Write a word report, part of the assessment is on your ability to systematically organize and professionally present information you think a potential investor or other interested parties would need/want to know.
Task: Develop and present a 5-minute ‘pitch’ for a group of interested investors and successful entrepreneurs. This will be a dragon’s den style event.
Understanding Dawn and Dusk: The Evolution of Capitalism from the Perspectives of Fordism and Post-Fordism. The quest for benefit was not a science conceived idealize. Rather, as one mechanical or hierarchical development after another prompted consistently expanding rates of incremental change in the productivity and viability of the endeavor. These enhancements either lessened the cost structure, expanded the market request or both. It was simply such an ‘incremental’ change in the mid twentieth century that drove Henry Ford and his Model T to start a period of ‘namesake’ free enterprise that ruled until the 1980’s and perseveres even today. The techniques that started the time of private enterprise known as Fordism was less simply the extra of a sequential construction system yet rather a line that moved to the laborer rather that the a different way. This innovation of this technique was not new, having been used in Chicago slaughterhouses since at any rate the 1890’s nevertheless it was the first occasion when that it have been utilized on such a scale to shopper products with the end impact of making the car moderate. Maybe considerably more imperatively, the use of this technique to vehicle generation, empowered the utilization of extra authoritative innovations to be conveyed. For instance, bottlenecks and other generation issues could be promptly recognized and tackled and it ended up feasible for fewer directors to ‘control’ the yield of a bigger gathering of laborers (Grint, 1991, p. 294-295; Clarke, 1992, p. 17). In view of the hierarchical change in outlook, these techniques were rapidly and effectively received at different organizations in an a wide range of businesses. Together, changes presented in innovation and administration made ready to more extensive sociological changes. At the core of these was the ascent of “administration” as controlling impact upon specialists. While Taylorism executed strict proportions of control and effectiveness to the specialists, the hierarchical effect of Fordism outfit singular profitability once more into the firm. In some routes, rehearses at the Ford Motor Company were very dynamic, for example, his “Five Dollar Day” strategy by which specialists were paid for their chance. While noteworthy from a work point of view, it likewise justifies remarked on in light of the way this was remuneration. Not simply “pay” but instead pay for turning into a gear-tooth in a haggle purported ‘factor of generation’ under fairly unforgiving conditions. While some should seriously think about Ford to be liberal to pay his representatives so an aggregate, others may not that it could likewise be seen as an especially wise intends to diminish truancy, work interferences, low quality and maybe in particular, as a way to fight off enthusiasm for exchange unionization by specialists. Truth be told, once established, the outcomes were sensational as coming up next were watched, “truancy tumbled from 10% to under 0.5%… turnover tumbled from about 400% to under 15%… . efficiency climbed so drastically that notwithstanding the multiplying of wages and shortening of the workday generation costs fell” (Clarke, 1992, pp. 20-21). With respect to association and sociological ramifications, previously, the prevailing strategy for work was the “expert” who was a talented laborer and invested [his] energy in making particular and remarkable tasks and the family was, it could be said the essential financial unit of generation (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 191). Passage required moderately few specialists but instead he required numerous nearly untalented laborers that were eager to submit to Tayloristic-type administration in return for “… routinely rising wages… and additionally broad assurances of business security” (Freidman 2000, p. 60). The across the board work of a developing American white collar class by a developing number of vast, vertically incorporated oligopolistic firms reared the start of large scale manufacturing. With consistently expanding levels of profitability because of more up to date innovations and more noteworthy authoritative control, more merchandise were delivered at even lower cost levels. Of course, consequently, this realized new levels of mass utilization of mass-created items by the thriving positions of the regular workers (Friedman, 2000, pp. 59-60). This delivered a cycle that was both self-fortifying and self-digging in. As the arrangement of Fordism propagated itself, it started to make somewhat of a beast. Nearly by definition, Fordism is embodied and stereotyped by expansive organizations. For instance, General Motors, utilizing indistinguishable strategies from Ford (General Motorism does not have a remarkable ring to it of Fordism), turned into the biggest company in world in the 1950’s to the degree that this one firm macroeconomically affected the US net national item (consider Wal-Mart today with over $250,000,000,000 in yearly deals). These organizations that made their benefits on economies of scale on the utilization of merchandise that were mass-delivered and mass-expended until the point when they hit somewhat of a ‘hindrance’ in the 1970’s. These hindrances went up against the type of various verifiable occasions and additionally developing patterns. For instance, the oil emergency of the 1970’s, a wheat lack and turmoil among composed work bunches notwithstanding an “immersion of the market in purchaser durables” let to the start of the finish of what had came to be known as the Fordism period. The extensive, these progressions were most noteworthy for the sorts of organizations that benefitted most from the mechanical and hierarchical advancements that made them. In this way, the progressions for ‘enormous’ corporate America happened through the joined marvels of changes in business sectors and changes in labor, amusing however fitting as the specific things that made them were fixing them, or, at any rate, making them figure out how to re-make themselves as conditions changed (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 181). As America purchasers had devoured about everything they could, firms started to sensibly search out new markets, for example, Latin America, Asia or European districts that presently couldn’t seem to be not really contacted with respect to US created shopper merchandise. This globalization of business presented various ‘new’ ideas to US firms. Maybe in particular, that basically offering a similar gadget may not be a way to benefit. Strangely enough, the corporate monster General Motors, in the now universal story, was one of the first to find this exercise as administration saw extremely disillusioning deals for the Chevrolet Nova vehicle south of the US fringe. Just later did they discover that “No va” precisely means “no go”… a hard yet significant exercise as America goes worldwide. Inside the fringes of the US, it was not that buyers never again needed to make buys, rather, they needed new items. Tuning in to the market was not a quality of the Fordist framework. As Henry Ford himself said concerning the Model T, “… any shading you need, as long as its dark”, large scale manufacturing was not noted for being adaptable. The possibility of adaptability wound up integral to the development of what has come to be known as the post-Fordism time. “Adaptability” is reflected in post-Fordism in various ways. Concerning business, with an end goal to adapt to changes sought after, enterprises started to swing to the thought of adaptable business courses of action so as to dodge the high settled expenses of keeping up an expansive workforce during low interest. This was reflected by a little, center workforce that was enhanced by subcontractors and low maintenance specialists and, transitory laborers, if necessary (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 183). This is much as opposed to the majority of representatives who, either through the business or the Union, worked on the preface of life-time work. Another methods by which post-Fordism utilized the idea of flexibity in business was the presentation of thoughts, for example, ‘broadly educating’. As opposed to having a one individual – one particular occupation mantra, the new time of profitability upheld workers who were prepared to do any number of errands. This adaptable usefulness underway workers was received by organizations with having the capacity to adjust quicker to changing interest and by representatives keeping in mind the end goal to enhance occupations and to increase expanded business security (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 187); Grint, 1991, pp. 296-297). Also, firms started to outsource non-center capacities, for example, cleaning or security to accomplish bring down expenses and lessen the extent of administrations regularly going with expansive organizations (Friedman 2000, p. 71). Generally speaking, the adjustment in business sectors and market weights and in addition the movements in labor systems that started to be recognizable in the 1970’s, denoted the change of the predominance of a couple of oligopolistic firms from 50 years rule of large scale manufacturing to the present time of ‘mass customization’. Apparently inconsistent with each other, the expressions “mass customization” uncover a dynamic strain that is as obvious on the processing plant floor and is in the commercial center. As advancements rose that made it conceivable to store and break down a lot of information slammed into the capacity to accurately control fabricating forms, the truth of having the capacity to cost adequately presented client asked for changes in the procedures of generation proclaimed the introduction of mass customization. A distinct difference to a ‘one-choice’ Model T, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler (the ‘Enormous 3’) offered a plenty of models and choices going from shading, upholstery and inside arrangements, motors, transmissions and all the more for to a great extent indistinguishable expense from one ‘off the rack’. This adaptability is effectively reflected by a discussion with any US individual over age 25 when asked what requesting anything other than a ‘stock cheeseburger’ resembled in the eighties. Presently, the experience is vastly different with Burger King notwithstanding going to far as to receive the motto, “We do it your way.” While mass customization keeps on developing and thrive, large scale manufacturing isn’t dead>