Assignment 2
1. In your university, professors likely have objectives regarding teaching, research, and service to the university. From your perspective, what are the relative priorities of these three objectives? If you could, how would you change these priorities and why?
I think that the top priority of the professors is research. Professors had to do research to generate leading-edge knowledge. Moreover, they can find the right and fun ways of teaching by doing research. For example, my marketing teacher makes learning an extremely fun activity by implementing outside sources such as videos and pictures into classroom lectures. He does not get those ideas straight from the textbooks instead he does researches to find those outside sources. …show more content…
On the other hand, professors that don’t do research will teach straight from the text and makes lectures boring and dull. Therefore, their second top priority would be teaching. Teaching always have to follow immediately after Research. Because they need research in order to provide quality teaching. Then the last priority would be service to universities. I think teaching is already considered as providing service to the university, therefore other extra service to the university by professors would be of choice, such as providing tutoring during office hours. I don’t think it’s a requirement of the professors but it will sure be a plus.
4. Thank about the last goal you set for yourself. How SMART was it?
The last goal I set for myself was to lose ten pounds in two months, which I don’t think was a smart goal. Because I wasn’t specific enough in setting the goal, losing 10 pounds is too vague. I should’ve state the goal in specific terms such as eating healthy or exercise more in order to lose that weight. Moreover, the goal itself was too unrealistic. I was too naïve to think that I could lose 10 pounds in two months without rebounding. I should’ve assumed a more realistic time frame which might be five months instead of two. Also, I did not commit to achieving my goal. Losing weight involves eating right and exercise, but after the second week, I gave up on exercising and started eating junk food. Overall, my goal isn’t quite a smart one.
Closing case essay:
What adjustments would you make at this point? Would you cancel the program or run it at a loss?
I would access another $15,000 from the general contingency budget. Since Pam originally considered that it would take about 18 participants for the program to break even financially, since there’s only 10 now, she needs eight more in order to break even. Since there’s only four weeks left before the start of the program, there will be a very small chance for the number of participants to reach 18. Since most of them had already inquired about the program and showed no interest during the first few weeks. Therefore the only way to keep the program going is to run it at a loss. I would run it at a loss because human capital is a firm’s most important internal resource. A group of senior executives trained by excellent leadership programs would definitely enhance a firm’s success. Therefore I evaluate the gain over the loss.
3.
What do you think went wrong? What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the planning process?
LDC did a great job in setting objectives and developing action plans. The companies set the objective that training senior executives would more likely encourage mid-level managers to participate because they would recommend and approve training requests for mid-level managers. Moreover, they measure the objective in three ways. First, the number of participants taking the first program would be monitored, and calculated that it would take 18 participants for the program to break even financially. Second, she would survey all participants regarding their satisfaction with the program. Finally, LDC would track the number of mid-level managers from the companies of those attending the senior executive program to determine if there was an increased participation level overtime. These are great measurements of the objective determined by Pam. However, she did not quite do a great job in analyzing the firm’s external environment. Originally she made the measurement that 18 participant would be needed in order to break even financially, she did not generate actions to be taken if there were only 10 participants, therefore she failed at developing constingency
plans.
I think that the top priority of the professors is research. Professors had to do research to generate leading-edge knowledge. Moreover, they can find the right and fun ways of teaching by doing research. For example, my marketing teacher makes learning an extremely fun activity by implementing outside sources such as videos and pictures into classroom lectures. He does not get those ideas straight from the textbooks instead he does researches to find those outside sources. …show more content…
On the other hand, professors that don’t do research will teach straight from the text and makes lectures boring and dull. Therefore, their second top priority would be teaching. Teaching always have to follow immediately after Research. Because they need research in order to provide quality teaching. Then the last priority would be service to universities. I think teaching is already considered as providing service to the university, therefore other extra service to the university by professors would be of choice, such as providing tutoring during office hours. I don’t think it’s a requirement of the professors but it will sure be a plus.
4. Thank about the last goal you set for yourself. How SMART was it?
The last goal I set for myself was to lose ten pounds in two months, which I don’t think was a smart goal. Because I wasn’t specific enough in setting the goal, losing 10 pounds is too vague. I should’ve state the goal in specific terms such as eating healthy or exercise more in order to lose that weight. Moreover, the goal itself was too unrealistic. I was too naïve to think that I could lose 10 pounds in two months without rebounding. I should’ve assumed a more realistic time frame which might be five months instead of two. Also, I did not commit to achieving my goal. Losing weight involves eating right and exercise, but after the second week, I gave up on exercising and started eating junk food. Overall, my goal isn’t quite a smart one.
Closing case essay:
What adjustments would you make at this point? Would you cancel the program or run it at a loss?
I would access another $15,000 from the general contingency budget. Since Pam originally considered that it would take about 18 participants for the program to break even financially, since there’s only 10 now, she needs eight more in order to break even. Since there’s only four weeks left before the start of the program, there will be a very small chance for the number of participants to reach 18. Since most of them had already inquired about the program and showed no interest during the first few weeks. Therefore the only way to keep the program going is to run it at a loss. I would run it at a loss because human capital is a firm’s most important internal resource. A group of senior executives trained by excellent leadership programs would definitely enhance a firm’s success. Therefore I evaluate the gain over the loss.
3.
What do you think went wrong? What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the planning process?
LDC did a great job in setting objectives and developing action plans. The companies set the objective that training senior executives would more likely encourage mid-level managers to participate because they would recommend and approve training requests for mid-level managers. Moreover, they measure the objective in three ways. First, the number of participants taking the first program would be monitored, and calculated that it would take 18 participants for the program to break even financially. Second, she would survey all participants regarding their satisfaction with the program. Finally, LDC would track the number of mid-level managers from the companies of those attending the senior executive program to determine if there was an increased participation level overtime. These are great measurements of the objective determined by Pam. However, she did not quite do a great job in analyzing the firm’s external environment. Originally she made the measurement that 18 participant would be needed in order to break even financially, she did not generate actions to be taken if there were only 10 participants, therefore she failed at developing constingency
plans.