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

How is a Professor’s Time Divided?

The notion of professors sitting around on plush chairs discussing the nuances of a latest theory is gone. No longer do dusty books, social ramblings, and conversations of historic significance make their way into the ivory towers. A study at Boise State University dismisses the myth of esoteric discussions and replaces it with longer workweeks engage in teaching, administrative work, and meetings. 

The study printed Inside Higher Ed was limited to the university and 30 instructors but does indicate that the expectations of professors have changed. On average professors worked 61 hours a week and worked nearly every day of the week. This means that when they are home on Saturday or Sunday they also engage in their work. 

Around 60% of their work was completed on campus, 24% at home and 17% at off-campus locations. The majority of the time professors worked alone on their projects and used only 17% of their time with other colleagues and 15% with other students.  According to the study findings 58% of time was spent on teaching, 22% on research and 20% on administrative tasks.

Teaching is seen as one of the primary responsibilities of faculty followed by research. Administrative tasks appear to take up additional time and may be a result of the economic changes occurring at colleges. The author indicates that teaching is often encouraged due to the income students provide to the university while many faculty are still personally rewarded for their research.

The study is important because it helps potential professors as well as current professors understand how their normal day will be divided and how much effort they are going to put toward their work. Many of the long hours are part of a “labor of love” as the entrepreneurial spirit of researchers seems to make their way into their lifestyle. It is simply hard for them to ignore their work for any great length of time. Being a professor is more of a lifestyle choice than an occupational choice.

Read the Study

Call for Papers: The IAFOR North American Conference on Business and Public Policy

October 2nd to 5^th, 2014
Providence, United States of America

The International Academic Forum in conjunction with its global university and institutional partners is proud to announce the North American Conference on Business and Public Policy, October 2-5, 2014. At The Marriott, Providence, Rhode Island, USA

Abstract Submission Deadline: June 1, 2014

Please submit your abstract through the online submission system found on the "Call for Papers" page of the conference website.

Web address:
http://iafor.org/iafor/conferences/the-iafor-north-american-conference-on-business-and-public-policy-2014/

The Economic System as an Avenue of Needs Fulfillment

The economic system permeates our entire existence from cradle to grave. From our socialized beginning to our elder years we are constantly making choices that impact our social and financial positions in society. Our very first experiences in life help us internalize certain cultural traits that become the foundation for our viewpoints and our ability to compete on the market. Economic hubs and nations are collective traits of our economic values that maintain patterns across society. All systems start with very personal biological, sociological, and psychological choices we may not be fully aware of and make their way throughout society to determine the success or failure of a nation in the global market.

Our economic system starts in our biological, psychological, and sociological core. Neuroeconomics is a concept that tries to explain how we make subconscious choices to purchase products, trust one another, or engage in certain activities beyond the simple mathematical equations of present day economists. It is a deep process that connects to our biology but also takes into account our psychological and social needs.

Culture influences our viewpoint of the world and our ability to compete in it. As we internalize the values of our society and behavior we ultimately set upon an acceptable way of viewing the world and viewing ourselves within that world. This defines what behaviors are acceptable and what behaviors are not acceptable within society. Such behaviors become a vantage point of life and make their way in repeated form throughout our history.

On a conscious level we compare and contrast our limited resources to determine where we are most likely to compete. We use our limited experience and known skills to compare against the potential acceptance in our social networks to choose our occupational paths. Some will go to college and others will move into trade schools. Each offers opportunities to redefine ourselves and obtain needed skills to adequately fulfill these psychological, sociological, and biological needs.

If we were to add up all of the choices people make, and the culture vantage point  they use to make those choices, we will have the economic indicators for a state, city, or regional hub. Indicators will include the economic choices of education, occupation, expended effort, skill development, innovative ability, employment opportunities, social outlets, recreational pursuits, etc…(i.e. demographic trends) When certain economic similarities in choice, sociological behavior patterns, and psychological streams of conscious begin to define an area you have found the segmented borders of a hub and market.

Diversity of perspective that maintain shared goals can improve upon the abilities of participants within an economic hub. As all understanding is socially negotiated it is important to connect those with diverse opinions to each other to develop a more accurate understanding of the world, market, product, lifestyle, etc… When diversity, knowledge, and experience are used to enhance decision-making and find new and more accurate solutions to problems you have maximized human capital  development.  Maximization of human capital can be seen as the motivational  pressures and available pathways to achieving biological, sociological, and psychological fulfillment within a particular system.

Economics is the added sum of all of our choices and opportunities. Those nations with greater choices and opportunities have better economies than those without. Each economic system is based upon hundreds of thousands of choices that include education, occupation, purchasing behavior, social relationships, and recreational activities. Each choice made by members of an economic system is a result of how they see themselves within their environment and their internal subconscious pressures that result from their biological, psychological, and sociological needs. No one can escape the market as much as no one can escape their own needs. To improve the market means to improve the choices and the factors that lead to those choices. The greatest freedom in society is the lawful maximization of available opportunities to achieve fulfillment based upon one's own skills and abilities.

Seeking the 99 Cent Fish Taco at El Zarapes

El Zarape provides a “quick bit” Mexican experience in the University Heights district. People line out the door to grab one of their Mexican specialties and make their way down the street to other activities. As a street side establishment you can order and eat in only a few minutes. Convenience, price and location appear to be the biggest attractions. 

For 99 cents you can get a fish taco on a corn tortilla. The restaurant offers an option of either corn or flour. The corn tortilla has 70 vs. 150 calories, and 1 gram fat vs. 3.5 grams (1).  Other than protein, the corn tortilla is a healthy choice when compared to the flour option. 

The other option is to skip the deep fried fish taco and go for a grilled fish burrito priced at $4.75. Options include shrimp, scallops, salmon, and lobster. Each provides an alternative for better eating. The taste, price and palate fits well with the working population and college students demographics of the area.

 

The restaurant is simple in design, offers fountain drinks, quick and convenient. It looks busy and appears to draw a large crowd of local people. You may sit inside or on the patio and watch the street traffic. The night life crowd likes the convenience of a quick bit to eat before moving down the street. 

http://elzarape.menutoeat.com/

4642 Park Blvd,

San Diego,

CA 92116