Analyzing the accuracy of lca than just looking at the carbon footprint of the ‘usephase’ of a material
BSBMGT608 Manage Innovation and Continuous Improvement
Questions:
1. What is Continuous Improvement? Who would be involved in this process and what would they be doing to enable improvements? Support your answer with examples from the case.
Answers:
In a general context, continuous improvement is ongoing cycles wherein efforts are put to improve products, services and other processes. Further, these efforts could be seek an incremental improvement over time or breakthrough where improvement is done all at once. The widely used tool for the same is a four-step quality model which is known as PDCA cycle. Furthermore, at all three levels the CI cycle works and in fact all the employees of an organization are involved in this process. By taking an insight from the case, it can be described that Corus has adopted the Kaizen concept and for that the firm will utilize the PDCA cycle. The top management will do the planning regarding the CI and for that they will identify an opportunity and they will plan for a change. Then they will order the middle management to implement the change on a small group of employees or at any smaller area which requires improvement. Later, gathered data will be used for analyzing results which was generated out of change and then they will determine whether it created a difference or not. Lastly, if the change would be successful then the Corus will implement it on a wider scale and will analyze the result on a continual basis. This way, the firm could enable the improvements in the company.
Describing the types of culture which Corus is developing and finding out the ways in which vision plan will help to develop this culture
Analyzing how KPIs will help Corus to give satisfaction to its customers
Evaluating the key benefits of CI in helping Corus for becoming a more innovative and customer focused organization
Describing the meaning of ethical business practices
Explaining sustainable practice that could help a business to compete
From the case study, it is clear that Tata steel upholds the commitment of being sustainable and also has also adopted the environmental practices the firm cares about the society among which it works and also it cares about the future generation so that they can get the benefit out of resources which we are using in today’s world. Therefore, the company is concerned about the sustainability and hence, sustainable practice has been adopted by the firm. Furthermore, by adopting this practice company could get maximum benefits which will be helpful for them in order to compete in a highly competitive and dynamic market. Further, by adopting the sustainability criteria, Tata Steel will be able to develop the society wherein they can make the Earth a better place to live. Furthermore, sustainability will also bring economic development because, the particular nation is getting benefitted because there will be abundance of resources in that particular country for longer period of time. Therefore, by adopting these practices, company’s recognition will get increases and this way it can remain ahead in the competition going on in the market.
Analyzing the accuracy of LCA than just looking at the carbon footprint of the ‘usephase’ of a material
LCA was first introduced by Tata Steel in India and it was the new concept in India. The accuracy of LCA of this company could be analyzed by comparing it with the other steel production firm. This way the firm could get the clear picture regarding its LCA than carbon footprint of the material.
Evaluating the contribution of Tata Steel for sustainable and ethical business practices
Defining the product and its current use by mapping the way product has evolved since its first invention
Establishing a need for innovation
Brainstorming of the ideas
- Power efficient microprocessor should be innovated.
- Size of the microprocessor must be contracted so that the device’s size could be reduced.
- Single type of microprocessor must be invented for all types of devices. Whether it may be computers, laptops, mobile or any other device.
Shortlisting two ideas for trial
The two ideas which have been shortlisted are as follow:
- Power efficient microprocessor should be innovated.
- Single type of microprocessor must be invented for all types of devices. Whether it may be computers, laptops, mobile or any other device.
Cost-benefit analysis for each one
Cost-benefit analysis for power efficiency | ||||||||
Costs ($m) | Year | |||||||
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
Development costs | -50,000 | |||||||
Operating costs | -75,000 | -82,500 | -90,750 | -99,825 | -109,808 | |||
Total costs | -50,000 | -75,000 | -82,500 | -90,750 | -99,825 | -109,808 | ||
Benefits | ||||||||
Tangible benefits for new microprocessor | 110,000 | 121,000 | 133,100 | 146,410 | 161,051 | |||
Intangible benefits for new microprocessor | 10,000 | 11,000 | 12,100 | 13,310 | 14,641 | 10,000 | ||
Total Benefits | 120,000 | 132,000 | 145,200 | 159,720 | 175,692 | 10,000 |
Analyzing risks and developing strategies for mitigation
- Incompatibility of existing hardware and software with new microprocessor.
- Lack of resources like lack of latest technology in all parts of world.
- Uncertain circumstances like change in the company’s policy.
Highlighting sustainability issues
Strategies and resources for implementing new idea
Key action items and time frames for implementation
Deadline for the task allocated is 6 months and under this the planning and implementation will be done. Moreover, key action require for the implementation is the accurate planning and motivation to the employees.
Impact of change and consequences for people within the organization
During this implementation, employees may be required to stay more in than the office hours and this may impact their health and temper. To avoid this, company must provide proper comfort to the employees and also motivate them on a timely basis.
A communication plan communicating
Performance measures for measuring success of the new product
Testing and trialing process
5S engages people through the use of 'Standards' and ‘Discipline'. It is not just about housekeeping, but concentrating on maintaining the standards & discipline to manage the organization - all achieved by upholding & showing respect for the Gemba every day. The 5S of Kaizen is as follows:
- Sort: Sort out & separate that which is needed & not needed in the area.
- Straighten: Arrange items that are needed so that they are ready & easy to use. Clearly identify locations for all items so that anyone can find them & return them once the task is completed.
- Shine: Clean the workplace & equipment on a regular basis in order to maintain standards & identify defects.
- Standardize: Revisit the first three of the 5S on a frequent basis and confirm the condition of the Gemba using standard procedures.
- Sustain: Keep to the rules to maintain the standard & continue to improve every day.
The difference between sustaining and disruptive innovation is commonly misunderstood by many in business. The main differentiation that it makes is that sustaining innovation comes from listening to the needs of customers in the existing market and creating products that satisfy their predicted needs for the future. Disruptive innovation creates new markets separate to the mainstream; markets that are unknowable at the time of the technologies conception. Furthermore the two examples of each type of innovations are as follows:
- Disruptive innovation: The Transistor Radio and pocket calculators
- Sustaining innovation: Mobile phones and LCD screen.
- Ethics
- Integrity
- Trust
- Training
- Teamwork
- Leadership
- Recognition
- Communication
- Managers of the company take responsibility for employee learning
- Organizational structure of the company has been designed in such a way that it promotes or facilitates learning to the employees.
References
Fan, S. T., Lo, C. M., Poon, R. T., Yeung, C., Liu, C. L., Yuen, W. K. and Chan, S. C. ‘Continuous improvement of survival outcomes of resection of hepatocellular carcinoma: a 20-year experience.”. (2011). Annals of surgery, 253(4), 745-758.
Rampersad, G., Quester, P. and Troshani, I., ‘Managing innovation networks: Exploratory evidence from ICT, biotechnology and nanotechnology networks.’ (2010). Industrial Marketing Management, 39(5), pp.793-805.