Timur+Personal+Write-Up

Based on my interaction with the GlobalTech simulation case study I feel I have learned the following: This case study has opened my eyes to the extremely complex and inter-linked human relationships that occur within any company and how these informal relationships are often more important than the formal ones. A personal dislike for someone (e.g Scott Bell) can cause major tensions between departments. As this case study clearly illustrates, each department has its own roles, responsibilites and most importantly motivation within the company. Since, the survival or success of one department often heavily depends on the adequate work done by the other, tension is created. For e.g: R&D arguing that Marketing is not selling their product appropriately. This friction is often made worste when the departments follow seperate agendas that clash. For e.g: R&D being heavily pro-military while Marketing is heavily commercial. The GlobalTech case study has demonstrated how tension within a department can come about due to clashing motivations. A perfect example of this is the internal struggle for decreasing resources within the R&D department. Seanna Grey vs. James Clarke and the fight for resource allocation between military projects and commercial ones. This simulation illustrates how much more difficult it would be to conduct such a change in real life since there is no opportunity to re-start the game. Careful step-by-step planning is required in-order to succeed at the first go. "If you fail to plan, you plan to fail". This case study illustrates how there is no 'right' or 'wrong' tactic, rather there are decisions that carry particular consequences the success of which often depends on the time during which it is implemented. A tactic that is used at the right time can easily switch from being a beneficial move for the company to a harmful one. One of the tactics that we used yet didn't seem worth the cost was 'Large Group Intervention'. The tactic cost over 100,000 but increased management buy-in by only 1%. In contrast, a CEO speech costing 500 led to a similar outcome. This input vs. output assessment emphasizes that often a company will have many ways to achieve a similar goal; the key is finding the best option out of the available ones. This case-study emphasizes the limited nature of the resources that a company can have access to. These limited resources really restrict the tactics that could be used and force a manager to carefully weigh out all decisions to be implemented.
 * The reality of formal and informal relationships within a company.
 * Friction between departments.
 * Friction within a department.
 * Importance of Planning.
 * Importance of Timing
 * Importance of 'opportunity cost'.
 * Implications of limited resources.