Use of computers in training.

The need to be appreciated for the work they do may be reflected in the prestige attached to their job, and while the need for a variety in the workplace may be satisfied by an interesting job.

A factor, which effects motivation, is that every individual has different needs. For example an employee may prefer to work on his or her own than in a friendly team. In order to have good motivation employees needs have to be found. This is shown in how lack of motivation equals reduced effort and lack of commitment.

An example of how employee´s needs could be satisfied is through involving them in discussions so that they feel recognised and wanted. A business could also set up discussions with management about goals and working practises which would make employees feel their opion counts and also that their contribution is valuable. In the long term this may result in the employee being willing to work longer hours or take responsibility.

In 1954 Abraham Maslow identified five classes of needs these included physiological needs, safety needs, love and belonging, esteem needs and self-actualisation. The needs, which Maslow identified at the bottom of the pyramid, are based on basic needs concerned with survival, and these must be satisfied before a person can go to the next level. For example some people may be more concerned with basic needs such as food, than anything else. Although it must be noted that once each need has been satisfied the ones below become less important, with exception to self-actualisation at the top, Maslow argued that although everybody is capable, very few actually reach this level.

Elton Mayo conducted some experiments in Hawthorne Chicago in 1927-32 and found that better lighting equalled high productivity. He set up to groups of workers; these included a test group and also a control group. When he turned up the lights in-group one, but not in the other productivity rose in both groups. While in further experiments he reduced the lighting to its original level and turned the lighting up in the other group productivity still rose in both groups. The reason for this was that both groups were being consulted and workers developed cohesiveremess as a social group. This was mainly due to workers sensing belonging and the un-weighed desire for higher pay and the need for many to reach productivity targets.

An example of these ideas being used in business today is the Volvo plant in Uddevalla, opened in 1989, was designed to allow workers to work in teams of 8-10. Each team built a complete car and made decisions about production. It was found that the absenteeism rates at the Uddevalla averaged 8 per cent, compared to 25 per cent in their Gothenburg plant, which used a production line system.

At this present time I go to work just in order to earn money to buy goods, but this will change in the future when I leave home. This mostly due to my mum providing food, clothing and other essential survival items. I do get job satisfaction from talking to customer and this leads make to continue talking to them even when I finish work, another factor which helps me become motivated to work is having a good boss, who allows flexibility. Which is vitally needed because of the time it now takes to get to work after college, he also allows advances on the grounds that I do back calls if I finish early.

Also when I used to work as a collector for another company I used to receive 10% of what ever I collected, this was around 40p per door on monthly rounds and 20p per house on fortnightly rounds, and there was also productivity bonuses. This also meant that it was not just the company losing out but also you.

In order for people to know how to motivate themselves towards their target they have to decide on these 3 things:

. Decide on the result you want to achieve

2. Take action towards that result

3. Measure what the action is producing and change your approach if needed.

Have found that I when I go to work I fall into both theories x and y categories this is because allow I am motivated to work to earn money, I enjoy work. I do not fall into the theory x category in all matters low this is because I take responsibility and have ambition. This is shown in how my first job I earned £1.50 an hour, and now earn £5 an hour. The factor which helped get the collecting job was that I was motivated enough to work in snow or atrious weather. I show responsibility by keeping all books right and deducting accordingly.

Theory x is mainly based around punishment i.e. threats, allow one downside of threats is that they only work if the employee believes they will actually carry them out.

Theory x is mainly used for people lower down in the chain i.e. shop floor workers while theory y is mainly used with managerial staff.

In the Independent a banker´s union wrote, the lower down the ladder you are, the less control you have over your work environment.

Improving Productivity in the Workplace

Finance

Finance is a) the management of money, and b) money resources. All businesses need short-term finance from the very beginning to start up the business and to cover day-to-day running costs. This provides the business with working capital. However businesses also need long-term capital to help them to grow and expand, and this is paid back over a number of years. Without finance a business would find it difficult to accomplish anything, for example someone who decided to start up a shop would need finance at first to just buy the shop and the stock. Even a window cleaner would need finance to buy equipment such as ladders and buckets. But this can be taken onto a larger scale, as all businesses need finance at some point.

Sources of finance can be both internal and external. Some external sources of finance are:

· Borrowing money from family or friends without paying interest.

· A loan from a bank or a building society, an agreed amount is borrowed and repaid over a fixed period of time with interest.

· An overdraft. (A predetermined credit limit which needs to be paid back within a certain amount of time)

The best sources of finance for my business would probably be a combination of savings, a loan, and an overdraft.

· Savings are a good way to start a business as you are under no obligation to pay anything back to anyone. However, the amount you can put into the business is limited by the amount of money you have saved up, so other sources of finance are usually needed to back this up.

· A loan is a good way of obtaining finance, providing you can write up a suitable business plan to get a loan from the bank. However loans do have to be paid back with added interest, which can add up to quite a large amount.

· An overdraft can be a good way of achieving some extra pre-agreed money from a bank, for example if you over-spent slightly you'd still be able to keep afloat until you were able to obtain some more money. However this needs to be paid back within a given amount of time, for example a month, Over drafts are usually paid off when you next receive some income, which for most people is approximately every month.

I am going to get a loan of £25,000 to begin my business, from the bank Nat West, which I will pay back over a period of five years. I am going to combine this with savings of approximately £10,000, which should be enough to get my business up and running for the first year. After the first year the profits that I should make will go into running the business for my second year of business. I will pay the loan back at a rate of 5.7%, which will mean I'm eventually repaying just over £32,000, at a cost of about £6500 per year, or £535 per month.

Ethics in Business

From a business perspective, working under government contracts can be a very lucrative proposition. In general, a stream of orders keep coming in, revenue increases and the company grows in the aggregate. The obvious downfalls to working in this manner is both higher quality expected as well as the extensive research and documentation required for government contracts. If a part fails to perform correctly it can cause minor glitches as well as problems that can carry serious repercussions, such as in the National Semiconductor case. When both the culpable component and company are found, the question arises of how extensive these repercussions should be. Is the company as an entity liable or do you look into individual employees within that company? From an ethical perspective one would have to look at the mitigating factors of both the employees and their superiors along with the role of others in the failure of these components. Next you would have to analyze the final ruling from a corporate perspective and then we must examine the macro issue of corporate responsibility in order to attempt to find a resolution for cases like these. The first mitigating factor involved in the National Semiconductor case is the uncertainty, on the part of the employees, on the duties that they were assigned. It is plausible that during the testing procedure, an employee couldnt distinguish which parts they were to test under government standards and commercial standards. In some cases they might have even been misinformed on the final consumers of the products that they tested. In fact, ignorance on the part of the employees would fully excuse them from any moral responsibility for any damage that may result from their work. Whether it is decided that an employees is fully excused, or is given some moral responsibility, would have to be looked at on an individual basis. The second mitigating factor is the duress or threats that an employee might suffer if they do not follow through with their assignment. After the bogus testing was completed in the National Semiconductor labs, the documentation department also had to falsify documents stating that the parts had surpassed the governmental testing standards. From a legal and ethical standpoint, both the testers and the writers of the reports were merely acting as agents on direct orders from a superior. This was also the case when the plant in Singapore refused to falsify the documents and were later falsified by the employees at the have California plant before being submitted to the approval committees (Velazquez, 53). The writers of the reports were well aware of the situation yet they acted in this manner on the instruction of a supervisor. Acting in an ethical manner becomes a secondary priority in this type of environment. As stated by Alan Reder, . . . if they [the employees] feel they will suffer retribution, if they report a problem, they arent too likely to open their mouths. (113). The workers knew that if the reports were not falsified they would come under questioning and perhaps their employment would go into jeopardy. Although working under these conditions does not fully excuse an employees from moral fault, it does start the divulging process for determining the order of the chain of command of superiors and it helps to narrow down the person or department that issued the original request for the unethical acts. The third mitigating factor is one that perhaps encompasses the majority of the employees in the National Semiconductor case. We have to balance the direct involvement that each employee had with the defective parts. Thus, it has to be made clear that many of the employees did not have a direct duty with the testing departments or with the parts that eventually failed. Even employees, or sub-contractors, that were directly involved with the production were not aware of the incompetence on the part of the testing department. For example, the electrical engineer that designed the defective computer chip could act in good faith that it would be tested to ensure that it did indeed meet the required government endurance tests. Also, for the employees that handled the part after the testing process, they were dealing with what they believed to be a component that met every governmental standard. If it was not tested properly, and did eventually fail, isnt the testing department more morally responsible than the designer or the assembly line worker that was in charge of installing the chip? Plus, in large corporations there may be several testing departments and is some cases one may be held more responsible than another depending on their involvement. A process like this can serve the dual purpose of finding irresponsible employees as well as those that are morally excused. The fourth mitigating factor in cases of this nature is the gauging of the seriousness of the fault or error caused by this product. Since National Semiconductor was repeatedly being reinstated to the listed of approved government contractors, one can safely assume that the level of seriousness, in the opinion of For the contractor approval committees, is not of monumental importance. Yet one has to wonder how this case would have been different if the lack of testing did cause the loss of life in either a domestic or foreign military setting. Perhaps the repercussions would have come faster much more stringent. The fact that National Semiconductor did not cause a death does not make them a safe company. They are still to be held responsible for any errors that their products cause, no matter the magnitude. As for the opposition to the delegating of moral responsibility, mitigating factors and excusing factors, they would argue that the entity of the corporation as a whole should be held responsible. The executives within a corporation should not be forced to bring out all of the employees responsible into a public forum. A company should be reprimanded and be left alone to carry out its own internal investigation and repercussions. From a business law perspective this is the ideal case since a corporation is defined as being a separate legal entity. Furthermore, the opposition would argue that this resolution would benefit both the company and the government since it would not inconvenience either party. The original resolution in the National Semiconductor case was along these lines. The government permanently removed National from its approved contractors list and then National set out to untangle the web of culpability within its own confines. This allowed a relatively quick resolution as well as the ideal scenario for National Semiconductor. In response, one could argue that the entity of a corporation has no morals or even a concept of the word, it is only as moral and ethical as the employees that work in that entity. All of the employees, including top ranking executives are working towards advancing the entity known as their corporation (Capitman, 117). All employees, including the sub-contractors and assembly line workers, are in some part morally responsible because they should have been clear on their employment duties and they all should have been aware of which parts were intended for government use. Ambiguity is not an excusing factor of moral responsibility for the workers. Also, the fact that some employees failed to act in an ethical manner gives even more moral responsibility to that employee. While some are definitely more morally responsible than others, every employee has some burden of weight in this case. In fact, when the government reached a final resolution, they decided to further impose repercussions and certain employees of National Semiconductor were banned from future work in any government office (Velazquez, 54). Looking at the case from the standpoint of National Semiconductor, the outcome was favorable considering the alternate steps that the government could taken. As explained before, it is ideal for a company to be able to conduct its own investigation as well as its own punishments. After all, it would be best for a company to determine what specific departments are responsible rather than having a court of law impose a burden on every employee in its corporation. Yet, since there are ethical issues of dishonesty and secrecy involved, National Semiconductor should have conducted a thorough analysis of their employees as well as their own practices. It is through efforts like these that a corporation can raise the ethical standard of everyone in their organization. This case brings into light the whole issue of corporate responsibility. The two sides that must ultimately be balanced are the self interests of the company, with main goal of maximum profit, and the impacts that a corporation can cause on society (Sawyer, 78). To further strengthen this need, one could argue that there are very few business decisions that do not affect society in way or another. In fact, with the plethora of corporations, society is being affected on various fronts; everything from water contamination to air bag safety is a concern. The biggest problem that all of us must contend with is that every decision that a business makes is gauged by the financial responsibility to their corporation instead of their social responsibility to the local community, and in some cases, the international community. This was pointed out on various occasions as the main reason why National Semiconductor falsified their reports. The cost that the full tests would incur did not outweigh their profit margins. Their business sense lead them to do what all companies want . . . maximum profit. In the opinion of the executives, they were acting in a sensible manner. After all, no executive wants to think of themselves as morally irresponsible. (Capitman, 118). The question that naturally arises, in debating corporate responsibility, is what types of checks and balances can be employed within a company to ensure that a corporation and all of its agents act in an ethical manner. Taking the example of the National Semiconductor case, one can notice many failures in moral responsibility. National Semiconductor would have to review its employees, particularly the supervisors, for basic ethical values such as honesty. example, ultimately it was the widespread falsification of the testing documentation that caused the downfall of National Semiconductor, not the integrity of their components. In the synopsis of the case it is never mentioned that the employees initiated this idea, it would seem that it was the supervisors that gave the order to falsify the documents. In order to accomplish this, the company executives would have to encourage their employees to voice their concerns in regards to the advancement of the company. Through open communication, a company can resolve a variety of its ethical dilemmas. As for the financial aspects of the corporation, it has to decide whether the long term effects that a reprimand from the government can have outweighs their bottom line. In other words, corporations have to start moving away from the thought of instant profit and start realizing both the long term effects and benefits. These long term benefits can include a stronger sense of ethics in the work force as well as a better overall society. To conclude, I must say that I agree with the use of mitigating factors in determining moral responsibility. A company, as defined by law, is only a name on a piece of paper. The company acts and conducts itself according to the employees that work in that entity. I use the word employee because in ethical thinking there should be no distinction of rank within a company. There are times when executives can be held directly responsible and at the same time, there are cases where employees are acting unethically without the executives knowing. Neither title of executive or employee equates to moral perfection. Therefore, when a company has acted irresponsibly, its employees must be held liable in a proportionate amount. As for the future of ethics in business I would speculate that if employees started to think more in long term benefits and profits, many of the ethical dilemmas that we face today would be greatly reduced. As mentioned before, businesses today uses the measuring stick of profitability. There needs to be a shift to the thinking of total utility for the social community in order to weigh business decisions. Opponents would argue that this is a long term plan that require too many radical changes in the face of business. Also, there is no way that an industry wide standard can be set since there are too many types of corporations. Plus, companies have different needs and every moral rule is subjective according to the type of business that everyone conducts. In response, I would argue that although there are no industry standards that are feasible, it is possible for every company to examine their practices as well as the attitude of their employees. There will be companies that find that they are doing fine with employees that are aware of their moral values. Yet other companies will find that they do have areas that need improvement. It is steps like these that start implementing changes. Once a few companies start to see the benefits of changes, it can help to encourage other companies to follow suit. After all, as seen in the case of National Semiconductor, mistakes in one department can cause the deterioration of an entire corporation. When the costs that are possible are taken into account, the changes required to rectify this are small in comparison. --- Bibliography Capitman, William. 1973. Panic In the Boardroom. New York: Anchor Press-DoubleDay Publishing Harris, Kathryn, Chips Maker Feels Attack on Four Sides Los Angeles Times April 4, 1982. Pg. B1 Pava, Moses. 1995. Corporate Responsibility and Financial Performance. London Quorum Books Reder, Alan. 1944. In Pursuit of Principle and Profit. New York: G.P. Putnams Sons Publishing Sawyer, George. 1979. Business and Society: Managing Corporate Social Impact. Boston Houghton Mifflin Publishing Schuyten, Peter. To Clone A Computer. New York Times February 4, 1979. Pg. 1 Velazquez, Manuel. 1992. Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases. New Jersey Prentice Hall Publishing

Economies Of Scale - Retailing

Aim - During this investigation I will identify the economies of scale earned by a large firm and compare them with a small firm. To make it a fair comparison I have chosen two firms associated with the same market. These are Waitrose, and a small family owned village shop, Beaconsfield Stores. Both of these sell groceries, which will make it easier to directly compare between them.

Both these firms make a range of goods including, fruit and vegetables, tinned products, drinks and canned food. When looking at both shops I could clearly see that the different areas covered by the products sold were very similar but the main difference was the range of products within any area, e.g. although both stores sold cat food Beaconsfield may only have one or two flavours, whereas Waitrose stocks many.

Some of the advantages enjoyed by Waitrose include buying in bulk, allowing employees to specialize at a particular job, more security when borrowing money, lower administration costs per unit, cheaper cost for transport and the ability to spread risks. These advantages can be grouped under several different economies of scale.

Below are the advantages in relation to economies of scale:

Technical

Economies of scale in this area occur within the production process. Both these firms use an EPOS system to record sales through the till, however because Waitrose has a steady flow of customers this system is never being left idle and is therefore being used to its full potential. In comparison there are many times in Beaconsfield where no customers are in the shop and so the till system is not in use. This is an example of an indivisibility. The larger the level of output, the less likely that indivisibilities will occur. When they do occur the cost per item of using the machinery will increase because the firm is getting less output from a machine costing the same

price.

Marketing

The larger the firm, the bigger chance it has of being able to buy in bulk. This is the main factor associated with economies of scale. It occurs when large firms place consistently large orders with suppliers and so leaves them in control when negotiating terms. A large supermarket may approach a farmer and request them to grow X amount of potatoes and then agree to buy all of them, they can then control them with the threat of canceling the order. By doing this, the large firm is able to secure lower prices for its inputs and so charge less to consumers. The local firm cannot compete on these grounds and so Beaconsfield buys small amounts regularly, this helps avoid wastage, which is a big problem to larger firms.

Financial

Within financial economies borrowing money is important for any business when funding expansion. Waitrose is far more likely to borrow large amounts of money and so can secure a lower rate of interest. This is another example of better terms being offered to the larger business. When buying new machinery Beaconsfield will usually choose lease purchase, which allows them to avoid the need to borrow money. Smaller firms are charged higher rates of interest because they are less financially secure and so less likely to be able to repay the loan.

Conclusion

I can quite clearly see that economies of scale exist and are used to maximum effect by large supermarkets. However, smaller shops target different markets such as people with no means of getting to out of town superstores. They provide a social service to the elderly, and stock many convenience items. From my interview I found that the most noticeable economy of scale was the discount gained from buying in bulk. The large supermarkets use specialisation to become more efficient and their range of products to cover any risk involved with changes in peoples wants.