Performance Factors In Business Organizations: Technology And Sustainability

Technology as a Performance Measure

Discuss About The Performance Factors In Business Organizations?

The global market is highly competitive and there are performance factors, which organizations use to measure their success (Daley, 2012). Different industries have different goals therefore require varied measures of performance. However, there are common factors that contemporary organizations should invest in today. The global environment is highly competitive and brands keep inventing and reinventing themselves in order to survive. These are important tools for measuring performance in different operations. Among the most important functions are customer service, marketing, financial and human resource. The agenda for the implementation of these factors depends on the organization’s goals, objectives and criteria for success (Braun, et al., 2013). An organization may have measures for specific departments or a centralized approach to defining performance. The success of the plan depends on the implementation of the strategies. This review of literature discusses four aspects of performance that are necessary for organizational performance in a global organization. The survival of modern organizations depends on an integrated approach because there is no alternatives to these elements (Callister & Rethwisch, 2012). This review discusses technology, sustainability, employees and customers as crucial measures for continuous improvement in organizations. It looks at the pros and cons in order to suggest an integrated approach.

Wang &Jian (2012) examine leadership and competence in organizations to point out the role of technology in knowledge sharing. Leadership styles in organizations today cannot survive without technology. From the article’s point of view, innovation is important in all areas of business management. The research terms the current global market as te surbodinates. Its analysis indicates that leaders need to instil innovative approaches to their employees in order for the organization to excel in its goals. The artcicle uses the example of service innovation to explain the role of knowledge sharing in personnel development. Most researchers suport the use of technological innovation in the improvement of service and product development processes (Bocken, et al., 2014). Technology has a wide array of applications for workplace, supply chain and customer functions. This artcles’ focus is on on workplace and interorganizational perfomance. From the findings, knowledge sharing, network competencies and organizational relationships interconnect to define innovation performance in the service industry. the article conclusively states that the organization needs quality structures and network capcity for high tech performance. This model is good for businesses and knowledge sharing sytems such as the online entreprises which depend on the internet for various functions.

Sustainability as a Performance Tool

The article’s discussion mentions the role of leadership in leading the improvement process. Research into the concept of innovation and leadership points at organizational strategy as the news strategies through leadership (Davila, et al., 2012). Online technology connects the organizations to the global markets. Leaders in the organization have a responsibility of developing competent network systems that positions the organization for suces. Perfomance measured through competence includes technology skills such as email communication, microsoft office, database management and digital applications. The article refer to interorganizational collaborations using technology support systems. Cloud computing is one of the common shared technology platforms for global organizations. Creating a competitve edge is about adding strategic importance to the processes such as value chain and customer care among others. The article stresses the importance of leaders developing these technology competencies. Proponents of  Key perfomance Indicators ( KPIs) agree (Parameter, 2015). Leaders in all sectors know how to manipulate technology tools and software applications for excellence because it provides artifical intelligence. In the article, competencies help organizations to excell. It encourages personal innovation as well as knowledge transfer. Effective performance techniques should not focus on the organizational alone but a holistic approach (Callister & Rethwisch, 2012).

The article acknowledges the challenge of knowledge sharing through technology. Its limiting factors discourages the development of inter-organizational network systems. Among the issues of concern is security and privacy violations, which places organizational data at risk of manipulation (FTC, 2017). Business organizations face the risk of data breach when unauthorized persons get access to confidential links. This is not good for a brand whose image is respectable (Rizkallah, 2017). Performance is about shaping the brand through reputation. This poses a challenge when technology becomes a negative influence rather than a plus. The exposure of strategic ideas to competitors nullifies the essence of performance. The information could compromise the strategic plan of the organization. This article ignores the challenge presented by lack of, limited access to technology as well as constant maintenance (Bharadwaj, et al., 2013). Digital business initiatives have a challenge of elaborating the technology strategy according to the organizational needs. Using concepts and applications from a customer care system in a supply chain could result in chaos. Capturing the organizational objectives in each unit helps to narrow down the implementation with specific tools and devices. The article also fails to mention lack of transparency in knowledge sharing for stakeholders in the same industry.

Andrea, S., 2012. The sustainable firm. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(21), pp. 34-47

Andrea (2012) presents a theoretical dicourse on sustainability as a strategy for business practice. In the article, he emphasises the interdependency that exists in the business processes. He brings out the role of external and internal stakeholders. The article starts by reinforcing the importance of sustainability and sustainable development as signficant in busines management. In the discussion, sustainability is multidimensional and it comprises of green practices, employee welfare as well as community activities. In the article, perfomance uses sustanability to gauge the impact of its processes or projects. Further studies into the phenomenon agree that the concept has social and economic benefits (Elliot, 2011: Orlitzky, et al., 2011). Although the research points out that sustainability has financial returns, most organizations undertake it voluntarily. The article points out that this is due to its limited presence in managerial studies. In disagreement to this notion, Willard (2012) gives examples of how modern organizations are embracing sustainability for risk management in inventory and value chains. Branding experts agree that the concept is more than the social and environmental aspects because it gives brands value and a future (Chu & Arun, 2012). Its appication varies in research, manufacturing, greeen energy, health care and branding.

Bocken, et al.( 2014) supports eco-friendly CSR practices including corporate innovation. Most businesses ignore the incorporation of sustainability in innovation. Technology is one of the techniques which require energy saving tactics. In the article, business activities exhaust resources through wastage, pollution and gas emissions. The suggestion in the discussion is that business management startegies which target sustainability should focus on an integrated approach. Giving the example of greener production, it points to the implication of ignoring sustainailtity. Unlike other perfromance metrics, it has a macroeconomic impact. In the study, there is concern across the globe on sustainable management practices featuring in policies and practices. Research shows that the concept continues to evolve into a value concept that influences stakeholders and financial turnover (Hearly & Palepu, 2012). Business analysis shows the adoption of sustainability in the supply chains for value chain. This tranformation of operational concepts has created a corporate culture that allocates funds and startegies to it. As a perfomance measure, it supports quality development of brands through effcient approaches to operational management. Unfortunately, the article does not discuss the limitation of sustainability as indicated by Ashby, et al (2012). Sustainability also faces future challenges of remaininig relevant to energy production which is on the increase (Sandler, 2011).

Andrea (2012) agrees that sustainability lacks a clear definintion because of this wide perspective. Howevever, he reiterates that the agenda behind sustainability is in environmental protection and social good. Its focus on environmental concerns explains the global adoption of ecofriendly activities in business activities. One of this is the use of Public Relations tactics under the CSR umbrella. However, sustainability as a perfomance element affects industries in energy, technology, waste management, recycling, economics, renewble energy, agriculture and production among others (Reichardt & Rogge, 2016).  This calls for a synthesis of different approaches for success. The article includes a clear definition of the process of developing an effective strategy for sustainability. This includes the design of a plan and definition of boundaries for the instruments or tools of measure. This approach gives an indepth analysis that broadens the application of sustainability in empirical research and practice. This identification prioriticizes the concept to help organizations to have a plan for performance using sustainability in customer segment, suppliers, community and industry stakeholders (Rogers, et al., 2012). This brings out another discusion of criteria and cost factors in sustainable management.

Alfes, K., Trus, C., Soane, E. C. R. C. & Gatenby, M., 2013. The relationship between line manager behavior, percieved HRM practicecs and individual perfomance: Examining the mediating role of engagement. Human Resource Management, 52(6), pp. 839-59.

This article explains the role of individuals in performance management. From the analysis, the relationship between managers and employees leads to performance. Each has a role to play within the allocated tasks.  In a study involving 1796 participants within the service sector in the UK, the article unfolds why employee involvement is critical (Alfes, et al., 2013). In organizational performance, the study of Human Resource has continued to evolve over time. With new ideas, Strategic Human Resource Management was born. The realization that an employee is a significant stakeholder in an organization enables employers to handle each employee individually (Avey, et al., 2011). Investment in motivation and talent management continues to transform global organizations. The article uses social exchange theory to explain the human behavioral factors that influence performance. The theory encourages the use of psychological as well as social factors to understand performance. The article points out that tools used in HRM such as appraisals should have a human face. Other researchers agree that this rationalism guides the development of functional structures for strategic performance. This is the practice and theoretical model used in global organizations whose perspective is in cross-cultural regions.

The findings of the research explain organizational relationships using structural equation model ( SEM).As a recipe for performance it defines the alignment of employees in their task areas according to competencies and talent. Researchers who support this notion state that this approach encourages the use of human intelligence and skills in the organization (Toplak, et al., 2011). The article finds that people are individuals first before they form a team. Therefore, managers need to form teams according to the capacities in an organization. An effective HRM approach does not exclude some employees based on their inadequate abilities. The discussion emphasizes the importance of complementing weaknesses through training and employee interaction (Moynian, et al., 2011). An organization, which strategically positions itself using key performance indicators, needs to balance leadership as well as the subordinates. An effective ranking system provides motivation to the employee who works hard for the performance. Human Resource Management practices support the use of various motivational factors in behavioral management (Meng, 2012). Among this is the use of monetary and non-monetary rewards. Professionals feel attracted to organizations that have good management practices and opportunities for growth.

The research focuses on the service sector; it leaves out other industries where technology is intensive. Some researchers would therefore argue that having an approach that looks at all industries is beneficial (Wilson, et al., 2012). Although relationships and structures are significant in performance, modern HRM practices encompass culture and diversity management. Cross border, workers are searching for more than simple rewards. The need for security, social acceptance and health benefits is wide (Bratton & Jeff, 2012). Performance management needs to look at all these elements including the role of online recruitment and communications. Research proves that employees perform better in areas with advanced technology (Schechner, 2013). However training employees equips them with the necessary skills for the technology. The article does not discuss the improvement of skills to fill in the deficits. Professionals in customer care require modern training to handle smartphone devices, web chats among others. Managers in leadership posts also need orientation on effective video conferencing. The improvement of their competencies adds value to their experience for better jobs and performance levels as Alfes, et al (2013) notes. Proper structures for training and employee recruitment needs to include these as a performance measure.

Sperdin, B., Plank, A. & Grissemann, U., 2013. Enhancing business perfomance of hotels: The role of innovation and customer orientation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, Volume 33, p. 347-356

Sperdin, et al ( 2013) presents a discussion on customer satisfaction and how this stimulates innovation within the organization. The center of the researrch is on business perfomance in the hospitality industry. Besides investing in technology, organizations should influence organizational behavior for customer satisafction. From the article, focusing on the consumer has monetary and non monetary benefits. Acknowledging the globalization and technology impact on consumer trends, the study suggests the redefinition of performance with customer needs such as quality and costs. Traditional research did not place the customer as a major astakehoder in the supply chain but contemorary researcher do (Yu, et al., 2013). The article support customer orientation theory as a factor that influences competitiveness in the industry. However, some theorists would argue that this approach is not reliable because customer perception does not always lead to positioning (De Mooij, 2013). The article advocates for global approaches to customer trends in the hospitality industry. It also points at the use of innovation for market research on the consumer. Customers determine the value of a brand by what it offers. Some researcher suggest the use of customer experience and experential marketing (Andrews, et al., 2012).

From the findings customers have values and believes which influence behavioral choices. If the customer is a measure of perfomance, capturing the trend is important. Some brands measure perfromance of a product or service by consumer reaction online (Choi & Varian, 2012). Contemporary analysists point out that websites, social media and news reactions provide statistics for organizations to hear from the consumer. The article defines the consumer attitude using psychosocial theories that support customer-contact staff. This means the employee may have an impact on consumer choices or vice versa. Sales departments use this appraoch for target marketing (Luo & Shiau, 2012). The article explains the importance of creativity in inlfuencing customer choices. The use of incentives in sales and promotions is also a bonus. This explains why price promotions are common in the advertising world today (Andrews, et al., 2012).

Although the focus on the hospitality industry supports the service industry, the customer is also a significant player in the product segment. Manufacturers reinvent products in order to meet this need (Ageron, et al., 2012). In the tourism industry, customer co-creation of services such as medical tourism in India has redefined the industry (Grissemann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2012). The article calls for more research into the customer factor of performance in the industry in order to support this new framework. The limitation in research for the industry also fails to explain the two conceptual frameworks in the article. These are innovation and customer orientation and business performance and innovation. Most of the research highlighted in the discussion is on customer orientation but scanty data on the business performance influence. As a result, the article leaves out research gaps for inquiry on global effects such as insecurity on the customer needs. The hospitality industry is one of the most adversely affected with terrorism and global insecurity. The article could have used this and sustainability issues in support of its performance notions of measuring performance in hospitality (Kang, et al., 2012).

In conclusion, competent organizations integrate different approaches in an effort to measure performance. The use of technology encourages innovation and new ideas. It also facilitates for improved processes. Wang & Jian  (2012) discuss this from a leadership perspective.  However, this theoretical approach does not have a social aspect to it therefore; it fails in addressing human factors. It leaves out the employee who is an integral part of an organization and the consumer who determines the trend in the industry. Performance measure using sustainability has become a popular notion. Global organizations connect through one agenda of environmental protection. According to Andrea (2012) the CSR practice has economic and social benefits. However, the article agrees that the definition of sustainability and sustainable development appears vague hence reducing its strenth as a perfomanc measure. The other performance metrices focus on people factors. The consumer as a determinant of perfomance makes choices that influence decisions. Sperdin, et al (2013) explains this usnig the example of the hospitality industry. Although the discussion is not conclusive, it shades some light about the performanc approach in the service industry. Finally, some researchers feel that the employee is the most important measure for successful business managament (Alfes, et al., 2013). It is therefore evident that all these factors are important in one way or the other. Therefore an integrated approach could be the solution because it caters for all the missing gaps in the other metrices. The performance concept is complex and it different business organizations customize their perfromance measures according to their specific needs.

References

Ageron, B., Gunasekaran, A. & Spalanzani, A., 2012. Sustainable supply management: An empirical study. International Journal of Production economics, 140(1), pp. 168-182.

Alfes, K., Trus, C., Soane, E. C. R. C. & Gatenby, M., 2013. The relationship between line manager behavior, percieved HRM practicecs and individual perfomance: Examining the mediating role of engagement. Human Resource Management, 52(6), pp. 839-59.

Andrea, S., 2012. The sustainable firm. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(21), pp. 34-47.

Andrews, L., Drennan, J. & Russel-Bennet, R., 2012. Linking percieved value of mobile marketing with the expereincetial consumption of mobile phones. European Journal of Marketing, 386(3/4), p. 357.

Ashby, A., Mike, L. & Menie, H., 2012. Making connections a review of supply chain management and sustainability literature. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(5), pp. 497-516.

Avey, J. B., Reichard, R., F, L. & Mhatre, K., 2011. Meta-analysis of the imapct of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors and perfomance. Human resource development quarterly, 22(2), pp. 127-152.

Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O., Pavlou, P. & Venkatraman, N. V., 2013. Digital business strategy: toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), pp. 471-482.

Bocken, N., Short, S., Rana, P. & Evans, S., 2014. A litearture and practice review to develop sustainable business model archtypes. Journal of cleaner production, Volume 65, pp. 42-56.

Bratton, J. & Jeff, G., 2012. HUman Resource Management: Theorty and Practice. s.l.:Palgrave.

Braun, S., Peus, C., Weisweiler, S. & Frey, D., 2013. Transformational leadership, job satisfaction and team perfomance: A multilevel mediation model of trust. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), pp. 270-283.

Callister, W. & Rethwisch, D. G., 2012. Fudamentals of materials science and engineering: An integrtaed approach. s.l.:John Wiley & Sons.

Choi, H. & Varian, H., 2012. Predicting the present with Google Trends. Economic Record, 88(1), pp. 2-9.

Chu, S. & Arun, M., 2012. Opportunities and challenges for a sustainable energy. nature, 488(7411), p. 294.

Daley, D., 2012. Strategic human resource management. Public Personnel Management, pp. 120-125.

Davila, T., Epstein, M. & Shelton, R., 2012. Making innovation work: How to manage it, measure it and profit from it. s.l.:FT Press.

De Mooij, M., 2013. Global marketing and adevrtising: Understanding cultural paradoxes. Fourth ed. s.l.:Sage.

Elliot, S., 2011. Transdisciplinary perspectives on environmental sustainability: a resource base and framework for IT-enabled busiess transformation. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), pp. 197-236.

FTC, 2017. Data Breach Response. [Online]
Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/data-breach-response-guide-business
[Accessed 25 August 2017].

Grissemann, U. & Stokburger-Sauer, N. E., 2012. Customer cocreation of travel services: the role of company support and customer satisfaction with the co-creation perfomance. Tourism Management, 33(6), pp. 1483-1492.

Hearly, P. & Palepu, K., 2012. Business analysis valuation: Using financial statements. s.l.:Cengage learning.

Johnson, M. & Marshall, G., 2016. Sales force management leadership, innovation, technology. s.l.:Routledge.

Kang, K., Stein, l., Heo, C. & Lee, S., 2012. Consumers' willingness to pay for green initiaves of the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality, 31(2), pp. 564-572.

Luo, M. M. & Shiau, W. L., 2012. Factors affecting online group buying intention and satisfacttion: A Social exchange theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), pp. 2431-2444.

Marshall, G. & Johnson, M. W., n.d. Sales Force Management. 12th ed. s.l.:s.n.

Meng, X., 2012. The effect of relationship management on project performance in construction. International Journal of project management, 30(2), pp. 188-198.

Moynian, D., Pandey, S. & Wright, B. E., 2011. Setting the table: How transformational leadership fosters perfomance infromation use. Journal of Public Adminstration Research and Theory, 22(1), pp. 143-164.

Orlitzky, M., Siegel, D. S. & Waldman, D., 2011. Strategic corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Business & Society, 50(1), pp. 6-7.

Parameter, D., 2015. Key Perfomance inidcators: developing, implimenting and using winning KPI,. s.l.:JOhn Wiley & Sons.

Reichardt, K. & Rogge, K., 2016. Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis. Research Policy, 45(8), p. 1620.

Rizkallah, J., 2017. When a data breach can be a benefit to your brand. Forbes.

Rogers, P., Jalal, K. F. & Boyd, J., 2012. An Introduction to sustainable development. s.l.:Earthscan.

Sandler, R., 2011. In defence of sustainability. Carnergie Council of International Business.

Schechner, R., 2013. Performance studies: An Introduction. s.l.:Routledge.

Sperdin, B., Plank, A. & Grissemann, U., 2013. Enhancing business perfomance of hotels: The role of innovation and customer orientation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, Volume 33, p. 347.

Toplak, M., West, R. & Stanovich, K., 2011. The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics and biases tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39(7), p. 1275.

Wang, C. & Jian, Z., 2012. The impacts of network competence, knowledge sharing on service innovation perfomance: Moderating the role of relationship quality. Journal of engineering and management, 6(1).

Willard, B., 2012. The new sustainability advantage: seven business case benefits of a tripple bottom line. s.l.:New Society Publishers.

Wilson, A., Zeithaml, V., Bitner, M. & Gremler, D., 2012. Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm. s.l.:McGraw Hill.

Yu, W., Jacobs, M., Salisbury, W. & Enns, H., 2013. The effects of supply chain integration on customer satisfaction and financial perfomance: An organizational learning perpective. International Journal of Production Economics, 146(1), pp. 346-358.