Posts

DCU Business School welcomes University of Ljubljana MBA Participants to DCU

The Faculty of Economics at the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia is a triple crown Business School with which DCU Business School enjoys a close working relationship in teaching, research and school development.

Recently, participants from the University’s Executive MBA Programme enjoyed a very successful International week in Dublin.  A highlight of their visit was a Masterclass on Leadership with Professor Patrick Flood which they shared with our own Executive MBA students.This provided both groups of students with the opportunity to network and share perspectives on Leadership.

Dr John McMackin, Lecturer in Human Resource Management

/by
, ,

My DCU Executive MBA Journey

My MBA journey: “It’s about horsepower not brain power and I think that anyone who doubts their ability to do it, my advice would be to go for it”

Taking on two years of part-time study, whilst working in a full time job and raising a young family is no small task, but as Barry Gavigan (40) found out, it can be very rewarding and can also lead to greater things, career wise.

Gavigan has a degree in engineering from the University of Limerick and works for British Telecom. With years of management experience under his belt, he decided to go for a new job but wasn’t even shortlisted for interview. He began to ask the question, why?

The feedback he was given showed he was pigeonholed into engineering. He decided to take back control and have his management experience formally recognised in the form of a Master of Business Administration (MBA) at Dublin City University in 2013.

It wasn’t all plain sailing and he encountered many “peaks and troughs” along the way, but ultimately the hard work paid off.

“It’s a significant investment, both financially and of personal time. The family have to be brought in to it. I had a 4 year old, 2 year old and a newborn in the middle of it and I also changed jobs internally. It does involve a lot of personal sacrifice but it’s not one of these excruciating scenarios, and there are peaks and troughs, like your work life. The real ability is to cope with the workload and stay on top of it. It did mean sacrificing nights out and getting up early to study before the kids got up. It was a trade-off but good support from home was vital.”

As an MBA is usually paid for, or part paid for by the employer, it’s vital that they give full support. “My employer was extremely supportive. The MBA required a half day on Thursdays and other times outside of that, so the employer needs to be very committed towards it as well. British Telecom was very accommodating and flexible. It’s a two-way street, my commitment to them was that my work wouldn’t suffer and they got flexibility out of me in other ways.”

Gavigan says the MBA has broadened his mind and made him understand the value of carrying out a task in a certain way. “You recognise why best practice is used,” he says.

It has also got him a new job in another sector, something he says the MBA gave him the confidence to go for.

Peer learning is another key element of the course and he says the insight into other industries is invaluable. “People frankly and honestly share their experiences and rationale behind why a business has taken a certain line.”

He says he would advise anyone considering the masters to “stop procrastinating” and get on with applying.

“It’s about horsepower not brain power and I think that for anyone who doubts their ability to do it, my advice would be to go for it. Everyone who did it had busy lives and busy jobs but they all juggled it and managed it.”

This article was originally published in conversation with the Irish Times.

To learn more about how the DCU Executive MBA fits with your career goals, download our brochure here.

/by
,

DCU MBA Blog: How Much Are We Drinking?

This blog reports on the recently estimated 2015 average alcohol consumption in Ireland and the measurement methodology involved. The estimation was done by the author on behalf of the Drinks Industry Group of Ireland. The data used are from the CSO Population and Migration Estimates for April 2015 (published in August 2015) and the Revenue Commissioners’ alcohol clearances data (clearances are beverages released into the market) (the 2015 figures were made available on March 5th 2016). The levels and trends in average alcohol consumption are important elements in public policy evaluation and design and robust estimates of the indicator are desirable.

Estimation Methodology

The measurement approach follows standard international practice and also the practice of previous Irish estimates by Foley (2015). The aggregate alcohol content of the different alcoholic beverages is identified. Revenue publishes alcohol equivalents for beer and spirits but cider and wine are published as quantity of beverage. The estimate is based on 5% alcohol by volume for cider and 12.5% alcohol content for wine and the actual alcohol estimates provided in the clearances data by Revenue are used for spirits and beer. Some international and national estimates use lower alcohol contents for wine and cider. The international and traditional convention of defining the adult population as 15 years and over is used, although this is, of course, an inaccurate measure of the adult population. The population data refer to April of each year. Consumption is equated with clearances as is normally done, although clearances are not an exact measure of consumption due to factors such as unrecorded out of state sourcing, stock changes and the effects of outward and inward tourism. These and other limitations of the alcohol consumption measurement methodology are discussed in Foley (2015).

Average alcohol consumption per adult 2014 and 2015

The data are presented in Table 1. The aggregate alcohol clearances and the “adult” populations are presented. These two are combined to provide the average per adult consumption. 

Table 1.  Average per adult alcohol consumption 2014 and 2015

2014

2015

% change 2014/2015

Litres of pure alcohol (LPA), Total consumption39,838,51039,711,197-0.3
Population aged 15 and over, millions3.59373.6060+0.3
Litres of pure alcohol per adult (LPA)11.08611.013-0.7
Beer (LPA)18,820,08118,538,561-1.5
Cider (LPA)3,120,5392,905,029-6.9
Spirits (LPA)7,217,9977,357,644+1.9
Wine (LPA)10,679,89310,909,963+2.2

Sources.  CSO Population and Migration Estimates August 2015, Revenue Commissioners’ Clearances data March 2015.

Total alcohol consumption as measured by clearances decreased slightly by 0.3% in 2015. The number of adults increased slightly by 0.3%.  Average per adult alcohol consumption decreased in 2015. It was 11.086 litres of pure alcohol (lpa) in 2014 compared with 11.013 lpa in 2015, a decrease of 0.7%.  Average per adult consumption is now slightly above 11 lpa. By comparison, it was at around 11 lpa in 1994 and peaked at 14.44 lpa in 2001. Since 2001 the average per adult alcohol consumption has declined by 23.7%.

It is useful to translate the litres of pure alcohol into more understandable indicators.

The 2015 11.01 lpa is equivalent to 8.7 pints of beer per week at 4.3% alcohol strength or 2.26 750 ml bottles of wine per week at 12.5% alcohol strength.

These consumption figures are averages. There is a distribution around the average. Some do not drink, some drink a lot and some drink a little. There are different estimates of the rate of abstinence but about 20% of adults do not consume alcohol. The average consumption for the drinking population is therefore about 13.766 lpa and in this group some consume above and some below this average.

In the 15 annual changes between the peak average consumption year of 2001 and 2015 there were 11 decreases and four increases.

The pattern of annual average per adult consumption of alcohol over the most recent five years is shown below:

 YearLpa
201511.013
201411.086
201310.730
201211.614
201111.692

Beer and cider volumes decreased in 2015. Spirits and wine both increased. Beer accounted for 47% of alcohol in 2015, cider 7%, spirits 19% and wine 27%. In 2001 wine’s share was only 14% and beer was 55%.

International Context

It is useful to place the Irish consumption level in an international context. The latest OECD Health Statistics for 2015 reports an OECD average alcohol consumption (for 2013 or latest year available) of 8.8 lpa, Ireland in this database is measured as 10.6 lpa for 2013 ( Foley  estimates the Irish 2013 level to be 10.7 lpa) .

The OECD average has been identified as a policy target for Ireland. However, this is not necessarily appropriate as an exact target. The OECD database includes far distant and culturally specific countries such as Turkey and Israel with very low alcohol consumption of 2.6 lpa and 1.4 lpa respectively and several other countries with “lowish” consumption such as Canada, Chile, Japan, Mexico and USA. The non EU countries in the database have an average consumption of 7.1 lpa. The 21 EU members included in the OECD database have an average consumption of 9.9 lpa compared to the 10.6 recorded in the database for Ireland. Ireland is not widely out of line with this. These figures exclude unrecorded consumption which can be relatively high in some countries, such as, for example, Portugal.

Ireland is ranked ninth highest in the OECD database with all eight higher countries being from the EU. This ranking contrasts with 2001, which was Ireland’s peak consumption level, when Ireland was the highest alcohol consuming country in the OECD. If we use the 2015 estimate of 11.01 lpa instead of the estimate in the OECD database Ireland would be fifth highest.

The eight EU countries, of those in the OECD database, with higher alcohol consumption than Ireland (figures relate to 2013 or latest available year) were:

  • Austria 12.2 lpa
  • Czech Republic 11.5 lpa
  • Estonia 11.8 lpa
  • France 11.1 lpa
  • Germany 10.9 lpa
  • Hungary 11.1 lpa
  • Luxembourg 11.0 lpa
  • Poland 10.8 lpa

Average per adult alcohol consumption decreased by 0.7% in 2015 compared with 2014; from 11.086 lpa to 11.013 lpa. Total consumption decreased by 0.3% in 2015 and there were was an increase in the adult population of 0.3%.  Beer volume decreased by 1.5%. Cider volume decreased by 6.9%. Spirits volume increased by 1.9%. Wine volume increased by 2.2%. Since its peak in 2001 the average per adult alcohol consumption has declined by 23.7%.

Beer accounted for 47% of alcohol consumed in 2015, cider 7%, spirits 19% and wine 27%. In 2001 wine’s share was only 14% while beer was 55%.

 The 2015 11.01 lpa is equivalent to 8.7 pints of beer per week at 4.3% alcohol strength or 2.26 750 ml bottles of wine per week at 12.5% alcohol strength.

In 2001 Ireland was the highest alcohol consuming country in the OECD. Now, using OECD database figures it is ninth highest or, based on the latest 2015 Irish figures and the “older” OECD other country database figures, Ireland is fifth highest.

Anthony Foley is Senior Lecturer in Economics in DCU Business School, and lectures on the Executive MBA Programme.

References

  • Foley Anthony. Estimates of Alcohol Consumption Per Adult 2014. Drinks Industry Group of Ireland. 2015
  • Foley Anthony. Alcohol Consumption: Measurement and Data Issues; and Performance. Economics, Finance and Entrepreneurship Research Seminar Series. DCU Business School. November 2015
  • Population and Migration Estimates April 2015. Central Statistics Office. August 2015
  • Revenue Commissioners. Alcohol Clearances (available from Revenue Commissioners)

 

/by
,

DCU MBA Blog: Fiscal Space Odyssey – Facts and Myths

As we all know, Ireland’s public finances must meet specific EU and domestic fiscal rules on annual deficits, expenditure growth and debt reduction. Fiscal space refers to the projected or forecast amount of money available to the Government over a period of time for extra spending and/or tax reductions while ensuring that the overall fiscal rules are met. In the bad old days of cutbacks the relevant and opposite phrase was fiscal consolidation which meant the amount of expenditure reduction and/or tax increases needed to reduce borrowing over a particular period. The amount, probability and use of the available fiscal space were major issues in the recent general election.

In the election discussion the fiscal space refers to the five years from 2017 to 2021. Most of the projected fiscal space money occurs later in the period. Of the much quoted total figure of €8.6 billion, €5.7 billion or 66% arises in 2020 and 2021. Only €0.6 billion is in 2017 and €1.1b is in 2018. The 2019 level is €1.3 billion. We will have to wait a while for most of the fiscal space goodies. If the EU changes, as expected, our annual borrowing or deficit rule we will have another €1.5 billion which will arise in 2019.

The fiscal space money is not certain. It is not sitting in a bank waiting to be withdrawn. It depends on the achievement of solid economic and employment growth over the next five years. If the economy performs weaker than forecast there will be less fiscal space money available. The fiscal space calculation is based on an assumption of GDP growth of 3.5% in 2017 and around 3% for each of 2018 to 2021.

So, the fiscal space is a forecast amount of money and therefore uncertain; it depends on reasonable economic growth and other economic performance up to 2021. Even if the forecast turns out to be correct, the bulk of the fiscal space will arrive in 2020 and 2021 with much less in 2017 and 2018.

There are several different concepts, definitions and estimates of the fiscal space ranging from €14.2 billion to €3.2 billion which cause problems for a wide understanding of the issue.. This range gives space for much argument as was seen in the election campaign. All of the estimates are valid methodologically but are based on different interpretations, inclusions/exclusions and assumptions.

The €8.6 billion estimate is based on achieving a deficit of 0% but, as mentioned, there is a strong likelihood that we will be allowed a deficit of 0.5% by the EU, instead of 0%. This would give us another €1.5 billion of fiscal space and would arise in 2019. Therefore the fiscal space could be €8.6 billion plus €1.5 billion, or the €10.1 billion which appears, for example, in the FG election economic plan.

The original €8.6 billion was estimated by the department of finance and details are in tables A.8 and A.9 of the 2016 Economic and Fiscal Outlook. To arrive at the figure the department estimated the requirements to meet the fiscal rules between 2017 and 2021 based on our projected economic performance. It then calculated the projected actual public financial situation based on the current level of public services, salaries, social welfare payments and other expenditures and tax revenues. The difference between the two is the fiscal space or the amount of money available to use in expenditure (above the current level) and tax reductions and still be compliant with the fiscal rules.

This exercise resulted in what is called the gross fiscal space of €10.9 billion but this figure assumed that income tax bands would be adjusted in line with inflation. As such an adjustment is unlikely, there would be additional tax revenues flowing to the exchequer of €1.8 billion. Adding this to the €10.9 billion we get €12.7 billion of adjusted gross fiscal space. If we add on the €1.5 billion from the possible change in the level of the deficit the total is €14.2 billion. Excluding this reduced deficit impact we are at €12.7 billion.

But, the government could not spend all of this €12.7 (or €14.2 billion) billion on, for example, new teachers, doctors, nurses, social workers and guards or reduce taxation by €12.7 (or €14.2) billion because there are some definite or committed other expenditures over the 2017 to 2021 period. These include capital investment projects, the Lansdowne Rd pay deal and the demographic effect of more users of service through population growth and aging. There is also a plus side in that the number claiming unemployment payments will decrease. The department of finance estimates that €4.3 billion should be taken from the gross space of €12.7 billion, to cover the capital item, Lansdowne Rd and demographic influences to give the net fiscal space of €8.6 billion. You will note that the actual figure is €8.4 billion but this  deifference is due to rounding the totals.

Hence, we have our famous €8.6 billion. It includes an estimate for future demographic pressures and other known expenditure commitments. However, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council thinks that the €4.3 billion adjustment to the gross fiscal space is too low and that the €8.6 billion (or €10.1 billion if the deficit is changed to 0.5%) gives a wrong and exaggerated picture of the additional money the government will have to allocate over the next five years. The IFAC agrees with the figures up to this point and with the estimate of gross and net fiscal space (actually the IFAC estimates it to be €8.9 billion versus the €8.6 billion) but not with the implication that the money is available for new measures. The IFAC wants to identify the cost of providing the current level of services over the five year period including higher cost from inflation, likely increased salaries after Lansdowne Rd for 2019 to 2021 and increased social welfare payments. In addition, the IFAC believes the demographic adjustment done by the Department of Finance is too low.

Starting from the department of finance’s €8.6 billion net fiscal space which already incorporates a demographic adjustment, the IFAC suggests that another €1.5 billion should be allocated to cope with demographic pressure. The IFAC estimates that the cost of providing the present level of services and expenditure will increase by €4.2 billion between 2017 and 2021 through pay and social welfare increases and price inflation. Consequently, the IFAC estimates that the €8.6 billion (or €8.9 billion as IFAC estimates) should be further reduced by €1.5 billion and €4.2 billion to give an available level of resources of €3.2 billion. When the likely future cost of current services, salaries and social welfare payments are taken into account, the IFAC says there is €3.2 billion instead of €8.6 billion (or €4.7 billion instead of €10.1 billion) net fiscal space remaining for new measures.

The magnitude of dealing with likely increases in wages and social payments is substantial. Keeping pace with the GDP deflator measure of inflation of 1.2% per year would add about €1.7 billion to the social payments total between 2017 and 2021.  The same increase for wages and salaries in 2019 to 2021 would add about €800 million. Indexing the cost of government purchases would add about €600 million in the 2017 to 2021 period. These three alone on the above estimates would add €3.1 billion to the future cost of the current level of services and reduce the amount of fiscal space available for new services and tax reductions, except, of course, that higher social welfare payments, which could also be defined as a new measure, are accounted for. Higher interest payments and higher capital costs would further add to the cost of the present level of expenditure and services.

Some politicians in the election campaign have pointed out that the €8.6 billion (or €10.1 billion) figure includes an allowance for demographic effects. However, as noted, the IFAC believes that the department of finance demographic adjustment is insufficient and should be increased.

The point was also made by various politicians that the IFAC approach prejudges government decisions on wage deals and social payment increases and that these should be part of how the bigger estimate of fiscal space should be used and not excluded from the fiscal space total which is available for decision-making. This is a reasonable position. The IFAC concern is that a failure to make these costs explicit gives an exaggerated impression of the available new financial resources for tax reductions and new spending measures. For example, the FF economic plan allocated €4.76 billion of the available fiscal space for current services but this includes a sum for higher social welfare payments.

The FG economic plan allocated €4.2 billion of fiscal space for current services and notes (page 9) that this allocation includes…”provisions for sensible pay increases,….targeted welfare improvements and for other pressures (over and above a provision for addressing demographic costs)” (presumably the department of finance demographic provision). It was also argued that indexing the cost of goods and services to inflation is not appropriate because more effective procurement would reduce costs.

The IFAC figure of €3.2 billion is not directly comparable to the FG and FF figures of €8.6 billion because the FG and FF figures expect the social welfare increases to come from their €8.6 billion figures  while the IFAC has already excluded this from the fiscal space. However, neither FF nor FG included a provision for additional demographic costs compared to the department of finance’s estimate.

However, it must be remembered that there are no fiscal space monies available now. It depends on future economic growth and will be quite limited in the early years of the new government. In addition, the large amounts which are being mentioned relate to a five year period.

Anthony Foley is Senior Lecturer in Economics in DCU Business School, and lectures on the Executive MBA Programme.

If you’re interested in undertaking a part-time Executive MBA, we’re holding an open evening on March 31st 2016. Details here.

/by
, ,

DCU MBA Blog: Babies and bathwater? Time to take another look at performance reviews.

Picture the scene.  You’re sitting opposite your boss in the end- of-year performance review meeting.  It’s been a big year for you; you’ve worked really hard and you and your team have delivered great results, in some areas even exceeding targets despite a very difficult business climate.  Your boss looks up and smiles.  “You’ve done a great job this year Brian” she says “I am going to put you down as a 4”.  “A 4!” you cry indignantly “why not a 5? .  “Now you know that nobody really gets a five here…..”.   After further pointless argument you leave the room, determined to reduce the time and effort you put in next year.

The experience described above is not atypical; for many years an end of year appraisal — in which a numeric rating or descriptive equivalent on a scale is communicated from managers to their direct reports — has been the key event in the annual performance management calendar.  The ratings were perceived as a requirement for demonstrable compliance with employment legislation, especially if a problem arose with a particular employee.  Ratings were also perceived as providing “objective” inputs on which important remuneration and promotion decisions could be based and defended.

Once ratings were accepted as necessary, a substantial consulting industry arose to help organisations design and implement their own performance rating process.  Reports advised the adoption or change from five point scales to four and back again, and from numeric scales to descriptive equivalents – e.g., a 3 becomes “meets expectations”, a  4 “exceeds expectations” etc.   Significant resources were allocated to training and retraining managers to implement these processes.   While all of this was happening, academic research focused largely on studies of what rating systems and processes worked best, while too few studies looked at the bigger question of whether ratings should be used at all.

2015 has seen some really important changes in attitudes to performance ratings, in what may become an irresistible trend.  Most recently, HBR reports that “The move away from conventional, ratings-based performance management continues to gain momentum.  By November 2015, at least 52 large companies had shifted from the practice of once-yearly performance appraisals; estimates are that hundreds of other companies are considering following suit. A wide range of industries are represented.”

Ironically, the catalysts for this rethink have been Deloitte and Accenture, two consulting firms who would have been to the fore in the provision of advice on implementing ratings in the past.   Accenture have completely abandoned annual performance reviews for their 330,000 employees with immediate effect, confirming that “We’re going to get rid of probably 90 percent of what we did in the past”.   Deloitte announced in a HBR article in April 2015 that “we realize that our current process for evaluating the work of our people—and then training them, promoting them, and paying them accordingly—is increasingly out of step with our objectives”.  Both firms say they are adopting new processes that will involve more frequent feedback –“nimbler, real-time, and more individualized—something squarely focused on fueling performance in the future rather than assessing it in the past.”

There seems little doubt that few will shed a tear if the types of meetings described in the introduction become a thing of the past.  As researchers, we can’t but be excited about finding ways to make the performance management process more relevant to today’s business needs.  Of course, there is always a danger that those who embrace these trends without due consideration may be in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  It’s worth remembering  that there is substantial research evidence to support retaining key aspects of the performance management process such as goal setting, where research clearly shows that employees who are working to achieve specific, challenging but achievable goals will be on average 16% more productive than others doing the same work, in the same conditions but without such goals.

Watch this space.

Dr John McMackin is a lecturer in our Human Resource Management and Organisational Psychology group in DCU Business School. He holds an MBA from Columbia University, New York and a PhD from the University of Oregon. His area of research is around change management, leadership development and strategic innovation.

For more details about the DCU Executive MBA, currently accepting applications, please visit the DCU Executive MBA course page.

/by
,

DCU Executive MBA Programme Highlights 2015

As we approach the end of 2015, we look back on some of our highlights on our Executive MBA programme. Why not take a look here!

/by
, ,

DCU Business Masters Scholarships announced for top GAA Players

Down footballer Kalum King and former Dublin footballer Ross McConnell are the latest players to be awarded scholarships for the prestigious DCU Business School Executive MBA.

They follow in the footsteps of recent recipients of DCU Business School/GPA MBA scholarships, Fermanagh’s Chris Breen, Leitrim’s Rob Lowe, Westmeath’s David O’Shaughnessy and Dublin duo Coman Goggins and Barry Cahill.

Five county players in total have been awarded scholarships on this year’s DCU Business School Masters Scholarship Programme including Meath’s Niamh Lister who is the first WGPA recipient of a scholarship jointly funded by DCU Business School and DCU GAA Academy. Niamh will undertake an MSc in Business Management.

The five players being awarded scholarships will bring to 22 the total of GAA county players who have benefited from the scholarship programme over the last five years. Other notable graduates to date include Roscommon’s Tadhg Lowe, Leitrim’s Donal Wrynn, Kilkenny star Richie Hogan, Dublin’s Denis Bastick and former footballers Jason Sherlock and Justin McNulty.

As well as the two MBA Scholarships, two other county players, Dublin hurler Danny Sutcliffe and Monaghan footballer Shane Carey have been awarded Master’s scholarships to undertake MSc in Finance and MSc in Strategic Management respectively.

Speaking about the announcement, GPA Chief Executive Dessie Farrell said: “I’d like to congratulate all the players who have now commenced their various Masters Programmes in DCU Business School this year. I would particularly like to congratulate Niamh Lister on becoming the first WGPA recipient of a DCU Business School/DCU GAA Academy Scholarship.  These scholarships provide life-changing opportunities for the players, helping them in their personal development and to broaden their career opportunities. It is increasingly satisfying to consider that we are now celebrating the sixth intake under the joint scholarship scheme. I would like to wish all the scholars the very best of luck with their studies over the next 12 to 24 months.”

The Dean of DCU Business School, Anne Sinnott commented: “Our Scholarship Programme for GAA players began in 2010 in partnership with the Gaelic Players Association.  We are pleased that our relationship with the GPA will continue for the academic year 2015/2016.  This year we are delighted to announce that we have also partnered with the Women’s Gaelic Players Association (WGPA) and for the first time will offer a scholarship to a Ladies Senior inter-county player.”

Chairperson of the WGPA, Aoife Lane added: “We are delighted to be associated with DCU, and particularly the Business School, who have so generously offered a postgraduate scholarship opportunity for WGPA members in collaboration with the DCU GAA Academy.  We are very grateful to DCU who have been so welcoming and supportive of our new organisation, which reflects their commitment to male and female Gaelic games in the University.  We look forward to working with the college into 2016 and beyond.”

DCU Business School’s mission is to educate leaders and professionals for the global marketplace. Through its teaching, its research and its engagement with industry, it proactively contributes to the development of individuals, industry and society.

DCU Business School is recognised nationally and internationally for the outstanding quality of its business education programmes.  Its teaching, learning and research activities are strongly influenced by the core guiding principles of relevance and excellence. Its programme portfolio is continually updated and expanded, and recent years have seen the introduction of a number of highly innovative programmes at Bachelor, Masters and Doctorate levels.

Applications for our full-time and part-time Master’s Programmes are now open for our September 2016 intake.

/by
,

DCU MBA Blog: McKinsey on Four Trend-Breaking Global Forces

As the business world continues to recover from the ravages of the recent recession, many experts now warn that we are far from returning to a business-as-usual scenario. Whether it is Rita Gunther McGrath of Columbia Business School telling us that we have entered a new “transient advantage” era, Joseph Badaracco of Harvard calling it a new “Schumpeterian” recombinant economy or Scott Anthony of Innosight (Clayton Christensen’s consultancy arm) terming it the “great disruption,” few expect the old assumptions and formulas that brought success in the past to continue to be effective in the coming decades.

Richard Dobbs, James Manyika and Jonathan Woetzel of McKinsey have just published a new book called No Ordinary Disruption (New York: Public Affairs, 2015) in which they have identified “the four global forces breaking all the trends.” The four are (1) the shifting locus of economic activity and dynamism to emerging markets like China and India, and, more particularly, to about 400-500 cities within those markets, in what they call a “new age of urbanization”; (2) the acceleration in the scope, scale, and economic impact of technology, where the effects of ongoing, rapid advances in processing power and connectivity are being amplified by the big data revolution, the mobile Internet and the “proliferation of new technology-enabled business models;” (3) global demographics and the aging of the human population, where more than 60% of the world’s people already live in countries with fertility rates that have fallen below replacement rates; and (4) ever-increasing global economic interconnectedness and the  expansion in the flows of capital, people and information associated with it, where “south-south” flows between emerging markets have doubled their share of global trade over the last ten years. Taken together, these four shifts are producing “monumental change.”

To take just three examples of how rapidly and radically the world as we have known it up to recently is being transformed, in December 2014 “Cyber Monday” generated $2.65B in online shopping, but just a few weeks earlier on November 11th, China’s “Singles Day,” Alibaba recorded the world’s highest ever single day e-commerce trading total of $9.3B; earlier, in February 2014, Facebook acquired a 5-year old start-up for an amazing $19.3B, and in September 2014, the Indian Space Research Organization successfully put a spacecraft into orbit around Mars, and for a total cost of only $74M, less than it took to produce the award-winning film, Gravity.

The big implication from No Ordinary Disruption is that all CEOs and corporate strategists will have to learn to “reset” the intuitions that up to now have been guiding their perceptions about future opportunities and challenges. “We have to rethink the assumptions that drive our decisions on such crucial issues as consumption, resources, labour, capital and competition.” According to the McKinsey authors, the era we have already entered is full of promise, but also more volatile and “deeply unsettling,” and for business leaders, the intellectual integrity to be willing and able to see the world as it really is, and the humility and persistence to keep learning, have never been more needed. The recent past is no longer a reliable guide to even the next 5 to 10 years, and imagination, not just experience, is now at a premium.

Professor Brian Leavy is a Professor of Strategic Management at DCU Business School and teaches strategy on the Executive MBA programme. Prior to his academic career, he spent eight years as a manufacturing engineer with Digital Equipment Corporation, now part of Hewlett Packard. Brian’s teaching and research interests centre on strategic leadership, competitive analysis and strategy innovation, and he has published over 80 articles, chapters and book reviews on these topics, nationally and internationally. 

To learn more about the Executive MBA click here

To attend our upcoming taster evening click here

/by
, ,

Employee Engagement Roundtable held in DCU Business School

On May, 28th 2015 DCU Business School hosted the first of three ‘Employee Engagement Roundtables’ which will be spread out over the course of a year.

The roundtable was organized and led by academic experts in the field of HR and engagement, Professor Kathy Monks, Dr Edel Conway, Dr Yseult Freeney and Dr Janine Bosak (all DCU Business School staff members). It brought 17 HR directors and managers from a range of non-competitive organizations together in order to explore the concept of employee engagement and the various definitions that are being used by practitioners, discuss best practices in assessing engagement and jointly tackle issues of employee engagement using an evidence-based approach.

The first roundtable was a great success; the second part of this exclusive event will be held on September, 17th 2015 in DCU Business School with over 20 HR directors and managers expressing interest already.

You can find out more about research in HR and Organisational Behaviour at DCU Business School here.

Details of our part-time executive Masters in Work and Organisational Psychology/Behaviour can be found here.

/by
,

MSc in Management (Aviation Leadership) Information Evening

DCU Business School will be hosting an Information Evening about the new part-time executive Masters in Aviation Leadership on the 25th June 2015 at 6.00pm. If you are interested in learning more about the programme, you can register here.

About the Programme:

The MSc in Management (Aviation Leadership) is the first programme of its kind in Ireland. Commencing in September 2015, it will be a two year part-time executive masters with elements of the programme delivered both in Dublin Airport, in its capacity as a live laboratory, and in Castlemoate House, daa International’s academy facility, adjacent to Dublin Airport.

Subject Areas:

  • Aviation Leadership
  • Aviation Governance
  • Aerodrome Operations Management
  • Leadership and Change
  • Delivering Performance Excellence [Operational, People and Financial Performance]
  • Strategy, Organization and Innovation
  • Research Methods
  • Aviation Industry based research project

Aims and Objectives:

  • Demonstrate an understanding of the management complexity required to operate the various compnents of Airport Operations
  • Identify the important leadership and management competencies required to plan and execute future aviation industry strategies
  • Demonstrate an understanding of the characteristics, requirements and legal responsibilties of aviation organisations
  • Identify the concepts and skills necessary for conducting business analysis and strategic thinking
  • Develop the ability to lead and initiate professional and/or research activity independently or as part of an aviation management team;
  • Enhance your opportunities to take a leading role in the future development of the aviation industry

Details of the Open Evening:

When: 25th June at 6.00pm

Where: 3rd Floor of DCU Business School, DCU, Collins Avenue, Dublin 9 [Map here]

Register online here

Why attend?

  • Learn first hand about the programme and how it will help to advance your career
  • Speak to members of faculty directly, who can answer any questions you may have
  • Network with members of the aviation industry

Informal Enquiries:

Informal enquiries about the programme can be made via email to pj.byrne@dcu.ie

Register:

You can register to attend online here.

/by