IntroductionThe liberalization of the labour market has expanded the use of market like mechanisms such as competition, pricing, dispersed decision making and work based incentives to enhance program outputs. As a result, this report seeks to describe two markets –like arrangements that have impacted on my workplace whether positively or negatively by analyzing its purposes, how it is intended to work and how it currently operates. In addition, evaluation of the impact of the two markets –like arrangements on quality and value of services provided and presenting a retrospective commentary. Two market-like arrangements that have impacted my workplaceMy workplace is an events management firm that facilitate events for its clients and ensures the clients who range from corporations, individuals and groups of people are effectively and efficiently satisfied with the type and quality of services provided.
The two markets like arrangements that are apparent at my place of work are competition and work based incentives. CompetitionAccording to Stephenson & Thurman (2007), competition in business is described as the efforts of more than one party functioning autonomously to acquire the best resources in order to attract and retain loyal customers both existing and potential ones by offering them favourable business terms.
In my workplace, competition is the most evident market –like arrangement, which is meant to enhance the quality of services delivered to the clients. According to Abrams & Kleiner, (2003), competition is not only a mechanism for protecting the customer from the effects of monopolization but also it is an incentive for an organization’s growth. Its purposesThere are varied purposes why businesses and organizations seek to be competitive ranging from the desire to acquire more in terms of profits, in order to attract the best investors, for brand recognition and brand equity.
On the other hand, simply to be recognized as the best in the industry or the leader in the sector the organization or the business operates as suggested by Barrow (1996). For the events management firm, the main purpose of competition is to deliver the best services to the client and ensures the customer have value for their money and guarantee they have the best experience they can find and ensure they not only bring return business but also recommend the firm’s services to others.
This will eventually enhance the firm’s customer base and market share. The other purpose of competition at the events management firm is to push the human resources contracted to be the best in doing whatever they have been assigned to do. More importantly, ensuring they offer the best of their skills and knowledge and ensure they register enhanced productivity and performance, which translates to quality customer services and enhanced business growth. Other than that, the event management firms uses competition for the purpose of establishing a good reputation for itself from the external environment which encompasses stakeholders such as the government, investors, customers, marketers, customers and suppliers (Stephenson & Thurman, 2007).
Through competition, the events management company hopes to contract the best suppliers of various products and services ranging from sound equipments, tents, insurance, security among other products and services that the firm may require. By having the best supplier, the firm is therefore assured of the best quality products to deliver effective and satisfying programs and events for the clients and more importantly, the risks of late deliveries, missed deliveries and poor procurement services associated with low standard suppliers are prevented and adequately managed (Keddy, 2001).
In regards to investors and customers, the events management firm strives to sustain its competitive advantage to ensure it attracts and retains investors and customers who are fundamental to the growth, sustainability and success of the firm (Ho & Chen-Chia, 2006).