Saturday, February 29, 2020

Business Model Innovation

This growth has largely been driven by socio-economic and political imperatives to improve rural livelihood and by technological innovation. Based on a content analysis of 232 scholarly articles, the literature is categorized into four focal lenses: technology, institutional, viability and user-centric. We ? nd that the ? rst two dominate the RE debate. The viability lens has been used less frequently, whilst the user-centric lens began to engage scholars as late as 2007. However, there are business models that avoid this problem: in Bangladesh, the operational risk remained with Grameen Shakti, although ownership was immediately transferred to the customer (Alamgir, 1999). We found no single RE paper that explicitly incorporated these replacement costs and associated risks in their analysis of the purchasing decision. Â  Reliability The reliability of electricity provision is an important parameter in the customer’s decision-to-connect. We understand reliability as a combination of quality, service level and suf? ciency (timely delivery of desired quantity). Peters et al. (2010) con? rm that locally conceived projects could overcome barriers that would otherwise arise, while Hossein Mondal et al. (2010) state that involving local stakeholders will facilitate RET diffusion. Involving the community from the conception stage thus reduces the ‘not invented here syndrome’ and improves acceptance of new technologies. They conclude that technology push projects seldom involve local communities and that this lack of involvement might be one of the crucial reasons for their demise. On an outcome level, Reiche et al. (2000) state that giving local communities ownership will also increase sustainability.

Thursday, February 13, 2020


LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR (520) - Case Study Example 171). In order to foster good relationship with the customers, it is imperative that the employees know how the customers form perceptions, what factors play a role in affecting their perceptions about the salespersons or the company’s products for the better and worse, and what behaviors in the salespersons are appreciated by the customers. Since statistics are available that reflect that the employees who have had good terms with the customers have outperformed their coworkers in terms of sales, understanding the process of formation of perceptions and development of attributed by the customers becomes very important for Joe’s employees. Suitability of Leaning Theories Several learning theories are suitable for Joe to apply in this situation that include but are not limited to operant conditioning learning theory and social learning theory. While there are certain theories that apply more in the case under consideration as compared to others, none can be completely re futed as most learning theories apply at least to some extent. ... Employees come in the company and try their fortune by executing their individualistic behaviors; for some, it works whereas for others, it does not. Employees are only able to find out the impact of their behaviors on their ability to make sales after they have executed their behaviors as part of the company’s workforce. Likewise, since the employees are provided with the opportunity to earn certain commission on the list price, they are motivated to make more sales to make more commission which makes it obvious that the reward is tied to the performance, thus justifying the suitability of the operant conditioning theory for Joe in this case. On the other hand, the social learning theory is also suitable for application in this case because many behaviors are learnt by the employees in the workplace. For example, employees can witness that their coworkers who have fostered good relations with the customers are able to make more sales as compared to other employees who do not manage to develop as good relations with the customers. Having observed this, employees feel intrinsically motivated to take steps to develop good relations and association with the customers. However, certain end up achieving this successfully whereas others fail to develop good relations with the customers, and the social learning theory provides rationale for this difference. According to social learning theory, while people may observe what behaviors lead to success in a particular setting, it is not imperative that this learning brings a change in their behavior. Although the employees know the importance of fostering good relationships with the employees, yet they fail to enhance their sales because this learning did not cause them to

Saturday, February 1, 2020

What is the best way to motivate employees to perform better Essay

What is the best way to motivate employees to perform better - Essay Example The other school of thought is that workers are motivated to perform better by internal motivating factors, such as achievement, enjoyment, a sense of competence, and personal loyalty to employees, which are factors that drive employees to work better or harder (intrinsic motivation) (Linder, 1998: p6). What all have in common, however, is that whether external or internal, rewards play an essential role in job satisfaction for the employee. When examining the internal factors that motivate employees, it has been found that the behaviour of employees is linked to attitudes and that the motivation for employees is not solely dependent on money (Lindner, 1998: p7). Internal factors of motivation consist of variables that are directly associated with the work of team members with such dimensions as challenging work environments, autonomy, and responsibility being closely linked with intrinsic motivation of employees. Indeed, interesting work has been identified as one of the most important internal factors of motivation, while having a sense of ownership concerning the work and output also acts as a major motivating factor. There is no clear agreement on where the responsibility for providing these set of motivating factors comes from, however. This is in line with Lindners (1998: p7) idea that these motivating factors differ within the organizational context that the employee works in. Under a ‘rewards’ system, it is clear that it is up to the management to provide motivation for employees. Longenecker (2011: p11) states that managers are responsible for motivating employees to use their talents and energy more willingly by encouraging ownership through maintenance of productive relationships and developing trust with individual employees. Lindner (1998: p) also identifies managers as being responsible for motivating their employees, noting that they should ensure that the work