Animation Critique Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 2

Animation Critique - Essay Example Hanna and Barbera received eight Emmy and seven Academy awards. Hanna-Barbera in 1967 was acquired by Taft Broadcasting at a value of $12million. Hanna and barbera headed the company upto 1991, when Turner Broadcasting System bought it. In 1996, Turner Broadcasting and Time Warner merged; Hanna and Barbera performed advisory roles in the new company. The animator applies philosophical aspects of semiotics, ritual, psychology, aesthetics and myths in his works. Semiotics involves creating meaning through symbols or signs. The meaning illustrated in most animation works is funny entertainment; for instance Tom and Jerry. Aesthetics entails beauty appreciation. The Jetsons majorly applied the aesthetics concept. Myths explain traditional issues or stories. For instance The Flintstones shows the ways of life if the historical stone age or cave man. Psychology involves understanding the mental functions or human behaviors. The animator applied this concept in identifying funny issues in the society that can be applied in animation. For instance; the jokes illustrated in Tom and Jerry or Scooby-Doo. Ritual entails sequence of related activities done in sequence; for instance the laboratory tests illustrated in the Dexter’s Laboratory (Lenburg 43). Joseph Barbera applied three significant animation principles in his work. These are; squash and stretch, anticipation and staging. The objective of squash and stretch is to illustrate features of weight and flexibility in drawn objects. This is illustrated in works like Dexter’s Laboratory (Mallory 107). Anticipation is applied in preparing viewers for action; and ensures the action seems realistic. This concept is applied in film versions like Scooby-Doo (2002). Staging principle is used to attract and direct the attention of the audience, to the important aspect of the animation. The main focus of attention in the work The Ruff and Reddy Show is the unlikely

Temporary files Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Temporary files - Research Paper Example Thus, erasing these files from the system is able to create tons of problems to our PC. In this scenario, the diversity is fact about the temporary files which are utilized to keep data which is presently utilized by plenty of programs, otherwise information to be exchanged by programs or by the OS platform. Additionally, the moment a computer program is working with data; it can create various temporary files. In this scenario application has the potential to make use of these temporary files while execution, as well as once the execution of a particular application is stopped; it must remove its temporary files subsequently. In addition, the increasing volume of temporary files inside our computer system gets room from our computer hard disk and consequently decelerates our system performance and capabilities. Since our computer hard drive has plenty of temporary files, every file is divided over a single portion. This division will surely enable our hard disk inconsistent/fragment ed; as a result of that computer hard drive will take extra time to find out the location of the files before reading a particular portion of hard disk. Therefore, this will certainly reduce the speed of our computer (FixMyComputerErrors, 2011; Beal, 2010).

Individual Analysis Of Marks Spencer Marketing Essay

Individual Analysis Of Marks Spencer Marketing Essay Nowadays, consumers buying behaviour and wants changed rapidly. It is vital for an organization to segment their market in order to meets the needs and wants of all ranges of the consumers in this competitive market. Market is a place where potential buyers and sellers gathered in order to exchange their goods. (Kotler, et al., 2004, pp.14). Market segmentation is to divide a market into direct groups which consist of buyers that might require separate products or marketing mixes and classified customers with different needs, characteristics or behavior into groups. (Kotler, et al., 2004, pp.344). It includes geographical segmentation, demographic segmentation, psychographic segmentation and behavioral segmentation. Geographical segmentation classified the market into different geographical units, for example, nations, regions, states, municipalities, cities or neighbourhoods. (Kotler, et al., 2004, pp.345). For instance, a company can operate in one, few or all areas but only focus to local variations. Demographic segmentation Demographic segmentation divide the market into groups on the basic variables such as age, family size, family life cycle, gender, income, occupation, education, religion, race, generation, nationality, and social class. Demographic segmentation is often be used to distinguish the customer groups because it often associated with the customers needs, wants, usage rates, product and brand preferences. Psychographic segmentation Psychographic segmentation divided market into different groups of buyers based on their socioeconomic status, lifestyle and personality characteristic. (Kotler, et al., 2004, pp.348). Socioeconomic status is the strong effect on preferences of buyers in the product. Lifestyle is a way of life or style of living of a person that will reflect the products they choose to buy. Personality is where a product is designed based on the personality of the consumer. Behavioural segmentation Behavioural segmentation divides the buyers into groups which based on their knowledge, attitude and responses towards the product. (Kotler, et al., 2004, pp.349). It also can based on the occasion segmentation and benefit segmentation. The Perfect and Classic ranges The Perfect and Classic ranges are in the psychographic segmentation because it is based on the consumers socioeconomic, lifestyle, and personality. For instance, it is based on classically stylish mature customers who are in a busy lifestyle but look for quality products in a value reasonable price. Besides, it also aimed on consumers which look for timeless collection and smart and elegant clothes. The Autograph range The Autograph range is in geographical segmentation by launched in spring / summer 2000 range at selected stores only. It also launched the hat collection in nationwide which classified the market into nations. Besides, it also in the range of demographic segmentation in terms of gender and by recruited top designers to create women wear and menswear. per una range Per una is using demographic segmentation in its market. It divided the market in age, gender and income. For instance, it target on the customer in the age between 25 and 35 which is fashion- conscious women. Besides, it also in superb design at competitive price and 10 per cent more expensive than M S other main range which aimed at the customers that have upper medium to high income level to purchase for its products. Besides, it also based on behavioural segmentation by divide the customers based on their response toward the product. For instance, the speed of reaction the customers will reflect the good from design concept to be faster shop rails in weeks but not in months. Conclusion As a result, Marks Spencer had segmented its three sub brands into different kinds of segmentation which can gather the potential buyers with different characteristic to purchase their goods according to their preferences. This will helps to target different customers from all over the region to increase the sales volume and profitability and at the same time understand the customers needs, wants and taste that will help in the production line. Question 2 Introduction Marks Spencer (M S) garments had segmented its womens wear into number of ranges and sub brands in order to appeal a different lifestyles to target the market. It includes The Perfect Collection, The Classic Collection, The Autograph and per una. Order winners Order winners is the things that directly and significant contribute to the winning business. Order-winning factor is the arrangement of resources which are applied to the production and the delivery of products and services. (Slack, et al., 2007, pp. 69). It is also the features which are unique and distinctive compared to other similar product ranges as to retain existing customer patronage as well as to attract new customers and brand switches. Qualifiers Qualifiers is the aspects of competitiveness where the performance of the operation has to be above the level considered by the customer. (Slack, et al., 2007, pp. 69). It also a product features that are usually present in other similar competitive brands. It means that existing customers needs will remain satisfied where they need not switch to other brand but at the same time it hold no unique features to attract new customers. Features The features of Perfect collection garments is based on classically stylish which is focused on basics and machine washable, non-iron and tumble-dry friendly which aimed at customer who are busy and look for quality and value garments on a reasonable price. Besides, it is a timeless essentials where customers can just wear it with anything. Whereas, the Classic collection garments is focus on more mature customer which concentrated on design, comfort, long-lasting, smart, elegant clothes and versatility which made from high quality fabrics at value-for-money prices. It is designed for skim and flatter the natural body shape of the customers. It is a timeless collection that reflects customers style and finesses. Autograph range is available in selected stores and which is designed by top designers. It includes women wears, men wears and accessories. Autograph range is sell on high street price with limited pieces on each item launched. Per una is targeted on fashion-conscious women between the aged of 25-35 and the size of 8-18. It provides a superb design at affordable price. It also comes with latest trends, limited editions and exclusive design with no repetition which stands 10% more expensive in M S main range. Customers expectation The customer who is smartly dressed would expect the availability of their size, price and quality for the standard items in M S. They prefer the garments which is easy to clean. As for the fashionably dressed lady would expect the availability of bigger sizes in the store with reasonable quality and the colour of the garments must not be fade or shrink when washed. This customer is more focus on availability of size rather than the variety of colour shades. As for premium items, the customers who is smartly dressed would expect limited design clothes which is exclusively designed with high quality and long lasting. Besides, the customers who is fashionably dressed would focus much on design rather than quality and unlikely to purchase high fashion item unless it is a impulse purchase which its expect to wear for only a few times before replacing it. The Perfect and Classic ranges Order winners The order winners of Perfect and Classic ranges are the items which is timeless essentials, long lasting style that can maintain quality and versatility. It is also skim and flatter to the natural body shape and belongs to the range of smart and elegant clothes with high quality of fabrics at valuable price which can attract the new and existing customers. Qualifiers The qualifiers of the Perfect and Classic ranges are the items which are machine washable, non-iron and tumble dry friendly. Besides, the items which is return to basics such as plain, white shirts, black roll neck sweaters and jeans which can retains the existing customers . The Autograph range Order winners The order winners of The Autograph range is the unique design by the top designers which is the philosophy of Autograph to bring cutting-edge design for the customers within a selected stores which charged at a high street price but in a designer boutique environment that can attract more new customers for the unique design that only available in selected stores. Qualifiers The qualifiers of The Autograph range is the availability of collection items such as Philips Treacys collection with 18 hats and 10 bags with a variety of no more than 60 of each colour and style which can let the existing customers to have more choices in terms on style and colour of the items.. per una range Qrder winners The order winners of per una are the unique design with quality materials and latest trends which comes in limited editions. It is also comes with small numbers with no repetition in design that will attract new customers to purchase it as its design are exclusive and limited edition. Qualifiers The qualifiers of per una is the size of clothes which is from 8-18 that come in small number. This will retained the existing customers that are small in size between aged of 25-35. Besides, the design of clothes also very attention to detail. Conclusion It is vital that M S to distinguish the company order winners and qualifiers for the customers in order to target the markets and to gaining competitive advantage. Question 3 Every operation also had a range of stakeholders which may or maybe influence the operations activities. (Slack, et al., 2004, pp. 39). There are internal stakeholders such as employees and external stakeholders such as customers, society companys shareholders and so on. Operation performance objective includes the five performance objectives which are quality, speed, dependability, flexibility and cost. Perfect and Classic ranges Autograph range per una range Product range Targets on classically stylish and mature customers that with a busy lifestyle. Produce smart and elegant clothes. Targets on unique design by top designers which available in selected store. Targets on fashion conscious women in the aged of 25-35 with the size of 8-18. Inspired by latest trends. Design changes Continual changes Occasional changes Occasional changes Price Reasonable and value-for-money prices in terms of quality. The lowest price among the Autograph range and per una range. High street prices. It ranks as the second highest of price between perfect and classic range, and per una range. The highest price compared to perfect and classic range, and per una range. 10% more expensive in the Marks Spencer main range. Quality High quality that ranked number three among Autograph range and per una range. High quality High and exclusive quality. Sales volumes SKU High Medium Low Order winners The garments are timeless essentials that have long lasting style which can maintain quality and versatility. It also skim and flatter to the natural body that used high quality of fabric but in valuable price. The clothes are unique design by the top designers which is the philosophy of Autograph to bring cutting-edge design for the customers at selected stores. The clothes are charged at a high street price but in a designer boutique environment. The garments are unique design with quality materials and latest trends which comes in limited editions. No repetition in the in the design. Order qualifiers The garments are machine washable, non iron and tumble dry friendly. It also focused on basic design such as plain, white shirts, black roll neck sweaters and jeans. The availability of collection items such as Philips Treacys collection with 18 hats and 10 bags with a variety of no more than 60 of each colour and style. The size of clothes which is from 8-18 that came in small number. The design of clothes also very attention to detail. Operations priorities Dependability and quality. Basic and comfort. Cutting edge design within a unique boutique environment. Quality materials and latest trends. Conclusion It is important for Marks Spence to identify and classified their companys operation performance objectives of different ranges in order to ensure that the three sub brands will have a smooth production line in terms of which brands that different customers served by differentiate it into different product ranges. (2023words)

Joseph Stalin :: essays research papers

JOSEPH STALIN: TYRANT OF STEEL Iosef Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili (a.k.a. Joseph Stalin), was the undisputed leader of the Soviet Union from 1929 to 1953. Although Stalin’s reign in power did not begin immediately his contribution to government began in 1912, and from then on he slowly rose to the high chain of command. Stalin’s long and troublesome road to absolute power had many steps that marked important events in the Soviet Union’s condition but they did not always improve the life of his people. Stalin’s first position in government began in 1898 when he joined a secret Marxist revolutionary group and became involved in many demonstrations. In 1901 Stalin began writing for the Brdzola which published many of his revolutionary articles and ideas. At the end of 1901, he was formally accepted into the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. Between the years of 1902 and 1913 Stalin was arrested and exiled many times for countless crimes and as a result in 1907 he was expelled from the Social Democratic Labor Party. However, his luck changed in 1912 when Lenin appointed Stalin to the Bolshevik Central Committee. In addition, he was given various commands and was appointed to the position of people’s commissar for nationalities. After proving himself at this position, he was assigned the position of commissar of workers’ and peasants’ inspection. He finally gained the power he desired most in 1922, when he became general secretary of the Central Committee. With this position Stalin was able to control appointments, set agendas, and transfer officials and increase his own power. When Lenin died in 1924, Stalin used the current power he attained and crushed his opponents to become the dictator in 1929. Stalin used his new authority to try and make the Soviet Union a world power so that no enemies could destroy his nation. When he first took over, he began a series of five-year plans. The first plan was to industrialize the country, however, the production of machinery and farm equipment became more important than the production of household items and necessities such as clothing and food. Secondly, Stalin wanted to use collectivization to increase the production of agricultural products and to end private farming. Stalin also decided to transfer the control of the farms to the government, and as a result, caused a severe resistance in the peasant class especially the kulaks. The measures taken by Stalin to discipline those who opposed his authority were either exiled, or executed as well as a great famine killed 10 million peasants (1932-33).

The British-German naval rivalry as a contributing factor to the start of World War One

Introduction One the main arguments that have been presented in order to understand the reasons for the beginning of World War One revolves around the growth of military capabilities in the European continent in the period leading up to the start of the conflagration. Among the immediate causes cited for the beginning of hostilities was the naval rivalry that unfolded between the United Kingdom and Germany, particularly in the 1960-1914 period (Churchill, 1923: 119). Upon the establishment of the German Kingdom in 1871, Britain was in possession of the biggest naval forces in the world (Kelly, 2011: 20). In order to entrench the position of Germany in the European political order, Emperor Wilhelm II launched a strategy that was centred around extending the projection of power of the German High Seas Fleet (Clark, 2012: 116). This policy was seconded by the German Imperial Naval Office which, under the stewardship of Admiral Alfred Von Tirpitz, became an influential force in expanding the countryà ¢â‚¬â„¢s naval fleet to 2/3 of the size of the Royal Navy (Von Tirpitz, 1920: 134). This essay argues that the British-German naval rivalry contributed the advent of the First World War due to the fact that it compelled London to enter the conflagration in order to maintain the balance of power in the European political order and to preserve its commercial interests in the wider world. These became seriously threatened by the expansion of German naval capabilities. The first part of the essay outlines the historical and geopolitical circumstances involved in the British-German naval rivalry. Particular attention is given to the way in which the United Kingdom reacted to the decision of the German Empire to extend its sea power to the wider world as well as the geopolitical implications involved in the decision to resist the expansion of Germany’s naval capabilities. The second part of the essay examines the way in which those considerations were brought to bear in the decision to enter World War One.The British-German naval rivalry during the period leading u p to the First World WarThe plan for the expansion of German naval capabilities responded to the geopolitical situation that was taking place in Southern Africa in the context of the Boer War (Weir, 1992: 81). When British forces invaded Transvaal at the end of the nineteenth century, plans were put in place in order to place a blockade on Germany, catering for the possibility that the imperial forces may try to intervene in the conflict (Kelly, 2002: 1048). This move would have potentially resulted in severe dislocations to the German economy, which depended on foreign raw materials and markets for its continued expansion (Kelly, 2011: 29). The extension of German naval capabilities was therefore geared towards securing the conditions for the country’s long term economic growth (Grey, 1925: 17). From a technical standpoint, the launch of HMS Dreadnought in 1906 exacerbated the intensity of the German-British naval race. The Dreadnought became the first battleship that opera ted a synchronised main battery (Churchill, 1923: 188; Weir, 1992: 39). In addition, it also possessed the highest speed of any other vessel commissioned for military service due to the fact that it ran on steam engines (Wilson, 1985: 55; Lambert, 2002: 22). It is worth mentioning that the naval hegemony possessed by the United Kingdom became a more costly exercise with the rise of Germany and other revisionist states in the late nineteenth century (Neilson, 1995: 99; Kelly, 2011: 46). This state of affairs had prompted the United Kingdom to adopt the ‘Two-Power standard’, which provided that the British naval forces had to be at least as powerful as the next two strongest navies (France and Russia) (Clark, 2012: 122; Steinberg, 1985: 59). In the period leading up to the advent of the First World War there was a great deal of popular support in both countries for a continuation of the policy of naval expansion. It is worth mentioning that in spite of the race for expanded naval capabilities, British sea power had been severely curtailed by the eve of the First World War. (Von Tirpitz, 1920: 136) There are a number of observations that can be made in order to explain this occurrence (Kelly, 2002: 1055). To begin with, Britain was under severe financial constraints due its ever decreasing share of word trade and political unrest at home, marked by the demands for social justice exerted by the trade union movement and the Labour Party (Weir, 1992: 33; Kelly, 2011: 190). In addition, the expansion of the American Navy as well as the efforts of the German Naval Office to extend the country’s sea power contributed to the diminished capacity of the Royal Navy to project its capabilities in the wider world. In spite of these developments, it is safe to argue that the United Kingdom had the greatest naval power upon entering World War One (Grey, 1925: 23). Furthermore, the country ensured the continuation of its relative superiority in the sea by entering into an alliance with Russia and France, geared towards counterbalancing the emerging central bloc constituted by Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy (Wilson, 1985: 59). The Entente Cordiale, signed between Britain and France in 1904, came about as a result of the willingness of the German Empire to enlarge their commercial reach to the wider world, particularly in Africa where both nations had substantial colonial interests (Von Tirpitz, 1920: 130; Clark, 2012: 124). The establishment and preservation of a German colonial system was to be carried out through the expansion of the nation’s naval capabilities (Lambert, 2002: 25). The British Foreign Office was aware of the grand geopolitical designs of the German Empire. Some of its most prominent members distinguished a distinct revisionist stance on the part of Germany, which they likened to the hegemonic drive of France’s Napoleon a century earlier (Grey, 1925: 44). The preservation of naval superiority and the establishment of political alliances with like-minded nations were conducive to abandoning the policy of neutrality in European affairs and to engage in an act of balancing agai nst Germany (Clark, 2012: 144). The threat of a German revisionist drive was outlined by Eyre Crowe, an official at the Western Department of the British Foreign office, in his famous memorandum of 1907. Crowe emphasised the need to maintain naval supremacy in order to preserve the freedom of the seas and international commerce, ‘In proportion as England champions the principle of the largest measure of general freedom of commerce, she undoubtedly strengthens her hold on the interested friendship of other nations, at least to the extent of making them feel less apprehensive of naval supremacy in the hands of a free trade England than they would in the face of a predominant protectionist Power’ (Crowe, 1907). The British diplomatic establishment was aware of the dangers of a revisionist Germany for world peace. At the same time, there was an expressed preoccupation with the possibility that the extension of German naval resources may result in a diminution of British sea power (McDermott in Kennedy (ed.), 1979: 81). This is what transpires from a statement made to the House of Commons in 1911 by Sir Edward Grey, British Foreign Secretary, ‘Germany is rightly proud of her strength. She is building a big fleet. Surely it is natural and obvious that the growth of that fleet must raise apprehensions, or at least make other nations very sensitive to apprehensions, lest the Power which is becoming strong should have aggressive designs towards themselves. I do not believe in these aggressive designs. I do not wish to have it interpreted in that sense, but I think it must be realised that other nations will be apprehensive and sensitive, and on the lookout for any indications of aggression. All we or the other neighbours of Germany desire is to live with her on equal terms’ (Grey, 1911). The geopolitical implications of the rise of Germany were tied to the establishment of a naval network capable of sustaining the growing commercial influence of the nation in the wider world. However, it should be mentioned that in 1912 the German Chancellor, Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg, approached the British authorities in order to put an end to the naval race between the two countries (Kennedy, 1983: 120). The Chancellor’s approach might have been motivated by the need to overcome the increasing isolation of Germany in the European political order. The British authorities responded by sending Richard Haldane, the Secretary of State for War, to negotiate the terms of the detente with Imperial Germany (Grey, 1925: 33). However, this mission failed due to the German proposal to accept the naval dominance of the United Kingdom in return for London’s neutral stance in the case of a general conflagration and the assurance that the Berlin would not be branded as the aggre ssor (McDermott in Kennedy (ed.), 1979: 86). The visit of Lord Haldane to Berlin revealed some of the geopolitical concerns regarding the revisionist stance adopted by Germany (Kennedy, 1980: 60). Winston Churchill, who had been a member of the Liberal Cabinet, argued that whilst for Germany the maintenance of naval capabilities was a ‘luxury’, for Britain it a was a ‘necessity’ (Churchill, 1923: 144). Here we see an attempt by a prominent British politician to downplay the importance of the construction of naval resources on the part of Germany (Kennedy, 1980: 67). This was done in order to reinforce the notion that British naval superiority was a feature of the European and international political order that was not to be challenged (Kelly, 2011: 173). As we will see in the next section, the geopolitical considerations pertaining to the possibility of German supremacy in the continent constituted a significant factor in the British decision to enter into the First World War (Epkenhans, 2008: 122). The impact of the British-German naval rivalry in London’s decision to enter into the First World War In regards to the outbreak of hostilities, it should be argued that the arms race that took place between the United Kingdom and the Germany drove both nations to enter into the war (McDermott in Kennedy (ed.), 1979: 99). Additionally, the inimical interests of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian Empires in the Balkans made their participation in the war inevitable. France embarked upon the pursuit of war as a consequence of the invasion by the German forces and its alliance commitments to Russia (Kennedy, 1989: 91). It could be posited that one of the most salient aspects of World War One is constituted by the British participation in the war in order to balance the revisionist drive of the German Empire. From this perspective, the British entry into the war may be regarded as an attempt to maintain an equilibrium of forces in the European political order. This balance of power was tilting towards Germany in a decisive manner, since the country adopted the decision to build up its nava l resources that severely threatened British supremacy at sea (Clark, 2012: 132). There is an established consensus on a segment of the scholarship that is centred on the idea that the United Kingdom had become increasingly wary about the intention of the German imperial government to increase its naval capabilities (Massie, 1991: 20). The Reichsflotte Doctrine, propounded by Admiral Tirpitz, revolved around the notion that Germany was impelled to prop up its naval resources in order to be able to inflict damage to the Royal Navy in case of a war (Kelly, 2002: 1037). However, it should be mentioned that in 1912 the German Chancellor, Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg, approached the British authorities in order to put an end to the naval race between the two countries (Kennedy, 1983: 120). The Chancellor’s approach might have been motivated by the need to overcome the increasing isolation of Germany in the European political order. The British authorities responded by sending Richard Haldane, the Secretary of State for War, to negotiate the terms of the detente with Imperial Germany (Grey, 1925: 33). This would force the United Kingdom to enter into an alliance with Germany. However, it may be stated that the position of the United Kingdom was one of the defiance, preferring the option of entering into the First World War in order to prevent the possibility that Germany may achieve geopolitical supremacy in the European continent and a broader projection of power into the wider world (Epkenhans, 2008: 101). During the decade that preceded the advent of World War One, the United Kingdom made considerable preparations in order to cater for the eventuality of hostilities against Germany (Kennedy, 1980: 109). In addition to the signing of diplomatic treaties with France and Russia, the United Kingdom also entered into an alliance with Japan, in order to devote their attention to the emerging geopolitical scenario in the European theatre (Modelski and Thompson, 1988: 19). The acceleration of the naval race that took place during the 1908-12 period left an indelible impression on the mindset of British foreign policy makers (Clark, 2012: 141). The shift from a naval to an army doctrine by Germany in 1812 did not assuage tensions between the two countries, as it became another instrument to exert potential domination over the British allies: France and Russia (Massie, 1991: 50). Some alternative explanations to Britain’s entry into World War One gyrate around the idea that London did no t just seek to contain the naval prowess of Germany but to attain a situation in which the other competitors would see their sea power diminished (Kennedy, 1989: 133). For example, the Russian Empire, which had experienced significant economic growth in the last two decades before the war, could have potentially threatened British interests in India (Kennedy, 1980: 11). The British Raj could not have been defended by its tiny armed forces in case of an overland Russian invasion. This prompted London to seek an alliance with Russia, which was duly effectuated in 1907 (Steinberg, 1973: 201; Kennedy, 1983: 50). From this perspective, confecting a German naval threat would be conducive to reassuring France and Russia that only the Royal Navy could provide an equilibrium of forces in the seas (Massie, 1991: 56). Therefore, the British-German rivalry also has to be assessed in the context of British diminution of power due to the rise of revisionist powers such as Japan and Germany (Kelly, 2002: 1036). In addition, the rise of the United States as the largest economy in the world also played into the geopolitical considerations of British foreign policy makers on the eve of World War One (Modelski and Thompson, 1988: 21).The antagonism regarding the naval race between the United Kingdom and Germany has to be appraised in the context of the actual erosion of British power (McDermott in Kennedy (ed.), 1979: 93). Consequently, British policy revolved around the principle of avoiding the rise of a naval competitor that could threaten its imperial possessions, rather than a revisionist power that could attain supremacy in the continent (Epkenhans, 2008: 55). It could be stated that the strategy that led to British entry into World War One was centred around the maintenance of naval supremacy through the introduction of ships that would be able to rise to the challenge of an attack against any of Britain’s imperial possessions (Kennedy, 1989: 139). It was known at the time that Germany did not pose an immediate threat to British Empire. However, the United Kingdom was compelled to enter into World War One in order to prevent a situation in which a victorious Germany would be in a position to reconfigure the geopolitical map through the accumulation of naval forces with France and Russia (Steinberg, 1973: 199; Neilson, 1995: 55). G erman supremacy in the European continent would have eventually resulted in naval dominance by an entente between Germany and the vanquished powers (Kennedy, 1983: 88). The British-German naval rivalry was a significant factor in Britain’s entry into World War One due to the potential ramifications of a German victory in the continent, rather than as a response to its potential supremacy over the European continent (Kelly, 2002: 1034). Conclusion By way of conclusion, it should be noted that the naval rivalry between the United Kingdom and Germany exerted a significant amount of influence in the decision to enter into the First World War. Prompted by Berlin’s accumulation of naval resources, the United Kingdom attempted to preserve its relative superiority in the sea by forging an alliance with Russia and France (Clark, 2012: 155; Steinberg, 1985: 59). This was geared towards counterpoising the looming threat constituted by the associative framework between Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy. The Entente Cordiale originated from the need to counterbalance the German Empire’s to commercial and military reach into the wider world, especially in regions where both France and the United Kingdom had substantial colonial interests (Churchill, 1923: 213). The British political establishment was well aware of the geopolitical constructs of the German Empire, which was compared to the hegemonic drive instigated by Napoleon in the early part of the nineteenth century (Steinberg, 1973: 196; Kennedy, 1989: 129). It may be argued that the motivations that led to British entry into the First World War were centred around the need to preserve naval supremacy through the retrofitting of the Royal Navy’s capabilities in order to fend off the challenge of an attack against any of Britain’s imperial possessions (Epkenhans, 2008: 81). For all the reasons to be cited above, it could be concluded that the United Kingdom entered into the First World War in order to avoid a situation in which German supremacy in the European continent would result in an eventual naval alliance between Germany and its former enemies (Neilson, 1995: 61). Consequently, the British-German naval rivalry was an important factor in London’s decision to enter into World War One, as the potential geopolitical implications of a German victory would have involved an eventual threat to British possessions overseas. These were to be defended at all costs. Even at the expense of entering into a war that diminished the standing of the United Kingdom in world affairs and which did not manage to sort out the position of Germany in the European political spectrum. Bibliography Churchill, W. (1923) The World Crisis, 1911-1914, T London : Thornton Butterworth Limited Clark, C. (2012) The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914, London : Vintage Crowe memorandum, British Foreign Office, 1/1/1907 – germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/603_Percept Germ For Policy_107.pdf – Accessed on 15/5/2014 Epkenhans, M. (2008) Tirpitz: Architect of the German High Seas Fleet, Lincoln, NE : Potomac Books, Grey, E. (1925) Twenty-Five Years, 1892-1916, London: Hodder & Stoughton Kelly, P., Strategy, Tactics, and Turf Wars: Tirpitz and the Oberkommando der Marine, 1892-1895, Journal of Military History, Volume 66, Issue 4, (2002), pp. 1033–1060 Kelly, P. (2011) Tirpitz and the Imperial German Navy, I Bloomington, IN: ndiana University Press Kennedy, P. (1989) The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, London: Vintage Kennedy, P. (1983) The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery, London: Macmillan Education Ltd. Kennedy, P. (1980) The Rise of the Anglo-German Antagonism: 1860-1914, Amherst, NY : Prometheus Books Lambert, N. (2002) Sir John Fisher’s Naval Revolution, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press McDermott, J. (1979) The Revolution in British Military Thinking from the Boer War to the Moroccan Crisis in Kennedy, P. (ed.) War Plans of the Great Powers, 1880-1914, London : George Allen and Unwin Massie, R. (1991) Dreadnought: Britain, Germany, and the Coming of the Great War, New York, NY : Ballantine Books Modelski, G. and Thompson, W. (1988) Seapower in Global Politics, 1494-199, London : MacMillan Press Ltd., Neilson, K. (1995) Britain and the Last Tsar: British Policy and Russia 1894-1917, Oxford : Clarendon Press Steinberg, J. (1985) Yesterday’s Deterrent: Tirpitz and the Birth of the German Battle Fleet, London : Viking, Steinberg, J., The Tirpitz Plan, Historical Journal, Volume 16, Issue 1, 1973, pp. 196–204 Von Tirpitz, A. (1920) My Memoirs, London: Hurst & Blackett, Ltd. Weir, G. (1992) Building the Kaiser’s Navy: The Imperial Navy Offi ce and German Industry in the Von Tirpitz Era, 1890-1919, Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, Wilson, K. (1985) The Policy of the Entente: Essays on the Determinants of British Foreign Policy, Cambridge Cambridge University Press,

Planning techniques Essay

According to the BCG matrix, companies’ business units can be categorized into 4 categories. These categories are based on the amalgamations of market share and market growth relative to the biggest competitor. Based on BCG matrix, it is very good for the company when its products have large market share or the product’s market is growing very fast. The Boston Consulting Group Portfolio Matrix Stars indicate that the business or the product has high market share and high growth. †¢Large amount of money are invested and so these businesses/products are expected to generate considerable amount of cash. They are the leaders in that particular business. †¢Usually approximately in balance on net cash flow. Nevertheless, if any effort is needed to be made to keep the share it should been done because if the market share is maintained then the returns will be a cash cow. Cash cows are companies or products which have low market growth and high market share. †¢These are mature and successful businesses with high profit and cash generation †¢There is little need for investment because of the low growth. Dogs represent companies or products which have low growth and low market share. †¢These businesses neither generate nor consume a large amount of money. †¢The number of dogs in a company should be avoided and minimized. Question marks display organizations or products with high growth and low market share. †¢Question marks require huge amount of investment and have low returns because the market share is low. †¢If the market share stays low than question marks will constantly demand large amounts of money and as the growth terminates, they will convert in a dog. †¢However, if the market share increases then the question marks may return into a star and ultimately a cash cow as the market growth slows. The BCG Matrix Method helps to understand a common strategy mistake make by the companies which is: having a one-size-fits-all-approach to strategy. In such circumstances: A.Cash cows Business Units will reach easily their profit target and their managers will be permitted to invest more money in  the businesses which are developed but not growing any more. B.Dogs Business Units will not stop investing in order to ‘turn the business around’ C.Subsequently the investment made in Question Marks and Stars Business Units is mediocre and thus they do not have the opportunity to become cash cows. In this scenario there are only two things that the companies should do. Either these SBU should receive decent amount of cash to allow them to become a cash cow (or star), or companies should not invest anymore and try to take whatever amount of cash out of the question marks. Some of the drawbacks of the BCG Matrix are: 1.Having a high market share does not mean that the company or the product will be successful. 2.The attractiveness of markets is not indicated only by the market growth 3.It may happen that Dogs can achieve higher returns than Cash Cows. Profit impact on market strategy (PIMS) The Profit Impact of Market Strategy (PIMS) is a program which started initially in the USA, to determine how profit impacted on marketing strategy and vice versa. Based on the information collected from participating companies, PIMS estimated businesses’ market position and proposed feasible strategies. According to Lancaster, Massingham and Ashford (Essentials of Marketing, 4th edition, McGraw Hill), PIMS seeks to address three basic questions: †¢What is the typical profit rate for each type of business? †¢Given current strategies in a company, what are the future operating results likely to be? †¢What strategies are likely to help improve future operating results? Dibb, Simkin, Pride and Ferrell (Marketing Concepts and Strategies, 4th European edition, Houghton Mifflin) cite six principal areas of information that PIMS holds on each business: †¢characteristics of the business environment †¢competitive position of the business †¢structure of the production process †¢how the budget is allocated †¢strategic movement †¢Operating results. Businesses which want to use the service have to present detailed information, containing details of their: †¢competitors and market †¢balance sheet †¢assumptions about future sales. In return, PIMS produces four reports, described by Lancaster, Massingham and Ashford as: 1. A ‘PAR’ report – demonstrates the ROI and cash flows that are considered ‘normal’ for that particular kind of business, displaying its market, competition, technology, and cost structure. 2. A ‘Strategy Analysis’ report – shows the likely effects of strategy changes on ROI/cash flow both short and long term. This is achieved by analyzing the information of other companies in an analogue business making similar moves, from an equal starting-point and in similar business environment. 3. A ‘Report on Look-Alikes’ (ROLA) – analyzes strategically equivalent businesses more closely and then predicts the best combination of strategies for that particular company 4. An ‘Optimum Strategy’ report – is almost the same as ROLA because it recommends the best strategy for the company based on the experience of othe r companies in the same position. One of the disadvantages of this model is that the data has been misinterpreted in some cases. In addition, another area which can be argued is connecting the profitability to the market share. Shell Directional Policy Matrix The Shell Directional Policy Matrix is another refinement upon the Boston Matrix. It has two dimensions, vertical and horizontal. Next to the vertical axe are company’s competitive capabilities and next to the horizontal axe are the prospects for sector profitability. Different strategic decisions will be implied depending on the position of a Strategic Business Unit (SBU) in the matrix. Each of the cells is explained below: Disinvest: Disinvesting is the best option when the SBU is running in losses  with ambiguous cash flow because the situation is not going to ameliorate in the future. These liquidate or move the assets. Phased withdrawal: SBU’s with average competitive capability in low growth market has almost no chance to generate cash and as such they should be eliminated sequentially. Double or quit: this is all about gambling. There are two possible options to gamble and these are either to invest more in order to take full advantage of the prospects displayed by the market or to abandon the business. Custodial: SBU’s are just like a cash cow, milk it and do not commit any more resources. In this situation the corporate has to make a decision whether to get help from other SBU’s or exit the scene to concentrate more on other attractive business. Try harder: SBU may be doing fine for the moment but the future does not look promising and thus additional resources to strength their capabilities will be required. By trying harder, the company may take advantage of the business prospects thoroughly. Cash Generator: This is like a cash cow where no further amounts of cash are invested and SBU may carry on with their operations because the generation of cash is strong and satisfactory profit is made. Growth: In order to support product invention and R&D activities the SBU’s need investment. So ensuring that enough resources are available is crucial to grow the market. Market Leadership: Significant resources are concentrated on the SBU and so it must be the first priority. SHELL DPM has its limitations. The first limitation is that it assumes that the similar factors are entirely applicable for appraising the prospects of any product/business.