Information, Contemporary Technologies and Decision Making - Starbucks Corporation - Case Study Example

iNFORMATION, CONTEMPORARY TECHNOLOGIES AND DECISION MAKING Name: Institution affiliated: Date of submission: Tutor: Section I: collaboration How to improve decision making through collective intelligence in the sales department Starbucks Corporation Starbucks Corporation is a food and beverage serving store that provides beverages to consumers around the world. As a manager, the papers requires that we identify ways through which collaboration can be used in the stores within Australia to improves decision making in the sales department through collective intelligence. Collaboration is the use of social media and emergent social software that helps people to collaborate or to connect with each other through computer related technologies to allow communication and to provide an online communication platform. In the medium-large organizations like Starbucks Corporation, there are some stakeholders who never interact directly such interaction between the shareholders and the employees and that between the shareholders and the customers. The social software allows the stakeholders to connect, cooperate and communicate with each other effectively. The social software includes sites like tags, wiki, blogs smash-ups, social networking and RSS. The key characteristics provided by the social software include persistency, asynchronous, distributive, and structured and open for improvements, criticisms and discussions [Car13]. Collective intelligence for the sales department of Starbucks Corporation provides leadership, trust and incentives to identify the problem as it allows the collection of information. The choice in decision we make at Starbucks Corporation provides the organization with criteria that should be used to evaluate the organizational alternatives and offer different choices to the same processes. The use of collaboration to make choices encourages openness in the organization thus promoting innovation and encouragement of better processes and in the long last promotes growth and better performance. For Starbucks Corporation to gather intelligence as the in charge of the stores in Australia we have agreed to use social tagging and folksonomy to gather information from the tools that it uses. The social software tools that are usually used by collective intelligence to gather information include forums, social networking, blogs and wikis. Collective intelligence requires the Starbucks Corporation to provide incentives to the public to encourage them identify the problem or issues at hand and provide information on how they can be improved upon and the problems reduced. Tools to use for each set of users in Starbucks Corporation and contributions expected from them Collaboration is used to provide new designs, intelligence, and implementation of new decisions and to provide choices to the users. The new designs provide a selection of criteria to be used as well as developing new alternatives of organizational leadership, trust, culture and stakeholders’ incentives [Ter14]. The tools for the implementation of collaboration in an organization range from tags, wikis, blogs, RSS, to smash-ups. The wikis have been constructed so that they can be constructively used by the users who have little or no knowledge in programming. They provide functions like editing, linking, undoing changes, viewing historical data and formatting to provide better information for Starbucks Corporation. Wikis major contributions in the sales department are that they offer training and induction provide a transfer of information and provide knowledge accumulation to the users. Blog is an abbreviation for Weblog. The blogs provide contributions for Starbucks Corporation as they offer a platform for the individual to express themselves; expert opinion is also provided as well as making announcements, news and journalism options which could be used in the sale department of Starbucks to share crucial information. Social networking sites form relationships and alliances for Starbucks Corporation through the interactions they provide through the networks. The purpose is that they offer a platform for discussions, chatting and creativity that can be used in the organization. Tangible and intangible benefits and risks associated with collaboration in the sales department of Starbucks Corporation A major reason as to why the Starbucks Corporation uses collaboration with other stakeholders is to gain knowledge concerning particular issues in the organization. (Babak and Hamid, (2013) classify organizational knowledge into four groups namely; prescriptive knowledge, expert knowledge, proprietary descriptive knowledge and emerging knowledge [Bab13]. The prescriptive type of knowledge provides Starbucks Corporation with the how things must be done through the records available and organizational management. The prescriptive knowledge seeks to provide control within Starbucks Corporation. Expert knowledge provides Starbucks Corporation with expert means of doing things. With collaboration the most tangible benefit is that the organization enjoys profitability that they gain from the improvements made on the products and services as per the requests of the consumers. Collaboration provides Starbucks Corporation with information from different parts around the world. With the technological advancements and the actions by the world to adopt the technologies, many people usually use the platform provided by the organization to provide information on the types of products and services they would wish to have delivered to them. Collaboration for the sale department in Starbucks Corporation allows for the review of decisions. When Starbucks Corporation make their decisions concerning a particular product or service, they place their decisions to have the other users of the social software to provide their views on the new developments before they can be implemented. The most intangible benefit that Starbucks Corporation gains from the adoption of collaboration in the organization is goodwill. As consumers are increasingly involved in the decision making process through the request of their opinion, the corporation wins the loyalty of the consumer thus improving on the reputation of the organization. The corporation thus sells its products and services through the good name that it posses. Finally, risks are there in any given decisions that are made in an organization. The idea of collaboration for Starbucks Corporation could face some risks among them being the risk of biased decision in the organization. The consumers may provide ideas to the organization that could be biased such that they only suite their needs and not those of other. The organization may end up making decisions that are based on the opinion of a few consumers which may not provide a true reflection of the demand forces of the products and services offered by the organization. Critical success factors for Starbucks Corporation Collaboration has also been attributed to the successful and productive usage by the industries and the government. The Starbucks Corporation needs to understand their consumers, thus they need to continuously interact with them to gather information about the quality of products and services they provide. Collaboration has enhanced an understanding of the consumers by the Starbucks Corporation allowing them to make better informed decision about the need of the citizens. Other benefits that Starbucks Corporation gets from the social software include organizational learning, sorting of information, review of decisions and overcoming of times and space in the organization [Ter14]. Most organization fail to employ the younger people who in most cases are used to connectivity and easily understand the use of the social sites that would greatly enhance the performance of the organization. Collaboration tools provide information to Starbucks Corporation on issues concerning the human resource management. Different tools used for collaboration provide information on the importance of young people in the organization. Collaboration has increasingly been used by Starbucks Corporation as they are increasingly employing more young people to work for them in different departments in the organization[Ger03]. Section II: Crowd sourcing Journal article: Crowd sourcing as a model for problem solving: an introduction and cases; international journal of research into new media technologies by Daren C. Brabham How crowd sourcing is used through the normative decision model Crowd sourcing is a means through which the organizations source for information from the other stakeholders within the organization. The best source of information for an organization could be the customers as they better understand the products and services offered by the different organization, thus they understand their weaknesses and strengths [Jef08]. According to the journal article crowd sourcing allows the organization to get the opinion of the customers regarding the products and services that they offer. Globally, it has been identified that the customers are the leading sources of ideas. Other sources of ideas include the heads of business unites, employees, the research and development teams, CEO, sales teams, special innovation teams, business partners and suppliers and the outsourced research and development team [Ted13]. Just like collaboration, the decision making process in crowd sourcing also provide new designs, intelligence, and implementation of new decisions and to provide choices to the users. The new designs provide a variety of criteria to be used as well as developing new alternatives of organizational [Dar08]. Problems that are overcome using crowd sourcing According to the journal crowd sourcing is a strategy that organizations use to improve their decision making process. The major issues that are overcome by the crowd sourcing include bad decisions that are regularly made and lack of conventional improvements in the organization. Bad decisions are usually made by the organization’s lack of information concerning vital matters for their products and services and groups distortions. Both the bad decision making process in the organization and lack of conventional improvements is the major problems that are improved by crowd sourcing. Crowd sourcing provides the minds with the technology that allows them to discuss and reason out options to improve the decision made in the organization. Objections and resistance to using crowd sourcing for decision making according to the journal article by Daren C. Brabham According to Daren, (2008) the typical crowd sourcing process required the formulation of requirements by the client organization to the public who are then required to develop their own views and offer ideas and feasible solutions to the client. The client should offer rewards back to developers of the new ideas. Although the ideas provided may offer better options to the organization, in most cases the public goes unrewarded. Similarly, in some instances, the managers may be reluctant to encourage crowd sourcing so that they can only work with their personal ideas and opinions concerning the products of the organization [Dar08]. Daren, (2008) continues to argue that bad or poor decision making processes are usually available in the organization due to the lack of information to enhance the profitability of the organization. Lack of information could be as a result of poor understanding of the product or service being offered by the organization as well as poor factual knowledge about the customers royal to the organization [Jef08]. Although crowd sourcing reduces instances of an organization making bad decisions the managers in the organization are still reluctant to promote its usage due to the overconfidence that they have bestowed upon themselves. Daren’s argument on how to overcome risks to make better decision using crowd sourcing The value added chain for products and services required that the products and services be taken through a chain of activities. Before products and services are displayed for sale by the organization, they go through a number of levels that are aimed at reducing the risks in production of the product. The levels that the product goes through include; inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and servicing. The inbound logistics provides for quality control and control of supply schedules for raw material [Dar08]. Daren, (2008 p.83) argues that there are major risks that organizations face during the different stages of production of products and services. Operations are usually the processes that the organization undertakes it’s for its products to be processed. Among the steps involved in operations include manufacturing, production, packaging maintenance and quality control. Operational risks that crowd sourcing helps to reduce include the risk of products and services not being able to meet the requirements of the consumers due to poor quality or less quantity. Outbound logistics provides for the handling of finished goods. The handling of finished goods entails handling of orders, invoicing, dispatch and delivery of goods. The process carries inherent risks with itself that could be avoided if the organization adopts crowd sourcing as part of its processes. Marketing and promotions entails customer management, promotional activities, marketing research, order taking and sales analysis. Marketing also have their financial risks that could be avoided or reduced if at all the organizations adopt crowd sourcing. Finally, servicing entails the after sale services that the organization provides to the consumers after the sale of products. Servicing include activities like providing warranty, training on product usage, upgrades and maintenance education. Other value added opportunities include the support activities such as administrative activities, human resource management, product, service and technology development and procurement [Tho13]. REFERENCES Car13: , (Caroline & Elias, 2013), Ter14: , (Terri, 2014), Bab13: , (Babak & Hamid, 2013), Ger03: , (Gerry, 2003), Jef08: , (Jeff, 2008), Ted13: , (Ted, 2013), Dar08: , (Daren, 2008), Tho13: , (Thomas, 2013), Appendix 1: Daren, C. B. (2008). Crowd sourcing as a model for problem solving: an introduction and cases. (U. o. Utah, Ed.) The international journal of research into media technologies, 14(1), 75-90. doi:10.11778442013548565070 p.76 Crowd sourcing, a distributed problem-solving model, is not, however, open-source practice. Problems solved and products designed by the crowd become the property of companies, who turn large profits off from this crowd labor. And the crowd knows this going in. And the Frankfurt boys roll in their graves. This article is an introduction to crowd sourcing – what it is, how it works, and its potential. As an emerging, successful, alternative business model, I hope to turn the model toward non-profit applications for health and social and environmental justice. Toward this end, I argue that crowd sourcing is substantially different from open-source production – and superior in many ways. I also argue that crowd sourcing is a legitimate, complex problem-solving model, more than merely a new format for holding contests and awarding prizes. In critiquing the theories which seem to predict crowd sourcing, I hope to establish an agenda for research on crowd sourcing so that some day we will have developed a model that can have profound influence in the way we solve our world’s most pressing social and environmental problems. Coined by Jeff Howe and Mark Robinson in the June 2006 issue of wired magazine (Howe, 2006f), the term crowd sourcing describes a new web-based business model that harnesses the creative solutions of a distributed network of individuals through what amounts to an open call for proposals. Howe offers the following definition: Simply defined, crowd sourcing represents the act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by employees and outsourcing it to an undefined (and generally large) network of people in the form of an open call. This can take the form of peer-production (when the job is performed collaboratively), but is also often undertaken by sole individuals. The crucial prerequisite is the use of the open call format and the large network of potential laborers. (2006a: 5) Howe further clarifies that ‘it’s only crowd sourcing once a company takes that design, fabricates [it] in mass quantity and sell[s] it’ (2006b: 1). In other words, a company posts a problem online, a vast number of individuals offer solutions to the problem, the winning ideas are awarded some form of a bounty, and the company mass produces the idea for its own gain. To understand the workings of crowd sourcing, it is best to examine some of the most successful and profitable cases in a variety of industries. pp. 87-88 Crowdsourcing is not just another buzzword, not another meme. It is not just a repackaging of open source philosophy for capitalist ends either. It is a model capable of aggregating talent, leveraging ingenuity while reducing the costs and time formerly needed to solve problems. Finally, crowdsourcing is enabled only through the technology of the web, which is a creative mode of user interactivity, not merely a medium between messages and people. Because of this, it is now the challenge of communication studies, science and technology studies, and other scholars to take up this new, hearty agenda for research. Read More