The Competitive Advantages of Apple Inc Literature review

The Competitive Advantages of Apple Inc - Literature review Example John Wiley & Sons. 15 Bibliography 17 Literature Review Interrelationship between Leadership and Organizational Commitment In the year 1993, Drucker had mentioned that the performance and quality of the managers are significant influential factor to decide organizational success. A company without effective leadership would not be able to transform the internal resources to its competitive advantage. It would not be denied that there is a close relationship among the leadership style and organization development. In the year 1990, Bass made one study in which it was pretty observable that around 45 % to 65 % of the total factors which are responsible of causing either success or failure would be decided by the organizational leaders. Definition of Leadership Leadership is an ability to persuade any group towards the attainment of goals. In the year 1964, Tannenbaum and others have considered leadership as an influential factor in human relations. Leadership is an attribute guiding a group of people to achieve preset goals through communication. According to Fiedler, leadership can be assumed to be a type of relationship to make the group members work together and achieve common goal. Rauch and Behling in 1984 and Hsieh in the year 1993 considered leadership as a process to influence any group to approach the goals. Theories of Leadership Since twentieth century, a number of theories and literature had been introduced to prove different standpoints. Four major perspectives had been shown through these theories. Some of the theories are articulated in the later segment (Wu et. al., 2006, p.438- 440). Trait Theories According to Stogdill (1963) and Davis (1972), a successful leader must posses certain personality traits. Behavior Theories In 1957, Halpin and Winer had introduced two dimensions, initiating consideration and structure. Following the same, a number of studies conducted by Stogdill, Likert and Kotter also introduced certain behavioral attributes of le adership. Contingency Theories In the year 1967, Fiedler has introduced the contingency model of leadership. In the year 1971, House came up with a path-goal theory by extracting details from the research carried out by Ohio State University as well as the expectancy theory of motivation. In the year 1977, Blackchard and Hersey introduced situational leadership theory considering two leadership sides in terms of relationship behaviors and tasks and mix and matching the intensity of these two to come up with specific leadership types: selling, telling, delegating and participating. As per Contingency theory, the leaders of any group are required to opt for an appropriate leadership style considering the readiness of the following group. The selling style can be effective for willing but unable subordinates; while, the telling styles can reap good results for the unwilling and unable followers. Leaders usually use participating style when his or her followers are willing but unable. T he delegating style seems to be good for followers who are able but unwilling to do the tasks (Wu et. al., 2006, p.438- 440). Non Charismatic Theories: These theories include the theories on transformational and transactional leadership styles. These two are pretty well known in the arenas of leadership theories. According to the transactional leadership theory, both superior as well as the subordinate would influence each other to derive value of that exchange. Transactional leader

Can socialism be achieved within a capitalist society Essay

Can socialism be achieved within a capitalist society - Essay Example The forces of demand, supply and availability of goods determine prices. As a result, there exists a huge gap between individuals in possession of capital and the ones without. Under capitalism, the government has little control over labour forces (Wu, 2002, p. 56; Yunker, 2009, p. 56). Although socialism idea was noble, its enforcement in a modern capitalist society can prove to be retrogressive rather that progressive (Hancke?, Martin, and Mark, 2007, p. 34). The introduction of socialist elements would prove inefficient and wasteful in a capitalist economy. This owes to the difficulties that arise in the organization of production by socialists. Moreover, socialists remain vague on the manner in which the system should be effectively integrated without harming the more stable capitalist form of governance. Gross misconceptions and indolence of the masses about the intentions of socialism also threaten its practicality (Hancke? et al., 2007, p. 58). In effect, this would challenge the scientific thought of rational conduct over life, which promotes rational economic calculations. Socialism would fail to address scarcity, an economic problem, if introduced in a capitalist society. Scarcity stems from the unlimited wants versus limited resources to meet them. Capitalism solves this problem through the theory of value, which asserts that an individual can only chose a good whose value is appeasing. Preference therefore sets the platform for monetary valuations and prices. Socialists do not value pricing or the determination of prices by economic agents. Without prices, valuations of goods and services would not adequately support satisfaction of wants through expending acquired incomes from specialized division of labour (Watson, and Hassett, 2008, p. 121). Socialism, through its limitation of the absence of fluctuating prices and free markets, would undermine proper use of resources in a capitalist society. It is nearly impossible to imagine a successful societ y that prevents free expression of preferences through a pool of prices. Random and frequent valuations of a resource through the forces of supply and demand are the only sure way of determining whether it is being used effectively to meet human wants. It would be impossible for socialist ideas like these to thrive in a highly competitive capitalist society where only the strong survive (Yunker, 2009, p. 112). While competitiveness in a capitalist society drives civilization, socialist ideas would lead to slow growth. This is because decision making and planning become centralized with bureaucracy standing in the way of development and growth. There is also the aspect of collective effort rather than personal challenge that leaves the society exposed to inefficiency and laxity. There is no place for laxity in a capitalist society as everyone is encouraged to work hard to attain personal development, which often reflects in the overall performance of the economy. Socialists cannot gu arantee adequate service to consumers while maximizing profits compared to capitalists. This efficiency arises from the promotion of private ownership of factors of production, which socialists oppose (Lawler III, 2009, p. 6). Freedom by private owners like proprietors and entrepreneurs to acquire and dispose property sets them on the path to determining true prices that reflect market forces of demand and supply. Through such freedom to calculate and