Introduction

The success of any business organization largely depends on the effectiveness of its business model.  Instances of poor business models in any organization will consequently lead to underperformance and an overall decline in the organization’s profits. Although there has been no definite definition of the term, academicians have defined a business model as the way a company through which an organization operates. An effective business model is the one that covers all the customers’ needs and wants (Masanell and Ricart).  Business managers must also have a good understanding of how the business models works if the organization’s success will be a reality. It is argued that smart companies know how to strengthen the virtuous cycles that result from the business model that leads to increased efficiency and effectiveness as compared to other competitors.

Argument

It is imperative noting that most organizations are trying to create innovative business models while others are striving to improve on their existing ones. Nevertheless, most of these business identities are striving to create their business models with total disregard of their competitor’s reactions to their business model. Business entities have failed to take business models as the building block of their competitiveness. It is worth noting that business model involves making choices and these choices have consequences on the overall performance of the organization. To have mitigation effects on these choices, it is paramount for such organizations to engage in radical transformations that focus on modification and innovation (Masanell and Ricart). The interaction of the business model with those of the competitors remains one of the essential aspects in formulating business models. A business model that is implemented in isolation will to a great extent undermine the company’s success.

As aforementioned, a good business model is the one that addresses the entire consumers’ needs and wants at a reasonable cost. The business model is expected to address some important aspects such as customer value proposition, profit formula, key resources and key processes. All these basic elements in the formulation of business models will entail making important choices for the thriving of the business. The most important choices involved in the formulation of the business model include; policy choices, assets choices, and government choices. As the saying goes’’ choices have consequences’’ and these choices, have both flexible and rigid consequences.  Rigid consequences are detrimental to the organization’s success since these companies will require time to build them.

Formulation of business models entails making choices, and these choices have consequences. The emerging consequences lead to making fresh choices, and the process continue bringing about what is commonly referred to as Virtuous cycles. These virtuous cycles are said to be the source of effectiveness and competitiveness of the business entity since it strengthens the business model. For instance, virtuous cycles in a business model can lead to maximized profits as a result of increased low costs and prices (Masanell and Ricart). In such cases, managers in an organization will have cycles that allow for lower prices that grow sales and consequently lead to increased profits. This process continues, and the organization competitiveness is maintained.

It is nevertheless imperative noting that not all business models that work equally well to the advantage of the organization. A good business model should be in alignment with the organization’s goals, be self-reinforcing and also robust (Masanell and Ricart). The virtuous cycle must ensure that a business model upholds the above characteristics and at the same time provide feedback loops that are self-reinforcing. Most leaders have over the years failed to match their choices regarding assets, policy, and governance to other essential aspects of the business model.

When making choices in the formulation of the business model, the managers should be wary of the company’s goals. It is imperative that the choices made should enable the company to achieve its goals. Failure to consider the organizational goals in making decisions can lead to low business and competitive edge of the business. Also, the choices must also complement one another to ensure that there is internal consistency in the operations of the business. Choices must ensure that the consumers’ desires are adequately addressed (Masanell and Ricart). The choices made in developing the business model should also ensure robustness of the business model. The business model should be able to sustain its effectiveness for reasonable periods and be able to fend off threats from slack, imitation, sub-situation and hold ups.  A good business model should be sustainable to ensure that the competitive advantage of the organization is not compromised.

Conclusion

In conclusion, creating a winning business model involves making choices in essential operations within the organizations. All the choices made have consequences that lead to more choices and consequently lead to the generation of virtuous cycles that continuously improve the business model. It is nevertheless essential understanding that the generation of virtuous cycles does not continue forever. There is normally a limit that triggers counterbalancing cycles or a moment of slowness resulting from interaction with another business model. This ultimately leads to erosion of the competitive advantage of the firm (Masanell and Ricart). It is therefore of paramount importance that organizations should always strive to strengthen their virtuous cycles to enable completion with rivals. Improvement of these cycles must also ensure that the business model meets all the characteristics of a good model such as goal alignment and robustness.

Question Two: Kanter’s framework on leadership

Introduction

Leadership is an important aspect of the success of any organization. It is nevertheless imperative noting that not all leaders can make effective decisions especially during crisis times in their organizations. The challenging moments in an organization poses great challenges to leaders who views these challenges as the end their business entities. Most are the times when leaders doubt their leadership capabilities in moments when their leadership traits are greatly missed (Kanter). Efficient managers are ones who rise to the occasion and offer solutions to challenges facing the organization. As a result, Kanter’s framework on leadership and how to stretch their mental capabilities becomes an integral tool for improved leadership.  The framework provides a framework through which leaders can improve their problem-solving capabilities.

Argument

In his framework ‘’Zoom In Zoom Out,’’ Kanter uses the issue of the lens to help leaders in making decision making. He argues that the lens through which leaders view the world is the reason as to why one can make good strategic decisions or poor strategic decisions. To make it easy to understand, Kanter uses the zooming in digital gadgets to explain how different people will have a different view on a certain issue. When using an electronic gadget, zooming out enables one to see a broader picture than what one sees when you zoom in (Kanter). The zoom buttons present in electronic devices helps one examine images from various viewpoints. The different views will lead to different conclusions and Kanter used this metaphor to explain the different modes of strategic thinking and decision making.

The provision of this framework is a great reality in the decision-making process in modern organizations. From the provision the zoom framework, modern aspiring leaders can borrow insights that can help increase the range of vision and establish conditions that are of great importance to the success of others. Leaders will always face challenges in their leadership roles, and their decision making will to a large extent be influenced by the zooming in and zooming out hypothesis. For instance, by zooming in, leaders can get the details into sharp focus. When one zooms in, there are chances that one will see clear and large but may lack some context. As a result, leaders will make hasty decisions without analyzing the underlying factors. When leaders zoom in, the decision making lacks proper background information essential for effective decision making (Kanter). A real case example is when decision making for a family business is entirely a responsibility of the family members with disregard of professional qualifications.  The zoom in managers has resulted in the increasing cases of falling companies in the modern economies.

Also, zoom in managers always look for a quick fix rather than addressing the underlying factors. As a result, the decisions made by close-in managers fail to offer a permanent solution to the challenges facing the organization. In most instances, these are leaders who seek answers from friends rather than seeking professional and experts’ opinions.  It is also evident that most close-in leaders are responsible for the resistance to change eminent in the modern business world. There is a personal approach to dealing with matters of paramount importance to the success f the organization (Kanter). In essence zooming in can lead to obscured bigger picture thus leading to poor decision making where important underlying factors are overlooked.

Zooming out decision making is also real. This is a form of decision making where the concept of the big picture is adequately addressed. Zoom out managers are concerned with the finest details that surround an important aspect of the management of the organization’s affairs. Managers who zoom out play an important role in enabling others participate in problem-solving. By zooming out, people involved in decision making will be able to remain focused on the larger principles and the context within which the organization operations are based. Personalizing issues in such management style is not condoned, and institutional capabilities are always upheld. This supports long term big picture thinking where broad visions are implemented.

Conclusion

In conclusion, close-in and far-out modes of decision making are real and evident in the modern society. It is also imperative noting that none of the two modes is free of shortcomings. While the zoom out modes overlooks important underlying issues, zoom out leaders are at the risk of neglecting to notice the moment of action on one promising path. The leaders may fail to get certain essential aspect important for broad vision.  It is, therefore, recommendable for leaders to create a balance between close-in and far-out modes to have effective decision making (Kanter). Zooming can also help leaders to be proactive in preventing events to becoming crises. A combination of zoom in –zoom out hypothesis can also be instrumental in identifying new opportunities and create a broad vision.

Question Three: C-level executives

Introduction

Job requirements at organizations’ top management have been an important topic in the recent years. The roles of the executive in the management and strategic positioning of organizations is becoming an important aspect in the recent years. C-level executives are expected to have different levels of skills that will be essential in the realization of the organizational objectives (Groysberg, Kelly and MacDonald). Executives’ abilities are an essential aspect especially among the aspiring executives in the modern dynamic business world. The level of competition among the organizations has also significantly increased, and firms will largely depend on these abilities for the sustained competitiveness.

Argument

There are different C-suite positions where individual’s capabilities have great influence on the overall performance of the organization.  It has been noted that technical and functional expertise is less important as compared to leadership skills required in C-executives. These positions include; chief marketing officer, chief supply-chain management officer, chief human resources officer, CIO, CFO, CEO and general counsel just to mention a few. It is argued that, for one to thrive under the above roles, it is imperative that one is a strong communicator, a collaborator, and a strategic thinker (Groysberg, Kelly and MacDonald). All these traits are essential leadership skills that will be of great significance in the organization’s strategic set up.

As aforementioned, leadership skills will be more valid in C-executive roles as compared to the functional and technical expertise. For instance, strong communication is an important leadership skill that the C-executives must possess. An organization’s CEO will be expected to give insights to the rest of the business community.  Passing f information from the top-most management level to the subordinates becomes an important part of realizing organizational goals. On this note, the executives should be great collaborators. The success of any business depends on the team spirit of all the stakeholders within the organization. It will, therefore, be prudent for these executive leaders to collaborate amongst themselves and the subordinates for the overall success of the organization. Also great thinking and open-mindedness will also be critical for the overall organizational strategic settings.

Although the leadership skills supersede the functional and technical expertise, the skills vary with time and geographical settings. These variations has also brought about some C-suite positions being more important than others. Different company and organizational settings in the current times is different from the one twenty years ago, and the trend will also change in future.  As a result, some of these C-suit professions will be less important as compared to others (Groysberg, Kelly and MacDonald). For instance, chief financial officer (CFO) will be among the powerful C-executives in future. This is because their roles have been advancing every year.  Unlike in early years where the CFO was just a steward, the position is currently a strong one whereby the CFO has a strategic role. The CFO has a role of helping the CEO and the business management in finding new opportunities and assesses strategic financial merits and risks.

Just like is the case for the CFO, the General Counsel has become an important figure in the modern business world. This trend is expected to carry on in the coming years as the business world becomes more complex and dynamic.  There has been increased attention to risk management amongst the business world. As a result, the General Counsel has become an important figure in the modern business world and plays different roles in crisis management, mergers and executive recruitment amongst others. Chief supply chain management officer and the CEO will also be an important executive role in the coming years. With increased globalization, strategic positioning in supply will be vital. On shore and off shore sourcing is becoming increasingly important in the recent years and this trend is expected to increase in future.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the C-level executives form an important part of the company’s strategic setting. Their roles are becoming increasingly important as the dynamics and globalization in the business world change. Unlike in the past where these executives were expected to concentrate simply in their respective areas, the modern business world requires them to active members of the business top decision-making organ. C-suite executives are expected to offer insights to the CEO on strategic insights aimed at enhancing the competitive edge of their respective companies. It is, therefore, prudent for the executives in the modern business world to be good team players, strategic thinkers and also have good communication skills. In essence, the functional and expertise qualifications will be becoming less and less important in future as the essential leadership traits become important. The executives have the role of improving the productivity of the business and also motivate the subordinates to work towards the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the organization.

(Works cited)

Groysberg, Boris, L. Kevin Kelly, and Bryan MacDonald. “The New Path To The C-Suiteare You Ready For The Big Job? How The Road To The Top Is Shifting—And What Changes Lie Ahead”. Harvard Business Review (2011): n. pag. Print.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. “Zoom In, Zoom Outthe Best Leaders Know When To Focus In And When To Pull Back.”. Harvard Business Review 112 (2011): n. pag. Print.

Masanell, Ramon Casadesus-, and Joan E. Ricart. “How To Design A Winning Business Model Smart Companies’ Business Models Generate Cycles That, Over Time, Make Them Operate More Eff Ectively”. Harvard Business Review 100 (2011): n. pag. Print.

 
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?