotic car write a 3 page sales presentation essay incoporating these steps

1. Introduction and Your Companies' history and background

2. Purpose of the presentation

3. Product/service information and knowledge

4. Features and Benefits ---- plus pricing and terms of sales

5. Solutions and challenges the product/service can help with and or eliminate

6. Actions: special deals, offers, terms, how the client can order the product/service

7. Follow up and services provided

List the eight components of the strategy execution process and one that you consider to be the most important. Explain why it is important? Research real world examples to support position. Must be at least 300 words.

please provide 3-5 questions with answers from the article below

Since the early days of Google, people throughout the company have ques- tioned the value of managers. That skepticism stems from a highly techno- cratic culture. As one software engineer, Eric Flatt, puts it, “We are a company built by engi- neers for engineers.” And most engineers, not just those at Google, want to spend their time designing and debugging, not communicating with bosses or supervising other workers’ progress. In their hearts they’ve long believed that management is more de- structive than beneficial, a distraction from “real work” and tangible, goal-directed tasks.

A few years into the company’s life, found- ers Larry Page and Sergey Brin actually wondered whether Google needed any managers at all. In 2002 they experimented with a completely flat organiza- tion, eliminating engineering managers in an effort to break down barriers to rapid idea development and to replicate the collegial environment they’d enjoyed in graduate school. That experiment lasted only a few months: They relented when too many people went directly to Page with questions about

expense reports, interpersonal conflicts, and other nitty-gritty issues. And as the company grew, the founders soon realized that managers contributed in many other, important ways—for instance, by com- municating strategy, helping employees prioritize projects, facilitating collaboration, supporting career development, and ensuring that processes and sys- tems aligned with company goals.

Google now has some layers but not as many as you might expect in an organization with more than 37,000 employees: just 5,000 managers, 1,000 direc- tors, and 100 vice presidents. It’s not uncommon to find engineering managers with 30 direct reports. Flatt says that’s by design, to prevent micromanag- ing. “There is only so much you can meddle when you have 30 people on your team, so you have to fo- cus on creating the best environment for engineers to make things happen,” he notes. Google gives its rank and file room to make decisions and innovate. Along with that freedom comes a greater respect for techni- cal expertise, skillful problem solving, and good ideas than for titles and formal authority. Given the overall indifference to pecking order, anyone making a case

for change at the company needs to provide compel- ling logic and rich supporting data. Seldom do em- ployees accept top-down directives without question.

Google downplays hierarchy and emphasizes the power of the individual in its recruitment efforts, as well, to achieve the right cultural fit. Using a rigor- ous, data-driven hiring process, the company goes to great lengths to attract young, ambitious self- starters and original thinkers. It screens candidates’ re?sume?s for markers that indicate potential to excel there—especially general cognitive ability. People who make that first cut are then carefully assessed for initiative, flexibility, collaborative spirit, evi- dence of being well-rounded, and other factors that make a candidate “Googley.”

So here’s the challenge Google faced: If your highly skilled, handpicked hires don’t value manage- ment, how can you run the place effectively? How do you turn doubters into believers, persuading them to spend time managing others? As it turns out, by applying the same analytical rigor and tools that you used to hire them in the first place—and that they set such store by in their own work. You use data to test your assumptions about management’s merits and then make your case.

Analyzing the Soft Stuff

To understand how Google set out to prove man- agers’ worth, let’s go back to 2006, when Page and Brin brought in Laszlo Bock to head up the human resources function—appropriately called people operations, or people ops. From the start, people ops managed performance reviews, which included annual 360-degree assessments. It also helped con- duct and interpret the Googlegeist employee survey on career development goals, perks, benefits, and company culture. A year later, with that foundation in place, Bock hired Prasad Setty from Capital One to lead a people analytics group. He challenged Setty to approach HR with the same empirical discipline Google applied to its business operations.

Setty took him at his word, recruiting several PhDs with serious research chops. This new team was committed to leading organizational change.

“I didn’t want our group to be simply a reporting house,” Setty recalls. “Organizations can get bogged down in all that data. Instead, I wanted us to be hypothesis-driven and help solve company prob- lems and questions with data.”

People analytics then pulled together a small team to tackle issues relating to employee well-being and productivity. In early 2009 it presented its ini- tial set of research questions to Setty. One question stood out, because it had come up again and again since the company’s founding: Do managers matter?

To find the answer, Google launched Project Oxygen, a multiyear research initiative. It has since grown into a comprehensive program that measures key management behaviors and cultivates them through communication and training. By November 2012, employees had widely adopted the program— and the company had shown statistically significant improvements in multiple areas of managerial effec- tiveness and performance.

Google is one of several companies that are ap- plying analytics in new ways. Until recently, organi- zations used data-driven decision making mainly in product development, marketing, and pricing. But these days, Google, Procter & Gamble, Harrah’s, and others take that same approach in addressing human resources needs. (See “Competing on Talent Analyt- ics,” by Thomas H. Davenport, Jeanne Harris, and Jeremy Shapiro, HBR October 2010.)

Unfortunately, scholars haven’t done enough to help these organizations understand and improve day-to-day management practice. Compared with leadership, managing remains understudied and undertaught—largely because it’s so difficult to describe, precisely and concretely, what managers actually do. We often say that they get things done through other people, yet we don’t usually spell out how in any detail. Project Oxygen, in contrast, was designed to offer granular, hands-on guidance. It didn’t just identify desirable management traits in the abstract; it pinpointed specific, measurable be- haviors that brought those traits to life.

That’s why Google employees let go of their skep- ticism and got with the program. Project Oxygen mir- rored their decision-making criteria, respected their need for rigorous analysis, and made it a priority to measure impact. Data-driven cultures, Google dis- covered, respond well to data-driven change.

please provide 3-5 questions with answers from the following article below.

Strategy and culture are among the primary levers at top leaders’ disposal in their never-ending quest to maintain organizational viability and effectiveness. Strategy offers a formal logic for the company’s goals and orients people around them. Culture expresses goals through values and beliefs and guides activity through shared assumptions and group norms.

Strategy provides clarity and focus for collective action and decision making. It relies on plans and sets of choices to mobilize people and can often be enforced by both concrete rewards for achieving goals and consequences for failing to do so. Ideally, it also incorporates adaptive elements that can scan and analyze the external environment and sense when changes are required to maintain continuity and growth. Leadership goes hand-in-hand with strategy formation, and most leaders understand the fundamentals. Culture, however, is a more elusive lever, because much of it is anchored in unspoken behaviors, mindsets, and social patterns.

For better and worse, culture and leadership are inextricably linked. Founders and influential leaders often set new cultures in motion and imprint values and assumptions that persist for decades. Over time an organization’s leaders can also shape culture, through both conscious and unconscious actions (sometimes with unintended consequences). The best leaders we have observed are fully aware of the multiple cultures within which they are embedded, can sense when change is required, and can deftly influence the process.

Unfortunately, in our experience it is far more common for leaders seeking to build high-performing organizations to be confounded by culture. Indeed, many either let it go unmanaged or relegate it to the HR function, where it becomes a secondary concern for the business. They may lay out detailed, thoughtful plans for strategy and execution, but because they don’t understand culture’s power and dynamics, their plans go off the rails. As someone once said, culture eats strategy for breakfast.

It doesn’t have to be that way. Our work suggests that culture can, in fact, be managed. The first and most important step leaders can take to maximize its value and minimize its risks is to become fully aware of how it works. By integrating findings from more than 100 of the most commonly used social and behavioral models, we have identified eight styles that distinguish a culture and can be measured. (We gratefully acknowledge the rich history of cultural studies—going all the way back to the earliest explorations of human nature—on which our work builds.) Using this framework, leaders can model the impact of culture on their business and assess its alignment with strategy. We also suggest how culture can help them achieve change and build organizations that thrive in even the most trying times.

Defining Culture

Culture is the tacit social order of an organization: It shapes attitudes and behaviors in wide-ranging and durable ways. Cultural norms define what is encouraged, discouraged, accepted, or rejected within a group. When properly aligned with personal values, drives, and needs, culture can unleash tremendous amounts of energy toward a shared purpose and foster an organization’s capacity to thrive.

Culture can also evolve flexibly and autonomously in response to changing opportunities and demands. Whereas strategy is typically determined by the C-suite, culture can fluidly blend the intentions of top leaders with the knowledge and experiences of frontline employees.

The academic literature on the subject is vast. Our review of it revealed many formal definitions of organizational culture and a variety of models and methods for assessing it. Numerous processes exist for creating and changing it. Agreement on specifics is sparse across these definitions, models, and methods, but through a synthesis of seminal work by Edgar Schein, Shalom Schwartz, Geert Hofstede, and other leading scholars, we have identified four generally accepted attributes:

Shared.

Culture is a group phenomenon. It cannot exist solely within a single person, nor is it simply the average of individual characteristics. It resides in shared behaviors, values, and assumptions and is most commonly experienced through the norms and expectations of a group—that is, the unwritten rules.

Pervasive.

Culture permeates multiple levels and applies very broadly in an organization; sometimes it is even conflated with the organization itself. It is manifest in collective behaviors, physical environments, group rituals, visible symbols, stories, and legends. Other aspects of culture are unseen, such as mindsets, motivations, unspoken assumptions, and what David Rooke and William Torbert refer to as “action logics” (mental models of how to interpret and respond to the world around you).

Enduring.

Culture can direct the thoughts and actions of group members over the long term. It develops through critical events in the collective life and learning of a group. Its endurance is explained in part by the attraction-selection-attrition model first introduced by Benjamin Schneider: People are drawn to organizations with characteristics similar to their own; organizations are more likely to select individuals who seem to “fit in”; and over time those who don’t fit in tend to leave. Thus culture becomes a self-reinforcing social pattern that grows increasingly resistant to change and outside influences.

Implicit.

An important and often overlooked aspect of culture is that despite its subliminal nature, people are effectively hardwired to recognize and respond to it instinctively. It acts as a kind of silent language. Shalom Schwartz and E.O. Wilson have shown through their research how evolutionary processes shaped human capacity; because the ability to sense and respond to culture is universal, certain themes should be expected to recur across the many models, definitions, and studies in the field. That is exactly what we have discovered in our research over the past few decades.

Eight Distinct Culture Styles

Our review of the literature for commonalities and central concepts revealed two primary dimensions that apply regardless of organization type, size, industry, or geography: people interactions and response to change. Understanding a company’s culture requires determining where it falls along these two dimensions.

People interactions.

An organization’s orientation toward people interactions and coordination will fall on a spectrum from highly independent to highly interdependent. Cultures that lean toward the former place greater value on autonomy, individual action, and competition. Those that lean toward the latter emphasize integration, managing relationships, and coordinating group effort. People in such cultures tend to collaborate and to see success through the lens of the group.

Response to change.

Whereas some cultures emphasize stability—prioritizing consistency, predictability, and maintenance of the status quo—others emphasize flexibility, adaptability, and receptiveness to change. Those that favor stability tend to follow rules, use control structures such as seniority-based staffing, reinforce hierarchy, and strive for efficiency. Those that favor flexibility tend to prioritize innovation, openness, diversity, and a longer-term orientation. (Kim Cameron, Robert Quinn, and Robert Ernest are among the researchers who employ similar dimensions in their culture frameworks.)

By applying this fundamental insight about the dimensions of people interactions and response to change, we have identified eight styles that apply to both organizational cultures and individual leaders. Researchers at Spencer Stuart (including two of this article’s authors) have interdependently studied and refined this list of styles across both levels over the past two decades.

Caring focuses on relationships and mutual trust. Work environments are warm, collaborative, and welcoming places where people help and support one another. Employees are united by loyalty; leaders emphasize sincerity, teamwork, and positive relationships.

Purpose is exemplified by idealism and altruism. Work environments are tolerant, compassionate places where people try to do good for the long-term future of the world. Employees are united by a focus on sustainability and global communities; leaders emphasize shared ideals and contributing to a greater cause.

Learning is characterized by exploration, expansiveness, and creativity. Work environments are inventive and open-minded places where people spark new ideas and explore alternatives. Employees are united by curiosity; leaders emphasize innovation, knowledge, and adventure.

Enjoyment is expressed through fun and excitement. Work environments are lighthearted places where people tend to do what makes them happy. Employees are united by playfulness and stimulation; leaders emphasize spontaneity and a sense of humor.

Results is characterized by achievement and winning. Work environments are outcome-oriented and merit-based places where people aspire to achieve top performance. Employees are united by a drive for capability and success; leaders emphasize goal accomplishment.

Authority is defined by strength, decisiveness, and boldness. Work environments are competitive places where people strive to gain personal advantage. Employees are united by strong control; leaders emphasize confidence and dominance.

Safety is defined by planning, caution, and preparedness. Work environments are predictable places where people are risk-conscious and think things through carefully. Employees are united by a desire to feel protected and anticipate change; leaders emphasize being realistic and planning ahead.

Order is focused on respect, structure, and shared norms. Work environments are methodical places where people tend to play by the rules and want to fit in. Employees are united by cooperation; leaders emphasize shared procedures and time-honored customs.

These eight styles fit into our integrated culture framework according to the degree to which they reflect independence or interdependence (people interactions) and flexibility or stability (response to change). Styles that are adjacent in the framework, such as safety and order, frequently coexist within organizations and their people. In contrast, styles that are located across from each other, such as safety and learning,are less likely to be found together and require more organizational energy to maintain simultaneously. Each style has advantages and disadvantages, and no style is inherently better than another. An organizational culture can be defined by the absolute and relative strengths of each of the eight and by the degree of employee agreement about which styles characterize the organization. A powerful feature of this framework, which differentiates it from other models, is that it can also be used to define individuals’ styles and the values of leaders and employees.

The text discussed a distinct difference in leadership and management. Recall the people in your life who were in charge, e.g. coaches, captains, club presidents, teachers, and employers. Identify one who was a good manager but not a good leader, and one who was a good leader but not a good manager. Write an essay comparing and contrasting these two individuals.

To ensure immediate feedback, please submit a response between 100 and 1000 words. Essay length alone will not necessarily result in a high or low score.

Joanne is a sales clerk for SaveCo, a retail store employing 14 full-time and 4 part-time employees in Tupleo, MS. She is frequently 10-15 minutes late for her shift on several days per week when she attends Mass at St James Catholic Church across town. On the other hand, Yusef, a newly hired clerk who is Muslim, is not disciplined by the supervisor, Donald, for frequently arriving 10 minutes late for his shift even though Donald knows it is due to his attendance at morning prayer at the local Mosque. On the other hand Donald has disciplined Joanne for her tardiness, despite her being his neice. Donald usually fills in for Yusef at his cash register until he arrives. Donald's explanation is that we should all be more understanding and supportive of Yusef's situation as a member of a minority community. However, Donald expects all other employees to be punctual. Donald explains that sometimes work rules need to be bent for some employees to show that the company has respect for diverse religious views.
Joanne stops going to mass during the week as a result of her written adverse performance counseling statements and docked pay. However, her perceived injustice weighs heavy on her, and seven months later she files a Title VII complaint over what she sees as different treatment in her workplace based on her religion,

Multiple Attempts Not allowed. This test can only be taken once. Force Completion This test can be saved and resumed later.

Question 1

Is SaveCo a covered employer under Title VII?

A. Yes

B. No

2 points

Question 2

If Joanne is to file her complaint in a timely manner, how many days does she have?

A. 365 days

B. 300 days

C. 180 days

D. 20 weeks

2 points

Question 3

Was Joanne's complaint filed in a timely manner, and what will happen next?

A. She did file in a timely manner and the EEOC is likely to conclude reasonable cause.

B. She did file in a timely manner and the EEOC is likely to conclude no cause.

C. She did not file in a timely manner and the EEOC is likely to conclude no cause.

D. She did not file in a timely manner and the EEOC is likely to administratively close her case.

2 points

Question 4

What is the next stage in the seven-step method to which Joanne's complaint is likely to advance .

A. Is the employee covered (some employees may be exempted)?

B. Applying the criteria for prima facie case.

C. Evaluate the employer's rebuttal.

D. Nowhere. Analysis stops once a step fails.

Question 5

Regardless of your previous answers, is Joanne a covered employee under the statute (Title VII)?

A. Yes
B. No