stuff september 29, 2011. attendance 0 absence = +3 eos 1 absence = +1 eos 2-3 absences = 0 eos (3...
Post on 26-Dec-2015
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Attendance
• 0 absence = +3 EOS• 1 absence = +1 EOS• 2-3 absences = 0 EOS (3 people)• 4-5 absences = -5 EOS• 6 or more absences = -10 EOS
Essays
• A = 95• A- = 90• B+ = 88• B = 85• B- = 80• C+ = 78• C = 75• C- = 70• D+ = 68• D = 65• D- = 60• F = 55
Strongly Disagree Disagree Not Sure Agree
Strongly Agree
Our team would have better without this member
This team member “carried his/her share of the load” on the project
The quality of this team member’s work was always good
This team member made our team stronger
This team member was easy to get along with
This person just didn’t put out the kind of effort our team needed
Strongly Disagree Disagree Not Sure Agree
Strongly Agree
Our team would have better without this member 0 1 2 3 4This team member “carried his/her share of the load” on the project 4 3 2 1 0The quality of this team member’s work was always good 0 1 2 3 4This team member made our team stronger 0 1 2 3 4This team member was easy to get along with 0 1 2 3 4This person just didn’t put out the kind of effort our team needed 4 3 2 1 0
Name of person being evaluated_____________________________
Strongly Disagree Disagree Not Sure Agree
Strongly Agree
Our team would have better without this member 0 1 2 3 4This team member “carried his/her share of the load” on the project 4 3 2 1 0The quality of this team member’s work was always good 0 1 2 3 4This team member made our team stronger 0 1 2 3 4This team member was easy to get along with 0 1 2 3 4This person just didn’t put out the kind of effort our team needed 4 3 2 1 0
(3 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 3) / 6 = 2.8(3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3) / 6 = 3.0
(3 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 3 + 1) / 5 = 1.8(2.8 + 3.0 + 1.8)/3 = 2.5
Peer AppraisalsAvg. Appraisal Quality Point Equivalent Numerical score
4.0 A 100
3.3 - 3.9 A- 95
3.3 – 3.6 B+ 88
3.0 – 3.2 B 85
2.7 – 2.9 B- 80
2.3 – 2.6 C+ 78
2.0 – 2.2 C 75
1.9 – 1.7 C- 70
1.3 – 1.6 D+ 68
1.0 - 1.2 D 65
0.7 – 0.9 D- 60
0.6 and below F 55
Fair Labor Standards Act (1938)
• Salary level test– Standard test
• $455 per week ($23,660)– Highly compensated
• Total annual compensation of at least $100,000• Perform office or non-manual work• Customarily and regularly perform any one or
more of the exempt duties identified in the standard tests for the executive, administrative or professional exemptions
Fair Labor Standards Act (1938)
• Executive– Managing the enterprise, dept., subdivision– => 2 full-time employees– “particular weight”
Fair Labor Standards Act (1938)
• Administrative– Office/non-manual work– Discretion and independent judgment when
it counts
Core Competencies
• Article on course website• Identify Netflix strategy (2nd paper)• Have to i.d. them for final project• Tie them tightly directly one-to-one like-
ugly-on-a-duck to specific criterion
Core Competency
• Particular strengths you have that others don’t
• Criteria• It provides consumer benefits• It is not easy for competitors to imitate• I t can be leveraged widely to many
products and markets• Technical/subject matter/relationships/
culture
Identify Core Competencies
• Identify strategic intent– Corresponds to the option your team was
assigned• 4 key questions to i.d. core
competencies that support this strategy (which in this case, was your team’s option)
Questions
• How long could we dominate our business if we didn’t control this competency?
• What future opportunities would we lose without it?
• Does it provide access to multiple markets?
• Do customer benefits revolve it?
Core Competency
• Particular strengths you have that others don’t
• Criteria• It provides consumer benefits• It is not easy for competitors to imitate• I t can be leveraged widely to many
products and markets• Technical/subject matter/relationships/
culture
Industry Analysis
• Mean = 76• A = 6
– Shad Benn– Haley Cox– Rhonda Daughdrill– Emily Lindner– Max Moseley– Troy Reahard
Industry Analysis
• No impact on grade (this time)– Introduction
• Purpose• Overview of what follows
– Conclusion• Brief
– Number pages– Order of discussion
• My error
Industry competitors
Rivalry amongexisting firms
BuyersSuppliers
Substituteproducts
Potentialentrants
Threat ofnew entrants
Bargaining powerof suppliers
Bargaining powerof buyers
Threat ofsubstitutes
PORTER’s 5 FORCES MODEL
Intensity of competitor rivalry
• Very high strategic stakes*• Large number of firms• Diversity of rivals*• Slow market growth• High fixed cost• Short shelf-life*• Low switching costs*
Intensity of competitor rivalry
• Types of questions–How many competitors are there?–How much market share does each
competitor hold and how strong are competitor brands
–How easy is it to win new customers?
Supplier power
• Supplier concentration*• Differentiation of inputs (*?)• Cost relative to total purchases• Switching costs*
Supplier power
• Types of questions–How many suppliers are there and what
mkt share do the largest suppliers hold?–How distinctive are each supplier’s
products?–How easy is it for the customer to switch
to another supplier?
Barriers to entry
• Access to inputs*• Economies of scale• Government policy• Brand identity• Switching costs*• Access to distribution• Expected retaliation• Proprietary products
Barriers to entry
• What are the barriers to entry? – Knowledge, technology, distribution
network, brand?• How much would it cost a new entrant to
enter the mkt and how quickly would this investment pay back?
Buyer power
• Buyer volume• Buyer information• Brand identity• Product differentiation*• Buyer concentration vs. industry• Price sensitivity
Buyer power
• Types of questions:– How many customers are there and how
many customers does a typical player have?– How much mkt share do the largest
customers account for?– What alternatives do customers have?
Threat of substitutes
• Switching costs*• Buyer inclination to substitute• Price-performance trade-off of
substitutes
top related