The paper 'Information Technology for Managers' is a good example of a Management Essay. Recently, the internet is a novel fundamental technology and has had considerable attention from investors, entrepreneurs, business observers as well as executives. The internet has had numerous implications on numerous companies worldwide, for instance, some companies have made bad decisions, and some firms have used internet technology so that they can shift competition away from pertinent matters such as features, quality, service as well as price, consequently making it intricate for anyone in the industry to realize a profit.
Some companies have forfeited pertinent proprietary advantages for misguided partnerships as well as outsourcing relationships (Porter, 2001). The most imperative aspect is not how to use internet technology however how to use it. Evidently, internet technology offers opportunities for firms to develop distinctive strategic positions compared to the past generations of information technology (Maumbe & Okello, 2013). A novel strategy is not required for a company to gain a competitive advantage (Dhunna & Dixit, 2010). Interestingly, the internet will hardly offer a competitive advantage. Usually, companies that succeed are the ones that make use of the internet as something that they complement to traditional approaches of being competitive and not those, which set their internet initiatives away from their established operations (Porter, 2001). Most companies, which use internet technology, have been confused by the distorted market signals that result from their own creation.
During the nuptial stages of rolling out of any novel technology, the market signals can be misleading. Novel technologies catapult fecund experimentation, both customers and companies, and experimentation is usually economically unsustainable. Consequently, the market condition is much distorted and should be interpreted with great caution.
Certainly, that is the scenario with the internet. Sales figures can be misleading because of three reasons. Firstly, many firms have reduced the purchase of services and products with hopes of staking a position on the internet as well as attracting the customer base. Customers can buy goods at discounted prices or acquire them freely, rather than to pay a process which reflects their exact costs. The moment prices are low, the unit demand is artificially high. Secondly, curiosity has attracted many people to the internet and they are willing to do business online when the benefits have been limited or uncertain.
Lastly, some “ income” from online commerce has been acquired in the form of stock and not cash (Porter, 2001). Creative accounting methods have also increased. Undeniably, the internet has resulted in an increase in an array of novel performance metrics, which have a loose relationship to the economic importance, for instance, pro forma measures of income that remove “ nonrecurring” costs such as acquisitions. The suspicious relationship between actual profitability and reported metrics has helped to increase the confusing signals regarding what takes place in the marketplace.
Evidently, the real financial performance of various internet-related businesses is worse than what has been stated before. One can argue that the proliferation of dot-com indicates the economic importance of the internet, this type of conclusion is very premature. For one key reason dot-com multiplied, they were in the position of raising capital without demonstrating viability (Porter, 2001). It is intricate to determine the impact on the internet on business by just looking at results over time.
Firstly, many businesses, which are active online, are artificial businesses that compete through artificial means and they are buttressed by capital, which recently has been made available. Secondly, in periods of transition, however, as the market forces play out the old rules come into play. The development of true economic value becomes the last intermediary for any business achievement (Porter, 2001).
Atkinson, C & Draheim, D 2010, Business process technology: A unified view on business processes, workflows and enterprise applications, London, Springer.
Australia. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 2001, Annual Report, Australian Sydney: Government Pub. Service.
Cunningham, J & Harney, B 2012, Strategy and strategists, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Dhunna, M & Dixit, J 2010, Information technology in business management, New Delhi, Laxmi Publications.
Gibson, W 2014, The online banking, New York, Bookpubber.
Hill, W.L., and Gareth R 2012, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach, London, Cengage Learning
Maumbe, B & Okello, J 2013, Technology, sustainability, and rural development in Africa, Hershey: Idea Group Inc.
McGrath, R 2013, The end of competitive advantage: How to keep your strategy moving as fast as your business, Boston, Harvard Business Press.
Mulcaster, W.R 2009, Three Strategic Frameworks, Business Strategy Series, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 68 – 75.
Nag, R, Hambrick, D and Chen, M, 2007, What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 28 no. 9, pp. 935–955.
Porter, M. E, 2001, Strategy and the Internet, Harvard Business Review, vol. 79, no. 3
Reynolds, G 2009, Information technology for managers, Boston, Cengage Learning
Samson, D & Daft, R 2012, Management, Belmont, Cengage Learning.