ONe POINT

[Thaylene Rogers]

Thanks for all the work on the poster.  I have to strongly disagree with one point that is included as a weakness:

 

No ROI calculation-The ROI is that they are the market leader.  Facts from the case:

 

Pg 192  ...E's business success is largely based on its capacity to establish a nationwide relationship with ins. companies and at the same time provide excellent service on the local level...while maintaining good relationships with the auto body shops.

 

the case states:

 

final paragraph pg 190   "By exhibiting leadership in and maintaining control of  a value net a firm is more likely to  be able to reap a significant portion of the  of the business value created by the value net--"value net integrator"...improving the effectiveness of the value chain by coordinating information.

pg. 191  a particularly effective way to exhibit leadership is  to introduce and own the technical platform on which the value net operates.

 

I think the whole point of the case is that their goal was effective customer service and they moved forward with investments in that direction as a business which ended up making them the "value net integrator".  Their magic was in getting buy in from competing body shops and insurance companies.  pg 190 "difficult to get the participants to work through a common tech platform"

 

on the 1st page the 2 main points to be learned are:

 

... not the amount of IT investment but the extent to which it is aligned with the firm's strategic direction (they did this to a tee - be the best customer service providers in our niche)

 

...capability to leverage value from IT investments not only  from their effective fashioning, but by fashioning and execution of business investments that that complement the IT investments.

 

Pg 190 dominant purpose of supplier driven value net-"create a flexible and adaptable value chain able to react quickly and effectively to meet the needs of a varied customer base.

 

they didn't start out realizing how effective their IT investment would be in driving their primary position in their market niche.  They worked into the "value net integrator" role without that as their goal.  their goal being "effective customer service"

 

---

From: byug...@googlegroups.com [byug...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of Nathan [nat...@ngeorge.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:08 AM
To: Jared Call
Cc: byug...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Poster

The page is 24" x 36" without any margins and 300dpi in case they ask.

On May 20, 2014 1:01 AM, "Jared Call" <jare...@gmail.com> wrote:

Nathan,

I exported to a png, then exported that png to a pdf.  I now have Enterprise_Poster_Draft-jjc.pdf.  How does it look?

-jared

On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Nathan <nat...@ngeorge.org> wrote:

Good Evening All!

Thanks to a lot of help from Jared and David, I think the poster is finished.

You can take a look at either the .jpg or .png versions in dropbox.  Please take a moment to proof read it as soon as possible Tuesday morning, so that if there are any errors we can correct them.  Reply to this thread when you're finished, so we know everyone has had a look.  We'd like to get it printed sooner than later so we have time to deal with the unexpected.

Thaylene: The PDF file didn't appear to render the fonts correctly, so unless you hear otherwise in this thread the JPG version is probably what the printer will want.

-Nathan

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BYU eMBA 2015 Group 3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to byugroup+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BYU eMBA 2015 Group 3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to byugroup+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Thaylene Rogers]

One more quote from case:  "...ARMS originally developed to  to serve and enhance relationship with partners, has become a primary driver of the firm's on-going success in this market.  Pg 192

 

I think had they relied on an ROI to make a decision about developing the tool, the uncertainties might have kept them from going after it and it would have been a big mistake for them. 

---

From: byug...@googlegroups.com [byug...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of Thaylene Rogers [thaylen...@byu.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 7:09 AM
To: Nathan; byug...@googlegroups.com
Subject: ONe POINT

[Nathan]

Since quibbles are an important piece of the assignment, we should probably address the concern.  The idea we are trying to convey here is that Enterprise's interests in this platform have a very specific focus, and that the business needs of the auto body shops and insurance companies may be much broader.  If they aren't careful and continue to make ROI decisions in the same way they did when they started building the platform, they could find themselves in trouble.  We're not saying they shouldn't focus on the customer and build what that customer wants, but that they should be careful to focus on their common customers (the right customers for Enterprise).

Any specifics on what to change to make this point clearer and stronger?

-Nathan

[Jared Call]

ROI analysis is not about whether or not a project makes the company a market leader or is successful, it's about revenue vs investment costs. The case says that Enterprise never did an ROI calculation.  This tells us that while Enterprise believes that ARMS is a primary driver to their success, they don't have data to back up whether it makes them more money than they invest in it.

I don't think the argument is whether or not they should have ever done ARMS, or whether or not they should continue to invest in ARMS, but that they should have a better financial awareness of revenues and costs of ARMS.

-jared

[Nathan]

So again, any changes to the text?  Or are we good to go?

-Nathan

[Thaylene Rogers]

I guess my concern is about whether ROI is really relevant to the whole discussion.  If we are picking and choosing the most important points to address, I would not pick that as one of the most relevant in the context of the case.  More relevant to the issues in the case than ROI is “such an investment is justifiable only if the resulting competitive advantage can be sustained over time”.  The assessments of sustainable competitive advantage become the focus of the article.  I think ROI is a distraction from the focus of the case.

[Nathan]

Found a typo on the first flag of the first column.  Fixing and reissuing copies now.  Any other changes?

[Thaylene Rogers]

Can you let me know which file I’m having printed?  There are several out there.

[Nathan]

More questions:

The "iPhone vs Blackberry" part of the first flag of the second column seems a bit unclear.  Ideas on how to improve it?  Jared?

Finally, any concrete ideas for changing the ROI paragraph?  Or are we happy with how it is now?

-Nathan

[Thaylene Rogers]

Thanks.  If no one has any additional feedback I’ll get this to the printer.

Thaylene

 

From: nat...@utahlan.com [mailto:nat...@utahlan.com] On Behalf Of Nathan
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 10:51 AM
To: Thaylene Rogers; byug...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: ONe POINT

 

What I believe to be the final versions are attached.

The files are 24 inches high by 36 inches wide with 0 margins at 300 dpi.

I believe they will prefer the PDF file, but the JPG is also attached in case they need it.

 

On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Thaylene Rogers <thaylen...@byu.edu> wrote:

Nathan,

Could you email me the final file when we are ready to print?  That way I’ll know I have the right one.

Thanks,

Thaylene

[Nathan]

I sent the final versions, but the google group didn't like the size of the attachments.  Thaylene, please let me know if you got them, if not I can try resending them one at a time (I sent the PDF and the JPG files).  The final versions should be in Dropbox at Dropbox/EMBA Collaboration/MBA 510 - Mgmt Information Technology/Enterprise Poster Case/Enterprise_Poster_Draft.pdf and Dropbox/EMBA Collaboration/MBA 510 - Mgmt Information Technology/Enterprise Poster Case/Enterprise_Poster_Draft.jpg

-Nathan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <mailer...@google.com>
Date: Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:51 AM
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
To: nat...@utahlan.com


Hello Nathan <nat...@ngeorge.org>,

The message you are sending is too large.  All messages must be less than 8.00 MBytes.

If you have questions related to this or any other Google Group, visit the Help Center at http://groups.google.com/support/.

Thanks,

Google Groups



----- Original message -----

X-Received: by 10.152.170.130 with SMTP id am2mr606921lac.8.1400604673144;
        Tue, 20 May 2014 09:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <nat...@utahlan.com>
Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com (mail-wi0-x233.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c05::233])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id eh2si107382wib.2.2014.05.20.09.51.10
        for <byug...@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 20 May 2014 09:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nat...@utahlan.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::233;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of nat...@utahlan.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nat...@utahlan.com;
       dkim=pass header.i=@ngeorge.org
Received: by mail-wi0-x233.google.com with SMTP id bs8so1305438wib.12
        for <byug...@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 20 May 2014 09:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=utahlan.com; s=google;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
         :from:to:content-type;
        bh=jZC0cC1R+vZHUDfdentUDb5Zjcf5yIgBe5VEz6WFoWY=;
        b=ekUJWA6HHe5cud6KhVBOiLOdYgBZYFrV1PuhnkCa74RtRe104PDVUczfM/nZHzUjhr
         +ussEyhAK6yc8MrCfmxvdRotfjnyShSr6ME02qKQEA1aIIKEPR20U8K7TTw3R8lGYpf4
         pdDh5eI44zIXtpNK6KQupVakilVHe/d9Ymth4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=ngeorge.org; s=google;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
         :from:to:content-type;
        bh=jZC0cC1R+vZHUDfdentUDb5Zjcf5yIgBe5VEz6WFoWY=;
        b=QI/2HFO6FXZcEA+4MgDau0Uel+1FAP0FnstlXRF+QrZh35cTk3f6phv0r9kiRTaky5
         5mS1lLwgfCNsqibreEZMsUfuuzlgv5g8HQnjwd2iDBHIjrg/r42MjQ5TW3eec9iNPlhZ
         ZHvvsZe/DHL8aGTQhWomCAnxKyJvoosmI+LWc=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=jZC0cC1R+vZHUDfdentUDb5Zjcf5yIgBe5VEz6WFoWY=;
        b=YedAdv1gMEs6Bjjr3jrHclc4JpiiPBnS5FRIqGYNlPBeadkLqQlpuGje0zyOIwVWUD
         wEH6yT3ROawzQBRwJOj9yCmxbEdqKXaTm63GuE85sHKloBB7YAIeCU1sdEw6lFJ1/JgW
         Bmz9vyxMdfVIl8aoKA5YeSZ90G6Rlzafy5Gwa6z54/6zLTU2pUk8k8gYEqN2rddMyEKk
         ajK/W1rRNHV3+wCJk+kYFMbNd/3p8J2FUwMkkwbgwIhzcMrZc7H1/6XwgQMeau5uXIMg
         Ma24qYIaMUPPqCy/2Tc+meFlJxRAPT3nno0lHKc4ZNNRYcPGQbRd1+A6dFc06owHUXvD
         7I7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk/Wgp/1KBk64MsOrqVcbHyfPQXnxSM26/WsUFhV6KWv4L96Sw8T2NqDPGEO3jI66SCWefx
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.100.41 with SMTP id ev9mr5352571wib.22.1400604668208;
 Tue, 20 May 2014 09:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: nat...@utahlan.com
Received: by 10.216.114.72 with HTTP; Tue, 20 May 2014 09:51:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ED69D8B805C07B49BB89...@Carrot.byu.local>
References: <ED69D8B805C07B49BB89...@Carrot.byu.local>
        <ED69D8B805C07B49BB89...@Carrot.byu.local>
        <CAG42_T-sbz5xrxJP6g4aPT4E...@mail.gmail.com>
        <CAPpKuHWkip=Om2y0JSbck6CyOx=7MW5qvZU4nr...@mail.gmail.com>
        <ED69D8B805C07B49BB89...@Carrot.byu.local>
        <CAG42_T_nMWh25T_6NG6-SvUV...@mail.gmail.com>
        <ED69D8B805C07B49BB89...@Carrot.byu.local>
        <CAG42_T-KbJe6J9LiJ3EZ8bV5...@mail.gmail.com>
        <ED69D8B805C07B49BB89...@Carrot.byu.local>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 10:51:07 -0600
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6_FJnrnT2DQmG4q5mUbhr73bDTs
Message-ID: <CAG42_T8NCbaTyrbSYLBD6Up4...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ONe POINT
From: Nathan <nat...@ngeorge.org>
To: Thaylene Rogers <thaylen...@byu.edu>,
        "byug...@googlegroups.com" <byug...@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=f46d044402f4bba24f04f9d7af53

What I believe to be the final versions are attached.

The files are 24 inches high by 36 inches wide with 0 margins at 300 dpi.

I believe they will prefer the PDF file, but the JPG is also attached in
case they need it.


On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Thaylene Rogers
<thaylen...@byu.edu>wrote:

>  Nathan,
>
> Could you email me the final file when we are ready to print?  That way
> I'll know I have the right one.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thaylene
>
>
>

> *From:* nat...@utahlan.com [mailto:nat...@utahlan.com] *On Behalf Of *
> Nathan
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 9:51 AM
> *To:* Thaylene Rogers
> *Cc:* byug...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: ONe POINT

>
>
>
> More questions:
>
> The "iPhone vs Blackberry" part of the first flag of the second column
> seems a bit unclear.  Ideas on how to improve it?  Jared?
>
> Finally, any concrete ideas for changing the ROI paragraph?  Or are we
> happy with how it is now?
>
> -Nathan
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Thaylene Rogers <thaylen...@byu.edu>
> wrote:
>
>  Can you let me know which file I'm having printed?  There are several
> out there.
>
>
>

> *From:* nat...@utahlan.com [mailto:nat...@utahlan.com] *On Behalf Of *
> Nathan
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 9:28 AM
> *To:* Thaylene Rogers
> *Cc:* Jared Call; byug...@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: ONe POINT

>
>
>
> Found a typo on the first flag of the first column.  Fixing and reissuing
> copies now.  Any other changes?
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Thaylene Rogers <thaylen...@byu.edu>
> wrote:
>
>  I guess my concern is about whether ROI is really relevant to the whole
> discussion.  If we are picking and choosing the most important points to
> address, I would not pick that as one of the most relevant in the context
> of the case.  More relevant to the issues in the case than ROI is "such an
> investment is justifiable only if the resulting competitive advantage can

----- Message truncated -----

[Jared Call]

Sorry I've been unable to contribute much to the discussion today -- it's been busy at work.

-jared