ماه: دسامبر 2011

فرصت های کارآفرینانه (مروری سطحی)

فرصت‌های کارآفرینانه موقعیت هایی هستند که یک فرد چارچوب و الگویی تازه برای استفاده از منابع ایجاد می‌کند (Shane, 2004). (منابعی که کارآفرینان معتقدند که سودآور می‌باشند.) در واقع مهمترین تفاوت فرصت‌های کارآفرینانه با دیگر موقعیت‌هایی که افراد در آنها بدنبال کسب سود هستند، در این است که فرصت‌های کارآفرینانه نیازمند ارائه الگو و چارچوب تازه هستند. الگوهایی که باید نسبت به چارچوب‌های قبلی بهینه ‌شده‌ باشد. به اعتقاد شومپیتر فرصت ها به اشکال مختلفی خود را نشان می‌دهند: کالا وخدمات نوین، روش های جدید سازماندهی، موادخام جدید، بازارهای جدید و یا فرایندهای تولید نوین (Schumpeter, 1934).

دو دیدگاه متفاوت به این موقعیت‌ها و اینکه از کجا منشا می‌گیرند و این موضوع که چرا این امکان برای یک فرد بوجود می‌آید تا چارچوب تازه‌ای را برای ترکیب[1] مجدد منابع ارائه دهد، وجود دارد: دیدگاه شومپیتری و دیدگاه کریزنری. کریزنر معتقد است که روش‌های مختلف دستیابی به اطلاعات باعث بروز و وجود فرصت ها می گردند. فرصت‌های کریزنری فقط محدود به پدیده کشف هستند. شومپیتر در توضیح وجود فرصت‌های کارآفرینانه بر اهمیت نقش اطلاعات جدید تاکید می‌کند. در این دیدگاه فرصت‌های کارافرینانه، نوآورانه‌تر نشان‌داده می‌شوند. این بدین معنی ‌است که اغلب فرصت های کارآفرینانه خلق می شوند تا کشف شوند. هر دو نوع فرصت می توانند در آن واحد در یک اقتصاد قابل دستیابی باشند (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). تغییرات در تکنولوژی، نیروهای سیاسی، قانون‌گذاری، و فاکتورهای اجتماعی و اقتصادی، منجر به خلق اطلاعات تازه‌ای می‌شود،که این اطلاعات توسط کارآفرینان شناسایی شده و به آنها کمک می‌کند که چگونه مجدداً از منابع استفاده‌کنند.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry in to profits, capital credit, Interest and the business cycle. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press.

Shane, S. (2004). A general theory of entrepreneurship: The individual-opportunity nexus: Edward Elgar Pub.

Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217-226.

 

 

[1] Combination

Can a Consultant Become a Manager, or a President? – from HBR

مقاله ای در سایت هاروارد بیزنس ریویو:

لینک مطلب اصلی

By: RON ASHKENAS

Here in the United States, the presidential election cycle gives us the opportunity to publicly discuss the characteristics of good leaders. Running a country calls for asophisticated array of leadership skills — from shaping strategy to building a team to managing day-to-day operations. Choosing a candidate therefore requires thoughtfulness about what experiences provide the best training for a good leader.

recent New York Times article by David Leonhardt explores the issue of whether Mitt Romney’s consulting background enhances his qualifications as a potential president, particularly since Romney himself cites his track record with the Boston Consulting Group and Bain Capital to show that he knows how to “solve problems.” But whether we’re talking about Romney or not, it’s important to question whether consulting is good preparation for leadership. After all, as Leonhardt points out, many top business school graduates start their careers with large consulting firms. So as many of these talented people migrate into managerial roles, it’s worth asking: Are they ready to lead?

Of course there is no absolute answer to this question, and examples can be cited to support either side. For example, McKinsey alumni Lou Gerstner and Jeff Skillings both went on to lead large corporations. Gerstner turned around IBM and developed a reputation as one of the most effective executives ever — while Skillings played a major role in destroying Enron and ended up in jail.

As an alternative, let’s look at several characteristics of successful consultantsand determine whether these would be the same or different for successful leaders. Here are three such characteristics:

Deep analytical skills: Effective consultants can usually crunch through large amounts of data to identify patterns and opportunities. Logical conclusions drawn from this data then underpin their recommendations. Good leaders also need analytical skills to help them sort through divergent views and, whenever possible, to make data-based decisions. However, leaders also need to appreciate the limitations of data and have the courage to follow their instincts when the data is either inconclusive or just doesn’t feel right. Steve Jobs, for example, often relied less on market research than on his gut feel for what customers would want. And while he was sometimes wrong, more often his instincts were on target.

Objectivity and detachment: In difficult situations, consultants need to stay objective and go where the data leads them. To do this, they have to avoid emotional attachment and deliver bad news without feeling guilty about the consequences for individuals. Leaders also have to maintain objectivity and make tough calls that can negatively affect people — but do so with a genuine sense of compassion. Employees can accept bad news, but they generally don’t want to work for people who don’t care. That’s why Jack Welch used to talk about the need for his leaders to be “hard-headed and soft-hearted” — to make decisions in the best interest of the business but to remember that those decisions often have human costs.

Accountability: Most consultants say that their job is to get results. But most of the time this means identifying what the client needs to do to get results. In other words, most consultants take accountability for the quality of their recommendations, but not for their implementation: That’s the client’s job. Effective leaders, however, take end-to-end accountability for achieving results — from problem identification to strategy development to execution.

Looking at these three characteristics suggests that while consulting may be a useful background for an organizational leader, it’s certainly not sufficient. In fact if consultants-turned-managers don’t go beyond these core consulting characteristics, they are likely to fail.

So if you’re looking to make a career shift from consulting to management, think about whether you can combine intuition with your analytical ability, compassion with your toughness, and implementation with your ideas. And if you’re looking to choose a former consultant as a candidate for president, think about whether that person can add to his core consulting characteristics as well.

منابعی برای تحقیق پیرامون فضای کسب و کار

در این ارایه برخی از منابع ممکن برای دستیابی به اطلاعاتی پیرامون فضای کسب و کار معرفی شده اند. این منابع در سه بخش زیر دسته بندی شده اند:

  • ابزارهای Google
  • شرکت های متخصص در حوزه تولید و گردآوری این اطلاعات
  • منابع معتبر بین اللملی

فایل ارایه منابع اطلاعاتی برای تحلیل محیط کسب و کار

 

 

 

بحران در محیط کلان

در این ارایه به نگاهی به برخی آمارها در حوزه تولید و مصرف غذا، پیشبینی بحرانی در آینده بشر انجام شده است. در نظر گرفتن این بحران در کنار نحوه رشد جمعیت و وضعیت کشورهای شکست خورده می تواند برای برنامه ریزی برای آینده کشور راه گشا باشد.

این ارایه براساس یک مقاله در مجله «چشم انداز ایران»، و همچنین استفاده از ایندکس کشورهای شکست خورده تهیه شده است.

 

برای دریافت فایل ارایه اینجا کلیک کنید.

A Crisis: Population, Food and Safty

In this presentation, using some information about the production and consumtion of food, and also some other pridictions about the future of world population, we have shown a possible crisis.

In addition, with a look at failed states index, we expand other aspects of this possible crisis. At last having a look at currrent situation of our oil and other exports, we alarm a danger.

The main reference of this presentation is an article in “Chashm andaz Iran” journal.

The attached file is the peresentation slides in Farsi.

Collaborative knowledge management

The primary goal of knowledge management is to “improve organizational performance by enabling individuals to capture, share, and apply their collective knowledge to make optimal decisions…in real time” (Smith and Farquhar, 2000). The approach of deploying centralized data repositories in an organization to gather organizational knowledge is considered a “conventional” or “traditional” knowledge management.

With technology changes, approaches to knowledge management are shifting. A “traditional” or “conventional” approach to knowledge management focuses on collection of knowledge in a centralized repository and its accessibility whereas a “conversational” approach emphases the integration and collaboration of knowledge creation amongst knowledge workers (Lee and Lan, 2007). The empirical evidence shows that knowledge management is a collaborative activity, which depends on the creation of ‘shared context’ between the participants (Clarke and Cooper, 2000). A study of thirty-one knowledge management projects in twenty-four companies, recognize the importance of knowledge sharing (Davenport et al., 1998).

Information technology is creating the opportunity to collaborate (Davenport et al., 1998). Information technology offers several possibilities for making social networks and collaborative knowledge management more visible, inspectable, and systematic, which may aid the process of organizational learning. Collaborative knowledge management tools that allow people to share documents, make comments, engage in discussion, create schematic diagrams, and so on can be valuable aids to support organizational learning (Jones, 2001). The new approach to knowledge management could be described as a “Community of Practice (COP)” (Keyes, 2006). COP is a group of people who are interested in the same topics and share a common practice within the same period of time. They may not stay in the same geographical location, share the same time zone, but on the same knowledge networks.

Internet and Web connectivity has greatly improved the popularity of these conversational technologies in recent years (Wagner and Bolloju, 2005). Technologies like discussion forums, wikis, and weblogs are referred as conversational, to reflect that much of the knowledge creation and sharing is carried out through a process of discussion with questions and answers (discussion forum), collaborative editing (wikis), or through a process of storytelling (weblogs) (Wagner and Bolloju, 2005). Conversations, whether in discussion forums or other media have been recognized as a useful medium for knowledge exchange and extraction (Nishida, 2002).

 References:

Clarke, P. & Cooper, M. (2000) Knowledge Management And Collaboration. Proc. of the Third Int. Conf. On Practical Aspects of Knowledge Management (PAKM2000). Basel, Switzerland.

Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W. & Beers, M. C. (1998) Successful Knowledge Management Projects. Sloan Management Review Vol 39, No. 2, 43-57.

Jones, P. M. (2001) Collaborative Knowledge Management, Social Networks, and Organizational Learning. IN SMITH, M. J. & SALVENDY, G. (Eds.) Systems, social and internationalization design aspects of human-computer interaction (HCI International 2001 proceedings). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Keyes, J. (2006) Knowledge Management, Business Intelligence, and Content Management: the IT practitioner’s Guide, Taylor & Francis Group, USA.

Lee, M. R. & Lan, Y. (2007) From Web 2.0 to Conversational Knowledge Management: Towards Collaborative Intelligence. Journal of Entrepreneurship Research,Vol 2, No. 2, 47-62.

Nishida, T. (2002) A traveling conversation model for dynamic knowledge interaction. Journal of Knowledge Management,Vol.,No.,Vol 7, No. 4, 124-134.

Smith, R. & Farquhar, A. (2000) The road ahead for knowledge management. AI magazine,Vol 21, No. 4, 17–40.

Wagner, C. & Bolloju, N. (2005) Supporting knowledge management in organizations with conversational technologies: discussion forums, weblogs, and wikis. Journal of Database Management,Vol 16, No. 2, 1-8.