Lawsuits Apple versus Samsung

Case Law on Apple versus Samsung – Patent Infringement

Title: Apple Samsung Lawsuits – Cornish, W., Llewelyn, G. I. D., & Aplin, T. (2013) Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks & allied rights.

Patent infringement can be described as an act of making, selling, using or offering to set an invention that has been protected by government for the rights of inventor. In this report, a case of Apple vs. Samsung has been analyzed and discussed using critical understanding by referring the literature. In addition to this, supporting cases are also analyzed to provide understanding in the area of legal risk management. The report concludes that patent infringement cases are very critical and differ according to legal requirements of different countries. From the analysis of the case study, it was found that Apple and Samsung are going through a long lasting battle of patent infringement. Both have faced serious consequences of this battle due to different legal perspectives.

Case Summary and Analysis

Apple and Samsung are two technology giants have their number of lawsuits between each other relating to tablets and smart phone designs. This technology battle is very significant because these two companies contribute almost half of the smartphone market share across the world. The two parties which are claiming each other are two major technology giants Apple and Samsung. However, it Apple remained in winning position in most of the cases. A brief description of the two parties has been provided before discussing the main issues of the case in order to give introduction to these two companies.

About Parties

Apple Inc

Apple is an American multinational electronic company that is often characterized for offering best quality and innovative electronic products such as tablets, smartphones, laptops etc. It was founded in California, America in 1976 by Steve Jobs and since then, the company has placed it in number one position in hardware and electronic industry. Its products iPhone and iPads are considered as revolutionary innovation in the electronic world.

Samsung Group

Samsung group has five major business units including Samsung electronics company, Samsung telecoms etc. It is a South Korean multinational company that is comprised of number of subsidiaries and affiliated business organizations. The company was founded in 1938 by Lee Byung-chul and emerged as one of the largest electronics companies in the world.

Main Issue

Apple made the very first case against Samsung by suing it for four design patents on 5^th January 2007. In response to the same, Samsung also filed a case against Apple for violating colour design patent of 193 screen shots of many iPhone graphical use cross points. Apple made a claim on its component provider Samsung in more than 10 countries including USA, South Korea, Germany, Australia, Netherlands, and Japan etc. Thus, the patent battle between Apple and Samsung has become an international case related to patent infringement. The key issue in this case is to identify if Samsung or Apple have infringed the patents of each other.

Apple has sued Samsung because the company is trying to protect its patent provided by the government for new invention. The issue has become more significant because Apple cannot protect all of its patents because technology is changing very frequently. In such a scenario, only specific features like “princh stretch” can be protected. Therefore, Apple won a court case against Samsung for $1.05 billion because of patent infringement by Samsung for copying a specific feature. Samsung also sued Apple for the same and won in few cases where it did not copy specific features. Both companies are major rivals in electronic industry and hold specific market share therefore, will never back down and accept that they were wrong. Thus, the battle is not going to end easily to the give case scenario.

What did Samsung Copy?

O’Rourke, M. (2011) Apple and Samsung Wage Patent War. Risk Management. 58(10). p.6.

Samsung had a basic production on tablets before Apple’s innovative product iPad launched. After launching of iPad 2, Samsung changed its designs of tablets and Google alleged Samsung to copy Apple’s iPad. The key design violations by Samsung are discussed here under:

Violation 1	Samsung infringed the design patent by introducing a feature of enlarging the text by double tapping on the screen. Thus, Samsung introduced the zooming feature that was being used by Apple in its iPads.
Violation 2	Apple was the first company that offered a feature of bouncing back after scrolling. Samsung also violated this design patent in its smartphones.
Violation 3	Ornament design was used by Apple in iPhone 3 that was used by Samsung for its future models. The shape of iPhone was rectangular in shape and the same was adopted by Samsung later.
Violation 4	Samsung was also alleged to copy the shape and feature of icon alignment in a row or column that is a user friendly interface. Samsung can with the same interface that is used in android systems of Samsung.

What did Apple copy?

In response to the above claims, Apple was also sued by Samsung because it was accused for using the same architecture design icons in iPhones which were used by the Samsung smartphones. Thus, Samsung electronics filed a lawsuit against Apple iPhone 5 which was released recently. Apple was accused to use the same features and GUI interface that was used by Samsung. Thus, Samsung alleged that Apple’s iPhone 5 shape is unreasonable rectangular shape which was copied by infringing the patents.

Federal Complaints in Court

Cusumano, M. A. (2013) The Apple-Samsung lawsuits. Communications of the ACM. 56(1). pp.28-31.

The following federal complaints were filed in the courts of various countries of which few lawsuits are stated below:

South Korea

The South Korea court revealed that Samsung was in fault for infringing patents by violating Apple’s design patents. Nonetheless, the court also awarded the little damages to both Apple and Samsung. South Korean court gave the judgement in neither of the parties by banning the products of Apple and Samsung in the country. Samsung was ordered to stop marketing its 12 products and Apple was asked to ban iPhone 3gs and iPad 1 and iPad 2 in South Korean market.

Japan

Samsung was sued by Apple for two patent infringements in the federal court of Japan but court denied to take any action. The court held that the technology used by these two companies was different and therefore, complaint filed by Apple was stroked down by them.

British Lawsuit

According to statement of British court, galaxy product of the Samsung was not copied and iPad and galaxy are products with different technologies. By this judgement, Apple lost the case against Samsung in United Kingdom as court held that there was no point to claim.

Australia

In federal court of Australia, Apple was a clear winner because on this case of patent infringement, Samsung was found guilty in legal grounds and ordered to ban galaxy tab in Australian market.

United States of America

The USA case against Samsung is considered significant in this battle because court clearly favoured Apple and held that Samsung copied the technology used in iPhones and iPads. Thus, all the tablets and smart phones of Samsung were banned in USA and court also imposed huge penalty on Samsung.

Problems in Finding References

During this study, I found issues in reading and finding related literature because of unauthorized access on some website. There are many premium website which allow user to get data only on subscription. Due to financial constraints, I had to find alternatives which was time consuming and difficult. Furthermore, the other issue I faced during finding references was identification of appropriate key words. Patent infringement is a wider term and there are all unique cases relating to this. Thus, it was difficult to identify supporting cases and references for the same. For this, I used rational approach and identified the list of patent infringement cases. Then, I used key words based on initial literature review to solve this issue. I have used enough literature to create better understanding on this case and analyze the same.

Analysis and Reflection on Legal Grounds

From the analysis of the given case study, it was found that both Apple and Samsung are in losing position due to this patent war. On the one hand, Samsung has to pay penalty of billions and on the other hand Apple lost its reputation in few countries. However, Samsung been biggest loser in this battle because there were serious financial and reputational implications.

Crampes, C., & Langinier, C. (2002) Litigation and settlement in patent infringement cases. RAND Journal of Economics. pp. 258-274.

The patent laws in USA provide for granting patents to any person/organization invented new, ornamental and original design for an article for manufacturer. The manufacturing items under the scope of patent law include smartphones, peripheral, software icons and other automobile parts. However, it is important to note that three types of patents are there but the scope of this law does not cover utility patent. However, the patent rights granted to Apple being an American country is confined to the territory of USA and thus, there will be no effect in other countries. Almost every nation has its own patent law and a person who wants protection of any kind of patent in any country is subject to laws applicable on that particular country regarding patent infringement.

Bosworth, D. L. (2014) Intellectual property rights. Elsevier

The above discussed case is not applicable for a single country because Apple and Samsung have entered into an international battle by suing each other in more than 10 countries for patent infringement. The law suggests that before determining the patent infringement, it is important to compare overall appearance of the accused design and the claimed design. It was found that Apple won the battle in some countries like USA but it also lost the case in some countries. The decisions made by different federal courts were based on their patent regulations and guidelines. Thus, it will not be wrong to state that both Apple and Samsung were not able to effectively protect their intellectual property rights and faced difficulty. On the basis of legal grounds and analysis, the cost of these actions of Apple and Samsung and future implications of the same are presented below:

Cost of These Actions

Wingfield, N. (2012) Jury awards $1 billion to Apple in Samsung patent case. The New York Times (August 24, 2012).

Apple had claimed federal complaint on its supplier Samsung in many countries whereas Samsung also filed the case on Apple for copying 5 patents of Samsung. The cost of taking these actions remained too high for these two organizations because finally, some of the products of these companies were banned in some countries that caused huge loss to reputation of Apple and Samsung. In addition to this, this billion dollar patent dispute between these Samsung has led one of the biggest losses due to penalties for patent violations in legal history ever.

Lawsuits Future Implications

Jeruss, S., Feldman, R., & Walker, J. H. (2012). The America Invents Act 500: Effects of Patent Monetization Entities on US Litigation.

There are serious implications of this legal battle that can be discussed in financial, reputational and market terms. Countries like South Korea banned some of the products of Apple and Samsung due to which the companies lost significant market share and reputation. Apple’s biggest competitor Google can re evaluate its product designs and strategies to protect itself from any legal action. The Apple remained in the strong position and therefore, it can become world’s most valuable company. Samsung lost the share value because of this patent battle that has made Apple to gain competitive advantage in long run.

Analysis and Conclusion on Other Case Studies

Innogenetics, N.V. v. Abbott Laboratories, 512 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir., 2008)

Innogenetics Biotechnology is a company that is dealing with diagnostics assays, multi parameter testing and in the field of severe infectious diseases whereas Abbott labs is a health care company involved in activities like discovering medicines and new technologies for well being of people. Innogenetics was provided patent for the method of detecting a particular disease which was copied by Abbott labs. Innogenetics won $7 million against Abbott for infringement of patent. Although, Abbott gave an argument that the technology used was a raising technology. Court gave the judgement on the grounds that applicant is not required to convince specification. The technology was already known earlier therefore, innogenetics won the case. However, Innogenetics succeed in protecting the right to offer injunction in the market. From the analysis of the case study, it can be stated that Abbott was not able to defend itself on justifiable grounds because of pre existence of the technology.

Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc. (Fed. Cir., 2014)

The case of patent infringement was initially filed by Microsoft Inc. against Motorola in the District Court of Washington in year 2012. The reason for the claim was that Motorola was alleged to violate reasonable and non discriminatory agreement. During this US litigation, Motorola sued Microsoft in Germany for patent infringement. However, the patent battle has come to an end and the jury has ruled the case in favour of Microsoft and awarding the company $15 million in damages. The judgement was based on the argument that Motorola has breached the US agreement. From the analysis of the case study, it can be said that patent infringement cases are very complex to make decision because there is a thin line between current and new technology.

Conclusion

In this report, the case of Apple vs. Samsung has been analyzed using the existing literature including supportive cases and legal guidelines. It can be concluded that every country has its own regulation on patent protection. In the technological field, patent infringement cases are very common whether they are related to design, utility or knowledge. Thus, it is important to review each and every aspect of the case for taking the judgement. Legal application can be confined to a single territory in most of the cases therefore, before launching a product companies should ensure that no such legal agreements are breached. It can also be commented that patent cannot be considered as a right option all the time because in the case of infringement, the final decision takes a pretty long time. By the time, when decision is taken, technology may have reached the window of opportunity could have closed for patent owner that happened with Apple. However, the typical outcomes could be monetary damages, exclusion order, mediation, injunction relief and negotiated settlement.

Bibliography

Bosworth, D. L. (2014). Intellectual property rights and Lawsuits. Elsevier.

Cornish, W., Llewelyn, G. I. D., & Aplin, T. (2013) Intellectual property: Lawsuits patents, copyright, trade marks & allied rights.

Crampes, C., & Langinier, C. (2002) Litigation, lawsuits and settlement in patent infringement cases. RAND Journal of Economics. pp. 258-274.

Cusumano, M. A. (2013) The Apple-Samsung lawsuits. Communications of the ACM, 56(1). pp.28-31.

Innogenetics, N.V. v. Abbott Laboratories, Lawsuits 512 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir., 2008)

Jeruss, S., Feldman, R., & Walker, J. H. (2012) The America Invents Act 500: Effects of Patent Monetization Entities on US Litigation.

Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc. Lawsuits (Fed. Cir., 2014)

O’Rourke, M. (2011) Apple and Samsung Wage Lawsuits and Patent War. Risk Management. 58(10), 6.

Wingfield, N. (2012) Jury awards $1 billion to Apple in Samsung patent case Lawsuits . The New York Times (August 24, 2012)

View More Law Dissertations Here

Business Strategy John Lewis

Business Strategy and Sustainable Development – John Lewis Partnership

John Lewis Partnership is considered one of UK’s major retail businesses that have over twenty seven departmental stores and a hundred and six Waitrose stores. The enterprise is owned and operated as a partnership entity and the first store was set up in 1864 with Waitrose chains coming up in 1904. The first trust settlement was established in 1929 when the business gained a legal entity and profits became available for distribution to all partners; employees. The owner, Spedan Lewis sacrificed his personal business to fulfill his vision of establishing a business owned and run by employees as part of promoting ‘industrial democracy’ in the business.

In 1950, the partnership trust was transferred from a settlement trust to a legal Trust company under the name; John Lewis Partnership Trust Limited. In this arrangement, the Trust company would be under the Trust Chairmanship and his deputy elected by the three governing councils. John Lewis partnership is also regarded as Britain largest worker co-ownership business with more than 63, 000 permanent staffs as partners in the business. In this arrangement, the staffs share business profits and participate in important decisions for the enterprise development. The staffs’ commitment has seen the retail giant garner a unique competitive edge for over seventy five years with unparalleled growth.

One of the major aspects that have propelled the business to greater heights is due to a partnership approach based on understanding that profit is the main aim of business. Another important aspect that has propped the enterprise to its position is a business partnership model anchored on the principle of social economy and the integration of workers as company partners. All these have shaped the structure and principle of the company into a cooperative ownership that shapes the company policy and development.

John Lewis partnership has a legal form based on governing partnership and at no time are business operations directed by shareholders quest for profits but principles of the members’ happiness as enshrined in the partnership constitution. In particular, workers happiness comes from good job performance in enhancing successful business. The partnership constitution has ‘responsibilities and rights’ which enjoins the workers obligation of good job performance with overall betterment of the business for their benefits.

Evaluating John Lewis Partnership principles of conscious capitalism

John Lewis partnership is governed through principles of power, purpose, members read and profits. The principle of purpose dictate that the aim of the partnership is to promote, enhance and facilitate the happiness of its members through their work as employees in the business and as managing members of the business success. The partnership is based on trust and each member shares genuine responsibility of ownership and rewards that are accrued from the business entity such as knowledge, power and profits.

Conscious Leadership

At John Lewis, all employees are co-owners in the business a democratic management structure run the business. Power is held in esteem by John Lewis partnership and there are three governing authorities that share power; the partnership Board, the Partnership Council and the partnership council. The principle of profits in the partnership dictates that, the enterprise make more profits through its trading operations in order to sustain its commercial prominence, finance development activities and distribute part of the profits to members. Furthermore, the principle of profits making aims to enlarge the enterprise returns that enables the business engage in other activities in accordance to its goals.

Under the principle of members, the partnership constitution is to increase more employees who are competent and committed to working and supporting the enterpri9se principles. In the principle of membership, courtesy, mutual respect and equality among the different members is highly encouraged. The aim is to enhance and encourage individual contributions fairly and reward each accordingly.

Evaluate the principles of conscious capitalism

The concept of conscious capitalism refers to establishing enterprises that implement practices which benefit people and the environment (Mackey, 2013:123). The concept of conscious capitalism is tied to conscious business that is gaining popularity in the modern age especially with regard to increased demand for corporate social responsibility by many business enterprises. Conscious capitalism is ‘values-based’ economic values that push for social and environmental concerns for business as they pursue their economic interests (Baron and Cayer, 2011: 344). The principle of conscious business is driven by the belief that when conducting business, it is not just for profit but facilitating social environmental responsibility for the general good.

Principle of Conscious Culture

Besides a democratic management structure, John Lewis has upholds the principle of radical transparency when conducting all business operations. All employees (co-owners) share, inquire, criticize and tell the management all that is important (Laszlo and Zhexembayeva, 2011:156). Each partner has a priority to voice any aspect deemed necessary regardless of age, education or experience.

Another aspect of conscious culture at John Lewis is its conscious consumerism through socially responsible investments (Zender, 2015). Ideally, the principles of conscious capitalism are based on certain criteria that demand businesses do no harm while undertaking their enterprise operations. One principle of conscious capitalism is that the products and services of business enterprises should never be harmful to the environment or people. This requires business to have mechanisms that forestall social and environmental effects while doing business as well as adopting beneficial social and environmental practices (Korschun, Bhattacharya and Swain, 2014).

Another principle of conscious capitalism is the triple down line model of doing business. Under the triple down model of doing business, the aim is to promote positive value in domains such as the planet, profits and people (Mackey, 2013:123). Profits are what distinguish an entity as a business and not social enterprises. As such, the degree to which an organization has adopted ‘conscious capitalism’ may be reflected in how it utilizes part of the profits for social and environmental welfare. In modern firms, there is a tendency to utilize part of the profits accrued in business for social welfare through donations or establishing an organization foundation whose purpose is social welfare; a good example is the Aga-khan Foundation, Bill Gates Foundation among others.

In line with the principles of ‘conscious business’ firms that have an understanding of conscious capitalism should desist from accumulating profits through illegal means or deceitful operation practices such as failing to pay employees, poor working conditions or supporting harmful causes. For instance, the recent revelation that HSBC Swiss Bank has been evading tax cuts is an example of a business operating without conscious culture principles. The bank is alleged to have allowed bank transactions involving stolen oversees funds and this disqualifies the bank as being a ‘conscious business.’

A conscious business seeks to enhance the external and internal lives of its stakeholders (shareholders, clients, neighboring community and importantly its employees). In addition, a conscious business should benefit its other stakeholders such as the suppliers, creditors and humanity at large globally. Business enterprises embrace consciousness by forming welfare workplace programs, fair trade in manufacturing and assisting the general community with outreach programs. A business that is conscious aims to reduce the effects of its business operations on the environment in various ways such as engaging in recycling, using renewable energy and working with environmentally conscious partners.

Furthermore, businesses that are conscious use their resources in benefiting the environment and the society through direct or indirect programs related to the distribution of services and products. It has become increasingly important for businesses to reflect their ‘conscious capitalism’ spirit in the way they treat their employees and other stakeholders. Businesses are increasingly reflecting their consciousness through their company missions and values. In particular, paying employees well, donating services and products to non-profit organization is considered a good conscious business spirit. Operating under the spirit of conscious capitalism model pushes the fortunes of a business up by projecting a positive role of improving humanity in the society.

Conscious capitalism helps business to create value and ethics of economic exchanges, elevate humanity existence and creates prosperity by lifting people from poverty. In addition, when business operates on higher purposes other than the pursuit of profits, businesses creates value for all stakeholders, eliminate tradeoffs and elevate performance. The key pillars to conscious capitalism is having; higher purpose, stakeholder integration in the business, conscious leadership, management and culture (Rooke and Torbert, 1998). Neglecting one pillar would lead to jeopardized principle of conscious business. Examples of companies that have successfully embraced conscious capitalism are Google, POSCO in South Korea, Patagonia among others. These companies have created win-win situations for their customers, suppliers, employees, the general community and the environment.

Although conscious capitalism is related to corporate social responsibility, the two are different, Conscious capitalism purposes on creating value for the community stakeholders through actively engagement in business decisions as opposed to engaging them in periphery business programs (Fialka, 2006: 4).

The principle of conscious stakeholder integration

John Lewis Partnership is an example of conscious capitalism on many fronts. First, the partnership is based on conscious purposeful principles whose objective is promoting social economy (Mackey, 2015:1). By developing a co-ownership with workers is one important tenets of conscious capitalism employed by the partnership. Employees are important stakeholders in any organization and play critical roles in the success of an entity (Burden and Warwick, 2013: 3). It is common knowledge even among the company shareholders that employees are the cogs that support the organization in achieving its objectives and goals.

John Lewis Partnership is keen in building transformative relationships and co-develops solutions with all key stakeholders. John Lewis progressively builds transformative relationships with clients, employees, the local authority and charity organizations in its pursuit of sustainable business. In this way, by integrating the interests of all its stakeholders in the core of business activities, John Lewis is an example of a conscious capitalism.

Although organizations may boast of effective leadership, without competent and committed employees becomes an exercise in futile for mangers. Employees’ posses’ important skills and experience on areas that need improvement in the firm based on their day to day interaction with the various aspects of an organization. As such, having competent, committed and selfless employees is not easy and many modern firms are spending heavily in incentives and welfare programs meant to boost employees’ morale for performance (Mackey, 2015:1). Although these employee betterment programs are related to the principle of conscious capitalism, they are less effective in taping employees’ contribution to the firm. John Lewis might have done a critical assessment on these issues prior the development of a co-ownership with thousands of staffs at the retail enterprise. Enjoining employees in business ownerships serves many advantages. One is that employees contribute selflessly and actively in shaping the firms development policy based on their day to day work. Employees are not only motivated to work hard for the business but consistently strive to innovative new ideas that will benefit ‘their’ business.

In addition, the aspect of ‘owning’ the business and being part of decision making helps to improve employees motivation, cooperativeness and overall a corporate culture of harmony (Hind, Wilson and Lenssen, 2009: 23). John Lewis notes that, by enjoining thousands of his staffs in the business, he promoted ‘industrial democracy in which each employee has a fair equal responsibilities and rights in the affairs of the organization. The key pillar in John Lewis Partnership is promoting the happiness of its members who are employees. Human resources studies have found that, motivated and happy employees means happy customers and subsequently increase in sales returns (Somerville, 2013: 2). As such, by promoting the a conscious capitalism approach that focuses on improving employees happiness, the Partnership is a win-win model; employees will strive to make clients happy in return for good business to their partnership business (Abergene, 2005: 23).

Furthermore, by enjoining the employees in the business, this helped improve their welfare by raising their income thereby improving their social economy. In this way, by focusing on the general welfare of employees, John Lewis serves as an example of working ‘conscious capitalism’ enterprise. John Lewis is a good example of a ‘conscious business’ through its conscious management and leadership (Hind, Wilson and Lenssen, 2009: 23).

The Partnership enterprise is government by a well-structured constitution that establishes three centers of authority. These centers of authority promote democracy in the management and running affairs of the business especially in decision making; all employees are members while assessing the business problems. In this way, John Lewis partnership serves as an example to other businesses on what true conscious capitalism means.

Although modern firms allege to have conscious business, employees do not take part in decisions making and are often used as tools to achieve end goals. An example in case is Barclays bank that boast of a ‘conscious business’ but has been implicated with cases of employees mistreatment, underpay and contributing resources to programs that have hazardous effects on the welfare of humanity at large (Smith, 2013: 2). At John Lewis Partnership, employees have absolute freedom of openness in the management of the business; employees can inquire report and raise criticism based on actions deemed unsuitable for the business (Brown, 2012: 73).

Employees’ share business rewards, power and knowledge at the partnership and this has enhanced the firm have a competitive edge against conventional business those that treat employees as mere operational cogs in a business. All employees have equal opportunity to promote their potential and hold principle management positions in the Partnership Council. The management structure and organizational culture allows for two ways decentralized communications among the members. In this way, no individual feel neglected or out of the management structure (Lin, Hu S-y and Chen M-s, 2005: 534).

Another aspect of ‘conscious capitalism’ exhibited by the partnership is that, it does not condone or take part in social positions, sex, gender and political favoritism.’ This is a rare feat of ‘conscious capitalism’ especially in the modern world where most businesses take positions in social, political and religious matters (Burden and Warwick, 2013:2). According to Mackey (2013: 123), business enterprises project conscious business by contributing to the larger community in which they operate. At John Lewis Partnership the entity contributes to the general community in distinct ways. In particular, the enterprise has established links with Schools, local authorities, charitable institutions and other stakeholders in the community as part of giving back to the community (Shumate and O’Conner, 2010: 580).

John Lewis Partnership has important community outreach activities include the Partner volunteer work, charitable giving and development, customer panels and others. The principles established by John Lewis are strong indictors of a business operating under the principles of conscious capitalism. In particular, the entity main objective is to make more profits not for the purpose of enriching private shareholders but for the general good of partner members and the society at large (Korschun, Bhattacharya and Swain, 2014).

In summary, it is evident that the John Lewis entity was not formed with the sole aim of profit making but to facilitate social economy for members and the society at large. John Lewis Partnership serves as a good example of a conscious capitalism through its interest in the welfare of its employees and other stakeholders such as suppliers, having a conscious management structure, leadership, and democratic work culture and spreading the fortunes of the business to surrounding communities.

Conclusion

Conscious capitalism is an important aspect for modern business. The principle of conscious capitalism enables business organizations to surmount myriads of problems associated with employee management, stakeholders’ relation and projects a good role model in the society. Conscious capitalism facilitates free enterprise capitalisms that uphold social and environmental interests beyond economic interests. Conscious capitalisms is inspired by the need to improve humanity welfare, create business value to all stakeholders and improve organization performance competitiveness against conventional enterprises. Conscious capitalism is pillared by stakeholder integration, having conscious leadership in organizations, conscious management, conscious working cultures and creating value for the general community at large.

John Lewis Partnership is a good example of a successful ‘conscious capitalism’ that enjoined its employees as co-owners. The principles adopted by John Lewis have enhanced the firm uplift the welfare of its employees, suppliers, shareholders and the general community at large. Conscious capitalism is inspired by the need to improve social and environment needs in line with achieving economic gains. In short, conscious capitalism is means through which the ends goals of company profits are increased due to improved social reputation. John Lewis Partnership is a creation of conscious capitalism and this has enhanced the enterprise to remain competitively profitable as the largest retail store in UK.

References

Baron, C. M., & Cayer, M. (2011). “Fostering post-conventional consciousness in leaders: Why and how?” The Journal of Management Development, 30(4), 344.

Brown, B. C. (2012). “Conscious leadership for sustainability: How leaders with late-stage action logics design and engage in sustainability initiatives.” Dissertation Abstracts International, 73(07A), UMI No. 3498378.

Fialka, J. (2006). “Some Companies Move From Opposition to Offering Proposals on Limiting Emissions. “Politics & Economics: Big Businesses Have New Take on Warming”. Wall Street Journal. p. 4.

Hind, P., Wilson, A., & Lenssen, G. (2009). “Developing leaders for sustainable business.” Corporate Governance, 9(1), 7.

John Mackey (2015): “Why Companies Should Embrace Conscious Capitalism” Forbes.

Pete Burden and Rob Warwick (2013). “Exploring Conscious Business Practice: Sensing as we act reacting to what we sense” AMED.

Korschun, D.; Bhattacharya C. B.; Swain, S. D. (2014). “Corporate Social Responsibility, Customer Orientation and the Job Performance of Frontline Employees.” Journal of Marketing 78 (3): 20

Rooke, D. & Torbert, W. R. (1998). “Organizational transformation as a function of CEO’s developmental stage.” Organization Development Journal, 16(1), 11-28.

Smith, Nicola (2013). “Corporate social responsibility: Power to the people”.

Shumate, M; O’Conner, A. (2010). “The symbiotic sustainability model: Conceptualizing NGO-corporate alliance communication”. Journal of Communication 60 (3): 577–609.

Somerville, Michael (September 13, 2013). “Nearly half of Britons would buy more from a store that supports charity”

Zender Tom. (2015). “Discover the power of consciousness in your business.” Phoenix Business Blog.

Abergene, Patricia (September 2005). Mega Trends 2010: The Rise of Conscious Capitalism. Hampton Roads Publishing Company.

Mackey, J. (2013). Conscious capitalism : liberating the heroic spirit of business. Boston Mass.: Harvard Business Review Press.

Click Here To View Business Strategy Dissertations

Cloud Manufacturing Dissertation

An Investigation into the Concept, Design, Development, Applications and Future of Cloud Based Manufacturing and Design

Dissertation Title – Cloud Manufacturing. It is widely known that manufacturing challenges today are certainly more complex than what they were in prior times. We find ourselves as cogs of a fast moving world, connected to each other. Additionally, a booming and constantly moving global economy, drastic growth in consumer-driven technology, and constantly changing and somewhat unpredictable purchasing behaviors of consumers, jointly present their opportunity and risk. Therefore, in light of the reasons presented, the need for manufacturers to invest in next-gen industrial automation solutions is now, more than ever before, and the time is right to embrace the cloud.

In the introductory section of the dissertation, a brief background of the topic is given, to highlight some elements of the topic. Furthermore, the aims and objectives are mentioned, which have assisted in guiding the entire research project, from start till finish. Also, problem statement as well as the significance/scope of the research is mentioned, illustrating the significance of cloud manufacturing in today’s global economy. Finally, a brief overview of the report is listed, to provide a breakdown of the chapters. The evolution of manufacturing engineering systems has taken place with the aim of meeting various objectives.

These range from cost reduction, the need for reducing lead times, seamlessly integrating new processes, sub-systems, technology and / or upgrades; interoperability; reducing waste due to production activities, instantaneous reconfiguration capabilities and the ability to promptly adapt to events of an expected and unexpected nature.

Some of the most problematic areas of familiarizing with the concept and working of cloud manufacturing involve developing application level technologies that meet all the user requirements, and are adaptable with the existed distributed network for manufacturing. Another key challenge faced by organizations is the access to such machinery and equipment that allows them to utilize the unique system of manufacturing.

Cloud Manufacturing Dissertation Aims and Objectives

To develop a holistic framework and appreciate the concept of cloud manufacturing by examination of all the relevant data, to structure a comprehensive understanding on the research topic.
To analyze the transformation of cloud computing to cloud based manufacturing and design, and its integration with the global manufacturing networks.
To investigate the concept of cloud manufacturing, and relate with the different stages of development, design procedures, deployment models, manufacturing paradigms and maintenance.
To assess and illustrate the numerous applications of cloud manufacturing, and the scope and global impact of on-demand-supply of data and services through the cloud network.
Finally, to demonstrate how future products, services and organizations will be influenced by cloud manufacturing, and to delve deeper in to the ongoing research that will shape the future of cloud based manufacturing.

Dissertation Contents

1 – Introduction
Problem Statement
Aims and Objectives
Background of Research Topic
Significance of Research
Overview

2 – Literature Review
Aims and Objectives
Cloud Computing
Cloud Computing Paradigm
Cloud Computing Hierarchy
Advantages of Cloud Computing
Trade capital expense for variable expense
Benefit from massive economies of scale
Stop guessing capacity
Increase speed and agility
Stop spending money on running and maintaining data centers
Go global in minutes
Product Lifecycle Management
Paradigms of Manufacturing Systems
Central production planning / manufacturing systems
Computer-Aided Design (CAD) / Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM)
Computer integrated manufacturing (CIM)
Discussion
Cloud-Based Design and Manufacture (CBDM)
Characterization of CBDM
Strategic Division
Users
Application providers
Physical resource providers (PRPs)
Deployment Models
On-Premises
Infrastructure as a Service
Platform as a Service
Software as a Service
Benefits of Cloud Manufacturing
For the Economy
For the Supply-Chain
For Security
For the Workforce
For Big Data
For Innovation
For Agility
Applications of CM
Data Transformation
Virtualization
Remote Collaboration
Cyber Security

3 – Research Methodology
Aims and Objectives
Research Philosophy
Positivist
Interpretive
Realism
Justification for Selection of Interpretive Philosophy
Research Approach
Deductive
Inductive
Abductive
Justification of selection of Inductive
Research Design
Exploratory
Descriptive
Explanatory
Justification for Selection of Exploratory
Research Methodology
Quantitative Research
Qualitative Research
Justification for Selection of Qualitative Analysis
Data Collection Methods
Primary Methods of Data Collection
Secondary Methods of Data Collection
Research Ethics
Limitations

4 – Findings and Analysis
Introduction
Aims and Objectives
Rationale for Manufacturing Solutions
Challenges and Trends
Trends
Challenges
Big Data Management
Cloud Agile Manufacturing – Concept
Cloud Agile Manufacturing – Pros and Cons
Industrial Automation
Integrate the cloud
Manufacturing Execution Systems of Cloud Connect
Current Progress in CM
Summary

5 – Conclusion

6 – Future Work
Cloud-Based Manufacturing
Cloud-Based Design
Information, Communication and Cyber Security

References

View This Dissertation Here

Reward System HRM Dissertation

Reward System

Before discussing the elements of a reward systems, their aims, other issues related to design strategic reward system, reward strategies, implementation of chosen strategy along the evaluation; it seems worthwhile to explain the reward system which would make the discussion coherent. Armstrong (2004:4) explains the reward system in very lucid words as he regards employee reward system, an organizations’ integrated policies, processes and practices through which organization reward their employees on the basis of their skill, competence, their market worth and their overall contribution to the organization.

A reward system could include financial rewards (fixed and variable pay) and employee benefits, which together comprise total remuneration. The system also incorporates non- financial rewards (Recognition, praise, achievement, responsibility and personal growth) and in many cases, performance management processes. The non-financial compensation, financial rewards and employee benefits form the total reward system (Armstrong, 2004).

Aims and Purpose of a Reward System

Armstrong & Murlis (2007) put forward number of aims of reward management/system which are very helpful to understand what businesses want to drive through these reward systems which are as follows:

To create total reward processes that are based on beliefs about what the organization values and wants to achieve;
To reward the employees for the value they have created for the organization;
To bring into line the reward practices with the employee values and business goals and objectives;
To develop the positive psychological contract and employment relationships with the employees;
To reward right behaviours in order to deliver the positive message to the employees that what organization expects from them in terms of outcomes and behaviours;
To win the war of the talent by attracting and retaining the talented, skilled and competent pool of employees that organization need to make the difference;
To gain the commitment and engagement of the employees by motivating them through reward practices;
To cultivate and sustain the performance culture within the organization.

Structural Design Issues of Reward system

There are number of options for the organization to design its reward system because there are number of ways through which rewards are given and distributed among the employees in the organization. The reward’s content dimension or structural dimension denotes the practices (e.g. the performance appraisal forms, and the salary structure), formal procedures and mechanisms (Lawler, 1993). In relation to the structural dimension, there are many issues which organization will have to address, some of them are briefly discussed below:

Market Position- the organizational preference and its market position would influence not only the organizational environment but also the reward strategy. If business wants itself ahead of its competitors, it would rather go for setting the higher pay levels than the competitors. If organization sees its employees less important for the organizational effectiveness, it would be likely to have different reward system (Marchington & Wilkinson, 2005).In conclusion, market position of organization could influence its overall structural design of reward strategy.
Structure- the structural choice of organization also influence the organization overall reward system as what type of structure, an organization wants to pursue whether it would like to have the flexible and broad banded structure or comparatively formal (narrow-banded) and hierarchical (Armstrong, 2004).
Reward Priorities-The organizational reward priorities have influence on the reward system. Organization decides whether it has to limit the reward to the small number of key players only or it wants to share the reward many in the organization in order to support the steady improvement of many (Armstrong, 2004).
Reward Mix- The form of rewards actually shows that what type of culture or environment an organization wants to cultivate and maintain. Whether it wants to give the mix of rewards (base pay, benefits, non-financial reward) or it allows employees to choose their own package (such as Cafeteria-Style Approach) influence the overall reward system (Marchington & Wilkinson, 2005).

Strategic Reward

According to Armstrong & Murlis (2007:30)‘’Strategic reward management is the process of looking ahead at what an organization needs to do about its reward policies and practices in the middle or relatively distant future’ ’It enables the organization to drive its reward management to deal with the wider business issues for obtaining its long-term business goals (Armstrong & Murlis, 2007).

Reward Strategies

Reward strategy drives an organization to achieve business goals by developing and implementing the reward practices, processes and policies in order to address critical reward issues in the long-term (Armstrong & Brown, 2006:31). The three reward strategies are discussed below along with their strengths and weaknesses:

Financial Rewards: -A various ways by which a company can gives money to its employees is known as financial rewards. According to Armstrong (2007), financial rewards can be the one of the component that could motivate people in the workplace to work hard and to be able achieve higher standard as these rewards will be only given if the workers are competent in their jobs. These rewards come in ‘Pay packages’ such as salaries, fringe benefits, time-rate pay, commission, performance-related pay and pensions. However, the drawback of the rewards is that the company might not be able to pay the market rate and can be at the risk of losing a worker if the others organizations are offering higher standard of pay mix.
Non-Financial Rewards: -Some businesses find non-financial rewards methods are more approachable when it comes to motivate staff and it involves indirect payments. An achievement, autonomy, recognition, scope to use and develop skills, training, career development opportunities and high quality leadership which concerned with expectations and self-efficacy all are a part of non-financial rewards (Armstrong, 2007). These rewards can boot employee’s confidence and can satisfy employees. The possible downside of the reward could be that the employees can have better opportunities in the competitors company, who are willing to offer financial rewards along with non-financial rewards.
Total Reward Strategy:-According to Manus & Graham (2003) as cited in Armstrong (2006:629)‘’ total reward includes all types of rewards- indirect as well as direct, and intrinsic as well as extrinsic’ ’This strategy is proved to be very successful for many companies who implemented this strategy to motivate their employees as mentioned by Armstrong (2006). This is the holistic strategy in which every aspect of reward practices are employed so employees could gain satisfaction through their work Armstrong (2006). Maintaining the balance in financial and non-financial reward while pursuing according to the organization’s circumstances could be very difficult for the organization which could be regarded as the weakness for using this approach.

Implementation of Chosen Strategy

The chosen strategy of total reward could be implemented as it has number of benefits and it incorporates both the financial and non-financial rewards. Developing reward strategy is easy but implementation is hard. According to Armstrong (2006), implementation initiates the challenge of change management. The guidelines for implementation of chosen strategy which are as follows:

The value in-depth employee consultation should never be undervalued.
Without looking at the return on investment, no initiative should be implemented.
Actions should be taken as required and effectiveness of programmes should be evaluated.

Evaluation and Monitoring of Implemented Reward Strategy

After implementing the reward strategy, through number of ways effectiveness of implemented reward strategy is assessed and evaluated. Armstrong (2010) puts forward number of suggestions to assess and evaluate the reward strategy as follows:

A reward review should be done through gathering and researching from qualitative and quantitative information on the reward practices inside the organization.
By using this information the effectiveness of the delivery of reward goals from various reward practices should be assessed.
The time to time audit should be performed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the reward investment.
Through reward surveys, employees could be asked and analysed in order to monitor the effectiveness of the implemented reward strategy.

Motivation and Reward Practice

One cannot separate the process of motivation and the reward practices. It is very essential to comprehend those factors which motivate the employees and it would be recommendable for the organizations to design their reward strategies and practices in the light of those factors in order to increase performance of employees throughout the organization. Practical guidance is provided by the motivation theories in developing the reward systems. The theories of motivation tell that what factors exactly encourages individual, or group of employees to adopt something behaviour or to do something differently. These factors guide the human behaviour and could affect their efforts to do something (Armstrong, 2007). So, designing reward practices in the light of motivating factors could be very beneficial and effective.

Process Theory of Motivation and Reward

Porter & Lawler (1968) modified Vroom’s Expectancy Theory (1964) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005:8) expectancy theory of behaviour. Bartol and Locke (2000, p. 111) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005:8) state that expectancy theory “…holds that people make choices based on (1) their expectancy that their efforts will lead to a certain 8 level of performance, (2) their belief that their performance will lead to valued outcomes (instrumentality) and (3) the degree of value they place on those outcomes (valence).”

Expectancy theory underpins best fit thinking because it provides a design framework so that each element of a reward system can be used to the element’s best advantage. Lawler’s (1995) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005) new pay model provides guidance on what behaviours to measure. They must be linked to organisational strategy. However, Lawler (1981, p. 22)as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005:8) emphasises in an earlier work, the importance of the implementation process when he states: “In order for employees to believe that a performance-based pay relationship exists, the connection between performance and rewards must be visible, and a climate of trust and credibility must exist in the organization.”

The measurement of performance is a critical characteristic of ‘new pay’. Armstrong (2002) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005) emphasises the need for a robust performance management process. Schuster and Zingheim (1992, p. 210) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005:8), states “measurement is the core of new variable pay because it provides the justification for sharing performance improvements with employees.”

Content Theory of Motivation and Reward

Best practice advocates rely on content theories of motivation as the basis of their reward systems. Herzberg (2003, p. 91) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005:8) found ‘…that the factors involved in producing job satisfaction (and motivation) are distinct form the factors that lead to job dissatisfaction.’ Motivators, the source of job satisfaction, are intrinsic to the job including ‘achievement, recognition for achievement, the work itself, responsibility and growth or advancement.’ (Herzberg, 2003, p. 92) as cited in Morris & Vascular (2005:8) Hygiene factor, including salary, are extrinsic to the job and are a potential source of job dissatisfaction.

Performance Related Pay

Provision of financial rewards in terms of increment in the basic pay or any cash bonuses after assessment of the individual’s performance against the set objectives is regarded as performance related pay (Armstrong, 2002). Research and surveys show the both negative and positive aspect of the performance related pay.

One survey showed that, 14% respondents have opinion that PRP has made the fairness worse, 67% respondents have opinion that it conveys the message of clarity regarding performance of organization, while 57% respondents thinks it is fair to be get rewarded by performance related pay (Armstrong, 2002). However, study of IPM in 1997 found no relationship between the performance-related pay and the enhanced organizational performance (Armstrong, 2002).

When decisions are being in regards to the type of reward system, the main strategic decision that needs consideration is whether or not the reward system will be made on the basis of performance, which allows most of the reward systems feature to fit into the right places. However, it could also be based on seniority. In most government agencies, the pay rates are based on factors such as the roles of the employee and the length of their service. Although, in Japan, seniority is mostly used to decided individual pays, employees also receive bonuses based on the performances of the corporate (Lawler 1993).

According to Milkovish and Wigdor (1991) as cited by Lawler (1993), in America, most businesses use individual performances to reward its employees using the pay system and promotion system which is known as merit systems in America. Although it is believed that having a merit pay or promotion system in place helps businesses stay organised but according to Kerr (1975) as cited in Lawler, (1993) it is better to keep pay and promotion separate from performance and find ways to improve performances of an individual. There is a lot of evidence (Whyte, 1955; Lawler, 1971; Schuster and Zingheim, 1992 as cited in Lawler, 1993) that suggest that having a merit system could be harmful.

In order to improve team work and produce integration, organisational and group bonus plans have proven to be effective. A group and organisational plan means that everyone contributes towards the financial results of higher performance. Therefore, an individual work effectively and efficiently as everyone support, empower and encourage each other. People are more likely to empower and support others workers if they feel their performance would benefit them which is less likely to happen under individual plans as it increase competition and differentiation (Lawler 1993).

There are other factors that could arise from using performance based reward system such as poor practise, small rewards and failure to explain the system. Nevertheless, it is hard to determine whether or not pay should be based on performance as there is a lot of evidence to support the system. In conclusion, the negative impact of having such systems should not be overlooked (Lawler 1993).

Reference

Armstrong, M. (2004), Employee Reward: 3^rd ed. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of employee reward management and practice. 2^nd ed. Philadelphia: Kogan Page Limited

Armstrong, M. (2007), A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. 10^th ed London.

Armstrong, M. and Brown, D. (2006), Strategic Reward: Implementing More Effective Reward Management: 2^nd. Philadelphia.

Armstrong, M. and Murlis, H. (2007), Reward Management: A Handbook of Remuneration Strategy and Practice. 5^th ed. Philadelphia.

Armstrong, M., Brown, D. and Reilly, P. (2010), Evidence-Based Reward Management: Creating Measurable Business Impact from your pay and reward practices. Philadelphia.

Lawler, E.E. (1993) Effective Reward Systems: Strategy, Diagnosis, Design, and Change. Online.

Marchington, M and Wilkinson, A. (2005). Human Resource Management at Work: People Management and Development. 1^st ed. London: Chartered Institute of Personal and Development.

Morris, D. & Vascular, M. (2005) Strategic Reward Systems: Understanding the difference between ‘Best Fit’ and ‘Best Practice’. Online.

Armstrong, M. (2004), Employee Reward: 3^rd ed. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Click Here To View HRM Dissertation Titles

Introduction Accounting

Introduction to branches of Accounting

Accounting is an important concept that its history can be traced back centuries ago. Many businesses, based on numerous transactions made in a day requires accountability and proper records keeping for such in information in order to enhance other activities within a business enterprise such as communication. With the absence of accounting for businesses, this would act as a stabling block for the attainment of organizational objectives such as profit maximization as management of resources requires proper innovative structures for accountability.

According to Dyson (2004) the accounting branches can be segregated into three key areas; financial, cost, tax and managerial accounting (Dyson, 2004, p.12). Accounting plays a significant role in different business enterprises especially on key areas such decision-making, giving information, protection of business from various transactions involved with other business environments and explaining the business position. Financial Accounting is the art of managing business financial recording that stipulates the business position and it progress in growth through the analysis of profits and losses.

According to Babarinde (2003) financial accounting is a system that deals with explaining the situation and the state of affairs for businesses through preparation of financial statements such as the balance sheet and trade and profit loss account (Babarinde, 2003 p. 313). Financial accounting also plays a significant role in running a business enterprise as the system give the estimates of costs on products, functions, activities and the firm progress. Through financial management in a business entity can get quality information to plan through budgeting that gives estimates on expected expenditures.

Cost accounting is the system used in controlling activities of production that would regulate expenditures for the business in order to enhance profit maximization. According to Abeygunasekera and Fonseka (2013) every business has its control system that helps in cutting cost either through the production processes such as manufacturing, recruitment, training and development and delivery of services. Through such processes, cost accounting acts a system for the management to control such expenditures incurred through transactions with different business environments as well as in the processes of availing goods and services to consumers (Abeygunasekera and Fonseka, 2013).

Managerial accounting is the process that facilitates the management with information concerning the company’s progress that enhances the management in carrying out their day to day functions. The management in every business ought to have the facts in decision-making, planning, and in the development of policies and through managerial accounting such is facilitated. According to Mbroh (2013) he argued that in managerial accounting, frequent information is made obtainable to the management such as information on funds, profit and cost that gives a bulge of the business advancement and must be factual in support of truth and fairness (Mbroh, 2013).

Recommended accounting methodology for companies

It is necessary for the management of any business to how commitment in recording business transactions as this information can be retrieved for further use when such information is required. There are for instance methods of accounting that are commonly used across bossiness in the world of today. This includes the single entry and doubles entry methods that are used interchangeably in businesses. Use of double entry techniques has proved to have various advantages for many that use it. In the double entry, two columns are created for transaction entries in both what the company receives and also spends while running the business.

By following the right procedures in preparation of journals, trial balance, and final account, the use of the double entry techniques businesses benefits in different ways that is recommendable. Through such a system, the management is also to create the accounting book through a device known as the trial balance that give more accurate inform about the business transaction.

It is also easier to ascertain on the profits and losses incurred by a business if the transaction entries are properly entered in the trial balance device. According to Mbroh (2013) he also argued that a financial statement such as the balance sheet, the system gives accurate information concerning the position of the business enterprise (Mbroh, 2013). The management is also able to know if the firm has made any development such as profit maximization and growth. This as well regulates spaces for errors as the transaction entries in both the debit and the credit side should balance in the system. Through the double entry system, the management is also able to carry out a comparison study during a specific period such as between two consecutive years. It also becomes easier in making decisions for the business as the business position is made clear for instance in the trade and profit loss accounts.

References

Abeygunasekera, A.W.J.C and Fonseka, A. T (2013) Non-Compliance with Standard Practices by Small and Medium Scale Enterprises in Sri Lanka.

Babarinde A. (2003) Financial Accounting, Volume 1, Lagos: JBA Associates Ltd.

Dyson J. R (2004) Accounting For Non-Accounting Students, 6th Ed. Financial Times/ Pitman Publishing Imprint, England.

Mbroh, (2013) Control Systems Practiced By Small and Micro Enterprise Owners within the Cape Coast Metropolitan Area of Ghana in Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences Vol. 1 No. 9 [28-47]

Relevant Links

Strategic Finance Management Dissertations

Click Here To View Finance Dissertations