Economic Development in the Middle East

Cross-Cultural Film Analysis Gattaca Essay Example

Cross Cross-Cultural Film Analysis Gattaca Paper Cross-Cultural Film Analysis Gattaca Paper ‘GATTACA’ Film Summary Vincent is destined to be a second class citizen, conceived naturally, rather than in a laboratory. He is born into a world which discriminates against genetics, rather than religion, race or gender. In order to gain access into the Gattaca Corporation and reach his dream of going to Titan he takes on the identity of Jerome Morrow, a person with ideal genes but crippled from an accident. He uses Jerome’s hair, blood, urine and skin to pass all tests and is set to reach his lifelong desire when the mission director is murdered. He inadvertently loses one of his own eyelashes at the scene and becomes the main suspect in the case. The killer is determined to be another of Gattaca’s directors who is initially overlooked because his DNA profile indicates that violence is not in his nature. In the end Vincent takes off on his mission to Titan. Discussion Culture Shock due to contact with unfamiliar cultures (Stephen Bochner, 2003) Culture shock is something that Vincent experiences as he makes the transition from a culture comprising of second class citizens to a culture of superiority as he takes on the identity of the genetically superior Jerome. The first stage of culture shock is the honeymoon period (Bochner, 2003). Vincent experiences this before he meets Jerome for the first time and thoughts of fulfilling his life-long dream are active. He then goes through a period of fear and denial where he is not confident and actually refuses to go ahead with the plan. He is talked around by the real Jerome, who needs the money to pay for his alcohol addiction, and prepares himself to lie and cheat just to succeed. Situations similar to this are played out in organisations regularly where people are prepared to lie, cheat and steal to gain success, typically financial success; and management must deal with effectively. As time goes on Vincent gradually adjusts to the new expectations of within the Gattaca Corporation. A cross-cultural obstacle that needed to be overcome was the difficulty that Vincent has in accepting himself as Jerome which is essential if he is to succeed within Gattaca and not give up his cover. This is overcome by the real Jerome referring to Vincent as Jerome when they spoke. One thing that this framework does not discuss is the idea of never fully coming to grips with the new culture. The question I pose is: Can a person entirely take on a new culture or does their childhood culture remain with them for life? The film shows that people cannot fully accept a new culture and when forced upon them they show resistance. An example of this is when Vincent becomes aggressive towards one of the murder detectives in fear of being proven as the murderer. The implications of cultural shock for organisations can be seen when an employee is sent on sojourn, typically overseas, and needs to cope in an unfamiliar culture. Management could overcome some of these issues by educating the employee about the foreign culture and some expectations prior to leaving. Software of the Mind (Hofstede, 2005) Culture as mental programming: At the beginning of the film, during his childhood, Vincent’s patterns of thinking, feeling and acting are established in his mind. He learns to accept himself as inferior to his genetically ‘perfect’ brother Anton. When he finds a way of living his dream and must take on a new identity (Jerome) he finds it difficult to unlearn this mental programming. However, a person’s behaviour is only partially predetermined by their mental programming (Hofstede, 2005, p. 3), and this is seen as Vincent deviates from his culture and creatively takes on the identity of Jerome. Hofstede describes culture as being derived from exposure to the world rather than from one’s genes. Hofstede discusses the possibility of intelligence being attributed to genetics and suggests that on the basis of ethnic groups it is difficult to come to a conclusion. In the film it is clear that within Gattaca there is wide acceptance that yes a person’s genes do determine their intelligence. Vincent’s interview for entry into Gattaca entails solely a genetic test and not a physical or mental assessment. Manifestation of cultural differences: In the film we see the divergence of two very strong cultures. One belongs to the genetically gifted; and the other to the ‘degenerates’. The ways these cultures have divided themselves is explained well by Hofstede’s depiction of the ‘skins of an onion’ (Hofstede, 2005, p. 6). The heroes in the film (the genetically gifted) are highly valued and show model behaviour to inferiors or naturally conceived people. Depicted as the more capable members of society the heroes display symbols which carry specific meaning such as formal hair styles and very professional, clean clothing. The heroes display rituals such as the day on the treadmill where they assert themselves superfluous to reaching a desired end as assessors are solely interested in genetic make-up rather than fitness. Contrary to Hofstede’s view that values are acquired early in our lives we see Vincent’s values change significantly in the film. These values are a strong determinant of culture and as Vincent takes on the identity of Jerome he moves into the hero status of society, or as Hofstede describes it, from abnormal to normal (Hofstede, 2005). His move from second class status to hero status is a good example of how culture reproduces itself. His role models become the members of the Gattaca Corporation and he sees an opportunity to fulfil his aim in life. It appears that the hero’s culture is growing as more and more parents are opting for gene selection of their babies. Stereotyping The culture within the Gattaca Corporation shows clearly the human tendency to stereotype. Assessors discriminate against new applicants with undesirable genetics rather than testing each person individually to determine their capabilities. Genetics gives them a preconceived opinion of how people will perform and people are rejected or accepted accordingly. A specific example of stereotyping in the film is when the actual murderer of the mission director is excluded as a suspect because of his genetics. This would suggest that the idea of selection of people with ideal genetics and reliance on this for behaviour of people may be major a cause of stereotyping, not just a result of it. The implications that this has for managers of organisations are that they need to be aware of their stereotypes and ensure that this doesn’t affect their decisions or cause them to discriminate unnecessarily when dealing with people. References Bochner, S. (2003). Culture shock due to contact with unfamiliar cultures. Found in W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, S. A. Hayes, D. N. Sattler (Eds. ), Online Readings in Psychology and Culture (Unit 8, Chapter 7), Center for Cross-Cultural Research, Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington USA. Accessed 1st September 2008, from ac. wwu. edu/~culture/Bochner. htm Francesco, A. M. and Gold, B. A. (2005), International Organizational Behaviour: Text, Cases, and Exercises, 2nd Ed, Pearson Prentice Hall, pp. 17-45 Hofstede, G. and Hofstede, G. J. 2005, Culture and Organisations: Software of the Mind, 2nd Ed, McGraw-Hill P. L. Duffy Resource Centre, 2006, Gattaca, Trinity College WA, Accessed 31st August 2008, from trinity. wa. edu. au/plduffyrc/subjects/english/media/gattaca. htm

Financial Management Principles Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2

Financial Management Principles - Essay Example It should be noted that a lender cannot simply lend his excess fund to potential borrower without making sure that the latter will not default on his payment. In this situation, an intermediary should exist in order to gather information about both parties and mitigate risk (Mishkin 2004). Financial institutions are able to minimize the risk of information asymmetry by building their reputation in the industry. Thus, individuals are not cautious in putting their money in a bank’s savings account which are then lend to parties who are in need of funds. Financial institutions like banks, as stated above, carry out the important function of making financial resources available to parties who need them. By building expertise in information search and reputation in undertaking their financial functions, financial institutions serve as a great help for individuals and business organizations which require help in financing. On the other hand, individuals and companies who want to invest their money can trust in the efficiency of financial institutions in ensuring return to their investments. As the illustration above shows, as financial institutions carry out their role in the financial system, they take on the risk which should be handled by the borrower and lender. Thus, financial institutions also take measures in minimizing the risk that they take by ensuring that their borrowers will not default on their payment obligations. This scrutiny is even more highlighted when a company which borrows from the financial institution conducted its Initial Public Offering. As the company becomes public, it exposes itself from the critical eye of its current and potential creditors. A company can cope with this increased financial intermediation scrutiny by adhering to the standards set by accounting institutions. It should also instill tighter measures in ensuring the truthfulness of its financial reports and accounts.

2500 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

2500 - Essay Example The bearing used for this specific case of wind turbine is ball-bearings. The ball-bearings are used for low load and high speed machines. The ball bearings are generally manufactured from steel material. This material is preferred choice due to its high strength, and resistance of corrosion and high fatigue strength. As per standard practice, the outer race of the ball bearing is manufactured from high alloy steel bar, in most of the cases the inner races, wear rings are also manufactured from the same material. The recommended steel alloy for such manufacturing is BMS-931 and 8720H. The manufacturing process begins with the forging of the steel bar, the material is forged into different shapes like cups, cones etc. The forging process is generally hot forging; this process shall release thermal stresses from the material during the process. The forging process can be explained as, "exposure of the steel bar in the induction heater system, the heating process is halted after the temperature reaches the melting point of the material; at this temperature maximum formability for hot forging is attained". After the completion of hot forging, the material is pierced. The material used for the manufacturing is SAE-521000; the material is used in the form of forged rings. The centre-less grinding is applied on the material, which is extremely rough machining process. The material is then treated at high temperature, after which the hardness of the material is checked. The grinding on the material is conducted to secure smooth surface finish. During the process the material undergoes "honing and super finishing followed by washing; later anti-rush agent is applied on the object" (Bruce, 1997). The heat treatment process is extremely critical, and during this process the ample exposure to the heat will release thermal stresses within the object. The process is conducted "to

Equity and Debt Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Equity and Debt - Assignment Example The advantages of choosing equity financing reveal the compelling reasons why AMSC management felt the need to adopt floating shares in the market. Firstly, equity financing allowed the company to obtain a long-term relationship with investors ready to commit money in the company’s projects. Such an arrangement avoids short-term risks where the financial security offered by the funding party comes to an end after some time, such as in a loan agreement. Similarly, most investors in equity deals have preferences in the choice of projects to invest in, which attracts professional entrepreneurs. In this regard, equity relationships have safer business linkages by pulling passionate investors who add value in terms of business succession. Another advantage of equity financing relates to the overall reduction in outward cash-flow challenges that shrink liquidity. As opposed to debt financing, equity financing adds money to the business in the long-term, thereby reducing outflow challenges. Evans and Mellen (2010) noted a closely related advantage that touches on the long-term outcomes of additional investment without repayment obligations, which increases chances of growth. The long-term element of the equity relationship secures the growth prospects of a business as opposed to a debt that requires fixed repayment periods. Similarly, the investor bears the risk element of the investment made, which reduces the pressure of compulsory liability as seen in debt financing. The sharing outcomes of the partnership and shared ownership raises the confidence of the equity arrangement in facing risks. From these advantages, the management could have found grounds to make a decision to on engaging shareholders. As mentioned, equity financing also presents a fair share of disadvantages emanating from the opportunity cost against debt financing and other sources of capital. Firstly, equity financing implies

High Technology Semiconductor Company Acquisitions

High Technology Semiconductor Company Acquisitions The fast rate of technological change was one of the most important trends in the 1990s and this brought an increasing complexity and cost to the development of new technologies. Companies used their innovative assets as a major source of competitive advantage to quickly introduce new products and adopt new processes (Sen and Egelhoff, 2000). Acquisitions are completed in many industries for reasons that are aligned with the dominant competitive driving forces for that industry. In the area of high technology and seminconductors, the competitive drivers are short product life cycles and process advancement. Process advances are required to both support the incremental changes to existing products and to allow the creation of radically new one. The number of acquisitions rapidly increased through the decade for several reasons: the product life cycle was getting shorter; participating in the creation of industry and product standards was crucial; early entry helped capture market shar e; and R D risk could be reduced. Hagedoorn (1993) found the reduction in innovation time and acquisition of needed technologies as the most important reasons for one company to pursue another. Several researchers have written about the radical and incremental innovation capabilities, their distinguishing factors and the important consequences to the corporation. It has also been argued that large firms are effective with incremental innovations and small firms are better at radical innovations. (Ettlie, Bridges, and OKeefe, 1984; Dewar and Dutton, 1986; Christensen, 1992). Corporate decision to acquire or not acquire another company embodies a high level, serious management strategy decision toward repositioning a company in the competitive landscape. The decade from 1990 to 2000 was chosen as an important time for acquisition activity. There was frequent activity in acquisitions during a time of stable economic conditions creating good conditions for analysis. In 1990, the dollar value of all acquisitions and mergers in the United States was two percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In 2000, the value reached over 15% of the GDP (Mergerstat, 2003). In the first 10 months of 2000, in the technology sector alone, there were 2,019 acquisition and merger deals worth $573 billion (Reason, 2000). This occurred despite studies done in the 1980s and 1990s that found little positive effect financially for the acquiring company. The magnitude of the activity strongly suggests that some positive relationship could be found if examined in a different way o r using new metrics. This research uses a different methodology by exploring a single industry, selecting profitability growth as the metric from theoretical industry driving forces and analyzing profitability over time as a statistical repeated measures model using SPSS software. The results from this work may have strategic implications for remaining competitive in high technology, high-velocity industries. It should be noted here that the term acquisition, mergers and acquisitions and M A will be used interchangeably in this research and are defined in Appendix A along with other important terms. In high technology industries, such as semiconductors, a firm interested in new product innovation must aggressively invest to stay at the leading edge. Creating or acquiring new offerings can be dependent on a combination of efforts directed either internal or external to the company. Internal efforts include primarily Research and Development (R D) or newly formed affiliates, termed greenfields (Vermeulen Barkema, 2001; Sonenclar, 1984; Bradley Korn, 1981). External efforts can take the form of acquisition or mergers to best capture the intellectual property (IP) that is maintained in the categories of trade secret and proprietary know-how. Acquisitions, when done well, appear to have the advantage of capturing this kind of IP as compared to the other forms of external efforts. Acquisitions also potentially offer faster repositioning with less risk and lower cost than pursuing internal company endeavors (Singh Montgomery, 1987). A high technology companys success hinges on crea tion of innovative ideas, availability of creative personnel, speed of new product execution and cost effectiveness. Mergers and acquisitions are a highly favored management avenue for growth and competitive positioning. The importance of this management consideration and the impact of mergers and acquisitions continue to expand with billions of dollars involved. The importance in the technology sector becomes apparent when looking at the 724 firms that made their initial public offering (IPO) in 1992, but were not acquired or merged. Of these companies, 58% were selling at less than their IPO price six years later (Small Business Statistics, 2000). Product and service offering must constantly evolve and change (Thompson Strickland, 2001). High velocity innovation is fundamental to the growth and survival of high technology businesses. Organizations that are successful have a regular stream of unique products and services. Hewlett-Packard had over 50% of revenue in 1999 coming from products introduced in the previous two to four years. In high technology companies, the highest profit levels come from the newest products. Consequently, it is imperative to accelerate the innovation cycle, often through mergers and acquisitions, and this is critically important to remaining competitive. Entrepreneurial firms consistently outperform larger firms in both market and earnings growth on the Inc. 500 and Forbes 200 lists (Imparato Harari, 1994). There are several potential reasons for making an acquisition that have been identified and studied in the literature. In addition to the reasons for actually acquiring, there are a number of factors following the event that will influence the degree of success or failure that these efforts may experience. These elements that play a part in determining the outcome have been the focus of studies that are summarized in the Literature Review. WHAT MAKES HIGH-TECH COMPANIES AND THEIR ACQUISITIONS UNIQUE Both the popular business press as well as recent academic research seems to uniformly accept the unique nature of high-tech stocks. Kohers and Kohers (2000) state: The high-growth nature of technology-based industries distinguishes them from other types of industries. In addition to their high-growth potential, however, another distinctive feature of high-tech industries is the inherent uncertainty associated with companies whose values rely on future outcomes or developments is unproven, uncharted fields (p. 40). In fact, many pure technology stocks are young companies, underfunded and without prospects for generating any cash flows in the near future. Nevertheless, despite the inherent uncertainty of high-tech industries, investors seemed to disregard most equity fundamentals when valuing technology stocks, especially during the market upturn in the late 1990s. As a result, even though high-tech stocks were in general extremely volatile, many of them were trading at remarkable pre miums. The exploding rate of growth in M A activity that involved high-tech industries can be partly attributed to those overly optimistic valuations. Puranam (2001) argues: On the acquirers side, booming stock market valuations have made acquisitions for stock feasible for several relatively small (revenue wise) firms, as well as the more established larger ones. On the targets side, an increasing preference for the ready liquidity offered, by an acquisition, as opposed to the paper profits from an IPO have created an environment conducive to acquisitions of small start-ups. At the same time many of these acquisitions were also motivated by the acquirers need to obtain critical technologies and expertise in order to quickly enhance their own technological competence. Despite the burst of the high-tech market bubble and the failure of most of these acquisitions, investors continue to show an extreme faith on these stocks. Americans still believe that technology can create a better world. Each time the U.S. tech sector falls into a trough, new technologies and companies emerge to lead it forward again (Business Week, August 27, 2001). PROBLEM MOTIVATING THIS STUDY This research effort seeks to understand the relationship between acquisitions and profitability by looking at the industrial sector for high technology semiconductor companies. Many prior studies have shown little financial benefit to the acquiring company in research conducted beginning in the 1980s and extending to today using a variety of variables, measures and company sample selection. These studies will be discussed in more detail in the Literature Review. The researchers Rumelt (1984), Ravenscraft and Scherer (1987), Porter (1987) and Kaplan and Weisbach (1990) separately found that acquisitions that could be categorized as unrelated, or diversifications, did not lead to profitability improvements, but most of these studies obviously included a cross-section of divergent industries. The importance of innovation and new products in high velocity, competitive environments is discussed in literature and high velocity innovation is fundamental to the growth, profitability and sur vival of these businesses (Thompson and Strickland, 1999; Betz, 2001; Burgelman, Christensen and Wheelwright, 2004). The competitive advantage of capturing intellectual property through acquisition has also been discussed more recently. More clear evidence is beginning to emerge concerning the drive to acquire technology and the unique features of doing so (Prentice Fox, 2002). This research examines the correlation between the event of acquisition and subsequent company performance and growth of profitability in the decade of 1990-2000. Practicing managers in the area of management of technology are faced with the challenge of high velocity innovation being a requirement to maintain competitive positioning (Thompson Strickland, 2001). Two methods for constant innovation include internal efforts, such as Research Development (R D), and external efforts, such as acquisitions, on which this paper focuses. Prior studies have been cross-sectional across different industries and analyzed the benefits gained in terms of patents and R D (Bettis 1981), stock price (Matsusaka, 1990; Schleifer and Vishny, 1990; and Lubatkin, 1982) or increase in company size versus the cost of acquisitions. These studies have not captured one of the most unique features of the high technology industry where innovation and new products are dependent on intellectual property (IP) that is maintained in the categories of trade secret and proprietary know-how. Because of this characteristic, the high technology industry would be expected to yield different results. The importance of IP and know-how has been an area of academic focus working to clarify the concept of absorptive capacity in the 1990s, but empirical work to tie these concepts to firm performance was not pursued (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Barney, 1991; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). The use of patents as a measure, as used in prior research (Acs and Aud retsch, 1988; Pakes and Griliches, 1980; Hitt, Hoskisson, Ireland and Harrison, 1991), does not capture the IP benefits in these categories or measure the success resulting from these external efforts. Acquisitions, when done well, should be expected to have an advantage on capturing this kind of IP. Acquisitions potentially offer faster positioning with less risk and lower cost than internal company endeavors which include primarily Research and Development (R D) (Gulati, 1995; Singh Montgomery, 1987). STUDY OVERVIEW This research effort focuses on one high technology industrial sector of semiconductors and studies the correlation between acquisitions, profitability, survivability and RD intensity over time. Many prior studies (Rumelt, 1984; Ravenscraft and Scherer, 1987; Porter, 1987; and Kaplan and Weisbach, 1990) have shown little financial benefit to the acquiring company, but most of these studies included a cross-section of divergent industries. The importance of innovation and new products in high velocity, competitive environments is widely discussed in literature. High velocity innovation is fundamental for the theory of growth, profitability and survival of these businesses. The competitive advantage of capturing intellectual property through acquisition has also been discussed more recently. More clear evidence is beginning to emerge concerning the drive to acquire technology and the unique features of doing so (Prentice Fox, 2002). This paper researches the correlation between the ev ent of acquisition and subsequent company performance, survivability, the growth of profitability and R D spending. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ON HIGH-TECH COMPANIES Most research on high-tech companies is relatively recent and has its origin in various business fields. Chaudhuri and Tabrizi (1999) study the practices of 24 high-tech companies involved in acquisitions, and try to identify the key factors in capturing the real value in high-tech acquisitions. They conclude that in order to make a successful acquisition managers need to move beyond the traditional model of acquisitions where the people acquired are secondary to physical assets and brands. High-tech acquisitions need to focus on the people since technological capabilities tied to skilled people are the key to long-term success in these industries. Arora, Fosfuri and Gambardella (2000) examine how the growth of markets for technology affected the corporate strategies of the leading companies, which can now sell technologies that they do not use in-house and increase their potential returns to R D. They argue that globalization, along with the low transportation costs of technologies, has made large R D intensive companies realize that they have the potential to exploit their technology on a very large scale by licensing. However, in deciding how to exploit their technology small firms and technology-based startups face a different set of challenges. According to the authors they need to trade off the costs of acquiring capital and building in-house production, distribution and marketing capability against the rents that would be lost or shared with their partners in a licensing deal. Also, the authors argue that integration may reduce the innovative potential of the firm, because the acquisition of the complementary assets in evitably increases the size of firms and induces important changes in the culture of the firm and in the speed and fluidity of information flows. Finally, they claim that evaluating technologies and being able to use them requires substantial in-house scientific and technological expertise and therefore internal and external R D can be reviewed as complements and not substitutes. Liu (2000) focuses on a different issue by examining the markets reaction to innovation news announcement made by the U.S. biotech firms during the 1983-1992 period. He finds that the average AR to the announcements is as high as 3.98 percent for a three-day event window and biotech stocks trading volumes almost double on the day of the news announcement. The announcement period ARs are negatively related to firm-size and underwriter reputation, while positively related to the firms technology depth as measured by R D intensity. However, during the months following the announcement the average three-month post announcement AR is 2.73 percent. The negative drift in stock prices appears to be mainly driven by the firms weak science and technology (less R D intensive), firms with high Book to Market (B/M) ratios and large firms. In explaining his findings the author proposes an expectation error hypothesis. According to this hypothesis it is hard for investors or even managers to prec isely evaluate the economic value of innovations which in turn leads to the possibility of forming erroneous expectations. In high-tech industries the erroneous expectation is reflected in the investors over-optimism towards high-tech firms innovation news. Eventually, the stock prices adjust itself to reflect the firms fundamentals, especially its technology depth. The author attributes the observed evidence to the costly information required to value a high-tech firms innovation. Prentice and Fox (2002) provide a comprehensive review of the merger and acquisition process while focusing on the distinctive characteristics of high-tech companies. They argue that technology mergers are different from traditional mergers because of the importance that must be placed on people and their ability to innovate. Targets must be evaluated on intangible assets such as intellectual property and human capital. At the same time managers need to consider the issues of retention, culture and integration strategy from the beginning of the merger process to ensure success. There are two studies that are most relevant to this research. The first one is by Kohers and Kohers (2000) who examine the value creation potential of 1,634 mergers in the various high-tech areas between 1987 and 1996. They find that acquirers of high-tech targets experience significantly positive Ars at the time of the merger announcement, regardless of whether the merger is financed with cash or stock. Othe r factors influencing bidder returns are the time period in which the merger occurs, the ownership structure of the acquirer, the ownership status of the target and the high-tech affiliation of acquirers. They conclude that the market appears to be optimistic about such mergers and expects that acquiring companies will enjoy future growth benefits. The second related study is also by Kohers and Kohers (2001) who examine the post-merger performance of acquirers that purchase high-tech targets in order to determine whether the high expectations regarding the future merits of these investments are actually justified. Their results indicate that compared to non acquirers, acquirers perform poorly over the three-year period following the high-tech takeover announcement. Furthermore, glamour bidders show significantly lower long-run ARs, while value bidders do not experience significant post-merger ARs. Also, glamour bidders with a higher risk of agency problems show even worse post-merger performance while institutional ownership in the acquiring firm has a positive influence on acquirer long run ARs. Overall, the authors conclude that the market tends to exhibit excessive enthusiasm toward the expected benefits of high-tech mergers but many of these benefits do not materialize. CHAPTER 3 HYPOTHESES, METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES Previous research in the literature has generally found little financial benefit for the acquiring companies that were associated with occurrence of the acquisition activity (Rumelt, 1974; Ravenscraft and Scherer, 1987; Porter, 1987; and Kaplan and Weisbach, 1990). Consequently, the first and second questions for this study are focused using the single industry of semiconductors, are stated in the null hypothesis format. First, firm profitability growth rates are compared in two groups, one that does acquire and one that does not. Secondly, individual firm profitability growth is examined before and after an acquisition event looking for a change in growth rate that is significant. Hypothesis 1 (H1): There will be no significant difference in profitability growth when firms making acquisitions are compared to firms not making acquisitions in the high-tech sector. Hypothesis 2 (H2): Acquiring firms making acquisitions are expected to have no significant change in profitability growth before and after the acquisition event. The literature yields less empirical work in analyzing the relationship between merger and acquisition actions and the longevity of a corporation. Theory certainly recognizes the close link between competitive capability and company survival. For the high technology industry of semiconductors, high velocity innovation is a requirement for remaining competitive. Research questions three and four are also stated in the null hypothesis format. Company longevity, or survival rate in number of year, is compared in two groups also, where one group does acquire and one does not. Lastly, an individual firms spending rate on R D is examined before and after an acquisition event looking for a significant change in the rate compared to the trend for the company. Hypothesis 3 (H3): Firms making acquisitions are expected to have no difference in survivability in this industry than firms who do not make acquisitions. Hypothesis 4 (H4): A companys R D intensity will show no significant change following the event of acquisition within this industry. SELECTION OF VARIABLES This research was conducted in a concentric approach by starting with one independent and one dependent variable initially to define the relationship and guide the next treatment in the study. As work continued, variables were selected and the methodology expanded to assess both within-subject and between-subject effects. The variables used in this study for Hypothesis 1 (H1) include profitability growth rate and a dummy variable to represent the presence or absence of the event of acquisition. The event of acquisition is represented by a dummy variable with a zero (0) representing no acquisition and with a one (1) representing an acquisition event. An acquisition event is identified by using a firms reported cash flows attributed to acquisition as stated in the Compustat database. The profitability growth rate is calculated from the total gross profit margin reported by year and cumulated over three years, then averaged to reduce fluctuations and facilitate identification of trends. The variables used for H2 analysis of profitability growth rate before and after an acquisition were the dummy variable for the presence of acquisition, the gross profit margin percentage (GPM %) calculated as a three (3) year cumulative average growth rate (CAGR) to smooth fluctuations and better identify a trend. This relationship was studied for three (3) years prior to the actual acquisition and five (5) years following the action. As the study progressed, a second dummy variable was used for company size to separate the effect of this independent variable as well. A repeated measures matrix was designed with two dummy independent variable as well. A repeated measures matrix was designed with two dummy independent variables, each with two levels and one dependent variable with repeated measures over nine years for a 2 x 2 x 9 repeated measures analysis using the SPPS software. The variables used for H3 analysis of acquisition relation to firm longevity were the acquisition dummy variable and the data from Compustat for the number of years that the company did financial reporting during the period of this study. H4 looks for the effects between acquisition and RD spending or intensity by using the acquisition dummy independent variable and R D intensity as the dependent variable. R D intensity is calculated using the R D expense reported as such by the companies and in the Compustat database. This Compustat item represents all costs incurred during the year that relate to the development of new products or services. This amount is only the company`s contribution and includes software and amortization of software costs and complies with Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) standards. This item excludes customer or government-sponsored research and development (including reimbursable indirect costs) and ordinary engineering expenses for routine, ongoing efforts to define, enrich, or improve the qualities of existing products. Methodology This study encompasses the time period of ten years from 1990-2000, inclusive. Semiconductor companies were selected as an entire group according to their NAICS/SIC codes. Using the Standard Poors Compustat database, there are 153 semiconductor companies included that were identified as active companies at the end of the calendar year 2000 by Compustat. These companies are listed in Appendix B. Active reporting for one year. Companies are designated as inactive and reclassified in the Compustat database when it is no longer actively traded on a stock market exchange due to bankruptcy, becoming a private company, leveraged buyout or merging. The research effort started with analysis one independent variable and one dependent variable in order to initially establish what the relationship was that existed, if it was significant and how to proceed with analysis. Exploratory work on Hypothesis 1 showed that there was a statistically significant and positive correlation between acquisitions and gross profit margin (GMP) growth broadly over the decade which differs from prior research. Hypothesis 2 moves toward a more detailed analysis of this finding. Consequently, in this chronology of discovery, the next step presented in Section 4.2 look at one dependent variable of profit margin growth and two independent variables of company size and acquisition activity. 3-way ANNOVA and regression treatments of the data are conducted using the data analysis tool available under Microsoft Excel Software looking at individual years in the ten year study period. The results show significance again and suggest that other interactions betwe en variables would yield additional understanding. The next step in the research was set up to look at one dependent variable, again gross margin (GPM) growth, repeatedly measured over time for each subject or company was entered for the nine (9) years 1995-2000 inclusive to capture acquisition effects giving 2 x 2 x 9 repeated measures design. The two independent variables were used in the dummy format with non-acquires given a code zero 0 and acquires assigned at one (1). Company size was the second dummy variable with firms less than $100M in sales per year coded zero (0) and if greater than $100M in sales, assigned a one (1). The statistical analysis using a repeated measures design analyzed the variable interactions and their relationship to GPM growth using the SPSS software. These results are presented in Section 4.5 Repeated Measures Analysis that was done using SPSS software. Descriptive statistics were an important first treatment of the data sets created. This includes the values for the following parameters: mean, median, range variance, standard deviation, kurtosis, and skewness. This treatment looks at characteristics of the data and the degree of normal distribution. The 3-way ANOVA investigations and regression treatment of the data were initially done using the data analysis tool software available in Microsoft Excel. Generally, the data sets for this study vary somewhat from the classical normal distribution, but ANOVA and MANOVA (multivariate ANOVA) within a repeated measures analysis are considered robust to violations of the normal distribution assumption (Maxwell Dealney, 1990; Stevens, 1996) SPSS Advanced Models 11.0 software was used to create general linear models of the data and conduct analysis of variance (ANOVA), regression, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) for the multiple variables in this model with repeated measures. The factors or independent variables were used to divide the population of 153 active semiconductor companies into groups. There were two independent variables used that were designated as dummy variables. The first variable of acquisition separated companies that did complete acquisitions from those that did not complete acquisitions during the decade of study. The second variable grouped the companies by size of sales at the end of the decade by either greater than $100 million or less than $100 million. Then the general linear model procedure was used to test the four null hypotheses, as stated above, regarding the effects of the independent variables on the dependent variable of gross profit margin growth as a repeated measure over the perio d 1992-2000. The investigation included looking at interactions between factors as well as the individual factors and the effects and interactions of covariates. This model specifies the independent variables as covariates for regression analysis. The SPSS repeated measures model creates a matrix for the sums of squares due to the model effects, gives the approximate F statistics and estimates parameters in addition to testing hypotheses. When an F test shows significance, SPSS performs post hoc tests to evaluate the differences between the means. This yields a predicted mean value for the cells of the model. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to named variables to study the portion of variance in the each variable that could be identified as explained and unexpected with regard to the event of acquisition. A covariance tool was also used when looking at the variables described above such as acquisition occurrence, company size and profitability growth changes. This compares whether the two ranges of data move together à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" that is, whether large values of one set were associated with large values of the other (positive covariance), whether small values of one set were associated with large values of the other (negative covariance), or whether values in both sets were unrelated (covariance near zero). DATA SOURCES Standard Poors Compustat database was used for data collection in this research. The database contains fundamental financial, statistical and market data derived from publicity traded companies trading on the NYSE, NASDAQ, AMEX, OTC and Canadian stock exchanges. The calendar year for a company is the year in which the fiscal year ends and is the time period used as standard in this research. Companies with fiscal years ending in January through May are assigned by Compustant into the year in which the fiscal year begins. Companies with fiscal years that end in June through December are assigned to the year in which the fiscal year ends. The EDGAR (Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval) System database maintained by the United Stated Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) was also used. The EDGAR data is also collected from the same sources that are used to generate the Compustat database. Data from these controlled and verifiable sources were corroborated and augmented with information collected from semiconductor trade journals, company annual reports and the Mergers Acquisitions Journal that tracks statistics in this area. CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION HI à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" ACQUISITON AND PROFITABILITY RELATIONSHIP A strong positive relationship was found to exist between the presence of acquisition activity and the growth in gross profit margin (GPM) by the end of the ten year study period. The statistical analysis is detailed below and is a departure from previous findings. This finding addresses the central question of this research endeavor to look for a relationship between acquisition events and profitability growth within the one industry of semiconductors. A positive financial effect is found and opens the path for additional analysis in this direction. Consequently, this information forms the foundation for the additional work presented in this research. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> High Technology Semiconductor Company Acquisitions High Technology Semiconductor Company Acquisitions The fast rate of technological change was one of the most important trends in the 1990s and this brought an increasing complexity and cost to the development of new technologies. Companies used their innovative assets as a major source of competitive advantage to quickly introduce new products and adopt new processes (Sen and Egelhoff, 2000). Acquisitions are completed in many industries for reasons that are aligned with the dominant competitive driving forces for that industry. In the area of high technology and seminconductors, the competitive drivers are short product life cycles and process advancement. Process advances are required to both support the incremental changes to existing products and to allow the creation of radically new one. The number of acquisitions rapidly increased through the decade for several reasons: the product life cycle was getting shorter; participating in the creation of industry and product standards was crucial; early entry helped capture market shar e; and R D risk could be reduced. Hagedoorn (1993) found the reduction in innovation time and acquisition of needed technologies as the most important reasons for one company to pursue another. Several researchers have written about the radical and incremental innovation capabilities, their distinguishing factors and the important consequences to the corporation. It has also been argued that large firms are effective with incremental innovations and small firms are better at radical innovations. (Ettlie, Bridges, and OKeefe, 1984; Dewar and Dutton, 1986; Christensen, 1992). Corporate decision to acquire or not acquire another company embodies a high level, serious management strategy decision toward repositioning a company in the competitive landscape. The decade from 1990 to 2000 was chosen as an important time for acquisition activity. There was frequent activity in acquisitions during a time of stable economic conditions creating good conditions for analysis. In 1990, the dollar value of all acquisitions and mergers in the United States was two percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In 2000, the value reached over 15% of the GDP (Mergerstat, 2003). In the first 10 months of 2000, in the technology sector alone, there were 2,019 acquisition and merger deals worth $573 billion (Reason, 2000). This occurred despite studies done in the 1980s and 1990s that found little positive effect financially for the acquiring company. The magnitude of the activity strongly suggests that some positive relationship could be found if examined in a different way o r using new metrics. This research uses a different methodology by exploring a single industry, selecting profitability growth as the metric from theoretical industry driving forces and analyzing profitability over time as a statistical repeated measures model using SPSS software. The results from this work may have strategic implications for remaining competitive in high technology, high-velocity industries. It should be noted here that the term acquisition, mergers and acquisitions and M A will be used interchangeably in this research and are defined in Appendix A along with other important terms. In high technology industries, such as semiconductors, a firm interested in new product innovation must aggressively invest to stay at the leading edge. Creating or acquiring new offerings can be dependent on a combination of efforts directed either internal or external to the company. Internal efforts include primarily Research and Development (R D) or newly formed affiliates, termed greenfields (Vermeulen Barkema, 2001; Sonenclar, 1984; Bradley Korn, 1981). External efforts can take the form of acquisition or mergers to best capture the intellectual property (IP) that is maintained in the categories of trade secret and proprietary know-how. Acquisitions, when done well, appear to have the advantage of capturing this kind of IP as compared to the other forms of external efforts. Acquisitions also potentially offer faster repositioning with less risk and lower cost than pursuing internal company endeavors (Singh Montgomery, 1987). A high technology companys success hinges on crea tion of innovative ideas, availability of creative personnel, speed of new product execution and cost effectiveness. Mergers and acquisitions are a highly favored management avenue for growth and competitive positioning. The importance of this management consideration and the impact of mergers and acquisitions continue to expand with billions of dollars involved. The importance in the technology sector becomes apparent when looking at the 724 firms that made their initial public offering (IPO) in 1992, but were not acquired or merged. Of these companies, 58% were selling at less than their IPO price six years later (Small Business Statistics, 2000). Product and service offering must constantly evolve and change (Thompson Strickland, 2001). High velocity innovation is fundamental to the growth and survival of high technology businesses. Organizations that are successful have a regular stream of unique products and services. Hewlett-Packard had over 50% of revenue in 1999 coming from products introduced in the previous two to four years. In high technology companies, the highest profit levels come from the newest products. Consequently, it is imperative to accelerate the innovation cycle, often through mergers and acquisitions, and this is critically important to remaining competitive. Entrepreneurial firms consistently outperform larger firms in both market and earnings growth on the Inc. 500 and Forbes 200 lists (Imparato Harari, 1994). There are several potential reasons for making an acquisition that have been identified and studied in the literature. In addition to the reasons for actually acquiring, there are a number of factors following the event that will influence the degree of success or failure that these efforts may experience. These elements that play a part in determining the outcome have been the focus of studies that are summarized in the Literature Review. WHAT MAKES HIGH-TECH COMPANIES AND THEIR ACQUISITIONS UNIQUE Both the popular business press as well as recent academic research seems to uniformly accept the unique nature of high-tech stocks. Kohers and Kohers (2000) state: The high-growth nature of technology-based industries distinguishes them from other types of industries. In addition to their high-growth potential, however, another distinctive feature of high-tech industries is the inherent uncertainty associated with companies whose values rely on future outcomes or developments is unproven, uncharted fields (p. 40). In fact, many pure technology stocks are young companies, underfunded and without prospects for generating any cash flows in the near future. Nevertheless, despite the inherent uncertainty of high-tech industries, investors seemed to disregard most equity fundamentals when valuing technology stocks, especially during the market upturn in the late 1990s. As a result, even though high-tech stocks were in general extremely volatile, many of them were trading at remarkable pre miums. The exploding rate of growth in M A activity that involved high-tech industries can be partly attributed to those overly optimistic valuations. Puranam (2001) argues: On the acquirers side, booming stock market valuations have made acquisitions for stock feasible for several relatively small (revenue wise) firms, as well as the more established larger ones. On the targets side, an increasing preference for the ready liquidity offered, by an acquisition, as opposed to the paper profits from an IPO have created an environment conducive to acquisitions of small start-ups. At the same time many of these acquisitions were also motivated by the acquirers need to obtain critical technologies and expertise in order to quickly enhance their own technological competence. Despite the burst of the high-tech market bubble and the failure of most of these acquisitions, investors continue to show an extreme faith on these stocks. Americans still believe that technology can create a better world. Each time the U.S. tech sector falls into a trough, new technologies and companies emerge to lead it forward again (Business Week, August 27, 2001). PROBLEM MOTIVATING THIS STUDY This research effort seeks to understand the relationship between acquisitions and profitability by looking at the industrial sector for high technology semiconductor companies. Many prior studies have shown little financial benefit to the acquiring company in research conducted beginning in the 1980s and extending to today using a variety of variables, measures and company sample selection. These studies will be discussed in more detail in the Literature Review. The researchers Rumelt (1984), Ravenscraft and Scherer (1987), Porter (1987) and Kaplan and Weisbach (1990) separately found that acquisitions that could be categorized as unrelated, or diversifications, did not lead to profitability improvements, but most of these studies obviously included a cross-section of divergent industries. The importance of innovation and new products in high velocity, competitive environments is discussed in literature and high velocity innovation is fundamental to the growth, profitability and sur vival of these businesses (Thompson and Strickland, 1999; Betz, 2001; Burgelman, Christensen and Wheelwright, 2004). The competitive advantage of capturing intellectual property through acquisition has also been discussed more recently. More clear evidence is beginning to emerge concerning the drive to acquire technology and the unique features of doing so (Prentice Fox, 2002). This research examines the correlation between the event of acquisition and subsequent company performance and growth of profitability in the decade of 1990-2000. Practicing managers in the area of management of technology are faced with the challenge of high velocity innovation being a requirement to maintain competitive positioning (Thompson Strickland, 2001). Two methods for constant innovation include internal efforts, such as Research Development (R D), and external efforts, such as acquisitions, on which this paper focuses. Prior studies have been cross-sectional across different industries and analyzed the benefits gained in terms of patents and R D (Bettis 1981), stock price (Matsusaka, 1990; Schleifer and Vishny, 1990; and Lubatkin, 1982) or increase in company size versus the cost of acquisitions. These studies have not captured one of the most unique features of the high technology industry where innovation and new products are dependent on intellectual property (IP) that is maintained in the categories of trade secret and proprietary know-how. Because of this characteristic, the high technology industry would be expected to yield different results. The importance of IP and know-how has been an area of academic focus working to clarify the concept of absorptive capacity in the 1990s, but empirical work to tie these concepts to firm performance was not pursued (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Barney, 1991; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). The use of patents as a measure, as used in prior research (Acs and Aud retsch, 1988; Pakes and Griliches, 1980; Hitt, Hoskisson, Ireland and Harrison, 1991), does not capture the IP benefits in these categories or measure the success resulting from these external efforts. Acquisitions, when done well, should be expected to have an advantage on capturing this kind of IP. Acquisitions potentially offer faster positioning with less risk and lower cost than internal company endeavors which include primarily Research and Development (R D) (Gulati, 1995; Singh Montgomery, 1987). STUDY OVERVIEW This research effort focuses on one high technology industrial sector of semiconductors and studies the correlation between acquisitions, profitability, survivability and RD intensity over time. Many prior studies (Rumelt, 1984; Ravenscraft and Scherer, 1987; Porter, 1987; and Kaplan and Weisbach, 1990) have shown little financial benefit to the acquiring company, but most of these studies included a cross-section of divergent industries. The importance of innovation and new products in high velocity, competitive environments is widely discussed in literature. High velocity innovation is fundamental for the theory of growth, profitability and survival of these businesses. The competitive advantage of capturing intellectual property through acquisition has also been discussed more recently. More clear evidence is beginning to emerge concerning the drive to acquire technology and the unique features of doing so (Prentice Fox, 2002). This paper researches the correlation between the ev ent of acquisition and subsequent company performance, survivability, the growth of profitability and R D spending. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ON HIGH-TECH COMPANIES Most research on high-tech companies is relatively recent and has its origin in various business fields. Chaudhuri and Tabrizi (1999) study the practices of 24 high-tech companies involved in acquisitions, and try to identify the key factors in capturing the real value in high-tech acquisitions. They conclude that in order to make a successful acquisition managers need to move beyond the traditional model of acquisitions where the people acquired are secondary to physical assets and brands. High-tech acquisitions need to focus on the people since technological capabilities tied to skilled people are the key to long-term success in these industries. Arora, Fosfuri and Gambardella (2000) examine how the growth of markets for technology affected the corporate strategies of the leading companies, which can now sell technologies that they do not use in-house and increase their potential returns to R D. They argue that globalization, along with the low transportation costs of technologies, has made large R D intensive companies realize that they have the potential to exploit their technology on a very large scale by licensing. However, in deciding how to exploit their technology small firms and technology-based startups face a different set of challenges. According to the authors they need to trade off the costs of acquiring capital and building in-house production, distribution and marketing capability against the rents that would be lost or shared with their partners in a licensing deal. Also, the authors argue that integration may reduce the innovative potential of the firm, because the acquisition of the complementary assets in evitably increases the size of firms and induces important changes in the culture of the firm and in the speed and fluidity of information flows. Finally, they claim that evaluating technologies and being able to use them requires substantial in-house scientific and technological expertise and therefore internal and external R D can be reviewed as complements and not substitutes. Liu (2000) focuses on a different issue by examining the markets reaction to innovation news announcement made by the U.S. biotech firms during the 1983-1992 period. He finds that the average AR to the announcements is as high as 3.98 percent for a three-day event window and biotech stocks trading volumes almost double on the day of the news announcement. The announcement period ARs are negatively related to firm-size and underwriter reputation, while positively related to the firms technology depth as measured by R D intensity. However, during the months following the announcement the average three-month post announcement AR is 2.73 percent. The negative drift in stock prices appears to be mainly driven by the firms weak science and technology (less R D intensive), firms with high Book to Market (B/M) ratios and large firms. In explaining his findings the author proposes an expectation error hypothesis. According to this hypothesis it is hard for investors or even managers to prec isely evaluate the economic value of innovations which in turn leads to the possibility of forming erroneous expectations. In high-tech industries the erroneous expectation is reflected in the investors over-optimism towards high-tech firms innovation news. Eventually, the stock prices adjust itself to reflect the firms fundamentals, especially its technology depth. The author attributes the observed evidence to the costly information required to value a high-tech firms innovation. Prentice and Fox (2002) provide a comprehensive review of the merger and acquisition process while focusing on the distinctive characteristics of high-tech companies. They argue that technology mergers are different from traditional mergers because of the importance that must be placed on people and their ability to innovate. Targets must be evaluated on intangible assets such as intellectual property and human capital. At the same time managers need to consider the issues of retention, culture and integration strategy from the beginning of the merger process to ensure success. There are two studies that are most relevant to this research. The first one is by Kohers and Kohers (2000) who examine the value creation potential of 1,634 mergers in the various high-tech areas between 1987 and 1996. They find that acquirers of high-tech targets experience significantly positive Ars at the time of the merger announcement, regardless of whether the merger is financed with cash or stock. Othe r factors influencing bidder returns are the time period in which the merger occurs, the ownership structure of the acquirer, the ownership status of the target and the high-tech affiliation of acquirers. They conclude that the market appears to be optimistic about such mergers and expects that acquiring companies will enjoy future growth benefits. The second related study is also by Kohers and Kohers (2001) who examine the post-merger performance of acquirers that purchase high-tech targets in order to determine whether the high expectations regarding the future merits of these investments are actually justified. Their results indicate that compared to non acquirers, acquirers perform poorly over the three-year period following the high-tech takeover announcement. Furthermore, glamour bidders show significantly lower long-run ARs, while value bidders do not experience significant post-merger ARs. Also, glamour bidders with a higher risk of agency problems show even worse post-merger performance while institutional ownership in the acquiring firm has a positive influence on acquirer long run ARs. Overall, the authors conclude that the market tends to exhibit excessive enthusiasm toward the expected benefits of high-tech mergers but many of these benefits do not materialize. CHAPTER 3 HYPOTHESES, METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES Previous research in the literature has generally found little financial benefit for the acquiring companies that were associated with occurrence of the acquisition activity (Rumelt, 1974; Ravenscraft and Scherer, 1987; Porter, 1987; and Kaplan and Weisbach, 1990). Consequently, the first and second questions for this study are focused using the single industry of semiconductors, are stated in the null hypothesis format. First, firm profitability growth rates are compared in two groups, one that does acquire and one that does not. Secondly, individual firm profitability growth is examined before and after an acquisition event looking for a change in growth rate that is significant. Hypothesis 1 (H1): There will be no significant difference in profitability growth when firms making acquisitions are compared to firms not making acquisitions in the high-tech sector. Hypothesis 2 (H2): Acquiring firms making acquisitions are expected to have no significant change in profitability growth before and after the acquisition event. The literature yields less empirical work in analyzing the relationship between merger and acquisition actions and the longevity of a corporation. Theory certainly recognizes the close link between competitive capability and company survival. For the high technology industry of semiconductors, high velocity innovation is a requirement for remaining competitive. Research questions three and four are also stated in the null hypothesis format. Company longevity, or survival rate in number of year, is compared in two groups also, where one group does acquire and one does not. Lastly, an individual firms spending rate on R D is examined before and after an acquisition event looking for a significant change in the rate compared to the trend for the company. Hypothesis 3 (H3): Firms making acquisitions are expected to have no difference in survivability in this industry than firms who do not make acquisitions. Hypothesis 4 (H4): A companys R D intensity will show no significant change following the event of acquisition within this industry. SELECTION OF VARIABLES This research was conducted in a concentric approach by starting with one independent and one dependent variable initially to define the relationship and guide the next treatment in the study. As work continued, variables were selected and the methodology expanded to assess both within-subject and between-subject effects. The variables used in this study for Hypothesis 1 (H1) include profitability growth rate and a dummy variable to represent the presence or absence of the event of acquisition. The event of acquisition is represented by a dummy variable with a zero (0) representing no acquisition and with a one (1) representing an acquisition event. An acquisition event is identified by using a firms reported cash flows attributed to acquisition as stated in the Compustat database. The profitability growth rate is calculated from the total gross profit margin reported by year and cumulated over three years, then averaged to reduce fluctuations and facilitate identification of trends. The variables used for H2 analysis of profitability growth rate before and after an acquisition were the dummy variable for the presence of acquisition, the gross profit margin percentage (GPM %) calculated as a three (3) year cumulative average growth rate (CAGR) to smooth fluctuations and better identify a trend. This relationship was studied for three (3) years prior to the actual acquisition and five (5) years following the action. As the study progressed, a second dummy variable was used for company size to separate the effect of this independent variable as well. A repeated measures matrix was designed with two dummy independent variable as well. A repeated measures matrix was designed with two dummy independent variables, each with two levels and one dependent variable with repeated measures over nine years for a 2 x 2 x 9 repeated measures analysis using the SPPS software. The variables used for H3 analysis of acquisition relation to firm longevity were the acquisition dummy variable and the data from Compustat for the number of years that the company did financial reporting during the period of this study. H4 looks for the effects between acquisition and RD spending or intensity by using the acquisition dummy independent variable and R D intensity as the dependent variable. R D intensity is calculated using the R D expense reported as such by the companies and in the Compustat database. This Compustat item represents all costs incurred during the year that relate to the development of new products or services. This amount is only the company`s contribution and includes software and amortization of software costs and complies with Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) standards. This item excludes customer or government-sponsored research and development (including reimbursable indirect costs) and ordinary engineering expenses for routine, ongoing efforts to define, enrich, or improve the qualities of existing products. Methodology This study encompasses the time period of ten years from 1990-2000, inclusive. Semiconductor companies were selected as an entire group according to their NAICS/SIC codes. Using the Standard Poors Compustat database, there are 153 semiconductor companies included that were identified as active companies at the end of the calendar year 2000 by Compustat. These companies are listed in Appendix B. Active reporting for one year. Companies are designated as inactive and reclassified in the Compustat database when it is no longer actively traded on a stock market exchange due to bankruptcy, becoming a private company, leveraged buyout or merging. The research effort started with analysis one independent variable and one dependent variable in order to initially establish what the relationship was that existed, if it was significant and how to proceed with analysis. Exploratory work on Hypothesis 1 showed that there was a statistically significant and positive correlation between acquisitions and gross profit margin (GMP) growth broadly over the decade which differs from prior research. Hypothesis 2 moves toward a more detailed analysis of this finding. Consequently, in this chronology of discovery, the next step presented in Section 4.2 look at one dependent variable of profit margin growth and two independent variables of company size and acquisition activity. 3-way ANNOVA and regression treatments of the data are conducted using the data analysis tool available under Microsoft Excel Software looking at individual years in the ten year study period. The results show significance again and suggest that other interactions betwe en variables would yield additional understanding. The next step in the research was set up to look at one dependent variable, again gross margin (GPM) growth, repeatedly measured over time for each subject or company was entered for the nine (9) years 1995-2000 inclusive to capture acquisition effects giving 2 x 2 x 9 repeated measures design. The two independent variables were used in the dummy format with non-acquires given a code zero 0 and acquires assigned at one (1). Company size was the second dummy variable with firms less than $100M in sales per year coded zero (0) and if greater than $100M in sales, assigned a one (1). The statistical analysis using a repeated measures design analyzed the variable interactions and their relationship to GPM growth using the SPSS software. These results are presented in Section 4.5 Repeated Measures Analysis that was done using SPSS software. Descriptive statistics were an important first treatment of the data sets created. This includes the values for the following parameters: mean, median, range variance, standard deviation, kurtosis, and skewness. This treatment looks at characteristics of the data and the degree of normal distribution. The 3-way ANOVA investigations and regression treatment of the data were initially done using the data analysis tool software available in Microsoft Excel. Generally, the data sets for this study vary somewhat from the classical normal distribution, but ANOVA and MANOVA (multivariate ANOVA) within a repeated measures analysis are considered robust to violations of the normal distribution assumption (Maxwell Dealney, 1990; Stevens, 1996) SPSS Advanced Models 11.0 software was used to create general linear models of the data and conduct analysis of variance (ANOVA), regression, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) for the multiple variables in this model with repeated measures. The factors or independent variables were used to divide the population of 153 active semiconductor companies into groups. There were two independent variables used that were designated as dummy variables. The first variable of acquisition separated companies that did complete acquisitions from those that did not complete acquisitions during the decade of study. The second variable grouped the companies by size of sales at the end of the decade by either greater than $100 million or less than $100 million. Then the general linear model procedure was used to test the four null hypotheses, as stated above, regarding the effects of the independent variables on the dependent variable of gross profit margin growth as a repeated measure over the perio d 1992-2000. The investigation included looking at interactions between factors as well as the individual factors and the effects and interactions of covariates. This model specifies the independent variables as covariates for regression analysis. The SPSS repeated measures model creates a matrix for the sums of squares due to the model effects, gives the approximate F statistics and estimates parameters in addition to testing hypotheses. When an F test shows significance, SPSS performs post hoc tests to evaluate the differences between the means. This yields a predicted mean value for the cells of the model. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to named variables to study the portion of variance in the each variable that could be identified as explained and unexpected with regard to the event of acquisition. A covariance tool was also used when looking at the variables described above such as acquisition occurrence, company size and profitability growth changes. This compares whether the two ranges of data move together à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" that is, whether large values of one set were associated with large values of the other (positive covariance), whether small values of one set were associated with large values of the other (negative covariance), or whether values in both sets were unrelated (covariance near zero). DATA SOURCES Standard Poors Compustat database was used for data collection in this research. The database contains fundamental financial, statistical and market data derived from publicity traded companies trading on the NYSE, NASDAQ, AMEX, OTC and Canadian stock exchanges. The calendar year for a company is the year in which the fiscal year ends and is the time period used as standard in this research. Companies with fiscal years ending in January through May are assigned by Compustant into the year in which the fiscal year begins. Companies with fiscal years that end in June through December are assigned to the year in which the fiscal year ends. The EDGAR (Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval) System database maintained by the United Stated Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) was also used. The EDGAR data is also collected from the same sources that are used to generate the Compustat database. Data from these controlled and verifiable sources were corroborated and augmented with information collected from semiconductor trade journals, company annual reports and the Mergers Acquisitions Journal that tracks statistics in this area. CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION HI à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" ACQUISITON AND PROFITABILITY RELATIONSHIP A strong positive relationship was found to exist between the presence of acquisition activity and the growth in gross profit margin (GPM) by the end of the ten year study period. The statistical analysis is detailed below and is a departure from previous findings. This finding addresses the central question of this research endeavor to look for a relationship between acquisition events and profitability growth within the one industry of semiconductors. A positive financial effect is found and opens the path for additional analysis in this direction. Consequently, this information forms the foundation for the additional work presented in this research. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON ANALYSIS GOING ON >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Proofs for God’s Existence Essay

God’s existence can be proven in a multitude of ways. However, several introductory caveats are in order. First, by â€Å"God,† we mean the traditional Christian concept of an all-powerful and wise creator. Second, the project of â€Å"proving† anything is logic or science is nearly impossible. Even the best laid logical plans and the most iron clad arguments can be torn to pieces by a skilled logician. Such a state does not invalidate the proofs in question, just merely that the language of the discipline is such that any logical design can be manipulated and refuted by one who ardently desires it be refuted. What is being dealt with here is that faith in the God of the Christians is not an irrational, â€Å"blind faith,† but one that is eminently reasonable and defensible on metaphysical, logical and scientific grounds. 1. The proof of Aristotle, used by Thomas Aquinas later, is the â€Å"hylomorphic† proof and is very important to medieval thoughts about God and the nature of his existence. The theory centers around the distinction between first, form and matter which, second, corresponds to action and passion, or act and potency. The form of an object is it in act, or developing towards its natural telos, or end. The matter is passive, that which has non being, that which still needs to be developed. But the nature of reality is such that as one rises in knowledge, the form dominates over the matter. Mathematics, for example, is almost purely form, with only a minuscule amount of material stuff. But what is the origin of such things? Only the world of pure form, and hence, pure act, that is, God. God is pure act, pure perfection with no more need for development. It is the form of Forms that renders unchanging knowledge possible. The matter within its formal shell is not nly passive, but accidental, in that it is only the generator of sensations, colors, etc. But such things cannot exist without a substratum (there is no red, without it being a red something), and hence, form is the object of knowledge, not the matter, or the â€Å"accident† of the object. But knowledge only sees form, never matter. Matter might present form in the guise of a sensate object, but logical and mathematics does not work this way, these are separated from matter. Hence, the more universal the knowledge, the less matter. Hence, the ultimately form of knowledge is Pure form, hence God (Owens, 1980: 20-25). 2. Similarly, the proof of St. Augustine from the point of view of unchanging truth. Any such unchanging truth must have a cause. The truths of mathematics or logic never change regardless of time or place, and hence, there must be an entity in existence who could have brought such a world into being. Such an entity must never change or alter its being in any way, and hence, must be perfect (the only need for change is to improve, if no need for change, then there is no need for improvement). Therefore, God exists (Augustine, 1996: 19). 3. In terms of scientific proof, there is the entire question of natural law. The world is held together by a series of laws that never seem to change. They are regular and can be seen throughout nature, from its macro to its micro level. The â€Å"sensate† part of nature, logically, is anterior to the laws that allow it to exist. Hence, the laws of nature had to have come first, and are the form within which the sensate part of nature functions. Hence, an entity must exist that is capable of creating natural laws within which all created being can function in a regular and logical manner. Only God can be the cause of such things (Copleston, . 2006, 518). 4. The Russian philosopher Vladimir Solovyev uses the critique of nominalism to prove the existence of God in his Lectures on Godmanhood. First, the idea of empiricism is faulty since no real individuals exist (only God has this quality, but this is putting the cart before the horse). The objects seen in daily experience are themselves not particulars, but universals, ultimately reducible to pulses of energy. Force is the ultimate reality of being in terms of metaphysics. Hence, the empirical approach to the world is arbitrary, since the particulars we take for granted are in fact huge and complex collections of force and energy that appear to the senses as colors, sounds, textures, etc. Hence, energy is the source of being, and hence, retain the ontological status as universals. But this can not be sufficient, since the universal nature of forces must be accounted for. And this accounting can only be an entity powerful enough to have first created these forces that ultimately would register in human senses as objects, seemingly solid and singular, but in truth, complex and made up of universals (and in fact, representing universals in themselves). But this ultimately spiritual reality must have an equally spiritual cause, that is God. In other words, as the empirical qualities of objects exist only in the mind, the ultimate reality of the world is to be found in universals, and hence, the world of spirit. But all spiritual objects must have a cause that is equally creative and powerful (Solovyev, 1948: 60-63). 5. Spinoza’s concept of God is slightly different from the Christian view, but not entirely dissimilar. Spinoza argues for a single entity, Substance, that is the ultimate basis for all sensate objects. Substance is God, the ultimate basis (avoiding the word â€Å"cause† here) for all change and movement. Logically, there is only one ultimate Substance since there is no real reason for positing and more than one entity that, itself, can survive all change, but is not available to the senses. Spinoza’s Substance is not something that can be apprehended by senses, but only by the mind, and hence, is a spiritual being. While many writers have broken their backs trying to hold that nature is God for Spinoza, there is no reason to hold this: God is what is behind nature and is the ultimate basis for all being. Spinoza is not a pantheist, as nearly all commentators hold. Spinoza held that all change needs a basis, something that does not change. That which we see as changing is the modes of existence, the sensate objects in space and time (or mind and body). All of these sensate things can be reduced to that which is extended and that which is mental, ultimately one thing seen from two different points of view. But these two are merely two available modes for human comprehension of an infinite object that never changes, but is at the root of change, its basis, and that is Substance, or God, an infinite being who lies at the root of all change and the laws that govern change. It itself, does not change, but contains infinite attributes that only appear incompletely to human beings under two attributes only. Spinoza does not hold that there needs to be a cause of all things, but he does hold that there needs to be a basis of all things, that this is God (Della Rocca, 2008, 42-48) 6. The last proof or vision of God is to be found in Apostolos Makrakis, the little known 19th century Greek metaphysician. He was a Christian rationalist who held that Descartes butchered his own method. Makrakis holds that one can begin with Descartes ontological doubt. But the conclusion to this doubt, cogito ergo sum, is an arbitrary end point. When I engage in methodological doubt, I come up with several conclusions: first, the doubter exists, second, that the doubter is not the cause of his own existence, and third, that God exists necessarily. All of this derives from the single act of cognition: it is the true unpacking of the cogito. Since if the cogito is true, than the other propositions are equally true at the same time, known intuitively. Since the cogito is not self-created, then the outside world and God must exist necessarily in the same act of cognition as the original cogito. If one must strip away the outside world in order to reach the cogito, than the outside world is real, since in removing it, one reaches the truth of existence. The outside world cannot be a phantom then, if the doubter is not self-created. Something needed to have created and sustained the doubter, and this is as certain as the cogito itself. But since that outside world itself is not self-created (in other words, that the outside world does not know itself through itself, but through another), than God necessarily exists, and again, as true as the cogito itself. Hence, the cogito really says: I exist, the outside world exists, God exists, all at the same time all in the same act of cognition since the cogito itself implies it (Makrakis, 1956, 42-43). Again, none of these proofs are final, but the same can be said for all logic and science. But these do who that reason assents to the existence of God as infinite and all powerful. Spinoza’s approach is the most interesting, since it is compatible with mechanistic science, but holds that such science necessarily needs a basis for action, and this is Substance. The argument #3 above is also very difficult to refute, since one cannot hold to an ordered universe without holding to natural law, and if that, than the cause of natural law itself. If that is denied, then one is in the unenviable position of trying to argue that the material objects of nature can and did exist without a law to govern their actions. Hence, evolution is impossible. Natural laws (and a lawgiver) had to be before the actual sensate part of creation. But this, in an odd way, is very similar to the argument of Spinoza. It seems that science itself cannot function without recognizing natural law and it’s a priori existence with respect to the objects of science themselves. Bibliography: Owens, Joseph (1980) Thomas Aquinas on the Existence of God. SUNY Press Augustine (1996) â€Å"On The Free Choice of the Will† Readings in Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Andrew Schoedinger. Oxford. 3-24 Copleston, Frederick (2006) History of Philosophy: Medieval Philosophy. Continuum International. Solovyev, Vladimir (1948) Lectures on Godmanhood. Lindisfarne Press (this is sometimes called Lectures on Divine Humanity) Della Rocca, Michael (2008) Spinoza. Taylor and Francis Makrakis, Apostolos (1956) â€Å"The Tree of Life. † in Foundations of Philosophy. Chicago, OCES. 1-104

Explore Dickens presentation of education in Hard Times Essay

Dickens’ presents The Victorian education system in ‘Hard Times’ in a fundamentally negative way, Dickens’ expresses the idea that having an imaginative aspect to our education is essential. He does this through satirising the education system and mocking the characters. Throughout the novel, it is a purpose of Dickens being satirical towards the education system. Dickens opens the novel with a satirical description of Thomas Gradgrind and his utilitarian educational methods as he teaches the room full of students â€Å"Facts alone are wanted in life† (9) Dickens satirises Gradgrind’s commitment to an education comprised only of facts as Gradgrind exaggerates that facts are the only essential thing in life. â€Å"Fancy† (14) symbolises imagination and wonder compared to facts. Dickens emphasise â€Å"Fact† more than he does with â€Å"Fancy† he does this by repeating â€Å"fact† itself, sounds more forceful. Gradgrind’s view on education is his children are to never imagine or wonder. Gradgrind rejects the concept of â€Å"fancy† or imagination; ‘fancy’ has nothing to contribute to understanding; only things that can be measured are important. Gradgrind’s disapproving rant on fancy â€Å"You don’t walk upon flowers in fact† (14) to the students underlines that fancy is bad and it should be â€Å"facts!† (14) In his satirical description of Gradgrind, Dickens’ aim is of what he experienced in the industrial England during his time when education varied vastly, according to location, gender, and class, meaning that Dickens view on Utilitarianism is shown in a satirical way, and his beliefs stood out throughout the novel, this indicates how the education system was controlled. Dickens uses characters’ names to continue his satire of the utilitarian education system prevalent in Victorian Britain. Mr Gradgrind breaks into the word â€Å"Grind† as a means to crush, signifying his method of grinding down the students’ individuality and any imagination they may have entered the school with. Mr M’Choakumchild, breaks into â€Å"me, choke, child† Dickens’ exaggerates with the name as we don’t think the new teacher is literally choking the children in his care, that this Fact-obsessed creature will only choke imagination and feelings out of them. â€Å"If he had only learnt a little less, how infinitely better be he might have taught much more!† (15) This highlights that the utilitarianism system would function much better, if it were not so strung on facts. If Mr. M’Choakumchild had learnt less and been practically involved with his students more and would have taught far better. This is criticizing the way the system works. Dickens is suggesting that in the utilitarianism system, suggesting that ramming facts into students might not be the most effective way of teaching them. Not everything can be reduced to facts alone. Mr Gradgrind and Mr Bounderby are the main representations of utilitarianism and followers of the system. In Louisa’s proposed marriage to Bounderby, Dickens shows us a disastrous consequence of Gradgrind’s system that denied everything but facts. â€Å"You have been accustomed to consider every other question, simply as one of tangible Fact† (97) This illustrates that Gradgrind, who is incapable of expressing his emotions effectively toward Louisa, edges her into a marriage with Bounderby by stating various facts and statistics to her. Louisa is hesitant to communicate her feelings towards him â€Å"she returned, without any visible emotion† (96) David Lodge’s ‘How Successful Was Hard Times?’ (1981) argues that Gradgrind’s ideology in his system is questionable, Lodge explains that it is a â€Å"primary index of what is wrong with his system† Mr Bounderby is also a character with utilitarian beliefs, doubtlessly one of th e major characters that has a firm belief in the system, â€Å"you may force him to swallow boiling fat, but you shall never suppress force him to suppress the facts of his life† (23) He signifies the very essence of his ruthless principles that only has room for facts and statistics. ‘Hard Times’ outlines that a utilitarian approach to life is unsuccessful and costs those who follow their imaginations become robotic and inadequate to the system. Imagination and heart is found in the circus where Mr Bounderby and Mr Gradgrind despise â€Å"No young people have circus masters†¦ or attend circus lectures about circuses† (23) Gradgrind implies that circuses are not like a practical schoolroom. Dickens represents Sissy Jupe as an influential character of the novel who presents the value of a warm heart and embodies feelings and emotions. She is seen as a complete failure of Gradgrind’s system. However Dickens and the reader judge her as a success. The young innocent girl mocked by the teacher and presented as the â€Å"dumb† girl in the start of the novel, gradually turns out to be the most key character in the whole novel. Since the foundational significance of fact and the removal of fancy that Gradgrind’s education obli ges, Sissy Jupe will never succeed. Nevertheless, in spite of the education, Sissy becomes a young woman who is able to maintain her own principles and beliefs. The contrasting descriptions of Sissy and Bitzer are shown in their appearance. For example Sissy is described as radiant and warm â€Å"dark eyed and dark haired† (11) referring to her as someone who is the face of vitality. However Bitzer is portrayed as â€Å"what little colour he ever possessed† (11) and â€Å"His cold eyes would hardly have been eyes† (11)) Demonstrating that he is cold and emotionless with no heart and all calculation. Dickens uses Bitzer to demonstrate that other students are influenced by him, showing that he is a follower of Gradgrind’s system, whereas Sissy is the foreigner to the system. The Utilitarian education system relates to the industrial town ‘Coketown’ which consists of factories and â€Å"large streets †¦ like one another †¦ people equally like one another† (27) The town is linked to a â€Å"painted face of a savage† (27) that is described as barbaric and uncultured, the children are being deprived from the â€Å"ill-smelling dye† (27) Dickens suggests the society that the children/workers are living in is unsanitary â€Å"Jail† (28) indicating that they have no escape from their problems. The utilitarian system stamps out all imagination in the pupils and prepares them perfectly for the life of drudgery. Dickens describes as their lot as ‘hands’ in Coketown’s factories. Education presented in ‘Hard Times’ is shown as satirical in Dickensian vision of Utilitarianism. This is because Dickens is able to create a fool out of the system cunningly. Furthermore it is certain that what Dickens has presented is humorous and convincing with making the utilitarian ideology seem absurd through the novel. I find David Lodge’s argument towards Dickens opinion as liberal and potent.

Thesis Paper on Nitol Motors Limited Essay Essays

Thesis Paper on Nitol Motors Limited Essay Essays Thesis Paper on Nitol Motors Limited Essay Essay Thesis Paper on Nitol Motors Limited Essay Essay Performance assessment is a method by which the occupation public presentation of an employee is evaluated ( by and large in footings of quality. measure. cost. and clip ) typically by the corresponding director or supervisor [ 2 ] . A public presentation assessment is a portion of guiding and pull offing calling. It is the procedure of obtaining. analysing. and entering information about the comparative worth of an employee to the organisation. Performance assessment is an analysis of an employee’s recent successes and failures. personal strengths and failings. and suitableness for publicity or farther preparation. It is besides the judgement of an employee’s public presentation in a occupation based on considerations other than productiveness entirely. The section of interior’s public presentation direction policy is designed to document the outlooks of single and organisational public presentation. supply a meaningful procedure by which employee can be rewarded for notable parts to the organisation. and supply a mechanism to better individual/organizational public presentation as necessary. To accomplish this aims director need to place the organisational ends to be accomplished. pass on single and organisational ends to employees that support the overall strategic mission and authorities public presentation and consequence act. ends of the section. proctor and measure employees public presentation and usage public presentation as a footing of appropriate personal action including honoring notable public presentation and taking action to better less than successful public presentation. Nitol Motors Ltd. is the exclusive distributer of TATA vehicles in Bangladesh. Nitol Motors Ltd. ( Service ) is subordinate organ of Nitol Motors Ltd. The care and guarantee of TATA vehicle is given by Nitol Motors Ltd. ( Service ) division. To supply proper care with equal client satisfaction the employees of Nitol Motors Ltd. ( Service ) should posses required Knowledge. Skill and Ability to execute their occupation. Employees need to upgrade their public presentation to run into betterment in engineering and resources. 1. 2STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 1. 2. 1Vague Appraisal System Right now in Nitol Motors Ltd ( Service ) there is no standard system for public presentation assessment. Key questionnaire and Key Performance Factor are non sufficiently expressed. The Scenario how can be worse if a floor degree simply educated machinist have to confront questionnaire like: â€Å"What milestone accomplishment you covered in strategic concern degree or in educational making during last twelvemonth? † 1. 2. 2 Inapt Frequency of Appraisal Merely one time in a twelvemonth public presentation assessment is done. The most obnoxious sphere has been identified as the organisation continue engaging and enrolling people through out the twelvemonth. but the employee who join the organisation in some uneven section of the fiscal twelvemonth ; even miss the assessment. 1. 2. 3 As the Precedence like the Appraisal From the study within the organisation. grounds against the stating As Precedence like the assessment has proved non to be merely a stating instead a fact. However the assessment system is at that place. are incorporated by unwritten â€Å"adjustment of salary† or similar typical fact. 1. 2. 4 Need for the defined Job duty and structured Organ gm: As there is deficiency of sufficient employee against the place bing. Peoples have to play multi function in instances. This becomes a terrible expostulation when he can’t keep the proper precedence sequence of duties. Another interesting thing we observed that Persons holding the same organisational appellation are basking better periphery benefits and high quality probably for the instances of Service Executives. 1. 2. 5 Non conformance of evaluation country and public presentation country Harmonizing to the bing assessment system. the evaluation is simply done on the precisely what was intended from the forces. Even in some instances the evaluation is done on random standards what indicates that the ever busy individual can be busy in making nil for his twelvemonth terminal assessment 1. 3 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The aims of this survey are to analyse the present state of affairs of the employees of Nitol Motors Ltd ( service ) and suggest a theoretical account for Performance assessment for the company so that in can run more expeditiously and efficaciously. As Drumhead: 1. 3. 1 Major Aim The chief aim of the survey is to suggest a balanced assessment system in running the organisation more expeditiously and with better employee satisfaction. 1. 4 There is batch of restrictions of this survey. Some are There is no standard theoretical account for public presentation assessment system Normally public presentation assessment are done in senior status footing No proper guideline for occupation duty. Absence of Human Resource Executive in Service Division. Lack of Manpower in Human resource Department. Chapter II OVERVIEW OF NITOL MOTORS LIMITED ( SERVICE ) 2. 1 Background A dynamic immature adult male Abdul Matlub Ahmad founded Nitol Motors Ltd. In 1983. Very shortly the new company became a major participant in the commercial vehicle market and has been turning of all time since. With the slogan of quality. honestness and efficiency the company in its beginning started with trading of vehicles. Its high gross revenues figure attracted international companies and in 1989 Nitol Motors Ltd. became the exclusive distributer of TATA vehicles in Bangladesh. In 1991 a joint venture company named Nita Company Ltd. was formed between TELCO and NITOL for assembly of TATA vehicles in Bangladesh. From a trading company in early 1880ss. Nitol-Niloy Group has literally become a family name in less than twenty old ages. Over the old ages. it has expanded its activities into different sectors in order to guarantee excellence in service to the clients. Because of its uninterrupted variegation. it has shaped itself as a true pudding stone from its original individuality as a conveyance based organisation. This was the dream of Mr. Abdul Matlub Ahmad. which he had in his pupil yearss in Oxford. With strong support of dedicated direction squad. he made his dream come true. But like he says â€Å"This is merely the beginning of good times. best is yet to come† . The chief push of Nitol-Niloy Group comes from. selling TATA trade name of commercial vehicles in Bangladesh including Buses. trucks. rider version pickup trucks. Maxi and building equipment. Since 1991. it commenced assembly and constructing organic structure of TATA vehicles. popular in the state for its economic system and first-class value for money. alone pay-as you-earn selling system and complete after gross revenues service. Nitol-Niloy Group has a strong. diversified profile in Bangladesh. it has opted for merchandising collection of vehicles. coach organic structure devising. after gross revenues support. conveyance and air power services. fiscal establishments. fabrication industries. existent province including edifice of satellite townships. belongingss development and athleticss publicity. The group one-year turnover is estimated to traverse taka 500 crores. New endeavors are being implemented. Nitol-Niloy Group is looking at a new skyline of come-at-able dreams. For Nitol-Niloy Group. sky is the bound. Nitol Motors Ltd. is the exclusive distributer of TATA vehicles in Bangladesh. Nitol Motors Ltd. ( Service ) is subordinate organ of Nitol Motors Ltd. The care and guarantee of TATA vehicle is given by Nitol Motors Ltd. ( Service ) division. Nitol Motors Ltd. ( Service ) is supplying care service to valued proprietors of TATA vehicles in Bangladesh. There are 10 service Stationss entirely ain by NML ( Service ) and 25 Authorized Service Centre all over Bangladesh to back up the vehicle proprietors. The figure is increasing twenty-four hours by twenty-four hours. as the sale of the vehicle besides increasing. At present 75 % of market portion of commercial vehicle is owned by TATA vehicles. Thus it is really indispensable to supply equal support this of all time increasing figure of clients. at quickest possible clip with their satisfaction. Tough the company started its journey in the twelvemonth 1983. it become exclusive distributed of TATA vehicle in 1991. To back up the proprietor of TATA Vehicles the company has implemented the pattern of 3S system. a ) Sale. B ) Service and degree Celsius ) Spare. Since the company is importing the vehicles from parent company. TATA Motors Ltd. . it is bounded by the policies service fix as per recommendation of TATA motors Ltd. The commercial vehicles ply in different part of Bangladesh. There is no sure of manner stating when a vehicle will serve fix. Service fix may be required any where in the state. Maintenance is necessary when of all time there is a dislocation of the vehicle. Thus it is indispensable for the client to acquire available service at quickest possible clip. For the client the slogan is Time is Money. For proper service of the vehicles it is besides indispensable for the company to hold adequate accomplishment manpower to work out job on the route and in the workshop premises. The proper designation of the job and proper guidelines to maintenance can decide a batch of issues and avoid more major job from happening. 2. 2 Mission Helping Bangladesh to develop as a existent comfortable. ego dependent proud state by get the better ofing the dependence on imported foreign goods through industrialisation. 2. 3 Organizational Structure Nitol Niloy Group follows the Functional Organization theoretical account whereby each division. headed by a Executive Director with important educational and industry experience. focuses on its alone functional aims. Due to the context of the thesis on the subdivision of Nitol Motors Limited and its service division is highlighted. 2. 4 Service web ( workshop location ) The web of service ( workshop ) includes the CSD Workshops. Authorized Workshop and Nitol Shubidha Workshop. At Present Nitol Motors ( Service ) is supplying their installations through 10 CSD Workshop. 13 ASC Workshop and 1 Nitol Shubidha Workshop. The face book of Nitol Motors Service is their CSD Workshops.