Porter's Management Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Porter's Management Theory - Essay Example The book, which has been published in nineteen languages and re-printed approaching sixty times, changed the way business leaders' minds worked. Further, it remains a guide of choice for strategic managers on a global scale. Apart from being rich in lessons about why and how industries, regions, and nations succeed or fail, this book is of great value as the first serious attempt to develop a really original grand theory of national economic development processes since the early years of Postwar development economics, and one of the most original ways of thinking about development policy in years. This brings us to a discussion on the technicalities of the model proposed by Porter. Porter's Five Forces model provides suggested points under each main heading. When taken into consideration individually, each of these gives rise to the development of a broad and sophisticated analysis of competitive position. This may further be used during the creation of a strategy, plans, or even where making investment decisions about a business or organization is concerned. These five competitive forces determine industry profitability and attractiveness apart from being responsible for shaping the prices that firms can charge, the costs they have to bear, and the required investments to engage in industry level competition. We are concerned with the fact that Porter's essentially ahistorical approach cannot provide a full account of either a nation's competitive advantage and corporate strategies or the growth and development of industrial clusters. For this, let us first understand competitive advantage. Competitive advantage is the response of afirm to the pressing need to organize and perform discrete activities. While these needs may not be perpetually spelt out, it is the responsibility of the planners and executers of policies to foresee such situations when catering for growth and development of the firm n various levels. So does this mean that we are dealing with changes and issues only on an individual level and not a national level The basic explanation for this comes from the fact that any change on an individual level is effected by changes on a national level. Yet, Porter's theory cannot accommodate strategies and competitiveness at such levels due to various constraints. The first of these emerges from the fact that people run businesses and economies - and everyone has his or her own unique style. These cannot be covered at length when talking which factors and resources will be utilized in which combination. Thus Porter's theory does not provide an accurate account of the diversity and dynamism in the corporate and commercial environment that businesses and firms thrive in. Secondly, there are various activities to take into consideration. The activities performed when competing in a particular industry can be grouped into categories, as these activities can be divided broadly into primary activities and support activities. It has been noted that primary activities are those involved in the ongoing production, marketing, delivery, and servicing of the product.

Pharmacy Law & Ethics Coursework Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Pharmacy Law & Ethics Coursework - Essay Example The consequence of this to the pharmacy profession in Great Britain is significant considering that its governing body is a dual function entity – both performing regulatory role and professional leadership function. The present set up of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB hereafter) therefore, runs counter to the Government’s present thrust which is to make health professional regulatory bodies totally independent to be credible to the public. In line with this, the RSPGB is set to demerge its two functions through the creation of a separate regulatory body to be called General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC hereafter) and a separate new professional body, both to take place in 2010 (About the Society 2009). The need to establish a separate regulatory body for the pharmacy profession demerged from the present RPSGB structure was underpinned by Lord Carter of Coles, who headed the Working Party on Professional Regulation and Leadership in Pharmacy in early 2007. In the foreword of the Party’s Report at the conclusion of its review, he said that the justification of a new and separate regulatory body for the profession was keeping in step with the shift in the functional direction of pharmacists from its original â€Å"‘product-focused service’ to a truly clinical profession, directly caring for patients and the public† (MPI 2007 p 4). Subsequently, the Health and Care Act 2008 paved the way for the creation of the GPhC (s 5,  § (2) (1A), Schedule 8). At present, consultations are being undertaken for draft Pharmacy Order 2009, a secondary legislation which will lay down the details of the establishment of the GPhC (DH 2009). In addition, an independent group, called the Pharmacy Regulation and Leadership Oversight Group (PRLOG) chaired by Ken Jarrold CBE, was created to render advice to Ministers in the setting up of the