Participating in any economic activity presupposes dealing with the lack of balance between the existing resources and the factors that affect the entrepreneurship in question. While markets are represented by a correlation between demand and supply, the specified variables are rather unstable, not to mention the internal and external factors that affect markets and their development, e.g. the political forces, the changes in customer trends, etc (Kshetri 27). Herein the reason for the lack of stability in most markets lies.
On the other hand, however, all of the existing types of entrepreneurship can also be characterized by being based on a large number of paradoxes. Particularly, the correlation between creativity and the need to comply with the company rules deserves to be mentioned.
The inconsistency between the concepts such as planning and a degree of uncertainty, which a company always has to deal with, though typically added to the lineup of the existing problems that the leader of entrepreneurship has to fight, can also be viewed as a positive phenomenon (Schwinge 93).
To be more exact, the issue of the lack of certainty can be turned into a major advantage of the enterprise by introducing the principle of creativity to the organization. As a result, the business leader will prompt its members to see an opportunity for improvements in every change that occurs to the company and, therefore, seize this opportunity to improve the overall performance of it.
Particularly, the use of uncertainty to the advantage of the organization may begin with the introduction of the latest technological innovations to manage the subject matter by creating stronger ties with the customers’ community.
Therefore, the factor in question (i.e., the correlation between the misbalance of the economic and technological environment and the planning process) can be viewed as a threat to the overall progress of the firm: “The rhetoric on uncertainty among ICT people is also likely to create uncertainty outside their own community of practice, in whom the concept of newer versions of technology itself is translated in ‘risk’ rather than ‘opportunity’” (Bernasconi, Harris, and Moensted 23).
The specified phenomenon is a graphic example of imbalance within entrepreneurship enhanced by the inconsistency in the impact of outside factors. In other words, the effects of the lack of balance within an organization and outside of it are reciprocal.
Hence, it can be assumed that the process of running a business, including the related operational processes, production, logistics, etc., is fraught with dealing with the lack of balance both within a company and in the designated market.
Consequently, none of the theories under analysis is better than the other; in fact, none of the frameworks works on its own once applied to the environment of the global economy.
Quite on the contrary, the theories in question only become viable and applicable once they are combined and applied to the analysis of a particular firm. Planning, in its turn, is not supposed to eliminate every possibility of uncertainty occurring; instead, planning g must serve as the basis for developing a strategy that will help address a particular instance of uncertainty.
Indeed, the paradoxes that can be observed in a company are inhibited by the economic, financial, social and sometimes even political factors of a particular market. A closer look at the issues such a planning vs. uncertainty, etc. Although the paradoxes in question may seem incompatible in the specified environment, the realm of the global economy invites an opportunity for these paradoxes to not only coexist but also be co-dependent.
As a result, a sustainable environment, in which an organization may operate, is created. In other words, the specified theories can be viewed as two ways of looking at the process of running a business. In the realm of the global economy, where organizations are exposed to an increasingly large number of risks on a regular basis, the adoption of both theories for a dual analysis is essential to the existence of these firms.
Therefore, it can be assumed that the theories in question should be viewed as two sides of a coin. Being the exact opposites, they complement each other, thus, helping attain the full picture of the threats that an organization may be exposed to. Hence, they both have an equal degree of significance and should be applied to practical dilemmas together.
Addressing the paradoxes that operating in the realm of the global economy presupposes for most types of entrepreneurship, be it a small, a medium, or a large one, is an inevitable step in becoming a global company. However, the approach adopted by an organization to resolve the specified dilemmas is often unique, as the selection of the corresponding tools by the company hinges on the assets and disadvantages of the firm in question for the most part.
However, a general strategy for managing the above-mentioned concerns is still essential to succeed in the target market, as the environment of the global economy traditionally puts a set of similar obstacles on the way of any organization to its global triumph. Therefore, a paradigm in managing the aforementioned issues can be spotted when carrying out an analysis of global companies and their choices.
Specifically, large companies such as Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc. solve the problems under analysis by dividing the cash flow in an adequate manner so that the resources possessed by the company could be available and easy to allocate. More importantly, the division of the financial assets of the firm helps drive the line between the roles and responsibilities of the shareholders.
Seeing that the companies such as Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc., have several shareholders, it is imperative that the latter should be able to come to an agreement concerning the areas of their influence. It is only with the reconciliation of all parties involved that the process of introducing a business to the concept of sustainability may commence.
Some of the paradoxes specified above, however, are dealt with with the help of a different strategy based on the principles of corporate ethics and corporate citizenship promotion. Specifically, the issue regarding the conflict between the elements such as the staff’s personal ideas of corporate behavior and the company’s standards can be viewed as a graphic example of the need to adopt the standards of corporate ethics and develop corporate citizenship in the firm.
The issues of flexibility and organization, in their turn, are addressed from a variety of angles depending on the principles that a company is guided by. According to the experience of Microsoft regarding the subject matter, the strategy of cannibalization (Sushil and Bhal 15) is applicable to the dilemma of flexibility and entrepreneurship.
Defined as the process involving forced reduction in sales volume and, in some cases, the sales revenue of a particular product for the sake of promoting a different one produced by the same organization (Herzwurm and Margaria-Steffen 33), cannibalization helps arrange the corporate resources in the manner that reduces the threat of a financial loss to zero; as a result, the business has an impressive amount of resources stored for further use in case of an emergency.
Hence, even in the worst-case scenario involving the necessity to spend a significant amount of funds, the organization is capable of covering the costs and retaining its sustainability.
Likewise, companies such as Apple and Microsoft make sure that the correlation between risk-taking and risk management should be of an adequate rate. Apple, for instance, incorporates a strategic approach to address the issue in question; as a result, the company is capable of managing the emerging risks in a timely manner.
Seeing that the strategy in question is based on the link between the cost capital and the factors that the risks under analysis involve, Apple can afford to take rather big risks. Indeed, the strategy in question is linked directly to the financial approach adopted by the company and aimed at reducing costs. Hence, the resources saved by the organization can be utilized for taking risks when it comes to the projects such as branding of a new product, the promotion of a specific brand, targeting a new audience, etc.
The issue regarding the proper use of information technology is also addressed rather efficiently by growth companies. Particularly, the IT devices available to the organization are viewed as tools instead of being an end in itself. Consequently, the specified tools can be repurposed easily and shaped so that their key functions could serve the purposes of an enterprise.
As the examples of Google and Apple show, IT tools can be used for gathering feedback from customers and responding them in a timely manner so that the emerging issues could be addressed properly. Correspondingly, the above-mentioned IT tools can also be used as the means of improving the work process flow in the organization, providing staff members with improved strategies for time management and the related concerns.
Creativity
Although most companies prefer providing staff members with a rigid set of instructions that the latter have to follow, a range of organizations, such as Google and Apple, stress the importance of creativity in the staff’s approach to specific problems.
For instance, the high growth companies such as Google and Twitter encourage creativity in their staff members by encouraging their self-expression and helping them discover their talents: “By allowing its engineers to spend 20% of their work week on projects that interest them, Google is able to tap into the many talents of its employees” (He par. 18).
Analytical Ability
The ability to adopt an analytical approach to the process of decision-making is the feature that companies such as Google and Apple view as essential. Therefore, the organizations in question encourage the development of the specified quality in the members of their staff. Analytical ability is welcomed among the staff members of Google, Inc, Apple, Inc., as well as a range of other enterprises that have become leaders in the environment of the global economy.
Imagination
Spurring creativity, imagination is viewed as an important asset of staff members by a range of globally acclaimed companies, including Google and IBM.
Modern organizations evolving in the environment of the global economy realize that there is a consistent need for firms to produce original ideas and that these ideas may come from any directions, including the company’s staff: “In our fast-evolving market, it’s hard for people to know, or even imagine, what they want.
That’s why we recruit people who believe the impossible can become a reality” (Wojcicki par. 20). In other words, imagination is an indispensable requirement for candidates in most global organizations.
High Autonomy
The concept of staff autonomy has been an issue for a number of organizations due to its ambiguity. On the one hand, employees must follow the set of guidelines provided by the firm without any deviations from the prescribed patterns. On the other hand, a company must encourage staff’s understanding of its key processes and their independence in making company-related decisions.
Herein the need to promote autonomy based on the firm’s concept of ethics lies. As soon as the organization establishes a specific set of ethical values and starts promoting certain patterns of organizational behavior that presuppose enhancement of corporate social responsibility in the staff members, the premises for increasing autonomy rates without affecting the performance rates negatively will emerge.
Leadership
As a rule, most companies realize that leadership skills are not intrinsic and need to be developed in an individual. Therefore, it is not the display of leadership skills in a candidate that most companies seek – although the specified quality is also very appreciated – but the premises for developing these skills later on.
To be more exact, a candidate must possess a range of character traits, such as being quick on their feet, the ability to solve conflicts, impressive organization skills, etc., for a modern company to consider them as valuable resource.
Initiative Taking
As it has been emphasized above, being self-sufficient and independent in their company-related decisions is crucial for the members of global companies’ staff. Herein the need to take initiative for employees lies. As soon as the staff members display engagement in the changes occurring in the firm, the latter is going to prosper.
Tolerance for Ambiguity
Working in the global environment means dealing with a large amount of data that needs to be processed as quickly as possible. Therefore, at some point, the need to deal with rather ambiguous pieces of information emerges. In other words, the data that can be described as raw and, therefore, may incorporate conflicting information, may be supplied to the staff in the course of the company’s operations.
Consequently, it will be reasonable to assume that employees will have to be able to handle ambiguous data and retrieve the information that will define the further course of the company’s operations. While the skill in question can be developed under specific circumstances, it is desirable that the staff members should be able to identify the possible outcomes of ambiguous conditions intuitively.
Intuitive
As it was mentioned above, intuition is an essential quality of an employee working for a global organization. Because of a large number of factors that define the performance rates of an organization, including both internal (company-dependent) and external (inflicted by the outside factors) ones, managers need to rely on their intuitive understanding of the business processes to make the related decisions.
Works Cited
Bernasconi, Michel, Simon Harris, and Mette Moensted. High-Tech Entrepreneurship: Managing Innovation, Variety and Uncertainty. New York, NY: Routledge, 2013. Print.
He, Laura. “Google’s Secrets Of Innovation: Empowering Its Employees.” Forbes 29 Mar. 2013. Web.
Herzwurm, Georg, and Tiziana Margaria-Steffen. Software Business. From Physical Products to Software Services and Solutions: 4th International Conference. Potsdam, Germany: ICSOB, 2013. Print.
Kshetri, Nir. Global Entrepreneurship: Environment and Strategy. New York, NY: Routledge, 2014. Print.
Schwinge, Isabel. The Paradox of Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship in Low-Tech Industries: Evidence from Case Studies of the German Textile Industry. New York, NY: Springer, 2015. Print.
Sushil, Kanika T., and Surya P. Bhal. Managing Flexibility: People, Process, Technology and Business. New York, NY: Springer, 2015. Print.
Wojcicki, Susan. “The Eight Pillars of Innovation.” Think with Google 2 Jul. 2011. Web.