Wow those two months went by in a flash! I remember just writing a blog about whether I should consider being a project manager or not. My first thoughts were how difficult can it really be to coordinate a project. What I learned in my first blog is that it takes many years of experience to get a top level job. I figured that all a person needs is a little organization combined with communication skills. This course I wasn’t taking very seriously because of the field it is in and the field I am heading towards. IT and accounting, why in the world would I need the IT information if I was never planning on becoming one? Slowly through out the course it became clearer to me that a lot of my future will be dealing with the IT world.
My paradigm shifted almost at the very end of the course when finishing all the projects that there is an insane amount of work to be done. It seemed that tasks kept piling up and never stopping. I didn’t know what exactly to do and thinking back to one of the projects and creating a work break down structure that this course was really not that hard. All I needed was a little more self discipline and motivation to kick my self out the door and get the work done. I am still realizing my paradigm feel that they will never stop but as long as I stop, take a look around, I will be able to see and fix the challenge ahead of me.
Furthermore, when I began the accounting program just over 2 years ago, I wasn’t expecting anything big in my future. I wanted to be a CGA but when I signed up I didn’t think that the job would be anything special. About halfway through my view on what a success my future can be, I started to keep my head up high and feel good. The program overall has made me realize what I can provide the world in the upcoming future because I decided on taking something that I had no idea about.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Thursday, October 11, 2007
BP1 – Week 2
QUALITY DISCUSSIONS
Right now in the middle of my studies I work at a restaurant. If improvements were needed in the organization I would feel a lot more comfortable if the management took a total quality management method rather than a business process reengineering method. Before I choose to go one way 100 percent it would be nice to see the mission that management had come up with to determine on how severe the improvements will be.
Starting with total quality management (TQM) and to my understanding of the lesson notes TQM builds off of what an organization already has as a system. TQM has a incremental approach and with this type of approach I think employees at least I would have less resistance to change because the management knows they are implementing something new and they are also willing to train the staff. TQM is a system that will not change how the business processes are necessarily accomplished but looks at a way to improve certain sectors and fix the problem to prevent errors in the future.
Even though TQM takes incremental steps and seems to be a good idea, but sometimes an organization will need to take a step back, have a radical change and start with a clean slate and go with the business process reengineering (BPR). Furthermore BPR knows that current procedures are not working and finds an alternate new way to complete the business objectives. In the BPR method I would think that it is more stressful on the employees which can cause resistance in the organization. This would all fall back on the managers to take control and coach the organization through the good and bad times. The organization would have to be creative and most likely stretch out to reach the final goal, also which could mean employees need to take a new perspective and attitude when starting the radical change.
Overall both situations will work depending on the organization. All organizations are unique and needs to be looked at different angles to understand the concept. I believe a key factor for both situations to be successful is the support and determination of management to follow through and guide the employees.
Right now in the middle of my studies I work at a restaurant. If improvements were needed in the organization I would feel a lot more comfortable if the management took a total quality management method rather than a business process reengineering method. Before I choose to go one way 100 percent it would be nice to see the mission that management had come up with to determine on how severe the improvements will be.
Starting with total quality management (TQM) and to my understanding of the lesson notes TQM builds off of what an organization already has as a system. TQM has a incremental approach and with this type of approach I think employees at least I would have less resistance to change because the management knows they are implementing something new and they are also willing to train the staff. TQM is a system that will not change how the business processes are necessarily accomplished but looks at a way to improve certain sectors and fix the problem to prevent errors in the future.
Even though TQM takes incremental steps and seems to be a good idea, but sometimes an organization will need to take a step back, have a radical change and start with a clean slate and go with the business process reengineering (BPR). Furthermore BPR knows that current procedures are not working and finds an alternate new way to complete the business objectives. In the BPR method I would think that it is more stressful on the employees which can cause resistance in the organization. This would all fall back on the managers to take control and coach the organization through the good and bad times. The organization would have to be creative and most likely stretch out to reach the final goal, also which could mean employees need to take a new perspective and attitude when starting the radical change.
Overall both situations will work depending on the organization. All organizations are unique and needs to be looked at different angles to understand the concept. I believe a key factor for both situations to be successful is the support and determination of management to follow through and guide the employees.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
XBRL
To my knowledge and research I believe implementing XBRL will benefit the company today and in the future. It is a large organization publicly traded and to provide the investor with the best information XBRL will be beneficial. “It is a language that is made for the electronic communication of business and financial data and is changing how the business reporting is done around the world.” ( http://www.xbrl.org/WhatIsXBRL/) Switching to XBRL it is said that the publishing expenses can be cut up to 46 percent. (http://www.ey.com/global/content.nsf/International/XBRL-How_Can_It_Be_Used)
The business should use XBRL because it is already using ACCPAC which is compatible with XBRL, it would give a competitive advantage, and it cuts down on data manipulation. According to the Microsoft website, I believe it will give the competitive advantage because the time and cost that would have to be spent is no longer needed now that the data is copied into the XBRL format and by that the data is now easy to share to the outside market and the business can focus more on its services instead of presentation.
First of all the business can use XBRL to publish the financial reports on the market because it is publicly traded. These financial reports would include all financial statements needed and detailed financial and operational reporting information. The publishing of the reports are also good for regulatory reporting for tax agencies and industry regulations (http://www.ey.com/global/content.nsf/International/XBRL-How_Can_It_Be_Used) Generally XBRL benefits the company because it eases the understanding of the reporting for anyone looking at the data.
To start using XBRL it is suggested that the company checks with the local jurisdiction depending on the nature and circumstances of the reporting. They way that XBRL use to be was to create the script yourself but today many software programs are compatible and will do it for you and just follow the steps.
As an accountant, to stay up-to-date on the latest information, benefits, and understanding of its implementation I would suggest joining a consortium. (http://www.tie.nl/docs/BDDocument.asp?Action=VIEW&ID=%7BB94C1CC3-0E42-4DDA-BE56-C155911044F3%7D) It seems XBRL is still very fresh in the market but is catching on fast so by joining new information will always be at your finger tips.
The business should use XBRL because it is already using ACCPAC which is compatible with XBRL, it would give a competitive advantage, and it cuts down on data manipulation. According to the Microsoft website, I believe it will give the competitive advantage because the time and cost that would have to be spent is no longer needed now that the data is copied into the XBRL format and by that the data is now easy to share to the outside market and the business can focus more on its services instead of presentation.
First of all the business can use XBRL to publish the financial reports on the market because it is publicly traded. These financial reports would include all financial statements needed and detailed financial and operational reporting information. The publishing of the reports are also good for regulatory reporting for tax agencies and industry regulations (http://www.ey.com/global/content.nsf/International/XBRL-How_Can_It_Be_Used) Generally XBRL benefits the company because it eases the understanding of the reporting for anyone looking at the data.
To start using XBRL it is suggested that the company checks with the local jurisdiction depending on the nature and circumstances of the reporting. They way that XBRL use to be was to create the script yourself but today many software programs are compatible and will do it for you and just follow the steps.
As an accountant, to stay up-to-date on the latest information, benefits, and understanding of its implementation I would suggest joining a consortium. (http://www.tie.nl/docs/BDDocument.asp?Action=VIEW&ID=%7BB94C1CC3-0E42-4DDA-BE56-C155911044F3%7D) It seems XBRL is still very fresh in the market but is catching on fast so by joining new information will always be at your finger tips.
Friday, October 5, 2007
PM1 - Week 2
ORGANIZATIONS AS SYSTEMS
To my surprise in project management and learning about systems, I figured we would be talking and learning about new and exciting methods of systems. Instead the systems approach has been around since the 1950s and there are different types of system approaches like holistic and analytical which are used to solve complex problems. (p.40, Information technology project management, fourth edition, Kathy Schwalbe)
In my understanding of reading “Thinking about organizations as systems” by Carter McNarma that organizations are being driven towards the direction of adopting the systems view even though it has been around for over a half a century. In the past decade a paradigm shift has occurred and the management of business organizations are either trying to catch up to the way of business because they were stuck in a paradigm or the management was able to read the paradigm at the time and now possible ahead of the game.
It seems that businesses are now relying on all sections of the business or subsystems to become the most effective and efficient by working together and this is what the paradigm shift is. With the force of a paradigm and other businesses wanting to do the same as there competitors because of pressure the systems view has a very strong driving force on organizations. Carter McNarma explains why systems are very important to the organization by saying that managers look at one section and perfect that and move on to the next section. Each of these sections is perfected but the problem is that the sections that were perfected never integrated well with each other creating another problem so the organization suffers as a whole. (http://www.managementhelp.org/org_thry/org_sytm.htm#anchor1122052)
The system it self is everything put together by a few or many subsystems. In other words each subsystem produces something unique to the business and they all interact with the other subsystems which make up the overall systems view of organizations. In definition a subsystem “is a set of elements, which is a system itself, and a part of the whole system.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsystem) In a organization it would be expected to see a human resources, accounting, and marketing department as a subsystem.
With the paradigm shift, managers of organizations are recognizing that the systems organization is a key factor to becoming successful as a business. The managers are starting to see the shift and adjusting to it accordingly which for some businesses meaning implementing a whole new ERP system or something similar like the best appoach way. This way the managers can now use the subsystems to the fullest and join the others that recognized the shift before it affected the organization.
To my surprise in project management and learning about systems, I figured we would be talking and learning about new and exciting methods of systems. Instead the systems approach has been around since the 1950s and there are different types of system approaches like holistic and analytical which are used to solve complex problems. (p.40, Information technology project management, fourth edition, Kathy Schwalbe)
In my understanding of reading “Thinking about organizations as systems” by Carter McNarma that organizations are being driven towards the direction of adopting the systems view even though it has been around for over a half a century. In the past decade a paradigm shift has occurred and the management of business organizations are either trying to catch up to the way of business because they were stuck in a paradigm or the management was able to read the paradigm at the time and now possible ahead of the game.
It seems that businesses are now relying on all sections of the business or subsystems to become the most effective and efficient by working together and this is what the paradigm shift is. With the force of a paradigm and other businesses wanting to do the same as there competitors because of pressure the systems view has a very strong driving force on organizations. Carter McNarma explains why systems are very important to the organization by saying that managers look at one section and perfect that and move on to the next section. Each of these sections is perfected but the problem is that the sections that were perfected never integrated well with each other creating another problem so the organization suffers as a whole. (http://www.managementhelp.org/org_thry/org_sytm.htm#anchor1122052)
The system it self is everything put together by a few or many subsystems. In other words each subsystem produces something unique to the business and they all interact with the other subsystems which make up the overall systems view of organizations. In definition a subsystem “is a set of elements, which is a system itself, and a part of the whole system.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsystem) In a organization it would be expected to see a human resources, accounting, and marketing department as a subsystem.
With the paradigm shift, managers of organizations are recognizing that the systems organization is a key factor to becoming successful as a business. The managers are starting to see the shift and adjusting to it accordingly which for some businesses meaning implementing a whole new ERP system or something similar like the best appoach way. This way the managers can now use the subsystems to the fullest and join the others that recognized the shift before it affected the organization.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
BP1 – Week 1
BUSINESS PROCESS REENGINEERING
Business process reengineering was introduced in the late 80’s early 90’s and had a very warm welcome approach from businesses across the world including many of the fortune 500 businesses. It was a management approach to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of business processes across all organizations. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering)
It was interesting how business process reengineering took off and was widely accepted throughout the business world and across many large organizations including the fortune 500 companies. According to Michael Hammer and James Champy the BPR was a way to completely redesign the organizational processes to achieve a major improvement in cost, service, and speed. (http://www.12manage.com/methods_bpr.html) BPR was accepted because of the general perspective that managers got from the idea of improving the business processes by dehumanizing processes in the work place while adding more control for managers and all this justifies the downsizing because it saves time and money. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering)
When I read this quote by Thomas Davenport who was an early BPR proponent I figured that it made it clear BPR was not being as accepted after the implementation by the majority of the work force.
The failure according to Hammer was the lack of managements commitment towards BPR and perhaps when Hammer was introducing the idea he gave everyone a fantastic concept of the system while really it was an unrealistic scope and expectations. Due to the drastic downsizing of employees there was a resistance and eventally the idea and concept was abandoned. (http://searchcio.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid19_gci536451,00.html)
Today BPR is not widely recognized and has pretty much been abandoned, management has moved on had now accepting the new and improve Business Process Management systems. BPM has being recognized as a intersection between maangement and IT which overall analyzes the operational business processes involving the whole organization including humans. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Process_Management)
Business process reengineering was introduced in the late 80’s early 90’s and had a very warm welcome approach from businesses across the world including many of the fortune 500 businesses. It was a management approach to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of business processes across all organizations. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering)
It was interesting how business process reengineering took off and was widely accepted throughout the business world and across many large organizations including the fortune 500 companies. According to Michael Hammer and James Champy the BPR was a way to completely redesign the organizational processes to achieve a major improvement in cost, service, and speed. (http://www.12manage.com/methods_bpr.html) BPR was accepted because of the general perspective that managers got from the idea of improving the business processes by dehumanizing processes in the work place while adding more control for managers and all this justifies the downsizing because it saves time and money. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering)
When I read this quote by Thomas Davenport who was an early BPR proponent I figured that it made it clear BPR was not being as accepted after the implementation by the majority of the work force.
"When I wrote about "business process redesign" in 1990, I explicitly said that using it for cost reduction alone was not a sensible goal. And consultants Michael Hammer and James Champy, the two names most closely associated with reengineering, have insisted all along that layoffs shouldn't be the point. But the fact is, once out of the bottle, the reengineering genie quickly turned ugly." (Davenport, 1995) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering)
Today BPR is not widely recognized and has pretty much been abandoned, management has moved on had now accepting the new and improve Business Process Management systems. BPM has being recognized as a intersection between maangement and IT which overall analyzes the operational business processes involving the whole organization including humans. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Process_Management)
Friday, September 28, 2007
PM1 – Week 1
My first impression of project management was how difficult can this really get? As we started discussing project management, I realized that this subject can go very deep and grabbed my interest and possibly project management will be apart of my future. I may not be a project manager in the near future but I am sure that I will be working in many projects and what I learn in the next few months will really help. Researching a project manager job on monster made me realized how much of a demand there is when the search result came up with more than 1000 postings. When browsing through the postings there are many different levels needed from where you can start straight out of high school or you need at least 7 to 10 years of experience. Also it seems that a bachelor’s degree is requested for many of the upper level jobs. Common requirements requested were strong communication and technical skills, proven knowledge of financial operations and applications, and the ability to budget and manage projects. As researched education and experience is an asset and is required for many of the jobs. At the entry level though businesses are looking for young, creative, enthusiastic people that want to learn. With browsing on monster.ca I think that if a person wants to become a project manager they will need to get academic and hands on experience before the person can take on large project management tasks. There are many career jobs offered and at the same time there are many jobs that are short term contracts which are quick and build the experience of a project manager. In the long run I understand that I cannot become a project manager without having any experience in the field and there are a lot of hard and long hours needed to become a successful project manager. This introduction to project management has given me a good insight of what I could be doing in the future along side my accounting.
Sep 17 Project Manager Planet 4 It CA-ON-Toronto/GTA
Sep 13 Project Management Consultant WPCG CA-BC-Vancouver
Sep 13 Project Manager Ian Martin Limited CA-ON-Toronto/GTA
Sep 11 Senior Project Manager - Online Surveys Ipsos CA-ON-North York
Sep 11 Project Manager RIS CA-AB-Calgary
Sep 17 Project Manager Planet 4 It CA-ON-Toronto/GTA
Sep 13 Project Management Consultant WPCG CA-BC-Vancouver
Sep 13 Project Manager Ian Martin Limited CA-ON-Toronto/GTA
Sep 11 Senior Project Manager - Online Surveys Ipsos CA-ON-North York
Sep 11 Project Manager RIS CA-AB-Calgary
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)