The History of the Management in Business Essay

The History of the Management in Business - Essay Example Porter’s Five Force model is a set of analytic techniques to develop a strategy by looking at five competitive forces to position an organization and its activities so that its product or service is different and cannot be imitated by rivals or potential rivals. Of these, three forces are acting on Kao’s failure to grow its Western markets: bargaining power of buyers (Kao’s cheap image and reputation as a novice), threat of substitutes, and intensity of rivalry (competitors better at marketing high-end/high priced products). Porter then recommends that an organization choose one of three generic strategies – over-all cost leadership, differentiation, or focus – so it can compete and achieve sustainable profitability. How can we explain Kao’s success in cost leadership and differentiation? An explanation is its value chain, a framework introduced by Porter to analyze an organization’s internal capability to support and reinforce a chose n generic strategy. Kao’s internal capabilities and competencies (as we shall next see) helped it succeed in two generic strategies, although its failure to make buyers want its product means that it needs to make adjustments. Kao can satisfy the buyer’s bargaining power by improving its image through advertising and marketing, minimise the threat of substitutes by introducing quality but lower-priced products using its cost leadership and product differentiation advantages, and match the intensity of the rivalry.... buyers (Kao's cheap image and reputation as a novice), threat of substitutes (similar products familiar to the market), and intensity of rivalry (competitors better at marketing high-end/high priced products). Porter then recommends that an organisation choose one of three generic strategies - over-all cost leadership, differentiation, or focus - so it can compete and achieve sustainable profitability. How can we explain Kao's success in cost leadership and differentiation An explanation is its value chain, a framework introduced by Porter5 to analyse an organisation's internal capability to support and reinforce a chosen generic strategy. Kao's internal capabilities and competences (as we shall next see) helped it succeed in two generic strategies, although its failure to make buyers want its product means that it needs to make adjustments. Kao can satisfy the buyer's bargaining power by improving its image through advertising and marketing, minimise threat of substitutes by introdu cing quality but lower-priced products using its cost leadership and product differentiation advantages, and match the intensity of rivalry by deploying trained managers who know the culture to market products in the west. Using the so-called RBV (resource-based view) of strategy, which proposes that competitive advantage can stem from firm-specific skills and resources6, we see Kao as a collection7 of productive resources8 (brand name, quality products, employee loyalty), capabilities9 (unique combination of cross-functional business processes, Hansha information system, the way its workers interact, and how its management leads by example), and competences10 (intuitive learning environment and long-term focus). Kao must use these resources, capabilities, and competences in developing

Land law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Land law - Essay Example He also explained that in 1995 he bought a twenty-year lease of the flat from the then owner. The owner later sold the house to Anjum in 2002. Ned produced a document signed by him and by the previous owners, setting out the terms of the lease. The document is dated 1 June 1995. Mishal and Rick do not have a copy of the document and cannot recall if the signatures were witnessed. Ned also explained that they had had an agreement with Anjum that if Ned gives Anjum ?15,000 he will have procured the option of purchasing the house for ?300,000 at any time between 1 December 2013 and 30 November 2014. He had a document duly signed by Anjum and him for that effect and was dated 1 December 2012. Mishal and Rick do not have a copy of this agreement. Anjum sold Ned the option because she needed the cash. Ned has saved enough to purchase the property and now wants to purchase it. 1. Mishal and Rick are entitled to evict Ned Mishal and Rick have a proprietary interest in the property that they have purchased from Anjum. Their interest is registrable in accordance with s.27 of the Land Registration Act 2002. Mishal and Rick registered the property shortly after completion. This section demands that any transfer of a freehold, whether by value, gift or death, be registered. If such a disposition is not registered then it does not operate at law (Feinman, 2010). Since the land title was absolute title, it was clear that had there been any other interest in the land, and house, it would have been registered with the registrar of land. An absolute title means that there is nothing dubious about the title. Ned bought a lease for 20 years from 1995. Since the lease period is above seven years, Ned should have registered this interest, but he did not since the absolute title did not have a record of another interest against it. The Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act1989 clearly states in section 2 that for a contract of sale or other disposition of an interest in land to be valid all the terms must have been made in writing and all terms incorporated in one document, or where contracts are exchanged, in each. Therefore, the documents that Ned produced, purporting to have entered into contracts with the two previous owners does not hold under the law because they are not in the same legal document which should contain all the material terms. This point was made in Keay v Morris Homes (West Midlands) Limited [2012] EWCA Civ 900 where a document purporting to be a contract that complies with the provisions of s.2 of LPMPA 1989 but did not include all the expressly agreed terms was not considered as a contract at all. In the ruling, the judge mentioned the Grossman Point by referring to the Grossman case. In this case, Mr. Hooper bought a property in his sole name. Miss Grossman had beneficial interest in the property. After 10 years their relationship deteriorated and they parted ways with signing of a document of informal agreement transferring th e property to Miss Grossman. The document expressly provided that now Miss Grossman will take charge and responsibility of repaying the mortgage secured against it. After she contended it was held that the document was void as a contract as it did not comply with s.2 which directs that the all the express terms be included. The need to clearly state in writing the all the express terms is also evident in North Eastern Properties Limited v Coleman Limited and another [2010] EWCA Civ 277 and First