Effective Group Evaluation of Ideas-Creation and Selection

Groups work together to come up with ideas. These groups may be inter or intra-company formations that focus on particular problems. The process in which they generate ideas and evaluate these ideas is important for the development of stronger business models and group decision-making. A study Harvey & Kou (2013) focused on evaluating group decision-making and found that the idea generation process eventually moves into four modes of group interaction that can be used individually or in combination to determine the merits of each idea. 

The group process is important for determining how groups work through problems and find solutions. With greater understanding it is easier to formulate and train groups to make better decisions that have a real impact on the environment. The power of group decisions may be based in their ability to generate more ideas and evaluate those ideas from multiple perspectives.

The four different ways in which evaluation processes occur is in parallel interactions where several ideas are generated and evaluated, interactive evaluation by which a couple of ideas are evaluated based upon group goals, brainstorming without evaluation, and sequential evaluation whereby one’s idea is generated and evaluated before introducing another. 

Brainstorming without evaluation is great for generating ideas but these ideas will eventually need to be evaluated through the group process to determine which are most likely to work. The Use of collective development of creative products works best when small and diverse groups are able to draw on multiple perspectives and expertise to create new and useful ideas to be evaluated for those that achieve potential goals (Nemeth, 1997). 

The process of brainstorming (ideation) and evaluation helps to ensure that the quality of ideas is beneficial (Paletz and Schunn, 2010). Ideas should start out as free flowing to create as many different pathways to understanding as possible. Potential problems can be seen from different perspectives and backgrounds. The evaluation process ensures that those who are most likely to be successful are selected for use or further study. 

They found that groups used an evaluation-centered sequence whereby a small group of ideas were evaluated in parallel form. This helped the group to create a mental problem framework that allowed them to elaborate and integrate their ideas. The study does help highlight how defining group goals is important for encouraging a mental framework to understand the problem and how the potential solutions may work. Without this evaluation process it would be difficult for the group to formalize potential avenues for solving problems. 

Harvey, S. & Kou, C. (2013). Collective engagement in creative tasks: the role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Administrative science quarterly, 58 (3). 

Nemeth, C. (1997) ‘Managing innovation: When less is more. California Management Review, 40 (Fall): 59–74.

Paletz, S., and Schunn, C. (2010). ‘A social-cognitive framework of multidisciplinary team innovation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2: 73–95.

The Competitive Benefits of Business Collaboration

Organizations collaborate for a number of reasons that range from necessity to strategic enhancement. Smaller organizations may collaborate to develop stronger responses to collective problems (Sowa, 2009) while larger organizations collaborate with smaller organizations to incorporate new competencies. Collaboration is an exercise of hedging the different knowledge and skills of each organization to compete together on the global market.  Without collaboration businesses may suffer for a lack of resources and abilities to meet new market pressures.

Organizations collaborate due to internal and external drivers resulting from changes in the environment (Yankey & Willen, 2005). These organizations do not have the current internal or external abilities to meet the new demands of global change. Collaboration gives them an opportunity to work together to face market pressure (external drivers) or share abilities and knowledge to lower operational costs (internal drivers).

The collaborative efforts between businesses and various suppliers create greater interactivity which leads to economic and functional advantages (Hughes, 2008). Collaboration helps suppliers understand the needs of their customers and work together to create better operations to enhance their services. Both the purchaser and the supplier work together as a unit and become co-creators in the process of development.

Companies that need to improve certain areas of knowledge may want to work with other businesses to speed up the process of information transference (Rodriguez & Nieto, 2012).   The gaining and use of new knowledge can help both companies learn to compete better on the market. It is this learning and development that lends itself to industry innovation (Cox, 2012).

Companies rarely work well in isolation from one another. They need access to shared resources, knowledge, and human capital. Not all companies can be everything to everyone. Some will naturally have abilities in one area while others have abilities in different areas. For example, collaboration between e-commerce businesses and distribution businesses may raise the functionality of both (Kuo-pin & Graham, 2011).

There are many different ways in which companies can work together that range from collaborative projects to full integrations. They can formalize these efforts in contracts and service agreements or work with third-party vendors on shared projects. Regardless of the type integration, organizations that hedge their skills and abilities regularly find competitive advantages on the global market.

Cox, P. (2012) Strategies for collaboration agreements focusing on innovation. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 18 (1). 

Hughes, J. (2008). From vendor to partner: Why and how leading companies collaborate with suppliers for competitive advantage.  Global Business & Organizational Excellence, 27 (3). 

Kuo-pin, C. & Graham, G. (2012). E-business strategy in supply chain collaboration: an empirical study of B2B e-commerce project in Taiwan. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 10 (2). 

La Piana, D. (2010). Merging Wisely. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 8 (2). 

Rodriguez, A. (2012). The internationalization of knowledge-intensive business services: the effect of collaboration and the mediating role of innovation. Service Industries Journal, 32 (7). 

Sowa, J. (2009). The collaboration decision in nonprofit organizations: views from the front line. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38 (6).

Yankey, J. & Willen, C. (2005). Strategic alliances. In R&D. Herman & Associates (EDS). The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Managers Model Motivation for Employees

Art Work: Dr. Murad Abel

Motivation is an important tool for achieving goals. Motivation is not an all or nothing thing and different people show motivation in varying ways. Some employees will be motivated in a few tasks and others may not show any motivation whatsoever. A paper by Coget (2011) reviews managerial motivation in the fostering of employee motivation to adopt new technology and skills that service their customers better. 

It should be understood that adopting new technology and learning new skills can be difficult for employees. To master a new system or serve customers better requires employees who want to learn these new skills and are willing to move through initial frustration to gain mastery. When managers help employees by modeling motivated behavior they can raise motivation levels in their employees. 

In the case of technology adaptation, those managers who modeled the adaptation and use of technology found that their employees were motivated to do the same at a higher rate. This same concept applies to positive workplace behaviors as well as motivation in handling customers. The manager sets the pace and tone of the behaviors that should be emulated in his or her department. 

Charismatic managers found that their employees adopted their motivation more than those with managers who were not charismatic. When managers have charisma they promoted devotion to certain beliefs and causes. Their charm carried higher levels of influence with employees and this led to higher levels of modeling behavior. 

Managers who can connect with employees through multiple similarities with them also found greater motivation for adaptation. A manager who seemed to have similarities with the group they lead attracted more interest than those who were perceived as too different. People want to understand, connect, and see similarities with those above them in position. 

Motivation can be internally or externally driven but there are behaviors managers can emulate that create higher levels of motivation in their employees. When the manager shows motivation, charisma of personality, and appears to have similarities with employees they are likely to create greater motivation of change. This adaptation and change can help organizations learn new skills as well as learn new technology and weather the effects of immediate frustration. 

Coget, J. (2011). Does managerial motivation spill over to subordinates? Academy of Management Perspective, 25 (4). 

Wieseke, J. et. al. (2011). How leaders’ motivation transfers to customer service representatives. Journal of Service Research, 14(2).

How Highly Skilled Employees Draw Foreign Investment for Economic Growth

Economic development cannot happen without the proper skill levels available in the market to ensure that investment opportunities meet capabilities. A study by Osomu, et. al. (2010) delves into the overall concept of creating greater global competitiveness. They analyzed 84 different countries over 5 years to determine how skill development through formal education and corporate training raised economic viability and encourage foreign direct investment in high technology environments. 

Technological progress and globalization has created rapid changes in the environment putting pressure to create productive and innovative approaches that are supported through the comparative advantages of skills, industrial organization and management practices (Lall, 1999). The process of creating stronger businesses and management practices must meet available market skills to create competitive advantages for the region and the market. 

The types of skills vary based upon what industry labor is employed. However, there are some commonalities in the global market that appear to create competitive advantages. Skill development should include communication, team work, rotation, quality, problem-solving, health and safety, and performance-pay linkages (Low, 1998). Each industry will need to develop specific skill qualifications that enhance their positions. 

Prior success of the country is based on a number of factors. Through a previous analysis of market factors it was found that human capital investment in the early twentieth century helped the country gain competitive edges in technology, education, and human capital while lowering the damaging effects of inequality (Goldin and Katz, 2008). This period was marked by economic and social dominance in world markets that carried through to Baby Boomers. 

This development is based within the cognitive, analytical, and behavioral development that allows people to invent and adopt new technologies and ways of improving production (Lall, 2000). The overall process of learning, integrating best methods, and putting them to practical use fosters greater and faster growth. The management and labor population must be open to new ideas and developments to be effective.

Skill formation can be developed from a number of different sources. It is most often raised in vocational training, formal education, in-house training, outsourced training and on-the-job training (Lall, 2000). Organizations seeking to raise their market value and contribute to economic growth will need to support higher education as well as training & development within their organizations.

The model used by the researchers to analyze skill development within the country helps to understand how skill and economic development work together.  

The concepts included in the model are high technology exports, Harbison Myers Index based on education enrollment, science and engineering enrollment, gross domestic product per capital, and net foreign investment. The researchers used these concepts based upon previous research to create the mathematical model that helps to understand labor development and economic growth.

The researchers found through this model that the factors were statistically significant and accounted for 99% of variation in competitiveness.  Skills were important for global competitive position. Improvement in high technology exports requires the development of skill and investment in education. Low foreign investment was associated with low skill development while higher foreign investment was associated with high technology skill and product development.  High GDP per capita and purchasing parity was associated with the manufacturing and export of high technology products.  The authors recommend reforming education across all levels to encourage market relevance. 

Comment: The study is significant in that it highlights the need to develop local skills through varying methods such as on-the-job training, training & development, and higher education to provide the right human capital for further investment within the market. Those markets that focused on matching their skills to high technology exports also realized greater foreign investment that fostered future growth. New development into the post Baby Boomer generation is needed to further the American legacy.

Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2008). The race between education and technology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Lall, S. (1999). Competing with labour: Skills and competitiveness in developing countries. Geneva: International Labour Organization.

Lall, S. (2000, June). Skills, competitiveness and policy in developing countries. Queen Elizabeth House Working Paper Series 46. Oxford: Oxford University Department of International Development.

Low, L. (1998). Jobs, technology and skill requirements in a globalized economy: Country study on Singapore. Geneva: International Labour Organization.

Onsomu, et. al. (2010). The impact of skills development on competitiveness: empirical evidence from a cross-country analysis. Education and Policy Analysis, 18 (71).