Discussion: Compare planning in todays organizations compares to planning in 25 years ago

Discussion: Compare planning in todays organizations compares to planning in 25 years ago Discussion: Compare planning in todays organizations compares to planning in 25 years ago ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS At least 1 scholarly article or biblical integration; Discussion Board Forum 2: Open System Design Elements Joseph “Bryant” Tripp III School of Business, Liberty University Chapter 4: How do you think planning in today’s organizations compares to planning in an organization 25 years ago? Do you think planning becomes more important or less important in a world where everything quickly changes and crises are a regular part of organizational life? Why? As far as planning in today’s organizations compared to planning in an organization from 25 years ago there are many of the same challenges, but there are quite a few differences as well. While today we have countless tools to help us plan more efficiently within our organizations, we also we live in a much faster pace world than existed 25 years ago. There are many ways to list the types of organizational plans, but all the types will usually fall into the four main categories of financial, strategic, contingency, and succession (Ahmed, 2018). All of these categories have highly evolved in the last 25 years. Financial planning has never been more complex but there are many tools that organizations can use to forecast the potential financial difficulty. These types of tools may have existed 25 years ago but were not as available or useful as they are today. Strategic planning involves translating the organization’s vision into goals and objectives with steps in place to achieve them (Ahmed, 2018).This type of planning involves analyzing the organization’s future opportunities and threats (Ahmed, 2018). Strategic planning tools like financial planning tools have never been as useful and available as they are today. This is the exact case with contingency planning and succession planning as well. There have never been as many potential risks that current organizations need to plan for with contingency plans as there are today. With succession planning it requires a plan be put in place in case someone in a decision-making management position leaves the organization. There is much more potential of this today than there was 25 years ago just based solely on the number of other opportunities decision-making managers have compared to back then.Planning is much more important in a world where there are so many quick changes and crisis are a part of organizational life. Planning will help an organization to react better to those quick changes and avoid the crisis within the organization. According to Daft (2016 p.165), “in uncertain environments, planning and environmental forecasting actually become more important as a way to keep the organization geared for a coordinated, speedy response.” If there is no organizational planning then the organization will fail. All of the types of organizational planning that were covered above is all about adapting to change and forecasting how to overcome any potential crisis that may occur in the organization. There has never been as many resources available to help overcome any issues that may arise as there are today and taking full advantage of them will ensure the organization will be successful. Chapter 4: Is changing the organization’s domain a feasible strategy for coping with a threatening environment? Can you think of an organization in the recent news that has changed its domain? Explain. Changing the organization’s domain is not just a feasible strategy for coping with a threatening environment it is a very viable one as well. According to Daft (2016 p.171), “Managers make decisions about which business in; the markets to enter; and the suppliers, banks, employees, and location to use; and this domain can be changed, if necessary, to keep the organization competitive.” By getting out of domains that are not successful and changing to ones that are successful the organization will greatly benefit. Almost any organization that has been able to sustain success have had to change its domain to cope with a threating environment.According to Roos (2014), “a successful company is like a great white shark. In its prime it chews up the competition, but if it dares to sit for long, it dies.” Some of the most profitable and successful companies in the world achieved their status by consistently reinventing themselves (Roos, 2014). Roos (2014) listed the order of the top companies that changed their domain to achieve ultimate success. These companies consisted of IBM, Berkshire Hathaway, Royal Dutch Shell, Nokia, Nintendo, Western Union, Wipro, National Geographic, American Express, and Apple. Some of these companies completely started out by doing something completely different from where they found their success. For instance, Royal Dutch Shell (Shell Gasoline) actually started out as a small antique store selling decorative seashells, Nokia was a rubber boot company, and Nintendo started as a playing card company (Roos, 2014). These companies eventually found their niche by changing their domain completely. Chapter 6: Compare the descriptions of the transnational model described in Chapter 6 to the elements of the learning organization described in Chapter 1. Do you think the transnational model would work in a huge global firm? According to Daft (2016 p.254), “the transnational model represents the most advanced kind of international organization. It reflects the ultimate in both organizational complexity, with many diverse units, and organizational coordination, with mechanisms for integrating the varied parts.” Instead of building capabilities in just one area of global efficiency, local responsiveness, or global learning, the transnational model seeks to achieve all three at the same time (Daft, 2016 p.254). Learning organizations are a looser, free-flowing, and adaptive type of organic organization where rules and regulations are rarely written down and are loosely applied (Daft, 2016 p.31). The transnational model takes parts of both mechanistic and organic design to create a highly advanced international organization.According to Saxena (2020), a transnational strategy is a plan of action where a business decides to conduct its activities across international borders and is invested in overseas operations and assets, connecting them to every country in which the company operates. Transnational business strategy has two primary functions that include high local responsiveness and high global integration (Saxena, 2020). With the high local responsiveness portion of the transnational strategy companies pay attention to every detail of the local market they operate within. In regard to high global integration, transnational companies typically have a head office and centralized management staff that overlooks all international operations (Saxena. 2020).The transnational model would work very well within a huge global firm. In fact, huge global firms are the ones who benefit the most from the transnational model. According to Daft (2016 p. 254), “the transnational model is useful for large, multinational companies with subsidiaries in many countries that try to exploit both global and local advantages as well as technological advancements, rapid innovation, and global learning and knowledge sharing.” This shows that the transnational model would work extremely well within a huge global firm. Through the integration of global efficiency, local responsiveness, and global learning, the transnational model is the ideal model for huge global firms to follow.How can/should a biblical worldview be applied? The Bible has many verses that talk about the importance of planning. In the book of Proverbs it says, “The plans of the diligent surely lead to abundance, but everyone that is hasty comes only to poverty” (Proverbs 21:5, ESV). This verse shows the importance of planning especially in an organization if it is going to have success. The Bible also says in Proverbs, the heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps” (Proverbs 16:9, ESV). This shows that just because we make plans does not mean they will work out unless the Lord blesses them. God knows what is best for us even if we have other plans, but if we establish them the Lord will bless them if it is His will. References Ahmed, A. (2018, June 07). Definition of organization planning. Retrieved February 03, 2021, from https://bizfluent.com/about-7239429-definition-organization-planning.html Daft, R. L. (2016). Organization theory & design (12th Ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. ISBN: 9781285866345. Saxena, D. (2020, April 20). What is Transnational strategy in international business? Retrieved February 03, 2021, from https://www.superheuristics.com/what-is-transnational-strategy/ Roos, D. (2014, January 10). 10 companies that completely reinvented themselves. Retrieved February 03, 2021, from https://money.howstuffworks.com/10-companies-reinvented-themselves.htm Answer preview to how do you think planning in today’s organizations compares to planning in an organization 25 years ago Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10